Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Front sheet picture: Reflections on the Arctic Sea 2008 Ville Miettinen
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Arctic Operations Handbook Joint Industry Project (JIP) was launched in February of
2012 supported by a number of companies and knowledge institutes. The JIP was initiated
by a number of Dutch companies in the framework of the Maritime Innovation Program
(MIP) and was awarded a subsidy from the Dutch Ministry of EL&I (Economic affairs,
Agriculture & Innovation). With it the JIP participants committed to issue an open source
document to ensure that the work from the JIP is offered to the international arctic offshore
community and the general public for further use.
The participating companies have the ambition to execute projects in arctic areas, such as
installation and operations of oil and gas production facilities. The term arctic as used here
refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore
operations, field development and decommissioning.
Currently, there is no specific standard for companies operating in arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure services can be provided in a safe manner with minimum
environmental impact, it was proposed to prepare guidance/standards for such operations.
This project has taken an important step in gathering existing rules & regulations, identifying
the areas which require additional guidance, and has taken some steps in defining guidance.
The focus is on the operational activities for installation of fixed, floating and subsea units,
dredging, trenching, pipe laying and floating oil/gas production. Detailed design of facilities
& equipment was not covered in this JIP as it is already supported through ISO 19906 for
Arctic Offshore Structures.
As part of the work scope the JIP has taken the initiative to liaise with Class Societies, Arctic
Governmental Authorities and international standards organizations such as ISO. A
diversified group of Dutch operators and knowledge centers have assessed deficiencies in
existing standards and it is therefore considered useful and beneficial for the ISO TC67 SC 8
and SC 7 to use this report when preparing their new ISO norms.
This Arctic Marine Operations Challenges & Recommendations Report presents existing
rules & regulations, identifies the areas which require additional guidance, and in those cases
where possible defines recommendations for arctic operations. The index used in this report
is based on ISO 19901-6; Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for
offshore structures Part 6: Marine operations. The index has been adjusted and
complemented with aspects specific for arctic operations.
The following key observations/guidance have been gathered within the scope of this Joint
Industry Project;
It was noted from the gap analysis that there was limited (ISO) guidance for pipe lay,
trenching and dredging operations, let alone for the arctic areas. It was therefore chosen
to provide a number of best practices for these operations, considering the arctic
environment. The efforts concentrated on the aspects that would be new in the arctic
when comparing with open water operations in non-arctic areas.
Site specific operations should be considered when planning and carrying out operations.
Considerable effort was performed to align the knowledge on weather conditions and in
particular on the requirements for monitoring and forecasting as well as the requirements
for decision based tools.
For the transportation & logistic aspects input relied heavily on the existing guidance for
arctic shipping which is further developed and was evaluated and transferred to
recommendations for the specific services of this guide.
This report provides guidance as required specifically for contractors expecting to work
in arctic areas on the aspects of health, safety, training and also stakeholder mapping.
A frame work is provided to perform environmental impact assessments both in early as
well as detailed stages of design in order to ensure that impacts can be managed and
mitigated.
Specific attention was given to the evaluation of the loads on and the operation of
disconnectable floating production units.
The other volumes of this report contain results of the gap analysis performed in the project
as well as relevant results of the pilot projects of the Arctic Operations Handbook (AOH)
JIP;
The IceStream Pilot project, described in volume 3, has shown that the egg code
(which is a method to describe characteristics of ice fields), when used as a basis to
establish a visualization of the ice field, can serve as input to numerical models with
which ice loads can be predicted on floating structures. More field data is required to
support development of new analytical models.
The Environmental Impact Pilot project, described in volume 4, has developed an
enhanced approach (interaction of linked sensitivities) for understanding the
environmental impact of operations in an early project stage in a semi-quantitative
manner. Application of such an approach is recommended to assess, evaluate and reduce
the environmental impact of operations in arctic areas.
A state of the art review for marine icing on vessels has been performed and has been
documented in volume 5, Marine icing on arctic offshore operations Pilot project. It
highlights that although there are many approaches, there is no common approach and no
industry standard for marine icing calculations. It strongly recommends more field
observations and improved prediction models to determine sea spray formation and icing
accretion.
List of participants
The following companies have participated in the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP;
Table of Contents
1.0 SCOPE 16
1.1 Introduction 16
1.2 Arctic Operations Handbook JIP 16
1.3 Main Report structure 18
1.4 Key recommendations 18
9.0 STABILITY 70
9.1 Introduction 70
9.2 Whats different for stability in the Arctic 70
9.3 Stability recommendations 70
9.4 References 73
11.0 LOADOUT 76
11.1 Introduction 76
11.2 References 76
12.0 TRANSPORTATION 78
12.1 Introduction 78
12.2 Whats different for transportation in the Arctic 78
12.3 Transportation recommendations 79
12.4 References 81
INDEX TO VOLUMES
SECTION 1
1.0 SCOPE
1.1 Introduction
This report provides the summary results of the Arctic Operation Handbook JIP executed
over the period February 2012 to December 2013, with a group of 16 participants.
The term arctic as used in this report refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low
temperatures may influence offshore operations, field development and decommissioning.
The intent of the report is to assist service companies in preparing for and executing work in
arctic conditions including installation, pipe laying, dredging and trenching, floating oil &
gas production facilities and offloading operations. It is further intended to provide input for
(international) standard development, for instance that of the ISO TC67 SC8 Arctic
Operations.
Key result areas include the guidance for; operations, logistics and transport, weather
monitoring and forecasting, training, health and safety management, environmental impact,
ice flow behaviour and marine icing.
The participating companies have the ambition to execute projects in arctic areas, such as
installation and operations of oil and gas production facilities. The term arctic as used here
refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore
operations, field development and decommissioning.
Currently, there is no specific standard for companies operating in arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure services can be provided in a safe manner with minimum
environmental impact, it was proposed to prepare guidance/standards for such operations.
This project has taken an important step in gathering existing rules & regulations, identifying
the areas which require additional guidance, and has taken some steps in defining guidance.
The focus is on the operational activities for installation of fixed, floating and subsea units,
dredging, trenching, pipe laying and floating oil/gas production. Detailed design of facilities
& equipment was not covered in this JIP as it is already supported through ISO 19906 for
Arctic Offshore Structures.
As part of the work scope the JIP has taken the initiative to liaise with Class Societies, Arctic
Governmental Authorities and international standards organizations such as ISO. A
diversified group of Dutch operators and knowledge centers have assessed deficiencies in
existing standards and it is therefore considered useful and beneficial for the ISO TC67 SC 8
and SC 7 to use this report when preparing their new ISO norms.
The project addressed safety and sustainability of offshore operations in the arctic.
The work associated with these three operations was distributed over nine working
groups namely:
WG1 Logistics
WG2 Ice Metocean and Geophysical Intelligence
WG3 General Equipment
WG4 Health, Safety and Environment
WG5 Stakeholder management
WG6 Installation and removal of structures
WG7 Dredging and pipe laying
WG8 Floating oil/gas production
WG9 Vessel Operations
The individual participants that participated in the working groups have been reported in
Appendix A.
2. Development of technical notes on the methods and needs that follow from working in
the arctic areas during extended periods (normally less than year round). It may be
concluded that separate, more detailed, R&D work should be carried out, but the main
objective is to deliver proposals for guideline and standard development.
On the following areas specific investigations have been performed:
Define appropriate modeling of ice flow around and under floating structure hulls
(IceStream Pilot Project)
Develop a framework to support the environmental impact analysis of offshore
arctic operations (Environmental Impact Pilot Project)
Investigate aspects of marine icing on vessels and equipment like sources, review of
rules, prediction and notes on mitigation and removal (Marine Icing Pilot Project)
3. Preparation of a report (this report) that highlights the challenges for arctic marine
operations, reveals the gaps in relation to existing guidance and provides
recommendations to new and existing ISO standards based on the conclusions from the
project including the pilot projects. The report will also contain comments on existing
arctic standards and guidelines applicable to the scope of the study.
4. Liaison with Class Societies and Authorities to support the acceptance of technical
notes, proposals and comments in the development and updating of the standards and
guidelines.
The following documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated
documents only the edition cited applies. For undated documents, the latest edition of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 19901-6, Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for offshore
structures Part 6: Marine operations
ISO 19906, Petroleum and natural gas industries Arctic Offshore Structures
action
external load applied to the structure (direct action) or an imposed deformation or
acceleration (indirect action)
action combination
design values of the different actions considered simultaneously in the verification of a
specific limit state
action effect
effect of actions on the structure or its components
adfreeze
freezing of ice to the surface of a structure
alert
prescribed reaction to specific ice conditions, which in time can become hazardous to the
operation of a structure
NOTE Several different levels associated with the time proximity of the hazard are
normally recognized.
arctic *
the term arctic as used in this report refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low
temperatures may influence offshore operations, field development and decommissioning.
brash ice *
accumulation of floating ice made up of fragments no greater than 2 meter
broken ice
loose ice consisting of small floes, broken up as a result of natural processes, active or
passive intervention
disconnection
planned separation of the risers (and mooring, if applicable) from a floating structure
dynamic positioning
technique of automatically maintaining the position of a floating vessel within a
specified tolerance by controlling onboard thrusters to counter the wind, wave, current and
ice actions
egg code *
an oval code developed under WMO which specifies basic ice data on concentration, stages
of development (age) and form (floe size). A maximum of three ice types are identified
within the oval.
emergency disconnection
planned separation of the risers (and mooring, if applicable) from a floating structure,
without depressurization of the risers
escape
act of personnel moving away from a hazardous event to a place on the installation where its
effects are reduced or removed
evacuation
planned precautionary and emergency method of moving personnel from the installation
(muster station or TR) to a safe distance beyond the immediate or potential hazard zone
first-year ice
FY
sea ice formed during the current or prior winter that has not survived one summer melt
season
floe
relatively flat piece of sea ice greater than 20 m across
flowline
piping on the sea floor linking one or more subsea wells to the production system
NOTE functions may include production, injection, subsea systems control and export of
produced fluids.
freeze-thaw
possible degrading effect on concrete of repeated temperature changes causing frost cycles at
the surface
ice alert
alert related to encroaching hazardous ice features or conditions, generally requiring specific
changes to production operations
iceberg
glacial or shelf ice (greater than 5 m freeboard) that has broken (calved) away from its source
NOTE Icebergs can be freely floating or grounded, and are sometimes defined as tabular,
dome, pinnacle, wedge or blocky shaped.
ice detection
discrimination of ice features or associated conditions from the surrounding environment
ice gouge
incision made by an ice feature in the seabed
NOTE Also called ice scour; a pit is an areal incision and a furrow is a linear incision made
by ice in the seabed
ice island
large tabular shaped ice feature that has calved from an ice shelf or glacier
ice management
active processes used to alter the ice environment with the intent to reduce the frequency,
severity or uncertainty of ice actions
ice movement *
the resulting effect of wind, waves, current and thermal expansion on ice behavior in the
field.
ice ridge
linear feature formed of ice blocks created by the relative motion between ice sheets
NOTE A compression ridge is formed when ice sheets are pushed together and a shear ridge
is formed when ice sheets slide along a common boundary.
ice scenario
combination of circumstances involving the presence of ice, resulting in actions or action
combinations on a structure
landfast ice
ice that remains attached to a shoreline, island or grounded ice feature
NOTE Also called fast ice.
level ice
region of ice with relatively uniform thickness
NOTE Also called sheet ice.
multi-year ice
MY
sea ice that has survived at least one summer melt season
NOTE when the term multi-year ice is used in conjunction with the term second-year ice,
the former should be interpreted as ice that has survived at least two summer melt seasons
pack ice
sea ice consisting of discrete floes that is not landfast
permafrost
ground (soil or rock) remaining at or below 0 C for at least two consecutive years
place of safety
area outside the hazard zone in which personnel safety is no longer at risk due to the
installation hazard
rafted ice
ice feature formed from the superposition of two or more ice sheet layers
recovery
transfer of evacuees to a rescue vessel, helicopter, etc.
rescue
process by which persons entering the sea or reaching the ice surface, directly or in an
evacuation craft, are subsequently retrieved to a place where medical assistance is typically
available
ridge keel
portion of an ice ridge that extends below the water line
NOTE A ridge keel can consist of a consolidated layer and an unconsolidated layer.
ridge sail
portion of an ice ridge that extends above the water line
rubble field
region of broken ice blocks floating together as a continuous body
rubble pile
ice feature of areal, rather than linear extent, composed of blocks of broken ice
NOTE Term for grounded rubble piles is stamukha.
scour
soil erosion caused by wave, ice or current action
seabed
material below the elevation of the sea floor or ocean floor
sea floor
interface between the sea and the seabed
NOTE Refers to the upper surface of all unconsolidated material, also termed mudline.
seasonal operation
operation of a structure during a selected period during the course of the year, generally to
avoid particular ice conditions
second-year ice
sea ice that has survived one summer's melt season
NOTE second- year ice is sometimes referred to as multi-year ice
stamukha
grounded ice feature composed of broken ice pieces or rubble
temporary refuge
TR
place provided on the installation where personnel can take refuge for a specified period
while investigations, emergency response and evacuation preparations are undertaken
FE Finite Element
FEED Front End Engineering Design
FLS Fatigue Limit State
FMA Finnish Marine Administration
FPIC Free Prior and Informed Consent
FPSO Floating Production, Storage and Offloading vessel
FRC Fast Rescue Craft
FSU Floating Storage Unit
FTA Flow line Termination Assembly
FY First Year, with reference to ice
GBS Gravity Base Structure
GL Germanischer Lloyd
GOMO Global Offshore Marine Operations
GSK Group Survival Kit
HAZID Hazard identification
HDD Horizontal Directional Drilling
HLV Heavy Lift Vessel
HSE Health, Safety and Environment
HVAC Heating Ventilation and Conditioning
IACS International Association of Classification Societies
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IM Ice Management
IMCA International Marine Contractors Association
IMO International Maritime Organization
IPIECA International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ISPE International Society of Polar Engineers
ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security Code
JIP Joint Industry Project
KPa Kilo Pascal
LAN Local Area Network
LAST Lowest anticipated service temperature
LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide
LCV Light Construction Vessel
MBL Minimum Breaking Load
MCV Medium Construction Vessel
MIP Maritime Innovation Program
MY Multi Year, with reference to ice
ND No Data
NDT Non-destructive testing
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NRC National Research Council Canada
NRT Near Real Time mode
NSR Northern Sea Route
OGP International Association of Oil and Gas Producers
OIM Offshore Installation Manager
OSV Offshore Support Vessel
5.1 Introduction
The ISO 19901-6 provides recommendations for marine operation planning and execution.
Section 5 is used to indicate general considerations for marine operations preparation such as
Risk management and Job Safety analyses.
It is important for the user to realize that the many technical aspects in the sections hereunder
are to be integrated in a functional operations design. As many operations could be
seasonally limited, planning evaluation and operational phasing are essential parts of the
operations design. To get frozen in (unless as a planned activity) or having to abandon a job
that cannot continue through the winter will have great impact on the company involved but
also on all other arctic operations in the light of stakeholders tolerance. In sections 5 and 6 of
ISO 19901-6 the various aspects of preparing and planning marine operations are considered.
A significant part of this report involves the gap analysis that was carried out. Gaps are
identified as the difference between (required) guidance for arctic marine operations
compared to existing codes and standards.
The Environmental impact pilot project, described in volume 4, has developed an enhanced
approach (interaction of linked sensitivities) for understanding the environmental impact of
operations in an early project stage in a semi-quantitative manor. Application of such an
approach is recommended to assess, evaluate and reduce the environmental impact of
operations in arctic areas.
These considerations can be concluded with an excerpt noted hereunder of the Arctic
Offshore Oil and Gas guidelines from the Arctic Council, which describes very well what the
project aim is. The gap analysis is the first step to determine, where additional guidance is
required to ensure that operations are executed in a skilful and safe manner.
6.1 Introduction
The ISO 19901-6 section 6.0 gives recommendations for the organizational aspects of
marine operations. A number of additional recommendations are given in this section for
operations under arctic conditions.
An integrated approach during all stages of the project is recommended. Emphasis may need
to be put on sustainability during the review of the concepts and for final concept selection.
Due to the arctic complexities, this concept review and selection process may need several
iterations to be able to verify all possible (direct or indirect) effects of key parameters and to
facilitate the exchange of ideas between stakeholders.
The aspect of stakeholder mapping is considered an essential aspect which is more complex
in arctic areas, given the importance of involving among others indigenous people and
NGOs in the alignment processes. Recommendations on this aspect are given in the section
6.2 below.
6.2.1 General
ISO 26000, entitled "Guidance on Social Responsibility", released on 1 November 2010 is
recommended as primary reference for dealing with stakeholders.
This standard offers guidance much broader than stakeholder issues alone and also covers
socially responsible behaviour and possible actions. The content is summarized in the figure
on the next page, which is copied from the document. It does not contain requirements and
is therefore not certifiable, in contrast to ISO management system standards.
Foreword This section explains that the International Standard ISO26000 was
developed using a multi-stakeholder approach from more than 90
countries and 40 international or regional organisations
Introduction, Table 1 As part of the ISO 26000 outline it explains that Clause 5 covers
recognizing social responsibility and engaging stakeholders.
Introduction, Figure 1 As part of an overview it is explained that Clause 4 (Principles for
stakeholder interests) respect for stakeholder interests should be
considered.
2 Terms and Definitions, A stakeholder is defined as an individual or group that has an
Item 2.20 interest in any decision or activity of an organization
2 Terms and Definitions, Stakeholder engagement is defined as an activity undertaken to
Item 2.21 create opportunities for dialogue between an organisation and one or
more of its stakeholders.
3.3 Characteristics of This clause states that social responsibility is integrated throughout
social responsibility, the organization and takes into account the interests of the
Clause 3.3.1 stakeholder.
4.5 Respect for stakeholder The principle is that an organization should respect, consider and
interests respond to the interests of its stakeholders.
5.2.1 Impacts, interests and This clause states that an organization should be aware of its various
expectations stakeholders, and should understand the expectations of society.
5.3 Stakeholder Stakeholder identification and engagement are central addressing an
identification and organizations social responsibility.
engagement
5.3.3 Stakeholder This section covers the reasons for an organization to engage with its
engagement stakeholders.
Of particular note is Article 18, which states that indigenous peoples have the right to
participate in decision-making matters which would affect their rights, through
representatives chosen by themselves, to maintain and develop their own decision-making
institutions.
Article 20 states that indigenous peoples have the right to be secure in their own means of
subsistence and development and to engage freely in their own traditional and other
economic activities.
The UNDRIP also states that the indigenous peoples who may be affected by a development
are engaged prior to project initiation, and that they have full access to all information about
the scope and impacts of the proposed development activities on their lands, resources and
well-being.
Design phase
Abundant information is available about optimized operations scheduling, delay control and
cost control. For marine arctic operations the AOH participants would add three additional
considerations:
a. Design of the operation in phases and steps, led by the question What if
b. Allowance for delays due to late supply/support and interruptions, including large
seasonal changes from average.
c. Testing of the design schedule to arctic conditions in scenario simulations
The question What if should consider the arctic hazards and make the operations design
risk based. Arctic (metocean) conditions to be considered are listed in section 7.
For operations which are seasonal and/or extend over multiple seasons this is most relevant.
For operations which might extend into break up and or into freeze up the same will apply.
Mobilization phase
On basis of long term forecasting an initial estimate of the (earliest) start of the operation can
be made and, working backwards, the mobilization of ships and equipment can be scheduled
according to the planning of the operation. Localized and site specific observations,
measurements and forecasting must then be added to arrive at a prediction of local seasonal
starting dates as well as likely closing dates for the spread chosen.
6.4 References
1) ISO 26000 Guidance on Social Responsibility
2) United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP),
New York City, September 2007
3) GUIDEMAPS (2004). Successful transport decision making. A project
management and stakeholder engagement handbook. Reino Unido: Guidemaps
Consortium 2004. ISBN 3-88354-144-3
www.civitas-initiative.org/docs1/GUIDEMAPSHandbook_web.pdf
4) Taschner, S. & Fiedler, M. (2009). Stakeholder Involvement Handbook.
AENEAS report D2.1
http://www.aeneas-
project.eu/docs/AENEAS_StakeholderInvolvementHandbook.pdf
5) Convention 169 of the International Labour Organisation (1989)
6) Keinonen A, Browne and Jolles, Six years in Sakhalin offshore oil /
management of risk, operation in ice, Icetech 2006.
7) Reed, I., Oil exploration and production offshore Sakhalin Island, Icetech 2006.
SECTION 7
7.1 Introduction
The subsections in section 7 originate from the ISO 19901-6 norms, dealing with Operations
in Open Water. Additional sub sections have been added, to include specific requirements
for operations in arctic environments. As per the 19901-6 reference other areas than just
metocean and ice will be addressed here.
The Working Group looking after section 7 first defined gaps in operational standards and
codes and then assessed priorities for each of the defined gaps. The items listed in section 7
represent those items which were given a score of High Importance. In a final assessment
and preparation of new Guides it is worthwhile to review medium and low priorities. See
Volume 2 for the gap analysis results.
Where no details have been provided in each of the subsections, the existing ISO 19901-6
code can be used as general reference to cover operations in arctic areas. More refinements
may be required at a later date.
The following sub/sections will follow the same structure as this report in principle, a listing
of gaps, a discussion and suggested additions for an arctic operations standard.
This section provides a summary of currently available knowledge, known to the authors.
More specific solutions and new innovations can be developed in a follow up Phase or JIP,
see also under recommendations.
1) General lack of reliable long-term measurement data (in particular ice conditions) and
subsequent large uncertainties in extreme estimates (used for designs but also planning
of operations).
2) Due to climate change, anticipated faster melting of sea ice which in turn leads to larger
areas of open water, and which may lead to higher waves.
3) Perceived or real lack of proper tools and processes to determine ice hazards and risks, to
determine the effects of drift ice on operations, the ability to forecast season start and
end dates and the ability to predict the loads on systems operating in ice and the effects
of such loads.
4) Remoteness which affects the communication and data transfer capabilities, for
forecasting.
The project group further emphasizes the need to evaluate the reliability of hind cast data,
given strong climate change influences in the Arctic. Areas which in the past would show
limited wave action could change over time due to larger open water areas. These effects
need to be considered when evaluating operations and workability.
In the next section a number of significant aspects related to operations in cold climates are
noted.
Ice severity
For general guidance and use, adopt the enclosed ice severity table, prepared by the Arctic
Operations Handbook team, Table 7.1.
Weather windows
ISO 19901-6 refers to the operations, the design impact as well as the applicable weather
margins as a result of certain metocean conditions. In area with ice, different impacts will be
experienced compared to those in open water. Due to the presence of ice in different seasons,
the effects of certain metocean restrictions will change and one cannot rely on wave and
current data.
Considerations shall be given to partial ice concentrations and the occurrence of storms
when ice is forming or when ice is about to break up. Even in mid-winter pack ice may be
affected by strong winds and cause ice pressure in some areas and opening up of leads
(narrow open water areas between ice floes) in other areas.
Considerations shall be given to a combination of metocean restrictions and ice restrictions
in all phases of operations; see also for open water effects ISO 19901-6, section 7.5.
Operational duration
In section 7.6 of the ISO 19901-6 details can be found for operational durations in open
water operations. In ice these durations may differ.
Operational duration is defined as the time to carry out an operation, which could take just
one day, the delivery of material, to a week like ice management to a whole season from
break up to freeze up and into the ice season. These operational windows shall be as realistic
as possible and shall include inaccuracies in operational schedules, technical or operational
delays, uncertainties in environmental statistics and accuracy of the metocean, and ice
forecast.
Of key importance is the warning time required by operators to discontinue or even stop their
current operation and eventually leave the site, due to expected and prevailing ice conditions.
These hazard warning times are often referred to as T Time, which may vary from one to
several hours to well over 1 day. Operational procedures shall be prepared and in place to
handle any such T-Time and the associated responses needed.
Operating limits
Operating limits for the vessel or fleet of vessels shall be defined as limiting ice conditions
for a certain operation (i.e. thickness, type, concentration and drift speed as well as deformed
ice conditions and growlers), in the same context as using wind speed or sea states and
current to define open water limits for those same vessels.
Vessel operating limits should be defined in a similar way as they have been defined for
open water conditions. Aspects to consider will include:
Weather and Ice conditions and hazards, like icebergs, growlers, stamukhi or other
significant ice features
Operational phases and the respective securing time or T-times
Vessel structural and performance capabilities
Support system performance capabilities
Class and or Insurance requirements
Risk and hazard analysis and mitigation procedures
Accuracy of arctic data base and frequency, accuracy and reliability of forecasts from
various sources
Procedures for now casts and forecasts
Decision making principles and procedures
Remoteness
An approach to combine the effects of several key parameters, such as wind, waves and
ice conditions.
Consider the preparation of performance graphs for each of the operating scenarios and
varying with differing ice conditions or with differing support (ice management). These
performance graphs are referred to by some as ice passports. Both the Russian Class as well
as DNV have standards for such ice passports in place. Further details can be found in
section 21.5. Also use of the IMO Polar Code has to be considered.
Visibility
The lack of visibility or the occurrence of
fog, normally occurring at 100 % relative
humidity, can effect stationary and transit
operations in open water and in ice special
precautions will be necessary. Not only
will the usual navigational equipment be
required and in proper functioning order,
the complete metocean and ice detection,
monitoring and forecasting system shall
function properly as well.
Depending on the ice classes of the
various ships in use, safe operating speeds
shall be used, in order to prevent possible
risks in hitting free drifting ice floes, like
Figure 7.1 - Beaufort Sea Tow
(Source: W. Jolles)
7.3 Gaps
The following main operational gaps in standards and guides have been found related
metocean and ice; other sublevels are defined in the following sections:
1. Wind and current monitoring,
2. Temperature monitoring and the effects of ice spray on personnel exposure,
3. Weather windows and metocean and ice conditions for different operational seasons
summer, extended summer and early winter,
4. Sea ice and ice berg data and monitoring, for example satellite imagery may need to be
enhanced providing higher frequency, more coverage and better resolution and
5. Ice behavior and ice drift monitoring and forecasting.
A lot of work has been done in other areas of design of arctic systems (ISO 19906) and
general arctic shipping (IMO Polar Code) and use can be made thereof. Also OGP issued
norms for the monitoring of metocean conditions.
The workgroup identified a gap in the requirements for spatial and temporal detail of the
forecast, required forecast timeframes and forecast accuracies, which are needed to provide
guidance on the use and availability of now- and forecasting for ice & metocean. Therefore
the following tasks shall be regarded as high priority items:
Improved monitoring compared to other applications (open water)
Improved forecasting (compared to other applications, like non-arctic).
Other important gaps were found in areas of data quality and reliability and in risk and
hazard analysis. For the former no data is available how accurate the arctic metocean data is
and how accurate and reliable the forecast. Are sufficient weather stations available and can
the data be made available to all users? The latter gaps apply for instance to the forecasting
of polar lows white out or long term fog conditions, all affecting arctic operations. This
needs to be taken into consideration when conducting a hazard analysis to assess the risk of
continued operations.
It is recommended to add the need for supplementary ice and weather data in support of
operations of arctic systems within future standards. In various cases probabilistic data is
required to develop proper risks scenarios and ultimate loads and thus responses. When
considering floaters in ice additional time series may be required in order to conduct a proper
analysis of the behavior of the system in the dynamic ice conditions, including a probabilistic
analysis of extremes. Such time series data may not yet exist for all locations and when it
exists it may not cover a large enough number of years. Additional data will thus be
required.
The first project was to study the behavior of ice around floating structures, called IceStream,
since this influences the operation, station keeping, forces and appendices such as hoist wires
as well as ice formation in moon pools and ice floes impacting mooring wires.
It is difficult to describe the ice conditions with only a few parameters since they may
include first year and also second or multiyear ice, level ice and deformed ice, icebergs,
stamukhas and also various deformed ice conditions. For navigation in ice covered waters,
sea ice charts may indicate large scale ice conditions and small scale ice conditions. These
charts incorporate the so-called egg code, giving ice concentrations, floe sizes and the stage
of the development (or thickness ranges) and where needed they can show ice drift, pressure
as well as other ice features.
The Pilot study IceStream has shown that this egg code is a suitable basis for a parametric
description of an ice field, consisting of level ice at this time, thus useful for predicting level
ice loads on floating structures.
In this phase of IceStream the focus was on the correct simulation of ice floes, corresponding
to their existence in the field and to identify global ice behaviour. Actual modelling of floes
will be undertaken in next phases which fall outside of this JIP. A first step was made for the
modelling work and various models were looked at in some detail. More work is anticipated
in checking other models such as the models by NRC of Canada and a few others. Also
current modelling work has been initiated in 2012, which will need to be recognized.
The egg code may use up to ten parameters to describe the severity of the present level ice.
The first parameter indicates the overall ice concentration as the ratio of the level ice area
over the total area. The other nine parameters distinguish the three main types of level ice,
using three properties to describe them: partial concentration, stage of development and
form. The partial concentration again indicates the fraction of the total area covered with this
particular type of ice. The stage of development refers to the age of the ice, and the ice
thickness can be related to this parameter. Finally, the size of the individual ice particles is
indicated with the form parameter. In future the IceStream pilot can also add other
parameters such as traces of old ice, melting stages as well as other relevant ice conditions.
The limited number of parameters contained in the egg code allows IceStream to indicate the
severity of the level ice, based on the combination of the ice concentration, thickness and
floe size. Additionally, it enables comparison between multiple conditions. Finally, historical
data in the form of the egg code is available, which can be used in the establishment of a
statistical database (Canatec Ice06). The egg-code is therefore used as a basis to establish a
visualization of the ice field, which can serve as input to numerical models. In this method,
one extra parameter is used to indicate the distribution, or level of clustering, within the ice
field. Additionally, floe size distributions based on observations are part of the input.
IceStream has shown that this egg code is a suitable basis for a parametric description of an
ice field, consisting of level ice at this time, thus useful for predicting level ice loads on
floating structures.
For further details on the IceStream Pilot see volume 3 of the Arctic Marine Operations
Challenges & Recommendations report.
The second Pilot study concentrated on the state of the art in marine and Atmospheric icing.
Icing affects arctic operations in areas of lashings, operations on deck, safety of personnel on
deck as well as stability.
The report Impact of Marine Icing on Arctic Offshore Operations (ref. volume 5) is
intended to give designers a state-of the art review on the sources and distribution of ice
accretion on ships. The goal is to develop an understanding of the subject, and to develop a
guideline on ice accretion based on the best information available. Sea spray and
atmospheric precipitation are the two principal sources of ice accretion. Most sea spray
occurs from the sea surface up to 15 to 20 m above the sea surface and forms about 50 to
90% of the icing on ships, the remaining being atmospheric sources, depending on the
worlds geographic location.
The main international code containing provisions for marine icing is ISO19906 (ISO 2010),
which gives guidance on icing as a function of structure height and icing density, but no
indication of the environmental factors giving rise to these icing parameters. Prediction of
icing build up rate is very complex. The physical processes of superstructure icing vary
spatially and temporally on a ship, and icing rate is qualitatively related to ship size, speed,
headway, temperature, and sea state. Today, modeling of sea spray and atmospheric
precipitation are still in its development phases. Several methods are yet available for icing
mitigation and removal, such as thermal, coating, chemical or mechanical. Vessel design for
anti-icing may increase design and construction cost, but can significantly increase
workability and has potentially minimal operational costs.
For further details on the Marine Icing Pilot see volume 5 of the Arctic Marine Operations
Challenges & Recommendations report.
Specific examples of working conditions on deck depend on the vessel and her operational
area. For illustration these operations are provided:
Work on exposed decks Cold to extreme
Anchor handling Cold to extreme
Draghead inspections and maintenance Moderate to cold
Drill floor Heated
ISO 19906 Arctic Structures includes general and quick references to the key environmental
design conditions for all ice covered working areas. Although these tables provide a quick
reference of the conditions that can be experienced, including some design conditions, they
do not reflect operational criteria and they may fall short for detailed design phases as well.
Also they lack time series of data and probabilities of key parameters. Other data which may
be required as well includes Stamukhas, the severity of ridging and pressured ice.
The ONS Summit of 2012, Section 5.2 makes reference to such risks: Weather conditions
in the arctic are not well understood and long term developments are uncertain; special
design considerations lead to more severe conditions. Experience has shown that there are
additional challenges associated with establishing new activities where there is no prior
operating experience.
The Summit makes the following recommendation to adopt the Best Available Technique
(BAT), which has the overall ambition of reducing emissions and the impact on the
environment as a whole from any industrial activity. The purpose of a BAT assessment is to
identify the technique with the best environmental performance among all available
techniques for a certain industrial application, taking into account the environmental
footprint, cost, availability and reliability of the technology. Various techniques / models and
simulation runs may have to be run to select the best performing model.
Use can be made of the proposed mitigation factors for a number of identified risks, see
Table 1 in Section 5.2 ONS Summit 2012. Further details can be found in section 24.6.
Possible risks are related to the probabilistic distributions of the sea state and ice parameters
in the arctic areas. For the open water conditions, the ISO 19901-6, Section 7.4.4. makes
reference to these probabilities: In order to understand the relationship of sea state
parameters, such as the significant wave height and peak period, the unit- and bi-variable
distributions should be examined. This includes the joint frequency distributions of
significant wave height and period, and wind speed, wave height and current speed versus
direction. For those parameters that dictate operability, weather windows should be
computed (for which time series of weather and wave conditions are required). For open
water and ice conditions other bi-variable or joint probabilities shall be determined, i.e.
probability of exceedance of ice drift and direction versus distributions of exceedance of
wind speed and direction; a usual combined probability in arctic areas.
A similar approach shall be used to deal with the variability or uncertainty of several of the
key ice distributions. Joint probabilities shall be developed by the Operator, when preparing
the operations plans and procedures, and an approach with time series of the arctic weather
and ice conditions is required if operability (workability) is concerned.
Of specific relevance is the need to detect and monitor aspects related to Ice Management,
also discussed in section 21. See also lines 127 and following, in the gap analysis worksheet,
Volume 2.
Detection Defined as all those procedures necessary to detect metocean and ice conditions.
In general detection is the extraction of specific information from a larger stream of
information, such as the detection of ice and icebergs (from multiple sensors varying in time
and space).
Monitoring - Defined by all those procedures and operations to bring together all necessary
data, analysis, forecasts, risks and decision making processes in support of ice breaking,
removal and towing operations of potentially hazardous ice effecting operations. Monitoring
generally means an awareness of the state of a system and to observe a situation for any
changes that may occur over time.
Several aspects are important in the planning and execution of all monitoring procedures,
some were discussed above. The following considerations shall be given when preparing the
monitoring plan:
Localized monitoring, see also the Table 7.4.
Global monitoring; this may include bays and estuaries, rivers and outflows of rivers,
sources of sea ice and ice bergs and general behaviour of these ice conditions.
Special monitoring skills may be required as specified in ISO 19901-6, Section 7.7.1: For
complex and/or long weather-restricted operations, forecaster's with local experience shall
preferably be present on-site to check the local situation and provide regular weather briefing
based on forecasts from two independent sources. Independent sources shall be considered
for ice data (satellite, radar and visual) as well as weather data (global weather providers who
may use the same source data of the European, American or other models such as Hirlam),
complemented with those forecasts that make use of localized data.
Recording Defined as all those processes required to record data gathered. Forms can be in
log books, spread sheets or as part of a data collection system. It is important to label all data
properly and to conduct regular quality checks to monitor the validity and accuracy of such
data.
Forecasting - Defined by all procedures and operations on- and offshore to prepare suitable
forecasts in support of operational needs. This shall include the prediction of hazardous ice
features and ice conditions or ice situations effecting the operations. Such ice condition
forecasts shall normally include winds, gusts, cloud cover, air temperature as well as ice
pressure and ice movement.
Additional systems shall be considered in support of these ice management services and they
shall include, where possible:
communications,
data bases,
display
IT systems,
replication back and forth between ships and to shore,
simulations and
training
Note. It may be possible to reduce the design ice actions using IM using qualified techniques
for the determination of the performance and reliability of the IM operations. The
recommendation is to use both numerical (software) and physical (model tests) modeling for
determining minimum guidelines for IM in the design of these systems.
supplement the existing network where needed. Through an improved monitoring network
quality of data could be enhanced and thus forecasts could be enhanced.
Monitoring and forecasting is especially important to guarantee and safeguard arctic marine
operations. Use of such data is made by the overall Ice Management system, as is presented
in later sections.
Uncertainties induced by a lack of measurement data and proper data analysis influence the
reliability of such ice management operations. It may not be possible to reduce the design
ice actions using Ice Management, or IM, until qualified assumptions on the performance
and reliability connected to IM operations can be made, [Barents2020]. Consequently and
partially because IM has not been proven yet to reduce the design ice loads and using the
same risk scenarios, no reduction in the design ice actions for structures can be applied. The
effects of Ice Management on operations support may need a different approach. See also
section 21 for further details on IM criteria and vessel performance limits. Weather restricted
operations can be considered through the use of IM vessel capabilities and the determination
of limiting ice thicknesses and ice conditions.
The Ice Management effects should be better understood in order to make readily use of
reduced ice actions for ultimate design loads on the moored structures or vessels structures
on dynamic positioning.
It is recommended to conduct further work regarding measurement data analysis and
applying this in numerical and physical modeling, so that guidelines can be developed for
IMs consequences to the design. Finally, the total IM plan should include details regarding
ice detection, ice surveillance, data collection, forecasting and reporting of encroachment,
hazards and loading [Arctic Council - Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines, April 2009].
Monitoring
Key parameters effecting operations in cold weather must include the monitoring of these
parameters: temperature, wind conditions, wind chill (as a result of wind speed and
temperature), precipitation, ice accretion (including its extent and thickness), visibility as
well as polar lows. The designer and operator should check the actual operations and what
data will be required for monitoring. Special emphasis will need to be given to the effect of
ice on operations.
A sample of the recommended data to be monitored can be seen from the following Table
7.4. This table shows a general listing of possible data to be monitored, including:
Environmental data
Metocean data
Oceanography data
Sea ice data and icebergs
Sea bed data
Notes:
1. The listing in Table 7.4 is a general listing only.
3. Equipment and fleet requirements shall be used to select the required data (short duration
projects have different requirements compared to those with longer periods of operation
5. Environmental data collection may depend on the EIA need and requirements.
9. Under Meteorology consider adding polar lows, earthquake and tsunamis as required.
11. Navigation charts may be old in several areas and should be updated where required for
safe operations. See also section 22.4.3.
Sea ice and Icebergs Sea Ice types, Stages of development (Nilas to thick and old ice)
Ice type (i.e. first, second and multi-year ice, glacial)
Ice conditions or coverage, i.e. concentrations 0 - 10/10 and coverage
over the area of interest, extent of ice cover including ice edges
Ice forms (floe sizes, pancake to big floe)
Ice Motion (diverging, compacting, compression, shearing)
Ice Compression or pressure (none, slight, moderate, heavy)
Ice Features (growler, hummocks, icebergs, rafted, ridges, rubble,
Stamukha, strips)
Other classes as function of the season (strength, melting, snow cover)
Seabed Soil conditions (sand, soft clay, hard clay, rock, permafrost)
Boulders
Ice gouging
Seabed slope
The monitoring shall be conducted in close association with the needs and requirements of
the operations which will be conducted as specified in Sections 8 onwards. See also section
22 for specific details on standard equipment.
ISO 19901-6 refers to on site monitoring which covers the general requirements for ice in
some form: Where operations are sensitive to local (near-site or on-site) environmental
conditions or to changes in these, real-time measurement, as well as regular forecast, both
prior to start and during operations, shall be considered.
Ice data to be considered for monitoring during operations in arctic conditions are shown in
Table 7.4. Special consideration shall be given to the now cast techniques and the data to be
included, since this will have major impacts on the actual operations and safety.
Ice accretion can be caused by atmospheric icing as well as spray icing. It is important to
both monitor and forecast such accretions since it affects safety of operation (people,
equipment and the complete vessel stability). This includes the measurement and
assessing the impact of ice accretion on deck, on equipment as well as any other equipment
(such as oil spill equipment). Not only do crew members require proper and safe access to
systems, but systems must be able to handle the effects of icing, they must be operable and
monitoring must be feasible at all times, see also section 24.3.4.
For arctic marine operations a number of load combinations may be required and the
applicable scenarios may depend on the actual location and thus localized conditions. The
predictability of these local weather and ice conditions shall be taken into account, as well as
the accuracy / reliability and frequency of these weather and ice conditions.
Specific load combinations may include:
Weather (consisting of wind, waves and currents) and sea ice
Weather and sea ice and drift (pack ) ice
Weather and sea ice and icebergs, including drifting ice, pressure
Weather and sea ice and Stamukhas, including drifting ice
Weather and land fast or stationary pack ice
Effects of local eddies and bathymetry on ice drift behavior and the effects of localized
phenomena such as ice rivers
Combinations of the various loads to provide worst operational conditions.
Extreme events
Extreme events are listed in the Arctic offshore Oil & Gas Standards, section 4.1 which
specifies the requirements for the priority monitoring of extreme weather and ice events.
Some of these extremes can be the results of various load combinations, see above listing. In
specific the following conditions could generate extreme events which need to be monitored:
drift of ice islands
drift of land fast ice and large areas of pack ice
drift of old ice and glacial ice (icebergs) towards the operations sites
effects of polar lows
Depending the complexity of operations and the spread brought into the ice covered waters
the following may serve as monitoring equipment guidance:
- Shore stations
- special systems and software, i.e. Ice Surveillance Advisory Systems including
hazard analysis.
It is the responsibility of the crew to take responsibility of these items and use them to
manage the systems and keep operations safe. The human aspects including the requirements
for ice pilots or ice navigators and ice advisors, are highlighted in the next section.
The IMO Polar Code Section 12.11 refers to various systems which provide vessel routing
information: All ships should be provided with equipment for receiving ice and weather
charts and displaying ice imagery. The listing above specifies most of the equipment that
should be fitted on the bridge. Some ships may have stand-alone equipment brought on
board to facilitate in ice operations, others may not yet have such equipment and should be
equipped with such equipment. For operations involving multiple ships this is economically
achieved by setting a LAN (Local Area Network).
The availability of all data on shore and the replication of ice and system performance data
between different ships and the shore shall be considered. All ships involved in an operation
should have the means to share their data with the other vessels in the fleet, and this could be
achieved most economically using a LAN system. This makes the coverage better and
increases the accuracy of all data monitored and therefore provides the opportunity to make
better forecasts.
Monitoring procedures.
Monitoring of sea ice and icebergs requires special procedures. Sea ice monitoring is covered
well by WMO and as displayed in MANICE. Therefore no further details are provided in
this report.
Monitoring of icebergs is somewhat more specific. One of the main objectives of the iceberg
monitoring program is to known their trajectories and to keep track of their likely
movements such that operational alerts could be declared in time.
Opportunities for enhanced monitoring systems include the following. Visual information
like pictures from sea ice and iceberg can be supplemented with radar / sonar information
and UAVs could be deployed where possible. Special equipment can be used or developed
in order to enhance their detectability, in open water but also in low sea states and in bad
visibility. Tracking of multiple radar positions on marine charting displays will be required.
Satellite images will provide both global and local conditions. Special techniques can be
developed to enhance the ability for satellites to monitor the behavior of such icebergs and to
forward the results both in a Near Real Time, NRT mode and use the data for the next
forecasts.
An effective way for tracking an iceberg is to put a satellite tracking buoy on to it. This can
be considered when there are a few icebergs around and there is the capability to deploy to
the iceberg.
Systems deployed in arctic environments may have more onerous requirements,
operationally than non/arctic systems. This includes the effects of the cold temperatures, ice
accretion as well as loads due to motions in ice. Steps must be taken to address the impacts
as well as routine inspection and maintenance of all such systems. See also under section 22
equipment preparation.
The IMO Polar code in Section 1.2 refers to the need of having ice navigators on board the
vessel or vessels. It is of great importance that personnel with proper training and
background have been appraised on the planned conditions, that they can monitor these
conditions continuously and also record them and make the results available across the fleet
where possible as well as the shore, where possible and where needed. The availability of
such operational data is indispensable, not only to conduct continuous quality checks of the
data gathered, but also to make forecasts and to use for any analysis, during actual operations
and as post event analysis.
In accordance with section 6 of the Arctic Ice regime Shipping System or AIRSS, every
ship using the Arctic Ice Regime Shipping System must have on board an Ice Navigator.
The ice navigator may be any person on board, including the Master, who meets the
requirements of section 26 (3)(b) of the Regulations, which may be summarized as:
The ice navigator is required to have 50 days of experience as either the Master or a
person in charge of the deck watch on ships operating in ice conditions that required
the ship to
o be escorted by an icebreaker, or
o perform maneuvers to prevent the ship from coming in contact with ice
concentrations beyond the ships structural capability.
Of these 50 days of experience, at least 30 days must have been obtained in the
arctic.
Table 7.1 shows the terminology for appropriate weather and metocean parameters, and
severity classes.
The workgroup determined the need that the Operator should adjust this list for in-ice
operations and to assign priorities. Priorities will be determined by the Operator, having
assessed the weather, metocean and ice parameters which are relevant for their specific
operation type.
Polar lows are very difficult to forecast and a now casting approach is often used, with the
systems being transported with the mid portion of the Earths atmosphere flow. Numerical
weather prediction models are only just getting the horizontal and vertical resolution to
represent these systems. Polar lows tend to form when cold arctic air flows over relatively
warm open water. The storms can develop rapidly, reaching their maximum strength within
12 to 24 hours of formation, but they dissipate just as quickly, lasting on average only one or
two days.
It is advised, when necessary, that the Operator should request special weather/forecast
charts from the weather offices. In analogy to Barents 2020 (Section 3.2.3) it is proposed that
forecast should be improved by an improved observational network for weather forecasting
and meteorological databases in the area of operation.
The operations team shall be able to prepare the necessary forecasts or make use of special
forecasts prepared onshore and distributed in Near Real Time (NRT) fashion where possible.
This may require the use of special trained and experienced forecasters on board the vessels.
Such needs apply to the planning, departure and tow phases as well as operations on
location.
Forecasts must include the operational weather and ice conditions, taking into account
applicable performance limits as well as operational margins.
Pending the location and planned operations ice forecasts these variables shall also be
checked for inclusion in the ice forecasts:
- ice pressure
- localized and global ice conditions
- reliability of the data
- ice drift
In various cases probabilistic data is required to develop proper risks scenarios and ultimate
loads and thus responses. When considering floaters in ice additional time series may be
required in order to conduct a proper analysis of the behavior of the system in the dynamic
ice conditions, including a probabilistic analysis of extremes. Such time series data may not
yet exist for all locations and when it exists it may not cover a large enough number of years.
Additional data will thus be required.
Operators can either contact governmental ice and weather agencies, like the Canadian Ice
Service CIS and the Danish Meteorological Institute DMI and several others and obtain
longer term data. In addition use could be made of special databases, consisting of the
digitized ice charts (see also Ref ICE06, Canatec).
The expected performance of the ice forecast shall be documented (ISO1996, Section 17.1,
17.3.1), see also this report section 21.8. The expected performance of ice forecasting shall
be documented and should reflect the actual performance of the types of systems or devices
that will be used in the context of expected metocean conditions, visibility and offshore
operations.
policy toward the arctic region. It involves monitoring, ecology, communication. The
identified gaps included:
1. High bandwidth communications will not be available without further action.
2. High reliability navigation through the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay
Service (EGNOS) is presently not possible in the arctic because of the inability of
geostationary satellites to reach above 75N.
A number of satellite constellations that are in a low-Earth orbit such as Iridium,
Globalstar, OrbComm and Gonets, are serving the arctic with low data-rate and/or
messaging services.
3. GMES services for ice extent have been developed and demonstrated involving some
arctic user communities and national areas of interest but have not yet achieved a
complete circumpolar uptake.
4. The Sentinel-3 satellite will provide more accurate monitoring of ice thickness than has
been hitherto possible in order to meet the needs of science. However, ground
infrastructure and systems need to be developed to ensure that the data can be
downloaded and processed in time to also serve the operational needs of those living or
working in the arctic.
5. The relatively still waters and ice cover make an extension of the operational European
satellite oil-spill monitoring program CleanSeaNet to the arctic challenging.
It is proposed to add the following text to the current ISO 19901-6 text:
For the support of monitoring and forecasting activities, a proper infrastructure is required.
Measurement data in arctic areas are available, but it can be debated whether they are fully
exploited. Reliable statistics and numerical models on the physical environment are desired,
but at the moment large uncertainties are present: Poor knowledge of the environment
introduces thus more uncertainties, so ideally, statistics and numerical models should be
supported by more measurement data, which requires, apart from more measurements, better
data exchange. In order to achieve this, it is important that measurement methods are
documented in such a way that results from different measurement campaigns are
compatible [Barents 2020].
Historic as well as new satellite platforms and observation techniques can be used as a
source for long term wind, wave, ice data in combination with suitable modeling.
On one hand this concerns the application of standardized data formats, and it is
recommended to generate such a format and guide on the structured documentation method
of the measured data. On the other hand clear guidance should be given on how to interpret
the data. Barents 2020 recommends including a checklist with possible pitfalls and
requirements for representativeness and documentation. A gap is identified in high arctic IT
systems and the corresponding requirements for setting it up and utilizing it effectively.
The need for proper databases is thus an important requirement for operations and
monitoring. All offshore operations must be monitored such that all users have access to key
information and the most reliable access and use; exchange of data is key to safe operation;
certain data must be exchanged other may be exchanged. Systems should be in place to
monitor data received, allow sorting and filing, allow all data to be exchanged effectively
and that it can be sent around; data formats must be checked and standardized.
The database will also be improved by an increase in quality of the measurements due to
enhancement of the observational network. Such enhanced data capture must include data
collection on icebergs, corresponding requirements and criteria, and operational limits and
impacts. Further work is required, specifically on hazardous ice conditions. These hazardous
ice conditions involve among others icebergs and pack ice with a high rate of ridges as well
as pressured ice and ice drift.
Operations at high latitudes is not always easy, therefore the recommendation is made for
large projects to be self-reliant and be able to communicate effectively between the different
vessels and the shore.
Van der Schoor et al reports on the status of arctic navigation systems and makes
recommendations for future enhances (STC 2012).
Earthquake
Earthquakes may need to be considered in arctic areas since it may impact operations during
the presence of ice. As with all environmental parameters the combined effects should be
taken into account when applicable. This may become an effect when conducting operations
in the Sea of Okhotsk, especially in areas of using EER system for permanent structures,
which could become exposed to earthquakes. Also earthquakes could effect mobilization and
installation of structures as well as any dredging or construction activity. The combined
effects of earthquakes and cold weather or ice operations shall be considered.
Seabed
All geotechnical data must be collected prior actual operations, to be able to prepare the
proper designs and then operational procedures. This will have to include soils type, strength
and various soils parameters (i.e. structure like classes, porosity, density, particle size, shear
strength profile, presence and properties of permafrost, bedrocks and boulders).
The difference in the arctic may be permafrost as well as ice scours resulting from grounded
ice as well the general lack of detailed data.
During operations soil properties must be monitored to ensure that the procedures will be
followed and the actual conditions will match with the design values or be better than these
values. As a result and in regular intervals or at certain locations soils properties shall be
collected, measured and documented. Operations shall be limited if concerns arise for values
which are abnormal or which might be off the allowable ranges for these parameters.
1. Identify sources of reliable data that can be used in planning of arctic operations.
2. Conduct a study how to prepare short term or medium term forecasts for a relatively
large area, given pipe lay routes or transports.
3. Give due consideration to the variability of working windows derived from operational
limits. .
4. Compare the suitability of the forecasting systems to the required forecast timeframe
and reliability, which depends on the equipment design specs, duration of the operation,
and safety time to take precautionary actions. MO&I Forecasting models are generally
not sufficiently detailed and /or lack longer term reliability (past 3 days) and there is
limited publically available validation data available from measurements in many of the
arctic working areas.
In other ice covered areas typical predictions of ice conditions are extended into 72 or
even 96 hr. windows (i.e. the Baltic). Global forecasting predictions may therefore have
to be complemented with localized forecasts. Also the need for local weather stations
may have to be considered on a case by case basis. Validation of the forecast data with
the actual data should be considered as part of the normal operations. Global as well as
local weather and ice forecasting models may be enhanced from such validations.
5. Consider the suitability of forecasting models.
A number of different forecasting systems may be distinguished such as forecasting sea
ice, its formation and behavior, the occurrence of drift and pressure and the formation of
rubble and ridges in special areas. A second type is the forecasting of iceberg tracks.
Experience exists with models in most of the ice covered areas. The Operator shall take
into account such models and determine if such existing models need to be enhanced for
their operation or can be used as is.
6. Evaluate the reliability of hind cast data, given strong climate change influences in the
Arctic. Areas which in the past would show limited wave action could change over time
due to larger open water areas. It is recommended to prepare/improve global wave/ice
models (such as Oceanweather Inc. which is currently doing a JIP to set up a wave
model for the entire Arctic).
7. Consider the requirements for the frequency and duration. In regard to the frequency
and duration of such forecasts the same may apply. In some of these areas operations
have been carried out, but not in others. Now casts can be used with proper historic data
basis and good forecasting models to develop the necessary forecasts, usually up to 48
hrs. And in some areas up to 96 hrs.
8. Consider the installation of temporary arctic-proof weather monitoring stations which
can be erected on various sites.
9. Prepare procedures and manuals.
. Aspects which shall be covered to assist in metocean and ice monitoring and
forecasting involve:
Operation duration, single vessel or a fleet of ships, type and ice class of the systems
Monitoring and forecasting means
Available data at the start of the project and the need to gather more data than strictly
needed for the actual operation
7.11 References
1. Arctic Council - Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines, April 2009.
2. Arctic Waters Pollution and Prevention Regulations, CRC 353, Current to Aug 16, 2012
3. Arctic Operations Manual, Polar Continental Shelf Program by NRC.
4. Barents 2020
5. BMP (SEIA for the Greenland part of Baffin Bay)
6. BMP SEIA (http://www.bmp.gl/petroleum/environment/environmental-regulation).
7. http://www.bmp.gl/images/stories/petroleum/BMP_EIA_Guidelines_stratigraphic_drilli
ng.pdf
8. http://www.bmp.gl/petroleum/environment, the bureau of Minerals and Petroleum for
Greenland.
9. Enhanced navigation in arctic climates, JB van der Schoor and R. Van der Bijl, ICT
MAROF Thesis project 2013.
10. Forecasters handbook,
http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/forecaster_handbooks/Arctic/Forecasters%20Handbook%2
0for%20the%20Arctic.htm).
11. ICE12, Digitized ice charts for the arctic hemisphere, Canatec Associates of Calgary,
Canada.
12. IMO Polar Rules
13. ISO 19901-5
14. ISO 19901-6
15. ISO 19906
16. NORSOK N-002/3
17. ONS 2012
18. OGP, Oil and Gas Producers Report 447.
19. ONS Summit 2012 - Arctic Resource Development: Risks and Responsible Management
20. OSPAR Guidelines,
http://www.bmp.gl/images/stories/petroleum/2004_OSPAR_offshore_guidelines_monito
ring.pdf
SECTION 8
WEIGHT CONTROL
8.1 Introduction
ISO 19901-5 & 6 provide guidance for weight control and are the basis for this evaluation.
8.4 References
1) ISO 19901-5 & 6
2) ISO19001-6
9.0 STABILITY
9.1 Introduction
ISO 19901-6 gives clear guidance for the determination and documentation of the intact and
damaged stability of vessels and barges and any other floating object involved in marine
operations. Section 9 gives such guidance that is recognized as being uniform for rules and
regulations existing in the classification societies (such as DNV or GL Noble Denton). It is
important to review latest guidance to confirm this aspect.
It is considered prudent to add the above guidance for other specialized craft working in
arctic conditions.
Considerable care and precautionary measures shall be taken when planning, preparing for
and executing tows and/or installation operations in arctic areas even if it concerns an ice
free period. In most arctic areas ice free cannot be guaranteed and projects can encounter
delay which drive the schedule such that ice could be encountered. In the arctic areas it is
recommended to plan for the occurrence of ice and low temperatures even in the summer
periods and to take appropriate measures to adhere to environmental regulations. This has
impact on the choice of vessels, barges and floating objects and their preparation for arctic
transport and installation operations. In particular attention should be given to the use of
vessels or barges converted for arctic use or operations which involve limited ice coverage (1
to 3/10th , pending operation) as these could involve the issues as outlined in this section.
Noble Denton Guidelines for Marine Transportations, section 22 for towage of vessels and
structures in ice covered waters.
There are a number of stability considerations for arctic transport & operations:
General:
The addition of winterization of vessel and cargo should be considered when evaluating
the stability. Due consideration however needs to be given to the failure of systems.
Special attention should be given to the potential of ice building up inside the ballast
tanks and sea chests (ref. IMO guidelines A1024)
Stability considerations as indicated in ref IMO guideline A1024 section 3.2, for ships
riding up in ice. This applies more to the icebreaking vessels. Of equal or greater
importance for the fleets considered is the effect of ice pressure which may cause ice
loads which in turn may affect stability.
Conduct a detailed deadweight survey of the involved spread to mitigate uncertainty
with respect to the basic values for stability calculations.
Consider the acceptability for hopper dredgers to work at the normally reduced
freeboard when in ice conditions.
Review the requirement that additional margin and reserve in the righting arm curves is
included.
It is expected that Polar classed vessels or classed vessel rules will apply [ref ISO19001-
6 section 9.8] for the purpose of this document. Dredgers are classed vessels but do not
necessarily comply with all classed vessel rules.
The stability of self-floating structures [ref ISO19001-6 section 9.9] in ice covered areas
is subject to risk assessments as indicated in the code and the recommended values
should be reassessed, given the limited experience available.
Intact stability:
Cargo overhang is advised to have at least three meters clearance with the maximum
height of ice deformity during the tow, with due consideration of the vessel or barge
roll, pitch and heave. Cargo overhang is also not allowed to immerse which negates the
contribution of buoyant cargo on the intact stability. This is also recommended given
potential icing of overhanging cargo. The recommendation [ref ISO19001-6 section 9.3]
The buoyancy of cargo compartments (such as overhanging legs of structures and
hulls of mobile drilling units) can contribute to the intact stability (see 9.4) is not
accepted in arctic areas.
With respect to the required positive stability [ref ISO19001-6 section 9.3], it is noted
that GL Noble Denton requires an intact stability range of at least 36 degrees for all
vessels and barges for inland and sheltered waters (in ice areas).
With respect to the required inclining tests [ref ISO19001-6 section 9.12]; for the tow in
of arctic type gravity based structures, or GBS, adequate details must be gathered for the
weight and weight distribution. Since an inclining may become impractical detailed
weight and center of gravity records shall be collected during the construction and
margins of errors included where needed.
When major modifications are completed on board new inclining tests shall be required.
Damaged stability:
For arctic tows GL Noble Denton recommend that towed objects shall have positive
stability with any two compartments flooded or broached. This is in addition to that
stated in ISO 19901-6 section 9.5.11 on damaged stability. Damaged stability
relaxations are not allowed for vessels and barges in areas where ice can occur. For
floating objects which need to be transported or installed it is recommended to follow
the guidance of ISO 19901-6 section 9.9.2.2 which allows for thorough risk
assessment. This is recommended to be part of the design process for floating objects in
areas where ice or icing can occur.
In damaged stability considerations the potential of leaking of pollutant is not
acceptable. It is recommended to not carry pollutant directly against the outer hull.
Subdivision using double skin, as stated in ref IMO guideline A1024 section 3.4 is
advised.
With respect to the required damaged stability [ref ISO19001-6 section 9.4] and further
to the above introduction, it is noted that GL Noble Denton requires positive stability
with any two compartments flooded or broached and that no relaxations are given in ice
affected areas for e.g. gravity based structures contrary to what is acceptable in other
areas.
Icing related:
ISO19001-6 section 9.2 indicating allowance for ice accumulation should be taken
into account.
Weight and CoG envelopes need to account for icing of vessel, barge and/or floating
objects, ref. volume 5.
In addition to the attention given to the ingress of water as stated in ISO 19901-6 section
9.5.1.2, melting ice accretion should be avoided to accumulate.
Active monitoring of ice accumulation is advised in combination with planned ice
removal approaches, taking due account of the ability to safely access the icing
impacted areas on vessel, barge or floating object. Active monitoring could include
monitoring the roll period. In the tow of large topsides through arctic areas due
consideration needs to be taken to the accumulation at the top of cargos due to
atmospheric icing which is particularly critical for stability and which is not easily
removed during an unmanned tow. Apart from designing the tow for potential icing, it is
advised to consider active heating or other removal methods not requiring human
intervention.
Icing accumulation due to sea spray is in most cases critical for bow areas. As such the
design of the tows need to take account of an increased trim to the bow due to this effect
and potential effect on the tow stability.
If load-out is performed in arctic areas considerations need to be added on ice and snow
accumulation according to severity classes.
When the effect of accumulated icing on the vessels stability is uncertain a simple
inclining test onboard could provide reliable results. Instead of estimating the weight
and CoG of the icing.
9.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
2) Barents 2020
3) IMO Polar Rules
4) ABS Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature Environments
5) GL Noble Denton guidelines for Marine Transportations
6) IMO guidelines A1024
10.1 Introduction
This section will highlight considerations as supplied by various guidelines as well as an
extension of the recommendation given in ISO 19901-6 section 10.3.2 on freezing.
The ABS Guide for vessels operating in low temperature environments offers a number of
considerations for the ballast & piping systems which can also apply to barges and in part for
floating objects.
It is advised to use high salinity seawater for ballast water within the local or regional
environmental regulations as it is less inclined to freeze as compared to fresh or
brackish water.
Apart from the earlier point the use of using salt water, heating of the ballast water can
prevent or minimize freezing.
Circulation of water can offer another means to reduce freezing but needs to be
controlled which is less obvious for un-manned barge or floating object tows.
Prevention of freezing may be assisted by ballast water exchange, drawing water from
the lowest sea suction which will be warmer.
Barge Ballast control rooms need to be checked for their ability to heat and ventilate
these areas as well as the piping and valve access areas given possible low temperature
and (sea spray) icing circumstances.
The operation of barges and floating objects often involve dedicated ballast control
systems. These ballast control areas also need to be reviewed from an EER perspective.
This is in particular the case when operations are conducted in areas where ice can
occur.
It is important to ensure that all ballast tanks, valves and piping can be maintained,
accessed and operated in low temperature circumstances and that access can be safely
acquired given icing circumstances. Access routes need to frequently checked. They
may not be accessible during all operations when tanks are filled or partially filled or
when the structure in in an active sit on bottom load condition. Also structural and
ballasting criteria may apply in case in tank valves may need to be inspected.
Winterizing and de-winterizing systems may need to be added in case winter layup is
needed.
Proper tank gauging systems shall be provided for control of ballast levels; Tank vents
may need to be heat traced; sea suction inlets shall be suitable for operation in ice
covered waters.
Centralized control of all ballast operation is recommended; a proper monitoring and
control system is recommended. Ballast and stability information may need to be
displayed in a separate command center if one is fitted.
GL Noble Denton: Special precautions should be taken to avoid structural damage
caused by pressurizing compartments when ballasting and deballasting due to water
freezing in tanks or inside tank vent pipes. This is in addition to the freezing of tank
vents from coating with freezing spray in very low temperatures.
Guidelines for ballast water freezing prevention (ABS Low temperature operations,
Lloyds provisional rules for winterization of ships) See also Section 20.4: The
guidelines warn for damage and recommend stirring and/or pumping-through, which
could be feasible for conventional transport ship. For transport operations involving
project cargo specialized vessels and heavy lift vessels these measures may not suffice.
The vessels use large dynamic ballasting system e.g. for balancing crane operations and
ballast water heating may be required to keep these functionalities. For towed barges
without power, power packs may have to be installed. Large dynamic ballast operations
may also involve large discharges for which MARPOL regulations basically apply.
Due to the effects of working in the arctic and having potential low temperatures in the
tanks, considerations shall be given to the tank layout and tank stripping system [ref
ISO19001-6 section 10.2]. Optimal distribution of ballast during periods of controlled
set down and also during winterized layup may pose more stringent requirements when
in compared to open water ballasting systems.
Apart from the considerations mentioned in 10.1, it is recommended [ref ISO19001-6
section 10.5] to ensure that manual override options are also reachable and operable in
arctic conditions.
10.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
2) Barents 2020
3) IMO Polar Rules
4) ABS Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature Environments
5) GL Noble Denton Guidelines for Marine Transportations 2010
6) IMO guidelines A1024
7) Lloyds provisional rules for winterization of ships
8) Ice Navigation in Canadian Water
11.0 LOADOUT
11.1 Introduction
Load-out has not been further reviewed but it can be expected that load-out will become part
of future scopes. It is therefore recommended to study further and use could be made of a
number of actual projects (Tarsiut Caissons, Caisson Retained Island and SDC used in the
Canadian Beaufort Sera Operations) carried out safely and successfully in the arctic, some of
which in ice conditions.
11.2 References
1) ISO 19901-6
SECTION 12
TRANSPORTATION
12.0 TRANSPORTATION
12.1 Introduction
The guidance in section 12 will focus on self-propelled heavy lift vessel transport of large
objects, tows of un-manned or manned barges, tows of floating objects such as Semi or GBS
as indicated in ISO 19901-6 Section 12.2.2. It will also provide guidance for mobilization
and demobilization of construction vessels.
In section 20 of this report the logistic transport activities for supply and materials/parts is
addressed.
Transportation to, in and from arctic areas requires considerable preparation above what is
recommended for transportations in relevant guidance such as the ISO 19901-6 Section 12.
This section of this report applies guidance from relevant vessel operating standards for the
arctic in order to define guidance for offshore transportation of vessels, barges and floating
objects intended for arctic areas also covering construction spreads or other specialized
systems.
As indicated in ISO 19901-6 Section 12.2.1 manned tows are considered to be covered by
IMO regulations. For the arctic this would mean IMO guidelines A1024. The section 1 of
that guideline is important and a few general recommendations are highlighted here, which
are relevant to offshore transports:
Operations in polar waters should take due account of factors such as: ship class,
environmental conditions, icebreaker escort, prepared tracks, short or local routes,
crew experience, support technology and services such as ice-mapping, availability of
hydrographic information, communications, safe ports, repair facilities and other ships
in convoy. (1.1.7)
All ships operating in polar ice-covered waters should carry at least one Ice Navigator
qualified in accordance with section 14. Consideration should also be given to carrying
an Ice Navigator when planning voyages into polar waters. (1.2.1)
This can be augmented with the type and location of the operations, the seasonal and
expected duration, hazards and risks and both short and long term metocean data and the
forecasts.
In addition to the above, GL Noble Denton recommends that a tow-master should have at
least 3 years experience of towing in the anticipated ice conditions.
Tows may pass through narrows between different land masses or between land and ice
and conditions could be challenging at those locations where single vessels or vessel
spreads may need to wait or require additional icebreaker support.
In comparison to ocean tows access to the tow can be hampered due to ice or icing
occurrence.
The draft for sailing in ice and in open water needs to be accessed taking into account
the possible shallow areas together with weight increase and contingency due to icing.
Design accelerations will have to take into account extreme seastate conditions, given
the weather-unrestricted character which will often necessitate model tests or detailed
calculations. Next to this the tow/transport may experience ice loads requiring an
additional assessment of accelerations.
Towing in the arctic in ice covered waters require a distinct different approach in the
tow arrangements, such as short towline arrangements in heavy ice conditions and as
such have a considerable influence on the tug / BP and fleet selection. Due
consideration will have to be taken to the effect on the arrangement (such as fishtailing)
due to the various tow arrangements. Normal tow arrangements are sufficient for lower
ice conditions.
Arrangement of ice escort vessels and or ice management vessels.
In a way similar to ocean tows arctic tows will have to be designed to be self-sustained
requiring all backup tugs and equipment to be available upon short notice. Requiring all
backup tugs and equipment to be available upon short notice. I.e. selected tow fleets
should be chosen such that severe weather changes, black outs on different vessels or
other operational changes can be accommodated. A suitable risk analysis must be
performed.
Ice may be covering the destination site and a temporary waiting position may need to
be selected or operations may need to be carried out in such ice conditions when judged
feasible and safe.
Construction vessels designed mainly for open water areas do not have good housing
around equipment or do not possess enclosed working areas against the harsh weather
conditions.
which indicates
an increase as compared to the (non-benign) table 12 of ISO-19901-6 which is similar to
the table 13.5 of GL Noble Denton. These are only applicable in short tows in very thin
new ice or in very low concentrations (<3/10ths) of medium or thick rotten ice.
Appropriate in ice tow calculations shall be performed to assess the (range) of towing
resistance for a number of selected ice conditions and towing spreads, consider the
formula given in chapter 3.3 of the book 'Marine Towing in ice covered waters' by Peter
Dunderdale.
Towing winches need to be protected from icing and low temperature effects to ensure
they are accessible and operable when required.
Synthetic rope is prone to rapid cutting both internally by ice crystals and externally by
ice edges and therefore is not approved for use in a towing system for an in-ice towage.
Application of synthetic ropes as springs is also not recommended. (GL Noble Denton
22.7.7.1)
The tow plan should indicate required type of fuel and calculated fuel amount given the
power needed in the anticipated ice conditions, where it is noted that a towing speed of
less than 2 knots can be assumed in ice covered areas with severity type 3 or more and 5
knots in ice severity type 2 or less (very thin new ice or in very low concentrations
(<3/10ths) of medium or thick rotten ice). It should also include a strategy for
refuelling where the tow can remain in position with remaining tugs. An additional 25%
fuel (and other consumables)may be required (GL Noble Denton 22.13.4.2)
Minimum requirements for manoeuvrability and propulsion power (Ice Navigation in
Canadian Waters, Ice passport system of RMRS, Russia): Vessel manoeuvring and
turning in ice is more difficult for vessels with long parallel mid-body. See also section
20.4. Larger manoeuvring areas in harbours are advised, to be matched with harbour ice
management. Appropriate calculations and or simulations are advisable to support the
selection of required time and support fleet.
It is noted that the consideration on bunker ports distances [ref ISO19001-6 section
12.2.7] is very important for the arctic areas as there may not be ports available over the
largest part of the tows.
Other spreads then normally applied for open water tows [ref ISO19001-6 section 12.3]
may need to be considered, i.e.
- 1 lead tug on a bridle with smaller classed tugs as escort on the corners of the
object
- 1 lead tug and 2 smaller tugs connected to the corner positions
- Same with a stern tug
- Dual lead tug on 2 bridles with 2 smaller type escort tugs
- Combinations of the above.
Based on the required pull and the availability of proper vessels various combinations of
differing tugs may be available. Towing and especially long tow performance
capabilities may be compared before a preferred spread is chosen. This applies to the
need of support vessels and ice management vessels as well. A total spread will need to
be considered with all vessel capabilities and integrated performances.
A dedicated transport manual [ref ISO19001-6 section 12.8] should be made as per
normal open water operations and cover all ice needs and requirements.
12.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
2) Barents 2020
3) IMO Polar Rules
4) ABS Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature Environments
5) GL Noble Denton guidelines for Marine Transportations
6) IMO guidelines A1024
7) Lloyds provisional rules for winterization of ships
8) Ice Navigation in Canadian Waters
9) Ice passport system of RMRS, Russia
10) SOLAS
11) Marine Towing in ice covered waters by Peter Dunderdale.
13.1 Introduction
The station keeping required to keep the installation vessel in position in ice covered areas is
a critical part of the establishment of operational limits for the whole marine operation. In
particular when working near to active oil & gas platforms station keeping should be
designed such that an accurate position can be held in the anticipated environment.
13.2 Whats different for mooring and station keeping in the Arctic
A number of key aspects are important to consider when preparing temporary mooring and
station keeping in arctic areas. These are (not in specific higher risk order);
The occurrence of ice in considerable variations complicates the placement, operation
and abandonment of temporary moorings but also the functioning of DP. It is therefore
important to start assessing development areas for types of ice coverage as early as
possible.
The fast occurrence of polar lows has an impact on the speed with which abandonment
needs to be designed.
Mooring and abandonment operations need to be performed in darkness, low
temperatures and often in permafrost conditions.
Limited knowledge of (design/operational) loads due to ice conditions.
For station keeping in the arctic, in ice covered waters, the approach chosen in this report
follows that of the Barents2020 Working group 2 design of floating structures in ice
(Annex A17) very much where Ice Management (IM) is used to improve the ability to
remain in position.
As a recommendation this report proposes to apply an operational ice level for defining the
ice action at which position may no longer be retained, due to structural or station keeping
capability. It distinguishes from Abnormal (ALIE), Extreme (ELIE) or Serviceability Level
Ice Events (SLIE) which are design parameters, related to the design of fixed structures or
stationary floating structures, permanently moored. The operational ice level relates to
stationary floating structures, temporary moored, and indicates the design ice loading level
for the temporary mooring before the reaching of which the unit should have disconnected.
After disconnection the unit will have to be able to survive in the ice conditions with the
assistance of an ice breaking vessel and move from location.
The operational ice level is therefore similar to operational limits such as Hs/Tp limits which
define not to exceed maximum motions or forces. The operational ice level ice action needs
to be defined in the operations manual.
In this section the various considerations are discussed in calculating the operational ice
level, relating it to existing ice conditions at location and applying it in actual offshore
situations.
movement) and evaluating in which condition threshold values are exceeded. The threshold
value is effectively the operational ice level, which indicates the ice action the stationary
floating structures, temporary moored, can resist as a maximum. From the analysis it will
become clear which conditions can lead to exceedance of the operational ice level which is
required for in-field decision making.
Assessment of the requirements for the mooring and DP system based on the operational ice
level principle calls for a proper estimation of the loads. To establish such an estimation, a
tool needs to become available which predicts the global loads on the floating structure as a
result of the ice features interacting with the structure, including the effect on the DP system
performance. Validation of the estimation tool should be made through model tests and full
scale measurements of the load conditions.
Reference is made to table 21-4 for a sample of operational risks experienced in the field.
Due consideration needs to be given to the difference between radial symmetric vessels and
weather-vaning vessels, which are influenced stronger by ice drift direction changes.
Figure 13.1 Reduced outgoing equivalent ice thickness in ice floe size. [Ref 3]
13.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
2) Barents 2020
3) Sea-ice management and its impact on the design of offshore structures - Kenneth Eik -
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway 2010.
14.1 Introduction
Construction and outfitting afloat has not been further reviewed as it was considered not to
be performed in arctic circumstances.
Depending the needs and requirements posed by logistical and construction projects, more
details should be provided which will need to be addressed on a project specific basis.
14.2 References
1) ISO 19901-6
15.1 Introduction
A large number of the float-over operations are performed in summer circumstances, but can
be expected to encounter arctic conditions in spite of the period of operation. This guidance
is therefore intended to highlight the most important points for consideration.
ISO19001-6 section 15.4 indicates When setting these clearances, consideration shall
be given to the influence of factors such as relative motions, tide, current effects, water
density, wind heel, bathymetry and draught measurement tolerances, as well as to
deflections of structures. Minimum required clearances are given in 15.4.2 to 15.4.4.
Here it is advised to add the effect of ice intrusion for arctic conditions.
15.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
16.1 Introduction
For the installation of mooring systems in arctic conditions, the guidance in ISO 19901-6 is
quite elaborate and can be supplemented with information from ISO 19906, which indicates
concerns regarding permafrost conditions. This guidance will look specifically at the
foundation considerations and less at the installation work.
16.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
2) Barents 2020
3) ISO 19906
4) GL Noble Denton guidelines for Marine Transportations
17.1 Introduction
For offshore installation operations the precautions which need to be taken depend strongly
on the season in which operations are conducted. Currently offshore installation operations
are anticipated to be performed in the relative ice free summer period. Various operations in
the arctic have been carried out over the past 30 years. This guidance notes that the main
aspect to be tackled in arctic areas is the human performance, which needs considerable
reassessment in arctic areas.
With respect to other aspects in ISO 19901-6 section 17.0 similar considerations need to be
taken as indicated in the earlier sections 8-16. Reference is also made to sections 23 & 24
concerning health and safety management.
In previous sections many aspects of the offshore installation operations have already been
addressed.
17.4 References
1) ISO 19901-6
18.1 Introduction
Lifting Operations has not been further reviewed but is not expected to generate strongly
different requirements in arctic conditions if due consideration is taken to icing and low
temperature effects. Other effects include visibility and wind conditions therefore detailed
weather forecasts will be required.
Currently offshore lifting operations are anticipated to be performed in the relative ice free
summer period with potentially cold temperatures.
In previous sections many aspects of the offshore installation operations have already been
addressed.
The weight contingency factors noted in ISO 19901-6 section 18.3.2.1 need to address the
uncertainty of the effects of icing and snow on the weight of the lift object.
The effects of extreme cold temperatures on steel shackles, slings and grommets are not fully
understood and documented. The possible down grading of standard lifting appliances
depending on the temperature should be investigated.
18.2 References
1) ISO 19901-6
19.1 Introduction
Decommissioning and removal has not been further reviewed but will have to be reviewed in
arctic circumstances as it should be part of installation considerations.
19.2 References
1) ISO 19901-6
SECTION 20
20.1 Introduction
Logistics and associated transport in arctic areas / arctic conditions concerns the following
issues:
Crew change (airborne and waterborne)
Supply base, storage and logistic planning & communication thereof (which may
include temporary offshore supply/storage bases)
Transport of project cargoes, typically 50-500T (pipes for pipe-laying, construction
parts, machinery, replacement parts)
Transport of regular supplies typically parcelled, 5-50T (consumables, spare
parts/materials) or pump-able (fuel, drill liquids)
Stand-by and berthing of these carriers at arctic destination (incl. mooring/station
keeping) and loading/un-loading operations from and to these carriers.
Also airborne transports (crew change, fast spare part delivery) are considered.
These are generally from a base not too far from the arctic destination. Airborne overseas
transport to the offshore site of operation is by helicopter, fixed wing aircraft are used if an
airstrip is available, e.g. at a supply base / logistic hub.
Ice formation on ship (heli-deck), loading gear, other equipment needed for operation,
and on cargo and sea-fastenings. This is especially valid when the vessel needs to be
winterized for the arctic.
Possibly long distances from ice free supply basis thus working remotely. Also existing
infrastructure may be under heavy strain due to use beyond capacity.
Cargo or crew transfer from ship to ship, affected by visibility and sea conditions (using
cranes, helicopter or small crew tender).
All these hazards may lead to call for emergency assistance of icebreakers, to un-finished
voyages (halfway returns), delays and/or damage or injuries. Damages can be to an extent
that EER measures are needed and ship/aircraft repair or salvage is needed. Complicating
factors in these are that SAR capabilities may be slow and limited in capability, that charting
and GPS positioning may be inaccurate, and DGPS (e.g. needed for Dynamic Positioning) is
up to now scarcely available.
This report includes a matrix analysis of arctic condition severity classes, which follows ISO
19906 section 7, but has been extended [see section 7 in this report], which is advised to be
used for planning purposes and is used for recommendations below.
1. Seasonal, incidental transports (meaning open water, no ice or incidental ice only):
The transport vessels arctic capabilities are considered low. The ships are usually of
low polar class ( i.e #7 or 6, IMO rev 2011) or have an ice notation from class.
Icebreaker assistance may be needed, along the NSR or NWP.
Ice conditions severity: below IMO polar class 7 conditions (summer/autumn operation
in thin 1st year ice with old ice inclusions), as far as other class ice notations allow.
Atmospheric conditions severity: 10-year return voyage wind and waves, temperatures
down to -20oC as a daily mean but depending on the area of operation, snow, graupel
(soft hail), spray water freezing, loss of standard maritime communication, low
visibility.
2. Seasonal scheduled transports:
The vessels have been purpose built, with Polar Class 7 or 6/Baltic class 1A.
Ice conditions severity: summer/autumn operation in medium 1st year ice with old ice
inclusions.
Atmospheric conditions severity: 10-year return voyage wind and waves, temperatures
down to -20oC, snow, graupel (soft hail), spray water freezing, loss of standard maritime
communication, low visibility.
Note for 2)
USA Alaska logistics make use of tug-barge
combinations and conventional tows for
supply and export of products of activities
(i.e. mining). The tugs have additional ice
breaking capabilities. Refer also to section
9.1.
carrying pollutants and a general requirement (minimize chance for pollution) for
hoses/pipes and connectors for fluid transfer.
Furthermore, the Guidelines for Offshore Marine Operations GOMO, Appendix 7-A provide
some guidance on operations in environmentally extreme conditions. In general this
document provide guidelines for offshore support operations and is well established within
the industry, replacing the former North West European Area Guidelines (NWEA). See
www.marinesafetyforum.org. Also relevant is the OCIMF's Offshore Vessel Inspection
Database (OVID) questionnaire which, in section 13 presents some requirements for
operations in ice and severe sub-zero conditions.
No further reference is given for the logistic operation planning. Access to arctic regions
may be limited by local and federal regulations, Class, Ice Passports and other., e.g. Russian
Class and DNV having standards in place related to Ice Passports. Canada uses the Ice
numerals method. As of January 2013 the processes and regulations for the Northern Sea
Route Administration seem to have changed. In that respect the IMO Polar Code
requirement for each ship to have a Polar Waters Operations Manual is relevant. This
document, as one of its requirements, will address safe speed, although that may still rely on
local procedures as mentioned above.
For over- wintering operations, NRC has submitted a Technical Report (OCR-TR-2012-08)
describing ice loads for typical Canadian Beaufort Sea overwintering locations.
The IMCA SEL-019 M187 guidelines on crane and lifting operations give no provisions for
arctic conditions, but require that a site specific Job Risk Assessment is made before the
work begins. Site specific implies arctic conditions, but criteria are missing.
Various Class recommendations exist for winterization of ships (Lloyds, ABS, DNV), the
Russian Maritime Register of Shipping is a well informed source (see ref. M. Niini et al). A
problem is that the requirements e.g. for icing vary widely between difference class
regulations and focus on ship safety and not so much on operability.
In the reference IACS Review of World Wide Ice Classes for Ships and Ice Breakers the
limit of operation of a ship behind an ice breaker is indicated. Generally, the operability
criteria increase with a small extent, suggesting that passing in a broken ice corridor still
involves significant ice loads on the ship hull. For example the Russian classes LU4 and LU
5 (1999) are quite prescriptive in this:
LU4: Ice strengthening notation of the ship (independent navigation in young open arctic ice up to
0.6 m thick in winter and spring, and up to 0.8 m thick in summer and autumn. Navigation in a
navigable passage astern an icebreaker in young arctic ice up to 0.7 m thick in winter and spring,
and up to 1.0 m thick in summer and autumn.
LU5:Ice strengthening notation of the ship (independent navigation in young open arctic ice up to
0.8 m thick in winter and spring, and up to 1.0 m thick in summer and autumn. Navigation in a
navigable passage astern an icebreaker in young arctic ice up to 0.9 m thick in winter and spring,
and up to 1.2 m thick in summer and autumn.
Ships generally used for transport of construction components and heavy equipment
generally lack ice-class (Dockwise Vanguard has an ice class 1B). Hence, the operations
design should take the hazards of sailing and (off-)loading in arctic conditions into account.
Transport of project cargo (typically 50-500t), may require special ships and ice class should
be considered. Useful information may be found in section 12 (Transportation) and section
21 (General equipment preparation) where the construction and preparation aspects are
considered.
20.4.2 General aspects of ships without polar ice class entering Arctic
General aspects of ships without polar ice class entering the arctic are:
Criteria for ships with Polar Class. Operation according the stipulations in the IMO
Polar Class Rules and the National Authorities, see also below.
Criteria for ships with IACS Unified Requirements or with a Finnish Swedish class.
Operation according to the applicable standards and satisfying the arctic requirements.
Generally vessels with an FS Class of 1A Super or equivalent are more than capable for
the summer and some shoulder season conditions in the arctic waters.
Guidelines for ballast water freezing prevention (ABS Low temperature operations,
Lloyds provisional rules for winterization of ships)
See section 10.2 of this report
Minimum requirements for navigation preparations in areas with un-reliable charting and
uncertain position assessment (IMO Polar Code; Ice Navigation in Canadian Waters;
Canadian Aids to Navigation System)
The guidelines provide clear minimum requirements for ice navigation. Awareness
in ice navigator training of inaccurate GPS positioning and inaccurate charts on
remote locations is advised.
Minimum requirements for manoeuvrability (are tows feasible?) and propulsion power
(Ice Navigation in Canadian Waters, Ice passport system of RMRS, Russia)
Vessel manoeuvring and turning in ice is more difficult for vessels with long parallel
mid-body. Larger manoeuvring areas in harbours are advised, to be matched with
harbour ice management. . Tow-barges and tugs will have enhanced manoeuvrability
and control problems in ice. Tugs should have ice management capabilities. For
seasonal operations with guaranteed ice free waters the operations will be as in
standard offshore tows. See also section 12 on feasibility of tows.
Also, regarding capability to handle ice conditions, low powered ships (EEDI
compliant) and conventional cargo ships /cruise ships need access guidelines.
paper by Pospelov: Yamal LNG). Logistic hubs and supply bases provide intermediate
storage of these supplies.
Airborne (Year round) (EASA rules, OGP Aircraft management guidelines, CAA
CAP437)
ICS/OCIMF Guide to helicopter / ship operations.
Helicopter blade de-icing and heating
Above includes:
- Approach & landing , stand-by and take-off criteria
- Minimum criteria for cold climate operation of a heli-deck
- Minimum criteria for de-icing of heli-deck and for navigation aids for heli-operation
Regional guidelines may exist for cold climate airborne operation, also related to fast
growing tourism. Generic guidelines require risk based operations design and due-
full preparation of each flight. Helicopter landing criteria for ships and platforms are
presently quite tight, resulting in low workability. Additional hazards in arctic
conditions will further limit the operations. Further investigations are advised, i.e. of
hazards, of new technology to pilot guidance and of technology for helicopter
securing to the deck, leading to improved criteria.
Ship borne crew change operations may be needed for longer distances off the
logistic hub. (Presently, distances >200 nm are out of range for helicopters however,
these capabilities may be extended).
The present regulations cover the basic issues. Operational considerations will define
polar class requirements of the ships concerned. As crew transfer ships are likely to
be relatively fast, ice belt strengthening and advanced ice detection equipment
(collision avoidance systems) are to be considered. Guidelines for safe transfer of
people from ship to ship/platform in cold climate needs extension beyond clothing
protection and standard offshore crane operations; some are found in the new (2013)
GOMO guidelines. Question is whether the ship-ship/platform transfers can be
carried out into more severe conditions than helicopter transfer.
Ice conditions severity: a supply base location is assumed to have open waterborne access in
summer but in winter the ice conditions may be more severe than medium 1st year ice with
inclusions of old ice. Precautions shall be taken to prevent the accumulation of brash ice,
impacting part entry and docking operations. Passive and or active port control brash ice
management systems shall be considered.
Atmospheric conditions severity: 10-year return voyage wind and waves, temperatures down
to -40 C, -50 C or even -60 C (this is site specific), snow, spray water freezing, loss of
standard maritime communication, low visibility.
This section provides recommendations for supply bases and load-on and load-off
operations.
Also, a supply base will have to be prepared for extended functionality as regional
communication and command centre for operations. Adequate communication
systems will be needed.
Storage of rescue and oil spill cleaning equipment, medical facilities, SAR capabilities,
repair and maintenance facilities.
A logistic hub should have sufficient capabilities of support and mitigation in case of
emergencies, guidelines on that should be developed considering agreements made
and to be developed in the Arctic Council WG on SAR and emergency response.
Logistics in mild areas has developed into just in time logistics and minimum stock
optimization. In arctic, these approaches are probably not valid.
Operational criteria for winterization of loading gear (cranes, skid beams, ramps)
See section 22. This concerns specific equipment for the project cargo specialized
ships (e.g. heavy lift ships) (off) loading relatively heavy cargoes (50-500T). Various
studies on specific winterization methods are carried out (See papers by Niini,
Legland).
Criteria for assessment of operational limits of (un-) loading operations (icing effects,
material effects)
In operations design, it is advised to establish limiting ice and icing conditions for
ships (un-)loading operation. These depend on provisions made (winterization of
loading gear) and design of sea-fastenings.
Criteria for working schedules and climate protection of loading gear operators
To extend existing guidelines (IMCA SEL Section 5.4.; IMO-ISPS) for working
conditions to maintain safety levels in arctic conditions.
weather patterns (i.e. polar lows) mismatches in logistics operations may occur and these
aspects shall be considered in the planning and operation stages.
20.8 References
International Guidelines:
1) IMO Polar Code 2009 and revision proposal for harmonized Ice Classes
2) ISO 19901-6 Marine operations
3) ABS: Low Temperature Operations
4) IMCA 'Guidelines for Lifting Operations'. (SEL 019/M 187)
5) IMO - ISPS code/ISM code
6) IMO resolution A.469(XI), Guidelines for the design and construction of offshore supply
vessels
7) IMO resolution A.863(20), Code of Safe Practice for the Carriage of Cargoes and
Persons by Offshore Supply Vessels (OSV Code)
8) Lloyds :Provisional Rules for the Winterization of Ships 2009
Regional guidelines:
9) ISO 19902, 2007, appendix B 3.2 The regulatory framework for Canada
10) Ice Navigation in Canadian Waters, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2012,
ISBN 978-1-100-20610-3
11) Canadian Aids to Navigation System, Canada Coast Guard, ISBN 978-1-100-15842-6
CAA CAP 437 Standards for Offshore Helicopter Landing
References
12) Barents2020 (Phase 4 report, 2011)
13) Naval Arctic Operations Handbook (ONR, 1953)
14) IACS: Review of World Wide Ice Classes for ships and icebreakers (internet)
15) Enfotec, GeoInfo and John Mc Callum: Safe Speed in Ice: An analysis of transit speed
and ice numerals, Ship Safety Northern, Transport Canada, Dec . 1996
16) Pospelov: Yamal LNG, AARC12 Arctic Passion Seminar, 2012
17) G.W. Timco and I. Morin: Canadian Ice Regime System Database, 8th International
Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE98, Vol.II), Montreal , 1998
18) Fridtjof Nansens institute: Arctic resource development, Risk and responsible
management, ONS 2012 summit The Geopolitics of Energy, Stavanger
19) M. Niini, S. Kaganov and R.D. Tustin: Development of Arctic double acting shuttle
tankers for the Prirazlomnoye project TSCF 2007 Shipbuilders meeting
20) E. Legland et al: Winterization guidelines for LNG/CNG carriers in Arctic
environments, ABS technical Papers 2006
21) Helios JIP preliminary results (not public available)
22) US Military: FM 04-203 Section 3, Rotary wing environmental operations Cold
weather operations (internet)
23) OGP: Aircraft management guidelines Report No: 390 July 2008, updated August 2011
24) Garas, V. et al: Aerial Reconnaissance in Support of Arctic Drilling Operations:
Requirements, Challenges and Potential Solutions. OTC 24649, ATC conference 2014)
25) Ice classes: ABS Low temperature Operations
26) Floating and Bottom founded units for arctic drilling operations, W.H. Jolles et al,
OMAE 1989.
SECTION 21
VESSEL OPERATION
21.1 Introduction
Arctic operations or operations in cold climates, could pose challenges or in some cases
risks, which will be discussed in section 21 and 22:
- Selection of best vessel for the job, including her ice class when needed and support
vessels, when needed,
- Operational window, how many days can be worked in summer, in an extended
summer including the break up and freeze-up shoulder seasons,
- Operating performance, what is the vessel speed or system uptime,
- Icebreaker support, what type of support is needed, in normal operations and also in
emergencies, including mobilization and demobilization,
- Ice management requirements to provide a safe and efficient working environment
with minimal risks and downtime or waiting for ice.
The Arctic Ice Regime Shipping System (AIRSS) is a regulatory standard currently in use
only outside the Zone/Date System(Z/DS), as a requirement of the Arctic Shipping Pollution
Prevention Regulations (ASPPR). Based on the success of the AIRSS, the potential exists for
broader application of the AIRSS , with the Z/DS acting as guidelines. Visibility, vessel
speed, manoeuvrability, the availability of an icebreaker escort, and the knowledge and
experience of the crew must be considered when applying the AIRSS.
AIRSS: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/debs-arctic-acts-regulations-airss-291.htm.
Another Class comparison Table is obtained from DNV with approximate ice conditions
which the vessel would be able to handle from the safety of the hull point of view, see ref 6.
Other Rules will also need to be checked and compared (including those by Applonov 2007
and CNIMF).
Table 21-3 shows the approximate correspondence between the ice classes of the Finnish -
Swedish ice class rules (Baltic ice classes) and the ice classes of other Classification
Societies.
Table 21-3 Comparison of various Ice Classes
Classification Society Ice Class
CASPPR, 1972 D E
Germanischer Lloyd 4 3 E2 E1 E
The Ice Passport, Ref 1, or Ice Certicate is required when operating in the Northern Sea
Route or ports in Russia, when the ice conditions become more severe than those dened by
the ships ice class. The passport will provide guidance to the selection of a safe speed
subject to ice thickness and concentration, with or without icebreaker support.
Another method of determining safe vessel speeds can be obtained from ref 7, Ship Safety
Northern, which provides safe operating speeds based on an Ice Numeral system. This Ice
Numeral is a function of the vessel ice class and the prevailing ice conditions found on the
route. High numbers provide access to that area, negative numbers prevent access.
Additional icebreaker support will increase this Numeral. This reference provides an
indication of the safe speed for Type B, D and E ships based on actual route data. Other safe
speeds for other ice classes can be prepared on a case by case basis, by preparing ship
performance data or by using the ice passport approach.
The Ice Numerals, see ref 8, provide a means for predicting average transit speeds which
particular classes of vessels under actual operating conditions. Data quality do not permit
any further refinement of a dependence of transit speed on magnitude of the Transit
Numeral. The ice class regime used is the WMO egg code definition of ice conditions,
which is the best method for classifying ice regimes from the perspective of safety and
efficacy of ice navigation.
Traffic restrictions may apply to different areas. One reference for instance is HELMCOM,
ref 9, which specifies the following capabilities for 4 ice thickness ranges:
1. When the thickness of level ice is in the range of 10-15 cm, and the weather forecast
predicts continuing low temperature, a minimum ice class LU1 or equivalent should be
required.
2. When the thickness of level ice is in the range of 15-30 cm, and the weather forecast
predicts continuing low temperature, a minimum ice class IC or LU2 or equivalent should be
required.
3. When the thickness of level ice is in the range of 30-50 cm, a minimum ice class IB or
LU3 or equivalent should be required.
4. When the thickness of level ice exceeds 50 cm, a minimum ice class IA or LU4 or
equivalent should be required.
The traffic restrictions can be lightened and finally removed after the melting period of ice
has started in spring and the strength of the level ice fields has started to decrease. The
external temperature has been proven to be a good guidance for a proportional decrease of
ice strength.
IM can be divided in IM for pack ice and that for of icebergs and growlers. Barents 2020
lists a number of practical physical IM activities for a variety of systems. These activities
shall be selected based on:
- ice conditions
- forecast weather and ice conditions
- system performance, mother vessel and IM vessels
- T-times
- possible risks and hazards
- effectiveness of IM activities.
No one standard procedure can be provided for all possible scenarios and a possible start
will be given by ISO. In 2013 the ISO TC 67 SC8 and specifically Working Group 4 Ice
Management, will start to define operational needs, requirements and procedures. This
process is expected to take some 2-3 years.
IM procedures shall be selected based on the type of operation, the station keeping
requirements or the requirements for transits. Scenarios that may be selected pending the
above factors include:
- picket boat approach, strategic vessel up drift and the tactical and smaller vessel
closer in, both circling or conducting other manoeuvres.
- high speed approach, to cut through large floes of pack ice.
- use of prop wash and clearance of azimuth propelled vessels to generate a near open
water area downstream of this vessel.
- local ice clearance, use of the hull momentum and prop wash to clear ice locally.
- other physical management operations may include circling, random patterns, radial
transits, towing and moving of icebergs
- combinations of the above.
No single guidance is possible since projects and ice conditions could differ. Vessel
performance and overall safety are key considerations. The technical selection process may
need to include:
- Type and size of vessel, classical hull, double acting type hull with azimuthal drives
- Type of powering, mechanical, electrical, number of engines, power controls
- Dimensions, length, beam, max beam, draft
- Special hull features, hull lubrication, special paints, icebreaking belt, heeling
system, special navigational systems and remote sensing gear
- Performance, expected and actual, speed in various ice conditions, shallow water if
applicable, thick ice, ice under pressure
- Other mechanical and electrical features.
Other aspects that can be considered are the vessel and crew experience and knowledge as
well as prior operations, vessel and crew maintenance, quality control, vessel age.
21.6.2 IM requirements
The IM requirements are a function of the requirements of the vessel that needs IM support,
the environmental conditions and the capabilities of the IM vessels. An example has been
prepared in the following figure which shows IM capabilities for a number of icebreaking
fleets for 10/10 ice concentration, drift speed of 0.5 m/sec, flexural strength of 500KPa and
an air temperature of -30C, see ref 10. The graph shows that selection of different fleets will
result in small size floes. An assessment shall be conducted for each of such operation,
pending site specific conditions.
Figure 21-3 Outgoing equivalent ice thickness versus incoming ice thickness, for
different icebreaker fleets (10)
Risks and hazards must also be considered and a good example of such risk for various
operations is depicted in the next table, ref 11. For each operation one shall determine the
critical operations, the time to stop and secure such operations, the time needed to re-start
such operation. T-times, the time to secure such operation, shall be determined. Based on
actual conditions, forecast conditions, appropriate decisions can be made.
Table 21-4 Sample of Operational risks experienced in the field, ref 11.
A general review of navigational systems, procedures and equipment has been conducted by
STC MAROF students, ref 12, which provides further data on technology and its
development. The study recommends the use of the European based Galileo system in
combination with the GPS system for increased accuracy and reliability of the GPS signals.
Also the use of a laser gyro compass or satellite compass is recommend for the same reasons
of high latitude operations. In the area of communication systems the study recommends to
supplement the Inmarsat system with an Iridium based system.
Considerations for atmospheric icing and marine icing effects shall be taken into account.
The state of the art for icing is described in the Guide, Volume 5, Icing Pilot Study. The
effects of both types of icing on marine operations shall be addressed.
Another navigational aspect to be considered for both ice classed ships and non-ice classed
ships, are the ice charts. These shall consist, where needed and applicable, of global ice
charts and local ice charts. The former can be regarded as strategic charts and are mostly
issued by the Governmental metocean and ice centers. The localized charts can also be
provided by the same, provided they have good access to real time localized information.
The local charts, also referenced as operational charts, shall be used in a tactical sense. Such
global and local charts may contain few areas with identified ice conditions through the ice
eggs nomenclature or they can consist of many of such eggs with supplementary conditions
like deformations, snow, rubble, ridges, pressure, stamukhas.
21.9 Recommendations
Key recommendations are:
Risks and hazards shall be defined for all operations and the use of an integrated risk
management system shall be considered.
The requirements for physical ice management needs shall be detailed.
Effective solutions shall be sought for all communication system at high northern
latitudes for ship to ship and ship to shore communication and data transfer.
21.10 References
1. Vessel Rules, including BV, Lloyds register, DNV and ABS.
2. Polar Rules
3. ISO 19901-6, and 19902
4. http://meeting.helcom.fi/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=76322&name=DLFE-
30794.pdf
5. IACS Requirements for Polar Class Ships Overview and background, C. Daley, MUN.
6. DNV:
http://www.dnv.no/Binaries/Ship%20operation%20in%20cold%20climates_tcm155-
295010.pdf
7. Safe speed in ice, Ship Safety Northern, Transport Canada, 1996:
http://www.geoinfosolutions.com/projects/Safeice.pdf
8. Frederking, Isope 1999, Ice Numeral System and safe speeds in ice:
ftp://ftp2.chc.nrc.ca/CRTReports/ISOPE_99_adaptingIRS.pdf
9. Helcom 25/7: http://www.helcom.fi/Recommendations/en_GB/rec25_7/
10. Keinonen, A., Matin, E., Neville, M., Gudmestad, O.T., 2007. Operability of an Arctic
Drill Ship in Ice with and without Ice Management, Proceedings of the 19th Deep
Offshore Technology conference (DOT), Stavanger, Norway.
11. A. Keinonen, E. Martin, Ice Risk Management for Floating Operations in Pack Ice,
SNAME 2010.
12. Enhanced ice navigation in arctic climates, R. van der Bijl, J-B van der Schoor, Final
Thesis MAROF study, expected by Oct 2013.
22.1 Introduction
This section deals with the preparation of equipment for operations in arctic conditions.
Equipment in this respect consists of the hull and shipboard systems and mission equipment.
Mission equipment is the terminology used for equipment specifically required for the actual
operations, such as cranes, pipe lay or dredging equipment.
This section aims to provide a structured approach to the evaluation of the suitability of
equipment for use in arctic marine operations and the identification of required modifications
to either equipment and/or operations based on such evaluation. It also provides guidance for
specific subjects such as winterization, repair and maintenance as well as lay-up. It does not
aim to provide (design) solutions for making equipment suitable for use in arctic conditions.
22.2 Guidelines
For general equipment preparation, numerous guidelines exist for arctic conditions, both
specifically for these conditions and general ones that are equally applicable to arctic
conditions. A distinction should be made here between guidelines for the Hull and shipboard
systems and mission equipment.
For the hull and shipboard systems (marine systems and equipment that are normally found
on all types of vessels), generally well established guidelines developed for shipping can be
applied. These cover most of the issues related to operations, except for:
Station keeping systems, such as mooring and dynamic positioning systems
Specifically when operations are dependent on ice management guidelines for station
keeping are lacking, see section 21
Sea ice loads on hull and overboard structures passing through the splash zone. Ice class
rules are geared towards ships travelling through ice, which gives different loadings
than vessel staying geostationary in the ice, especially in the zones outside stern and
bow
Icing loads due to sea spray, atmospheric icing and precipitation. General guidance for
stability loads exist in ice class rules, but a direct correlation to actual local conditions
which is required for operational considerations does not exist
For establishing sea ice loads there are no established codes or guidelines available yet. Also
analysis and model testing methods to establish sea ice loads, both global (station keeping
systems) and local (hull strength), are not yet fully established. It is therefore advised that a
best practice approach as available at the time of the planning phase of the operations is
chosen, preferably combining two or more methodologies available.
Guidelines that deal with the specific requirements for mission equipment used in offshore
operations in the arctic are less available, as most have been developed for shipping
purposes. The existing general guidelines for such equipment, such as the Lifting Appliances
guides from the major Classification societies, however provide sufficient guidance for the
specific nature of arctic operations. By combining these general equipment guidelines with
arctic specific guidelines for shipping (by applying the principles and solutions from the
generic guidelines to the mission equipment), these can be successfully used as a good
reference on equipment preparation for the arctic.
Dependent on the above, equipment preparation for the arctic will differ to a varying degree
from equipment preparation for any operation in a remote and harsh environment area. Main
differences with respect to non-arctic preparation may follow from the following conditions
and circumstances specific to the arctic:
Design and operating temperature, specifically extreme low temperatures during start
and end of season periods
Icing, due to sea spray icing, atmospheric icing and precipitation
Interaction with sea ice floes and other floating ice, for both the hull and shipboard
systems and any equipment operating through the splash zone
Winterization requirements, to deal with the effects of the above phenomena
Remoteness of the operating areas, with limited or no infrastructure for supply and
repair or maintenance
Winter lay-up (if required)
Increased interdependency of vessels employed in the operations, as success of
operations may be dependent on e.g. ice management, ice breaking support, multiple
logistics vessels etc., with limited or no alternative options available
This has been further addressed on a subject by subject basis in this section.
The methodology is set-up to assess the suitability of equipment for an arctic operation. It
can also be used to develop operability assessments, e.g. determining the operating limits of
existing unit and assess its operability for a given operation in the arctic. This is described in
more detail in section 22.4.8.
When preparing an assessment in accordance with this section, it should be taken into
account that operations will almost always involve multiple units with interdependencies.
The acceptability for the operation and underlying assumptions (operational windows,
acceptance criteria etc.) are preferably to match or the operations should be based on the
least capable equipment, and changes in the overall composition of the units involved should
trigger re-evaluation of all assessments. This needs to be taken into account when
performing the assessment for each unit and its equipment.
Additionally, account shall be taken of the interaction with any existing offshore installation
and/or infrastructure which may be present.
The figure below shows the flowchart for the equipment selection and modification, with the
methodology further elaborated in subsequent sections.
The equipment assessment can be carried out at various levels of complexity as per below.
The objective of the assessment is to show that the acceptance criteria as referenced in
section 22.4.2 are met. If this is achieved at a certain complexity level, there is no
requirement to consider a higher complexity level.
Compare assessment situations with design conditions or other existing assessments
determined in accordance with this part of the handbook
Carry out appropriate calculations according to the simpler methods, such as ISO
19906. Where possible, compare results with those from existing more detailed/complex
calculations
Carry out appropriate detailed analysis according to the more complex methods, such as
direct calculation and/or (model)tests for the hull and risk based assessments for the
marine systems and mission equipment
For non-arctic units, SLS should be established for the arctic condition where they differ
from the original design conditions / specification of the unit;
Fatigue limit states (FLS)
For arctic units, the FLS is generally addressed at the design stage. It is not necessary to
evaluate fatigue unless the unit is to be deployed for a long-term operation.
These considerations apply to non-arctic units as well, as fatigue is not considered to be
a governing factor;
Accidental limit states (ALS)
For arctic units, the ALS will generally have been addressed at the design stage and it is
not necessary to evaluate it in the assessment unless there are unusual risks at the site
under consideration.
For non-arctic units, ALS should be established for the arctic condition where they
differ from the original design conditions / specification of the unit.
Where more than one configuration is contemplated, the differences (e.g. loading conditions,
retrieving overboard equipment in its stored position on board) should be considered in the
assessment. The practicality of any required configuration change should be evaluated and
appropriate assumptions incorporated into the assessment. Any required restrictions on the
operations shall be included in the operating procedures. The assessment situations should be
determined from appropriate combinations of operating mode, operating configuration and
limit state.
Exposure levels
For exposure levels, reference is made to ISO19905 section 5.5. In ISO19905-1 various
levels of exposure are recognized to determine criteria that are appropriate for their intended
service. This section summarizes this approach based on ISO19905 and addresses the
changes and applicability for application to assessment of equipment for arctic marine
operations.
The levels are determined by consideration of life-safety and of environmental and economic
consequences. The life-safety category addresses personnel on the unit and, where
applicable, the likelihood of successful evacuation before an extreme event occurs. The
consequence category considers the potential risk to life of personnel brought in to respond
to any incident, the potential risk of environmental damage and the potential risk of
economic losses.
Life-safety categories
The category for life-safety (S1, S2 or S3) should be determined for the unit prior to the
assessment. When either S2 or S3 is selected, this shall be agreed with the operator and,
where applicable, the regulator:
S1 Manned non-evacuated
The manned non-evacuated category refers to the situation when a unit (or an adjacent
structure that can be affected by the failure of the unit) is continuously manned and
from which personnel evacuation prior to the extreme event is either not intended or
impractical.
This is the expected category for units operating the arctic for operations within the
context of this handbook;
S2 Manned evacuated
The manned evacuated category refers to a unit that is normally manned except during a
forecast extreme event. The condition under which a unit may be categorized as S2 are
similar to those in ISO19905-1 section 5.5.
This category is considered not likely for units operating the arctic for operations within
the context of this handbook but may apply to adjacent structures or could be considered
for extreme events;
S3 Unmanned
The unmanned category refers to an unit that is manned only for occasional inspection,
maintenance and modification visits.
This category is considered not likely for units operating the arctic for operations within
the context of this handbook, but is included for reference.
Consequence categories
Factors that should be considered in determining the consequence category include the
following:
Life-safety of personnel either on or near the unit who are brought in to respond to any
consequence of failure, but not personnel that are part of the normal complement of the
unit
Damage to the environment; and
Anticipated losses to the unit owner, to the operator, to the industry and/or to other third
parties as well as to society in general. This category should also reflect the cost of
plugging and abandoning wells on damaged facilities
This classification includes risk of loss of human life for people other than personnel being
part of the unit's normal complement and personnel on any adjacent structure that can be
affected by failure of the unit. A primary driver for the classification in consequence
categories is damage to the environment or to society. This in particular should take into
account the specific aspects of operating in arctic areas.
The consequence category that applies shall be determined prior to the assessment and shall
be agreed by the operator and, where applicable, the regulator and operator(s) of adjacent
facilities. Matching actual situations to generic consequence category definitions woll
require a degree of judgment.
The three categories each for life-safety and consequence can, in principle, be combined into
nine exposure levels. However, the level to use for categorization is the more restrictive level
for either life-safety or consequence. This results in three exposure levels as detailed below.
The exposure level applicable to a unit shall be determined prior to the assessment and,
where applicable, shall be agreed on by the regulator and operator and by the regulator and
operator(s) of adjacent facilities.
It should be noted that risk acceptance levels, where already available, normally do not take
into account arctic specific conditions. A review of those risk acceptance levels and their
suitability for arctic marine operations should therefore be carried out prior to them being
used in an assessment.
Metocean data
Metocean data for the operations sites and (de)mobilization route(s) should be obtained. For
arctic areas, specific attention should be paid to the reliability and availability of such data.
Site-specific data should include at least the following:
Water depth (LAT or CD)
Tide and storm surge
Wave data:
o Significant wave height and spectral peak period
o Maximum wave height and associated period
o Abnormal wave crest elevation
Current velocity and profile
Wind speed and profile
Omnidirectional data can be sufficient but, in particular circumstances, directional data can
also be required.
For arctic marine operations additional data should be evaluated, when applicable:
Lowest daily air temperatures, etc.
Lowest water temperatures, etc.
Typical data to be considered is given in Table 7.1 of this handbook. Also note the further
considerations on this data as discussed in section 7.
Seasonal variability
In the collection of metocean and sea ice / iceberg data, great care shall be taken to account
for seasonal variations, i.e. the applicability of the data for the period of intended period of
operations. Also yearly variations for the intended period of operations shall be considered,
as great differences may occur for the same period in different years.
Geotechnical data
Geotechnical data for the assessment of equipment is required for moored operations and/or
operations with bottom founded units. In general, data as required by ISO19905-1 Section
6.5 (bottom founded units) or API RP2SK (mooring system) should be obtained.
For arctic areas, specific attention should be paid to the reliability and availability of such
data and the potential presence of permafrost layers.
22.4.4 Actions
Typical actions to be considered are:
Metocean actions:
o Actions on station keeping systems, hull and other structures from wave and
current
o Actions on station keeping systems, hull and exposed areas from wind
Sea ice actions:
o Actions on station keeping systems, hull and other structures from sea ice
interaction
Functional actions:
o Actions from mission equipment
o Fixed actions, and
o Actions from variable load
Indirect actions resulting from responses:
o Accelerations from dynamic response
Other actions as may be appropriate:
o Icing, and
o Snow, and
o Other based on assessment of the envisaged operations
22.4.5 Analysis
Analysis should be performed to the degree required as discussed in section 22.4.1, taking
due account of specific arctic issues such as sea ice and icing loads. Appropriate analysis
methods should be considered, including their reliability.
In general, due account should be taken of reliability of both the assembled data and
available analysis methods, which may both be lower for arctic specific locations and
analysis methods than those for non-arctic areas. When this reliability is judged to be
comparatively low, this should be reflected in the assessment, e.g. by using increased
margins and/or safety factors.
Such modifications could build on the same references as those used for the assessment of
the equipment:
Hull & shipboard systems: relevant IMO code for the unit (IMO SOLAS, MODU or
other certification) and the IMO Polar code, classification rules and regulations for ice
classed vessels and winterization notations for the establishment of limiting criteria and
the assessment of hull and shipboard systems suitability for arctic operations. Where
these are not available, insufficiently defined or considered to be otherwise not suitable
for the expected conditions or operations, a risk based evaluation can be used instead.
Mission equipment: classification rules and regulations for cargo gear, lifting appliances
and winterization notations for the establishment of limiting criteria and the assessment
of hull and shipboard systems suitability for arctic operations. Where these are not
available, insufficiently defined or considered to be otherwise not suitable for the
expected conditions or operations, a risk based evaluation can be used instead.
As an example, the procedure as outlined by ABS is given below. Similar processes exist
with other classification societies as well, and also several companies including operators
have their own processes on technology qualification as well, which could be utilized.
Of particular relevance in the above shown procedure are the AIP (Approval in principle)
and Detailed design approval phases. Note that this is a formal approval process, individual
processes can and should be adopted to their particular needs, as dictated by the required
involvement of stakeholders such as classifications and /or authorities and regulators.
Where these are not available, insufficiently defined or considered to be otherwise not
suitable for the expected conditions or operations, a risk based evaluation can be used
instead. A procedure similar to that described in section 22.4.7 can be used in those cases.
In the assessment of the hull and shipboard system, two major parts of the operation can be
distinguished which may have quite different requirements. These are:
Mobilization, which mainly involves transit of the unit to and from the site where the
actual operation(s) are to take place. Due to the general remoteness of arctic areas,
distinctly different conditions than those on site may be encountered during
mobilization
Operations, which is the actual work and supporting activities to be performed on the
site(s) where the work is to take place
Capability to mobilize
For mobilization, the following subjects should be taken into account:
Metocean conditions, taking into account intended routes and periods
Sea ice conditions, taking into account intended routes and periods
Autonomy (endurance) required to mobilize, taking into account required remaining
autonomy for operations and/or emergency conditions (i.e. unit delayed due to severe
ice conditions during (de)mobilization)
Ice breaker assistance (if applicable)
Winterization, with specific attention to sailing conditions i.e. including sea spray icing
considerations
Draught limitations
Safe havens available en route
Self aid capabilities during emergency conditions, taking into account intended routes
and periods and/or interdependency when multiple vessels are involved
Ice class and other regulatory requirements, including coastal state requirements that are
applicable on the routes to be navigated
Temperatures to be encountered, taking into account emergency conditions (i.e. unit
delayed due to severe ice conditions during (de)mobilization)
Capability to operate
For operations, the following subjects should be taken into account:
Metocean conditions, taking into account intended operating sites and periods
Sea ice conditions, taking into account intended operating sites and periods
Autonomy (with due considerations for interruptions on supply route, if operations are
dependent on intermediate supplies)
Ice management assistance (if applicable)
Winterization, with specific attention to operation of the mission equipment and safe
operation by personnel (including human factors)
Draught limitations
Safe havens available
Self-aid capabilities during emergency conditions, taking into account intended
operating sites and periods and/or interdependency when multiple vessels are involved
Ice class and other regulatory requirements, including coastal state requirements that are
applicable on the operating sites
Ice strengthening for ice loading patterns outside the scope of ice class
Temperatures to be encountered
Where these are not available, insufficiently defined or considered to be otherwise not
suitable for the expected conditions or operations, a risk based evaluation can be used
instead. A procedure similar to that described in section 22.4.9 can be used in those cases.
Alternatively, equivalency with the classification rules and regulations can be established for
mission equipment (by comparable criticality for shipboard systems), based on operational
requirements.
Equipment suitability
For mission equipment suitability, the following subjects should be taken into account :
Temperatures to be encountered versus design temperatures and operational condition
(e.g. the design temperature of a crane during use or when seafastened, in relation to
temperatures encountered)
Winterization
Availability of anti-/de-icing provisions
Icing in general
For equipment working through the splash zone:
o Temperature gradients when equipment is passing from the (cold) air into the
(comparatively) warm water, and vice-versa
o Icing, when retrieving wet equipment
o Interaction with sea ice floes
For subsea installation:
o Temperature gradients when equipment is passing from the (cold) air into the
(comparatively) warm water, and vice-versa
o Icing, when retrieving wet equipment
o Interaction with sea ice floes
22.7 Winterization
Winterization measures should generally be applied in accordance with the classification
rules for winterization (see section 22.7.1). These cover most of the marine and shipboard
systems in sufficient detail. However, for mission equipment these guidelines are generally
less detailed and/or not practicable / usable.
Two main methods can be used to determine the appropriate winterization for mission
equipment:
Determine equivalence with marine and shipboard systems and apply measures
accordingly
In general, equivalence is advised for equipment which is not related to the safety of the
operation and/or critical for the operations. For equipment which is critical to the safety
and/or continuity of the operation a risk based approach is advised.
To determine equivalence of winterization for mission equipment, the approach as per DNV
rules for classification of ships, part 5 chapter 1 Ships for navigation in ice can be used as
a guiding principle. The basic principle is to define equipment into three categories,
requiring different levels of anti- and/or de-icing provisions:
Category I: installations where anti-icing arrangements are required with sufficient
capacity to keep the equipment or areas free from ice (generally by means of heating or
cover) at all times
Category II: installations where de-icing arrangements are required with sufficient
capacity for removal of accreted ice within a reasonable period of time (normally 4 to 6
hours) under the icing conditions specified
Uncategorized: installations requiring no anti- or de-icing
In determining the appropriate category for mission equipment due consideration shall be
given to its specific purpose and criticality for safety and the operations intended.
In addition, for marine and shipboard systems covered by the classification rules for
winterization additional consideration shall be given to the continued operation under arctic
conditions. Requirements to certain equipment and systems such as access provisions etc.
may be different due to the continued operation in extreme weather conditions as opposed to
the infrequent operation required for merchant shipping.
This means that, in addition to the station keeping system, the following should be
considered in relation to redundancy:
Systems and equipment as required by the governing rules and regulations, including
IMO Polar Code and coastal state requirements
Critical mission equipment. Although not all mission equipment can be made redundant
considerations should be given to redundancy in components and to the ability for safe
termination of operations, such as redundant power supply
Winterization (as per rules and guidelines)
Accommodation support systems, particularly when larger numbers of personnel are on
board. These systems should allow for basic life support under all circumstances. IMO
A.1024(26) provides minimum guidance, principles as per SOLAS Safe Return to Port
provide good reference for further redundancy
Particular aspects of arctic circumstances that have a potential impact as they may require an
increased level of redundancy or have the ability to degrade the redundancy normally
available are:
Influence of extreme weather conditions, which may require a higher degree of
redundancy than for non-arctic operations
Reduced ability for maintenance and repair (see also section 22.9), which may resulted
in a prolonged period of degraded redundancy due to waiting on reinstatement of the
equipment
Extreme weather considerations should be taken into account when determining the required
redundancy for (critical) operations. For safe terminations of operations, inability to
accurately predict environmental conditions for the entire period of operations, additional
loads on equipment and/or station keeping systems, more severe consequences in case of
failures may all require higher degrees of redundancy for the entire unit or individual
equipment. Alternatively, operations should be adapted such that the available degree of
redundancy suffices for the operations. When found necessary, additional redundancy
measures should be implemented in the operational planning.
The reduced ability for maintenance and repair may result in degraded redundancy until such
maintenance and repair can be carried out. This may impact both the start-up of operations
(redundancy should be in place when starting the operation) but may also impact the ability
for safe termination of operations. When safe termination is not possible for a prolonged
period due to the inability to repair, it exposes the equipment to a potentially unsafe situation
for longer period in time, which may not be acceptable. This should be addressed in
operation planning, either in providing increased redundancy or by providing planned
maintenance or enhanced / winterized repair possibilities.
Potential repair work should be identified as much as possible during the operational
planning. Where considered critical for the operations (including required redundancy, see
section 22.8) it should be considered if and how such repairs can be effectively executed in
the expected conditions. If necessary, additional provisions should be made to allow a more
efficient repair, e.g. by installing winterization measures, improving access to equipment etc.
Additionally, increased redundancy (i.e. above the redundancy required for the operation
itself) can be considered such that repairs can be delayed to until after execution of the
operations and demobilization of the unit.
Also, in view of the potentially remote areas of operations, carriage of critical spares and
supplies on board should be considered to prevent additional downtime due to waiting on
such spares and supplies to be delivered.
Planned maintenance and contingency plans for repairs to equipment requiring dry-docking
or dockside facilities should therefore take into account demobilization of equipment for
such planned maintenance / repair or prepare alternative methods to carry out such
maintenance / repairs. These alternative methods, if applied, shall take due account of the
arctic circumstances, in particular environmental sensitivity and low water temperatures (in
case of underwater methods).
22.10 Lay-up
For operations in the arctic requiring equipment to work in an area for multiple seasons with
winter conditions prohibiting operations in the winter, (de-)mobilization costs to and from
the operating area may be substantial and could warrant that equipment is kept in the area
during winter. During this overwintering the equipment would effectively be laid-up, for
which due consideration is to be given to the especially harsh arctic conditions.
Where lay-up is envisaged as a part of the operations, arctic conditions shall be accounted for
in both selection of the appropriate location for lay-up and the specific preparations for lay-
up, monitoring during lay-up and re-activation. Two main subjects need to be addressed:
Selection and preparation of the lay-up site
Equipment preparation, monitoring and re-activation
The above subjects can be addressed based on a best practice approach or risk based
analysis, or a combination thereof.
It is advised that the above considerations, preparations and procedures are laid down in a
lay-up manual or similar planning document.
To prevent damage due to ice loads, a sheltered spot, with a limited fetch area, to limit pack
ice driving forces is a key factor to minimizing the likelihood of damage due to ice.
Therefore locations with land fast ice are generally preferred. However there are many
locations where a unit may be in dynamic conditions come the spring break-up period
despite being in land fast ice during the winter. During this period, depending upon the
location, ice crushing forces on a vessel and/or ice loads can be sufficient to break mooring
lines and potentially damage a vessel. This shall be given due consideration and mitigating
measures should be developed. More detailed guidance on this subject can be found in the
CNRC report Overwintering of Barges in the Beaufort Assessing Ice Issues and Damage
Potential (see 22.10.4).
Conservation methods for cold lay-up should take into account the expected minimum
temperatures and precautions should take these into account. Both the stability of the unit
and the suitability of the lay-out and arrangement should be considered in view of icing.
For stability, class requirements for ice classed vessels can be taken as a starting point,
although due consideration should be given to the point of de-icing. Specifically in cold lay-
up de-icing may be (very) infrequent and more sever icing may have to be taken into
account. Additionally, the lay-out of the unit and its vulnerability due to icing should be
taken into account for access for inspection and re-commissioning as well as potential
damage due to excessive ice weight.
SECTION 23
HEALTH
23.0 HEALTH
23.1 Health
23.1.1 Introduction to health
This section elaborates the importance of health in the arctic. All employees should be
extensively informed about nutrition and the consequences of alcohol and drugs
consumption in the arctic. Research was focused only on relevant parameters, so ice
thickness or environmental aspects are not included here. This is also reflected in the matrix
in the Appendices.
b) Alcohol consumption
Alcohol reduces a persons ability to cope with extremes of climate by interfering with
hormones which control body fluids and via its direct effect on blood vessels. Alcohol
reduces shivering as a heat source in the cold.
d) Work overload
From experience, it is known that operations in arctic conditions may introduce an extra
workload on the crew. As an example, sailing in open water with drifting ice and fog often
calls for additional look-out and navigators for lengthy periods. Ref can be made to GOMO
Appendix 7-A section 5 which discusses the consequence on crew while operating for
lengthy periods in areas with limited natural daylight and section 2 for cold weather
operations. Also the ISO TC 67 SC8 working will address the human capital aspects.
General
a) ABS, Guide for vessels operating in low temperature environments May 2010.
Section 9.3 Documentation;
b) OGP and IPIECA, Health Aspects of work in Extreme Climates 2008
Section about Environmental controls
c) Canadian rules, PCSP manual
d) ABS, Guide for vessels operating in low temperature environments May 2010
Section 8 Crew considerations
e) ABS, Guide for vessels operating in low temperature environments May 2010
Section 9 Training
DNV also has training standards, and guidelines for staff & crew, but they were not
considered during the gap analysis and this further investigation.
Personnel on board
f) ABS, low temperature operations
g) Barents 2020
Section 7.3. Health and stress management
Section 7.3.2. Health and stress management regimes;
h) ABS, low temperature operations
Crew selection
k) Barents 2020
Section 7.2; Fitness for work in an arctic offshore environment.
l) OGP and IPIECA, Health Aspects of work in Extreme Climates 2008
Health assessment for fitness to work
m) ABS, Low temperature operations, Guidance for Arctic shipping
General
a) Documentation
An operating and training manual shall be submitted in English and if needed in the working
language of the crew.
The operating section is to include, but not be limited to, the following:
General arrangement showing location of equipment (including loose items) installed
on-board to facilitate operation of the vessel in low-temperature environments.
b) Environmental controls
Heating and shelter:
General or spot heating on the work site to increase temperature.
Shielding of the work area from the wind.
Provision of heated shelters on the work site.
Local modifications:
If bare hands need to be used for more than 15 minutes, warm air jets, radiant heaters or
contact warm plates should be used. In very low temperatures hands should never be
bare.
Covering metal tools with thermal insulating material.
Protecting metal chairs.
d) Crew considerations
Because of the significant environmental conditions that a vessel and its crew are operating
in, particular attention must be paid to the personnel so that they remain effective in
performing their duties.
Adequate supplies of protective clothing and thermal insulating materials are to be
provided for all persons on-board at any time. Head and eye protection gear is to be
provided to reduce loss of body heat and protect vision from ultraviolet rays.
The crew must be provided with clothing necessary to stay in thermal equilibrium
during cold exposure in accordance with ISO 11079, or other suitable standard.
Head and eye protection is to be compatible and usable with communications
equipment.
Foot protection gear is to be provided. Slip-resistant, insulated safety footwear is to be
provided. For heavy work, a felt-lined (or similar insulating material) rubber-bottomed,
leather-topped boot with a removable felt insole is preferred. An extra pair of safety
shoes for inside work is to be provided.
Personnel protective equipment is to be properly maintained and stored.
Suit Protection Immersion suits are to be provided for all members of the crew.
Vessel should have sufficient tools on-board for removal of icing
The ABS Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature Environments provide a
good description of crew considerations.
e) Training
Vessels operating in low-temperature environments are exposed to a number of unique
circumstances. Weather conditions are poor and navigation charts may be unreliable or not
reflect current conditions. Shipboard polar ice charts should be updated weekly upon
processing of satellite images or as frequently as required by the actual operations and the
conditions experienced and expected. Local ice conditions may differ significantly from
those depicted on charts. Maintaining manoeuvrability for the avoidance of locally heavy ice
conditions is an important consideration when using ice charts at the route planning level,
and communication systems and navigational aids present challenges to mariners. The areas
that the vessels operate in are remote, making rescue and any clean-up operations difficult.
Therefore, additional crew training must be undertaken and operations manuals must be
developed. See also section 7 for more detailed monitoring and forecasting requirements and
section 26 training.
Training to be provided should address operations and navigation in ice-infested waters and
winterisation. Training is to address means to prevent and treat potential cold weather-related
maladies of crew, including hypothermia and frostbite. Certifications are to be recorded,
where applicable, and records are to be kept up-to-date.
Personnel on board
f) Low-temperature operations
The designated person in charge and officers should know the physical characteristics and
limitations of the facility, its (hull) structure, its machinery and equipment.
h) Crew welfare
Crew welfare should be one of the highest priorities of the designated person in charge of the
facility when operating in an extreme low-temperature environment. It is well-documented
that memory function decreases when suffering from (mild) hypothermia. Additional
guidance concerning crew welfare can be found in Marine Labour Convention (MLC)
requirements.
i) PPE
Guidance is required to determine the need for personal protective devices, the types, the
amount and the storage locations. PPE shall be provided for all personnel in sufficient
numbers. It should be noted that PPE is the last line of defence; other measures should
be taken to protect personnel from ambient conditions, e.g. in the winterisation strategy.
j) Survival suits
Guidance is required to determine the types of survival suits needed as well as their
amount and storage locations. Survival suits shall be provided for all personnel in
sufficient numbers. Deployment locations shall include the living quarters and other
strategic areas. Devices should be provided to facilitate evacuee movement from the sea
to ice floes, if required by the EER analysis.
Crew selection
l) Fitness for work in an arctic offshore environment.
It has been proposed in the Barents 2020 phase 4 report that the Company is primarily
responsible for assessing the fitness of individuals for offshore work in the cold environment
of the Barents Sea. The Company should adopt the cold-related health assessment process
outlined in ISO 15743 and ISO 12894 to identify any possible medical predisposition to
harm from exposure to cold. The assessment shall inform Company decisions on accepting
or rejecting an individual for offshore work in the cold environment of the Barents Sea. This
should be applicable for other Artic/ cold regions as well.
These International Standards are intended to assist those with responsibility for such
exposures to reach appropriate decisions regarding the suitability of individuals for work in
cold environments. The International Standards should be read and used in the context of
other relevant legislation, regulation and guidance.
Competence
Tests should be developed to examine the sensitivity of each individual to the cold,
the range of sensitivities and what potential impacts may be.
Communication
Standards should be developed on two way communication methods and tracking
devices and the ability to use them in combination with PPE. Communication
devices need to function properly in cold environments. Personal tracking systems
may be required to enhance safety of operations.
24.1 Introduction
This section covers medical support,
emergency response, fire fighting and
operational manuals covering working
conditions.
Medics on board
h) On-board medical facilities
Arctic operations are likely to require a greater degree of self-sufficiency given the
distance to onshore medical facilities and the potential for delays in evacuating personnel
for medical attention. Suggested functional standard: The company shall perform a
systematic analysis of the preconditions for providing adequate first aid, emergent and
interim medical care. The analysis shall consider the intended geographic location of the
installation or operation, its proximity to shore side medical facilities, the conditions for
medical evacuation from the facility, and the potential for extended delays in evacuation
due to adverse arctic weather conditions. The assessment shall be used in determining
the provision of adequate medical care in the workplace design (medical facilities),
staffing (doctors, nurses, paramedics), supply (medicines, medical equipment and
supplies), communications (telemedicine), and organization of the installation or
operation.
i) Medical equipment
All installations and vessels should be provided with an adequate number of first aid kits
and equipment with contents suitable to the onboard location and the recognized
provision for personnel safety hazards of such locations. With respect to the nature of the
voyage, ship operations and the ability to communicate and obtain timely assistance of
medical aid or medical evacuation, certain medical equipment, medicines and facilities
may be considered unreasonable and unnecessary. Crews operating in polar waters
should be provided with appropriate equipment and training to evacuate an individual in
a medical emergency from the ship safety.
Consider the use of special medics on board each vessel and consider the modifications
to all vessels to include a small mini hospital. Consider remote support from a medical
centre. (Harsh Weather Summit, The Hague 2012).
First Aid
k) Advice on arctic field work, health and safety
Each field party member should have a valid first aid certificate at the appropriate level
for the risks involved.
First aid is the immediate and temporary care given to the victim of either an accident or
a sudden illness. Its purpose is to preserve life, assist recovery and prevent aggravation
of a condition, until you can obtain the services of medical personnel.
the potential for fluids to get cold (e.g. intravenous drips) or to freeze (making
ampoules difficult to open).
Psychological support
n) Psychological stress in the arctic
Extreme cold is only one component of the total psychological stress imposed by work
in an arctic offshore environment.
ISO 15544 (Requirements and guidelines for emergency response) addresses the issues listed
below;
ER strategy assessment & procedures
ER plan statements, information & procedures
Command and control organization & procedures
Detection of the need for ER
Competence associated with education, training & drills
Maintenance of ER equipment
Communications
Escape, evacuation and rescue
Environmental ER
Medical ER Medevac only
Furthermore, operations involving emergency response resources have been included in this
assessment. Such operations may be:
Emergency repairs, assumed always to be conducted using unit-based equipment
Salvage
Recovery of a man-overboard and personnel from a ditched helicopter
Fire fighting (area and external resources)
Vessel towing
In accordance with ISO 15544, the resources that typically are involved in ER have been
divided into three categories:
1. Unit resources
Resources which are under the direction of the person in overall charge of the unit,
and which are immediately available.
2. Area resources
Resources which are not under the direction of the person in overall charge of the
unit, but which are located in the same area. The resources are made available by a
mutual aid or cooperation agreement.
3. External resources
Resources which are not under the direction of the person in overall charge of the
unit, and which are not located in the area. Such resources may be the organization
and resources of national and international rescue services, as well as other resources
which professional bodies or others may place at the disposal of the field, installation
or vessel manager.
Escape, evacuation, and rescue (EER) in the context of this report is the process of
transferring personnel from a unit, from their location at the time of an evacuation alarm to a
place of comparable safety in relation to the one evacuated, such as an emergency response
vessel. An overview of the EER framework is given in the Figure 24-2, an overview of the
EER framework [1].
1
Integrated Ice and Open Water Canadian Offshore Petroleum Installations EER Performance-Based Standards -
Transport Canada
Evacuation
The second stage of the EER process is
evacuation, whereby personnel transfer
from the muster stations to a safe
location, clear of the effects of any
immediate or potential hazardous event
coming from the unit. This could either
be a planned precautionary evacuation
or an emergency evacuation.
Precautionary evacuation is the
controlled means of removing
personnel from the unit prior to an
uncontrolled or escalating incident that
would otherwise dictate emergency
evacuation. An offshore unit should be
equipped with several means of
evacuation for redundancy reasons. In case one of the means is unavailable, personnel should
still be able to abandon the unit. Means of evacuation can be divided into dry & direct, semi-
dry & indirect and wet evacuation.
Tertiary means of evacuation: The method of leaving the unit, which relies considerably
on the individuals own action and is an inherently higher risk method used when
primary and secondary methods are not available.
A variety of evacuation equipment is listed above. A survival craft in this context is a marine
or amphibious craft that is used by personnel on-board an offshore unit to evacuate to the sea
or ice and provides the evacuees with protection from the incident and the environment.
Embarkation stations are accessed via evacuation routes that lead from the primary muster
area to these embarkation stations at which personnel can enter the survival craft. Evacuation
routes are to be short and should provide evacuee protection from prevailing hazards. They
are assumed to be enclosed and illuminated; if not, they should be assessed as escape routes.
Back-up power and illumination are assumed to be available at all times. Furthermore,
emergency response, standby and rescue vessels are all assumed to provide illumination, all
craft are assumed to have headlights and all rafts are assumed to be equipped with flash
lights.
Rescue
Rescue is the final stage of the EER process whereby personnel leaving the facility, entering
the sea or reaching the ice surface, directly or in a survival craft, are transferred directly or
indirectly to a safe haven. Medical assistance should typically be available at these safe
havens. The rescue (and transfer) process commences when the evacuation method(s) has
moved beyond the hazard zone or clearing zone. However, in case of Direct & Dry
Evacuation means, the evacuation and rescue phases are sometimes merged, depending on
the incident scenario. The rescue process is subdivided into the survival and the recovery
components because these two components have distinct characteristics.
24.3.3 Considerations
An ideal EER system off course would allow all on-board personnel to abandon an unit
under the full range of environmental conditions. It would also not be affected by any
incident or damage conditions. The actual evacuation of personnel from the unit should be
achieved in both a timely and orderly manner, without causing injuries to anyone. The main
considerations that should be taken into account during the design of an EER system are
subdivided here into:
Structure
Logistics
Accident scenarios
Environmental conditions
Human performance
These considerations are further elaborated below. It should be noted that several issues are
mutually related. Certain extreme environmental conditions for instance could induce an
accident and logistics are correlated to a units functions.
Unit
Some of the major characteristics that are of relevance are particulars such as the type of
structure or vessel and its function. The size, shape and freeboard are of interest as well. A
ship shaped floating structure and a fixed caisson would require different approaches. For a
free fall lifeboat, a larger extent of freeboard would imply a higher impact velocity. The
structure could either be designed as a permanent production facility or as a mobile drilling
unit. The number of personnel on board may be 4 or 400. The layout may be such that
sections of the facility become separated in case of a fire or explosion. A thorough analysis
of all aspects related to the structure is essential to both minimize risks and maximize
opportunities.
Logistics
The method of export and supply as well as logistics relating to the marine fleet involved
should be explored for the benefit of an EER strategy. Stand-by vessels, platform supply
vessels, ice breakers, shuttle tankers and their availability and capacity could be of major
interest. Furthermore, the presence of any structure or vessel, not related to the unit
concerned, in the direct vicinity and shore-based facilities could influence the strategy. For
instance, a heliport nearby would be of great convenience.
Accident scenarios
During a drill or a precautionary escape, evacuation and rescue from a unit, the conditions
during the process will usually be considered as normal (although drills should include some
realistic surprises). However, if an accident occurs and the unit must be abandoned
immediately, circumstances may not be as gentle as one would want. The structure might
have tilted due to an impact, toxic fumes may accompany extreme heat due to a fire or
explosion and at the same time a storm could be raging outside. All reasonably possible
events and scenarios that might be encountered and combinations of these should be taken
into account.
Human performance
Over the past few years, research has been performed regarding human performance during
an EER process, both physically and mentally. According to Bercha et al.2, in life-
threatening situations, people get terrified and become unable to think, referred to as
cognitive dysfunction. People also tend to get tunnel vision, referred to as perceptual
narrowing. As a result of all this, the error rate increases and this should be accounted for in
an EER system. Stressors affecting human performance are summarized in the table below.
Physical human performance is for instance affected by cold temperatures and therefore
should not be considered as a constant, but rather as a variable depending on the severity of
its stressors.
2
Bercha, F.G., Brooks, C.J., Leafloor, F. 2003. Human Performance in Arctic Offshore Escape, Evacuation and
Rescue. 13th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, 8 p.
The environmental conditions in which emergency escape, evacuation and rescue may be
required are unknown up front and cannot be changed. The effects may impair certain
evacuation strategies. Helicopters for instance may not be able to operate in storm
conditions. However, in some cases, the effects can be mitigated and accounted for in the
design and strategy. In regions with potential for high waves, such as the Norwegian Sea,
lifeboats should not be stored in such a manner that they might be damaged by these waves.
Some of the factors, all from benign to extreme, which should be considered, include wind,
waves, currents, temperature and precipitation but also issues like marine growth and
visibility.
Environmental conditions
Remoteness and darkness are assumed to be the only 2 potential hazards within the
environment-related category, since 2 out of the other 3 conditions concern the environment
and socio-economic aspects are not relevant for ER operations.
1) Remoteness
The distance from the offshore unit to shore directly relates to the feasibility of the use of
vessels and helicopters. In case of an emergency situation which requires immediate
evacuation, vessels might not arrive in time. Helicopters might not be able to make a round
trip on a single fuel tank, so there is a limit to the distance that can be covered. There is also
a limiting number of people they can transfer. In some cases, additional fuel tanks can be
installed; however, this reduces the amount of people that can be carried. The limiting factor
of a vessel is its sailing speed; if relatively large distances have to be covered, the vessel may
not arrive at the required location in time. Meanwhile, personnel in an evacuation craft may
be forced to cover great distances before they are rescued. Other concerns related to the
remoteness which is often associated with arctic and/ or cold regions include for instance the
duration of search and recovery operations, the duration of supply and other logistical
operations. The following rearrangement has been proposed for the benefit of this
assessment:
<200 km: Helicopters are feasible, vessels may be feasible in terms of (survival)
time-distance-constraints.
200-400 km: Helicopters may be feasible, vessels are unlikely to be feasible in terms
of (survival) time-distance-constraints but can still be considered.
400-600 km: Helicopters are unlikely to be feasible and vessels are not feasible in
terms of (survival) time-distance-constraints.
>600 km: external resources cannot be relied on; autonomous systems are required.
It should be noted that since this section assesses remoteness the feasibility in the
rearrangement above is assessed only in terms of (survival) time-distance-constraints.
Dedicated vessels with a sufficient additional complement for all personnel on board the (to
be) evacuated unit are feasible if present in the vicinity of the unit.
2) Seasonal darkness
Darkness, especially in combination with conditions deteriorating visibility such as fog and
snow, may prevent detection of the potential presence of sea ice and other features in the sea.
Evacuation in such conditions may become particularly treacherous since many survival
craft are not equipped to operate in arctic conditions.
Since darkness in itself is not a cold region or arctic specific issue and since the duration of
ER operations/ events is relatively short, darkness is not further considered here. It should be
noted that the resources typically involved in ER are assumed to have capable lighting.
Meteorological conditions
1) Air temperature
The low ambient (absolute) air temperatures in the arctic obviously have an impact on
people. As indicated before, physical human performance degrades as temperatures become
lower, which affect ER operations. The cold can even lead to injuries, such as frostbites, and
hypothermia. Next, the survival time of secondary and tertiary evacuation methods could
very well be shorter. Machinery, engines, controls, electrical circuits, batteries and other
systems might also be affected and therefore require extra attention, i.e. winterization.
Furthermore, potential hazards consist of material embrittlement and freezing of fuels,
lubricants and hydraulic fluids.
Risks are eminent in the event that individuals are exposed to low temperatures for a
relatively long period of time, for instance during survival. Helicopters, vessels, fast rescue
craft (FRC) and active indirect & semi-dry evacuation means are however assumed to be
either designed for the temperatures they are likely to encounter or will provide adequate
heating (e.g. by means of the engine).
2) Wind speed
Wind speed is assumed to be covered in other (general) guidelines and standards and is not
considered any further here.
3) Wind chill
Wind chill is assumed to be hazardous to people, if directly exposed to wind, since it can
cause serious injuries within just a couple of minutes. As a result, fast rescue craft operations
and the duration of the survival phase for individuals (i.e. wet evacuees) may entail higher
risks. Wind affects the temperatures actually experienced. A strong breeze transforms an
absolute temperature of -20C into an effective temperature of -35C. This degrades physical
human performance even further and increases the risk of personnel getting frostbites and
suffering from hypothermia.
6) Blizzards
Blizzards reduce visibility and entail similar problems as can be encountered with ice fog.
Although not exclusively arctic or cold region specific, blizzards are therefore assumed to be
a substantial risk.
7) Polar lows
Polar lows are also referred to as arctic hurricanes: severe, relatively short-lasting
depressions with the potential for frequently strong wind gusts, thunderstorms and
waterspouts. While passing, temperatures radically drop, thereby enormously increasing the
probability of icing5. Polar lows are difficult to predict, entail many of the phenomena
3
http://nsidc.org/arcticmet/factors/precipitation.html
4
Integrated Ice & Open Water Canadian Offshore Petroleum Installations EER Performance-Based Standards
Transport Canada
5
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/The-Polar-low---the-arctic-hurricane.htm
With respect to icing, the duration of operations and events is however key. Escape is a short
process, hence it is not the rate of accretion that is of interest, but the presence and thickness
of ice in itself at the time the escape process is initiated. If no ice accretion has taken place
yet at the time a unit has to be abandoned for other reasons, but ice starts to accrete from that
moment on, all personnel on board will have been evacuated by the time a significant layer
of ice has accreted and therefore it is not a risk. A low amount of ice accretion here refers to
that which can quickly be removed during the time an evacuation takes place, while a high
amount of ice accretion refers to that which cannot be removed during the time an
evacuation takes place. For long distances, the accretion rate becomes an important issue for
resources.
9) Visibility
Visibility can be drastically hindered by precipitation, which here includes blizzards,
whiteouts & ice fog. A whiteout reduces visibility and contrast and it influences peoples
orientation abilities. It has been defined as A condition of diffuse light when no shadows
are cast, due to a continuous white cloud layer appearing to merge with the white snow
surface. No surface irregularities of the snow are visible, but a dark object may be clearly
seen. There is no visible horizon6. Qualitative distinction depends on the operation and/ or
resource concerned; a visibility range of 1 vessel length is sufficient for escape routes, but
not for helicopters. Distinction is made here between visibility of more than a vessels
length, less than a vessels length and zero visibility.
Oceanographic conditions
Both in (partially) ice-covered waters and cool open water, the temperature of the water
substantially decreases the probability of survival of individuals entering the sea. Thermal
6
Sir Fuchs, V., Sir Hillary, E. 1958. The Crossing of Antarctica. Cassell, London. Glossary, page 296.
conductivity may also be an issue for personnel in survival craft, life rafts and other
equipment entering the sea; however, active indirect & semi-dry evacuation means, such as
survival craft, are however assumed to be either designed for the temperatures they are likely
to encounter or will provide adequate heating (e.g. by means of the engine).
Seabed conditions
Seabed conditions are assumed not to have interaction with ER operations.
1) Ice Thickness
Since the quantitative definition of ice thicknesses that entail risks in this assessment greatly
depends on the system used, a qualitative approach has been proposed instead. Sea ice has
been subdivided in thin and thick ice. Thin ice will not bear (support) EER equipment and
personnel, while thick ice has sufficient bearing capacity to support a given evacuation craft
and personnel. Therefore, thick ice precludes navigation, but active & passive systems may
be used as an on-ice shelter as long as they can be transferred to beyond the hazard zone.
Thin ice allows for navigation, be it with impediment; however, manoeuvrability and speed
of passive evacuation means, such as rafts, in thin ice are expected to be low or insignificant.
Furthermore, in thin ice, the interaction through the ice of , the evacuation craft and rescue
means is a potential risk. In thick ice, this risk becomes even more significant and
accessibility of evacuees may be impaired.
It should be noted that the strength of ice can vary with its age. Multi-year ice can be
considerably stronger than first-year ice. Multi-year ice is therefore assumed to be thick ice;
since it has greater strength it may even require less thickness to qualify as thick ice. Multi-
year ice is also assumed to have less surface features; entailing better on-ice transfer
possibilities.
The strength of ice can also vary due to (spring) melt. As temperatures seasonally fluctuate,
so does the extent to which ice grows and melts. During warmer periods, the ice surface
melts, affecting the integrity of the ice sheet in terms of strength and bearing capacity. Holes
and channels may develop and melted water may accumulate in pools. This implicates that
rescue vessels and survival craft may encounter less resistance while transiting through the
ice, but direct evacuation of individuals onto the ice sheet may become too dangerous. It
should also be noticed that hypothermia can be aggravated by wet clothes.
It should be noted that evacuation craft intended for restricted seasonal operation may
experience lower risks than year-round systems which need to cope with extreme conditions.
Emergency Response Vehicles (ERVs) are not assessed here, since it has been assumed that
they have sufficient icebreaking capabilities, which accounts for EER and operations related
to (other) Emergency Response tasks.
2) Ice management
In some of the scenarios described above use can be made of ice management systems to
provide broken ice conditions which enhances the ice performance of evacuation craft as
well as rescue vessels in broken ice conditions. Such systems should however be
continuously present in the direct vicinity to allow for a quick response time which may be
required.
4) Ice Coverage
Coverage cannot be addressed separately; there are many relations with other issues.
Whether or not craft and rafts can be launched and/ or embarked in certain coverage
conditions totally depends on thickness, floe size, drift speed and pressurization (if any) and
comes down to one issue: is the ice feature stable or not? Ice coverage is therefore not
assessed here. The same accounts for Touch-down and Impact in case of Individual (Wet)
Evacuation.
Coverage was initially indicated as a hazard for ERVs, but it's not the coverage percentage
itself that is a hazard since it has been assumed that all ERVs have sufficient icebreaking
capabilities for this assessment. The same accounts for ERV Resource Operations related to
(other) Emergency Response tasks.
Open water sea state can also be combined with some ice conditions to create additional
environmental conditions. However, as ice coverage and floe size increase, the effect of
waves will decrease due to damping effects of the ice. In open pack ice (5/10) and severe sea
state (Bft. 8-10 or average max. wind velocity 55 knots), ice floe projectiles are assumed to
become a significant risk7.
Low coverage ice conditions allow for navigation, while medium coverage impedes
manoeuvrability and high coverage practically precludes navigation (except when supported
by ice management systems). In-plane ice pressure may cause a fast rescue craft or survival
craft to capsize or inflict damage to it.
Whether or not an ice floe can provide a stable platform to deploy active or passive indirect
& semi-dry evacuation means on, or whether it can provide an on-ice shelter for individuals
depends on several issues, including floe size, ice thickness, ice strength and the type of
evacuation means used.
6) Drift Speed
This category has been added since it is deemed to be of significant importance. Moving ice
floes can be very challenging for the deployment of fast rescue craft and evacuation means.
Ice floes crushing or breaking on the units boundary may furthermore be extremely
dangerous for individuals trying to enter the ice. On the other hand, in case of Indirect &
Semi-Dry Evacuation, depending on the drift direction, the moving ice floes may assist in
exiting the hazard zone by adding momentum.
Depending on the system selected, ice drift will occur on the windward or current side.
Generally lees are experienced on the leeward sides even with multi legged structures. These
so called wakes can be very long (miles) and will change with upcoming drift changes.
Therefore emergency rescue system designs shall incorporate the ice drift behaviour such
that alternating sides could potentially be used.
Initially, Touch-Down/ Impact of Marine & Amphibious Craft (Active), Launch of Rafts
(Passive) as well as Touch-Down/ Impact of Individual (Wet) Evacuation all were indicated
as potential hazards. However, since drift speed only becomes relevant after impact, during
transfer, these operations have been discarded for this category.
Fast drifting ice may entail sudden movements of unit and rescue platform, which may be
hazardous during transfer and impedes recovery. It may result in (progressive) set-back
(towards incident-related hazards) and potential crushing of active and passive systems. Fast
drifting ice may also result in crushing, puncturing, cutting, tearing, immersion, entrainment
and entrapment of active and passive systems.
High drift speeds will be hazardous for FRC operations particularly in case of thick ice. FRC
cannot sail through ice; they can only manoeuvre around ice floes if the specific conditions
allow for it.
7
See table A.3 of Integrated Ice and Open Water Canadian Offshore Petroleum Installations EER Performance-
Based Standards - Transport Canada.
It should be noted that some issues related to drift speed cannot be addressed separately;
there are some relations with other issues. Of significant impact however can be the resulting
pressure that will be encountered when trying to move off in such drift ice conditions.
Selection of alternate positions which may offer a lee are to be preferred.
7) Ice Features
Ice features may include level and rafted ice, rubble, ridges, stamukhas, in-plane ice pressure
and icebergs. However, level and rafted ice have been discarded from this category since
they both mainly are a function of the ice thickness.
A stamukha is a grounded ridge and as such only poses as an obstacle which turns it into a
non-arctic specific feature (sandbanks, reefs or buoys are also obstacles). Account shall be
taken of such obstacles in the safe evacuation from the structure in various conditions that
provide little or no visibility. Icebergs have been disregarded since they are assumed not to
pose any additional specific risks to ER operations (see earlier comments).
Loose or floating rubble cannot be considered as stable, temporary on-ice shelters, since
these features are uncohesive/ loose and may break up. Rubble can be an additional hazard
when rubble has been accumulated against the side of a structure when landing a craft. The
dimensions of the rubble, height, width and extent, depend on many factors and due account
should be taken when lowering craft onto such rubble piles. Alternatively they should be
removed or design aspects should be modified when possible to help minimize the build-up
of such rubble.
Ridges can potentially be considered as stable, temporary on-ice shelters; however, they
could break up as well.
Dry transfer from unit to ERV as a Direct & Dry Evacuation method has been discarded
since ice is only assumed to be a potential hazard due to the risk of sudden unintended
movements caused by drifting ice.
It should be noted that some issues related to ice features cannot be addressed separately;
there are some relations with other issues.
There is not one solution that fits all structures and all environmental conditions. Therefore it
may be questionable whether these current systems will suitably perform in case of an
emergency evacuation in conditions such as those described in this assessment. They should
therefore be thoroughly tested and improved. In most cases, several different systems will be
required to allow for emergency response operations at all times and under all circumstances.
Some examples of arctic evacuation methods that have either been implemented or are
currently under development are given in Barents 2020 Phase 4 Report, Appendix A:
Evacuation Methods.
Icing has been accounted for up to a large extent in design standards and guidelines. It is
usually part of the winterization design and strategy of a unit. Winterization measures can
assist substantially in the overall performance of an ER and EER system; however, due to
the extremely harsh environmental conditions, the best protective measure is to stow systems
and craft such, that they are protected. Personnel should remain protected from raining
conditions as long as possible and preferably not be exposed at all.
Icing has also been accounted for in the design of unit, area & external resources related to
ER operations. It should however be realized that all of these resources have operational
limitations, which is not a gap in itself.
Arctic specific considerations regarding evacuation have illustrated the need for region
specific guidelines since it has been observed that not all requirements can be standardized
for global application.
Physical and psychological human performance and integrity of materials and equipment in
conditions of low air and sea temperatures, bad visibility, wind (chill) and (blowing) snow
(blizzards), icing and ice fog are major issues and should be accounted for during an early
design stage. Important issues are Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and survival suits.
Raising awareness, providing extensive training programs and conducting realistic drills are
key.
One of the main conclusions that can be drawn regarding ice cover versus sea state is that the
problematic conditions are dynamic ice conditions. This has also been recognized by Drover
and Warrillow in 20078. ISO 19906 states decisively that Unless the water column is
completely frozen or ice covered, sea state is the key environmental condition that would
influence the behaviour of surface marine EER systems9.
Care should be taken when using rafts, as passive means of evacuation, in cold regions and
especially in ice-infested waters. If there are stable floes to sit the raft on they could provide
good shelter and warmth. Rafts should be used as a last absolute last resort if nothing else is
available. It should be noted though that the severity of conditions with respect to an
evacuation means is relative to the system selected. From seasonal or extended summer work
8
Drover, K., Warrillow, A. 2007. Evaluation of Evacuation Vehicle Performance in Dynamic Ice Conditions.
Presentations, Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. Nov 2007.
9
ISO Petroleum and natural gas industries - Arctic offshore structures (ISO/FDIS 19906:2010(E), ISO TC
67/SC 7), Draft January 21, 2010, p115.
one gradually moves into more severe ice conditions with increased vessel or system
capabilities.
Rescue is defined as the process by which persons entering the sea or reaching the ice
surface, directly or in an evacuation craft, are subsequently transferred to a safe haven.
Search and rescue aspects must however be thoroughly addressed as well as other tracking
systems for personnel, equipment and craft. At the same time more details will be required to
provide the required systems and procedures to monitor and forecast weather and ice
conditions, which is discussed in more details in section 7. Without the proper information
rescue craft cannot easily find safe havens.
The Transport Canada - Integrated Ice and Open Water Canadian Offshore Petroleum
Installations Escape, Evacuation and Rescue Performance-Based Standards (March 2006) fill
in many of the gaps related to escape, evacuation, survival and recovery, as well as some of
the gaps related to recovery operations by emergency response resources. It should however
be noted, that this is a draft standard which was not (yet) accepted and adopted at the time of
writing this report. Whether it will ever be accepted remains questionable.
The main issues for operations related to the recovery of a man-overboard, personnel from a
ditched helicopter and Medevacs by means of helicopters include ice fog, blizzards, icing
and visibility issues. The same issues are applicable for fast rescue craft operations, with the
addition of certain sea ice conditions. No regulations were found in which these issues are
dealt with and these topics are therefore still outstanding. It should be noted however, that
the OLF guidelines OLF/NR No. 096 - Guidelines for man-overboard, which were not
available at the time of writing this report, may fill in (some of) the gaps for man-overboard
related operations. In a man overboard situation the sea temperature is also a key issue for
hypothermia reducing survival times.
temperatures cause that the consequence of some risks are more severe on arctic projects
than elsewhere.
The next session, Guidelines for fire fighting, provides details on the review of regulations
and guidelines. Relevant sections were linked to the fire fighting operations and arctic
conditions to generate a schema of challenges and rules. gaps are listed and
recommendations formulated in Section 24.4.3.
The operations of fire fighting were divided in seven parts being fire prevention, equipment,
fire detections, fire control, fire extinguishment, monitoring and damage assessment.
Fire prevention was included in the review of fire fighting as being an important step to
reduce the likelihood of the risk. Major parts of fire prevention were identified in crew
selection, training, motivation, provision of appropriate storage facilities, housekeeping and
in the vessel design.
All fire fighting equipment & procedures need to be suitable for the anticipated
circumstances including fire detection system, fire fighting equipment, fire fighting
procedures, PPE, fire fighting team, drills & training, fire fighting & escape plans, external
support system and medical care. For medical care reference is made to chapter 24.2.
The fire detection and alarm system was further divided into smoke detectors, temperature
detectors, gas detectors, alarm buttons, internal and external communication. For
communication reference is made to work group 2.
Fire fighting and control focusses on the requirements to follow procedures and includes the
accessibility and usability of PPE, accessibility and usage of fire fighting equipment,
accessibility of the fire source and the supply of appropriate extinguish media.
The three remaining major steps fire extinguishment, monitoring and damage assess were
not specified further.
10
Socio-economic aspects is a broad term. In relation to fire fighting it is associated with broad public concerns
as well as employment of locals due to economic interest of Arctic countries. While locals may have a different
social background, limited offshore experience and no experience on the specific construction unit.
More guidance for fire mitigation and fire fighting would be useful. Recommendations could
be developed by collecting expertise from suppliers and fire fighters in cold regions
(onshore).
General
a) ABS Guide for vessels operating in low temperature environments May 2010
Section 5.2 Heating for Survival
PPE
b) Barents 2020
Section 7.1.4. Clothing and personal protection equipment
c) ABS
Low temperature operations
d) Guide for vessels operating in low temperature environments May 2010
Crew Considerations , section 8.2 Clothing
e) Vessels operating in low temperature environments
PPE
b) Clothing and personal protection equipment
Proper clothing in cold climates is an essential factor for ensuring personnel health, safety,
comfort and work performance. Working in the cold implies varying climatic conditions
and activity levels and thus varying requirements for protection. The company shall
ensure that all personnel working outside are correctly dressed for the weather conditions
and the job to be undertaken.
A multi-layered clothing system is ideal, with each layer serving a specific purpose.
Inner layer (underwear): moisture absorption and transport
Middle layer (shirt, sweater): insulation and moisture transport
Outer layer (wind breaker, arctic clothing, rain gear): protection against the external
environment and moisture transport.
In addition, protective clothing must include appropriate head, face and neck protection;
hand protection; and foot protection.
If evacuation onto solid ice is part of the EER strategy, the evacuees shall have adequate
clothing, footwear and traction devices to provide protection and mobility until rescued.
Externally stored PPE shall account for extreme cold temperatures and snow and ice
accumulations. The need for heating storage areas shall be assessed.
j) Clothing insulation
Calculates the clothing insulation required to work in the cold. This is handy for arctic
environments. Clothing insulation is expressed in Clo values. To survive in arctic
regions clothing insulation of about 3.5 Clo is required.
Accommodation
k) Health and safety;
It is recommended not to allow anyone to be alone in the field. Every field party must
have at least one person in camp at all times with at least three years experience
working in the arctic.
All personnel accommodation, public spaces and the equipment installed in them should
be designed so that each person making proper use of them will not suffer injury during
normal open water operations, designed ice transiting modes of operation, and
emergency manoeuvring conditions. Ships of Polar Classes 1 to 5 inclusive should have
sufficiently available and reliable facilities to maintain a life sustaining environment in
the event of an emergency and/or of extended ice entrapment.
Other
o) Fire fighter outfits, live saving appliances and survival arrangements
It is recommended that adequate supplies of protective clothing and thermal insulating
materials should be provided, taking into account the intended voyage:
Personal Survival Kit (PSK)
Group Survival Kit (GSK)
The contents of these kits can be found in Appendix B
Additional guidance concerning crew welfare can be found in Marine Labour Convention
(MLC) requirements.
SECTION 25
ENVIRONMMENT
25.0 ENVIRONMENT
Prioritization phase
The next step is the prioritization phase in which the ecological impact of the various
scenarios is compared to select which scenario is the best option. This phase can be
elaborated using a semi quantitative approach or a quantitative approach.
The semi quantitative assessment is used to compare the relative impact of the various (sub)
activities. It is often used to identify and prioritize potential areas for mitigation. For the semi
quantitative assessment three steps are defined; intensity of pressures, sensitivity of
ecosystem components and determination of the environmental impact.
The quantitative assessment is used when the actual effect on the ecosystem components
needs to be established. It differs from the qualitative and the semi quantitative assessment
by the numerical quantified effect scores, indicating the expected decrease/increase of the
25.1.5 References
1) Therivel, R. and B. Ross, Cumulative effect assessment: Does scale matter? .
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2007
2) van der Walt, A., The consideration of cumulative effects in environmental
assessment: South African experience in an international context, 2005, University
of Manchester.
3) Karman, C.C. and R.H. Jongbloed, Assessment of the Cumulative Effect of
Activities in the Maritime Area. Overview of relevant legislation and proposal for a
harmonised approach, 2008, IMARES: Den Helder.
4) Volume 4 Environmental Impact Pilot Project.
As part of the performed gap analysis on the environment the resulting tables have been
attached in Appendix C for reference. There a list of rules & regulations for an EIA are given
in Table C.05
26.0 TRAINING
26.1 Introduction
Training is used to prepare and improve personnel awareness and performance.
Familiarization
f) Canadian rules, PCSP manual, Part 3 Advice on arctic field work, health and safety
Training sessions
g) IMO, guidelines for ships operating in polar waters
h) Arctic council, arctic offshore oil and gas guidelines
Section 6.7 Training
Drills
i) Arctic council, arctic offshore oil and gas guidelines
Section 7.2 Response, subsection Exercises and Drills
The DNV standards for approved Navigation training and training standards is mentioned
here for reference.
The training section is to cover at least the following subject matter areas:
Ice recognition
Safe navigation in ice
Procedures during escorted operations
Instructions for drills and emergency response
Cold weather-related maladies
Ice management
Arctic awareness and operations
Survival
Ice pilot, ice advisor and ice observer training
Training for marine engineers
Arctic training for shore support staff
Risk and hazard management
An updated listing of personnel certified (if applicable) in the use of specialized
equipment carried for any type of emergency response is to be maintained. A training log
is to be maintained documenting the conduct of the training and the names of the persons
attending the training.
Familiarization
f) Advice on arctic field work, health and safety
Safety considerations are paramount in the arctic. Ultimately, you are responsible for
your safety do some homework in advance to learn the rules of the road.
Training sessions
g) Employment in extreme climates
Can be used as a reference document for employee training
This should take place at induction and then as needed throughout employment in
extreme climates. The following subjects should be covered:
The basics of body temperature and heat exchange.
Hazards related to sunlight, carbon monoxide poisoning and alcohol.
Preventive practices.
Clothing requirements.
The importance of food and water.
Recognition of temperature-related symptoms and signs.
The potential for other illness to impact on tolerance to extremes of heat and
cold.
Drills
i) Response, subsection Exercises and Drills
Drills include desk-top exercises and actual equipment and operational deployment
exercises. Such drills should be conducted by operators as well as by relevant
government authorities in their areas of responsibility, such as coast guards for marine
spills.
Toolbox talks must be convened for every operation and all planned processes shall be
clarified and discussed with all personnel involved and specific roles for all personnel
involved shall be discussed. Risk and hazards to be defined and documented as well as the
necessary permitting systems. Communication shall be established.
SECTION 27
DREDGING OPERATIONS
27.1 Introduction
The scope of this section includes the following
activities:
1. General dredging operations (incl.
reclamation works)
2. Pipeline trenching
Description of activities
Figure 27.1 - Dredging Operation
Specific impact from execution in arctic (Source: Boskalis)
environment
Recommendations
During the gap analysis no specific existing codes or guidelines for dredging operations have
been identified. This also means that no codes or guidelines have been identified specifically
for arctic environments. However, some scattered guidance for dredging operations in arctic
environments can be found in the following documents:
ISO 19906
DNV-OS-F101
API Recommended Practise 2N
BS 6349-5
Note:
The following document was published after completion of the gap analysis. It is a
comprehensive manual into dredging and reclamation operations. General and specific
guidance for designers and contractors is reported there and used in the remainder of this
section. However no reference is made in the manual to arctic environments.
CURNET publication 244 Hydraulic Fill Manual
For further details reference is made to Volume 2 Gap Analysis Study Matrix.
CSDs are widely used in dredging and reclamation projects and can, depending on their
installed power, dredge material ranging from silt and soft clay to moderately strong rock.
While dredging, the CSD swings sideways around a point fixed by the so-called working
spud at the vessels aft. The sideways movement is controlled with a wire anchor system
attached to the lower end of the cutter ladder. Although the larger CSDs are often self-
propelled, most CSDs are not.
Discharging may be achieved by opening doors or valves in the bottom of the vessels
hopper, or by so-called rainbowing or pumping through a discharge pipeline. The selected
discharge method depends on many factors like existing environmental constraints, distance
to the reclamation site and water depth.
The TSHD may be used for dredging sand, silt or clayey material. The larger dredgers are
even capable of dredging (weak) rock. Dredging production will vary according to the
strength of the material to be dredged.
Backhoe dredger
The backhoe dredger is basically a hydraulic excavator installed on a pontoon. The pontoon
uses spuds to secure its position when dredging. In the dredging position the spuds elevate
the pontoon and in this way considerable excavation forces may be delivered to the seabed.
Depending on the size and capacity of the backhoe pontoon, this type of dredger may dredge
compacted sand, stiff clay and weak rock. Depending on the sophistication of the dredger,
the backhoe can be more or less integrated with the pontoon.
For all of the three above equipment types, the transport of dredged material, either from
project excavation site to disposal area or from borrow area to project reclamation site, can
be carried out by hydraulic transport through pipelines, by hopper dredgers or by barges.
With hydraulic transport the marine pipeline may be a floating line or a sinker line, which
ever fits best in the working conditions like e.g. hindrance to/from other shipping, pumping
distances and effects of swell, waves and current. On land this pipeline is continued with
flanged sections and/or pipeline branches.
Soil conditions
Firstly arctic soil conditions affect the dredging design and work method. The behaviour of
permafrost and seasonally frozen grounds, especially the active layer11 and the talik12 within
the frozen ground system, is variable and may change during (long-term) dredging
operations. Also the dredging operation itself may affect the behaviour of the frozen and
possible thawing ground system. The stability and bearing strength of the ground will
change. The design and dredging work method should take this change into account.
Secondly the production rates of the dredger will be negatively affected by (subsea)
permafrost and seasonally frozen ground.
It is noted in the API Recommended Practice [ref. 3], section 10.4.2, that the placing of
frozen fill may create ice build-up and can cause large settlement and that the in-place
properties should take into account ice content. No further guidance, no reference or any
quantification is provided.
11
Active layer is the seasonally thawing/freezing layer of permafrost
12
Talik (from Russian: ;derived from the verb tait, to melt) is a layer of year-round unfrozen ground that
lies in permafrost areas.
Cold climate
It is identified that cold climate meteorological conditions (i.e. temperature, snow, icing etc)
affect the operability of the dredger, first of all through the impact, that meteorological
conditions have on people operating the dredger. Secondly, icing and low air temperature
affect the functioning of onboard systems (such as winches, wires, hydraulic systems,
hydraulic pipelines, valves and pipe couplings enabling dredging).
Under arctic conditions hydraulic transport of dredged material through pipelines needs to be
considered. Experience is that they freeze after stoppage of work and that it is difficult to
make couplings. Moreover valves/control structures within the pipelines start to freeze
during operations.
Without the correct winterization measures marine icing effects the safety on all areas were
personnel must find access and on operating systems and bridge visibility. Marine icing,
atmospheric and sea spray, can fill sheaves up with ice.
Next to determining workability figures for the range of dredger types with respect to ice
conditions, also guidelines are recommended on the implementation of ice management
systems and measures such as forecasting, definition of safety zones, ice sheltering,
abandonment decision procedures etc. This has been discussed in section 21 Vessel
operation and section 7 Metocean, ice and earthquake requirements.
Guidelines on how to keep dredging systems operable under cold conditions are
recommended. In former sections equipment preparation, winterisation measures, different
operational strategies, de-icing strategies and prevention of icing are discussed.
Here are some practical examples; Submerged fairleads can minimize the impact of floating
ice on mooring lines. The impact of floating ice on overboard drag arms and cutter ladders
can be minimized by creating a lee side. Also special arrangements for the drag arms as well
as cutter ladders could be considered. Freezing of the water in the hopper tanks needs to be
prevented. Using overdesigned dredging gear mitigates the problems with sea ice and marine
icing.
Guidelines on how to deal with frozen fill are needed. Questions that have to be addressed
are: How frozen fill effects the design (load and stability) and what is acceptable and what
mitigating or precaution measures are to be taken.
The open trench could be covered by natural sedimentation depending on soil conditions and
current near sea bottom. However, backfilling after the trenching or burial could be required
for additional protection or thermal insulation purposes.
Trenching equipment should be selected based on sea floor soil conditions; following are
available trenching equipment in the industry:
- Ploughing
- Jetting
- Mechanical digging & cutting
- Dredging
A paper concerning Arctic and Harsh Environment Pipeline Trenching Technologies and
Challenges has been presented at the ATC in 2011, ref. 6, which highlights the challenges
facing trenching pipelines in arctic regions and the limitations of current trenching and
dredging equipment. Another paper is Vessel requirements for Arctic Pipeline trenching
and installation, W.H. Jolles 1990, ref. 7.
27.4 References
1) ISO 19906
2) DNV-OS-F101
3) API Recommended Practice 2N
4) BS 6349-5
5) CURNET publication 244 Hydraulic Fill Manual13
6) Jukes P., Kenny s., et al. ATC 2011. Arctic and Harsh Environment Pipeline Trenching
Technologies and Challenges.
7) Vessel requirements for Arctic Pipeline trenching and installation, W.H. Jolles 1990
13
Published after Gap Analysis
28.1 Introduction
The scope of this section includes the following
activities:
General Pipe lay Operation
Subsea Structure Installation
Launch & Recovery of Equipment
Abandonment and Recovery
Anchoring
Landfalls
The impact of arctic and cold weather conditions on Figure 28.1 pipe laying in the
pipe lay operations (for projects) are more of a Gulf of Finland (Source: Allseas)
general nature than specific to the pipe lay
operation itself.
The general impact of arctic conditions on all kinds of operations including pipe lay are
described in the previous sections but specifically in sections 6 Organization, 7 Metocean
and Ice requirements, 12 Transportation, 20 Logistics, 21 Vessel Operation, 22 General
Equipment Preparation and in sections 23-26 HSE related. The noted gaps and
recommendations in these sections are as important as and go hand in hand with the gaps and
recommendations related to pipe lay operations stated further in this section.
Figure 28.1 - Pipelaying in the Gulf of Finland
28.2 Guidelines
During the gap analysis no general rules, regulations or standards for arctic pipe lay
operations are available. This means that no codes or guidelines have been identified
specifically for arctic environments. However, some scattered guidance for pipe lay
operations in arctic environments can be found in the following documents:
ISO 19901-6 Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for
offshore structures - Part 6: Marine operations
ISO 19906 Petroleum and natural gas industries Arctic offshore structures
DNV-OS-F101 Submarine Pipeline Systems
API RP 2N Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing
Structures and Pipelines for Arctic Conditions
Operator requirements and project specific operational manuals prescribe the environmental
criteria in which the operation has to be possible. Guidelines for pipe laying are established
on a project basis in the form of an Operational Manual, taking into consideration all the
project specific data and circumstances. Taking into consideration the arctic conditions the
ccontractor will use general engineering practice to proof suitability and safety of the
intended operation.
The four pipeline installation method are listed and illustrated below:
- Towing bottom tow, near bottom tow, mid-depth tow and surface tow
- S-lay
- J-lay
- Reel-lay
In shallow waters, an anchor moored barge might need to be used but a dynamic position
(DP) vessel is widely used for deepwater installation. The last generation of vessels are
basically DP, but for some arctic project in shallow water, this solution could not be feasible.
Pending on project details, combination of the two solutions (DP and moored) could
represent a useful alternative.
The initiation of laying the pipe can start with a start-up (suction)pile and flowline
termination assembly (FTA) or by deadman anchor. The lay-down of the pipe is described in
section 28.6 Abandonment, with or without FTA.
Most if not all frontier Oil & Gas exploration and production prospects in cold climates have
seasonal ice-free periods, in which the field development construction works have to take
place, including pipe lay.
A paper concerning Reeling Arctic Export Lines has been presented at the ATC in 2012,
ref. 5, highlighting the challenges of pipe lay operations in the arctic.
Meteorology
Air temperature Plant / HSE Relevant for systems on board the pipelay
vessel, e.g. enclosed working areas, material
selection and utilities, such as fuel, ballast and
fire-fighting water, hydraulic oil, HVAC.
Also, air temperature is relevant for selection of
coating (becoming brittle at low T) and for line
pipe specification & welding material (reeling /
bending / critical T should be below -40C).
Polar lows Plant / HSE Specific weather conditions can prevent the
/Duration execution of certain activities. Specially in the
arctic reliable weather forecasts need to cover
the duration that is required to abandon the
pipeline, this is a challenge in arctic areas.
Seabed
Soil conditions Design Freeze-thaw settlement to be included in design
duration and may affect productivity.
Many scour marks are present in arctic areas.
These seabed anomalies affect the
design/routing and installation.
Permafrost Design Permafrost and boulders affect the
duration design/routing and may affect productivity of the
Boulders Design pipe lay operation
duration
Polar lows
It is also recommended to create guidelines on the variability of the weather conditions in
arctic regions such as polar lows. Due to the unpredictability and the severity of these
phenomena, they can create a threat to the pipe lay -and subsea installation operations.
Develop and implement guidelines on arctic specific weather conditions e.g. polar lows.
This has been discussed in detail in 7 Metocean, Ice and Earthquake Requirements.
Conventional XT XT
Field Lay-Out
XT
Manifold
XT
FTA
XT XT
Jumper
Flowline
Depending on their weights and dimensions, these structures are lifted and lowered to the
seabed by the way Heavy Lift Vessel (HLV), Medium or Light Construction Vessel (MCV
& LCV).
calculate these loads. Therefore studies on the impact of low temperatures and high wind
speed on the ice accretion on structures passing through the splash zone are recommended.
Before lifting & lowering, the structure may have been transported and be loaded with spray
ice. Spray ice may reduce the transparency of the structure, thus increasing loads / changing
dynamic behaviour during lowering.
28.7 Anchoring
28.7.1 Description of anchoring
A moored pipelay vessel maintains its position in the lay corridor during pipe lay by
connection to different mooring lines and anchor systems which have to be moved to allow
the vessel to reach the next section of the pipeline corridor. In order to perform this
movement the pipelay vessel needs the support of AHTs (anchor handling tugs) that
relocate the pipelay vessel anchors in order to allow her to move.
AHT 2
Anchor
Moreover, in case of deepwater flowlines, an anchor system is also required to start-up the
pipeline string and create the required installation catenary. Some anchoring could also be
required to stabilize the pipeline on the seabed.
Anchoring equipment should be selected based on sea floor soil conditions; following are
available anchoring equipment in the industry:
- Drag anchors
- Clump weight
- Suction pile
- Driven pile
28.8 Landfalls
28.8.1 Description of landfalls
Pipelines transport oil or gas from offshore fields/ platforms to onshore storage or refinery
facilities. Also, pipelines could be used to transport onshore oil or gas to offshore for
offloading to a shuttle tanker. Either case, the pipeline needs to cross the coastal lines.
If environmental restriction permits, the most cost effective beach crossing method is an
open cut using dredge or trencher. Otherwise horizontal directional drilling (HDD) could be
considered. Alternatively contractors may consider working off the ice in limited water
depths.
The following figures shows HDD principle:
28.9 References
1) ISO 19901-6
2) ISO 19906
3) DNV-OS-F101
4) API Recommended Practise 2N
5) Zandwijk van C., Benard C., Faidutti D. ATC 2012. Reeling Arctic Export Lines.
SECTION 29
29.1 Introduction
The scope of this section includes the following activities:
Station keeping (Mooring and/or Dynamic Positioning).
Floating oil and gas production
Produced oil and gas export operations, offloading
Disconnection and re-connection operations form part of the scope when the design of
the floating production facility is based on limited station keeping capability in ice.
Pipeline operations
The production facility installation, platform hook-up and commissioning is outside the
scope of this workgroup.
In the following sections the respective operations are discussed in the following
standardized format:
The aim of the platform re-connection activities is to hook-up the floating platform to the
subsea infrastructure. This hook-up activity includes the retrieval of and connection to the
mooring system and to risers and umbilicals and to re-establish the flow of well fluids to the
process facilities on the platform.
In all these concepts re-connection means that the floating production platform is
mechanically connected to an infrastructure which remains in the field and which provides
(semi-) permanent mooring capacity. At the same time this infrastructure supports the flow
lines, which bring the well fluids to the platform for treatment and export.
Operation of field support vessels, assisting in the reconnection operation of the floating
production platform (if any)
Aspects like ice loading, icing, visibility (darkness, fog, etc.) and communication will
affect the operability.
Cold temperatures and wind chill will affect the feasibility and schedule of the
operation, since maximum outdoor working time, outdoor walking distances, etc.,
become limited (even with special clothing and eye protection).
If reconnection support operations involve boarding buoy type structures (like a
SALM), or other operations that have their working area close to the sea level, this
activity may be treated as a diving operation and shall be executed by divers wearing
full dry suits.
ROV launching
Depending on the design of the reconnection procedure, ROV operation may be needed.
ROV launching and recovery will be effected by ice covered waters and they should be
launched through a moon pool where possible.
Mooring retrieval
In the concept of a disconnectable mooring, the solution will generally include a
disconnectable, sub-surface, mooring riser buoy, of which the reconnection cables have
to be recovered from the FPSO platform with or without the help of field support
vessels or ROVs (see above).
In the concept of a shallow water SALM mooring, the reconnection will be completely
outdoor and will be effected by ice and cold temperatures. Boarding the SALM may
require de-icing, typically using hand held tools, as no power is available on the SALM.
After re-establishment of the mooring, the risers and umbilicals have to be hooked up
to the production systems for a start-up of production
Low temperature may cause flow assurance problems after reconnection, in the
flowlines towards the platform. If any water has been used for flushing it should be
drained before abandoning the system otherwise it will freeze and block systems or it
should be blended with glycol if it is to remain in the system.
It is recommended, within the framework of this Arctic Operations Handbook JIP, not to
focus on drafting arctic guidelines, specifically for reconnection operations, and to deal with
this operation on a project-by-project basis, as for reconnections in a milder climate.
Obviously, arctic conditions will affect the operation of reconnection, as explained in
Section 29.2.3.
Documents such as
ISO 19906
Barents 2020, phase 4
Arctic FPSO - Technical Feasibilities and Challenges, OMAE2012-83028, Guang Li,
SBM Atlantia, Houston, TX, USA
provide information with respect to the general requirements also influencing the
reconnection operation, when it has to be performed in arctic conditions.
structure, temporary moored, may no longer be retained, due to structural or station keeping
capability.
Ice management may be required to enable station keeping. Ref. section 21.
The potential necessity to disconnect at the moment a holding capacity limit is reached, may
also bring along additional safety requirements to the availability of on-board systems (for
instance lay-out and redundancy of power generation)
For Dynamic Positioning operations forecasting models of ice loading/ ice drifting are
essential to ensure safe operation. Models shall include the platforms response to incoming
variable arctic conditions.
In more general terms this operation covers the intended full functional and safe use of the
floating production facility.
ISO 13702 " Control and mitigation of fires and explosions on offshore production
installations"
Either a separate document based on ISO 13702 or an amendment to ISO 13702 Control
and mitigation of fires and explosions on offshore production installations
Aspects to be dealt with (see ISO 13702):
Containment (prevent releases of hydrocarbons, chemicals and/or toxic substances)
Ignitions source control
Gas detection
Active fire protection
Passive fire protection
Effect of ice/snow on passive fire protection
Ventilation (natural and mechanical)
Design and proper operation of HVAC systems in cold environments.
The standard should also refer to ISO 19906 for main principles with respect to design of
HVAC systems for cold regions, and to IEC 61892-7 for requirements to power supply for
HVAC systems.
Intrinsically safe characteristics can change and this must be reflected by selecting
barriers accordingly.
IEC 61892-7 Mobile and fixed offshore units, electrical installations , Part 7
Hazardous areas
IEC 61892 forms a series of International Standards intended to enable safety in the design,
selection, installation, maintenance and use of electrical equipment for the generation,
storage, distribution and utilization of electrical energy for all purposes in offshore units
which are used for the purpose of exploration or exploitation of petroleum resources.
arctic condition require that the standard need to take in new requirements for selection of
materials to be described, cable and cable installation requirements, layout to get access to
exposed equipment for maintenance purposes and heating methods of walls and structures.
Part 7 does not give any general requirements to ambient temperatures.
The standard need to take in additional requirements for arctic conditions to secure that the
artificial ventilation will function even if the main system failure. The air intakes and
capacity of the HVAC system must not be affected by snow and atmospheric or sea spray
icing. The HVAC system must also ensure that the concentration of explosion substances in
atmosphere shall not increase due to sheltering of process or drilling areas.
On these areas it is recommended that the standard refer to ISO 13207 and ISO 19906, to
give consistent guidance. ISO 19906 requires that redundancy shall be provided for
emergency power generation for all structures in cold regions (ISO19906). IEC61892 - Part
7 must describe back up sources requirements to maintain the ventilation required for area
classification or other means of protecting the plant if the system should fail. This can for
example be to require a higher level of explosion protection of operating equipment.
Justification:
To provide the rules for choosing, examining and training of outsourcing firms for regular
service operations for equipment and constructions.
All to be in line with the existing standards ISO 19906, ISO 10418 and ISO 13702.
giving a tandem moored offloading carrier protection against drifting ice flows. Active ice
management using ice breakers will support the operation. The tandem mooring could be
based on a taut hawser mooring and Dynamic Positioning capability of the offloading carrier
can only be used to reduce risk during approach and to limit fish tailing dynamics. When ice
loads on the offloading carrier becomes larger than the capability of the hawser system,
emergency disconnection of the hawser under full load needs to be possible.
The offloading hose and mooring hawser shall be kept well above the seas and ice surface at
all times to avoid abrasion or crushing of hose sections from (sharp) ice. The torque of the
bolting of the different hose sections shall be regularly checked against their minimum
required values as cyclic temperatures tend to reduce this torque overtime.
During transfer the hoses and hawser(s) need to be kept above the ice surface and need to be
passed directly to the bow of the offloading tanker by messenger line(s). Hawsers need to be
tested on regular bases as cold temperatures can reduce the lifetime of the (nylon) hawser.
To avoid freezing or clogging of the hose from products being transferred through the
hose(s), draining procedures shall be required, These procedures need to include draining
products to the carrier as well as draining products to temporary storage on the Floating
Production Facility in case of emergency disconnection.
The offloading procedure need to include close-up inspection procedures to detect damage to
the protective covers of the hose(s) and hawser(s) from sharp ice crystals, either originating
from the ice on the seawater or from ice formation in the hawser or hose due to (sea)water
ingress.
Guide for Building and Classing Vessels Intended for Navigation in Polar Waters, ABS
Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature Environments, ABS
Planning, Designing and Constructing Structures and Pipelines for Arctic Conditions
RP 2N , API
Rules for the Classification of Polar Class Ships NR 527 DT R00, BV
Barents 2020 Phase 1 Offshore Standards Position Paper-Norw. Baseline on HSE
Standard for Offshore Exploration, Dev. & Production, DNV
Certification of Competence Management Systems-Certification of Maritime Education
and Training (MET)-Competence of Officers for Navigation in Ice No. 3.312, DNV
Unified Requirement Polar Class, IACS
Guidelines for Ships Operating in Polar Waters, A1024 (26), IMO
Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries-Arctic Offshore Structures-ISO 19906, ISO
International Society of Polar Engineers (ISOPE) Papers, ISOPE
Provisional Rules for the Winterization of Ships 2009, LR
Rules for Ice and Cold Operations, LR
Handling Ships in Ice, Nautical Institute
Ice Seamanship, Nautical Institute
Shipping Operations in Arctic Region, OCIMF
The Use of Large Tankers in Seasonal First-Year Ice or Severe Sub-Zero Conditions,
OCIMF
Ice Manual, Witherbys
The industry guideline for worldwide offloading as being developed by OCIMF, includes a
section on offloading terminals in ice. This information could resolve the above gaps.
Also practical recommendations to deal with arctic conditions are stated in section 29.5.1
and 29.5.3.
It is recommended, within the framework of this Arctic Operations Handbook JIP, not to
focus on drafting arctic guidelines, specifically for disconnection operations, and to deal with
this operation on a project-by-project basis, as for disconnections in a milder climate.
Obviously, arctic conditions will affect the operation of disconnection, as explained in
Section 29.6.3.
Documents such as
ISO 19906
Barents 2020, phase 4
Arctic FPSO - Technical Feasibilities and Challenges, OMAE2012-83028, Guang Li,
SBM Atlantia, Houston, TX, USA
provide information with respect to the general requirements also influencing the
disconnection operation, when it has to be performed in arctic conditions.
Furthermore the sea ice and icebergs can affect flexible risers which connect the pipeline at
the seabed with for example a floating production vessel. Similar to the mooring system (see
section 29.3) the flexible risers need to be disconnected when the vessel cannot maintain its
position due to excessive ice loads. Typically both the mooring and riser system are
connected to a buoy that will descent after disconnection to a sufficient low position in the
water column to avoid impact with sea ice or ice bergs.
30.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX
WG8 Floating oil/gas production Clemens van der Nat (lead) Bluewater
Hannes Bogaert Marin
Benny van der Vegte Intecsea
Henk van den Boom Marin
Wim Jolles Canatec
Guido Kuiper Shell
Table C.01 EIA & mitigation Part 1: Operations Environmental impact assessment
General
ISO 31000 Provides relevant definitions.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.1.3 Fuel turbines and boilers shall be avoided. Preferable gas driven.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.1.3 max. Nox and SO2 in ppm are given for production units.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.1.3 Waste heat recovery unit (WHRU) will be a better way to generate
heat than by using boilers or heaters.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.1.3 Use of water emulsion in diesel should be considered.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.1.3 Selective catalytic reduction or similar shall be considered.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.3.1 Emissions to air shall be in compliance with the provisions of
MARPOL 73/78 Annex VI and in addition according to the following
requirements:
- Marine fuels shall be of marine distillate type with characteristics
equal to the DM (X, A, Z, B) qualities under ISO 8217:2010 or
Russian GOST 305-82 Diesel fuel technical specification or
similar. Maximum sulphur content in fuels shall be 0.5% by weight.
Water controlled discharges
IMO MARPOL (not Arctic specific, For example: Sewage which is not comminuted or disinfected has
but referred to in Barents 2020) to be discharged at a distance of more than 12 nautical miles from
the nearest land.
Disposal into the sea of all forms of plastics is prohibited
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.1 Ballast water, storm/rain water and other liquid water contaminated
with oil: - Discharge should be in compliance with Marpol 73/78
Annex - Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.1: Ballast water, storm/rain
water and other liquid water contaminated with oil: - Discharge
should be in compliance with Marpol 73/78 Annex I, regulation 39.
Oil content shall be measured once a day in the period of
discharge.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.1 Rain water from clean zones can be discharged to sea. Snow and
ice shall be handled as rain water (storm water).
Note: Different than in Alaskan regulations.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.1 The provisions for treatment and discharges of sewage as set out
for ships in Marpol Annex IV shall also apply to offshore
installations.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.1 On ice and in proximity to ice discharge of black and grey sewage
water should be avoided.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.1 The discharge of garbage shall be prohibited, except from food
waste that can be discharged subject to the discharge provisions as
set out for ships in Marpol 73/78 Annex V.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.4 Daily registration of the amount of produced water rejected or
discharged to the sea, of the content of oil in produced water, and
total amount of oil in produced water discharged to sea. Daily
registration of oil in ballast, storm, bilge and other water
contaminated with oil during production operations, amount of
water and amount of oil in water. Daily registration of consumption
of added chemicals. Monthly internal reporting of production data,
chemical consumption and discharge, oil in water, including
discharges. Yearly report of all discharge to sea, including chemical
consumption and discharge.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.2.5 Waste water shall to the extent possible be contained and any oily
discharge shall not exceed 30 mg/l. Polar Code prohibits all oil
discharges.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.3.2 Ballast water discharge and management shall be in compliance
with the provisions of the IMO Ballast Water Management
Convention.
Barents 2020 RN07 S 6.3.2 No tank residues, including tank washing residues, shall be
discharged to sea from offshore supply and service vessels.
Canadian Shipping Act 2001 Part of the objectives of this Act is to protect the marine
environment from damage due to navigation and shipping activities.
For example: Section 187 prohibits discharge of pollutants and
Section 190 states that the Governor in Council may make
regulations respecting the protection of the marine environment.
Canadian Fisheries Act Throwing overboard of certain substances is prohibited.
Water spills
ISO 19906, 5.6 Fluids and materials that could pollute the environment, if released,
shall be contained in tanks having double
barriers.
ISO 19906, 5.6 A careful strategy should be followed as far as practically possible
for inspection, maintenance and repair of any tanks containing
Table C.05 References to rules & regulations for the Environmental Impact Analysis
Front sheet picture: Reflections on the Arctic Sea 2008 Ville Miettinen
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Arctic Operations Handbook Joint Industry Project (JIP) was launched in February of
2012 supported by a number of companies and knowledge institutes. The JIP was initiated
by a number of Dutch companies in the framework of the Maritime Innovation Program
(MIP) and was awarded a subsidy from the Dutch Ministry of EL&I (Economic affairs,
Agriculture & Innovation). With it the JIP participants committed to issue an open source
document to ensure that the work from the JIP is offered to the international arctic offshore
community and the general public for further use.
The participating companies have the ambition to execute projects in arctic areas, such as
installation and operations of oil and gas production facilities. The term arctic as used here
refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore
operations, field development and decommissioning.
Currently, there is no specific standard for companies operating in arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure services can be provided in a safe manner with minimum
environmental impact, it was proposed to prepare guidance/standards for such operations.
This project has taken an important step in gathering existing rules & regulations, identifying
the areas which require additional guidance, and has taken some steps in defining guidance.
The focus is on the operational activities for installation of fixed, floating and subsea units,
dredging, trenching, pipe laying and floating oil/gas production. Detailed design of facilities
& equipment was not covered in this JIP as it is already supported through ISO 19906 for
Arctic Offshore Structures.
As part of the work scope the JIP has taken the initiative to liaise with Class Societies, Arctic
Governmental Authorities and international standards organizations such as ISO. A
diversified group of Dutch operators and knowledge centers have assessed deficiencies in
existing standards and it is therefore considered useful and beneficial for the ISO TC67 SC 8
and SC 7 to use this report when preparing their new ISO norms.
This Arctic Marine Operations Challenges & Recommendations Report presents existing
rules & regulations, identifies the areas which require additional guidance, and in those cases
where possible defines recommendations for arctic operations. The index used in this report
is based on ISO 19901-6; Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for
offshore structures Part 6: Marine operations. The index has been adjusted and
complemented with aspects specific for arctic operations.
The following key observations/guidance have been gathered within the scope of this Joint
Industry Project;
It was noted from the gap analysis that there was limited (ISO) guidance for pipe lay,
trenching and dredging operations, let alone for the arctic areas. It was therefore chosen
to provide a number of best practices for these operations, considering the arctic
environment. The efforts concentrated on the aspects that would be new in the arctic
when comparing with open water operations in non-arctic areas.
Site specific operations should be considered when planning and carrying out operations.
Considerable effort was performed to align the knowledge on weather conditions and in
particular on the requirements for monitoring and forecasting as well as the requirements
for decision based tools.
For the transportation & logistic aspects input relied heavily on the existing guidance for
arctic shipping which is further developed and was evaluated and transferred to
recommendations for the specific services of this guide.
This report provides guidance as required specifically for contractors expecting to work
in arctic areas on the aspects of health, safety, training and also stakeholder mapping.
A frame work is provided to perform environmental impact assessments both in early as
well as detailed stages of design in order to ensure that impacts can be managed and
mitigated.
Specific attention was given to the evaluation of the loads on and the operation of
disconnectable floating production units.
The other volumes of this report contain results of the gap analysis performed in the project
as well as relevant results of the pilot projects of the Arctic Operations Handbook (AOH)
JIP;
The IceStream Pilot project, described in volume 3, has shown that the egg code
(which is a method to describe characteristics of ice fields), when used as a basis to
establish a visualization of the ice field, can serve as input to numerical models with
which ice loads can be predicted on floating structures. More field data is required to
support development of new analytical models.
The Environmental Impact Pilot project, described in volume 4, has developed an
enhanced approach (interaction of linked sensitivities) for understanding the
environmental impact of operations in an early project stage in a semi-quantitative
manner. Application of such an approach is recommended to assess, evaluate and reduce
the environmental impact of operations in arctic areas.
A state of the art review for marine icing on vessels has been performed and has been
documented in volume 5, Marine icing on arctic offshore operations Pilot project. It
highlights that although there are many approaches, there is no common approach and no
industry standard for marine icing calculations. It strongly recommends more field
observations and improved prediction models to determine sea spray formation and icing
accretion.
List of participants
The following companies have participated in the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP;
INDEX TO VOLUMES
SECTION 1
SECTION 2
or Low
c) That no further action is required.
Introduction High
1 1 Scope Review relevant Fabrication guidelines Medium
2 2 Normative references Low
3 3 Terms and definitions Adapt for consistency High
4 0 4 Symbols and abbreviated terms Adapt for consistency High
5 0 5 General considerations Low
5 14 5.14 Arctic Factory Acceptance Testing FAT as seen important specific Requires additional review - not picked up at this stage Medium
for Arctic applications
7 3 7.3 Metocean conditions (to include Meteorology & 19901-6 7.3 Lists definitions and what should be included as significant weather conditions. to design codes; several codes exist for open water conditions which Low add ice conditions, see
Oceanography) could be adapted to include ice; remains a design item WG3 Design Severity Table, icing, visibility,
polar low, ice conditions and
more
7 3 7.3 Metocean conditions (to include Meteorology & Wind and current monitoring was not highlighted as key parameters influencing operations in harsh areas Add a Section specifically pertaining to the needs to measure and High assessment needed; check
Oceanography) forecast winds, temp and current for people, workability and safety as sea states for arctic conditions
well as station keeping and thus not only for Ice Management
7 3 7.3 Metocean conditions (to include Meteorology & Barents2020 Only some remarks on visibility wrt rescue / man over board Check and add other references? Needs to be added Medium
Oceanography)
7 3 7.3 Metocean conditions (to include Meteorology & Arctic Operations 3.1.1. Poor visibility Whiteouts are a phenomenon in the Arctic that can affect operations any time of the year. add to AOH
Oceanography) Manual Ice crystals in the air eliminate definition of the horizon. This can pose a serious hazard to
pilots, who can lose depth perception. On the ground, you can lose a sense of direction.
When whiteout conditions exist or are approaching, remain in camp and wait it out; even
attempting to travel a fewmetres can result in disorientation. Exercise similar caution in
foggy conditions.
7 4 7.4 Metocean criteria 19901-6 7.4 Defines criteria and return periods ice to be added, see ISO 19906; review 19901-6 High
7 4 7.4 Metocean criteria Add details for Arctic conditions: Add Severity Table
7 5 7.5 Weather windows 19901-6 7.5 Defines operations, design impact and weather margins review 19901-6; describe principles and ADD arctic High
conditions; Move to WG3 Design;
7 5 7.5 Weather windows 19901-6 7.5 Defines operations, design impact and weather margins Guidance should be included / updated on the use of metocean High
restrictions, which can be delayed due to occurance of ice
7 6 7.6 Operational duration 19901-6 7.6 Defines time schedule and point of no return Review 19901-6; describe principles and ADD Arctic conditions; High
7 6 7.6 Operational duration 19901-6 7.6 Defines time schedule and point of no return Guidance should be included / updated on the use of metocean High
restrictions, which can be delayed due to occurance of ice
7 7 7.7 Monitoring & forecasting Guidance should be included on the use and availability of now- and High
forecasting for ice & metocean
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring wi, wa, cu, speed, direction; 19906 6.3 meteorology temp, wind, chill, precipitation, accretion, visibility, polar lows, check for operations; add ice impact on operations and High
stations; buoys; ships; tide; monitoring requirements
pressure; RH; precip; fog;
cloud; visibility; EO; satellite
imagery; radar, etc
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 19906 6.1 metocean requirements see also ISO 19900 on MO information check if needed low
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 19906 6,1,1 determine normal conditions, long term distributions, extreme conditions regional oscillations no specific mention of the effects of ice on operations but low
this is included in the general requirements; design issue
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 19906 6.4 oceanography depth, waves, currents, other low prior low
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 19906 6.5 ice, icebergs wmo nomenclature, statistics, types, morphology, movement, properties, monitoring check and read for operations, should suffice check with High
IICWG documents
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 19906 6,5,6 ice monitoring Ice conditions shall be considered as part of the environmental data monitoring program. consider in WP2 High
Real time information on ice conditions can be used, for example, to operate ice
management systems, and escape, evacuation and rescue (EER) procedures for the
installation. Coupled with a facility management plan for shutdown and possible removal,
during the operational phase of the structures, ice monitoring can help reduce the ice
criteria used for structural design.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 SB2.4.2 Ice conditions When planning a marine operation in the areas described in B.2.2, the ice conditions being Check if Operations relevance; design issue; WG3; It
considered shall be in accordance with the duration of the operation as indicated in Table does have operational relevance, as it indicates the
B.1. databases that should be assembled, and which data to
include
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring Table B.1 General guidance for ice conditions
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring Duration of the operation Ice conditions
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring Fewer than 3 days Based on specific weather window
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 3 days to 1 week 1 year environmental condition (seasonal)
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 1 week to 1 month 10 year environmental condition (seasonal)
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring 1 month to 1 year Extreme level environmental action (seasonal)
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring Greater than 1 year Extreme level environmental action
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.2 Wave and swell conditions Wave conditions shall be considered in the planning and engineering of marine operations. Design item, delete
For the description of the wave and swell parameters, reference is made to ISO 19901-1.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.2 Wave and swell conditions If swell has a noticeable effect on the operation, the response of the vessel to combined Check for the effects of waves and ice; spray ice
wind-driven seas and swell should be evaluated. In shallow water, lateral surge motions due
to shoaling swell and second order wave drift actions should be considered.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.2 Wave and swell conditions For operations involving phases that are sensitive to large or extreme wave heights, such Not relevant for AOH
as temporary on bottom
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.2 Wave and swell conditions For precise operations that are sensitive to small fluctuations of the sea level, even under Not different for arctic operations, delete for AOH
calm sea state conditions, the occurrence of long period, small amplitude swell on the site
should be checked.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.2 Wave and swell conditions Attention should also be paid to particular site conditions that are prone to current acting Delete from AOH? Check ice and currents
against the waves, which can amplify wave steepness.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.3.1 Current Current conditions shall be considered in the planning and engineering of marine Design issue. Delete from AOH
operations. For the description of the current parameters, reference is made to ISO 19901-
1.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.3.1 Current For marine operations, data and forecasts should be provided for current speed and Standing requirement for WP2
direction including, as appropriate, current profiles from the surface to the sea floor.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.3.3 Current for sites where tidal current dominates, measurement during at least one complete lunar Helps in monitoring ice drift patters\ Medium
cycle during the same season of the year as the actual planned operation;
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.3.3 Current for sites where the complexity of the bathymetry (topographical current) can generate Helps in monitoring ice drift patters\ Medium
unstable flow, real-time current measurements with devices that record the current velocity
and direction, with readouts at various depths; an example is the shedding of current
stream around land obstacles that can introduce macro vortices in the main current flow.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.4 Other metocean factors Other factors and combinations of factors that can be critical and shall be considered Check parameters individually and in combinations
include :
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring S7.3.4 - combinations of wind, wave and current; wind and current focus (ice drift; seasons) High
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-8 S7.3.6 water level, including tide and surge; not key, same as o.w.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-9 S7.3.7 restricted visibility; second level priority Medium
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring S7.3.4 - sea ice, icebergs, snow and ice accretion on topsides and structure, exceptionally low Highest priority High check impact of
temperatures; combined effects
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-11 S7.3.9 tropical cyclones, dust storms and wind squalls; n.a.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-12 S7.3.10 water density and salinity; n.a.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-13 S7.3.11 precipitation;
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring S7.3.4 - air temperature; key importance on personnel, WG4
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring S7.3.4 - water temperature. impact on freezing of water and ice growth; end of summer
season
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.3.5 Temperature The occurrence of extreme high and low environmental temperatures shall be considered See WG 3
for their effect on equipment, operations and personnel.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ISO19901-6 S7.4.1 Design and operational criteria For each specific phase of a marine operation, the design and operational metocean criteria check for ice impacts; most is WG 3 and rest in Design
shall be defined as follows : aspects
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring IMO Polar 12.11 Ice routing equipment All ships should be provided with eq't if receiving ice and weather charts and displaying ice Adopt, see also WG 3 Design, see also 7.7.3 IT and High WG 3 Design
imagery. Comm.
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring IMO Polar 13,4,2 Evacuation Crew members to be given special instructions for the use of lifesaving apliances in severe see also WG 4 HSE
weather and severe sea conditions and ice
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring IMO Polar 14,1,2 Ice navigators All officers and crew should be made familiar with cold weather survival training ; ships crew see also WG 4 HSE
should be trained in ship operations in ice covered waters
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring IMO Polar 1.2 Ice navigators Continuous monitoring of ice conditions by an Ice navigator should be available Adopt, see also WG 4 HSE High further work needed
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ONS 12 5.2 Risk management i practice Weather conditions in Arctic are not well understood and long term developments are Add ice and ice island monitoring (CAD Arctic) High further work needed;
uncertain; special design considerations lead to more severe conditions build long term criteria
and build database
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring ONS 12 5.2 Risk management i practice Arctic is a more vulanarable environment; introduce more safety barriers; adopt narrow adopt with added ice and weather monitoring; use and
operational windows and seasonal operations; check increased consequence of incidents expand in WG4 HSE. And in WG3 Design and planning
7 7 1 7.7.1 Weather monitoring pre, post surveys ISO19901-6 S7.4.4 Probability distributions of sea In order to understand the relationship of sea state parameters, such as the significant A Similar approach is possible for ice conditions. High
state parameters wave height and peak period, the unit- and bi-variable distributions should be examined. Develop joint probabilities and Add ice (during monitoring).
This includes the joint frequency distributions of significant wave height and period, and Part of weather monitoring
wind speed, wave height and current speed versus direction. For those parameters that
dictate operability, weather windows should be computed.
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting ice and weather, structure and 19906 17.1 Ice management - general IM may include detection and forecasting. check and expand High more work required
systems, ice management
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting 19906 17,2,3 IM performance The expected performance of ice detection, tracking and forecasting capabilities and the use, operations aspects High
associated uncertainties shall be documented, and should reflect the actual performance of
the types of systems or devices that will be used in the context of expected metocean
conditions, visibility and offshore operations.
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting Barents2020 3.2.3 Ice management Improve weather-, ice- and iceberg forecasts by improved observational network for add ; important operation High develop
weather forecasting and meteorological databases for Barents Sea.
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting Barents2020 4.1.4.4. Ice management It may be anticipated that the icebreakers conducting the ice management operation will reference; add to WG3 on equipment and IM
have problems operating during the heavy ice conditions that drive the design. A lack in the
ISO rules is the including of IM in the design.
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting Arctic O. O&G S 3.5 Environmental Impact Assessment EIA The EIA shall be based on the forecasting methods used to assess the effects on the Add weather, ice aspects See WG HSE 4
environment and any limitation
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting Arctic O. O&G S 7.2 Response (oil spill) The Ice management plan should include details regarding ice detection, ice surveillance, Good section, adopt; See also S 7.7,3 IT and comm.; All High
data collection, forecasting and reporting of encroachment, hazards and loading users must have access to the same data and systems
must be in place to send such data back and forth;
Consider in WG3 design since it is equipment related
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting If appropriote the IM plan to include forecasting of oil in ice drift. Good section, adopt High same
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting IMO Polar 14.2 Navigator qualifications ice navigator should be trained including the use of ice forecasts and other interrelated Adopt, see also WG 4 HSE High to WG4 HSE
aspects
7 7 2 7.7.2 Forecasting
7 7 3 7.7.3. IT Information and communication techn communication, data storage, This section should be also show under WG 3 Equipment and Operations Medium
handling, data management, and be included in Monitoring
remote sites
7 7 3 7.7.3. IT Information and communication techn 19906 15,1,3,2, Topsides - Communication At least two independent communication system technologies shall be provided on the add ice and remoteness and ice worthiness' of ops. Check Medium
1 facility to ensure redundant communication to shore-based facilities under adverse Arctic Oper impact on Comm. Add a note that all Contractors and
environmental events. Companies should work together iin Feed stage and in
Operations Phase with the sharing of data, maximize
bandwidth, exchange data gathered
7 7 3 7.7.3. IT Information and communication techn 19906 6,1,1 MO - MO requirements These requirements could include a minimum period of site specific data (according to Seems FEED work, not in AOH?
country regulations), the type of data to be collected, and a definition of extreme design
criteria.
7 7 3 7.7.3. IT Information and communication techn Barents2020 App.1 Telecommunication A reference is given to the Russian code (GOST 50829-95) where common requirements Operations or Equipment?
and test methods are provided. GOST 52454-2005 is about global navigating satellite
system and global system of positioning.
7 7 3 7.7.3. IT Information and communication techn Barents2020 App.1 Database of metocean elements Although available measured data and results from numerical models do not show worse More measurements are needed? Is this FEED and EIS High further work required for
metocean design criteria related to wind, waves and currents in the Barents Sea than related? Larger uncertainties -> more requirements to high arctic comm
further south on the Norwegian shelf (the North Sea, mid-Norway), less knowledge about monitoring system? systems
the physical environment in the Barents Sea introduces larger uncertainties into the
estimates of values with annual recurrences of 10-2 and 10-4.
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 8 7.8 Earthquake ISO19901-6 S7.8 Earthquake Possible effects of earthquakes (not metocean effects as tsunamis) on structures during use for set down and Oper of systems (anchors, GBS's)
marine operations, if applicable, should be taken into account. WG 6 Set down
7 9 7.9 Sea Ice and icebergs no specific references to ice bergs Add section on monitoring of icebergs, requirements, criteria and High further work needed
operational limits and impact; sea ice monitoring pretty specifically on
well covered by Manice and others hazardous ice
conditions, icebergs and
others
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring mammals; noise, vegetation, Barents2020 App.1, Ground motions Only earthquake-induced ground motions addressed in detail in ISO19901-2; other Check standards of local Governments, i.e. BMP
impacts pollution, seabed sec 7 geologically-induced hazards only mentioned and briefly discussed; probabilistic seismic
disturbance and turbidity hazard analysis (PSHA)
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring Barents2020 4.6.5 Underwater noise Underwater noise is posing negative risk on marine mammals and posing negative risk on Check standards of local Governments, i.e. BMP High WG4 action: more work
marine mammals and fish. The issue is generally addressed by the IFC/World Bank http://www.bmp.gl/ - (SvBB: specific guidelines for u.w. pertaining to the effects
Standard, but not at the very detailed level. noise by seismic surveying exist, but no guidelines for of noise and
drilling noise for instance. The BMP SEIA does state that disturbances on wildlife
displacement due to drilling noise for certain species and in Arctic conditions;
certain times/location are to be expected, and mitigation by
avoiding sensitive areas/times is proposed (see BMP
below)
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 10.1.1 Noise assessment, noise from seismic Seismic sounds in the marine environment are neither completely without consequences seismic specific, relevant to our scope? Currently outside
Greenland part of surveys nor are they certain to result in serious and irreversible harm to the environment (DFO the scope
the Baffin Bay 2004). Short-term behavioural changes are known and in some cases well documented, but
area) longer-term changes are debated and studies are lacking.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 1 Environmental impact assessment A SEIA forms part of the basis for relevant authorities decisions, and may identify general adopt, but rephrase? Medium
Greenland part of restrictive or mitigative measures and monitoring requirements that must be dealt with by
the Baffin Bay the companies applying for oil licences. It is important to stress that an SEIA does not
area) replace the need for sitespeci c Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs).
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring BMP (SEIA for the Assessment of exploration No severe impacts are expected if adequate mitigative measures are applied, activities in Is this part of monitoring, or more related to EIS in WG4?
Greenland part of sensitive areas are avoided in the most sensitive periods and no accidents such as oil spills
the Baffin Bay occur.
area)
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring BMP (SEIA for the Assessment of development and Noise from drilling platforms has displaced migration routes of bowhead whales in Alaska. Is this part of monitoring, or more related to EIS in WG4?;
Greenland part of production Depending on the location of installations, displacement of migrating and Depending on the USE EXISTING STANDARDS
the Baffin Bay location of installations, displacement of migrating and staging whales and walrus must be
area) expected.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring BMP (SEIA for the Assessment of development and Careful planning in combination with thorough environmental background studies, BEP, Is this part of monitoring, or more related to EIS in WG4?
Greenland part of production BAT and application of the Precautionary Principle can do much to limit and mitigate USE EXISTING STANDARDS
the Baffin Bay impacts from development and production, e.g. by avoiding the most sensitive areas and
area) avoiding activities in the most sensitve periods.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 10.1.1. Assessment of noise Mitigation measures generally recommend a soft start or ramp up of the airgun array each seismic specific, relevant to our scope? Not at present USE
Greenland part of time a new line is initiated. Secondly it is recommended to bring skilled marine mammal EXISTING STANDARDS
the Baffin Bay observers onboard the seismic ships.
area)
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 10 Monitoring programme Monitoring programmes should comprise both baseline surveys prior to any petroleum adopt Medium
development and follow-up surveys during exploration, production and decommissioning.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 11 Field specific monitoring Field specific monitoring should be based on a baseline survey and should address spatial adopt Medium
and temporal trends in contamination and effects within the impact zone of an offshore
petroleum field or installation. The focus should be on the verification of predicted impacts
at individual fields. These monitoring programmes should start shortly after drilling activities
have started. Consecutive field specific monitoring should be integrated into wider area
(regional) monitoring programmes where these are in place.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 12 Coordinated wider-area (regional) In order to put offshore industry installation impacts into a more holistic context, co- not sure whether we need to add this. Not sure whose
surveying ordinated wider area (regional) surveys should be conducted. Such monitoring should responsibility it is to coordinate (government?).
describe general environmental background levels in addition to data from the field specific
monitoring in the region and will provide information on large-scale environmental patterns
and enable the added effects of adjacent installations in areas of intense offshore activity to
be assessed.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 13 Regional monitoring The regional monitoring should describe general environmental levels distant from the not sure whether we need to add this. Not sure whose
installations and the integrated impact of offshore activities in a wider area. responsibility it is to coordinate (government?).
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 14 Comparability of monitoring surveys To facilitate inter-annual comparison, fieldwork for baseline and monitoring surveys should adopt Medium
be carried out in the same season each year. Sediment surveys should preferably be
carried out in spring in order to avoid problems related to newly settled juveniles of benthic
fauna.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 16 Monitoring station planning The orientation and extent of the station pattern should be based on the predicted area of adopt Medium
influence as determined by dispersion modelling, discharge scenarios and local
environmental conditions.
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring OSPAR 2004 21 Sampling requirements Sampling equipment, sample collection, and treatment and storage of samples should be in adopt, add noise (could refer to EU noise standardization as Medium
accordance with the JAMP Guidelines for monitoring contaminants in sediments part of MSFD)?
(Agreement 2002-16) and the JAMP Eutrophication Monitoring Guidelines: Benthos
(Agreement 1997-06). The following conditions of the sediment should be monitored: visual
description of the sediment surface;presence of large and/or conspicuous fauna, sediment
colour,smell, grain size distribution, total organic carbon, hydrocarbons and synthetic drilling
fluids, metals and benthic macrofauna.
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring Arctic O. O&G S3 EIA Environmental monitoring programs to be adequate and intercompatible so that the results Adopt Medium
may be compared from one yr to another and from one place to another
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring Arctic O. O&G S4 Environmental monitoring includes special sections and subsections on the Aim, areas to be monitored, monitoring Adopt; can be of use in WG HSE and Pilot on EIS Medium
methods, standards and follow up
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring Arctic O. O&G S3 EIA EIA should include the effects of ice dynamics Adopt and expand with other key weather and ice factors Medium
within this section
7 10 7.10 Environment & Eco-system monitoring Guidance should be included on the approach of EIA High
7 11 7.11 Seabed 19906 6,6,4 Sea bed - Ice gouge Data on ice induced seabed gouging shall be obtained to determine frequency of gouge this is a FEED item
occurrence, depth, width, length, and direction.
7 11 7.11 Seabed 19906 9,2-1 Site investigations The near-field investigation shall include as a minimum: survey is required if ice was on site prior operations
7 11 7.11 Seabed - a bathymetry survey
7 11 7.11 Seabed - a geophysical survey, including ice scour delineation where applicable
7 11 7.11 Seabed - a geotechnical investigation
7 11 7.11 Seabed 19906 9,2,3 Geophysical survey High resolution geophysical survey methods and equipment shall be chosen with due Feed work? Check. Also applicable to WG 3 Equipment
consideration for site conditions and the intended purpose. The capabilities of the
equipment with regard to the depth of penetration and resolution shall also be considered.
7 11 7.11 Seabed The areal extent, spacing, and orientation of the geophysical survey lines shall be seems relevant here; adopt Medium
compatible with the purpose of the investigation and the type (near-field or far-field), and
with the nature of the seafloor and seabed features.
7 11 7.11 Seabed Additional features pertinent to arctic conditions include; the depth, frequency and seems relevant here; adopt Medium
distribution of ice gouges and the presence or otherwise of shallow permafrost and gas
hydrates. In areas of shallow permafrost, consideration shall be given to the use of special
geophysical investigation techniques such as the incorporation of shorter receiver arrays or
the application of resistivity methods.
7 11 7.11 Seabed ISO 19906 9.4.10 Construction and installation to be compatible with soil criteria Operations WG6 Installation
9.5.3 Long term soil effect on foundations
9.5.4 Installation and removal
9.6.7 Installation piled structures
7 11 7.11 Seabed ISO 19906 9.7.1 Floating Structures refers for foundations to 19901-7 Operations WG6 Installation
9.7.3.2 Installation of suction anchors
7 11 7.11 Seabed Barents2020 3.2.3 Ice management Establish methods for inspection of subsea equipment in areas with sea ice. yes, keep; Oper and equipment specific WG 8
7 11 7.11 Seabed Guidelines to Sec. 6 Recommendations for best Safety zone, ramp-up, acoustic monitoring and observations, use of airguns, models of seismic specific, relevant for our scope? Not at Present
environmental practice of conducting seismic impact assessment
mitigation assessment surveys
of seismic activities in
Greenland waters
7 12 7.12 Surveys local and global ISO19901-6 S7.5.1 Weather-restricted operations Weather-restricted operations shall be planned using reliable time history data that indicate Check on ice impact , Feed work
not only the probability of not exceeding the limiting criteria but also the persistence of such
conditions for the season considered.
7 12 7.12 Surveys ISO19901-6 S7.5.1 Weather-restricted operations Consideration shall be given to applying a reduction factor to the limiting criteria in order to Design issues outside of AOH
account for remaining uncertainties. The reduction factor should be determined as a
function of the duration of the operation, the number of data sources and the quality of the
available data.
7 12 7.12 Surveys ISO19901-6 S7.5.1 Weather-restricted operations Weather windows should be developed based on thresholds of the key sensitive Design issues outside of AOH
parameters of the operation. For example, based on known limiting thresholds
for wind and wave, the duration statistics for favourable conditions should be computed.
7 12 7.12 Surveys ISO19901-6 S7.5.3 Margins on weather A margin shall be added to the design weather criteria, if these are based on statistical Design issues outside of AOH
maxima. The margin accounts for inaccuracies in the calculation model and the probability
of exceeding the maxima. For precise operations, a margin of 20% on critical parameters is
recommended. For other operations, it is a matter of judgement.
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 12 7.12 Surveys - extra allowance for operations with vulnerable or critical equipment;
7 12 7.12 Surveys - reduced allowance for operations with a time schedule based on previous similar
operations;
7 12 7.12 Surveys - extra allowance for operations in geographical areas and/or seasons where conditions are
difficult to predict.
7 12 7.12 Surveys ISO19901-6 S7.6.2 Point of no return Weather-restricted operations shall be divided into a series of phases where the operation Discuss; Feed work and WG 3 Operations
can be aborted and brought to a safe condition within the remainder of the existing weather
window. The weather window in which conditions remain below operational criteria shall be
of sufficient duration to reach a safe condition before proceeding beyond the point of no
return (PNR).
7 12 7.12 Surveys The reliability of the weather window is crucial for the critical period during an operation
between any PNR and the structure reaching a safe situation.
7 12 7.12 Surveys ISO19901-6 S13.2 Environmental criteria In particular, when the temporary construction mooring is set up close to the shore, special Discuss; Feed work and WG 3 Operations
consideration shall be paid to :
7 12 7.12 Surveys - change of wave direction when rounding the shore contour;
7 12 7.12 Surveys - instability of the tidal current in speed and direction due to the bathymetry close to
headlands;
7 12 7.12 Surveys - increase in wind speed and change of direction when close to landscape highs.
7 12 7.12 Surveys Barents2020 App.1, Collection of metocean data "Collection of metocean data" in the NORSOK N-002 standard presents functional use, add ice, see priorities Medium
sec 7 requirements and common principles for collection of meteorological and oceanographic
data
7 12 7.12 Surveys NORSOK N-002 N-002 Collection of metocean data Intended as an initial reference for offshore operators when planning metocean monitoring use, add ice, see priorities Medium
equipment on offshore installations
7 12 7.12 Surveys Barents2020 3.2.1 Data on ice and icebergs Sea ice, icebergs, icing and wind chill are new elements that may increase both frequency use, add ice, see priorities Medium
of accidents and the consequences thereof. Data on ice and iceberg are insufficient.
7 12 7.12 Surveys Barents2020 4.1.4.3 Ice data collection Measurement methods should be documented in such a way that results from different use, add ice, see priorities Medium
measurement campaigns are compatible.
7 12 7.12 Surveys Barents2020 4.4.4.10 Icing Ship codes and offshore standards give guidelines for calculation of ice accretion but they use, add ice, see priorities Medium
are rudimentary.
7 12 7.12 Surveys NORSOK N-003 6.4.2.1 Ice accretion In absence of a more detailed assessment, values for thickness of accumulated ice caused use, add ice, see priorities Medium
by sea spray or precipitation may be selected as indicated in the given table for latitude and
height above sea level.
7 12 7.12 Surveys NORSOK N-003 6.4.2.3 Ice occurrence For planning of operations, the monthly extreme ice limit with annual probability of use, add ice, see priorities Medium
exceedance of 10-2 may be used.
7 12 7.12 Surveys Barents2020 4.1.4.3 Interpretation of measurement data Have guidance on how to interpret the data, a check list with possible pitfalls, requirements use, add ice, see priorities Medium
for representativeness and for documentation
7 12 7.12 Surveys Barents2020 4.1.4.4 Ice Management Not sufficient data on pack ice with a high rate of ridges etc. It may not be possible to Discuss; need to conduct more monitoring and data High further work required
reduce the design ice actions using IM until qualified assumptions on the performance and analysis, see also ONS 12 and Barents 2020; Adopt in
reliability connected to IM operations can be made. Use both numerical and physical WG3 Design
modelling for determining minimum guidelines for IM in design.
7 12 7.12 Surveys Arctic Operations 2.2.1 Weather observations and forecasts Access to satellite weather imagery that gives nearly real-time pictures from orbiting for design and equipment specs WG3
Manual satellites. The PCSP uses this information to plan daily aircraft operations and to identify
sea-ice conditions.
7 12 7.12 Surveys Arctic Operations 2.2.1 Weather observations and forecasts Basic weather information will involve cloud ceiling, visibility, precipitation, and wind speed for design and equipment specs WG3
Manual and direction, for example. Weather observation guides are available from the PCSP base
manager (see Section 2.1.1, Contacts)
7 12 7.12 Surveys BMP Guidelines for 7.7 Meteorological, Oceanographic and Ice The licensee shall, upon BMP request, keep a logbook of meteorological, oceanographic Greenland specific ? This may apply to other locations as Medium
application, execution Observations and ice observations made during exploration activities. Reporting shall be done in well i.e. Canada
and reporting of accordance with the following Chapter 8 of these guidelines and any other specific
offshore hydrocarbon requirements on format, as defined by BMP.
exploration activities
(excluding drilling) in
Greenland
7 12 7.12 Surveys ISO19901.6 SB2.4.6 Site and route surveys and preparation Appropriate route surveys and environmental measurement programmes should be low
performed. Where navigational charts are of questionable accuracy or are for areas subject
to changes in seabed topography, a survey s hould be carried out as close to the expected
date of operations as possible. Anticipated tow routes (corridors) and alternate routes
should be sufficiently wide to accommodate deviations of the tow that can be necessary to
avoid encounters with large ice floes or heavy ice features.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Codes are missing, Requirements are missing since technology falls short Add section on describing spill planing, clean up options High
and monitoring & forecasting needs of spills in ice and
especially under ice and in ice/open water areas. New and
enhanced models are required. Field data and remote
sensing information should be used and integrated.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring 19906 5,6,3 Produced water clean to environ acceptable standards, before release to sea check for arctic (see BMP below)
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring 19906 5,6,5 Spill containment and clean up Means for the containment and cleanup of polluting fluids should be available at the site no mention of arctic (for increased severity expected in
and be proven to operate under the expected environmental conditions. Arctic see BMP 12.3), Design and Operation WG3
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring 19906 10,3,1,4, Spill containment gravel island to be designed to contain spills, where possible apply to floaters and structures? Design item WG 3
3
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring 19906 13,9,3,1 Floaters - deck surfaces spillage measures from main deck to include.. no monitoring is mentioned; add low
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Barents2020 4.5.1 Risk of oil spill in Barents Sea Identify relevant standards, identify possible gaps and recommend possible modifications to same, see also WG 4 HSE low
these standards in order to secure safe operation and minimize environmental risk of
accidental oil spills.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Barents2020 4.5.4 Oil spill procedures Oil Company shall provide on oil terminals and offshore platforms adequate preparedness low
to respond to oil spill sizes up to 1500 tons. Near terminal and offshore platform shall be
stand-by vessel with oil spill response equipment. Oil film shall be localized in 4 hours. REF:
Russian Register of shipping: Volume 2, part 8.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring ISO 19901-6 Review requirements for ice accretion and other Arctic severity classes. adopt; include the effects and impact of icing on deck, on High
equipment and on all oil spill equipment; personnel need to
have proper access to systems, systems must be able to
handle the effects of iceing, systems must be operable and
monitoring must be feasible during times of oil spills;
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 12.3 Accidents The lack of adequate response methods in ice-covered waters and the remoteness and more relevant to WG4?
Greenland part of lack of infrastructure in large parts of the assessment area will add to the severity of an oil
the Baffin Bay spill.
area)
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring ISO 19901-6 S 5.4 Ice accretion during construction and transportation : Allowance for possible weight Adopt for scenarios during oil spills High
increase and centre of gravity shift during fitting out (if performed in an arctic or cold regions
environment) and transportation due to ice accretion should be included in the weight and
the stability characteristics of the structure depending on the time of the year the activity
may occur.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Iso 19901-5 weight control during engineering and construction apply to offshore operations and its impact on oil spill High
systems, see above
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 11.1.3 Oil spills Oil spill trajectory modelling was carried out by DMI as a part of this SEIA. In most of the part of monitoring or EIS (then move to WG4)? High
Greenland part of modelled oil spill drift scenarios oil does not reach the coasts, but stays offshore. However, Implement such models into monitoring system to respond
the Baffin Bay three of the 24 scenarios indicate 11 that under certain conditions, oil may reach shores up to oil spills quicker?
area) to several hundred kilometres from the spill site.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 11.1.3 Oil spills The high sensitivity of the coastal zone is also related to the fact that oil may be trapped in oil spill tracki ng in ice High
Greenland part of bays and fjords where high and toxic concentrations can build up in the water.
the Baffin Bay
area)
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 11.1.3 Oil spills The spread of an oil spill will, at least in the beginning, tend to be contained and limited by adopt Medium
Greenland part of the presence of sea ice, unlilke in the open sea. Oil will be contained between the ice oes
the Baffin Bay and on the rough underside of the ice. However, oil caught in or under the ice may be
area) transported in an almost un-weathered state over long ranges, far from the spill site when
the ice melts.
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring BMP (SEIA for the 11.2.9 Mitigation of oil spills An important tool in oil spill response planning and implementation is oil spill sensitivity adopt Medium
Greenland part of mapping, which has not yet been carried out in the assessment area.
the Baffin Bay
area)
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Arctic O. O&G S 7.2 Response contingency planning Contingency planning process is one of the best practices to evaluate the effects of adopt Medium
response options under varrying weather conditions
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Arctic O. O&G S 7.2 Response contingency planning Hazards to include heavy weather adopt Medium
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring Arctic O. O&G S 7.2 Response contingency planning Alert criteria should include heavy weather Adopt Medium
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring ASPPR S 3.2 Navigation access to zones A type B ship carrying oil as cargo can enter zone 6 from Aug 1-24 if escorted by an adopt; need for selection proper class (WG3) and assess Medium
icebreaker provided she has adequate oil spill equipment and monitor ice conditions to document the ice numeral and
then confirm entry
7 13 7.13 Oil Spill Monitoring ASPPR S 3.2 Navigation access to zones A type B ship carrying more than 453 m of oil between Aug 1-24 in Zone 6 provided an adopt; need for selection proper class (WG3) and assess Medium
icebreaker is close to zone 6. and monitor ice conditions to document the ice numeral and
then confirm entry
8 0 8 Weight control ISO 19901-5 Review requirements for ice accretion and other Arctic severity classes. Add guidance for icing on transport & installation High
9 0 9 Stability Add guidance for icing on transport & installation High
9 3 9.3 Stability calculations ISO 1901-6 Reference is made to chapter 8 - where ice effect needs to be included. Low
Add consideration for element submergance (refer to clauses in GL Noble Denton)
9 4 9.4 Intact stability ISO 1901-6 Effect of ice build up on floating structures to be taken into account based on severity classes. Low
Update note on extra actions chapter 9.4.1 for ice
GL Noble Denton; 10.1 Intact stability Table 10-1 Intact Stability Range indicates requirement of 36 degrees for Inland and sheltered water (in ice Low
GUIDELINES FOR areas)
MARINE
TRANSPORTATIONS
0030/ND Rev 4 - 31
March 2010
9 5 9.5 Damage stability GL Noble Denton; 10.2 Damaged stability Relaxations as defined in 10.2.4 & 10.2.5 are not deemed applicable for ice-affected areas. This is important for Low
GUIDELINES FOR GBS's.
MARINE
TRANSPORTATIONS
0030/ND Rev 4 - 31
March 2010
10 0 10 Ballasting operations GL Noble Denton; 22.12 Review ballast equipment requirements regarding freezing of pipes and compartments No action at present Low
GUIDELINES FOR Add winterisation considerations
MARINE
TRANSPORTATIONS
0030/ND Rev 4 - 31
March 2010
10 2 10.2 Ballast system Additional considerations for freezing up of pipes compartments Low
10 3 10.3 Protection against damage and deterioration 10.3.2 Gives description of effect of freezing Low
10 5 10.5 Control and indicating systems Depending on severity classes requirements need to be added on the operability of control and monitoring Emphasis on the operational aspects during ballasting and having good High
equipement access to all systems engaged in ballasting to the operators centres.
Ability to access / control / work at ballasting control areas and winch control areas
10 6 10.6 Pumps Review required of capacity of pumps for ice (parts) Low
10 7 10.7 Valve arrangements Review required of capacity of valves for ice (parts) Low
Identify manual override options applicable for arctic climate
10 8 10.8 Vent systems Additional considerations for freezing up of air vents (also for various equipment types) Low
10 9 10.9 Air cushion system capacity Review requirement to dry air for low temperature areas Low
11 0 11 Loadout ABS Low temperature 11 Operations Mostly referring to mechanical systems No action at present Low
guide May 2012 3 Notations, Cold weather effects CCO NOTATIONS, impact on personnel
ABS Low temperature
guide May 2012
Transportation motions, tow forces and see also 19902-2007, 8 and 22 and iso 19903-2006, 11 Low
tug efficiency, dry tow cribbage see also section 11 on Pump capacities
Conditions mentioned only relate to metocean and not to ice.
Aspects of tug classes should include polar class
Review ukc based on recent seabed survey (ice gauging)
Cribbing friction factors possibly influenced by severity classes
12 2 12.2 General considerations SOLAS consolidated Chapter Regulation 6. Ice Patrol Service Ships transiting the region of icebergs guarded by the Ice Patrol during the ise season are required to make use Low
edition 2009 V of the services provided by the Ice Patrol.
12 3 12.3 Towline pull required, fleet composition and towing arrangement GL Noble Denton; 13.2.10 In particular circumstances, where the available towing vessel is oversized with regard to TPR (see Section Low
GUIDELINES FOR 12.2), and the towline connections are already fitted to the tow, then the towline connections (but not the
MARINE towline itself) may be related to the required BP rather than the actual BP. Such relaxation shall be with the
TRANSPORTATIONS express agreement of the Master of the tug, and shall be noted in the towing arrangements. It shall not apply
0030/ND Rev 4 - 31 for towages in ice areas.
March 2010
12 6 12.6 Offshore tow Emphasis on operational windows and support fleet requirements for High
getting through NSR or NE Passages. What are the norms and standards
by Canadian, NA and Russian regulators, to be defined, if they exist?
13 0 13 Temporary mooring and stationkeeping for marine operations Reliability of positioning / DP system based on DGPS at high lattitudes Study use of ice management on operational design criteria for High
temporary moored (or DP) construction vessels. These need to go hand
in hand with 7.5 Weather Windows and 7.6 Operational Duration.
Barents2020 RN02 Recommendations for ISO19906 Include requirements / aspects for Ice management Low
13 1 13.1 Introduction Apply GL Noble Denton clauses regarding tow wire Low
review effect of working mooring based on ice severities
13 2 13.2 Environmental criteria see clause 7; include ice aspects Low
13 5 13.5 Sizing of anchors Review soil aspects with respect to permafrost Low
14 0 14 Construction and outfitting afloat All descriptions are general and indicate limited impact of Arctic conditions No action at present Low
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
15 4 15.4 Clearances Based on severity classes consideration to be taken on ice "blockage" Low
Make freeboard severity class dependant
15 6 15.6 Operational aspects Refer to DNV approach regarding operational times based on severity classes Low
16 0 16 Pre-laid mooring including foundation ISO 19906 9.4.10 Construction and installation to be compatible with soil criteria Guidance to be updated for cold temperature operations and storage of High
9.5.3 Long term soil effect on foundations mooring lines. What is imporant is the accessibility of systems during
9.5.4 Installation and removal operations. Think of the SBM access in the SEIC operations. How to deal
9.6.7 Installation piled structures with icing and how to monitor and forecast and manage such with
proper risk analysis (operationally).
ISO 19906 9.7.1 Floating Structures refers for foundations to 19901-7 Low
9.7.3.2 Installation of suction anchors
GL Noble Denton; Review requirements for arctic on wires Low
GUIDELINES FOR
MARINE
TRANSPORTATIONS
0030/ND Rev 4 - 31
March 2010
27 API Recommended 10.3.4 Icing 10.3.4: Some references are made to several forms and applications of icing. This phenomenon can occur at More quantitative guidance is required in the estimation of icing Low
Practice 2N 10.4.2 Earth fill Structures any offshore construction situated above waterline in cold weather. accretion.
10.4.2: It is noted that the selection of the borrow site should take into account any possible ice content
27 Low
In areas where ice may develop or
where ice bergs may pass or where the
soil may freeze sufficient statistics shall
Offshore standard DNV- Sec. 3 - be established in order to enable
OS-F101 C400 calculations of relevant loads.
27 BS 6349-5 1991 section Maritime structures part 5 - code of gives guidance of estimation of boulder content. Guidance on how to incorporate existance of boulders in arctic area. Low
2, practice for dredging and land Recommended to include areas where boulders may be of abundance in
paragrap reclamation arctic areas (morene afzettingen)
h 2.10.3
soil
classifica
tion,
table 6,
commen
ts on
table 6
27 1.1.1 Mechanical dredging by Grab dredge BS 6349-5 1991 section Maritime structures part 5 - code of gives guidance on factors affecting dredging plant and specifies maximum ice thickness to operate additional guidelines in performance of dredging in different ice Low
3.2, practice for dredging and land thicknesses.
table 10 reclamation
27 ISO 19906:2010 ; ISO A) ISO 19901-6:2009 - Temporary mooring is described; dredge also requires a certain mooring. guidance on impact of permafrost on dredging production is Low
19901-6:2009 A.17.3.4. A) Iceberg management recommended, how does permafrost extend underwater. Experience
3 B) recommendations on towing here is that permafrost hampers production and causes unpredictable
14.2.4 ; techniques B) special consideration ingress of dredging faces
ISO should be given to trenching or digging
19901- in seabed soils containing permafrost ;
6:2009 - ISO 19901-6:2009 - Temporary mooring
13 and stationkeeping for marine
operations (including all paragraphs)
27 1.2 Transport dredged material Hydraulic fill manual 4 dredging equipment gives overview of available transport methods Low
27 1.2.1 Hydraulic transport through pipeline ISO 19906:2010 5.4.3 new additional guidance recommended on operability of hydraulic Low
limiting environmental conditions pipelines in arctic conditions. Experience is that they freeze after
specified, associated weather windows stoppage of work and that it is difficult to make couplings. Morover
to be taken into account. valves/control stuctures within the pipelines start to freeze during
operations
27 1.2.2 Loading and transport of dredged material by Barges ISO 19906:2010 5.4.3 limiting environmental conditions Low
specified, associated weather windows
to be taken into account.
27 ISO 19901-6:2009 12 Transportation Transport of offshore equipment on barges show similarities with barges containing dredged material. Also Low
covered in WG Logistics?
27 1.2.3 Transport of dredged material by TSHD or barge ISO 19906:2010 5.4.3 Disposal of dredged amterial gives guidance on disposal of dredged amterial Low
27 1.3 Placement dredged material API Recommended 10.4.2 Earth fill Structures It is noted that the placing of frozen fill may create ice build-up and can cause large settlement and that the in- Good comments on the frozen fill but no further guidance, no reference Low
Practice 2N place properties should take into account ice content. or any quantification. Generating additional guidance is recommended
27 Hydraulic fill manual 6 Construction methods reclamation area nothing metntioned on artic conditions Low
27 BS 6349-5:1991 3.6 code of practice dredging and land this section gives guidance on disposal of dredged material. Nothing mentioned regarding the artic. Low
reclamation
27 ISO 19901-6:2009 17 Offshore installation operations > 17.13 Placement of dredged material is similar activity Low
Underbase grouting
27 1.3.1 Under water placement by TSHD's and barges (bottom doors, split ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
hull, valves) stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 1.3.2 Under water placement through diffuser, spreader pontoon ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
27 1.3.4 Under water placement by rainbowing from TSHD of pontoon ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations Low
27 1.3.5 Under water placement trough suction pipe TSHD ISO 19901-6:2009 16 & 17 16 Pre-laid mooring including Mooring structures may be required for hydraulic pipe line connections Low
foundation. Paragraph 17.15
Attachment to pre-laid mooring system
27 2.1.2 Placement of rock by Side Stone Dumping Vessel ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
17.13 Underbase grouting & 17.15
Launching
27 2.1.3 Placement of rock by Split hull ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
17.13 Underbase grouting
27 2.1.4 Placement of rock by Fall pipe vessel ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
17.13 Underbase grouting
27 2.1.5 Placement and leveling of rock by Multi purpose pontoon ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
17.13 Underbase grouting
27 Pipeline Trenching API Recommended 10.3.2 Planning 10.3.2: Code implies that ice management and ice forecasting system should be in place including prediction of More quantitative guidance is required in the estimation of icing Low
Practice 2N 10.3.3 Ice Management fog and polar lows. accretion.
10.3.4 Icing 10.3.3: It contains a description of the Ice forecasting, Ice surveillance, early warning Alert System and Ice
10.3.6 Icebreaker assistance Clearing Procedures with some useful references on where to obtain ice data. More guidance is required in defining the allowable ice regime
10.3.4: Some references are made to different forms of icing. This phenomenon can occur at any offshore (including IM) for specific dredging activities
construction situated above waterline in cold climates.
10.3.6: Icebreaker Assistance is suggested as an option but provided info is very limited. More guidance on selecting ice management systems and determining
The above items are relevant to all offshore activities in this chapter. its performance should be generated
27 Low
Effects from the following phenomena
are the minimum to be considered
Offshore standard DNV- Sec. 4 - when establishing functional loads:
OS-F101 B100 changed axial friction due to freezing
27 code of practice dredging and land gives channel width recommendations on ttrench widths, no difference in arctic Low
BS 6349-5:1991 sec 3.2.3 reclamation
27 3.1 Pre and post trenching of pipeline ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
17.11 Precise positioning on the sea
floor by active and passive means
27 3.1.3 pre-trenching by Grab dredge ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 3.1.4 pre-trenching by Backhoe dredge ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 3.1.5 post-trenching by Backhoe dredge ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 3.1.6 pre-trenching by CSD ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 3.1.7 post-trenching by Jet pontoon ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 3.2.3 backfilling by placement dredged material by grabdredge or ISO 19901-6:2009 13 & 17 13 Temporary mooring and Low
backhoe dredge stationkeeping for marine operations
17 Offshore installation operations
27 Man-made islands ISO 19906:2010 11.3.3 & Ice interaction may cause vibrations to Low
15.2.7.6 structure
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
27 4.2.5 Positioning of floating equipment by anchoring ISO 19901-6:2009 13 13 Temporary mooring and Low
stationkeeping for marine operations
27 4.3 Ground improvement operations Hydraulic fill manual 7 Ground improvement Gives overview of ground improvement techniques. Nothing on working conditions in the arctic Low
27 4.3.2 Underwater placement of suitables (sand, rock, other foundation ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
material) 17.13 Underbase grouting
27 4.3.4 Installation of preconstructed vertical drains ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations Low
27 Land Falls API Recommended 10.3.2 Planning 10.3.2: Code implies that ice management and ice forecasting system should be in place including prediction of More quantitative guidance is required in the estimation of icing Low
Practice 2N 10.3.3 Ice Management fog and polar lows. accretion.
10.3.4 Icing 10.3.3: It contains a description of the Ice forecasting, Ice surveillance, early warning Alert System and Ice
10.3.6 Icebreaker assistance Clearing Procedures with some useful references on where to obtain ice data. More guidance is required in defining the allowable ice regime
10.3.4: Some references are made to different forms of icing. This phenomenon can occur at any offshore (including IM) for specific dredging activities
construction situated above waterline in cold climates.
10.3.6: Icebreaker Assistance is suggested as an option but provided info is very limited. More guidance on selecting ice management systems and determining
The above items are relevant to all offshore activities in this chapter. its performance should be generated
27 5.1 Pipe-pull Low
27 5.1.1 Offshore anchor pontoon installation ISO 19901-6:2009 9, 13 & 9 Stability, 13 Temporary mooring and Low
16 stationkeeping for marine operations
(including all paragraphs), 16 Pre-laid
mooring including foundation
27 5.1.2 Onshore backanchor installation ISO 19901-6:2009 16 Pre-laid mooring including foundation Low
28 6.1 Introduction / assumptions / remarks ISO 19901-6:2009 14 Construction and outfitting afloat > 14.3 Low
Construction spread
28 6.1.1 Positioning reference systems assumed to be available (already ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
installed and working) 17.4 Systems and equipment > 17.4.3
Positioning monitoring system
28 6.1.2 Trench and seabed preparation completed and ISO 19901-6:2009 17 17 Offshore installation operations > Low
inspected/surveyed/approved 17.2 Installation site
28 6.1.5 Offshore transfer of pipe joints, pipe crates or reels not (yet) part ISO 19901-6:2009 11 11 Loadout Low
of pipelay scope
28 6.2 Launch & Recovery of Equipment additional guidance on impact of icing on operability of umbilicals and Low
wires connected to ROV
28 6.3 Stinger handling additional guidance on performance of exposed winches in cold Low
conditions
28 6.4 Production activities onboard (pipe fabrication) Low
28 6.4.1 Transport pipe joints from storage to production line including Low
upending (j-lay) Icing shall be considered for the loading
Offshore standard DNV- Sec. 8 - capacity of temporary linepipe storage
OS-F101 F400 and transportation
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
28 Intermittent re-positioning of additional guidance on impact of exposed winches and wires going Low
anchors --> anchor handling through water surface
procedure
28 6.6 Landfalls Low
28 6.6.1 Boka scope ISO 19901-6:2009 11 11 Loadout > 11.8 Grounded loadouts Low
28 6.7 Anchor point pipeline ISO 19906:2010 9.7.3.1 Installation suction anchoring; anchor guidance on anchoring in arctic conditions. A lot of is anchroing done Low
height in excess of the target related to our operations (mainly temporary). How is anchoring different
penetration depth. Unreduced in permafrost soil conditions?
penetration resistance higher due to
permafrost: larger under pressures.
Check if soil plug does not move up
inside the anchor
28 6.7.1 This is a fixed anchor point on the seabed against which the vessel ISO 19901-6:2009 11 11 Loadout > 11.8 Grounded loadouts Low
can pull to initiate the pipelay.
28 6.7.2 Several solutions exist: suction pile, anchor, deadman anchor, ISO 19901-6:2009 16 Low
driven pile, existing structure (jacket, template) 16 Pre-laid mooring including
foundation > 16.1 Installation planning
till 16.7 Gravity anchor installation
28 6.8 Abandon & Recovery guidance on impact of sea ice and ice bergs on abandonment of pipeline Low
during laying; I.e. guidance on when to abandon in approach of ice bergs
or ice fields
28 6.8.4 Abandonment R-lay Low
28 Close Hang-off Clamp additional guidance on effect of icing and cold conditions on friction Low
reduction and ice obstruction mechanisms
28 Open tensioners guidance on hydraulic fluidity in cold temperatures and obstruction Low
mehcnisms
28 Open HOC (Hang-Off Clamp) Recommendation regarding Impact of arctic environment on operability Low
of these kind of systems and possible obstructions and what to do about
it to keep them operational
28 6.9 Pipe Lay Activities (J,S,R lay) Low
28 Sec. 4 mainly a design issue Low
B100 Sec. 4 - B100 Effects from the following
phenomena are the minimum to be
considered when establishing
Offshore standard DNV- functional loads: changed axial friction
OS-F101 due to freezing
28 Sec. 4 - mainly a design issue Low
C400 Sec. 4 - C400 In areas where ice may
develop of drift, the possibility of ice
loads on the pipeline system shall be
considered. Guidance note: Ice loads
may be due to ice frozen on the
pipeline system itself, or partly due to
Offshore standard DNV- floating ice, or combination of these
OS-F101 two.
Index item (chapter) Clarification Relevant other Section Title Comments Recommendations for new or additional guidance: Priority: Further study work; JIP;
[Index item is derived from ISO 19901-6 as a basis with [What is the scope of the codes /guides [Title of the relevant other code / [Comments on this index item in relation to other codes / guides or in general. Comments on the a) That a piece of guidance text will be drafted, or High assessment
additional chapters defined from workshop input. New or index item] guide] existance of GAP's] b) That further study / work / assessment should be performed, Medium
Paragraph
Chapter
29 5 29.5 Disconnection Facility The above guidelines are not developed for disconnection operations. As Low
guidelines for disconnect operations in non-Arctic climates are
In Section 2.6.2 is explained that no general rules, regulations, guidelines or standards are available that developed on a project-by-project basis, it is recommended to develop
describe the specific operation of disconnection of a floating production platform. the guidelines or procedures for this operation in arctic conditions also
Neither ISO 19901-6, nor ISO 19906 cover this quite special, field dependent procedure. Obviously, Arctic on a project-by-project basis.
conditions will affect the operation of disconnection, as explained in Section 2.2.3. The following documents
provide information with respect to the general guidelines for Arctic (disconnection) operations:
ISO 19906
Barents 2020, phase 4
Arctic FPSO - Technical Feasibilities and Challenges, OMAE2012-83028, Guang Li, SBM Atlantia, Houston, TX,
USA
29 7 29.7 Stationkeeping Adopt High
Guidelines are needed to cover the operational aspects mentioned in section 2.3.3., and which are specific for
operation in Arctic conditions.
The following topics can be mentioned as potential gaps:
Mooring integrity monitoring and assessment
Ice load forecasting to support strategies for shut-down/disconnection
Requirements on ice management systems
Ice drift and risk analysis
Safety/reliability/redundancy requirements to systems needed in a potential disconnection scenario.
Training and testing requirements
29 8 29.8 Re-connection Facility The above guidelines are not developed for re-connection operations. As Low
guidelines for reconnect operations in non-Arctic climates are developed
on a project-by-project basis, it is recommended to develop the
guidelines or procedures for this operation in arctic conditions also on a
project-by-project basis.
SECTION 2
Soil condition
Water depth
Permafrost
Boulders
Ice type
Waves
GENERAL NOTES
General
Training
Medics on board
MEDICAL SUPPORT Experience
First aid
Psychological support
General
Gender
Staff selection and training
Selection Ethnicity
Age
SELECTION AND TRAINING
OPERATIONS
Familiarization
Training session
Training
Drills
Documentation
General
Nutrition
Alcohol consumption
FACILITIES PPE Other
Clothing
Accommodation
Other
General
Personnel on board
STAFF AND CREW
Personnel on bridge
EER & ER team\Firefighting team (other matrises)
= Major challenge
Vol 2B Sec. 2.2 CONDITIONS CONDITIONS
Barents 2020
Ocean currents
Daylight hours
Seaspray icing
Tidal currents
Soil condition
Temperature
Water depth
Precipitation
Remoteness
Wind speed
SO 19906
Permafrost
Polar lows
Wind chill
Darkness
Boulders
Ice type
Visibility
Waves
Crew selection
Training
Motivation
Fire prevention
Storages
Housekeeping 5, 7, 8
Vessel design 13.8.1.2
fire fighting equiqment
fire fighting procedures
PPE 13.8.1.2
Fire fighting team
Fire fighting preparation Training & Drills
Fire fighting & escape plan 14, B12
Fire fighting
Temperature detectors 10
Gas detectors 4.2.1
Fire dection/alarm
Alarm button 10
Internal communication
External communication
Fire control Access & use PPE
Access fire 12
Access & use equipment
Supply extinguishing media
Extinguish fire
Monitor & prevent re-spark 15, B14
Assess damage
Number of medics
Hospital and medical
Hospital capacity
Supplies and storage
Hospital temperature
care
Emergency response
Availability
Resource
&
operations
Reliability
Vol 2B Sec. 2.3
Emergency repairs
ER Vessel operations
equipment
ditch/crash
ditch/ crash
Emergency Response
Recovery, fire
Unit-based ER
fighting, towing,
MOB & helicopter
MOB & helicopter
Including rigging,
scaffolding, welding,
Environmental vulnerability
Socio-economic aspects
Remoteness
Environment
Darkness
= Major challenge
Daylight hours
Temperature
Wind speed
Wind chill
Precipitation
Seaspray icing
Meteology
Visibility
Polar lows
Water depth
CONDITIONS
Temperature seawater
Ocean currents
Tidal currents
Oceanography
Boulders
Vol 2B Sec. 2.4 Escape, Evacuation and Rescue CONDITIONS
Oceanography Sea ice and icebergs Seabed
Soil condition
Water depth
Permafrost
Boulders
Ice type
Alarm & Communication
Escape Routes
Temporary Safe Refuge
Route to Evacuation Points [A]
Escape
Embarkation
OPERATIONS
Marine &
Launch
Amphibious Craft
Indirect Touch -down/ Impact
(Active)
and Semi- Transfer to beyond hazard zone
Dry [B] Launch
Rafts (passive) Embarkation
Transfer to beyond hazard zone
Abandonment
Wet Individual Touch -down/ Impact
Transfer to beyond hazard zone
Active
Indirect & Semi-Dry
Survival Passive
Wet Individual
Recovery by Indirect & Semi-Dry
Rescue
Helicopter Wet
Recovery
Recovery by Indirect & Semi-Dry
Vessel [D] Wet
Indirect & Semi-Dry
Other Transvessel transfer
Wet
= Major challenge
Vol 2B Sec. 2.5 CONDITIONS
Socio-economic aspects
Eco system sensitivity
ARCTIC COUNCIL
GAS GUIDELINES
IMO MARPOL
Daylight hours
Seaspray icing
Temperature
Precipitation
Remoteness
Wind speed
Polar lows
Wind chill
Darkness
Visibility
Tracking
Handling
Black and gray water
Storage
Disposal
Tracking
Handling
Oily water
Storage
Disposal 1) Annex 1, 10, 2
Tracking
Handling
Metals
Storage
Disposal
6. Waste management
Tracking
Handling
OPERATIONS
Incineration residues
Storage
Disposal
Tracking
Handling
Organic waste
Storage
Disposal 2) Annex 1, 10, 3
Tracking 3) Chap. 6,2
Handling
Paints and solvents
Storage
Disposal
Tracking
Handling
Paper, card and wood
Storage
Disposal 4) Annex 1, 10, 3
Tracking
Handling
Plastic
Storage
Disposal
= Major challenge
G1; Annex 1, 12
Definitions:
Tracking When is waste produced, how much is produced, waste contents, where is it stored
Handling Lifting materials, pumping, man handling, processing (schredding, burning, filtering)
Storage Storage condition (on deck, in container, at a certain temperature,
in open waste skip), storage duration, stored amount
Disposal Over board, ship to shore, incinerate, recycle
Sources:
1) IMO MARPOL Annex 1, 10, 2
2) IMO MARPOL Annex 1, 10, 3
3) ARCTIC COUNCIL ARCTIC OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS GUIDELINES Chap. 6,2
4) IMO MARPOL Annex 1, 10, 3
Vol 2B Sec. 2.6 3D Metocean & Environment Precipitation
Transport Canada Perf. Based Standard EER Barents 2020 RN04
Ice Fog Blizzard Sources (numbered) Filling in the gaps: Filling in the gaps:
Alarm & Communication 1 6.2.2.2 Escape Specific Standards Visual alarms, signs, emergency plan postings, arrows, or other visual indicators, shall be protected from the Auditory alarm or communication devices such as loud speakers shall be
Escape Selection of optimal escape routes and procedure for cold temperature including minimizing external routes, or
Escape Routes
2 High potential risk 6.2.3.2 not satisfactory alternate escape plan for cold temperature.
Initial accessibility (base to unit) 3 Possible risk 7.1.2.2 (b) ice fog only Aircraft operations are often suspended in ice fog, so that the preferred evacuation option
Helicopter Take-off 4 No risk 7.1.2.2 (b) ice fog only (helicopter) is usually eliminated. Alternative preferred evacuation means need to be defined.
Direct & Dry
Transfer to beyond hazard zone 5 7.1.2.2 (b) ice fog only
Evacuation
Vessel (ERV) Dry transfer from unit to ERV
Wet Individual Abandonment
Transfer to beyond hazard zone
Survival Wet Individual 6 8.2.2.3 (ii) Craft shall be designed to compensate for the effects of ice fog.
Rescue Indirect & Semi-Dry
Recovery By Helicopter
Wet
Helicopter operations MOB & ditch recovery, Medevac
Resource operations MOB & helicopter ditch/ crash personnel
Emergency FRC operations
recovery
Response
Availability, Reliability &
Emergency Repairs Rigging, scaffolding, welding, diving, etcetera
Competence
Visibility (precipitation)
Compensation for reduced visibility in ice fog area, including fog lights
Alarm & Communication
11 5.2 (d), 6.1.2 (i), There shall be provisions to eliminate or manage to ALARP Ice fog and audio signals.
Escape
Compensation for reduced visibility in ice fog area, including fog lights
Escape Routes
12 5.2 (d), 6.1.2 (i) Compensation for reduced visibility in ice fog area, including fog lights and audio signals. and audio signals.
Suitable lighting shall be provided, as under normal provisions visibility will be reduced and searchlights have
Initial accessibility
13 7.1.2.2 limited range.
Aircraft operations are often suspended in ice fog, so that the preferred evacuation option (helicopter) is usually
Embarkation
Helicopter 14 7.1.2.2 eliminated. Alternative preferred evacuation means need to be defined.
Direct & Dry Thin ice layer on surfaces has the effect of: Canopy, window visibility reduction - Antenna icing. - Lights, colour,
Take-off
15 7.1.2.2 dimmed. And shall be compensated for in design.
Transfer to beyond hazard zone 16 7.1.2.2
Initial accessibility & Stationkeeping 17 7.1.2.2
Vessel (ERV)
Dry transfer from unit to ERV 18 7.1.2.2
Evacuation
Embarkation 19 7.1.2.2
Marine & Amphibious Craft
Touch-down/ Impact 20 7.1.2.2
(active)
Transfer to beyond hazard zone 21 7.1.2.2
Indirect & Semi-Dry
Launch 22 7.1.2.2
Rafts (passive) Embarkation 23 7.1.2.2
Transfer to beyond hazard zone 24 7.1.2.2
Abandonment 25 7.1.2.2
Wet Individual Touch-down/ Impact 26 7.1.2.2
Transfer to beyond hazard zone 27 7.1.2.2
Active 28 8.2.2.3 Not satisfactory Craft shall be designed to compensate for the effects of ice fog.
Indirect & Semi-Dry
Survival Passive 29 High potential risk 8.2.2.3
Wet Individual 30 Possible risk 8.2.2.3
Appropriate marking, colour, and lights to optimize visibility shall be included in the design for all environmental
Indirect & Semi-Dry
31 No risk 8.3.3, 8.3.6.3.1 (b), Appendix B.3.c conditions.
By Helicopter In order for the Master to be able to continuously monitor rescue operations and at the same time safely
Rescue
Recovery Wet approach and rescue people from the water, the bridge should be so designed that allows him/her to view the
32 8.3.3, 8.3.6.3.1 (b), Appendix B.3.c rescue area at all times.
Indirect & Semi-Dry 33 8.3.3 RN04-2.3-F1
By Vessel (ERV)
Wet 34 8.3.3
Direct & Dry (bridge, gondola, bucket, etc.)
Other Transvessel Transfer
Indirect & Semi-Dry (TEMPSC, FRC, raft)
Helicopter operations MOB & ditch recovery, Medevac
Recovery, fire fighting, towing, salvage,
ERV operations
Resource operations diving
Emergency
MOB & helicopter ditch/ crash personnel
Response FRC operations
recovery
Availability, Reliability &
Emergency Repairs Rigging, scaffolding, welding, diving, etcetera
Competence
Front sheet picture: Reflections on the Arctic Sea 2008 Ville Miettinen
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Arctic Operations Handbook Joint Industry Project (JIP) was launched in February of
2012 supported by a number of companies and knowledge institutes. The JIP was initiated
by a number of Dutch companies in the framework of the Maritime Innovation Program
(MIP) and was awarded a subsidy from the Dutch Ministry of EL&I (Economic affairs,
Agriculture & Innovation). With it the JIP participants committed to issue an open source
document to ensure that the work from the JIP is offered to the international arctic offshore
community and the general public for further use.
The participating companies have the ambition to execute projects in arctic areas, such as
installation and operations of oil and gas production facilities. The term arctic as used here
refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore
operations, field development and decommissioning.
Currently, there is no specific standard for companies operating in arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure services can be provided in a safe manner with minimum
environmental impact, it was proposed to prepare guidance/standards for such operations.
This project has taken an important step in gathering existing rules & regulations, identifying
the areas which require additional guidance, and has taken some steps in defining guidance.
The focus is on the operational activities for installation of fixed, floating and subsea units,
dredging, trenching, pipe laying and floating oil/gas production. Detailed design of facilities
& equipment was not covered in this JIP as it is already supported through ISO 19906 for
Arctic Offshore Structures.
As part of the work scope the JIP has taken the initiative to liaise with Class Societies, Arctic
Governmental Authorities and international standards organizations such as ISO. A
diversified group of Dutch operators and knowledge centers have assessed deficiencies in
existing standards and it is therefore considered useful and beneficial for the ISO TC67 SC 8
and SC 7 to use this report when preparing their new ISO norms.
This Arctic Marine Operations Challenges & Recommendations Report presents existing
rules & regulations, identifies the areas which require additional guidance, and in those cases
where possible defines recommendations for arctic operations. The index used in this report
is based on ISO 19901-6; Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for
offshore structures Part 6: Marine operations. The index has been adjusted and
complemented with aspects specific for arctic operations.
The following key observations/guidance have been gathered within the scope of this Joint
Industry Project;
It was noted from the gap analysis that there was limited (ISO) guidance for pipe lay,
trenching and dredging operations, let alone for the arctic areas. It was therefore chosen
to provide a number of best practices for these operations, considering the arctic
environment. The efforts concentrated on the aspects that would be new in the arctic
when comparing with open water operations in non-arctic areas.
Site specific operations should be considered when planning and carrying out operations.
Considerable effort was performed to align the knowledge on weather conditions and in
particular on the requirements for monitoring and forecasting as well as the requirements
for decision based tools.
For the transportation & logistic aspects input relied heavily on the existing guidance for
arctic shipping which is further developed and was evaluated and transferred to
recommendations for the specific services of this guide.
This report provides guidance as required specifically for contractors expecting to work
in arctic areas on the aspects of health, safety, training and also stakeholder mapping.
A frame work is provided to perform environmental impact assessments both in early as
well as detailed stages of design in order to ensure that impacts can be managed and
mitigated.
Specific attention was given to the evaluation of the loads on and the operation of
disconnectable floating production units.
The other volumes of this report contain results of the gap analysis performed in the project
as well as relevant results of the pilot projects of the Arctic Operations Handbook (AOH)
JIP;
The IceStream Pilot project, described in volume 3, has shown that the egg code
(which is a method to describe characteristics of ice fields), when used as a basis to
establish a visualization of the ice field, can serve as input to numerical models with
which ice loads can be predicted on floating structures. More field data is required to
support development of new analytical models.
The Environmental Impact Pilot project, described in volume 4, has developed an
enhanced approach (interaction of linked sensitivities) for understanding the
environmental impact of operations in an early project stage in a semi-quantitative
manner. Application of such an approach is recommended to assess, evaluate and reduce
the environmental impact of operations in arctic areas.
A state of the art review for marine icing on vessels has been performed and has been
documented in volume 5, Marine icing on arctic offshore operations Pilot project. It
highlights that although there are many approaches, there is no common approach and no
industry standard for marine icing calculations. It strongly recommends more field
observations and improved prediction models to determine sea spray formation and icing
accretion.
List of participants
The following companies have participated in the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP;
INDEX TO VOLUMES
IceStream
Revision Table:
CONTENTS Page
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 3
2 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................ 4
6 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................... 63
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................... 65
8 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 68
8.1 Greenland expedition summary ......................................................................... 68
8.2 Overview Numerical Models .............................................................................. 69
IceStream 25713 3
1 INTRODUCTION
As a fair share of the earths natural resources are located in the Arctic, the offshore
industry is preparing for future activities in these areas. The term Arctic refers to areas
where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore operations and field
development. These areas can be found in e.g. the Beaufort Sea but also the Caspian
Sea (see Exhibit 1 of Arctic Operations Handbook JIP). Operators, designers, regulators
and research institutes gained extensive experience in offshore operations during the
last decades. There are however many challenges to deal with when moving to these
areas, which implies that design requirements and operating criteria need to be
redefined, design procedures need to be reengineered, new operation procedures need
to be worked out, etc.
In 2011, the Dutch offshore industry took the initiative to develop guidelines and
standards that indicate operational restrains in the Arctic areas. This initiative has led to
the initiation of the Arctic Operations Handbook (AOH) Joint Industry Project. This
project will conduct a survey of the available guidelines. The survey relates to dredging,
pipe lay and trenching operations and to fixed and floating platform installation,
operation and decommissioning. An overview of suitable existing guidelines will be given
and proposals will be drawn up to develop missing guidelines.
In the preparation phase of the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP, a few gaps in the
guidelines were already identified. Pilot projects have been initiated to work out
proposals for corresponding appropriate guidelines. The three pilot projects are
IceStream, Environmental Impact and Ice Loads (mainly concerning consequences of
icing on structures above the water level).
This document contains the results of the study performed within the IceStream pilot
project, which is executed by MARIN in cooperation with Bluewater (leader of this pilot
within the AOH JIP), SBM Offshore and IntecSea.
IceStream 25713 4
2 BACKGROUND
The Arctic Operations Handbook JIP identified that guidelines are required for
evaluation of measures to predict and control the flow of ice around offshore floating
structures. A controlled ice flow needs to prevent that ice accumulation and
corresponding loads on the structures exceed design levels. The flow of ice can be
controlled by an optimized shape of the floater, or with methods to physically manage
the ice, such as ice breaking, or methods to break up any accumulation that might
occur, such as water jets.
In order to make a sound evaluation of the measures to control the ice flow, a guideline
is required that describes the following four items. The IceStream project focuses on the
second item.
1. the environmental conditions (wind, waves, current and (managed) ice) that
need to be assessed in combination with the operational conditions (transit,
manoeuvring, dynamic positioning, etc.) for dredging, pipe lay, trenching,
offloading, etc;
2. the appropriate physical modelling of an ice flow such that it can be included in
experimental and numerical tools that are used to assess the conditions given in
item 1.;
3. the acceptable levels of accumulation of broken drift ice and the corresponding
loads on the floater and its appendages in order to evaluate the outcomes of the
experimental and numerical tools that are in accordance with 2. for the
conditions given in 1.; and
4. best design and operational practices to control the ice flow around floating
structures with appendages and/or moon pools.
The environmental conditions in item 1. are related to the operational area and the type
of operations with their related allowed environmental conditions. A review of guidelines
(gap analysis) will be performed within the AOH JIP to set such definitions.
The outcome of IceStream may be used for setting up a method for determination of the
loads imposed by the ice, as stated in item 3. Once the experimental and numerical
tools are in accordance with the definitions following from 2. and are ready to be used,
best design and operational practices for the control of ice flow can be distinguished.
IceStream 25713 5
3 PROBLEM DEFINITION
Given particular environmental conditions in which an operation will be conducted, sea
ice may be present. A number of numerical tools are developed for the investigation of
the behaviour of floating structures in broken ice fields (1),(2), (3), (4). Among these
models, there is no consensus about how application of particular simplifications or
specific assumptions in these models influence the predicted ice flow behaviour around
floating structures.
IceStream will contribute to solving this problem by conducting a study having the
following main objective:
To deliver a description of the geometry and physical processes that influence and
contribute to the ice flow process, such that it specifies the requirements for appropriate
modelling
Basically, we want to know why ice (e.g. individual floes, groups of floes, etc.) behaves
the way it does. A number of present environmental forces and processes related to ice
behaviour are shown in Figure 1. It will become clear that many of these processes are
interrelated and are important in the appearance of the ice field. In the numerical
modelling, one of the most crucial properties of an ice field is the strong polydispersity
(5); the objects (ice floes) have a very inconsistent size, shape and mass. Thus, the
geometry and the dynamics of an ice field are closely related.
The problem is divided into two sub problems; the first one considers the geometrical
appearance of the ice field in a static way, and the second concerns the sea ice
dynamics. This report is thus divided into the following two parts:
Wind
Collisions
Ridging Breaking
Melting
Current
Freezing
Figure 1 IceStream investigates the relevant processes for ice flow, required for
numerical modelling
IceStream 25713 6
Descriptions drawn up on the processes related to the above two topics will finally be
used for an evaluation of a number of existing numerical tools used for ice-structure
interaction. Input and modelling processes and theories will be described so that an
overview is created of the current state of the art of these numerical models.
Based on the IceStream outcome, the input and requirements for numerical tools on the
flow of ice can be defined. Furthermore the outcome can be used to better define the
conditions in physical model tests, for validation purposes. With this guideline, next
steps can be taken in the evaluation of the flow of ice around a floating structure,
assessment of the accompanying loads and control measures that can be taken.
IceStream 25713 7
Figure 2 shows a possible contributor to this wide spread in results and also clarifies
why it is so important to describe and include the assessed conditions more accurately
in numerical prediction tools. The two examples illustrate models using different
approaches to model the ice particles, using either circular discs or polygon shapes for
the ice particles. The effort it takes for the floater to shift aside circular shaped ice
particles will be different from shifting aside polygon shaped ice particles, even if they
would be of equal size. This was demonstrated by Daley (1), refer to section 5.5.
Adapting a more realistic representation of the broken ice field in numerical tools will
reduce the undesired influence of the shape models. The question is how to obtain such
a representation. First a clear definition is required of the actual ice conditions, indicating
its severity, that can be used as input for prediction methods.
Many indications of the severity of the ice conditions are based on the ice
concentration, which is the fraction of a particular area which is covered by ice. Model
tests in ice have indicated that the ice concentration is one of the most important factors
influencing the loads that are experienced by a floater.
Ideally the ice conditions at the operation site would be described by a (small) number of
parameters, which give just sufficient information to define the appearance of the ice,
specific for a location. Besides the ice concentration, the size and shape of the particles
and the ice thickness are interesting parameters to incorporate.
For navigation in ice, sailors need this much information for a safe passage through the
ice as well. Therefore, we can make use of similar tools to indicate the ice severity; ice
charts. These charts contain up to 10 parameters to describe one particular ice
condition. This set of parameters is gathered in what is called the Egg-code.
Figure 2 Importance of well defined ice conditions with top right DECICE (4) and bottom
right by Lset (6)
IceStream 25713 8
4.1 EGG-CODE
The Egg-code is the system for defining sea ice conditions by the World Meteorology
Organization (WMO). It has received this name due to the oval shape of the symbol, in
which the parameters are gathered. The basic data concerning concentrations, stages
of development (age) and form (floe size) of ice are included in this simple form. Since
this code represents international convention, it is used in coding of all visual sea and
lake ice observations (7).
The ice charts follow from observations that may be made from space (satellites), an
aircraft, a helicopter, the deck of a ship or a shore base. Electronic aids such as radar or
visual observations are applied depending on the utilized platform. The type of ice
observations that can be made are dependent on the perspective from which the ice is
viewed. From the air, ice thickness estimation is difficult, however floe shapes are very
clear. The thickness is more easily estimated standing on a ship, when sailing through
the ice the sheets may turn over giving a view on the cross section. Standing so close to
the water surface, it is more difficult to gain an idea of ice coverage and the size of the
present floes. Figure 4 gives an example of an ice chart based on a helicopter flight.
Figure 3 Part of a DMI ice chart for the Figure 4 Example of an ice chart produced
East Greenland area from a helicopter flight
IceStream 25713 9
Parameters Sa, Sb and Sc indicate the stage of development of respectively the thickest,
second thickest and third thickest ice, of which the concentrations are reported by Ca, Cb
and Cc respectively. The parameter S0 is used to indicate presence of ice which is
thicker than given by Sa, but having a concentration lower than one tenth. The symbols
in the code refer to descriptions of the stages of development, or ages, of the ice, and
are related to the thickness of the ice.
Floe sizes corresponding to Sa, Sb and Sc respectively are given by Fa, Fb and Fc. The
parameters stated here refer to the size of the ice particles (floes) and range from
several meters to over 10 kilometres. For tables and overviews of interpretations of egg-
code parameters and realistic examples, refer to the MANICE (7) document.
Ct Total concentration
Ca Cb Cc Cd Partial concentration
The use of the egg-code parameters is very practical for getting a good understanding of
the ice conditions ahead when being at sea. All possible ice conditions can be described
with this method. A number of characteristics will be given here, which are of importance
when applying the egg-code to our particular purpose; obtaining a set of parameters to
describe the severity of the ice conditions, and creating an input for numerical models.
A team of ice experts has created a set of ice conditions with sketches of the
appearance corresponding to particular egg-codes which help demonstrating these
properties, mentioned below. The full report of the experts is given in (8).
Distinctiveness
The categorization of the three different ice types that are present makes it possible to
distinct the appearance of various ice fields. Only a small variation in parameters can tell
the difference between ice fields which appear to be very different. An example is shown
in Figure 6, where the difference between a natural, unmanaged ice field is illustrated
next to the managed condition of this particular scenario.
It can be seen here that the egg-codes on which these visualizations are based, are
almost equal (note that only two parameters have slightly changed), however the
sketches quite differ. Both cases have a total ice concentration of 8/10, of which 1/10 is
multiyear ice with a thickness of over 2.0m, 2/10 is medium first year ice (thickness
about 70-120cm) and 5/10 is first year thin ice having a thickness in the range between
30-70cm.
The distinction between the two cases is in the ice form, or floe size. The upper case is
taken as reference, where the bottom case is a managed version of the top one. The
medium and thin first year ice floes have been reduced from a size of between 100-
500m and 500-2000m in the unmanaged situation, to a size between 3-20m and 20-
100m in the managed condition.
A range of conditions were visualized based on a given egg-code description. They give
an understanding of the appearance of the ice field and how the egg-code follows from a
particular ice field. Additionally it shows examples of how the various ice types are
distributed over the complete ice field and possible occurrence of clustering.
Variability
It was shown that the geometry of the ice field can be changed significantly by making
small alternations to the egg-code parameters. This property is beneficial for extracting
visualizations from the egg-code. However, another property is given by the fact that for
one egg-code, a large range of variations of visualizations is possible, which brings
some challenges to the extraction of visualizations from the egg-code. This arises due to
the following two causes:
The first is the fact that there are no indicators among the parameters pointing out the
positioning of the ice floes in the field, so starting from a particular egg-code the
distribution of the floes over the ice field is random. It is unknown if there is a general
pattern such as clustering of the floes leaving large open water areas, or uniform
distribution over the domain so that the open water and ice areas are spread.
Secondly, the parameters refer to ranges of ice floe sizes and thicknesses, which leaves
space for variations. The ranges may be as large as several hundreds of meters
depending on the value of the parameter.
This variability can be seen as a disadvantage when are thinking about developing a
method that takes an egg-code as a starting point from which we want to generate an
appropriate ice field.
Even if the created ice field complies with the parameters from the egg-code, the
visualization may look very different compared to a top view picture taken at the site,
due to a difference in floe size distributions and the distribution of the floes over the
domain. However, the statistical correspondence with the ice field will be much larger
than with an ice field generated only on ice concentration and average floe size.
In the following sections a method will be described for the creation of an ice field that
complies with the parameters given in the egg-code. Additionally, the above mentioned
items (floe sizes and floe distribution over the domain) will be investigated further and
the developed method will be adjusted such that these aspects are still included in the
most realistic way.
IceStream 25713 12
In order to avoid generating ice fields by hand each time, a method will be developed
which creates a domain containing ice particles such that it corresponds with the egg-
code. Additionally the field must be as realistic as possible. The main requirements for
the adapted method are as follows:
Since the egg-code is taken as a basis, it is required that there is the possibility to
predefine the areas of the individual ice particles. This enables generating the ice field
exactly according to the egg-code, and the option to perform checks. In addition, the
distribution of ice floe areas within one class can be investigated and adapted. Of
course, fulfilling this requirement is easiest by generating regular shaped ice particles,
such as circles or squares. However, it was stressed from the beginning that the shapes
of the floes must be as realistic as possible to avoid having them influencing the end
result.
As a basis, a two-dimensional field (top view) will be created and thicknesses will be
assigned to all ice particles. The same will be done with other relevant ice properties.
Although this part of the report only considers the static appearance of an ice field, the
highly dynamic character of the Arctic mentioned before, should be taken into account.
The consequence hereof is the fact that a mixture of a wide spread of ice types can be
present within one ice field.
Another important requirement defines that it should be possible to create ice fields for
the lowest up to the highest ice concentrations. Especially attention should be paid to
the high concentration, depending on the chosen method. When the particles would be
created and subsequently they are placed in the domain, it is likely that several ice floes
will overlap each other. As defined by the last item, it is important that an ice field will be
delivered which has no particles overlapping another, since many dynamic models
calculate the motions as a result of overlapping bodies, and need to start from a neutral
basis without overlaps.
In this case treemaps (right of Figure 7) can be applied, which subdivide a rectangular
area according to the hierarchy. Here, each branch of the tree is given a rectangle,
which is subdivided into smaller rectangles representing the sub-branches.
IceStream 25713 13
This subdivision at a particular level is done only in one direction (either horizontal or
vertical). This may have the consequence that in the case of many branches at a
particular level, very thin rectangles appear and the shapes (and sizes) are difficult to
compare.
The ice concentration in Figure 9 is quite high and the example of a Voronoi diagram in
Figure 8 does not show any distinction between different types of cells except for their
hierarchic level. However, since each created cell in the diagram can be given certain
properties, it is possible to for example assign open water areas to a desired amount of
cells (resulting in the desired ice concentration).
IceStream 25713 14
The Voronoi diagram is the basis in creating the visualization of the ice field. By itself, it
is not capable of adapting particular prescribed values for the areas of its cells. This
capability will be added to the Voronoi derivation procedure, by using what is called the
Weighted Centroidal Voronoi Tessellation (WCVT). As the egg-code only delivers some
parameters describing the ice field, these parameters need to first be translated into a
list of ice floes present in the field. The Voronoi diagram divides the entire domain into
cells, so next to the cells that become ice floes, we also have to specify cells of a
particular size to become water areas.
So, the procedure for establishing an ice field consists of two main parts:
1. Deriving the tree of ice floe and water areas from the egg-code
2. Subdividing a domain resulting in an ice field, following the WCVT procedure
based on the obtained tree
Refer to Figure 10, where on the left, the coloured treemap from Figure 7 is shown,
applying the hierarchic levels. On the right of Figure 10, the entire domain is immediately
subdivided into the lowest level areas that are defined, which also becomes clear from
the presented tree below. So, the depicted areas are left and right equally large, but on
the right only one level is used to allocate them. As a result, the areas have different
shapes and are differently distributed.
The benefit of the approach used in the left picture is that we have the control of
grouping particular areas together, ensuring that they are located close to each other.
Therefore, also in the visualization of the egg-code, we will make use of hierarchic
levels. Consequently, the list of ice floe and water areas, now becomes a hierarchic
area structure, such as the tree in the left of Figure 10.
The lowest level of Voronoi cells represents the individual ice floes and open water
surfaces. These areas are referred to as cells, Figure 11 shows that this is the fourth
level. The field area is the top level and only defines the area of the evaluated ice field
(domain). Two more levels are then specified, which will be further explained below.
1. Field area
2. Section areas
3. Cluster areas
4. Cell areas
Sections
The first subdivision made is that from field area into a number of section areas. In order
to make sure that the generated ice field complies with the egg-code, it is beneficial to
ensure that each of the section areas complies with the egg-code. So how do we
determine the size of the section areas based on this?
Refer to the egg code below. We assume that each section includes one ice floe of the
largest category, which is in this case category 3. Based on the ice concentration
corresponding to this largest type of floe (2/10th), the yellow area (20% of total ice field)
is reserved for this type of ice. Next, within this yellow area, ice floe sizes are
determined based on the size range corresponding to size category 3 and a distribution
function of ice floe sizes. The size distribution function is based on ice observations and
will be further explained in the following part of this section.
So, the yellow area is filled with individual floes, in this case four floes fit in the available
yellow area. Since it was defined that there is only one floe of this type per section, the
size of this floe determines the size of this section. In the example below, it results in
four sections. Next, each section has according to the egg code a specific area available
for the other floe types, in this case 1/10th for multiyear ice and another 5/10th for first
year ice. The remaining 2/10th is open water area.
Section 1 Section 1
Floe
2
Section 3 Section 3
Section 4 Section 4
Clusters
The sections could directly be subdivided into cells, the ice floes and water areas would
then be the right next level. However, as was mentioned, it can be beneficial to establish
groups of cells, to ensure that particular cells will be located close to each other. So,
first, the sections are subdivided into cells, representing ice particles and water areas.
Next, these cells are divided into several groups. This is done in the cluster level. Most
importantly, a difference can be made between two extremes:
1. Each cluster has the same ratio ice floes versus water areas
2. Each cluster consists of only ice floes or only water areas
IceStream 25713 16
The first extreme distributes the floes evenly over the domain, with the open water areas
in between. In the second case, large floe clusters are obtained, where all the ice is
grouped together, leaving larger areas of water in between the ice groups. Besides
these two extreme cases, intermediate cluster compositions can be applied as well. The
possible difference in the result can be indicated by comparing the diagrams in Figure
12, where the drawn circles represent individual ice floes.
To account for this observation, in the ice field generation process a distribution function
is applied such that the probability of adding a small floe to the list will be larger than the
probability of adding a large one. In a number of studies, (12), (13), (14), a relation is
found between the number of appearances in a field and the floe size, which is referred
to as fractal theory or fractional dimensions. Cammaert and Jolles (8) describe this
IceStream 25713 17
Here, is the minimum floe size considered in the ice field and is the total
number of ice floes present in the field. The function is a straight line on log-log plot
where the shape parameter is the slope of the line. As mentioned, this parameter is
location dependent and typically varies between 1.17 and 2.5.
Figure 13 shows the power-law function for the fractional dimensions principle, using a
shape factor of 1.17 and the smallest considered floe of 2.0m. Consequently, all floes
present in the field are larger than 2.0m; only 14% of the floes is larger than 10m, and
only a small fraction exceeds 100m.
0.5
(corresponding to the horizontal axis in
0.4
Figure 13) into seven size segments,
indicated with the parameters 1 to 7. 0.3
0.2
has to be applied to a particular floe size Figure 13 Plot of the number of objects N
range. with linear dimension larger than L
300
Based on the cumulative distribution
function (derived from the above given 250
obtained for every floe size segment that Figure 14 Plot of the applied floe size
corresponding to a randomly chosen number
can be indicated in the egg.
IceStream 25713 18
The cumulative distribution function states the probability of occurrence of a floe with a
linear dimension larger than a particular value. Turning this relation around (the
inverse), after rescaling, results in the plot in Figure 14 for the floe size range of 100 to
500 m.
In the ice field generation method, this is implemented by taking the form of ice
parameter, stating the smallest and largest possible floe in the segment. Randomly
selecting a number between 0 and 1 will give the floe size according to the distribution,
taking these limits into account. It can be seen from Figure 14 that based on a shape
parameter of 1.17 only values above 0.75 result in floe sizes over 250 m, thus making it
more likely to create a smaller floe.
Based on the defined egg-code, a hierarchic scheme is made consisting of all ice floes
and water areas. The position of the ice floes and open water areas in the hierarchic
scheme defines in which cluster they are, and to which section in the main field they
belong. Remember from Figure 11 that three subdivision steps have to be made:
Definition of field
parameters Place the required
(egg-code) number of generators
within boundary
Determine
breakdown of Weighted Centroidal Voronoi
area into main Tessellation
sections, clusters
and cells Apply
Voronoi
tessellation
Subdivide the
domain into main Adjust Calculate
sections generator difference
positions & from target
Subdivide the weights areas
main sections into
clusters
The visualisation process starts with the highest level in the hierarchic tree. It then works
from the top down; first the total field is subdivided into sections, subsequently these
sections are again subdivided into smaller areas, etc. In the end, at cell level, the areas
of ice floes and open water areas are specified.
In Figure 16 the subdivision of a 200m by 200m field is presented, showing the three
subdivision steps. An example tree as shown below is used for this visualisation. In the
top diagram only the highest level subdivision is made (field area into section areas); as
can be seen this consists only of three main sections. In the middle diagram two of the
main sections are again subdivided, showing already that some groups of cells will be
larger than others. The diagram at the bottom shows the diagram with one of the main
sections even further subdivided. When looking carefully, the upper laying boundaries
can still be distinguished.
Each of the subdivision steps makes use of the same method; the Weighted Centroidal
Voronoi Tessellation (WCVT). This is an iterative method which starts from a set of sites
in the field, generators and the Voronoi Tessellation based on the positions of these
generators. A VT works by the following principle: for each generator, there is a region
consisting of all points closer to that generator than to any other. The subdivision into
those regions, called Voronoi cells, is referred to as Voronoi Tessellation (VT).
In each iteration step, a modified VT method is used for this conversion process, which
results in so called Weighted Centroidal Voronoi Tessellations (WCVTs). Finally, after a
number of iterations, a tessellation is obtained which has satisfactory cell areas.
For the reader interested in a detailed description of the tessellation procedure, in the
next paragraphs an explanation will be given of the used approach. Section 4.3.4
explains principles of the (original) Voronoi Tessellation (VT), and the WCVT method
used in the iteration steps is further described in section 4.3.5.
Paragraph 4.4 shows a number of obtained ice fields, and will discuss the features of
each of them. It will also demonstrate the randomness that is still present and the
possibilities of the user to influence the end result.
IceStream 25713 20
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
There are a number of methods for the derivation of the Voronoi diagram. Two methods
proved to be useful for the ice field generation process; those will be explained here.
Curve drawing
The first one is very straightforward and directly based on the property of the segments,
always laying equidistant to the two generators on which it is based. Drawing equidistant
lines between all pairs of generators results in the chaotic plot shown in Figure 18,
where all 15 possible line curves are drawn. The lines are perpendicular to the
connecting line between the two considered generators.
A large number of these lines are not relevant (they will not appear in the Voronoi
diagram) since the two corresponding generators are too far apart. By definition, on a
relevant line there is at least one point where the distance to its two generators is
smaller than the distance to all other generators. If no such part of or point on the line
exists, the line can be removed.
The remaining lines need to be shortened (cut off), therefore it is practical to know at
which parts of the line the above condition is valid. This indicates that this part of the line
is included in the final Voronoi diagram. In Figure 19, the non relevant lines have been
removed and the relevant segments on the remaining lines are indicated.
Finally, the lines are clipped such that the Voronoi diagram enclosing the generators in
the domain remains. This is done by finding the nearest intersections with line segments
indicated with an o in Figure 19. It can be seen here also that this is done for the
boundary lines (in blue) as well. The intersections form the vertices of the generators.
IceStream 25713 22
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 18 - All line curves between the Figure 19 - Only the relevant line curves
pairs of generators remaining
The benefit of this method is that it is very straightforward, and can be applied in all
cases. Boundaries can be taken into account independent of the shape of the domain. A
negative aspect from this method is the calculation time; lines need to be drawn
and evaluated (with the number of generators). Methods can however be found to
avoid assessing all possible lines and proceed straight with the relevant ones. As will be
shown further in this report, the application of target areas can be implemented (in two
different ways) without problems.
Circumcenter derivation
The second method derives, instead of the lines equidistant to two generators, the
points (nodes) equidistant to three surrounding generators. As was explained earlier, in
this way the vertices of the Voronoi cells are obtained directly. These nodes, with equal
distance to three surrounding generators, are defined to be the circumcenters of these
three points in space. A circumcenter is the center of the circumcircle (the circle passing
through the three generators), and is also defined as the point where the perpendicular
bisectors of the three sides of a triangle intersect.
In order to know which three generators have to be evaluated each time, and how the
vertices should be connected to each other, the Delaunay tessellation is used. This is a
triangulation for a set of points, such that no point is inside the circumcircle of any
triangle.
Starting from the Delaunay triangulation of the generators, for each triangle the
circumcircle is obtained, as is indicated in Figure 20. For the determination of the
Voronoi diagram the circle is not further required, but the center of this circle is. As
mentioned, these form the vertices of the Voronoi cells.
In Figure 21 the circumcircles and centers are drawn for the four triangles neighboring
to the middle generator (162, 162). It can be seen that the circumcenters are used to
construct the Voronoi cell corresponding to the generator positioned at (162, 162). When
comparing this plot with Figure 17 (derived by means of Matlab function) it can be seen
that the shape of the cell exactly corresponds. In Figure 19 the exact same shape can
be recognized as well.
IceStream 25713 23
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 20 Delaunay diagram with one Figure 21 Delaunay diagram with the
circumcircle around a triangle circumcircles and circumcenters forming
one Voronoi cell
Determination of circumcenters is a very direct way to obtain the vertices which form the
Voronoi cells and when based on the Delaunay triangulation (which can be done by a
Matlab function directly) it is a quicker method. However, as can be seen in Figure 21,
this method does not involve the presence of the boundaries. For this, a separate
method must be implemented. Additionally, the application of target areas will cause
extra challenges.
The process is iterative because the weights assigned to the generators are not linearly
related to the areas of the Voronoi cells. After each iteration, the current cell areas are
compared to the set target areas (defined in the tree established based on the egg-
code); A generator which cell is smaller than required is given a larger weight and vice
versa.
Often Lloyds algorithm is used to obtain this diagram. This method calculates the
Voronoi diagram and sub sequentially moves the generators to the centers of mass of
their Voronoi cells in each iteration. A CVT is finished when the distance shifted by the
generators between two iterations is smaller than a particular value.
IceStream 25713 24
To obtain Voronoi cells which comply with predefined areas captured in the hierarchic
tree described in section 4.3.2, weights are assigned to the generators which are
updated each iteration. This is based on the difference between the area of the Voronoi
cell and the set target area value for this cell.
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 24 Application of weights, indicated by the green circles; the 10 th (top left), 25th
(top right), 100th (bottom left) and 150th (bottom right) iteration are shown here
Curve drawing
When applying the iterative weights procedure, a distinction arises between two
approaches for the derivation of the equidistant lines to two generators, referred to as:
The equidistant line between two circles is originally a hyperbolic curve; in this case the
weights can be interpreted directly as the radii of the generators
If the radii of the generators are taken to be the square of the weights, the lines in
between two generators are straight lines
Circumcenter derivation
By application of weights, the circumcenter from three circles needs to be found instead
of three points. The fact that we consider circles instead of points, brings extra
challenges in the derivation of the circumcenter. The system of equations to solve for
the equidistant point to three circles cannot be solved uniquely; multiple solutions are
possible.
If none of the evaluated circles overlap, which is the case in the first number of iterations
when the weights (radii) are still small, already two possible solutions arise. As the
weights become larger, the probability of overlapping circles increases, and along with
this the number of solutions. This is shown below in Figure 25, where equidistance
curves are shown for the pairs circle 1&2 and circle 2&3. Intersections of these curves
indicate the number of solutions for the equidistant point to all three circles.
First, all possible solutions for three given circles have to be found. Then, the challenge
is to find the correct solutions out of all possibilities. A number of requirements and
constraints can be utilized to exclude unfeasible solutions. This set of constraints and
requirements needs to be complete and well defined, and increases the complexity of
the algorithm.
Limiting the weights simplifies the procedure by preventing many overlapping circles,
decreasing the number of possible solutions. However, more iterations will be required
since the Voronoi cell areas converge slower to their target area. Moreover, the problem
of obtaining multiple equidistant points cannot be excluded from this method.
Figure 25 All possible bisector forms and the maximum number of intersections for
every pair, which is the number of solutions for equidistant point to three circles (15)
IceStream 25713 27
4.4 RESULTS
As was discussed before, for each egg-code infinitely many ice field
configurations can be generated. Running the algorithm using the
same egg-code parameters may thus result in very different ice fields.
In Figure 26, three ice field visualizations are shown, all corresponding
to the same egg-code (as shown on the right) and having an equal
clustering parameter. The third row in the egg is displayed in grey,
since it considers stage of development which is thickness related,
and thus it does not cope with geometry in the top view.
Three different ice types are indicated with three shades of blue and water surfaces are
indicated with grey in Figure 26. It can be seen that the number of largest floe types
varies between the diagrams (two on the left, three in the middle, and for in the right
diagram). The egg-code states that this largest floe shape (the last row shows that this
is the middle value, 3) covers 3/10th of the total area (middle value in the second row),
and it can be seen that, since the area remains equal, this is the case for each diagram.
When looking more closely, the main field sections (highest level subdivision) can be
distinguished.
Given that the sections are determined by the size of the largest floe, there is one floe of
the largest type in each section (so again, two sections in the left, three in the middle
and four in the right diagram). As the floe size is indicated with 3 in the egg (last row),
the diameter ranges between 20 and 100m, where the largest ones can be found in the
left diagram (about 90m) and the smallest one appears in the right diagram (25m).
Due to the fact that the division into main sections is determined by the size of the
largest floe, it is possible to subdivide the rest of the section area such that each section
per definition complies with the egg-code. Another level can be distinguished however.
When looking closely at the figures, it can be seen that within the sections, clusters of
cells appear. The balance between water cells and ice cells in one cluster can be
adjusted. In Figure 26 it can be seen that some clusters hardly contain any ice cells, and
others consist of over 50% of ice.
The level of clustering is adjusted by changing this balance. To create a field which has
the least possible clustering, all ice cells are spread evenly over the domain. This is
obtained by applying an equal water/ice balance to each cluster. On the contrary, in a
field where a lot of ice clustering appears, this balance differs from cluster to cluster,
resulting in a field with large water surfaces and large clusters of ice floes.
IceStream 25713 28
80 80 80
60 60 60
40 40 40
20 20 20
0 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Figure 26 Three generations of one egg-code (concentration 6/10) with equal average
clustering factor
200 200 200
80 80 80
60 60 60
40 40 40
20 20 20
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2000 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
The layered structure which is used to establish the ice field is also a useful basis for the
storage of the properties of the cells. The geometry obtained from the Voronoi is
captured by two arrays; one consisting of all vertices (nodes) in the field, and one
consisting of the indices to the correct vertices of each cell.
IceStream 25713 29
Comparing the images for each scenario, shows that there is quite a good
correspondence between them. It is important to notice that it is not our goal to
reproduce the given sketches, but to generate a visualization of an egg-code, where of
course the properties of the ice field correspond to the parameters of the egg-code, and
which is a good representation of an actual ice field.
For high ice concentrations, such as the one in scenario 3, it can be seen that the
distribution of open water surfaces over the ice field is different. The sketch shows small
open water slots between the ice floes, but the generated field has fewer, larger open
water areas that more appear to be pools. To make the generated field better
comparable to the sketch, one could cover the entire field with ice floes, and eventually
decrease the size of each floe, creating open spaces between them.
In some cases it can be seen that the multiyear ice floes appear more frequently in the
generated ice fields than in the sketches. This occurs due to the fact that the generating
procedure will exactly stick to the given parameters in the egg-code, where in the sketch
a concentration of 1/10th is interpreted as low amounts. This can be seen for example
in scenario 4 and 4A. Actually, these scenarios are related to the same conditions,
except that scenario 4A represents the conditions before ice management activities, and
scenario 4 represents post ice management conditions.
All scenarios have been generated based on a clustering level which almost allows no
clustering; therefore it can be seen that in general the ice floes are quite spread over the
field. Only in lower ice concentration scenarios it can be recognized that some larger
open water areas actually arise and some ice particles appear to be more concentrated
together.
Due to the chosen approach, it is not possible to create a field which contains overlaps,
in other words, ice ridges or rubble fields cannot be generated with this procedure.
However, possibilities exist which can ensure the presence of those features, for
example by adjusting the ice floe properties.
IceStream 25713 30
Scenario 3
1/10 ice cakes (2-20m)
of multiyear ice (thickness >2.0m)
Scenario 4
1/10 ice cakes (2-20m)
of multiyear ice (thickness >2.0m)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
IceStream 25713 32
Scenario 4A
1/10 ice cakes (2-20m)
of multiyear ice (thickness >2.0m)
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
IceStream 25713 33
Scenario 5
1/10 ice cakes (2-20m)
of multiyear ice (thickness >2.0m)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
IceStream 25713 34
Scenario 6
1/10 ice cakes (2-20m)
of multiyear ice (thickness >2.0m)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
IceStream 25713 35
4.6 CONCLUSIONS
In this section, a proposed method was described that can be used to indicate the
properties and the severity of a level ice condition and can additionally be used as a
basis for creating the input ice conditions in numerical models. The benefit of the
adaptation of the so called egg code is that a small number of parameters are required
for defining the condition, and additionally these parameters describe realistic conditions
that are actually found in Arctic areas. The method is much more specific than just
indicating the ice concentration and average floe size, and it is suitable for usage in
numerical models on ice flow prediction.
This suitability for numerical model input was also demonstrated, by developing a
method to create a visualisation of the given egg code parameters, which can represent
the input ice conditions for numerical models. Due to the randomness of the appearance
of ice fields, the method can obtain an infinite number of variations for one equal set of
parameters. Consequently, two visualisations based on the same egg code will be very
different, however, the coverage of ice with a particular size will be equal in both cases.
To have more control on the positioning of the ice floes, an additional parameter had be
added. This parameter influences the level of clustering of the ice floes in the field, e.g.
up to what level they will appear in groups.
Ice experts manually established a set of ice fields based on corresponding egg code
parameters. Automatically generated ice fields by the algorithm based on the same egg
codes were compared to these examples and both visualisations were found to be very
similar. Even very high ice concentrations up to 10/10th coverage can be generated
without creating overlaps between the floes, which makes it suitable for numerical
modelling.
It must be noted that the proposed method is applicable to all level ice conditions, that
can be expressed by the egg code, but other ice features such as icebergs and ridges
are not included, as these are not included in the egg code. In the presented approach,
there is a possibility to add the presence of these features in the future, however this
requires further investigation on how these features can be represented.
Another recommendation regarding this approach is to look into a method for creating
small open water leads in between two neighbouring ice floes. This can be obtained by
starting off with floe areas that are slightly larger than prescribed, and afterwards
reducing the size again, creating some space in between two ice floes.
IceStream 25713 36
With the developed procedure, compositions of ice fields can be made based on user
defined and statistical area specific input parameters. From the figures in the last part of
the previous chapter, the highly variable shape and size (and mass) of the ice floes
becomes clear. This strong polydispersity has consequences for the dynamics of the
ice.
In this part of the report an overview will be given on available data and research
projects that contribute to the understanding of the dynamical behavior of an ice field.
Sources are full scale measurement campaigns, model test experiments, numerical
model descriptions and results, and approaches from rules and guideline documents.
An ice field is among others driven by wind and currents, but the interactions between
ice floes affect the overall ice behavior as well. A distinction can be made between
influencers affecting the small scale (tenths of km) or the large scale (thousands of km)
motions of the ice (and corresponding time scale), which is also found in the approach of
the developed models. An example is for example the Coriolis force, which affects large
masses particularly, and will have much less influence on smaller individual ice floes.
When evaluating the physical processes in an ice field, both large scale and small scale
influencers will be taken into account, although the emphasis will be on the small scale
forces.
5.1 OBSERVATIONS
In the geometry description this item has already been looked into, but it is maybe even
more important to find out what dynamic processes are behind this. What modeling
aspects should at least be included in a numerical model in order to simulate the flow of
ice realistically? It turns out that the correct geometry description for the ice field is the
first, and a vital, step for obtaining realistic clustering behavior. Additionally, internal
processes play a role.
Other phenomena that are observed in the Arctic ocean are ice ridges, or pressure
ridges. Due to the highly dynamic behavior of the sea ice in the Arctic and the presence
of land here, the ice is sometimes heavily compressed. As the ice floes collide with each
other, pieces of ice break off at the collision edge and are being submerged under the
floes or pushed on top of the floes (Figure 29). As this continues while the two ice floes
are pushed against each other, a pile of ice is forming on top of the ice sheets, called
the sail (Figure 30), and one is forming underneath the two ice floes, called the keel.
Due to melting and freezing, the ice particles can freeze together, forming a solid and
strong mass of ice. By conducting research into the characteristics of these ridges, a lot
has been learned about the formation of ice ridges. From the above brief summary it can
already be seen that external forces such as wind, but also internal forcing, building up
internal stresses, and thermodynamic processes are involved, making it a complex
event for modelling its flow.
Besides internal pressures in the ice resulting in pressure ridges, stresses in an ice
sheet can become large enough to split the sheet into multiple pieces. This is observed
for example near the coast, where large ice sheets are attached to land. Strong winds
directed off-coast pull the ice away from land and can finally rip off large ice sheets,
forming leads in between the two remaining ice sheets.
Leads can also form further away from the coast due to ice drift or sheets being pulled
apart. Their shapes are long and linear, ranging from a few meters to a kilometer in
width (19). An example can be seen in Figure 31.
IceStream 25713 38
Figure 32 Jet Propulsion Laboratory synthetic aperture radar image of the marginal ice
zone on September 19, 1979 [after NORSEX group, 1982] (21)
IceStream 25713 39
In the satellite image in Figure 32, the ice edge is shown with numerous plumes of ice
trailing off. Experiments conducted during this research program showed that the ice
velocities at the edge of the ice sheet were significantly higher than the velocities of the
floes further away from the edge, causing the development of these ice jets.
In the following chapter, physical processes present when an ice field emerges will be
identified according to observations in full scale and theory and modeling approaches
reflecting the current understanding of the observed processes. A distinction will be
made between the external forces and their influence on the behavior of the ice field,
and the internal forces and processes affecting the ice floe motions.
5.2.1 Wind
At the short term, the wind is the primary force driving the ice. A drag force is created on
the ice floe top surface by winds blowing over the oceans, which cause the ice particles
to drift. The amount of generated drag depends on the velocity of the wind and on the
roughness of the surface, where a rough surface generates more drag than a smooth
surface. According to (19), the relationship between wind and sea ice drift is very strong,
where the general guideline gives that freely drifting sea ice moves at two percent of the
wind speed. This represents 70 percent of the sea ice motion on the short term
(daily/weekly).
Drag force
In her numerical model, Herman (5) has included the floe size dependency of the ice
response to external forcing, where larger floes have a larger equilibrium velocity than
smaller ones. This is of importance for simulating correct clustering behavior of the ice
floes. Because of their large masses, large floes react more slowly to changes in the
external forces, and their motion direction deviates more from the wind direction due to
the Coriolis force (refer to paragraph 5.2.3).
Clusters are then formed due to this different response to external forces on small and
large floes. Because of the before mentioned phenomena, the large floes dominate. The
small floes accumulate in front of the large floes since they are moving more slowly (16).
The formation of these clusters due to external forces demonstrates again that it is
important to model a realistic ice field geometry with the appropriate variation in floe
sizes, in order to simulate the ice floe motions realistically (22).
Current profile
In a number of numerical models,
(16), (23), the model of Ekman is
used to obtain the direction of the
currents with respect to the wind. This
theory was developed after an
expedition of Nansen, where ice was
observed to drift with an angle of 20
to 40 degrees to the right of the
prevailing wind direction. The Ekman
spiral (24) explains this phenomenon
by a force balance between pressure
gradient force in the ocean, Coriolis
force (5.2.3) and turbulent drag. The
figure on the right shows a Northern
blowing wind creating a surface
stress and as a result an Ekman
spiral in the column of water
Figure 33 Ekman spiral (24)
underneath.
The spiral establishes from an ocean surface current accelerating in the direction of the
wind. Due to the Coriolis force, this current will also accelerate in a direction right to the
wind (northern hemisphere). The resultant current direction is a few degrees right of the
wind direction, and follows from the balance between the force of the wind, the Coriolis
effect and the resistance drag of the subsurface water. The surface current acts as a
drag on the water layer below, and again the forces balance result in a current motion of
this layer, which is again another few degrees right of the direction of the surface current
direction. With increasing depth, this event repeats, but the transmitted force decreases,
and thus the current velocity decreases.
Ice-water interaction
All evaluated numerical models for managed ice assume given values for velocities and
directions of wind and current; the ocean and atmosphere are not influenced by the
presence and motions of the ice. Additionally, a particular ice floe is not affected by the
presence of other floes, except when they are in direct contact. Possible shading effects
and coupled hydrodynamic behaviour are not taken into account.
Up to now no research can be found that investigates the existence and effect of
coupled hydrodynamic behaviour to assess the necessity to include such coupling in
developed models. In many evaluated numerical models, the assumed absence of this
coupling effect is stated, but the possible consequences of this assumption are not
mentioned.
IceStream 25713 41
When evaluating the ice being in contact with a floating structure, ventilation and
backfilling are particularly relevant ice-water interaction processes. The ventilation effect
occurs when the floater rides on top of an ice particle, whereby the ice is pushed
downward and rotated; parts that are located below the still water line still have their top
surface free of water. This effect contributes significantly to the resistance, almost
independently of the velocity (26). Backfilling is the filling of the ventilation gap with
surrounding water as the ice particle rotates further (3).
Waves
In the central pack, where the ocean is fully covered by ice, waves are practically non-
existent. However, there are areas where the waves have considerable influence on the
geometry and the dynamics of an ice field. The most important example of this is the
marginal ice zone (MIZ), forming the ice edge. In this region, the ice concentration is
lower and open water processes start to have influence on the dynamics.
Brostrm and Christensen (30) define five regions in the MIZ with a specific character:
Open ocean, with waves having open water characteristics.
Edge zone, with ice floes widely scattered such that only few interaction between
them takes place. These floes do influence the wave characteristics, by damping the
oscillations. Larger floes are broken into smaller sizes.
Transition zone, having frequent medium size ice floes. The floe-floe interactions are
dominant in this zone, where the rate of collision depends on ice concentration and
wave amplitude.
Interior MIZ, where the remaining waves have small amplitude and long wavelengths.
In this way, the waves are still able to break up large floes into smaller pieces, but
can also break off parts of the ice that is accounted as pack ice.
Solid ice, in which waves propagate over long distances. The wave energy is
dissipated by leads and pressure ridges.
The Coriolis effect can be demonstrated when observing a rotating carousel, as shown
in
Figure 35, with two individuals on top (indicated with green and orange). A ball is thrown
from person Green to person Orange, while the carousel rotates in counterclockwise
direction. In the left figure the straight path of the ball is shown, when looking from a
fixed reference point above the carousel. In the right figure the path of the ball is shown,
from the perception of person Orange. It appears as if the ball deflects to the right, due
to the counterclockwise rotation of this person.
This example represents the situation for the Northern hemisphere on the earth, where
all phenomena perceived by us like person Orange in the example, as we move along
with the counterclockwise rotation of the earth (seen from the North pole). The Coriolis
force thus causes objects to accelerate because of the rotation of the earth; objects
deflect to the right on the Northern hemisphere, and to the left on the Southern
hemisphere. As mentioned, the Coriolis force is small at small scales, but it affects
global processes such as currents and winds. Since the Coriolis force increases towards
the poles, it is an important external force to take into account when modeling sea ice
motion (at the large scale).
In order to explain the establishment of the observed features in the beginning of this
chapter, internal processes have to be evaluated as well. It is important to know how the
ice particles interact, but also how they deflect or change shape due to freezing and
melting processes. Again, not all processes contribute largely to the ice motions at the
short term and small scale. Most of them will be briefly discussed, evaluating whether
they are of importance for the numerical modeling at the scale of our interest later.
The internal stress reflects the level of compactness of the ice, which plays a role in the
ice motions and the developed ice features discussed in section 0. On one hand,
external forces influence the internal stress in an ice field, for example when the wind
forces the ice floes against the coast. On the other hand, scientists have also found the
relationship working in opposite direction; in case an ice field is compact, consequently
the wind driving forces become smaller.
The measurement points were positioned such that an infinitesimal element of about
100 km arose. For a number of reasons it was practically impossible to relate the stress
to the ice deformation. In the momentum balance, only spatial derivatives appear, and
not the stress itself. Additionally, the error of the estimated stress was the accumulation
of errors in measurement of the other terms in the balance, which made it quite noisy.
Based on the experiment, an ice model was developed, of which still a number of
features are included in recently developed models.
ocean waves, ice floes bend and break, and increasingly collide with each other,
resulting in a changed shape and size (36). Field operations of the Marginal Ice Zone
Experiment (MIZEX) were conducted from 1983 to 1987 (37). The objectives were to
collect and analyze a benchmark dataset, to understand the processes governing the
evolution of the MIZ, and to evaluate the ability of existing models to predict the MIZ
seasonal evolution.
In the MIZ north of Svalbard, remote sensing experiments were carried out during
September-October 1979. The experiments of the Norwegian Remote Sensing
Experiment (NORSEX) involved both ground measurements from the ship and aircraft
and satellite remote sensing. It was found here that convergence of the ice occurs when
the wind blows in down-ice direction (along-edge winds with the ice to the right) (21).
Additionally, ice velocity jets occur during down-ice winds.
The SAR satellite image shows ice features trailing off the ice edge. Data from the
drifting buoys on ice and surface water confirm that these features are ice jets, as the
measured velocities are significantly higher close to the ice edge (0.27 m/s), compared
to more inward in the ice field (0.20 m/s).
SHEBA
Another project that had as one of the objectives to qualitatively relate the ice stress to
deformation activity was the Surface Heat Budget of the Arctic Ocean (SHEBA) field
experiment in 1997-1998.
From the site measurements, conclusions are drawn on the ice deformation process at
regional scale. Winds dominantly drive the ice, and the internal ice stress builds up until
the ice sheet fails. As a result, lead and ridge systems develop. The persistence of the
forcing conditions (such as wind and current) mainly determine the extent of the failure
region.
IceStream 25713 46
A number of important observations made during the experiments described above are
Ice field convergence and trailing off occurring due to specific forcing by wind
parallel to the ice edge,
The increased velocity of the ice when approaching the ice edge,
The fact that there is a large correspondence between the temporal internal ice
stress measured at various sites,
The fact that there is a large variation between the spatial internal ice stress
measured at various sites
All of these observations are in a way related to the internal stress state of an ice field.
In this paragraph the term granular temperature will be explained, and in the following
paragraphs processes such as thermodynamics, breaking and friction will be described.
Granular temperature
In our evaluation, broken ice fields are considered, either because the location is in the
marginal ice zone (MIZ) or because the ice is pre-broken by icebreakers. As a result, it
is possible to say that the ice field consists of a large number of discrete elements (ice
floes). Given this fact, numerical model developers have found similarities with granular
gases and flows (16) and that gives the opportunity to utilize principles from these
models.
With the term granular temperature, among others, the tendency of granular material to
form clusters can be explained. It was already mentioned that environmental forces
such as the wind can cause cluster formation of the ice floes, due to their range of sizes
and thus masses; according to Herman (16), clusters are initiated by random density
fluctuations. The stability and progress of these clusters can be further evaluated with
the granular temperature.
The granular temperature is defined based on the kinetic energy associated with the
random motion of the floes (average fluctuation kinetic energy) (40). In the developed
clusters, naturally, the density of particles is higher than in the surrounding areas. As a
result, the collision frequency within cluster regions increases. Because of the fact that
the interaction forces are dissipative (friction and/or inelastic collisions), the granular
temperature, or energy density, decreases at relatively rapid rate (40), correspondingly
resulting in a pressure decrease.
In other words, the behaviour of the ice floes within the cluster becomes less random,
and they start moving as a unity. The large floes, which gained the highest velocity due
to wind forcing, are slowed down, and the largest floes are additionally driven by the
cluster velocity, such that their speed can increase up to 30% compared with their wind
driven velocity (16).
Therefore, within the clusters, the floes tend to stay close to each other, moreover, this
lower pressure attracts particles in the neighbourhood to the clusters. In this way, the
density and size of the cluster further increases, until other mechanisms intervene,
possibly breaking up the cluster (41).
IceStream 25713 47
5.3.3 Breaking
Following from the last paragraph, it becomes clear that breaking of ice is a result of
internal processes in the ice. The different ways in which the ice may fail (failure modes)
are the consequence of the type of loading. A distinction can for example be made
between the way the wind acts on the ice sheet, either compressing or tensioning the
ice sheet. Ridges or leads may form due to this loading, respectively.
Richter-Menge (39) describes the measured stress events during the experiments
conducted during the SHEBA project, where an event is the sustained period of
relatively high stress. A stress event lasted for 3-10 days. A distinction was made
between the rapid changes in the stress magnitude and the changes over a longer
duration. According to Richter-Menge, the large and rapid stress changes, taking in the
order of hours, are associated with the formation of ridges, leads and rubble fields.
This process of failure is found similar to the behaviour of a granular hardening plastic;
the internal stress builds under loading until the ice cover fails, resulting in lead and
ridge systems. Depending on the persistence of the forcing conditions and the prevailing
environmental conditions, a failure region grows larger.
The ISO 19906 draft (42) for ice interaction with offshore structures identifies five main
failure modes for ice as a consequence to a particular interaction scenario: creep,
crushing, bending, buckling and splitting. Which failure mode occurs, depends on a
number of variables, such as the ice thickness, velocity and temperature, the presence
of ridges and the structure shape. Loads associated with the particular interaction
scenario are largely dependent on the failure mode.
Numerous research projects have been carried out and are ongoing to get a better
understanding about the occurrence and the process of the various failure modes (for
example (43), (44), (45), (46)). It is found difficult to derive physical laws for the
prediction of the failure mode in particular loading case and the associated forces,
especially because in most cases, combined failure modes appear.
Daley and Riska (46) have, in their process of developing an ice load model, established
a hierarchy of mechanical processes by making four categories of scales of ice-structure
interaction:
1. Ice pack scale Ice cover description Ice cover formation and change
2. Local floes scale Ice field interaction Meso-scale ice cover geometry
process and group mechanics
3. Single floe scale Floe impact process Floe geometry and mechanics
Practically, only the lower three scales are covered in the model. Starting from the
smallest scale, the failure events are evaluated. Every event may represent a failure
process at a certain hierarchy, and it may also contribute to processes leading to failure
at a larger scale. The following example is given, indicating the various levels in the
hierarchy in which the events occur. Crushing is a hierarchy of the two failure events
cracking and extrusion. The crushing process occurs until the ice sheet fails in flexural
failure mode, and in its turn, a flexural failure event is a component in rubble formation.
Several methods are evaluated for mechanics at the smallest scale (item 4.), subdivided
into continuum, stochastic, and discrete ice load models. In the continuum models
calculus is applied to solve the problem, but a requirement is that the system is smooth;
properties cannot have sudden changes. In stochastic models, the observations are
used to describe for example pressure and fragment size distributions. This has the
consequence that the mechanics are not modelled, but an outcome of the failure
process is assumed. Discrete models can be chaotic, but they allow for variance in
properties and functions.
At global scale (item 2.) in the generally used approach, a distinction is made between
thee loading limiting mechanisms identified by Croasdale (48), which is also adopted in
the ISO code (42):
5.3.4 Thermodynamics
The reason for thermodynamics to be mentioned here, is the close relation with the
internal ice stress and the ice thickness. Thermodynamics concerns the freezing and
melting processes of the ice, thereby directly influencing the ice thickness. Ice forms
when the atmosphere has cooled down the ocean sufficiently. As cold water becomes
denser, it will sink, causing a warmer layer of water to float on top. Before ice starts to
form, the water layers below the water surface have to reach the freezing point.
Ice growth
Due to the presence of the formed layer of ice, it becomes more difficult to exchange
heat between the ocean and the atmosphere. In order to grow the ice layer at the
bottom, the heat of the water is conducted by transporting it through the layer of ice and
then emitting it to the atmosphere.
Albedo
The level of solar energy that is absorbed is an important factor in
thermodynamic processes of the ice. The non-dimensional reflection
coefficient , or albedo (whiteness), is used to specify the reflecting
power of a surface (diffuse reflectivity). Albedo varies between 0 and
1, where 0 corresponds to a perfect absorber, which is black, and 1
is white, being a perfect reflector.
Figure 41 Albedo for I) Open ocean, II) Bare sea ice, III) Sea ice with
snow on top
IceStream 25713 50
5.3.5 Friction
According to sliding experiments, where ice collected from the Beaufort Sea during April
2003, 2007 and 2009 was used, the friction coefficient depends on the ice temperature
(50). The maximum friction coefficients found varied between 1.0 and 1.6.
A growing number of research outcomes support the statement of Fortt and Schulson
(50): Brittle compressive failure of sea ice on scales large and small appears to be
governed by frictional sliding and by a mechanical property the coefficient of friction
that applies to all scales. As a result, measurements of this property can be performed
in a controlled environment, and the outcome can directly be applied at full scale.
It was found from the measurements that for each set of data, the normal stress is
linearly proportional to the shear stress with reasonable correlation coefficients, so the
sliding deformation obeys Coulombs failure criterion.
In the previous sections an overview was given of the processes that influence the
behaviour of an ice field, which also explains the appearance of an ice field. A number of
processes were already identified to be influencing only at larger scale or longer time
scale. In this section, the relevance to ice-structure interaction of these aspects is
reviewed.
It is important that the ice approaches the floating structure, driven by external forces
such as wind and current, instead of running the structure through a stationary ice field
as would be done in model tests. This is required to include the correct inertia forces.
Additionally it was shown in the previous section that the ice appearance and behaviour
is largely affected by these forces. However, it has not been investigated yet what the
influence is of the behaviour of the ice on the way the ice flows around the structure. To
give an example, it has not been shown what the difference is between a scattered ice
field approaching a floating structure or a heavily clustered field.
When operating in pack ice, waves are generally not present and therefore can be
neglected in the numerical model. If the operations are located in the marginal ice zone
(MIZ) however, waves contribute to the breaking of ice floes into smaller pieces, and to
the flow of the ice.
Coupling of hydrodynamic effects between a group of ice floes has not been
investigated thoroughly, but it is assumed that these effects have a significant influence
on the mutual behaviour of the ice particles, and thus on the ice flow around a floating
structure. At smaller scale, it was investigated by Lu (27) that it is important to
incorporate ventilation and backfilling effects when ice particles are rotated and being
submerged.
Other external forces described were the Coriolis force, which relates to the rotation of
the earth, and surface tilt effects, induced by the topography of the ocean floor. It was
also explained that these forces are mainly important for evaluation of large scale and
long term behaviour of the ice, and as such has negligible influence on the short term
and smaller scale evaluation of the flow of ice. However there are models that include
terms for both these forces (2), even though they are small. It is not indicated in this
literature what the significance is of including these terms, and if the uncertainty is not
larger than the terms themselves.
Correct modelling of the dissipative floe collisions must result in cluster formation, as
was explained based on the granular temperature principle. Due to these dissipative
collisions, the random motions of (mainly the smaller) ice floes are limited and
consequently large wind driven floes tend to drive the smaller floes in groups.
Breaking of ice is a very complex process, that has to be evaluated at multiple scales in
order to determine the exact behaviour. The hierarchic approach proposed by Daley and
Riska (46) gives a lot of insight in the processes acting at the various scales. Local
contact mechanics contribute to failure of the ice floes according to a particular failure
mode. At larger scale, limiting mechanisms are defined; limit stress, limit momentum and
limit force. ISO (42) has adapted this approach. It is important to develop a model that
incorporates all of these processes to model the behaviour correctly at each scale. A
number of recommendations is done for the model approaches at different scales (46).
IceStream 25713 52
Thermodynamic processes play an important role in mostly the vertical geometry of the
ice floes. It determines the thickness of the ice floe and the ice properties over the
thickness, such as the density, the salinity and the strength. Since the consequences of
these thermodynamic processes change very slowly (days, weeks), they can be
neglected when evaluating a flow of ice over a shorter periods of time (hours). Instead,
care must be taken in the modelling of geometric properties of the ice at a specific time
in the season at a specific location.
Finally, friction can influence the motions of the ice significantly. For this reason it is
important to incorporate correct modelling of both ice-ice and ice-floater friction effects.
At laboratory scale, a number of research projects (50) have been performed in order to
determine the friction coefficient of the ice.
IceStream 25713 53
Based on the modelling purposes, different approaches are applied that are based on
specific assumptions for the physical processes. An overview of the evaluated numerical
models can be found in Appendix 2. For sea ice dynamics, a distinction is made
between models based on two main theories (36), which will be described below. The
characteristics of the two approaches and the differences between them results in the
fact that all found and considered existing models are based on one of the approaches.
In the remaining of this section it is evaluated how the existing models incorporate the
identified physical processes of relevance.
Viscous-plastic
The first theory treats the sea ice as a highly fractured two-dimensional continuum (51).
A plastic constitutive law relates the internal ice stresses and the rates of strain. The
description of the rheology allows the pack ice to diverge when there is small or no
stress, but under convergence conditions it is able to resist compression and shearing
motion.
The viscous-plastic class of numerical models is derived from this theory, which
consists of a large number of large scale Arctic sea ice models. Since this approach
copes with continuum ice sheets, it is able to model the sea ice dynamics in the central
ice pack very well. Referring back to section 5.3.3, this type of loading and
corresponding failure mode is related to the limit-stress mechanism. The deformations in
the ice develop very slow and as a result, the ice slowly grows around a structure,
referred to as creep.
This approach is however less accurate in regions where sea ice is broken up. The
marginal ice zone is an example of this, where open water environmental processes
have created smaller ice particles.
Collisional
In order to be able to better model sea ice that has been broken up, the second theory
models an ice field as a collection of many individual particles colliding with each other.
These collisions determine the rheology.
Just like the viscous-plastic theory, the collisional theory equates the rate of work done
by internal stresses to the rate of energy dissipated in deformation. However, in the
collisional approach, the internal stresses and the energy dissipation are explicitly
determined in terms of rigid body collisions between floes, as described by Shen (52).
The mean floe diameter and a statistical distribution of the floe velocities are involved in
the collisional rheology.
Following from the approach and the purpose, this theory is more applied to smaller
scale (that could still cover numerous kms, but not the entire Arctic area as was
mentioned for the viscous-plastic approach). Again evaluating the limiting mechanism
related to this type of modelling, as described in section 5.3.3, because of the fact that
the collisions are the dominating internal process here, it is the limit-momentum which is
very important. In this case the limiting mechanism in the modelling is given by the
kinetic energy of the floe, due to its velocity at the time it collides with an ice structure or
an offshore structure.
IceStream 25713 54
Figure 43 Typical ice field very near the Figure 44 Typical pack ice field in the
ice edge: Greenland Sea, summer 1983. central Arctic: Beaufort Sea, spring 1971.
Floe size is ~50-200 m. (52) Floe size is ~5-20 km. (52)
In recent publications on sea ice modelling (40), a composite rheology is used, in which
both the viscous-plastic and the collisional theory have been included. In this case, the
collisional theory is used to obtain the internal stresses while the ice concentration is
below unity; the internal stresses increase as the concentration increases. The viscous-
plastic model is then applied when the concentration approaches unity. Through
pressure ridging, the ice thickness increases.
Following from the above descriptions, it becomes clear that for our purposes,
evaluating the flow of ice around a floating structure (thus at small scale), the collisional
modelling approach applies. As this approach only allows rigid motions of the ice floes, a
solution as above described by Feltham (40) may be applied.
Note that this model, as well as a number of other models mentioned in the previous
chapter, is developed with the objective to evaluate the ice dynamics, and not to
evaluate the interactions of the ice with a (floating) offshore structure. However, these
models have provided good descriptions of various interpretations of processes
contributing to the overall sea ice dynamic system. They were incorporated in this
research in order to create a complete overview of the involved processes (and still
there are many more sources not mentioned here).
IceStream 25713 55
For comparison, a few known ice-structure interaction models are evaluated here, to
give insight in the current state of development of the recent models, their idealizations
and modelling mechanisms. They are also included in the overview table in Appendix 2.
All of the below models incorporate the collisional modelling approach. However,
improvement of the models evaluated below could be done by implementing modelling
techniques used in viscous-plastic models.
Wind
In order to compare model tests performed at the Institute for Ocean Technology (IOT)
and the numerical simulations performed with DECICE (53), (54), wind was excluded
from both experiments. Daley (1) also mentions in his paper that their GPU (graphics
processing unit) modelling approach does not include environmental driving forces.
Specific details about including or excluding forcing from wind are not mentioned by
Metrikin (3), but it appears as if also in these simulations, wind was not incorporated.
The numerical model was among others used for comparison with model tests in the
HSVA ice basin, during the DYPIC testing campaign (55).
It is a logical decision in the above cases to not include effects from the wind for the
sake of comparison, however, as was demonstrated by among others Herman (5), there
is a large influence on the behaviour of the field of ice floes by the wind. An important
effect of a wind field is the variety in balance velocity and the resulting formation of ice
floe clusters. It would be particularly interesting to investigate the difference ice flow
around an offshore structure, for example between a scattered ice field and one that is
shows heavily clustering. Whether this effect would be correctly arising in these
numerical models is unknown.
Figure 45 A visual comparison of the numerical simulation (left) with the ice basin trials
(right)
IceStream 25713 56
Lau (53) explains that the majority of the drag results from unbalanced pressure forces,
thus that the contribution from fluid friction is negligible for small floes. For this reason, in
the evaluated case, a life boat progressing through broken ice, only form drag of ice
floes was taken into account in the simulation. The value of the drag coefficient was
based on a rectangular floe with an aspect ratio of 1:10 (thickness to size).
It was mentioned that so called ventilation and backfilling processes influence the
behaviour and the loads from the ice particles on the structure, and that for realistic
modelling, these processes should be included. Besides Metrikin (3), the authors do not
mention the influence of neglecting this effect. The importance of the processes is
stressed in this paper, and for future efforts the involvement of ventilation and backfill is
intended.
IceStream 25713 57
Vessel-water interaction
Although the interactions between vessel (or offshore structure) and water is not part of
the processes involved in a broken ice field, there are some remarks placed about the
evaluated models that will be mentioned here.
Daley (1) used a simple net-thrust versus speed relation based on a water resistance
model and a thrust deduction model to have the vessel moving forward. This relation is
used to settle the vessel at its open water velocity. Compared to the open water speed
of the vessel, the ice forces will reduce the velocity, such that the net thrust can be used
to obtain the time-averaged ice resistance.
The same approach is used by Lau, where the open water resistance was approximated
by a 5th degree polynomial least squares fit of the resistance versus the speed, where
the speed was measured during the corresponding open water test in the model basin.
Due to this approach, the very low velocities are less accurate (error up to 60%).
A 6 DOF floater model is used in Metrikin for the simulation of the floaters motions,
assuming calm water conditions. This is valid for a floater far away from the ice edge,
such that there are no waves present, and progressing at very low velocities, such that it
can be assumed that no radiation waves are generated. In the equation of motion of the
floater, environmental forces such as wind and ice forces as well as other external
forces such as propulsion and rudder forces are included.
Coriolis force and surface tilt
For the same reasons as for the atmospheric and current influences, the Coriolis force
and surface tilt effects are not specified in the MUN model and the DECICE model by
Daley and Lau respectively. In the 6 DOF floater model as part of the NTNU model by
Metrikin the Coriolis term is stated in the equation of motion. Assuming that the
equations of motions for the ice particles are based on the same conditions, this model
accounts for these environmental phenomena.
Left: Random ice floe field with sizes between 2 and 20 m (concentration 42%); Right: hexagonal
floes of 10 m size (concentration 46%)
IceStream 25713 58
Internal stress
As was already discussed, the geometry of the ice floes and the entire ice field can have
an important effect on the behaviour of the ice field. In Daley (1) for example, two
different approaches were followed for generating floe shapes. In one case, the ice field
was an assembly of randomly shaped floes which were polygons drawn on a number of
ice floes from a top view photograph of an ice field. By copying these floes into the
domain, the aimed ice concentration was obtained.
It can be seen from Figure 47 that a field of variable floe size was established. In the
other case, the ice field consisted of hexagonal ice floes of equal size, evenly distributed
over the domain. It was found that the hexagonal shaped floes clearly resulted in a
higher resistance then the random shaped floes, for the equal ice concentration of 60%.
The author mentions that it appeared that mechanical interlocking was the reason for
this found result.
In this model, the ice floes are represented by circular discs. The dashpot shown on the
left is apparently removed upon solid contact, which is used to model a remote contact
force. When two ice floes approach each other, freeze bonds act between them. The
dashpot only works in compression and does not act anymore when there is no space
left between the two floes (at solid contact). Apart from normal forces, there is also a
tangential component which also allows slip along the contact.
IceStream 25713 59
The MUN model (1) uses the same approach in discrete element modelling, where the
loads between elements are transferred by contact springs. According to Daley (1), the
chosen values for normal and tangential stiffness are similar those used in other models
like Lset. From (53) it appears that DECICE also uses the same value for the spring
stiffness, but here the effect of the spring constant was investigated for the ship
resistance during transit in broken ice.
Breaking
Metrikin et al. (3) describes the distinction between breakable and unbreakable floes in
their numerical model, where unbreakable ice floes have a lateral area which is smaller
than the ice thickness squared and are treated as rigid bodies with 6 degrees of
freedom.
The breaking process of breakable floes, only considering breaking by bending failure, is
described as well. These particles are allowed to penetrate the hull of the floater. Based
on this penetration depth, the ice crushing force is calculated. The sum of vertical forces,
made up of crushing and friction forces, determines the stresses in the ice floe. The
breaking of the ice is done based on a calculation of the maximum stress in a semi-
infinite ice sheet resting on an elastic foundation, resulting from a vertical distributed
load. A number of features are intended to be implemented in this model in the future,
such as a fracture mechanics approach, which is in this case the cohesive zone method
(CZM).
In DECICE, the ice floes were modelled by so called simply deformable finite elements
(SDFEs). These elements allow deformation and fracture, however, in the evaluated
simulation fracture of the elements was not allowed. The working principles of the
SDFEs are not further described in the paper (53).
Thermodynamics
In none of the models, thermodynamic processes have been incorporated; the
processes are not mentioned in the publications either. As was already mentioned in the
previous section, are processes such as freezing and melting relatively important for
long term, and large scale simulations. However, models for ice-structure interaction
evaluate time periods that are shorter to have significant influence of thermodynamics.
IceStream 25713 60
5.5.3 Boundaries
Some numerical models are used to compare the simulated ice loads with performed ice
model tests for the same testing configuration. For this reason, the numerical models
incorporate the same boundary conditions as the physical model tests; rigid vertical
walls. As was mentioned, it is logical to use similar boundary conditions for this purpose,
however, if the result is also used to give an indication of the ice loads on a vessel or
structure, the rigid walls may have unintended effects on the behaviour of the ice and
the obtained loads on the tested structure.
The influence of the wall boundary was investigated by Lau (53), by conducting a
simulation with a totally enclosed motor propelled survival craft (TEMPSC), progressing
with a velocity of 2.56 m/s through a broken ice field. Each time the simulation was
carried out with a different distance to the rigid wall. Both ice concentrations of 6/10th
and 7/10th were investigated.
In these runs, 7/10th concentration and 0.0 and 0.25 m offset, the pack ice was unable to
be cleared from the vessel. Interesting is, that during the physical model tests this effect
was not observed. The authors therefore conclude in the paper that the accumulation
was due to the inaccurate simulation of the pack ice boundary condition. To remedy
this phenomenon, the wall offset in the simulation was set to 0.50 m to give the pack ice
more space to move around the vessel. It is not mentioned if further measures are being
taken to improve the numerical model to have better correspondence with the model
tests (based on the same offset).
Further, in the MUN model, described by Daley, the simulations are also to be compared
with physical model tests, and the images in this publication also show to have rigid
boundaries constraining the motions of the ice floes. However, the possible influence of
these walls on the behaviour of the ice and the tested structure was not mentioned in
the paper.
IceStream 25713 61
For modelling the large numbers of ice particles, aNySIM was used based on the XMF
framework and a physics engine was used for collision detection and solving the
equations of motion. A physics engine, in this case Vortex, is able to solve these
equations very efficiently.
Figure 52 shows a screenshot of what this simulation looks like, using a very simple
vessel sailing through the ice particles. The main objective in the development of this
model is to include the correct relevant phenomena that drive the ice field, such that it
results in a realistic prediction of the ice flow (around a floating structure).
It can be seen that the shape of the floes is convex and the size varies. The approach
presented in the first part of this report was used to establish this ice field, based on an
ice concentration of 7/10th. Only one type of ice was used here, with a floe size ranging
between 20 and 100 m. The ice floes are modelled as rigid bodies; they are not able to
break.
As was mentioned, wind and current drag effects are modelled on the ice particles,
driving them towards the station keeping vessel. In the near future, studies will be
conducted with the objective to find and validate the correct assumptions for the external
driving forces and the collisional forces between ice floes mutually. By conducting these
studies, it can be evaluated whether the observed phenomena such as cluster formation
occur in the time domain model as well.
In the model, no rigid boundary walls are present, but to constrain the ice floes anyway,
larger floes are placed around the domain. Due to their large masses they are not easily
moved away, however if the pressure within the ice field becomes too large, they will
slightly move outwards.
Other efforts consider breaking of the ice flows. It was found in this pilot study that a
number of processes are involved in the breaking of a floe. Possibly, each of the failure
modes and limit states requires a different modelling approach. To incorporate these
complex processes into the numerical model might involve adaptation of a number of
IceStream 25713 62
6 CONCLUSIONS
From the Arctic Operations Handbook it follows that there is a need for a clear definition
that indicates the severity of the ice conditions. In the same way as generally is done
using sea states for open water conditions, operational limits can be defined based on
this description.
In this pilot study it is proposed to utilize the egg code to indicate the sea state of level
ice in an Arctic environment. On one hand it enables a definition of the operational limits
of a particular structure. On the other hand, a clear definition of the level ice severity
results in more specific requirements for realistic numerical modelling of broken ice
approaching (floating) structures.
To demonstrate this, within this pilot project an algorithm is developed for the translation
of the egg code parameters into a collection of ice particles that serves as an input to
numerical models. The approach ensures that the created ice field complies with the
characteristics that are captured in the parameters of the egg code, such as ice
concentration and composition of various types of ice within the field. Based on a
number of examples it is shown that the proposed approach is capable of delivering an
ice field consisting of particles having a realistic shape and size according to the egg
code specifications.
The benefit of this method is that even though we speak of one particular condition (one
egg), the variations in the ice conditions that are found in nature also appear in the ice
input in the numerical model. By running a simulation based on one egg code for several
hours in real time, a prediction is obtained of the response of the floating structure to a
particular ice condition. Advantageously, these conditions can be directly linked to the
actual conditions at the site.
A study into the dynamic processes that take place in an evolving ice field has been
performed as a second part of this pilot project. Starting from observations and full scale
measurements of ice fields, an attempt was made to identify processes contributing to
the evolution of the ice field. However, based on this information it is not always
straightforward to link a particular process influence to the dynamic behaviour of the ice.
Because of the high level of interaction between the various contributing processes, it is
in some cases difficult to identify individual processes. Therefore, simplifications may
necessarily already be applied to be able to obtain a description of an isolated process.
In order to better understand the separate influence of the various physical processes to
the dynamic behaviour of the ice field, more data is required.
On one hand, this considers full scale data, but on the other hand, model tests can give
more insight into the individual processes, since they are conducted in a controlled
environment. A follow up Joint Industry Project is being set up, which aims at
investigating the dynamic processes further by making use of numerical models and
physical model tests in ice. In this IceStream JIP a numerical tool will be developed,
where the physical laws will be validated by means of the performed model tests. A
cooperation with Oceanic Consulting Corporation (St. Johns, Canada) is established for
this purpose. Refer to the JIP proposal that was jointly written by Oceanic and MARIN
(57).
IceStream 25713 64
Additionally it was found that different processes may occur at different scales. As a
result, in some cases only processes at the evaluated scale have to be included, but in
other cases these processes are the result of one or several processes that take place
at smaller scale. If required, these smaller scale processes need to be evaluated first, in
order to end up with the correct larger scale process. Possibly, a hierarchic mechanical
model can be developed to deal with such processes, as was shown for the failure
process of the ice.
In order to get an idea of the state of the art of currently existing numerical models used
for the prediction of the ice loads on floating structures, a small number of models was
discussed. Several of these models are used to have their results compared with
physical model tests conducted at ice tank facilities, and for this reason these numerical
models do not include external processes or forces that are also not present in the
testing facility. Additionally, particular features are modelled such that the boundary
conditions are similar, such as vertical tank walls.
For this reason, a gap arises between the environmental and internal processes that
were described in this IceStream document on one hand, and the processes that are
included in the numerical models, which mainly use physical model tests as a
benchmark. This makes it difficult to assess the influence of the individual physical
processes.
It is concluded that it is not required to include all physical processes described in this
document; for example, some of them are only relevant on very large (time) scale.
However, the inconsistency of the found results implies that a more thorough
investigation should be performed to which processes are relevant when evaluating the
ice loads on a floating structure, as this cannot be done based on literature and existing
numerical models for ice-structure interaction only.
IceStream 25713 65
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. GPU Modeling of Ship Operations in Pack Ice. Daley, Claude, et al. Banff, Canada :
IceTech, 2012.
2. Discrete Element Modelling of a Broken Ice Field - Part I: Model Development. Lset,
Sveinung. s.l. : Cold Regions Science and Technology, 1993, Vol. 22.
3. Numerical Simulation of a Floater in a Broken Ice Field - Part I: Model Description.
Metrikin, Ivan, et al. Rio de Janeiro : ASME 31st International Conference on Ocean,
Offshore and Arctic Engineering, 2012.
4. Molyneux, David. Physical and Numerical Modeling of Offshore Operations in Ice.
Oceanic Consulting Corporation : s.n., 23 May 2012.
5. Numerical Modeling of Force and Contact Networks in Fragmented Sea Ice. Herman,
Agnieszka. 54, s.l. : Annals of Glaciology, 2013.
6. Modelling Floating Offshore Units Moored in Broken Ice: Model Description. Hansen,
Edmond H. and Lset, Sveinung. August 1999, Cold Regions Science and
Technology, pp. 97-106.
7. (CIS), Canadian Ice Service. Manual of Standard Procedures for Observing and
Reporting Ice Conditions. Meteorological Service of Canada. 2005.
8. Cammaert, Gus and Jolles, Wim. Ice Floe Size Distributions for the IceStream
Project.
9. Voronoi Treemaps for the Viusalization of Software Structures. Balzer, Michael,
Deussen, Oliver and Lewerentz, Claus. s.l. : Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on
Software Visualization, 2005.
10. 2012 Drift Arrow Plan. Drift Arrow. [Online] 12 June 2012.
http://www.driftarrow.com/sites/default/files/images/Ice_IMG_5394.preview.jpg.
11. Inellastic Collisions and Clustering of Ice Floes. Herman, Agnieszka. Ventura,
California, USA : s.n., 2011.
12. Fractal Characteristics of Ice. Cammaert, A.B. and Crocker, G.B. St. John's :
Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Ports and Oceans under Arctic
Conditions, 1991.
13. Characteristics of Sea Ice Floe Size Distribution in the Seasonal Ice Zone. Toyota,
Takenobu, Takatsuji, Shinya and Nakayama, Masashige. s.l. : Geophysical Research
Letters, 2006, Vol. 33. Paper L02616.
14. Aerial Observations of Floe Size Distribution in the Marginal Ice Zone of Summer
Prydz Bay. Lu, P., et al. C02011, s.l. : J. Geophys. Res. , 2008, Vol. 113.
doi:10.1029/2006JC003965.
15. Huber, Stefan. Computation of Voronoi Diagrams of Circular Arcs and Straight
Lines. Salzburg : s.n., 2008.
16. Molecular-dynamics Simulation of Clustering Processes in Sea Ice Floes. Herman,
Agnieszka. 5, s.l. : Physical Review E, 2011, Vol. 84.
17. Eicken, Hajo. Arctic theme page. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
[Online] NOAA. http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/ice-rubble-pressure.html.
18. van der Werff, Solange. SeeIce; JC Ross expedition to Greenland. s.l. : MARIN,
2012.
19. National Snow, and Ice Data Center. Dynamics of sea ice. All about sea ice.
[Online] National Snow and Ice Data Center, 2013.
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/processes/dynamics.html.
20. Studinger, Michael. Uncovering Sea Ice. Earth Observatory. [Online] NASA.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/IceBridge/page4.php.
21. Oceanographic Conditions in the Marginal Ice Zone North of Svalbard in Early Fall
1979. Johannessen, O.M., et al. C5, s.l. : Journal of Geophysical Research, 1983, Vol.
88.
IceStream 25713 66
22. Influence of Ice Concentration and Floe Size Distribution on Cluster Formation in
Sea Ice Floes. Herman, Agnieszka. 3, s.l. : Central European Journal of Physics, 2012,
Vol. 10.
23. Lepparanta, M. The Drift of Sea Ice. Berlin : Springer-Verlag, 2005.
24. Wikipedia. Ekman Spiral. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. [Online] 30 May 2013.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekman_spiral.
25. AIDJEX Revisited: A Look Back at the U.S.-Canadian Arctic Ice Dynamics Joint
Experiment 1970-78. Untersteiner, N., et al. 3, s.l. : InfoNorth, 2007, Vol. 60.
26. Kmrinen, Jorma. Theoretical Investigation on the Effect of Fluid Flow Between
the Hull of a Ship and Ice Floes on Ice Resistance in Level Ice. Helsinki : Helsinki
University of Technology, 2007.
27. Ventilation and Backfill Effect during Ice-sloping Structure Interactions. Lu, Wenjun,
Loset, Sveinung and Lubbad, Raed. Dalian, China : 21st IAHR International
Symposium on Ice, 2012.
28. Quinton, Bruce W. DECICE Implementation of Ship Performance in Ice: A
Summary Report. St. John's, NL, Canada : Institute for Ocean Technology, National
Research Council, 2006.
29. Numerical Simulation of Ship Maneuvering in Pack Ice. Zhan, Dexin, et al.
Shanghai, China : ASME 29th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
Engineering, 2010.
30. Brostrm, Gran and Christensen, Kai. Waves in Sea Ice. s.l. : Norwegian
Meteorological Institute, 2008.
31. Of Ocean Waves and Sea Ice. Squire, Vernon A., et al. s.l. : Annu. Rev. Fluid
Mech. , 1995, Vol. 27.
32. Wikipedia. Coriolis effect. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. [Online] 8 August 2013.
[Cited: 5 August 2013.] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect#Applied_to_Earth.
33. Sandwell, D.T., Gille, S.T. and Smith, W.H.F. Bathymetry from Space:
Oceanography, Geophysics and Climate. Bethesda, Maryland : Geoscience
Professional Services, 2002.
34. Arctic Ice Dynamics Joint Experiment (AIDJEX) assumptions revisited and found
inadequate. Coon, M., et al. s.l. : J. Geophys. Res, 2007, Vol. 11. C11S90,
doi:10.1029/2005JC003393.
35. National Snow, and Ice Data Center. Photo Gallery. AIDJEX Photo Album. [Online]
AIDJEX. http://nsidc.org/gallery/coppermine/displayimage.php?pos=-606.
36. Williams, Tim. The Marginal Ice Zone. Mohn-Sverdrup Center - Global Ocean
Studies - Operational Oceanography. [Online] Mohn-Sverdrup Center, 29 September
2009. http://msc.nersc.no/?q=MIZ.
37. Lee, C.M., et al. Science and Experiment Plan. Marginal Ice Zone (MIZ) Program.
[Online] 2012. http://www.apl.washington.edu/project/project.php?id=miz.
38. Perovich, Donald. A Year on the Ice. Field Observations: Snow and Ice. [Online]
SHEBA, 2 October 1997.
http://polar.crrel.usace.army.mil/people/personnel_sid/perovichweb/SHEBAice/year_oct.
htm.
39. Relating Arctic Pack Ice Stress and Deformation under Winter Conditions. Richter-
Menge, Jacqueline, et al. C10, s.l. : J. Geophys. Res. , 2002, Vol. 107.
doi:10.1029/2000JC000477.
40. Granular Flow in the Marginal Ice Zone. Feltham, Daniel L. s.l. : Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society, 2005.
41. Introduction to granular temperature. Goldhirsch, Isaac. 2, Tel Aviv : Elsevier,
2007, Vol. Powder Technology 182.
42. ISO 19906 Petroleum and natural gas industries - Arctic ofshore structures (draft).
s.l. : International Organization for Standardization, 2008.
IceStream 25713 67
43. Dynamics of the Ice-Crushing Process. Jordaan, Ian J. and Timco, Garry W. 118,
s.l. : Journal of Glaciology, 1988, Vol. 34.
44. Thickness Dependence of the Failure Modes of Ice from Field Observations on Wide
Structures. Timco, G.W. Dalian, China : Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic
Conditions Conference, 2007. 978-7-5611-3631-7.
45. Global Design Ice Loads' Dependence of Failure Mode. Bjerkas, Morten. Toulon,
France : 14th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE-2004),
2004. ISSN 1055-5381.
46. Daley, Claude and Riska, Kaj. Conceptual Framework for an Ice Load Model.
Calgary, Canada : National Energy Board.
47. Lset, Sveinung. Global and Local Ice Loads. University of Svalbard,
Longyearbyen : Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2009.
48. The Limiting Driving Force Approach to Ice Loads. Croasdale, K.R. Houston :
Offshore Technology Conference, 1984. OTC 4716.
49. Lset, Sveinung. Ice Physics, Presentation Arctic Offshore Engineering Course.
Longyearbyen : UNIS, 2009.
50. Fortt, Andrew L. and Schulson, Erland M. Sliding Along Coulombic Shear Faults
within First Year Sea Ice. Hanover, NH, USA : Ice Research Laboratory Thayer School
of Engineering, 2010.
51. An Elastic-Viscous-Plastic Model for Sea Ice Dynamics. Hunke, E.C. and
Dukowicz, J.K. s.l. : Journal of Physical Oceanography, 1997, Vol. 27.
52. The Role of Floe Collisions in Sea Ice Rheology. Shen, Hayley H., Hibler III,
William D. and Lepparanta, Matti. C7, s.l. : Journal of Geophysical Research, 1987,
Vol. 92. 0148-0227/87/007C-0283S05.00.
53. Performance of survival craft in ice environments. Lau, M. and Simes R, A.
Banff, Canada : IceTech, 2006.
54. Discrete Element Modeling of Ship Manoeuvring in Ice. Lau, M. Sapporo, Japan :
International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research, 2006.
55. Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Positioning in Ice. Metrikin, Ivan, et al. Houston :
Dynamic Positioning in Ice Conference, 2012.
56. Quinton, Bruce W. Numerical Modeling of a Conventional TEMPSC in Pack Ice. St.
John's, Canada : Institute for Ocean Technology, National Research Council, 2004.
57. Woods Hole, Oceanographic Institution. To Greenland's Frozen Coast. To
Greenland's Frozen Coast. [Online] http://www.greenlandsfrozencoast.com.
IceStream 25713 68
8 APPENDICES
In August 2012, MARIN joined an expedition on board of the RSS James Clark Ross,
starting from Iceland to the East Greenland coast. The expedition was organized by the
NIOZ (Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research) and WHOI (Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution) with the goal of gain a broader understanding about the
system upstream the Denmark Strait which delivers the cold water southbound. Since it
was very likely that ice would be encountered during the four weeks sailing, MARIN took
place aboard. More information about the oceanographic research can be found at the
Greenland Frozen Coast website (57).
A total week was spend in conditions involving sea ice; apart from earlier moments
where icebergs were encountered. The conditions seen showed a wide range of
varieties, from open water (less than 1/10 ice coverage) to very close pack ice (over
8/10 ice concentration) with floe sizes of several kilometres. Moreover, smooth surface
level ice was alternated by large rafted and ridged pieces of ice, and young and
multiyear ice were mixed up within one area.
This is supported by the conditions generally found in the Arctic region; it is known for its
highly dynamic character induced by currents and winds, and presence of land. The
accompanying behaviour of the present ice makes that many types of ice mixed up
throughout an ice field are encountered in these areas. Landfast ice which is broken off
the coast of Greenland is found together with multiyear ice which has drifted down south
from the higher northern Arctic areas.
A logbook was kept over the relevant period and the ice charts were followed and
compared to the encountered conditions. A lot of time was spend on the bridge, in order
to see the sailors manoeuvre the ship through light and heavy ice conditions. The
complete overview of activities is written in a separate SeeIce report (18).
Author Institute Type Purpose Wind Current Coriolis Breaking Thermo-
failure dynamics
8.2
Feltham Centre for Polar Observation and Viscous- Ice yes yes yes yes no
Modelling, University College plastic/ behaviour
London Collisional prediction
Hunke Los Alamos National Laboratory Viscous- Ice yes yes yes no yes
plastic behaviour
prediction
OVERVIEW NUMERICAL MODELS
Lepparanta Institute of Marine Research Collisional Ice yes yes yes no yes
Helsinki behaviour
prediction
IceStream 25713
The Arctic Operations Handbook Joint Industry Project (JIP) was launched in February of
2012 supported by a number of companies and knowledge institutes. The JIP was initiated
by a number of Dutch companies in the framework of the Maritime Innovation Program
(MIP) and was awarded a subsidy from the Dutch Ministry of EL&I (Economic affairs,
Agriculture & Innovation). With it the JIP participants committed to issue an open source
document to ensure that the work from the JIP is offered to the international arctic offshore
community and the general public for further use.
The participating companies have the ambition to execute projects in arctic areas, such as
installation and operations of oil and gas production facilities. The term arctic as used here
refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore
operations, field development and decommissioning.
Currently, there is no specific standard for companies operating in arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure services can be provided in a safe manner with minimum
environmental impact, it was proposed to prepare guidance/standards for such operations.
This project has taken an important step in gathering existing rules & regulations, identifying
the areas which require additional guidance, and has taken some steps in defining guidance.
The focus is on the operational activities for installation of fixed, floating and subsea units,
dredging, trenching, pipe laying and floating oil/gas production. Detailed design of facilities
& equipment was not covered in this JIP as it is already supported through ISO 19906 for
Arctic Offshore Structures.
As part of the work scope the JIP has taken the initiative to liaise with Class Societies, Arctic
Governmental Authorities and international standards organizations such as ISO. A
diversified group of Dutch operators and knowledge centers have assessed deficiencies in
existing standards and it is therefore considered useful and beneficial for the ISO TC67 SC 8
and SC 7 to use this report when preparing their new ISO norms.
This Arctic Marine Operations Challenges & Recommendations Report presents existing
rules & regulations, identifies the areas which require additional guidance, and in those cases
where possible defines recommendations for arctic operations. The index used in this report
is based on ISO 19901-6; Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for
offshore structures Part 6: Marine operations. The index has been adjusted and
complemented with aspects specific for arctic operations.
The following key observations/guidance have been gathered within the scope of this Joint
Industry Project;
It was noted from the gap analysis that there was limited (ISO) guidance for pipe lay,
trenching and dredging operations, let alone for the arctic areas. It was therefore chosen
to provide a number of best practices for these operations, considering the arctic
environment. The efforts concentrated on the aspects that would be new in the arctic
when comparing with open water operations in non-arctic areas.
Site specific operations should be considered when planning and carrying out operations.
Considerable effort was performed to align the knowledge on weather conditions and in
particular on the requirements for monitoring and forecasting as well as the requirements
for decision based tools.
For the transportation & logistic aspects input relied heavily on the existing guidance for
arctic shipping which is further developed and was evaluated and transferred to
recommendations for the specific services of this guide.
This report provides guidance as required specifically for contractors expecting to work
in arctic areas on the aspects of health, safety, training and also stakeholder mapping.
A frame work is provided to perform environmental impact assessments both in early as
well as detailed stages of design in order to ensure that impacts can be managed and
mitigated.
Specific attention was given to the evaluation of the loads on and the operation of
disconnectable floating production units.
The other volumes of this report contain results of the gap analysis performed in the project
as well as relevant results of the pilot projects of the Arctic Operations Handbook (AOH)
JIP;
The IceStream Pilot project, described in volume 3, has shown that the egg code
(which is a method to describe characteristics of ice fields), when used as a basis to
establish a visualization of the ice field, can serve as input to numerical models with
which ice loads can be predicted on floating structures. More field data is required to
support development of new analytical models.
The Environmental Impact Pilot project, described in volume 4, has developed an
enhanced approach (interaction of linked sensitivities) for understanding the
environmental impact of operations in an early project stage in a semi-quantitative
manner. Application of such an approach is recommended to assess, evaluate and reduce
the environmental impact of operations in arctic areas.
A state of the art review for marine icing on vessels has been performed and has been
documented in volume 5, Marine icing on arctic offshore operations Pilot project. It
highlights that although there are many approaches, there is no common approach and no
industry standard for marine icing calculations. It strongly recommends more field
observations and improved prediction models to determine sea spray formation and icing
accretion.
Key recommendations from the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP are:
Prepare more detailed operational standards including waiting on weather and ice,
uptime and risk and hazard management.
Develop equipment standards especially for the niche operations in this report.
Prepare ice management guidelines, in concert where possible with the ISO TC67 SC 8
Work group 4, ice management.
Guidance text for marine operations in arctic conditions has been prepared in this report.
It is recommended that this can be incorporation into ISO 19901-6, or other ISO
documentation.
Implementation of an operational ice level into the ISO documentation for defining the
ice action at which the (vessel) position may no longer be retained, due to structural or
station keeping capability.
List of participants
The following companies have participated in the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP;
IMARES Wageningen UR
Institute for Marine Resources & Ecosystem Studies
IMARES, institute of Stichting DLO The Management of IMARES is not responsible for resulting
is registered in the Dutch trade damage, as well as for damage resulting from the application of
record nr. 09098104, results or research obtained by IMARES, its clients or any claims
BTW nr. NL 806511618 related to the application of information found within its research.
This report has been made on the request of the client and is
wholly the client's property. This report may not be reproduced
and/or published partially or in its entirety without the express
written consent of the client.
A_4_3_2-V12.4
Summary ................................................................................................................. 5
Introduction .............................................................................................................. 8
3 Conclusions.................................................................................................... 51
3.1 Generic Framework ................................................................................ 51
3.2 GAP analysis ......................................................................................... 51
References .............................................................................................................. 54
Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... 57
Justification ............................................................................................................. 61
Appendix A ............................................................................................................. 62
Appendix B ............................................................................................................. 63
Appendix C ............................................................................................................. 66
The Dutch offshore industry has the ambition to execute operations on a large scale in Arctic areas, for
instance for installation and operation of oil- and gas production facilities and pipelines. Currently, there
is no standard for safe operations by service companies in Arctic offshore areas. Therefore a Joint
Industry Project (JIP) was started to carry out the necessary investigations to enable the formulation of
guidelines for specific Dutch offshore contractors skills, and to contribute to internationally accepted
standards and guidelines for Arctic operations. One of the deliverables of the JIP is an environmental
assessment pilot.
Figure 1 Cumulative effect assessment. The basic elements are Activities, Pressures and
Ecosystem components. It is assumed that effects are a function of the intensity of pressures
caused by activities and of the vulnerability of ecosystem components to those pressures.
Adapted from Karman & Jongbloed (2008) [11], including interrelationships of the ecosystem
components.
2. A case study in which the generic framework will be tested in order to evaluate its applicability
and identify areas for further elaboration. Hereby the environmental impact of various trenching
techniques will be determined in the Baffin Bay area.
This report describes the proposed generic framework for environmental assessments including a
working procedure on how the framework should be used. The case study will be covered in another
report.
During the development of a marine operation several project phases can be distinguished, each of them
requiring a specific environmental assessment (Figure 2):
When designing equipment and/or during the operation preparation it is important to know
the differences in ecological impact of the various scenarios, in order to be able to select the
best option. This can be applied in a prioritization assessment in which a semi quantitative or
quantitative assessment is performed to rank the expected effects, prioritize the areas for
mitigation and identify potential mitigation measures. The prioritization phase provides
information enabling decision making in an early stage of the project development and results in
a scope definition for the next steps.
In general, a license to operate in a vulnerable ecosystem will only be issued with an obligation
of monitoring the effects during and after the execution of the operation.
Eventually, an effect evaluation is executed during the project evaluation where the results
of the baseline and the effect monitoring are compared with the predictions in the EIA.
This generic framework covers the environmental assessments during the first two project phases.
1. Scoping assessment
For the current version of the generic framework the following gaps have been identified:
Description of the phases: baseline monitoring, EIA, effect monitoring & effect evaluation
Sensitivity & uncertainty analysis
Species interactions in a semi quantitative assessment
Natural variability of (marine) ecosystems
Building with nature principles
Description of the roles and responsibilities of the different maritime actors (oil companies, ship
builders & contractors) during the execution of the maritime operation.
These gaps will be addressed in the further development of the Generic Framework (but not within the
scope of this JIP).
The Dutch offshore industry has the ambition to execute operations on a large scale in Arctic areas, for
instance for installation and operation of oil- and gas production facilities and pipelines. The term Arctic
refers to areas on the northern hemisphere where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence
offshore operations and field development.
Currently, there is no standard for safe operations by service companies in Arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure development of steps towards minimum environmental impact, it is
proposed to develop guidance/standards for such operations, focused on dredging, trenching, pipe lay,
facilities installation and decommissioning activities.
For operations in the Arctic several types of equipment can be used, each with its specific advantages
and disadvantages, operational as well as environmental. For instance, an important environmental
consideration is the effect of dust plumes created during dredging. For a number of operations it has
been stated that dust plumes need to be limited but this gives too little guidance for the actual choice for
the operation. In addition, noise emissions by vessels, ice breaking or (trenching or pile driving)
equipment have become an environmental concern in standard oil & gas operations, as well as exhaust
gas emission of dredging operations. These and other pressures resulting from offshore operations are
issues of concern, especially in the vulnerable Arctic marine and terrestrial ecosystems.
The Arctic Operations Handbook Joint Industry Project aims to carry out the necessary investigations to
enable the formulation of guidelines for specific Dutch offshore contractors skills, and to contribute to
internationally accepted standards and guidelines for Arctic operations. An environmental assessment
pilot forms one of the deliverables of the JIP.
2. A case study in which the generic framework will be tested in order to evaluate its applicability
and identify areas for further elaboration. Hereby the environmental impact of various trenching
techniques will be determined in the Baffin Bay area.
This report describes the proposed generic framework for environmental assessments, including a
working procedure on how the framework should be used during the first two phases of the project
(Project preparation & Design of equipment).
The proposed methodology of the assessment is described in Chapter 1 and the application of the
method is described in Chapter 2. The case study will be covered in another report.
This work is executed by Heerema Marine Contractors, IMARES & TNO, in close coordination with INTEC-
Sea and Jolmar/Canatec.
This generic framework comprises the methodology of an environmental assessment and the way it
should be used by industry. The actual model is described in this chapter, whereas the application of the
model is described in Chapter 2. Abbreviations and definitions are given at page 59-61.
1.1 Background
A Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) addresses the environmental implications of decisions made
above project level, at the strategic tier of policies and plans (Figure 3). As a higher order environmental
assessment process, SEA occurs when alternative futures and options for development and conservation
are still open. In principle, the benefits of early environmental thinking should cascade downward
resulting in more informed, efficient, and focused project-level assessments and decisions Noble &
Harriman, 2013 [72]. SEA ensures the consideration of environmental issues at the outset of the
decision-making process and can detect potential environmental impacts at an early stage, before the
projects are designed.
An Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is defined by the Arctic Environment Protection Strategy [2]
as a process for identifying, predicting, evaluating, and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other
relevant effects of proposed projects and physical activities prior to major decisions and commitments
being made. The decision to apply an EIA and the requirements for that EIA depends on local
jurisdictions. In the Arctic, EIA should be applied to activities associated with the exploitation of both
renewable and non-renewable natural resources, public use, military activities and the development of
infrastructure for different purposes that may cause significant environmental impacts [2].
Within this JIP, only the project EIA is considered. During the development of a marine operation several
project phases can be distinguished, each of them requiring a specific environmental assessment (Figure
4):
During the project preparation it is important to gain insight in which ecosystem components
are occurring in the area and if they might be influenced by the proposed activities. This is done
in a scoping assessment, also known as a quick scan.
When designing equipment or during the operation preparation it is important to know the
differences in ecological impact of the various scenarios, in order to be able to select the best
option. This can be applied in a prioritization assessment.
Baseline monitoring is performed to access the actual population size of the ecosystem
components prior to the execution of the proposed activities. The baseline monitoring is often
done during the operation preparation.
Usually, a license to operate in a vulnerable ecosystem will only be issued with an obligation of
monitoring the effects during and after the execution of the operation.
Eventually, the results of the baseline and the effect monitoring can be assessed during the
project evaluation and compared with the predictions in the EIA.
Currently, this generic framework covers the environmental assessments during the first two project
phases:
1. Scoping assessment
2. Prioritization assessment
This section provides a short overview of the basic approach to assess effects on the ecosystem that
arise from human activities. The assessment needs to identify the possible effects of planned activities.
In that sense, it is a predictive method, making use of a conceptual and/or computerised model.
Assumptions and outcomes of the model could be tested in a field-monitoring programme that enables
validation of the model.
The basic elements of the model are Activities, Pressures and Ecosystem components and is applied as a
combination of the Cumulative Effect Assessment (CEA) and the Ecosystem Effect Chain (EEC).
The CEA assesses the actual impacts of various pressures on selected ecosystem components, which can
be species and habitats, but could also include specific ecosystem services, processes or functions. The
basic approach of the CEA is the assumption that effects are a function of the intensity of pressures
caused by activities and of the vulnerability of ecosystem components to those pressures (Figure 5).
Most assessments only include pressures which have a negative effect on the ecosystem components,
e.g. mortality or a lower reproduction rate. However, some pressures may also have a stimulative
effect. An increase in nutrients for example, resulting from the discharge of an effluent, may lead to a
higher density of phytoplankton. In this study we will consider negative as well as stimulative effects of
pressures.
The ecosystem effect chain (EEC) approach explicitly includes interactions between populations and
ecosystem components, and may therefore also reveal indirect impacts of the (direct) effects of human
activities. Examples of those ecosystem interrelationships are predator-prey interactions, cannibalism,
competition, mutualism etc. (section 3.1.9). The EEC requires detailed ecological knowledge on the
nature of the interactions, and how these are to be quantified. Since we will combine the CEA
methodology with the EEC in this study, we will therefore consider not only the effect of pressures on the
ecosystem components, but also the interrelationships of the ecosystem components (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Cumulative effect assessment, adapted from Karman & Jongbloed, 2008 [11], including
interrelationships of the ecosystem components
Although basic elements of CEA, i.e. activities pressures ecosystem components can be identified and
related to each other, it does not show elements of space and time, which are the dimensions in which
effects can cumulate (MacDonald, 2000 [12]).
Activities, pressures and ecosystem components often have temporal properties, and may therefore have
an influence on the duration of the effects, and as a consequence also on the size of the effects on the
ecosystem. Activities are usually time-bound, i.e. they take place in a specific period of the year, or last
for a certain period of time. Also the intensities of pressures show fluctuations and the natural population
size of ecosystem components may vary considerably over time (population dynamics).
As a first step, a potential impact assessment can be done in which the element of time can be
disregarded by assuming all elements are present at the same time. This can be considered as a worst
case, conservative approach. Depending on the available information and the goal of the assessment,
temporal distribution can be implemented, e.g. by including seasonal differences in both the elements
and their linkages. This allows for an assessment of the actual temporal confined impact.
To include temporal differentiation, a suitable time-scale has to be selected, e.g. based on ecological
conditions and relevant for the activities to consider. For year-round activities, differentiation based on
seasons may be relevant, while activities with short duration may only focus on the relevant ecological
aspects during the activity, e.g. breeding season for birds, or growing season for phytoplankton. In high
latitude areas, the growing season is very short in comparison to the temperate region. So, the highest
biological activity, like primary production of algae and plants, takes place in a short summer season.
The release of nutrients that enhance the growth of algae and plants, or the decrease of the
transparency in the water column that reduces the growth potential of algae, will have their highest
impact during the growing season. It may therefore be relevant to consider different seasons in the
assessment. Another example is the presence of marine mammals. Whales usually have migration routes
and are therefore only present during a specific time of the year. So, impacts may only arise when an
activity takes place at the same time that marine mammals are in the area.
The factor time adds more complexity to the model when population dynamics are considered in the
assessment. Time is an important property when considering the response of ecosystem components to
disturbances (pressures). Response times may be seconds but can also be years. In addition, a
disturbance could lead to a dynamic response of the ecosystem. In dynamic systems the fluctuations
may extinguish, stay the same or even increase in time.
Temporal aspects are not only relevant within the timeframe of the proposed activities. Also future and
past events are important, especially for the Arctic environment where human activities are historically
scarce but now faces major developments.
In addition to temporal aspects, the activities, pressures and ecosystem components are furthermore
limited to their spatial characteristics, i.e. they are bound to a limited area of the total environment. The
intensity of pressures, like the concentration of a toxic compound, or the level of noise, is in general high
near the actual activity and decreases with the distance. Spatial patterns are often also present in the
density of ecosystem components, e.g. the distribution of a species is not homogeneous, but usually
patchy.
A simple approach to include spatial dimension in a CEA is described by Halpern et al., 2008 [13, 14].
They mapped the intensity of pressures in geographic cells and included whether or not a specific
ecosystem was present (0 or 1). Stelzenmller et al., 2010 [15] follows a similar approach. Instead of
using this binary yes or no approach, a more quantitative approach is also possible. The assessment
could also include the probability of pressures and ecosystem components being present, as
implemented by Zacharias & Gregr, 2005 [16].
The previously presented methodology (CEA plus EEC) can be applied at three levels of detail:
1. Qualitative
A qualitative assessment provides the answer whether an activity has a (potential) effect on an
ecosystem component. The result of a qualitative assessment is an ecosystem components
impact matrix (Table 1). Note that ecosystem components can be species and habitats, but
could also include specific ecosystem services, processes or functions.
The qualitative assessment is performed during the scoping phase often based on expert
judgement, and applied as a first screening of relevant effects to consider in subsequent
research.
Table 1: Example of a qualitative effect matrix. In this matrix the effect on each ecosystem
component (species or habitat) is indicated for each activity. A decrease of the ecosystem
component is indicated in red, an increase is indicated in green. Effects are indicated by Yes
(certainly an effect), ? (possibly an effect) or No (certainly no effect).
Ecosystem Components
Bowhead Whale
Qualitative
Phytoplankton
Zooplankton
Effect
Polar Bear
Arctic Cod
Matrix
Sea Ice
Walrus
Pipe Lay No No ? No No No No
Backfill Material Yes Yes Yes Yes ? ? No
Seismic Research No No Yes Yes Yes ? No
Presence Platform No No Yes Yes ? ? No
2. Semi quantitative
A semi quantitative assessment differs from the qualitative assessment by the categorical effect
scores, indicating a relative magnitude of the impact (Table 2). A semi quantitative assessment
is usually the most efficient approach to compare the environmental impact of different
scenarios and therefore is often applied in the prioritization assessment.
Ecosystem Components
Bowhead Whale
Semi-quantitative
Phytoplankton
Zooplankton
effect
Polar Bear
Arctic Cod
matrix
Sea Ice
Walrus
Trenching - -/+ + - + ? 0
Activities
Pipe Lay 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0
Backfill Material - - - - ? ? 0
Seismic Research 0 0 ++ + -/+ -- 0
Presence Platform 0 0 -- + ? ? 0
3. Quantitative
A quantitative assessment determines the actual effect on the ecosystem components. The
effect scores refer to the actual number/density of a certain species or the amount of habitat in
the study area (Table 3). A quantitative assessment can be used during the prioritization
assessment if a higher level of detail is required.
Ecosystem Components
Bowhead Whale
Quantitative
Phytoplankton
Zooplankton
Effect
Polar Bear
Arctic Cod
Matrix
Sea Ice
Walrus
Trenching - 5% - 5% -1 - 1% - 10% -2 0
Activities
The aim of an uncertainty analysis is to identify and where possible to quantify the uncertainty in the
assessment. A sensitivity analysis evaluates the effects of uncertainty in the input parameters and the
computational algorithm on the output of the assessment.
A sensitivity and uncertainty analysis can be used to provide insight in the working of the methodology
and test the robustness of the assessment with regard to its assumptions and formulated dose-response
relationships.
It is outside the scope of this study to include a sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. However, it is
relevant for each step in the assessment to clearly document the assumptions, the origin and the quality
of the information used, and which knowledge or information is lacking that could improve the
assessment.
There is usually a perception that uncertainties only arise in quantitative information, but uncertainties
are of many kinds, including from political sources, to model output information. Unfortunately, there is
no agreed terminology to refer to certain types of uncertainty, and in fact many typologies exist. In
relation to model-based decision support three dimensions of uncertainty have been distinguished by
Walker, 2003 [17]:
Location of uncertainty
Level of uncertainty
Nature of uncertainty
The location of uncertainty refers to where the uncertainty manifests within the model complex. This
type of uncertainty relates to uncertainties on the context, the model, and the inputs.
The context is an identification of the boundaries of the system to be modelled; how much of the real
world is included in the model? Within the scoping phase of the assessment, these boundaries need to
be described. This could be e.g. the geographic boundaries, the part of the ecosystem that will be
considered, the level of complexity of the ecosystem that will be considered etc..
Another uncertainty that is part of the location, is uncertainty of the conceptual model. For example, the
dose-effect relationships are based on certain assumptions with regard to the shape, direction and nature
of the response of the ecosystem component. This includes a.o. the translation from effects on behaviour
to effects on the population level. In addition, the technical set-up of the model in a computer
implementation may create uncertainties.
A third type of location refers to the data (inputs) that are associated to the reference system. Not only
the activities that are considered have an impact on the outcome of the assessment, but also external
(natural) forces do, like climate change. So, part of the inputs can be controlled by the way an activity is
performed, but part of it cannot be controlled.
The level of uncertainty refers to the spectrum of knowledge. Optimally, the model is based fully on
knowledge and information, but sometimes we have to admit that we hardly know anything about even
crucial relationships. The level of uncertainty includes the statistical uncertainty, the type of uncertainty
that is most commonly referred to in natural sciences. What is the deviation from the true value? This
type of uncertainty is often quantifiable, and can be part of a sensitivity analysis.
Another type of uncertainty related to the level is scenario uncertainty. In this case, the mechanisms that
leads to the outcomes are not well understood, and this makes it hard to formulate how true the
(model) outcome of the assessment is. Within the assessment, assumptions made on the dose-response
relationships can be considered as an example. By changing assumptions of the model, a sensitivity
analysis can be conducted to gain more insight in the quantitative consequences of this type of
uncertainty.
The nature of uncertainty indicates whether the uncertainty is due to the imperfection of our knowledge
or to the inherent variability of the phenomena being described.
If the uncertainty is knowledge related, the uncertainty can be reduced by more research and empirical
effort. In case of variability uncertainty, more knowledge will not help to reduce the uncertainty. This
type of uncertainty could be e.g. processes that relate to political willingness and external random
forces.
A stepwise approach (Therivel & Ross, 2007 [18], van der Walt, 2005 [19] is proposed for the
elaboration of an environmental assessment in the Arctic, analogous to the development project of a
marine operation (Figure 4):
1. Scoping phase: a qualitative assessment identifying which ecosystem-components are
(potentially) affected by the proposed activities. Ecosystem components can be affected directly
through the activity induced pressures, or indirectly through other affected ecosystem
components. The qualitative assessment results in a scope definition for the next step.
2. Prioritization phase: a semi quantitative or quantitative assessment in order to rank the
expected effects, prioritize the areas for mitigation and identify potential mitigation measures.
The prioritization phase provides information enabling decision making in an early stage of the
project development and results in a scope definition for the baseline monitoring and the EIA.
3. Baseline monitoring: one or more surveys to determine the baseline situation, such as
population size of ecosystem components and other relevant indicators, prior to the execution of
the proposed activities.
4. EIA phase: prediction of the (main) effects of the proposed activities as quantitative as possible.
5. Effect monitoring: surveys of the actual situation, such as population size of ecosystem
components and other relevant indicators, during and after the implementation of the activities,
based on a monitoring plan.
6. Effect Evaluation: a comparison between the results of the effect monitoring and the predictions
of the EIA.
A qualitative assessment is used to determine the scope required for an assessment. During this phase it
is qualitatively assessed whether ecosystem-components are (potentially) affected by the activity
induced pressures and/or by interactions with other ecosystem components. The qualitative assessment
results in a scope definition for the subsequent phases.
Figure 6 shows the steps which are carried out during this phase. Each step is described in the next
sections.
Assessment
Identify relevant
stakeholders (par 3.1.3)
Identify relevant
Stakeholders legislation (par 3.1.4)
Legislation
& Guidelines
Define objectives
environmental impact
assessment (par 3.1.5)
Qualitative
Define
activities (par 3.1.6)
Define pressures
(par 3.1.7)
Select ecosystem
components (par 3.1.8)
Define interactions
ecosystem components
(par 3.1.9)
Define sensitivity
ecosystem components
(par 3.1.10)
Availability
Phase 1:
of data
Qualify
environmental impact
(par 3.1.11)
Define scope
& level of detail EIA
(par 3.1.12)
Figure 6: Phase 1; the 12 necessary steps that should be taken during a qualitative assessment. Note
the steps which may be influenced by stakeholders, legislation and/or the availability of data.
A wide variety of business needs can trigger an environmental assessment. Typical examples are:
New business and spatial developments; oil & gas drilling, trenching & pipe-lay operations,
mining, new shipping routes, offshore wind farms etc.
Environmental policy; wish for reduction of ecological footprint by choosing the least polluting
alternative during the selection of operational activities or the development of new equipment.
Environmental regulations; reassessment of existing activities to make sure they still comply
with current or future legislation.
Stakeholders requirements; public debate leading to new socially accepted environmental impact
standards.
It is important to make a detailed description of the business need in order to align the objectives of the
assessment. It needs to be perfectly clear what must be achieved to fulfil the business need.
The study area is the location where the operational activities are executed. The definition of the study
area contains two steps: describing the geographical and physical parameters. Information on the
geographical and physical parameters can be obtained from the contractor, who usually has conducted a
site survey at sea that contains an investigation of sediment conditions, bathymetry and corals (Hasle,
2009 [20]). The information should include:
Geographical information
Country
Area/location
Coordinates
Daylight length in relation to season
Physical information
Depending on the location on land or at sea the following information is needed to describe the study
area:
The Arctic is culturally and socio-economically a non-uniform and complex area. Stakeholders can be
important during the assessment process in order to manage potential conflicts and create possible
synergies. In addition, stakeholder involvement is essential and often mandatory. Conflicts and synergies
often can arise where species, habitats or resources in the designated area of an activity are of relevance
to more than one stakeholder, which is the case in almost all projects.
There are multiple possibilities to communicate, with various forms of interaction. In some cases the
preferred method is communication from individual to individual; in other cases it is individual-group or
group-group interaction. Sometimes face-to-face meetings are necessary to prevent individuals or
groups from influencing each other during the process. Depending on the objectives a variety of
consultation techniques are available. Examples are telephone interviews, face-to-face interviews, group
interviews, workshops, internet surveys etc.
Clearly such moments of interaction should be well prepared. What is the agenda? What are the items to
deal with? At least the objectives of the assessment and the selection of ecosystem components should
be listed. For more guidance on stakeholder interaction processes please check Guidemaps (2004) [21],
Taschner & Fiedler (2009) [22] and Lange & Wiersema (in prep) [79].
Stakeholders can act solely or as a group. When acting as a group of stakeholders, formal or informal
coalitions are established to achieve more by working together. Mostly these coalitions occur within a
specific category, e.g. associations of oil companies or civil society coalitions. Some stakeholders
deliberately choose not to act within coalitions because they prefer to not compromise their aims and
results. Hybrids also occur, such as public-private coalitions between governments and industries. A
rather new trend is the coalition between industries and civil society, sometimes combined with
governments and research organisations. The Arctic Council is an example of such a coalition.
The individuals and groups that are selected by answering these questions can be used to determine if
their involvement is required for the process.
Tourism
In the Arctic, indigenous peoples such as the Inuit of North America and Greenland play a crucial role in
new developments. The Arctic area is huge and contains an enormous diversity of peoples, cultures,
practices and conditions (Figure 7). Indigenous peoples of the Arctic share many similarities, e.g. they
(Helander-Renvall, 2005 [74]):
are indigenous to their lands;
have been subjected to overall colonial activities by the surrounding states, and national and
multinational companies;
possess knowledge that is now regarded as useful regarding the management of lands, waters,
and natural resources (traditional knowledge), receiving attention from scientists, politicians,
and administrators of sustainability and biodiversity;
are dependent on their traditional environmental knowledge to properly manage the resource
base of their regions;
view themselves as having a historical existence and identity that is separate and independent of
the states now enveloping them.
When getting into contact with stakeholders it is important to communicate what is expected and what
their role and responsibility is during the process. It is also important to communicate what will be done
with the input of stakeholders. In addition, stakeholders should know when they will be involved; in the
initial stages, during and/or after the process?
As indigenous people play a crucial role in new developments, it is important to sufficiently involve them
in these new developments. Full participation and responsibility in the decision-making process regarding
the management of resources must be promoted (Helander-Renvall, 2005 [74]).
This section firstly provides an overview of international requirements with respect to environmental
assessments. It covers international decrees, conventions and agreements that provide basic guidelines
on how to carry out an environmental assessment. Most of these regimes are not legally binding and do
not involve sanctions when not complying to the rules. International regimes are implemented at a
national level. Therefore the second section focuses on national legislation. In contrast with international
rules, national legislation can be enforced by legal bodies such as the state, involving legally binding
rules and possibly also sanctions if a project or an activity is not in compliance. It should be noted that
this section does not aim to provide a complete legal framework to which Arctic operations should
comply but only serves as an indication for legal requirements. Therefore, in this first phase of the
assessment, it should be checked which legislation is in force within the study area. All requirements
following the legislation should be addressed in the assessment.
On a global level, the United Nations Convention for the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is relevant. UNCLOS
states1 are required to conduct an assessment of the effects of activities taking place in their maritime
jurisdiction on the marine environment located in the other states jurisdiction as well as on areas
beyond national jurisdiction (Molenaar & Koivurova, 2009 [24]), i.e. the high seas. OSPAR, ESPOO and
London Convention (and protocols) are next in row using recommendations and agreements, but lacking
the possibility of sanctioning; the UNCLOS acts as a backstop, having little enforcing power. OSPAR
covers part of the Arctic region (Figure 8). The applicability of the Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention) and its SEA Protocol for the Arctic marine
area is also limited. Some Arctic states are not parties to the Espoo Convention, the SEA Protocol has not
yet entered into force, and some Arctic states have not even signed the SEA Protocol (Molenaar &
Koivurova, 2009 [24]).
On the level of the Arctic region, the Arctic Council was established in 1996 by the eight Arctic countries.
In 1997, Council developed guidelines with the aim at giving practical guidance for environmental
assessments to all parties involved in development activities in the northern circumpolar areas, but
especially to local authorities, developers and local people[2]. This guideline addresses the special
conditions in the Arctic, including climate, socio-cultural conditions and the functioning of the
ecosystems. According to the Arctic Environment Protection Strategy, the precautionary principle should
be included in Arctic EIA. The precautionary principle, used by the Rio Declaration on Environment and
Development, is as follows: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full
scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent
environmental degradation [2]. Another recommendation is to also consider the impacts of other
projects and developments in the EIA.
On a European level, the EIA Directive applies. The EU Directive originates from 1985, and has been
amended three times since (d.d. 2011). The Directive was brought in line with the Espoo Convention,
Aarhus Convention and to include projects including CO2 handling [23]; The EU EIA procedure can be
summarized as follows: the developer may request the competent authority to say what should be
covered by the EIA information to be provided by the developer (scoping stage); the developer must
provide information on the environmental impact (EIA report Annex IV); the environmental authorities
and the public (and affected Member States) must be informed and consulted; the competent authority
The strength of regulation of activities in the marine environment is dependent on the enforcing power of
those regulations dealing with the activity. An overview of the strength of regulation is presented in
Appendix B. The majority of the relevant activities that may take place in the maritime area are covered
by international regulation (Karman & Jongbloed, 2008 [11]). Only 4 of 30 activities are not covered by
any of these international regulations (desalination plants, extensive mariculture, atmospheric deposition
and land based inputs). Although it is difficult to identify measures to reduce diffuse inputs (i.e.
atmospheric deposition and land based inputs) from the perspective of the management of the sea; the
presence of these inputs might affect the capability of the ecosystem to deal with additional inputs from
activities in the maritime area (i.e., reducing the carrying capacity).
It must be noted that for regulation under some of the mentioned international regulatory instruments,
screening mechanisms may apply so that in practice plans, programmes and projects can be authorised
without undergoing an SEA/EIA. For CEA the inclusion of many smaller activities might be as relevant as
the inclusion of one larger activity and thus these size limits should not be used to exclude activities from
the assessment.
Arctic Council
SEA Protocol
UNCLOS
OSPAR
Arctic States
Iceland + + - + +
Russian Federation + - +
Unites States of America - +
Canada + + +
Norway + + + + +
Finland + + + + + +
Denmark (Greenland) + + + - + +
Sweden + + + + + +
- signed
+ participant
The way in which an EIA should be performed is thus the responsibility of national states. Therefore, the
existing national requirements based on national legislation is described in the next section.
Norway
In Norway four regimes are relevant for environmental assessments. One of them is international, three
of them are national regimes. The Bern Convention (Convention on the conservation of European wildlife
and natural habitats), signed by Norway, aims to protect wild flora and fauna species, including their
habitats. Endangered species are given extra attention. The Convention includes appendices in which
species are specified [25]. The Nature Diversity Act of Norway protects biological, geological and
landscape diversity and ecological processes through conservation and sustainable use [26]. The
Norwegian Wildlife Act of 1981 protects all mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians and their eggs,
nests and lairs, unless otherwise specified [27]. The last act concerns the prevention of pollution. Act no.
6 of 1981 aims to protect the outdoor environment against pollution and to reduce existing pollution. In
addition, the quantity of waste should be reduced including a better waste management. The scope of
this act is rather broad; pollution is regarded as the introduction of solids, liquids or gases to air, water
or ground. It also includes noise and vibrations, light, other radiations and temperature [28].
Considering environmental assessment the Canadian government has put the Canadian Environmental
Assessment Act, 2012 [78]. The CEAA and its regulations establish the legislative basis for the federal
environmental assessment process. Regulations define a.o. the types of projects automatically subject to
CEAA 2012 and the information to be provided in project descriptions.
Greenland (Denmark)
Since 2009 Greenland has self-government. This implies that Greenland has authority over resources in
its subsoil. However, legislation on species, habitats and pollution are in fact a hybrid of Greenlandic and
Danish acts. The Greenland Parliament Act on Mineral Resources aims to ensure appropriate exploitation
and activities related to mineral resources and the use of subsoil. The act provides the rules for
exploration and exploitation of mineral and hydrocarbon resources, including licensing procedures. It also
contains rules for environmental protection, pollution and EIAs [36]. The Marine Environment Act from
Denmark applies to Greenland since 2004. The act contributes to the safeguarding of nature and
environment and the protection of flora and fauna. It also aims at preventing and reducing solid, liquid,
gaseous or other pollution from ships, aircrafts, floating and fixed platforms, ports and harbours [37].
The Executive Order on Conservation of Birds deals primarily with hunting licenses. However, it also
introduces Bird Protection Areas, specifying a period in the year in which certain areas may not be
approached within a certain distance [38]. Greenland also has a nature preservation act. It aims to
protect biodiversity, including species, habitats and ecosystems. The act does not mention specific rules
for specific flora and fauna; it only provides the authority to certain departments of the government of
Greenland [39].
Russian Federation
The Federal Law on Environmental Protection was approved in 2001. It defines the legal framework for
environmental protection, biological biodiversity and natural resources in balance with socio-economic
developments. It applies to the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone of the Russian
Federation. Article 34 mentions that construction, commissioning, operation of installations and facilities
that directly or indirectly negatively impact the surrounding environment shall be performed within the
environmental protection requirements. In addition, measures should be taken to protect and restore the
environment, natural resources shall be used and recovered in a sound and consistent way in order to
ensure environmental safety [51]. The Federal Law on Atmospheric Air Protection specifies the legal
framework for atmospheric air protection, the application of the constitutional rights of citizens for a
favourable environment and the provision of reliable information about its condition [52]. The Water
Code of the Russian Federation includes the provisions for the use and protection of water bodies. It
permits, among others, construction and operation of industrial facilities in water protection zones, on
the condition that any negative impacts on the respective water bodies is ruled out [53]. The Federal Law
on Industrial and Domestic Waste provides the legal basis for waste management to prevent adverse
impacts on human health and the natural environment [54].
A next step in the process is to determine the objective of the environmental assessment. In general
three types of objectives can be distinguished:
1. Determine the environmental impact of an activity/development.
2. Compare the relative environmental impacts of the different activities.
3. Determine the effect of mitigation/compensation measures.
The objective of the assessment is not only determined by the business need. It is usually also influenced
by the availability of data, legislation & policy and requirements of stakeholders. An overview of relevant
legislation is provided in 2.1.4. Note that this overview is not intended to provide a complete legal
framework. Legal requirements applicable to the development should always be checked and be included
in the objectives of the environmental assessment.
In our framework we define activities as: any action that is not a physical work, including the
construction of an object/physical work, that may lead to an environmental effect (adapted from
Hegmann et al, 1999 [75]).
Some activities cause only one or few pressures (e.g., fisheries), while other activities cause multiple
pressures (e.g., offshore oil and gas). It should be noted that the number of pressures caused by an
activity is not an indication of the severity nor of the extent of the overall impact caused by the activity.
Description of an activity
Information required for each activity is:
Operational description; which activity is carried out (drilling, pipe lay, trenching) and in which
order in relation to the other activities.
Technical description; which materials and equipment are used during each activity.
Spatial boundaries; the physical area in which the activity is carried out, see section 2.3.
Temporal boundaries; which time of the year will the activity be carried out and for how long?
Ecosystem components often show seasonal patterns. An area may have different functions
during the year. It can for example be a breeding ground for birds in June and July, a stopover
site for juvenile birds in August, whereas no birds are present in other months. It is therefore
important to know the date limits of each activity, see also section 2.2.
Pressures can be defined as the mechanism through which an activity has an effect on any part of
the ecosystem (Koss et al, 2011 [7]). Pressures can be physical (e.g. abrasion), chemical (e.g.
introduction of synthetic components) or biological (e.g. introduction of microbial pathogens) and the
same pressure can be caused by a number of different activities. For example, both aggregate extraction
and navigational dredging cause abrasion, a physical damage pressure that can affect a number of
different ecosystem components (Koss et al, 2011 [7]).
Note that effects and impacts are generally considered interchangeable terms (Spaling, 1994 [56]) and
among various documents, sometimes even within, the terms are used alternately (Karman & Jongbloed,
2008 [11]). Here, impact is used to represent the exposure of the ecosystem to certain pressures.
Effect is used to refer to specific changes in the ecosystem as a result of the impact. For example, fish
For pressures official lists are available, such as Annex II from the European Marine Strategy Framework
Directive (MSFD) [58]. The 18 pressures listed in the MSFD (Directive 2008/56/EC) has been expanded
to 25 pressures in the guidance of Koss et al. (2011) [7, 55]. The additional seven pressures (numbers
19 to 25) were considered as current or emergent threats to ecosystem components. A pressure list is
included in Appendix C.
The pressures can be selected from the existing lists (see Appendix C) as mentioned above and adapted
to regional specifications. All pressures that are considered relevant for the assessment, i.e. can be
related to the identified sector/activities (see 3.1.6), should be identified as pressure and included in the
assessment.
The result of this step is an exposure Matrix in which the pressures are mapped against the activities
(Table 6).
Table 6: Exposure matrix; a pressure increase is indicated in red, a pressure decrease is indicated in
green. Note that these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Pressures
Activities 1 2 3 4
Ecosystem Components are defined as habitats, species or species groups that are part of the
ecosystem, and have a role as indicators in monitoring, assessing, and understanding ecosystem status,
impacts of human activities and effectiveness of management measures in achieving objectives. Given
these roles, the suites of indicators intended to fulfil them must be chosen with care. In both Canada and
the European Union the approach of Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) is used in environmental
assessments. A VEC can be defined as any part of the environment that is considered important by the
stakeholders involved in the assessment. Hence, a designated set of VECs will partly reflect the
perspective of the various stakeholders involved in the selection process, and does not necessarily reflect
the best ecological set of indicators.
A. Anthropogenic considerations
Nature Legislation
Stakeholders
B. Ecological considerations
Role in the ecosystem
Sensitivity to pressures
Ad A) Anthropogenic considerations focus on the legally protected species and on species considered
relevant by stakeholders (see 3.1.3), for instance representing an economic value. All ecosystem
components with a protected status and all ecosystem components which are of importance (for
whatever reason) for the relevant stakeholders should be included in the assessment.
Ad B) In general, the ecological status of species is ample known, but ideally the selection of
ecosystem components should be based on the following ecological criteria:
Abundance
Abundance consists of numbers and distribution of species. For some species this basic
information is not readily available, but recent developments made it feasible to predict species
distribution. For example, Huetmann et al. (2011) [59] predicted the distribution of 27 seabird
species north of the Arctic Circle during the ice-free summer period.
Seasonality in occurrence
In the Arctic many species show a strong seasonal pattern in occurrence; often related to food
availability depending on for instance snow or ice cover. Only species that use the area in the
same period as the assessed activities will take place are selected.
Function of an area for the ecosystem component
For example for seabirds an area can function as a feeding area in the breeding season and as a
moulting area after the breeding season. Both the sensitivity and the vulnerability of an
ecosystem component can vary according to the different functions:
food species
predators
stock structure
Key species are of particular importance in the ecosystem, for instance the fish species Capelin
Mallotus villosus as major prey of several marine species of higher trophic levels (Hjermann, 2010
[60]). In tundra ecosystems lemmings and voles are key components as major prey species for
different predators, that in turn shape the numbers of other prey species. Apart from prey species
apex predators can be a key species, e.g. polar bear Ursus maritimus as predator of seals, shaping
the numbers of their prey species. These examples highlight the existence of interactions and
relationships between ecosystem components; this topic will be discussed in more detail in the next
section (3.1.9).
Furthermore, the selection of the Ecosystem Components should be based on expected pressures,
and thus select components that are potentially sensitive to these pressures. For instance fish larvae
or marine mammals that are sensitive to underwater sound of certain frequencies. Application of this
3. Identifying suitable indicators that describe the objectives (see section 3.1.5).
Apart from their role in the ecosystem the selection of components needs to be re-iterative with
regard to the defined objectives. There are no general guidelines for selection of a minimum number
of essential indicators. On a population level these objectives relate to population condition,
population size and species distribution. For population condition a suitable indicator consists of
demographic characteristics like reproduction and mortality rate. For population size a suitable
indicator is population abundance and/or biomass. On the larger scale of species distribution,
distributional range and distributional pattern are suitable indicators.
Table 7: Selection criteria for ecosystem components. An ecosystem component is included in the
assessment if one or more selection criteria are relevant. Note that these are not actual data and only
serve as an example.
Selection criterion
Ecosystem
Legislation Stakeholders Ecology Pressure Overall
component
a Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
b Yes No Yes No Yes
c Yes No No No Yes
d Yes No Yes Yes Yes
e No Yes Yes Yes Yes
f No No Yes Yes Yes
g No No Yes No Yes
h No No Yes Yes Yes
i No No Yes Yes Yes
j No No No Yes Yes
k No Yes No No Yes
l No No No No No
To select and use ecosystem components as indicator for assessment of the impact of anthropogenic
activities on ecosystem components and ultimately on an ecosystem, knowledge on interactions between
ecosystem components is necessary. Ecosystem components are not isolated entities that coincidentally
share an area, but they constitute an ecosystem by their role and place in a variety of interlinked food-
chains forming a food-web (Figure 9). A food-chain starts with primary producers (e.g. algae and plants)
that produce their own biomass by photosynthesis using solar energy and nutrients. Consumers are
organisms that cannot synthesise their own food, and have to feed on other organisms. Apart from the
Interactions are the effects organisms have on each other. Interactions can be interspecific or
intraspecific. The effects of the interactions can be direct or indirect (e.g. cyclic abundance of prey
species like lemmings that affect the number of predators who switch to alternative prey after lemming
peak years). Effects can occur immediately or with a time lag. Theoretically, the variety of interactions
can be categorised in a few main categories (Begon, 1996 [62]) summarized in Table 8.
The whole suite of interactions shape the structure and dynamics of ecosystems. An understanding of
these relationships is essential to get a grip on the functioning of a species, and therefore on its
suitability as an indicator for pressures. Of these interactions predation and competition are the most
tangible and therefore the best studied. In comparison to ecosystems in lower latitudes in general Arctic
food-chains are relatively simple with only a few components. It does not mean, however, that the
ecosystems are simple.
Because ecosystem components may have a profound effect on other ecosystem components, these
interactions cannot be ignored in an environmental assessment. Due to the scale and complexity of
ecosystems, and the difficulties in studying these relationships, the definition of interactions usually rely
heavily on expert judgment.
In the qualitative assessment interactions between ecosystem components are identified (Table 9).
Interactions may result in a decrease of an ecosystem component (e.g. predation, parasitism,
competition etc.), but may also lead to an increase (e.g. a species who creates habitat for other species
etc.).
components A B C D
A No No No No
B No No No Yes
C No Yes No No
D No Yes No No
For a qualitative assessment of the linkage between activities-pressures and the linkage between
pressures-ecosystem components, relevant combinations are identified; which ecosystems are
potentially affected by the identified pressures? The linkage between pressures and ecosystem
components results in a matrix as presented in the table below. The matrix is usually based on expert
judgement in which characteristics of the ecosystem components are taken into account in assessing
their vulnerability . For example, a reduction in turbidity may impact species that depend on the visibility
to detect their prey, or reduce the availability of light for alga growth. In this type of assessment, the
possible seriousness of the effect is not evaluated.
The likelihood of exposure to the pressures could be taken into account in case the spatial and temporal
distribution of both the pressure and the ecosystem component is known. It should be clearly
documented whether the matrix is based on a potential interaction, or is based on actual information of
the spatial and temporal distribution of both pressures and ecosystem components.
Table 10: Vulnerability matrix; a decrease of an ecosystem component due to the exposure of a
pressure is indicated in red, an increase is indicated in green.? indicates a possible effect. Note that these
are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem components
A B C D
Pressures
1 Yes No Yes ?
2 No No No Yes
3 Yes No No No
4 No No No Yes
When the results of the exposure matrix (Table 6) are combined with the vulnerability matrix (Table 10)
the initial impact matrix can be derived (Table 11).
Table 11: Initial impact matrix; an increase of a pressure is indicated in red, a decrease in green. A
decrease of an ecosystem component is indicated in red, an increase in green.? indicates a possible
effect. Note that these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem components
Activities Pressure Exposure A B C D
1 Yes No No No No
2 Yes No No No Yes
a
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 No No No No No
1 Yes Yes No Yes ?
2 Yes No No No Yes
b
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 No No No No No
1 No No No No No
2 Yes No No No Yes
c
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 Yes No No No Yes
1 No No No No No
2 Yes No No No Yes
d
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 Yes No No No Yes
Cumulated effect induced by pressures Yes No Yes ?
Then, the results of the initial impact matrix (Table 11) are combined with the interaction matrix (Table
9) and summarized in the final impact matrix (Table 12). This is an iterative process and can be a
complicated step. In this case the cumulated effect induced by pressures is negative on ecosystem
component A (Table 11). Ecosystem component A does not affect other ecosystem components and vice
versa (Table 9). The overall effect on ecosystem component A therefore doesnt change. The cumulated
effect induced by pressures increases ecosystem component C which causes a decrease in ecosystem
Component B. The decrease of ecosystem component B doesnt have any effect of ecosystem component
D (an increase would have had an effect; Table 9). The effect on ecosystem component D by the
cumulated effect induced by pressures is not clear. If ecosystem component D would increase, an
additional decrease of ecosystem component B is possible.
Ecosystem components
Activities Pressure Exposure A B C D
1 Yes No No No No
2 Yes No No No Yes
a
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 No No No No No
1 Yes Yes Yes Yes ?
2 Yes No No No Yes
b
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 No No No No No
1 No No No No No
2 Yes No No No Yes
c
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 Yes No ? No Yes
1 No No No No No
2 Yes No No No Yes
d
3 Yes Yes No No No
4 Yes No ? No Yes
Cumulated effect induced by pressures
Yes Yes Yes ?
& ecosystem interactions
The final impact matrix can be simplified to a qualitative effect matrix (Table 13). In this case all
activities have a negative effect on Ecosystem Component A. Ecosystem Component B is not affected by
activity a, is negatively affected by activity b and possibly negatively affected by activity c & d.
Ecosystem Component C is (eventually) not negatively affected by any activity. Ecosystem Component D
is negatively affected by activity a, the cumulative effect of the other activities is not known.
Table 13: Qualitative Effect Matrix; a decrease of an ecosystem component is indicated in red, an
increase in green. ? indicates a possible effect. Note that these are not actual data and only serve as an
example.
Ecosystem Component
Activities A B C D
a Yes No No Yes
b Yes Yes Yes ?
c Yes ? No ?
d Yes ? No ?
The scope definition for further research is based on the matrices achieved during the previous steps. In
principle, all ecosystem components that are in no way affected by pressures or the other ecosystem
components are not included in the scope. This also applies to activities and pressures that have no
impact on ecosystem components.
After defining the elements included in the assessment, the desired level of detail of the assessment
needs to be established for the prioritization phase. If the objective of the assessment is to compare the
(relative) environmental impacts of various activities, a semi quantitative assessment is probably the
most efficient approach. A quantitative approach can also be used for the prioritization phase. Hereby,
The result of the semi quantitative assessment is also an effect matrix (cf Table 13). However, it differs
from the qualitative assessment by the categorical effect scores, indicating the magnitude of the impact.
The semi quantitative assessment is used to compare the relative impact of the various (sub) activities.
It is often used to identify and prioritize potential areas for mitigation.
So far, it has not been elaborated how species interactions can be incorporated in a semi quantitative
assessment. Therefore, species interactions will be left out of this analysis and will not be included in the
categorical effect scores of the semi quantitative assessment.
Semi Quantitative Assessment
Semi quantification
intensity pressures
(section 3.2.1)
Prioritization phase
Semi quantification
sensitivity ecosystem
components
(section 3.2.2)
)
Semi quantification
environmental impact
(section 3.2.3)
Figure 10: Prioritization phase using a semi quantitative assessment. Note that the environmental impact
is determined by the intensity of the pressures in combination with the vulnerability of the ecosystem
components. Species interactions are (yet) not included.
The intensity of pressures is based on the relation between activity and pressure. For example, the
activity benthic trawling, expressed in presence of vessels (hours actively fishing) results in the
pressure abrasion, expressed as the frequency in which a predefined area is abraded in a predefined
period.
Eventually the collected information of the activities is used to categorize the intensity of the pressures.
Usually, this is done by expert judgement according to a classification scheme. An example of such a
classification scheme, including criteria, is presented in Table 14.
A different classification scheme has been developed by Robinson et al. 2011 [57] for weighting linkages
and assessing high threat combinations between sector/pressures and ecosystem components. The
guidance document for this approach is available at www.liv.ac/odemm/outputs/guidancedocuments. A
similar approach is used for the development of a Vulnerability Matrix (Tillin, 2010 [63]), available at
http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=MB0102_9721_TRP.pdf
In the semi quantitative exposure matrix (Table 15) the intensity of each pressure per activity is
categorized by a classification scheme.
Table 15: Semi quantitative exposure matrix with categorical effect scores based on the classification
scheme in table 14. A pressure increase is indicated in red, a decrease is indicated in green. Note that
these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Pressures
Activities 1 2 3 4
a 4 1 4
b 2 2 2
c 1 8 2
d 2 1 1
This vulnerability should be specific for the type and level of effect that is considered of interest for the
assessment (e.g. mortality, reduced reproduction or feeding efficiency). Sparse data sets and system
complexity have compelled conservation scientists to estimate data through expert judgment and other
scoring procedures (Wolman, 2006 [65]). Semi quantitative methods thus mostly rely on expert
judgement to classify the vulnerability of ecosystem components to specific pressures.
To combine the effects on individual species, similar endpoints should be used. In case the assessment is
not based on one uniform endpoint, e.g. mortality, an additional step should be included in the
assessment to derive one single endpoint. Jak et al. (2000) and Karman et al. (2009) [66, 67] describe a
method to integrate the effects of potential exposures. They combined mortality with reproduction to
derive a single population measure.
In a semi quantitative assessment the linkage between pressure and ecosystem components is weighted
by expert judgement according to a classification scheme. An example of such a classification scheme,
including criteria, is presented in Table 16. It should be noted that this classification scheme was
developed for assessment of potential impact on Natura 2000 targets. The criteria effect indication and
ecological conditions were included because they were relevant for this purpose. The classification
scheme (i.e. criteria) used for a semi quantitative assessment should be appropriate for the aim and
scope of the study. As already mentioned in the semi quantitative assessment of the intensity of
pressures (section 3.2.1), different classification schemes have been developed (Robinson & Knights,
2011 [57]), which could be used as guidance for a semi quantitative assessment. Also Arctic specific
Table 16: Classification for the assessment of vulnerability based on three criteria: effect indication,
recovery and ecological conditions (Tamis et al 2011 [64]).
In the semi quantitative vulnerability matrix (Table 17) the vulnerability of each ecosystem component
per pressure is categorized by a classification scheme.
Table 17: Semi quantitative vulnerability matrix based on the classification scheme in table 16. A
decrease of an ecosystem component as a result of an increase in pressure is indicated in red, an
increase of an ecosystem component as a result of an increase in pressure is indicated in green. Note
that these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem components
Pressures
A B C D
1 4 0 1 2
2 0 0 0 2
3 8 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 4
The ecological impact can be assessed on a semi quantitative level by multiplying the intensity score
(Table 16) with the vulnerability score (Table 17). By adding up all pressure scores per activity this
results in a cumulative impact score per activity. By adding up all pressure scores per ecosystem
component this results in a cumulative impact score per ecosystem component. This approach is
demonstrated for offshore oil and gas activities in Natura 2000 areas (Tamis et all [64]).
Ecosystem components
Activities Pressure Exposure A B C D
1 4 0 0 0
2 1 2
a
3 4 32
4
1 2 8 2 4
2 2 4
b
3 2 16
4
1
2 1 2
c
3 8 64
4 2 8
1
2 2 4
d
3 1 8
4 1 4
Cumulated effect induced by pressures 128 2 4
The semi quantitative impact matrix can be simplified to a semi quantitative effect matrix (Table 19). In
this example all activities have a negative effect on ecosystem component A. Ecosystem component B is
not affected by any activity. Ecosystem component C increases due to activity b. Ecosystem component
D is negative affected by activity a, but is increased by activity c, resulting in an overall increase.
Table 19: Semi quantitative effect matrix. This table summarizes the semi quantitative impact matrix
(Table 18). A decrease of an ecosystem component is indicated in red, an increase in green. Note that
these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem component
Activities A B C D
a 32 2
b 24 2 0
c 64 6
d 8 0
total 128 2 4
The result of the quantitative assessment is also an effect matrix (cf Table 13 and Table 19). It differs
from the qualitative and the semi quantitative assessment by the numerical quantified effect scores,
indicating the expected decrease/increase of the population size/density of the ecosystem components.
The quantitative assessment is used when the actual effect on the ecosystem components needs to be
established.
As a first step, the preliminary impact is determined by the intensity of the pressures in combination with
the vulnerability of the ecosystem components. The expected fluctuations in the population size/density
of the ecosystem components induced by the pressures is then used to assess additional changes
through interactions with other ecosystem components. Finally, the recovery potential is assessed to
quantify the final environmental impact.
Specify intensity
Prioritization phase :Quantitative Assessment
pressures
(section 3.3.1)
Specify vulnerability
ecosystem components
(section 3.3.2)
Specify ecosystem
components
interactions
(section 3.3.3)
Specify recovery
ecosystem components
(section 3.3.4)
Quantify environmental
impact
(section 3.3.5)
Figure 11: Prioritisation phase, using a the quantitative assessment. Note that the environmental impact
is preliminary assessed by the intensity of the pressures in combination with the sensitivity of the
ecosystem components. The expected decrease/increase of the ecosystem components induced by the
pressures is then used to determine additional changes by interactions of the ecosystem components.
Finally, the recovery potential is assessed to quantify the final environmental impact.
The collected information of the activities is used to quantify the (cumulated) intensity of the pressures.
For a quantitative assessment the intensity of pressures to which an ecosystem component is exposed
The intensity of pressures is often high near the actual activity and decreases with the distance. When
pressures show significant spatial variation it might be necessary to use a grid in which the intensity of
the pressures is mapped per geographic cell. In addition to spatial patterns, the intensity of pressures
may also have temporal properties. This may require the recognition of time steps in the assessment.
In the quantitative exposure matrix (Table 20) the intensity of each pressure per activity is quantified.
Table 20: Quantitative exposure matrix; a pressure increase is indicated in red, a decrease is indicated in
green. In this example we assume that the pressures do not have spatial and temporal properties. Note
that these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Pressures
Activities 1 2 3 4
a 1 ml/s 50 db 2 kW 0
b 5 ml/s 120 dB 5 kW 0
c 0 100 dB 1 kW 1%
d 0 80 dB 4 kW 5%
In the quantitative assessment, the vulnerability of the ecosystem components is directly linked to the
intensity of each relevant pressure by the use of exposure-response relationships (Jak et al 2000 [66],
Karman et al 2009 [67]). The exposure-effect relationships describe the relation between the intensity of
a potential exposure (e.g. the cadmium concentration in water) and the effect on the population (in case
the ecosystem component concerns a species).
Several end-points are to be assessed in order to describe the effect at population level, such as age at
first reproduction, reproduction rate and mortality.
As an example, in the CUMULEO-RAM model (de Vries et al, 2010 [68]) the effect on a population is
expressed as a fraction between 0 and 1:
Fraction Effect = f (Exposure intensity)
Many types of functions can describe the above relationships, i.e. logistic curve, linear relation, etc. An
appropriate function type per pressure has to be selected (de Vries et al, 2010 [68]) which is applicable
for all relevant ecosystem components. Therefore, for each pressure, only the values of the parameters
differ per ecosystem component. The function has been quantified based on several calibration points,
which have been derived from literature information on the sensitivity of the species for that pressure.
A few general parameters have been used as much as possible in the different functions:
m = median effect intensity, intensity of disturbance at which effect = 50%
d = threshold value, disturbance intensity at which effect will occur
c = intensity-effect coefficient, indicating the slope of the function
In the quantitative sensitivity matrix (Table 21) the sensitivity of each ecosystem component is
quantified per pressure.
Ecosystem components
Pressures
A B C D
1 2% 0 1% 0.50%
2 0 0 0 0,01%/dB
3 1%/kW 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 1%/%
Interactions between ecosystem components (Table 8) can be quantified by deterministic and stochastic
models. Deterministic models are used when population sizes are large, rendering it possible to ignore
fluctuations due to chance. When population sizes are small stochastic models are used. These models
take demographic and environmental stochasticity, and the occurrence of (natural) catastrophes into
account. Stochastic models in ecology are among the most mathematically complex models in science.
The classic deterministic model by Lotka-Volterra (1925 [69] & 1920 [70]) describes competition without
specifying what species compete for. Therefore this model allows for a description of competition for
resources or predator-prey relationships. This model led to a cascade of new models based on several
assumptions, restrictions and mutual reactions. The performance of both deterministic and stochastic
models depends heavily on the availability of quantitative information on the species interactions. This
information, however, is scarce.
In the quantitative interaction matrix (Table 22) the effect of each ecosystem component on each other
ecosystem component is quantified.
The recovery can be predicted from the population dynamic characteristics of species, and the
interactions with the (changed) environment and with other species. Populations may recover as a result
of reproduction and/or recolonisation (migration). Depending on the species, it may take weeks or years
until a population has returned to a normal age distribution. Migration may be much faster, but depends
also on the presence of the species in the surrounding area and their motile abilities.
The recovery rate is not only dependent on the characteristics of the species, but also on their
environment. In case the substrate has changed, recovery may only be possible after the substrate has
recovered as well. In some cases, the substrate will never recover and the habitat of a species partly be
lost for ever. Also species interactions are very important in estimating recovery rates. Shifts in the
community structure, induced by pressures from activities, may increase or decrease the rate of
recovery. For example, in case a predator is more severely affected by an activity than its prey, prey
species may recover more quickly. Another example is the dependence on so-called biobuilders, like
mussels forming beds. Some species are strongly associated to these biological structures, and in case
these are affected, the recovery of associated species will take longer than predicted from their intrinsic
recovery potential. At first, the biological structure needs to recover, before its associated fauna will
recover.
The assessment of the recovery rate often involves many uncertainties, and therefore the recovery is
often empirically assessed after the activity has taken place. This thus requires a monitoring and
evaluation process, including field studies that may take several years after the activity has stopped. For
some specific cases, results from these kind of studies can be used to predict the recovery of similar type
of activities and/or environments.
In the recovery matrix (Table 23) the recovery rate of each ecosystem component is specified after a
certain time span. Note that the recovery rate after an initial decrease may differ from the recovery rate
after an initial increase.
When the results of the quantitative exposure matrix (Table 20) are combined with the quantitative
vulnerability matrix (Table 21) the initial impact matrix can be derived (Table 24).
Table 24: Initial quantitative impact matrix based on the quantitative exposure matrix (Table 20) and the
quantitative sensitivity matrix (Table 21). An increase of a pressure is indicated in red, a decrease in
green. A decrease of an ecosystem component is indicated in red, an increase in green. Note that these
are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem components
Activities Pressure Exposure A B C D
1 1% 0 0 0 0
2 50dB 0 0 0 0.50%
a
3 2kW 2% 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
1 5% 10% 0 5% 2.50%
2 120 dB 0 0 0 1.20%
b
3 5 kW 5% 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 100 dB 0 0 0 1%
c
3 1 kW 1% 0 0 0
4 1% 0 0 0 1%
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 80 dB 0 0 0 0.80%
d
3 4 kW 4% 0 0 0
4 5% 0 0 0 5%
Cumulated effect induced by pressures 22.0% 0.0% 5.0% 12.0%
The secondary quantitative impact matrix (Table 25) can be established with the initial impact scores
(Table 24) and the ecosystem interaction matrix (Table 22). This can be an iterative process and can be
a complicated step.
Ecosystem components
Activities Pressure Exposure A B C D
1 1% 0 0 0 0
2 50dB 0 0 0 0.50%
a
3 2kW 2% 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
1 5% 10% 15% 5% 2.50%
2 120 dB 0 0 0 1.20%
b
3 5 kW 5% 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 100 dB 0 0 0 1%
c
3 1 kW 1% 0 0 0
4 1% 0 1% 0 1%
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 80 dB 0 0 0 0.80%
d
3 4 kW 4% 0 0 0
4 5% 0 5% 0 5%
Cumulated effect induced by pressures
22.0% 21.0% 5.0% 5%
& ecosystem interactions
Eventually, the final impact matrix (Table 26) is derived by combining the secondary impact matrix
(Table 25) with the recovery matrix (Table 23).
Table 26: Final quantitative impact matrix based on the quantitative secondary impact matrix (Table 25)
and the recovery matrix (Table 23). An increase of a pressure is indicated in red, a decrease in green. A
decrease of an ecosystem component is indicated in red, an increase in green. Note that these are not
actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem components
Activities Pressure Exposure A B C D
1 1% 0 0 0 0
2 50dB 0 0 0 0.50%
a
3 2kW 2% 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
1 5% 10% 0 0 2.50%
2 120 dB 0 0 0 1.20%
b
3 5 kW 5% 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 100 dB 0 0 0 1%
c
3 1 kW 1% 0 0 0
4 1% 0 1% 0 1%
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 80 dB 0 0 0 0.80%
d
3 4 kW 4% 0 0 0
4 5% 0 5% 0 5%
Cumulated effect induced by pressures,
22.0% 6% 0 5%
ecosystem interactions & recovery
The final quantitative impact matrix (Table 26) can be simplified to a quantitative effect matrix (Table
27). In this case all activities have a negative effect on ecosystem component A, resulting in an overall
decrease of approximately 22%. Ecosystem component B is not affected by activity a & b, and negatively
Table 27: secondary quantitative impact matrix. A decrease of an ecosystem component is indicated in
red, an increase in green. Note that these are not actual data and only serve as an example.
Ecosystem component
Activities A B C D
a 2% 0 0 0.5%
b 15% 0 0 1.3%
c 1% 1% 0 0
d 4% 5% 0 4.2%
total 22.0% 6% 0 5%
This chapter gives a brief overview of the proposed generic framework to perform an environmental
assessment in Arctic ecosystems. Furthermore, areas in the proposed approach are identified which
havent been elaborated extensively and may be improved in the future (GAP analysis).
The actual model we propose is a combination of a CEA (cumulative effect assessment) and an EEC
(ecosystem effect chain). The basic approach of the CEA is the assumption that effects are a function of
the intensity of pressures caused by activities and of the sensitivity of ecosystem components to those
pressures. The EEC approach includes interactions between populations and ecosystem components, and
may therefore also reveal indirect impacts. Examples of those ecosystem interrelationships are predator-
prey interactions, cannibalism, competition, mutualism etc.
Furthermore, most environmental assessments only include pressures in the analysis which have a
negative effect on the ecosystem components, e.g. mortality or a lower reproduction rate. However,
some pressures may also have a stimulative effect. In this study we have considered negative as well
as stimulative effects of pressures.
We propose a stepwise application of the model during the project development of a marine operation,
each of them requiring a specific environmental assessment. The first phase is a qualitative assessment
which is used to determine which ecosystem components are (potentially) affected by the activity
induced pressures and/or by interactions with other ecosystem components. The qualitative assessment
results in a scope definition for the next phases. The 12 steps which are required for the qualitative
assessment are described in section 3.1. External influences as the requirements of stakeholders,
legislation and the availability of data are important factors to take into account during this phase.
The next step is the prioritization phase in which the ecological impact of the various scenarios is
compared to select the best option. This phase can be elaborated using a semi quantitative approach or
a quantitative approach. For the semi quantitative assessment we defined three steps, described in
section 3.2. A quantitative assessment is elaborated in 5 steps, described in section 3.3.
During the development of the generic framework we identified areas which have not been elaborated
extensively and may be improved in the future. An overview of the identified gaps is given below.
IMARES utilises an ISO 9001:2008 certified quality management system (certificate number: 57846-
2009-AQ-NLD-RvA). This certificate is valid until 15 December 2015. The organisation has been certified
since 27 February 2001. The certification was issued by DNV Certification B.V. Furthermore, the
chemical laboratory of the Fish Division has NEN-EN-ISO/IEC 17025:2005 accreditation for test
laboratories with number L097. This accreditation is valid until 1th of April 2017 and was first issued on
27 March 1997. Accreditation was granted by the Council for Accreditation.
1. Arctic Council, PAME - Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines -, 2009.
2. Arctic Environment Protection Strategy, Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the
Arctic. Sustainable Development and Utilization., 1997, Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Finland. p.
50.
3. BS/ISO, Requirements and Guidelines for Emergency Response (BS ISO 15544-2000) 2000.
4. Canadian Minister of Justice, Species at Risk Act, 2012: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
5. ISO, Petroleum and natural gas industries Offshore production installations Guidelines on tools and
techniques for hazard identification and risk assessment (ISO 17776:2002), 2002.
6. BS/ISO, BS ISO 31000:2009. Risk management Principles and guidelines, 2009.
7. Koss, R.S., et al., ODEMM Linkage Framework Userguide. ODEMM Guidance Document Series No.1. EC
FP7 project (244273) Options for Delivering Ecosystem-based Marine Management. University of
Liverpool, ISBN: 978-0-906370-66-7. Available at:
http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/~tknights/ODEMM_Linkage_Framework.pdf, 2011.
8. Lotze, H.K., et al., Recovery of marine animal populations and ecosystems. . Trends in Ecology and
Evolution, 26 (11), pp. 595-605. , 2011.
9. ISO, Standards for Petroleum and natural gas industries Arctic offshore Structures. ISO/FDIS
19906:2010(E), 2010.
10. ISO, Petroleum and natural gas industries Control and mitigation of fires and explosions on offshore
production installations Requirements and guidelines (ISO 13702-1999) 1999.
11. Karman, C.C. and R.H. Jongbloed, Assessment of the Cumulative Effect of Activities in the Maritime
Area. Overview of relevant legislation and proposal for a harmonised approach, 2008, IMARES: Den
Helder. p. 67.
12. MacDonald, L.H., Evaluating and Managing Cumulative Effects: Process and Constraints. Environmental
Management, 2000. 26(3): p. 17.
13. Halpern, B.S., et al., Managing for cumulative impacts in ecosystem-based management through
ocean zoning. Ocean & Coastal Management, 2008. 51(3): p. 203-211.
14. Halpern, B.S., et al., A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems. Science, 2008.
319(5865): p. 948-952.
15. Stelzenmller, V., et al., Quantifying cumulative impacts of human pressures on the marine
environment: a geospatial modelling framework. Marine Ecology-Progress Series, 2010. 398: p. 19-
32.
16. Zacharias, M.A. and E.J. Gregr, Sensitivity and vulnerability in marine environments: An approach to
identifying vulnerable marine areas. Conservation Biology, 2005. 19(1): p. 86-97.
17. Walker, W.E., et al., Defining Uncertainty. A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-
Based Decision Support. Integrated Assessment, 2003. 4: p. 5-17.
18. Therivel, R. and B. Ross, Cumulative effect assessment: Does scale matter? . Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 2007. 27: p. 21.
19. van der Walt, A., The consideration of cumulative effects in environmental assessment: South African
experience in an international context, 2005, University of Manchester.
20. Hasle, J.H., Y. Kjelln, and O. Haugerud, Decision on oil and gas exploration in an Arctic area: Case
study from the Norwegian Barents Sea. Safety Science, 2009. 47: p. 832-842.
21. GUIDEMAPS, Successful transport decision making. A project management and stakeholder
engagement handbook. , 2004, Reino Unido: Guidemaps Consortium 2004. ISBN 3-88354-144-3.
22. Taschner, S. and M. Fiedler, Stakeholder Involvement Handbook. , 2009, AENEAS report D2.1.
http://www.aeneas-project.eu/docs/AENEAS_StakeholderInvolvementHandbook.pdf.
23. European Commission, Environmental Impact Assessment. , 2012,
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/eia-legalcontext.htm Access on 7 September 2012.
24. Molenaar, E.J. and T. Koivurova, International governance and regulation of the marine Arctic. , 2009,
Oslo: WWF. .
25. Council of Europe, Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats. , 2012,
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/104.htm Accessed on 20 August 2012.
26. Government of Norway, Nature Diversity Act., 2012,
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/doc/laws/Acts/nature-diversity-act.html?id=570549 Accessed on 20
August 2012.
27. Government of Norway, Wildlife Act 1981., 2012, http://eelink.net/~asilwildlife/norway.html Accessed
on 20 August 2012.
Anthropogenic
Caused or influenced by humans.
Accident
A sudden, unplanned, unintentional and undesired event or series of events that causes physical harm to
a person or damage to property, or which has negative effects on the environment [1].
Activity
Any action that is not a physical work, including the construction of an object/physical work, that may
lead to an environmental effect (adapted from Hegmann, 1999 [77]).
Ecosystem
A community of organisms who interact with each other, as well as with their environment.
Ecosystem component
A species, species group or habitat that is part of an ecosystem.
Effect
A change within an ecosystem component that is a result of a pressure or an interaction with another .
Emergency
An unplanned event which has caused injury, loss or damage or which is an actual or potential threat to
human life or the environment and has made it necessary to deviate from the planned operation or
suspend the use of standard operating procedures.
Endangered species
Means a wildlife species that is facing imminent extirpation or extinction [4]. Where extinction means
the end of a species, i.e. the death of the last individual of the species and extirpated means locally
extinct.
Environment
Environment encompasses the natural (biological and physical) environment and the human (social,
cultural and economic) environment. The conceptualization of the environment, from the point of view of
each arctic country, can be found at the information site on the WWW or from the national EIA
authorities [2].
Habitat
Means (a) in respect of aquatic species, spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply, migration
and any other areas on which aquatic species depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life
processes, or areas where aquatic species formerly occurred and have the potential to be reintroduced;
and (b) in respect of other wildlife species, the area or type of site where an individual or wildlife species
naturally occurs or depends on directly or indirectly in order to carry out its life processes or formerly
occurred and has the potential to be reintroduced [4].
Interaction
The effect of ecosystem components on each other.
Intensity
The magnitude and/or duration of a pressure.
Likelihood
Chance of the occurrence of an event.
Mitigation
Limitation of the undesirable effects of a particular event [3, 5]
Pollution
The introduction by man, directly or indirectly of substances or energy into the marine environment
which results, or is likely to result in hazards to human health, harm to living resources and marine
ecosystems, damage to amenities or interference with other legitimate uses of the sea [1].
Pressure
The mechanism through which an activity has an effect on any part of the ecosystem. Pressures can be
physical (e.g. abrasion), chemical (e.g. introduction of synthetic components) or biological (e.g.
introduction of microbial pathogens), Koss et al 2011 [7].
Recovery
Recovery is defined as a return to a normal state of health, mind, or strength
(http://oxforddictionaries.com/), but such a normal state is often not known for marine populations and
ecosystems [8]. For the purpose of an EIA, the normal state can be established by baseline monitoring.
Review
Activity undertaken to determine the suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the subject matter to
achieve established objectives [6].
Risk
Combination of the probability of an event (the chance that a specified hazardous event will occur) and
the (severity of the) consequences of the event [3, 5, 10].
Risk assessment
The quantitative evaluation of the likelihood of undesired events and the likelihood of harm or damage
being caused together with the value judgments made concerning the significance of the results (Lloyds
Register Definition).
Seafloor
Interface between the sea and the seabed [9]. NOTE Refers to the upper surface of all unconsolidated
material, also termed mudline.
Sensitivity
The degree of effect on an ecosystem component due to the exposure of a pressure.
Species at risk
Extirpated, endangered or threatened species or a species of special concern [4]. Where extinction
means the end of a species, i.e. the death of the last individual of the species; extirpated means locally
extinct; endangered means facing imminent extirpation or extinction; and threatened means likely to
become endangered if nothing is done to reverse the factors leading to its extirpation or extinction.
Stakeholder
Person or organization that can affect, be affected by, or perceive themselves to be affected by a
decision or activity [6]. NOTE A decision maker can be a stakeholder.
Rapport C192/13
Project Number: 4305 106 906
The scientific quality of this report has been peer reviewed by the a colleague scientist and the head of
the department of IMARES.
Signature:
Signature:
n
io
tra
ct
ex
62 of 67
ra
e
t
iv
g
ex
ct
rin
le
n
on
g
iv
e
he
si
tio
al
in
ct
-s
se
ot
ra
n
i
al
le
lta
su
Sm
Se
Si
Ab
S
No
No
Vi
dredging wind parks dredging shipping dredging pipelines dredging wind parks
offshore oil and gas land reclamation land-based input (rivers, runoff) fisheries surface mining cables offshore oil and gas offshore oil and gas
dumping of sludge offshore oil and gas dumping of sludge dredging bioprospecting surface mining artificial islands
Appendix A
surface mining artificial islands trenching trenching scientific research shipping shipping
trenching coastal reconstruction trenching wind parks tourism
pipelines ports defense activities
fisheries trenching
tourism pipe laying
land reclamation working vessels (e.g. tugs,
coastal reconstruction supply vessels, pipe carriers)
artificial island
trenching
pipe laying
working vessels (e.g. tugs, supply vessels, pipe carriers)
defense activities
ds
Source: Karman & Jongbloed, 2008 [11]
un
ds
po
un
m
co
po
m
es
t ic
id
co
he
cl
ce
es
nt
t ic
y
nu
an
s
he
t
t
di
io
an
n-
nt
ra
en
en
ch
ad
r
s
no
m
ic
ie
fr
w
h
hm
et
of
of
o
rr
ic
n
flo
n
n
n
ric
ba
nr
ag
al
io
io
en
tio
n
te
ct
ct
m
id
c
n
i
uc
tio
r/t
du
d
du
tro
an
ra
rie
te
t
ec
a
tro
tro
tro
ig
rg
M
E
W
In
In
In
Nu
O
wind parks cables land reclamation land-based input (rivers, runoff) land-based input (rivers, runoff) land-based input (rivers, runoff) land-based input (rivers, runoff) intensive mariculture
Matrix of relevant activities per disturbance
land reclamation artificial islands offshore oil and gas offshore oil and gas offshore oil and gas atmospheric deposition extensive mariculture
artificial islands pipelines dumping of sludge dumping of sludge wastewater treatment plant dumping of sludge
pipelines coastal reconstruction shipping shipping
fisheries fisheries
tourism tourism
intensive mariculture atmospheric deposition
atmospheric deposition defense activities
defense activities wastewater treatment plant
wastewater treatment plant
ns
s
ie
ge
s
ec
ho
ie
at
sp
e
p
ec
im
al
sp
tiv
g
f
bi
a
o
re
-n
r
ro
n
ty
al
te
ic
io
di
ity
on
m
lit
m
n
ct
lin
er
rb
of
of
of
pH
tra
th
tu
sa
n
n
x
in
on
e
in
in
in
tio
tio
ti
s
e
s
es
es
iv
uc
uc
uc
ge
ge
d
d
d
ct
ng
ng
an
an
a
a
ro
le
h
tro
tro
C
nt
Ch
Ch
Ch
In
In
I
Se
cooling water dredging land-based input (rivers, runoff) CO2 storage tourism tourism shipping fisheries
offshore oil and gas offshore oil and gas cooling water shipping wastewater treatment plant tourism bioprospecting
wastewater treatment plant dumping of sludge offshore oil and gas intensive mariculture intensive mariculture scientific research
land-based input (rivers, runoff) coastal reconstruction extensive mariculture extensive mariculture
surface mining wastewater treatment plant
wastewater treatment plant
trenching
An overview of the strength of regulation is presented in Table 1. The text below is taken over
from the report of Karman & Jongbloed [11] and describes the different regulations.
Table 1. Analysis of the strength of regulation (enforcing power) of the various maritime activities,
decreasing from 1 to 5. 1: EU EIA/SEA; 2: OSPAR; 3: ESPOO; 4: LC; 5: UNCLOS [11].
Regulated activities For EIA and SEA by Espoo Convention and Kiev Protocol and EU EIA
and SEA directives
The EU EIA and SEA Directives, the Espoo Convention and the Kiev Protocol all refer to
projects, plans or programmes which might be subject to environmental impact assessment.
The basis for these lists if formed by the EU EIA directive, which is referred to directly in the
EU SEA directive. The Espoo Convention list of activities is equal to the KIEV protocol List of
Activities (Annex 1), which are in turn closely related to the EIA Directives list of projects
(Annex 1). Both the EU-EIA Directive and the Espoo convention further provide a (more
detailed) list of other projects (Annex II of both documents). All elements of the list provided
by the Espoo Convention are also included in the list of the EU-EIA Directive. The latter also
includes works for transport of water resources, waste water treatment plants, installations
for intensive rearing of poultry and construction of overhead power lines. No differences exist,
however, in activities related to the maritime area. In general, the list of the EU-EIA Directive
is more detailed and includes size related criteria.
Other projects if EIA required nationally (relevant selection for the marine environment):
intensive fish farming fish-meal and fish-oil factories
Industrial installations for the production of pipelines for transport of gas or oil
electricity, steam, hot water
Industrial installations for carrying electricity, pipelines for transport of chemicals with
steam, hot water diam > 800 mm, length > 40 km
surface storage of fossil fuels and natural gas construction of harbours and port
installations
underground storage of combustible gases trading ports, piers for loading and
unloading
installations for hydroelectric power production canalization of flood-relief works
wind parks construction of airports and airfields
installations related to nuclear fuel or waste sludge deposition sites
underground mining coastal work to combat erosion and
maritime works capable of altering the coast
through construction
extraction of minerals by marine or fluvial marina's
dredging
deep drillings reclamation of land from the sea
Shipyards
Furthermore, when assessing cumulative effects of activities at sea, diffuse inputs might need
to be considered as well.
Atmospheric deposition
Land-based input (rivers, runoff)
Overview of pressures
Source: The ODEMM Linkage Framework Userguide (Koss et al 2011 [7])
Pressure Pressure Name Pressure Definition Listed in the
Code MSFD
1. Smothering By man-made structures or disposal of Yes
materials to the seafloor.
2. Substrate loss Sealing by permanent construction (e.g. Yes
Coastal defences, wind turbines) or change
in substrate type due to loss of key
characteristic features (physical and/ or
biological). Natural substrate is lost and
replaced by a different kind of substrate
3. Changes in siltation Change in the concentration and/or Yes
distribution of suspended sediments in the
water column from runoff, dredging etc.
4. Abrasion Physical interaction of human activities with Yes
the seafloor and with seabed fauna/flora
causing physical damage and/or mortality
(e.g. from trawling or anchoring).
5. Selective extraction of non- Sand & gravel (aggregates) extraction, or Yes
living resources removal of surface substrates for
exploration of subsoil
6. Underwater noise Underwater noise created from shipping Yes
acoustic surveys, etc.
7. Marine litter Marine litter originates from numerous Yes
sources and consists of different materials
including: plastics, metal, glass, rubber,
wood and cloth.
8. Thermal regime change Change in temperature (average, range and Yes
variability) due to climate change, or more
locally due to outfalls/industry.
9. Salinity regime change Change in salinity (average, range and Yes
variability) due to climate change, or locally
due to constructions affecting water flow.
10. Introduction of synthetic Introduction of pesticides, antifoulants, and Yes
compounds pharmaceuticals into marine waters.
11. Introduction of non-synthetic Introduction of heavy metals and Yes
compounds hydrocarbons into marine waters.
12. Introduction of radionuclides Introduction of radionuclides into marine Yes
waters.
13. Introduction of other Introduction of solids, liquids or gases not Yes
substances covered by 10-12 or 14-15
14. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Input of fertilisers, and other Nitrogen & Yes
enrichment Phosphorous rich substances.
15. Input of organic matter Organic enrichment e.g. from industrial and Yes
sewage effluent into rivers and coastal
areas, from aquaculture or from fishing
discards.
16. Introduction of microbial Introduction of microbial pathogens into Yes
pathogens marine waters.
17. Introduction of non- Introduction of non-indigenous species and Yes
indigenous species and translocations by the activities of a
translocations particular sector (e.g. through shipping or
aquaculture).
The Arctic Operations Handbook Joint Industry Project (JIP) was launched in February of
2012 supported by a number of companies and knowledge institutes. The JIP was initiated
by a number of Dutch companies in the framework of the Maritime Innovation Program
(MIP) and was awarded a subsidy from the Dutch Ministry of EL&I (Economic affairs,
Agriculture & Innovation). With it the JIP participants committed to issue an open source
document to ensure that the work from the JIP is offered to the international arctic offshore
community and the general public for further use.
The participating companies have the ambition to execute projects in arctic areas, such as
installation and operations of oil and gas production facilities. The term arctic as used here
refers to areas where ice, permafrost and low temperatures may influence offshore
operations, field development and decommissioning.
Currently, there is no specific standard for companies operating in arctic offshore areas. To
support this industry and to ensure services can be provided in a safe manner with minimum
environmental impact, it was proposed to prepare guidance/standards for such operations.
This project has taken an important step in gathering existing rules & regulations, identifying
the areas which require additional guidance, and has taken some steps in defining guidance.
The focus is on the operational activities for installation of fixed, floating and subsea units,
dredging, trenching, pipe laying and floating oil/gas production. Detailed design of facilities
& equipment was not covered in this JIP as it is already supported through ISO 19906 for
Arctic Offshore Structures.
As part of the work scope the JIP has taken the initiative to liaise with Class Societies, Arctic
Governmental Authorities and international standards organizations such as ISO. A
diversified group of Dutch operators and knowledge centers have assessed deficiencies in
existing standards and it is therefore considered useful and beneficial for the ISO TC67 SC 8
and SC 7 to use this report when preparing their new ISO norms.
This Arctic Marine Operations Challenges & Recommendations Report presents existing
rules & regulations, identifies the areas which require additional guidance, and in those cases
where possible defines recommendations for arctic operations. The index used in this report
is based on ISO 19901-6; Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific requirements for
offshore structures Part 6: Marine operations. The index has been adjusted and
complemented with aspects specific for arctic operations.
The following key observations/guidance have been gathered within the scope of this Joint
Industry Project;
It was noted from the gap analysis that there was limited (ISO) guidance for pipe lay,
trenching and dredging operations, let alone for the arctic areas. It was therefore chosen
to provide a number of best practices for these operations, considering the arctic
environment. The efforts concentrated on the aspects that would be new in the arctic
when comparing with open water operations in non-arctic areas.
Site specific operations should be considered when planning and carrying out operations.
Considerable effort was performed to align the knowledge on weather conditions and in
particular on the requirements for monitoring and forecasting as well as the requirements
for decision based tools.
For the transportation & logistic aspects input relied heavily on the existing guidance for
arctic shipping which is further developed and was evaluated and transferred to
recommendations for the specific services of this guide.
This report provides guidance as required specifically for contractors expecting to work
in arctic areas on the aspects of health, safety, training and also stakeholder mapping.
A frame work is provided to perform environmental impact assessments both in early as
well as detailed stages of design in order to ensure that impacts can be managed and
mitigated.
Specific attention was given to the evaluation of the loads on and the operation of
disconnectable floating production units.
The other volumes of this report contain results of the gap analysis performed in the project
as well as relevant results of the pilot projects of the Arctic Operations Handbook (AOH)
JIP;
The IceStream Pilot project, described in volume 3, has shown that the egg code
(which is a method to describe characteristics of ice fields), when used as a basis to
establish a visualization of the ice field, can serve as input to numerical models with
which ice loads can be predicted on floating structures. More field data is required to
support development of new analytical models.
The Environmental Impact Pilot project, described in volume 4, has developed an
enhanced approach (interaction of linked sensitivities) for understanding the
environmental impact of operations in an early project stage in a semi-quantitative
manner. Application of such an approach is recommended to assess, evaluate and reduce
the environmental impact of operations in arctic areas.
A state of the art review for marine icing on vessels has been performed and has been
documented in volume 5, Marine icing on arctic offshore operations Pilot project. It
highlights that although there are many approaches, there is no common approach and no
industry standard for marine icing calculations. It strongly recommends more field
observations and improved prediction models to determine sea spray formation and icing
accretion.
Key recommendations from the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP are:
Prepare more detailed operational standards including waiting on weather and ice,
uptime and risk and hazard management.
Develop equipment standards especially for the niche operations in this report.
Prepare ice management guidelines, in concert where possible with the ISO TC67 SC 8
Work group 4, ice management.
Guidance text for marine operations in arctic conditions has been prepared in this report.
It is recommended that this can be incorporation into ISO 19901-6, or other ISO
documentation.
Implementation of an operational ice level into the ISO documentation for defining the
ice action at which the (vessel) position may no longer be retained, due to structural or
station keeping capability.
List of participants
The following companies have participated in the Arctic Operations Handbook JIP;
Pilot Project, Volume 5 of Arctic Marine Operations Challenges & Recommendations Report
Date Reference Status
10 December 2013 IHC-OTI/ IHC-OTI/ 38028Error! Reference
source not found.
Title:
Impact of Marine Icing on Arctic Offshore Operations
Author Date/Signature
Approved by Date/Signature
Dr. Robert Plat
Abstract:
This report is intended to give designers a state-of the art review on the sources and distribution
of ice accretion on ships. The goal is to develop an understanding of the subject, and to develop
a guideline on ice accretion based on the best information available. Sea spray and atmospheric
precipitation are the two principal sources of ice accretion. Most sea spray occurs up to 15 - 20
m above the sea surface and forms about 50 to 90% of the icing on ships, the remaining being
atmospheric sources, depending on the worlds geographic location. The main international code
containing provisions for marine icing is ISO19906 (ISO 2010), which gives guidance on icing as
a function of structure height and icing density, but no indication of the environmental factors
giving rise to these icing parameters. Prediction of icing build up rate is very complex. The
physical processes of superstructure icing vary spatially and temporally on a ship, and icing rate
is qualitatively related to ship size, speed, headway, temperature, and sea state. Today,
modeling of sea spray and atmospheric precipitation are still in its development phases. Several
methods are yet available for icing mitigation and removal, such as thermal, coating, chemical
or mechanical. Vessel design for anti-icing may increase design and construction cost, but can
significantly increase workability and has potentially minimal operational costs.
IHC Merwede
P.O. Box 1, 2960 AA Kinderdijk
Smitweg 6, 2961 AW Kinderdijk
T +31 78 69 0322
www.ihcmerwede.com
Table of Contents
1 Report Overview 4
1.1 Introduction 4
1.2 Report Scope 4
1.3 Report Authors 4
APPENDIX A REFERENCES 41
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 4 of 43
1 Report Overview
1.1 Introduction
Ice accretion on fixed or floating offshore structures is a potential concern for operations in cold
climates and can lead to a variety of problems. Even light ice accretion can lead to many
operational difficulties: slippery decks, ladders, and handrails can be safety hazards; equipment
such as winches, derricks, and valves can be rendered useless, causing delays in operation; ice
on radar antennas can interfere with operations, creating a safety hazard; life-saving and fire-
fighting equipment can be rendered unusable. For ground-based structures, heavy ice accretion
can be a serious concern because of the increased size of structural members. This can lead to
higher lateral wave and wind forces than anticipated. For floating structures and vessels, the
effects are more serious, in that ice accretion can increase the draught, reduce the freeboard,
and raise the center of gravity of the vessel, thereby compromising stability.
This report is intended to give designers a state-of the art review on the sources and distribution
of ice accretion on ships. The goal is to develop an understanding of the subject, and to develop
a guideline on ice accretion based on the best information available. It is not intended, however,
to provide detailed methods for estimating ice accretion loads for all types of vessels or
structures for all environmental conditions, as such technology is simply not yet available.
The chapters of this report are divided into the following subject areas:
Chapter 2 covers the fundamentals of sea spray and atmospheric icing. It provides an
overview of ice accretion observations to date (historical and current), and summarizes
the available theoretical ice accretion models.
Chapter 3 presents a review of applicable Rules, Codes and Standards, starting with the
most recent International Standard (ISO 19906), followed by the Russian Rules for sea
going ships, MODUs and FOPs. This leads to a discussion of the main national
standards (Canadian, US, and Norwegian), and the classification society guidelines
(principally DNV and ABS). This chapter concludes with a comparison of icing
provisions for potential users of the Arctic Operations Handbook, and then uses the
information in a comparative assessment for two different vessel types.
Chapter 4 provides an overview of the available models for theoretical and deterministic
prediction of icing accretion prediction, and draws some principal recommendations.
Chapter 5 summarizes the available knowledge on the mitigation and removal of icing,
and presents some recent information on effective for anti-icing.
Chapter 6 presents general conclusions and recommendations for future work.
Dr. Gus Cammaert of Delft University of Technology (TUDelft) was the prime author of this
report. Technical assistance and review was provided by Benny van der Vegte of IntecSea.
Research assistant for this study was Marijn Abrahamse (BSc student) of TUDelft.
The management of this pilot study was undertaken by IHC Merwede (Robert Plat and Frank
Renting).
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 5 of 43
Ice accretion on ships and offshore structures has two principal sources:
Sea spray - this type of ice accretion occurs when the air temperature is below the
freezing point of seawater (approximately 2oC) and air-borne brine droplets impact a
structure and partially freeze. Sea spray is mainly generated by wave-structure impact
and the wind convects spray to portions of the structure downstream of the source. Sea
spray can also be generated by strong winds that shear off the tops of wave crests
(referred to as spindrift) and by bubbles bursting in breaking waves. For offshore
structures, sea spray from wave-structure interactions is usually the dominant source of
ice accretion because of the large flux of seawater past the structure.
Atmospheric precipitation - these sources include freezing rain, super cooled fog, and
pellets of wet snow or ice. Freezing rain is the term for water droplets that are cooled
below 0oC (super cooled) in the atmosphere and partially freeze on impact with a
structure. This ice accretion source tends to produce glaze ice, which is clear ice with a
density of approximately 900 kg/m3. Supercoiled fog is the term for highly super cooled
water droplets that freeze completely on impact with a structure and produce a porous
white deposit known as rime ice, which has a density of 100 to 600 kg/m3, depending
on the air temperature and wind velocity. Pellets of wet snow or ice (which can include
ice flakes) adhere to a structure on impact and produce a layer that is a mixture of snow
and water. Compaction of the snow layer by the wind may produce a density of
approximately 350 kg/m3, which is greater than that of wet snow falling on the ground.
Sea-spray generated ice, or superstructure ice, has a greater impact on vessels, especially
vessels of supply boat size and smaller, than does atmospheric ice. Superstructure ice forms
when drops are created from waves splashing against the structural elements of rigs and
vessels, typically below main deck level. For smaller vessels, spray originates from bow/wave
interaction, and is carried over the ship by wind after the spray rises above the deck if the rails
are open, or above solid bulwarks. Most sea spray occurs 15 to 20 m above the sea surface,
but it can be lofted as high as 30 to 60 m (Figures 2.1 and 2.2). However, liquid water content at
the greatest heights will be low and thus presents less of a hazard.
Russian studies indicate that, in most parts of the world, sea spray forms about 90% of the icing
on ships. However, in the Arctic, sea spray is only about 50% of the source for icing, the
remaining being atmospheric sources. In addition, there is little evidence that freezing rain is a
significant hazard to vessels and platforms. Minsk (1984) indicates that freezing rain occurs only
about 4% of the time in the Barents and Chukchi Seas. Large vessels generally are not moving
and hence the effects of sea spray on FPSOs, for example, is expected to be much less than on
smaller ships.
Limited information is available on icing observations for larger vessels, and as such is only
available for ships in transit. A very severe case was documented in 1991 (Figure 2.3). A 120-
m container ship left a European port with a 0.2-m trim by the stern and reached port at Quebec
City with a trim by the bow of approximately 4.0 m. A heel of five degrees developed and the
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 6 of 43
vessel became directionally unstable. The ship master was totally unaware of the serious icing
forward until a boarding pilot reported the developing condition.
It is clear from the figure that icing in the bow area appears to be at its highest value (no
thickness measurements were reported), but at the stern the thickness of icing is minimal - it
was progressively thinner with distance from the bow. Ships with containers stacked on the
forward end are particularly vulnerable to ice accretion on the forecastle deck structure and
adjacent areas. Large quantities of ice accumulation may develop and remain unnoticed even
during daylight hours, since observation of that part of the ship from the bridge may be
obstructed.
For stationary vessels the only data that appears to be available is for drilling rigs. Typically, the
majority of icing of drilling rigs is caused by sea spray (Figure 2.4) Because drill rigs are
stationary (except when in transit), sea spray typically is found in greatest concentration from 5
to 7 m above the sea surface, to 10 to 20 m above the sea surface. Most of the literature
indicates that splashing of a stationary rig is less intense than splashing of a ship, and that
spray rarely carries more than 5 to 10 m above the sea surface.
Most investigators agree that sea-spray icing on superstructures is typically the greatest threat
to safety for stationary platforms, causing slippery decks, ladders, handrails, icing on helicopter
platforms, deck cargo, winches, and other equipment, causing operational delay and additional
costs. Ice on antennas cuts communications and distorts radar signals for navigation. Ice-
coated windows, rescue equipment hatches, winches, and cranes reduce safety. Added weight
during icing decreases stability and buoyancy, and additional sail area causes heeling (Figure
2.5). Bridge windows become covered with ice; winches, windlasses, boats, life rafts, fire-
fighting equipment and valves, and radar domes become ice-covered and inoperable (Figures
2.6, 2.7 and 2.8).
The expression atmospheric icing comprises all processes where drifting or falling water
droplets, rain, drizzle or wet snow in the atmosphere freeze or stick to any object exposed to the
weather.
Unlike other meteorological parameters such as temperature, precipitation, wind and snow
depths, there is generally very limited data available about atmospheric ice accretion. The wide
variety of local topography, climate and icing conditions make it difficult to standardize icing
actions.
The best source of information on atmospheric icing is the ISO standard (ET ISO 12494). the
standard states that the lack of available data requires urgent comparisons between collected
data and the exchange of experiences, since this will be a way to improve knowledge and data
necessary for a future comprehensive International Standard for atmospheric icing. Detailed
information about icing frequency, intensity, etc. should be collected. The following methods
may do this.
accretion. A main precondition for significant ice accretion are the dimensions of the object
exposed and its orientation to the direction of the icing wind.
Observations of ice accretion on offshore structures are scarce; however, there are a few
publications that give some idea of the potential for ice accretion as a function of environmental
conditions. Kelly and Karas (1989) provide environmental and icing data for the semi-
submersible Ross Rig operating in the Barents Sea during the winter of 198788. There are
also reports of ice accretion observations on offshore rigs for the semi-submersibles Ocean
Bounty in Alaska (Nauman and Tyagi, 1985), Sedco 708 on the North Aleutian Shelf (Minsk,
1984), Bow Drill 3 off the east coast of Canada (Mitten, 1987), and Sedneth II off the east coast
of Canada (Agnew, 1985). A detailed review of these observations is presented in Chung and
Lozowski (1996). In addition, Brown and Horjen (1989) present information on ice thickness
profiles and estimates of ice mass for several ice accretion incidents involving offshore
structures.
More recently, icing was observed in the Norne and Draugen fields in the Norwegian Sea, but
no measurements are reported (Teigen, 2012).
Estimates for total ice accretion loads on offshore structures fall into two categories: modeling
and field observations/measurements. Numerical models for estimating ice accretion combine
the spray generation rates discussed above with the thermodynamics and heat transfer
processes associated with freezing. The modeling is complex because seawater does not
freeze completely (resulting in concentrated brine pockets within the ice and brine drainage from
the ice layer) and the ice layer develops large surface irregularities that augment the ice
accretion process.
3.1 Introduction
The main international code containing provisions for marine icing is ISO19906 (ISO 2010). ISO
has also published a comprehensive code for atmospheric icing (see references). This section
also provides a summary of the Russian, Canadian, US and Norwegian codes as well as DNV
and ABS guidelines. It concludes with a comparison of the marine icing provisions of all
relevant standards.
The ISO Standard on Arctic Structures gives a short section on marine icing and its effects in
Sections A.6.3.5.3 - Marine Icing (ISO, 2010). The code points out that:
The extent of ice accretion from sea spray, freezing rain or drizzle, freezing fog or cloud
droplets shall be considered in the design and operability of the structure. Ice accretion can
increase the diameter of structural components and can lead to a substantial increase of actions
caused by wind and self-weight, particularly for long slender structure such as flare towers. Ice
accretion also affects operations and personnel safety.
The discussion on icing covers both atmospheric icing and sea spray icing (or marine icing).
Atmospheric icing is described in terms of what type of phenomena this is, where it will occur on
the structure and under what conditions. For marine icing ISO19906 also discusses the
phenomena, the most usual conditions causing it to occur and the typical severity (in mm/h) of
icing as a function of temperature and wind speed.
According to the code sea spray is formed in two ways. The most important with regard to icing
is sea spray generated by the vessel or structure as it interacts with waves. The second form is
created when the wind blows droplets of water off wave crests and depends on the form and
steepness of the waves and wind speed.
The code states that sea spray icing begins to occur at wind speeds of 8 m/s to 10 m/s. The
stronger the wind, the higher the spray is lifted. While the height of sea spray icing is usually
limited to 15 m to 20 m above the sea surface, there have been reports of sea spray icing at up
to 60 m above the sea surface.
Certain ranges of air temperature, water temperature and wind speed are required to cause a
significant accumulation of superstructure icing. These conditions are
an air temperature less than the freezing point of seawater (depending on the salinity of
the water)
a wind speed of 10 m/s or more;
a seawater temperature colder than 8 C.
A strong wind, cold air, and cold seawater all contribute to greater accumulations of ice. In Arctic
and cold regions seas, icing can occur throughout the year. Icing is most likely at the end of
autumn or in winter when air temperatures are below zero and there is no ice cover on the sea
surface. Generally, from mid-winter to mid-summer, salt water icing is unlikely. From end of
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 13 of 43
summer to mid-winter, marine icing accounts for about half of all cases of icing; most of the
remainder are mixed icing, simultaneous marine and atmospheric.
The code classifies icing by its intensity as slow, fast, or very fast. Broadly speaking,
Slow icing (ice accumulation of less than 10 mm/h) occurs when air temperature is
between 0 C and -3C and any wind speed, or with air temperatures of -3C or lower
and a wind speed of less than 7 m/s;
Fast icing (ice accumulation between 10 mm/h and 30 mm/h) occurs with air
temperature between -3C and -8C and wind speeds of 7 m/s to 15 m/s;
Very fast icing (ice accumulation greater than 30 mm/h) occurs with air temperature at or
below -8C and wind speed of more than 15 m/s.
The rate of ice thickness accumulation also depends on the structure and the height above
water. The duration of the icing phenomenon exceeds 12h in three quarters of reported cases;
its maximum duration is seven days. During the period prior to freeze-up, the occurrence rate of
slow icing is 20% to 40% in the coastal areas and 50% to 70% in the central parts of the Arctic
seas. The occurrence rate of fast icing ranges from 1% to 5% in the southern parts and up to
10% in the northern parts of the Arctic seas. These values increase by about 10% in the latter
part of this period. Icing can also accumulate through a series of independent icing events.
Much depends on the degree of melt and loss of adhesion between events as well as possible
countermeasures.
The ISO standard gives guidance on icing as a function of structure height and icing density, but
no indication of the environmental factors giving rise to these icing parameters.
Under RMRS Rules for the Classification, Construction and Construction of Sea-Going Ships,
for ships navigating within winter seasonal zones, stability with due regard for icing shall be
checked in addition to the main loading conditions.
Under Section 2.4 (Allowance for Icing) the mass of ice per square meter of the total area of
horizontal projection of exposed decks shall be assumed to be 30 kg (equivalent to 33 cm of ice
build-up at a density of 900 kg/m3). The mass of ice per square meter of wind age area shall be
assumed to be 15 kg (equivalent to 17 cm of icing).
The rules for sea-going ships do not include variation of ice accretion with vertical height.
RMRS Rules for MODUs and FOPs also stipulate that a unit must be checked for ice and snow
accretion if the unit is operating within a winter seasonal zone.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 14 of 43
In Section 2.5.5 guidelines are given on ice and snow accretion. For units operating within
winter seasonal zones to the north of latitude 66 30N, as also in winter in the Bering Sea, the
sea of Okhotsk and in the Tatar Strait, the specified mass of ice per square meter of the total
area of horizontal projection of exposed decks shall be assumed to be 30 kg if those decks are
located at a height up to 10 m above the water line, 15 kg if the height is from 10 m up to 30 m,
and if the height is above 30m the mass of ice may be neglected.
The specified mass of ice per square meter of the wind age area of the structure shall be
assumed 15 kg if those decks are located at a height up to 10 m above the water line, 7.5 kg if
the height is from 10 m up to 30 m, and if the height is above 30m the mass of ice may be
neglected.
For some other regions the accumulation is provided as a ratio of the rates described above.
The code also contains guidelines for the snow load. The mass of snow per square meter shall
be 100 kg for unmanned units and 10 kg for manned units.
(note the Canadian code may have been withdrawn and replaced by ISO19906 provisions,
but for the time being the discussion below will be retained for discussion purposes)
The Canadian code CSA S471 (General Requirements, Design Criteria, the Environment and
Loads) gives only a short discussion on snow and ice accretion in Section 5.2.3 of the code:
Ice accretion from sea spray, freezing rain or drizzle, freezing fog, or cloud droplets shall
be considered in the design. In the absence of specific information, the ice that can form
on the structure may be assumed to have a density of 900 kg/m3.
It also refers to Annex I of the code for more guidance on ice accretion.
Estimates for total ice accretion loads on offshore structures fall into two categories: modeling
and field observations/measurements. Numerical models for estimating ice accretion combine
the spray generation rates discussed above with the thermodynamics and heat transfer
processes associated with freezing. The modeling is complex because seawater does not
freeze completely (resulting in concentrated brine pockets within the ice and brine drainage from
the ice layer) and the ice layer develops large surface irregularities that augment the ice
accretion process. Two ice accretion models have been developed specifically for offshore
structures.
Observations of ice accretion on offshore structures are scarce; however, there are a few
publications that give some idea of the potential for ice accretion as a function of environmental
conditions. Kelly and Karas (1989) provide environmental and icing data for the semi-
submersible Ross Rig operating in the Barents Sea during the winter of 198788. There are
also reports of ice accretion observations on offshore rigs for the semi-submersibles Ocean
Bounty in Alaska (Nauman and Tyagi, 1985), Sedco 708 on the North Aleutian Shelf (Minsk,
1984), Bow Drill 3 off the east coast of Canada (Mitten, 1987), and Sedneth II off the east coast
of Canada (Agnew, 1985). A detailed review of these observations is presented in Chung and
Lozowski (1996). In addition, Brown and Horjen (1989) present information on ice thickness
profiles and estimates of ice mass for several ice accretion incidents involving offshore
structures.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 15 of 43
As a final note, the CSA code states a designer should obtain as much environmental data as
possible for the region of operation, including data from climatic atlases, ship measurements,
site measurements from rigs operating in the area, and coastal stations.
(more to come)
Section 4.3.5: Icing of structural members can result from fog, freezing rain or wind
driven seawater spray. Data for estimating icing potential may be found in Searby
(1977). A predictive method for calculating structural icing is given in Wise (1980),
Makkonen (1989) and Labelle (1983). Information on icing in the Bering Sea can be
found in McLeod (1977) and Pease (1986).
Furthermore, the standard states in several places that ice and snow loads should be taken into
account in the design of the structure but no design method or values are given.
The only Norwegian Standard that currently provides guidelines for ice accretion on offshore
structures is NORSOK N-003. In this standard, ice accretions due to sea spray and atmospheric
icing are considered separately, and ice accretion thickness and density are specified for
various elevations on the structure. Compared to previous mentioned codes it has a slightly
different approach to which areas of the structure are subject to icing and prescribes a linear
reduction in the ice accretion between 10 m and 25 m above sea level. For ice accretion due to
sea spray only, there are guidelines on ice thickness for various latitudes. However, these
guidelines have been developed for Norwegian coastal regions only.
A part of the DNV Classification Rules for Ships (Part 5, Chapter 1 Ships for Navigation in
Ice), ships with class notation WINTERIZED COLD will fulfil certain additional requirements.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 16 of 43
Part of these requirements relate to Section C203 which gives the additional ice load to be
included in the loading conditions and satisfying applicable stability requirements:
For decks, gangways, wheelhouse tops and other horizontal surface, the values found in
Table Error! No text of specified style in document..1below;
For projected lateral area of each side of the vessel above the water plane: 7.5 kg/m2.
The projected lateral area of discontinuous surfaces of rail, sundry booms, spars (except mats)
and rigging of vessels having no sails and the projected lateral area of other small objects shall
be computed by increasing the total projected area of continuous surfaces by 5% and the static
moments of this area by 10%.
Table Error! No text of specified style in document..1: Icing load (kg/m2) to be applied to
decks, gangways, wheelhouse tops and other horizontal surfaces.
Note that there is no allowance for reduction of icing weight on vertical planes with height as
there is in the RMRS and NORSOK formulations.
Furthermore the code includes some general information on anti-icing and de-icing methods in
Sections B 100 and B 200 subsequently.
To assist the marine industry, ABS issued the Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature
Environments (ABS, 2010). Included in this Guide are the ABS criteria that are intended to
assist in the design, operation, and maintenance of vessels when operating in either continuous
or occasional operation in ice.
Throughout the guide it is clearly described that icing should be taken into account in the design
of the vessels but the only reference to ice accretion is found in Appendix 3, Figure 1 of the
Guide, which is a grouping of icing nomograms developed by the United States National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) from actual icing reports from fishing, U.S.
Coast Guard and towing vessels operating in Alaskan waters. These reports were based on
icing events that lasted anywhere from 1 to 26 hours but averaged 3 to 6 hours.
Appendix 3, Figure 2 of the Guide provides information on ice accretion versus wind velocity for
air temperatures ranging from -34C to -7C. The source of this information is the US Navy Cold
Weather Handbook for Surface Ships (May 1988).
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 17 of 43
The ABS Guide also specifies the ABS requirements and criteria for obtaining the optional
notation of DE-ICE, which is a notation available for vessels occasionally operating in low
temperatures subject to ice accretion
Furthermore the guide addresses several anti-icing and de-icing methods in the Section 5.1.7
and Section 10.
The following table (table 3.2) provides a comparison of the marine icing provisions of the
various standards and rules presented above. The study team did not have access to the
Russian rules, however, and relied on summary reports by others for the discussion in Sections
3.3 and 3.4.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 18 of 43
Table 3.2 (Part 1): Comparison of Icing Provisions in Various Codes and Standards
Table 3.2 (Part 2): Comparison of Icing Provisions in Various Codes and Standards
Notes to tables
1) The code describes three different icing rates: slow icing (10 mm/h), fast icing (10 to 30
mm/h) and very fast icing (faster than 30 mm/h):
2) slow icing; air temperature is between 0C and 3C and any wind speed, or with air
temperatures of 3C or lower and a wind speed of less than 7 m/s,
3) fast icing; air temperature between 3C and 8C and wind speeds of 7 m/s to 15 m/s,
4) very fast icing; air temperature at or below 8C and wind speed of more than 15 m/s.
5) No mention is made of surface orientation or location. An example (location off Norway)
is given in which icing thickness depends on latitude.
6) The code also describes wind and wave conditions (depending on ship length) needed
to cause severe icing (assuming cold air and water temperatures).
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 21 of 43
4.1 Introduction
The prediction of how much icing will build up in a period of time is a very complex subject. The
physical processes of superstructure icing vary spatially and temporally on a ship, and icing rate
is qualitatively related to ship size, speed, headway, temperature, and sea state. This includes
the dynamics of how, hypothetically, ice could be forming on one portion of a ship, and eroding
on other portions (Ryerson, 2013).
The size and design of a ship has a major effect upon the rate of super-structure spraying
during icing conditions, and the subsequent growth of topside ice. Smaller vessels are
immersed with spray more frequently than larger ships because of their lower freeboard and
greater ship motions.
Also, bow spray clouds are more likely to cover the entire superstructure of a small ship with a
large spray flux than large ships. This is related to the size distribution of drops in spray clouds.
Larger drops have greater fall velocities than small drops. Droplet sizes in spray events can
range from less than 10 m to 3 mm diameter at the bow. As the bow jets break up into drops
and they are accelerated by the wind over the ship, they begin to fall. Large drops have higher
terminal fall velocities than small drops, but the time, and distance, required to reach terminal
velocity is greater for large drops than for small drops (Ryerson, 2013)
The distance that spray moves aft, the portion of the ship that is wetted, is a function of the
relative wind speed and the height of the spray jet. The height of the spray jet is a function of
true wind speed, ship speed, and ship heading according to Zakrzewski et al. (1988a, b). They
also state that wetting of the superstructure is greatest when spray crosses 60 to 70 off the
bow because the water source is now closer to the superstructure (Zakrzewski, 1987). Drops
originating over the bow in head seas potentially must travel farther to reach the superstructure.
Head seas may be more likely to allow drops to be carried farther aft, if the spray jet is high
enough, because the trajectory will be directly aft. However, ship heading also influences where
ice forms on a ship. Quartering seas, or their approximation, cause spray to be carried across
the deck and may actually cause more impingement on the opposite side of the ship from where
the spray originated than on the near side (Chung and Lozowski, 1999).
Hull shape also influences the amount of spray lofted over the superstructure. Ships with
greater freeboard in the bow area and greater bow flare tend to deflect spray away and reduce
entrainment of drops into the relative wind. Sapone (1990), in tow tank experiments, found that
bows with increased flare (tested from 35 to 55 flare angles) reduce the wetted area of decks.
Greater flare also reduced the volume of spray liquid water reaching decks, reduced the
distance spray travelled aft, and produced finer drops at the deck edge than did bows with less
flare angle.
Superstructure spray icing occurs when sea water is delivered to the ship superstructure and
sufficient heat can be removed from the spray droplets in flight and from the water film on the
superstructure after the droplets have collided and splashed, that the water can freeze. Air
supercools drops in their first few seconds of flight, but if the sea is too warm, even very cold air
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 22 of 43
may be insufficient to cool drops sufficiently that they freeze after collision. The water may run
off the ship without freezing.
Generally, sea temperature must be lower than 5C for superstructure icing to occur according
to Guest (2005; DeAngelis, 1974). The US Navy indicates that the critical sea water
temperatures for superstructure icing in the Gulf of Alaska, the Aleutian Islands, the Bering Sea,
and the Arctic is between -2.2 and 8.9C (Fett et al., 1993; Sechrist et al., 1989). Brown and
Agnew (1985), in assessing about 1000 ship icing reports in Canadian water from the 1960s to
the 1980s, found that water temperatures were typically 0 to 2C during icing events.
Winds may also contribute significantly to icing. Wind helps carry spray over the ship, and may
create the seas that cause the spray when the bow pitches into them. In addition, the wind
increases convective cooling of the drops. The Navy Forecasting Handbooks indicate that faster
wind speeds generally see more ice forming (Fett et al., 1993; Sechrist et al,. 1989). Brown and
Agnew (1985) find winds associated with icing to be typically 26 to - 31 m/s off the Canadian
east coast, and 15 to 20 m/s in the Arctic. Ryerson (1991) found mean wind speeds of 16 m/s in
ship icing off of the Canadian east coast, though speeds did range up to 33 m/s.
Wave heights are also important generators of spray. Without waves, bow plunging would not
occur to create spray jets and spray clouds. However, ships of different size interact with sea
states differently, with smaller vessels creating spray in lower sea states than larger ships
because of their greater pitch angle and pitch frequency, and typically lower freeboard. The
database analyzed by Brown and Agnew (1985) in Canadian waters includes ships ranging in
size from fishing trawlers to cargo ships. They found icing to be associated with seas of 2 to 4 m
off the east coast of Canada and in Hudson Bay, but seas of 1 to 12 m in the Scotian Shelf
area, the Grand Banks, and off Newfoundland. Seas of 6 to 8m accompanied icing in the Gulf of
St. Lawrence, Labrador Sea, and eastern Arctic. The western Arctic had seas of less than 2.5 m
during icing. Ryerson (1991) found that waves averaged about 1.6 m high, and swells 1.8 m off
the Canadian east coast during icing.
Sea spray ice accretion rates vary considerably with location on a ship (Ackley 1985). Ice
accretion rates are determined by the balance of heat delivery by spray, both sensible and
latent, and atmospheric heat removal processes. Figure 4.1 illustrates three icing zones that
often occur on all sizes of ships. The maximum accretion zone is where spray delivery matches
the atmospheres ability to remove sensible and latent heat from impinged water at a sufficient
rate for all spray to freeze (although some spray remains trapped as brine within the ice).
Maximum accretion may take place at bow locations maximally exposed to the wind, such as at
the top of the bow and windlass located on the forecastle of the fishing trawler shown in Figure
4.2. However, during heavy spraying, much ice may also accumulate amidships, where the
spray flux is smaller and the rate of heat removal by the atmosphere is still large (Figure 4.1).
This is demonstrated by the wheelhouse roof and areas immediately aft of the wheelhouse on
the trawler (Figure 4.2).
Thermally limited accretion (Figure 4.1) takes place where the spray water delivered exceeds
the atmospheres ability to remove its sensible and latent heat. Thus, ice accretion rates are
smaller than water delivery suggests. Large spray fluxes, and thus thermally limited accretions,
are normally only found on the bow areas of large ships, even though large volumes of spray
can reach farther aft on smaller ships.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 23 of 43
Guest (2005) provides guidelines relating vessel length, significant wave height, and wind speed
to threshold icing conditions (see Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 Threshold wind speeds for icing to occur on various length ships
(from Guest, 2005)
Icing rates, the result of seas, wind, spray, and cold, are either expressed as a thickness or
mass accumulation with time, and are usually expressed for the entire ship. Icing rates suggest
how quickly ships may become dangerously loaded with ice. Even small amounts of ice on a
ship can reduce the safety of personnel operating on decks, and also degrade optical systems,
sensors, and antennas. Icing rates are usually indicators of how quickly seaworthiness may
deteriorate, but they are also an indication of the deterioration of ship operations and safety
(Ryerson 2013).
Two theoretical ice accretion models have been developed specifically for ships and offshore
structures:
ICEMOD was developed in 1986 at the Norwegian Hydrotechnical Laboratory by Horjen and
Vefsnmo (1986a, 1986b) and modified in 1987 (Horjen and Vefsnmo, 1987) and 1988 (Horjen
et al., 1988). RIGICE was developed in 1987 (Roebber and Mitten, 1987) in response to a
request from government regulatory agencies to determine icing norms and extremes for
offshore structures operating in Canadian coastal waters; recently, some modifications have
been made to RIGICE, particularly with regard to spray generation (Lozowski et al., 2002).
Brown and Horjen (1989) and Chung and Lozowski (1996) compare these two ice accretion
models. It should be noted that neither model has been completely verified quantitatively by field
measurements of ice accretion on structures, but the models can still be used for comparative
purposes.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 24 of 43
where
The equation gives the following prediction of icing rates (Table 4.2):
Overland re-derived his 1986 algorithms in 1990, but stated that the 1986 algorithms were
operationally performing well (Overland 1990). The new derivation accounts for super cooling of
drops in flight when sea water temperatures are lower than 2 to 3C. This required reclassifying
icing rates into four categories (Table 4.3).
Wise and Comiskey (1980) used Mertins earlier (1968) nomograms and combined them into
one based on additional icing reports from the northeast Pacific Ocean. They also included
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 25 of 43
climatologies of the north-eastern Pacific Ocean and the north-eastern Atlantic Ocean (Feit,
1985).
It should be kept in mind however that these models are limited by the following:
No variation with vessel geometry,
No input of sea spray properties
Steady state assumption
Thermally limited scenarios
NOAA uses the algorithms developed by Overland (as discussed above) that relate icing to
wind speed at a height of 10 m, the sea water freezing temperature, air temperature at 2 m, and
sea surface temperature. Designed from a database of 58 carefully selected cases of trawlers
20 to 75 m in length, the prediction algorithms generate three classes of icing rates. Forecasts
are made at 3-hour intervals for 6-hour forecast periods on a 1 latitude by 1 longitude grid
globally. Icing rates are predicted in three intervals: light is 0.3 to 2.0 cm of ice in 3 hours,
moderate is 2.0 to 6.1 cm of ice in 3 hours, and heavy is greater than 6.1 cm of ice in 3 hours
(see also Table 4.2). Forecast maps show areas where each category could occur over 6-hour
periods, with forecasts created every three hours for one week ahead. These rates are defined
as the maximum sustained rate for typical Alaskan vessels, 20- to 75-m length, which are not
actively avoiding icing through heading downwind, moving at slow speeds or avoiding open
seas (Overland 1990). See examples of typical icing maps in Figure 4.3 and 4.4.
Forecast maps of icing are available directly from the Internet for the November-May Northern
Hemisphere icing season. The National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), Ocean
Modeling Branch (OMB), has a web site with icing maps for the North Atlantic, North Pacific,
Eurasian and off the U.S. East Coast ("NOPP Demonstration Area"). This site is also sponsored
by the US Department of Commerce, The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) and the National Weather Service (NWS).
www.weather.nps.navy.mil/~psguest/.../predict.html
Several research teams have recently applied computational techniques to simulate icing
accretion rates on various types of vessels.
The MARICE project is a multi-year effort by DNV, the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology (NTNU), Statoil and the Research Council of Norway (NFR) to study the ice
accretion issue. A three-part system was designed to study the amount of water lifted from
different types of ship bows in different weather conditions and estimation of the movement of
droplets over, and their impingement with, the superstructure of vessels, neglecting the
possibility of droplet break-up or coalescence.
An ATC paper by Shipilova et al. (2012) describes the MARICE model of sea spray dynamics,
based on published models of spray generation, fluid dynamics based simulation of droplet
movement subjected to reasonable simplifying assumptions, and a simple mechanism of droplet
freezing and runoff. The model was applied to two different vessels of similar size and profile -
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 26 of 43
the Geosund shown in Figure 4.5 has a helicopter deck impeding airflow over the top of the
vessel. Freezing rate estimates were compared to experimental measurements conducted in
cold conditions on Svalbard.
The authors state that modeling of sea spray generation is the most challenging subject in
marine icing. The amount of spray, its density, duration and frequency depend on the ship
design, speed and heading with respect to the waves. Few data are available in published
literature on this issue.
Figure 4.6 shows the calculated airflow for the initial wind speed of 25 m/s for the Geosund in
the plane along the vessel centerline. The maximum flow velocity reaches 46.6 m/s in the entire
domain. As it can be seen the helicopter deck on the Geosund forms a shelter above the bridge.
Thus, it is expected that the main part of the spray droplet cloud will end in the very front of the
hull.
To analyze the results on the ice accretion the authors have chosen to divide the vessel
superstructure into three main areas: Front, Bridge and Rear. Figure 4.7 shows the icing rate on
the Geosund for the total vessel, as well as for the three major areas of the ship, as functions of
air temperature for the cases (in the left-hand column) where the droplet temperature is the
same as the air temperature and (in the right-hand column) where the droplet temperature is the
same as the seawater, +5C.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 27 of 43
Figure 4.6 Velocity field over Geosund superstructure, 25 m/s wind speed
Shipilova et al, 2012
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 30 of 43
5.1 Introduction
Platforms operating in cold regions are protected primarily by designs that reduce ice accretion,
coupled with the selective use of heat. A variety of de-icing and anti-icing technologies have
been tested on offshore platforms and boats, but with mixed overall success. New technologies
and modern versions of old technologies, now used successfully in aviation, the electric power
industry, and on transportation systems in general, may be transferable to the offshore
environment.
A report by published by the US Army Corps of Engineers (Ryerson, 2008) has identified,
explained, and reviewed fifteen classes of de-icing and anti-icing technologies, as well as
numerous ice detection technologies. This report has been the main source of information used
for this Appendix.
The report by Ryerson addresses the superstructure icing threat to offshore oil structures and
supply vessels by assessing how sea spray icing and atmospheric icing affect operations and
safety. It also indicates how selected technologies can help improve safety on offshore
structures, and reduce the magnitude of the additional loads on the vessel and the
superstructure.
Only those methods which have potential for large-scale anti-icing or de-icing applications on
board offshore vessels are reviewed here. These methods fall under the following categories:
Thermal Methods
Coatings and Chemicals
Other De-icing Methods
Design is treated here as a mitigation method as well.
The reader is referred to the original Ryerson report for further information.
There are two methods of preventing icing. One is to prevent liquid water from reaching the
surface to be kept ice-free. The other is to heat the surface sufficiently so that it is anti-iced, or
heated periodically after icing to induce de-icing. Though costly in energy, heat is often the best
and most cost-effective approach (Ryerson, 2008).
For anti-icing or de-icing, sufficient heat must be applied to at least cause melting at the
ice/substrate interface. Or, heat must be sufficient to prevent latent heat from being released
from the water, causing ice. Water releases 334 J/g (334 W/cm3) to freeze at 0C. Therefore, an
anti-icing system must supply a sufficient amount of heat to prevent even a small volume of
water from freezing. Much less energy is required for de-icing if melting only a thin layer of water
is necessary to release ice from the substrate.
Heat is provided by a wide variety of technologies for many different applications. Provided here
is a review of electrothermal, hot air, and hot water de-icing.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 32 of 43
Electrothermal Heating
Electro-thermal heating results from heat from electrical resistance heating. Not considering the
source of electrical power, resistance heating is 100% efficient - all of the energy conducted
through the wires is converted to heat. Typically, Nichrome wires as found in electric heaters
that are controlled by thermostats, or materials such as carbon layers, which vary in thickness
with location and are self-healing and self-regulating, are used. Ships commonly use heating
cables to prevent icing of walkways, hatches and bulkhead doors (Figure 5.1).
Another source of heat for de-icing and anti-icing is hot air. The automobile windshield defroster
is a classic example of de-icing using hot air, and illustrates well the relatively modest ability of
air to transfer heat to solids. Obviously, this type of systems would have rather limited
application for a large offshore vessel.
Hot Water
Hot water has recently been used to deice aircraft where the use of chemicals needs to be
controlled. In a series of experiments, hot water at a temperature of 60C was applied to plates
contaminated with ice in air temperatures as low as -9C at wind speeds of 2.8 m/s. De-icing
was considered successful if a surface experiencing an ice accretion rate of 0.25 cm/cm2/hr
would de-ice and remain de-iced for 3 min or longer. Hot water performed acceptably, similarly
to Type I de-icing fluids under the same conditions. However other experiments have indicated
that water could refreeze on drained surface where no icing had previously formed.
Infrared De-icing
Infrared de-icing is a well-proven heating technology and it has had some application for de-
icing. Infrared may be considered a sub-application of de-icing technologies using heat.
However, it is unique because it is a remote technology; objects are heated through absorption
of infrared energy from an emitter that has a temperature allowing it to radiate in the infrared
portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. However the technology has not been applied to
ships, as far as is known.
Coatings
According to the CRELL report, coatings are materials applied to the surface of ice-accreting
substrates to reduce the adhesion strength of ice to the substrate. Also according to the report
there is a common notion that ice phobic coatings (coatings that have reduced adhesive
strength with ice) will prevent or reduce icing. Because ice phobic coatings also are often
hydrophobic, they do have the potential to reduce icing amounts. However, ice phobic coatings
typically do not prevent icing and, in general, hydrophobic coatings (those that repel water) are
not necessarily also ice phobic.
Development and testing of ice phobic coatings is one of the most active areas of anti-icing/de-
icing research. Coatings are attractive because an ideal coating would prevent icing, would be
easily applied over any substrate, would be inexpensive, would require little or no maintenance,
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 33 of 43
and because of its passive nature would require no power. In reality, most hydrophobic coatings
have little ice phobicity, most do not have longevity (thus requiring frequent maintenance or
cleaning to maintain the low adhesion characteristics, especially after numerous icing events),
and many are not easily applied and require frequent reapplication.
Coating technology varies widely in material properties, chemistry, and design. Most coatings
are of a single chemical compound that is applied to surfaces by spraying or brushing. Or, they
are materials such as plastics that can be structural materials themselves. As a solid material,
Teflon has been found to have nearly the lowest ice adhesion strength of all materials.
Polyethylene has an adhesive strength similar to Teflon. However, Teflon is soft and is not
generally a durable structural material. Other non-durable materials that have demonstrated
very low adhesion values include silicone grease and lithium grease. But grease typically readily
washes from surfaces, and is often removed with the ice, making it a nondurable coating.
Despite these remarks however, some new coatings show promise. The lowest adhesion
strength ever measured at CRREL (US Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering
Laboratory) was a silicone by NuSil Technology (see references in CRREL report, p. 59).
Compared to Teflons average adhesion strength of 238 kPa, NuSil R-2180 has an average
adhesion strength of 37 kPa. Another material, Phasebreak B-2, has an average strength of 117
kPa. Even after roughening with sandpaper and weathering to simulate thermal and humidity
cycling and salt spray, the adhesion strength of NuSil R-2180 was always lower than that of
unweathered Teflon.
In many cases, coatings that only reduce ice adhesion are insufficient. Coatings also require
easy field application and often require abrasion resistance. Several companies have proposed
developing coatings that are ice phobic and abrasion-resistant. However, only one such coating
is in development. Further details are not available at this time.
Researchers are still seeking a coating that will prevent ice formation, and at least two
approaches have been taken. The first is a nanotechnology approach to embed capsules of
anti-icing compound within an ice phobic coating material (Microphase 2008). Microphase
Coating, Inc. has created a coating with low ice adhesion that is erosion-resistant and
renewable, and has high adhesion to substrates. The coating is composed of epoxy, silicate
mesh, and freezing-point depressants in embedded nano-capsules. As the coating erodes, the
capsules break and slowly release freezing point depressant at the ice-coating interface,
thereby intending to reduce ice accretion rates. A company in Norway (Re-Turn AS, www.re-
turn.no) is carrying out similar research.
Chemicals
De-icing and anti-icing chemical development is probably the most active area of ice control
research with regard to new products and investment capital. This is because dry and wet
chemicals are used in large volumes and at great cost for highway and runway ice and snow
control and for airframe de-icing and anti-icing.
The most widely used de-icing chemicals are sodium chloride, calcium chloride, magnesium
chloride, potassium chloride, calcium magnesium acetate, and urea. Sodium chloride (NaCl),
rock salt, has been used heavily since the 1940s. Sodium chloride is most effective at
temperatures warmer than -10. However, the large volumes of material that may need to be
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 34 of 43
used are of concern because of potential problems with environmental impact and metal
corrosion.
Manual methods are still the primary technique for removing ice from smaller vessels and
marine structures, even in recent years. In the mid-1980s, de-icing was still largely
accomplished with wooden baseball bats, fire axes, hammers, and crowbars, as was done a
century earlier on whalers and other craft (Ryerson, 2008). However, mechanical methods are
slow and laborious, expose crew to dangerous conditions, and can damage marine equipment
and components such as machinery and windows. These methods can chip paint and damage
newer composite materials that are not resilient to impacts.
Electrical Techniques
Recently several innovative de-icing technologies have been developed using electrical
techniques that cause ice to melt in a thin layer at the ice/substrate interface, melt through the
entire ice thickness, or cause erosion of the ice, thereby physically disconnecting it from the
substrate. Methods also have been developed for electrical control of ice adhesion to
substrates, causing it to either decrease or increase at will.
Three fundamental electrical techniques have been developed to modify the adhesion strength
of ice to substrates. The techniques are 1) application of a DC voltage to the ice/substrate
interface, 2) pulse electro-thermal de-icing, or 3) ice dielectric heating. These inventions evolved
from basic research funded by US government agencies, as well as by private industry.
Because the more recent engineering work is privately funded, many details are proprietary and
are therefore unavailable.
The research up to the present time is largely experimental, and has only been used in small-
scale applications like helicopter or wind turbine blades.
Hydraulic de-icing involves the use of high pressure water jets to remove ice from surfaces.
Some researchers have concluded that high-pressure lances for de-icing of ships are a viable
method that is safer and less expensive than alternatives. It has generally been concluded that
the water jet approach, though high in initial cost, deserved additional investigation.
An experimental high pressure (75 to 125 psig) flash flow system for de-icing that operated
between 122C and 133C, has been demonstrated in the US. The concept was that such a
system could operate from the ship fire mains and use a portable heater to raise water
temperature (Fig. A-6), but not convert the water to steam. Therefore, seawater could be used.
The result is a two-phase flow with about 10% steam that, in experiments, removed ice faster
than a 4000-psi water jet. Tests showed the ability to remove ice 10 cm thick and up to 186 cm2
of ice per second. Recommendations were to construct a prototype system for shipboard
testing. However it is unknown whether this was done.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 35 of 43
Steam lances also were commonly used at sea in the past because of the ready availability of
steam from engine boilers. Lset (1985), for example, recommends steam as a method of
removing ice from ships and drill rigs.
All de-icing with high pressure hydraulics is still experimental. There are no systems known to
be sold as high pressure hydraulic de-icing systems (Ryerson, 2008)
Det Norske Veritas (DNV), an independent Norwegian foundation, manages risk, similar to
Lloyds of London and the American Bureau of Shipping. Because superstructure icing and snow
produce ice on decks and superstructures, they can affect the stability, safety, and general
operation of vessels. Ice covering navigational equipment and deck mechanical equipment
reduces safety (Koren 2007). Therefore, DNV has developed the class notation DEICE to
ensure operational safety by providing anti-icing requirements for equipment and areas of a ship
where continuous operation is required, such as navigational equipment and fire lines, and de-
icing requirements for equipment and areas where ice accumulation is acceptable (Magelssen
2005). However, the ship must be equipped to de-ice within 4 to 6 hours of accumulation. DNVs
concerns are impairment of stability, impaired navigation caused by inoperable antenna and
radar equipment, and icing of wheelhouse windows. Deck equipment, such as rescue
equipment, lifeboats, and life rafts may be sufficiently iced that davits are inoperable. Vents and
anchors may be ice covered and inoperable, and gangways and railings may be ice-covered,
making it dangerous to operate safely on deck. DNVs standards are intended to encourage
vessel operators to operate more safely in icing conditions.
Equipment and areas that DNV requires to be anti-iced include the following (Magelssen, 2005):
Equipment and areas the DNV requires to be de-iced within 46 hours of the end of an icing
event include the following (Magelssen, 2005):
6. Mooring winches.
7. Deck lighting.
8. Protected locations with heating.
9. Protected covers.
Improved design of vessels and topsides can be a significant method of reducing superstructure
icing. Of the methods for preventing icing, preventing water from freezing, or preventing liquid
water from striking the superstructure, the overall effect is that design reduces water from
striking the superstructure and freezing to it. Also, as stated in the Ryerson report optimal
design is a passive technology that has minimal operational cost if it does not cause
inefficiencies, though it may possibly increase design and construction cost.
Numerous examples can be drawn from reports for other types of vessels that may be relevant
for the design and operation of an FPSO. A report for de-icing of drilling vessels typically
recommended including an enclosed derrick, heated walkways, wind walls, additional heating
facilities, and temporary local shielding around working areas. As well as standard de-icing
equipment another source recommends a system to constantly flush the deck with warm
seawater during icing conditions. The overall design must be as clean as possible, with few
small-diameter elements, enclosed systems, and freeboard sufficient to reduce splashing of
deck and other working areas.
Figure 5.3 shows a well-enclosed topsides (in this case, for the Goliat Development off northern
Norway. Figure 5.4 shows a very efficient bow (the Ullstein X-bow) design that would minimize
icing problems over the rest of the vessel in that sea spray is interrupted from reaching the rest
of the vessel, and icing that does form could be flushed away with warm sea water.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 37 of 43
The main conclusions arising from the current report are as follows
Despite many years of observations, and the development of empirical and analytical
models, marine icing remains a serious operational issue for small and large vessels
alike.
The catastrophic capsize of smaller vessels is still taking place, with subsequent loss of
life.
For larger vessels ice accretion can lead to serious safety hazards and loss of usability.
Sea spray icing remains the predominant threat for vessels of all types. Limited
observations are available for icing of larger vessels.
As offshore operations are expected to continue in Arctic regions, the threats to life and
safety will inevitably increase.
Though the Arctic is warming sufficiently to cause significant warm season sea ice
retreat, sea surface temperatures will largely remain within a few degrees of freezing,
and the increase in fetch and the high frequency of storms and moderate to strong winds
will make superstructure icing a greater danger.
Work is continuing on national and international codes and standards, but there is little
agreement between them, and they mostly rely on observations in specific geographic
regions.
Icing codes and standards usually only give estimates for the total amount of icing that
may occur, and most do not give specifics on longitudinal and vertical variations in icing
buildup.
Empirical models for ice accretion rely mostly for smaller vessels, and extrapolation to
the larger vessels used in oil and gas operations are questionable.
6.2 Recommendations
Recommendations related to marine icing can be divided into practical operating guidelines, and
issues regarding codes and standards. With respect to operational issues:
Icing due to ice spray can be reduced by selection of a new course, adaption of a
reduced speed or avoiding open seas or heading into ice if practical.
Nearly all ship de-icing is now done manually, with some ship-specific technological help
such as deck heating systems. Modern technology should be used for de-icing and anti-
icing to a greater extent.
Technologies that do not require crew to be on deck in severe weather, at night, and on
slippery surfaces would be of value.
Decks on the forward part of the ship, but also including lifeboat launch should be given
highest ice protection priority. This will remove considerable weight, improving vessel
sea-worthiness and stability, and provide a safe topside operating environment.
Measures like heat traced lifeboat hatches and davits are recommended and vessels
should be equipped with arctic life rafts which have trace heating installed inside them.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 40 of 43
De-icing or anti-icing electronics, mooring and navigation, safety and boat launch
hardware will improve safety and allow greater operating success.
Vessel design for anti-icing may increase design and construction cost, but can
significantly increase workability and has potentially minimal operational costs.
There is a need for more field observations of sea spray formation and icing for all types
of vessels
Systematic procedure should be developed to determine sea spray formation and air
flows for particular types of vessels.
New prediction models should be developed that are relevant for larger vessels based
on actual observations and measurements.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 41 of 43
APPENDIX A REFERENCES
ABS (2010). Guide for Vessels Operating in Low Temperature Environments, American Bureau
of Shipping, Houston, August 2010.
CSA (2004). General Requirements, Design Criteria, the Environment and Loads. CSA S471.
Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, Canada.
DNV (2013). Classification Rules for Ships, Part 5, Chapter 1 Ships for Navigation in Ice
ISO (2010). Petroleum and natural gas industries - Arctic offshore structures. Final Draft
International Standard. ISO/FDIS 19906.
NORSOK (1999) (Norsk senter for kologisk landbruk). N-003, Actions and Action Effects
(rev. 1).
Russian Maritime Register of Shipping (2008). Rules for the Classification, Construction and
Equipment of Mobile Offshore Drilling Units and Fixed Offshore Platforms. ND No. 2-020201-
008-E. St. Petersburg.
Russian Maritime Register of Shipping (2010). Rules for the Classification and Construction of
Sea-Going Ships. ND No. 2-020101-056-E. St. Petersburg.
Note this list is not meant to be exhaustive; it focuses on field measurements and observations,
and empirical rather than theoretical models
Agnew, T.A. (1985). The SEDNETH II - A Severe Rig Icing Event on the East Coast.
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Offshore Winds and Icing.
Baller, H. (1983), Rig Winterization to Allow Year-round Drilling off Northern Norway. Oil and
Gas Journal, August 1983.
Brown, R.D., and Horjen, I. (1989). Evaluation of State-of-the-Art Drilling Platform Icing Models.
Canadian Climate Centre Report 89-10.
Chung, K.K., and Lozowski, E.P. (1996). Offshore Drilling Platform Icing: A Review. National
Energy Board of Canada Report.
DNV (2005). Managing Cold Climate Risks. Classification News, No. 3, June 2005.
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 42 of 43
Horjen, I., Vefsnmo, S., and Bjerke, P.L. (1988). Sea Spray Icing on Rigs and Supply Vessels.
Norwegian Hydrodynamic Laboratories. ESARC Report 15.
Kelly, P.M., and Karas, J.H.W. (1989). Ice Accretion in the Barents Sea: Phase 3.2, Ross Rig
Data Analysis. University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, Norwich, England.
Labelle, J.C., Wise, J.L., Voelker, R.P., Schulze, R.H., and Wohl, G.M. (1983). Alaska Marine
Ice Atlas, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (Alaska), University of Alaska,
Anchorage.
Lset, S. (1985). Investigation and Research on Anti-icing and De-icing Devices for Marine
Application. In Proceedings, International Workshop on Offshore Winds and Icing, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, 7-11 October, 1985.
Lset, S., Shkhinek, K.N., Gudmestad, O.T. and Hyland, K.V. (2006). Actions from Ice on
Arctic Offshore and Coastal Structures. Publisher LAN, 2006, St. Petersburg.
Lozowski, E.P., Forest, T., Chung, K.K., and Szilder, K. (2002). Study of Marine Icing. National
Research Council Canada Institute for Marine Dynamics, Report CR-2002-03.
Lundqvist, J-E and Udin, I. (1977). Ice Accretion on Ships with Special Emphasis on Baltic
Conditions. Winter Navigation Research Board, Swedish Administration of Shipping and
Navigation, Finnish Board of Navigation, Research Report No. 23.
Makkonen, L. (1989). Formation of Spray Ice on Offshore Structures, 9th IAHR Ice Symp.,
Sapporo Japan
Minsk, L.D. (1984a). Assessment of Ice Accretion on Offshore Structures. US Army Cold
Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire, CRREL Special
Report 84-4, 12 p.
Minsk, L.D. (1984b). Ice Observation Program on the Semisubmersible Drilling Vessel SEDCO
708. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Special Report 84-02.
Mitten, P. (1987). Rig Icing Monitoring Program, 1986-87. Downsview, Ontario: Atmospheric
Environment Service.
Nauman, J.W., and Tyagi, R. (1985). Superstructure Icing and Freezing Conditions on Offshore
Drill Rigs, Alaska: Experience and Regulatory Implications. Proceedings of the International
Workshop on Offshore Winds and Icing.
Pease, C.H. and Comiskey, A.L. (1986). Vessel Icing in Alaskan Waters -1979 to 1984 Data
Set. US NOAA, Environmental Research Laboratories, Report ERL PMEL-14.
Roebber, P., and Mitten, P. (1987). Modelling and Measurement of Icing in Canadian Waters.
Canadian Climate Centre Report 87-15.
Ryerson, C.C. (2008). Assessment of Superstructure Ice Protection as Applied to Offshore Oil
Operations Safety - Problems, Hazards, Needs, and Potential Transfer Technologies. US Army
Date Reference Status Page
11 October 2013 IHC-OTI/ 38028 Final draft 43 of 43
Searby, H.W. et al. (1977). Climatic atlas of the outer continental shelf waters and coastal
regions of Alaska, 3 vols., Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, AEIDC Pub. B-77,
University of Alaska, Anchorage.
Teigen, S.T. (2013). Simulation of Marine Icing for Arctic Offshore Field Developments, slide
presentation at Kursdagene, NTNU, January 2013.