OGP JOINT INDUSTRY PROGRAMME: E&P SOUND AND MARINE LIFE OGP JOINT INDUSTRY PROGRAMME: E&P SOUND AND MARINE LIFE Research and Development to Inform Decision Making, Risk Reduction and Management Russell D. Tait Presentation to OGP Sound & Marine Life JIP Tagging Workshop St. Andrews, Scotland March 20, 2007

Sperm Calving / Feeding Bottlenose Habitat Fisheries Gray Migration / Feeding S. Right / Blue / Humpback Migration / Breeding / Calving Humpback / Sperm / Others Migration / Breeding Bowhead Migration / Calving Gray Migration / Calving Global Nature of E&P Operations and Sound Issue Fisheries

Man-made Sound in The Marine Environment Industry faces this issue on global basis –Operational and access restrictions Regional issues –Taken up in a number of places and generally concludes that too little is known –Parallel issue: Marine Protected Areas Scientific basis needed to assess extent of the issue –Assess real risks/ impacts from E&P operations –Evaluate mitigation methods and develop effective options –Input to policy and regulatory decision processes JIP will address the issue by facilitating acquisition of required information –Rigorous scientific approach –Focus on key questions relevant to E&P Industry –Industry specific and collaborative research identified

Source – Pathway – Receiver Model Propagation divergence attenuation sea bed effects Sound Sources source level spectral content duty cycle Directivity Receiver audiogram demographic activity population status Behavior Diving Breathing Vocalization... Physical Injury Auditory Injury Behavior Changes Biological Significance ? IMPACT ? Navies E&P Construction Shipping Other OGP JIP will focus on Mitigation Research Tools

Phased Approach to Address E&P Sound and Marine Life Phase 1: Duration: 4Q 2004 to 1Q 2006 Members: –BPChevronConocoPhillips –ExxonMobilHydroIAGC –ShellStatoilTotal Assessment of issue, knowledge gaps, research options, model for prioritization Phase 2 / Research Implementation: Address Research/Scientific gaps Mitigation and monitoring 14 E&P Companies Anadarko, BG Group, BHP Billiton, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, ExxonMobil, Norsk-Hydro, Santos, Shell, Statoil, Total, Woodside, 1 Industry Association (IAGC) Funding –2006 >US$8M –2007 ~US$8.3M Uses/Users of Research Results Companies, Trade Associations, Researchers, JIP Programme Manager OGP secretariat OGP/ IAGC Marine Mammal Task Force (advocacy) Complete 3 year commitment initiated May, 2006

Implementation of Prioritised Research Higher Priorities (as a proposal to JIP Phase 2): –Sound characterization methods standardisation and industry sound inventory –Source characterization for seismic exploration and other E&P sound sources –Sound propagation models –Passive Acoustic Monitoring: especially PAMGUARD software development –Understanding biological significance –Animal tagging technology development –Temporary threshold shift in Cetaceans after exposure to repeated pulse sounds from airguns –Sound attenuation technology –Effectiveness of airgun start-up procedures and operational parameters –Behavioural reactions of marine life to E&P sound –Electrophysiological methods to enhance audiogram collection (e.g. Auditory Evoked Potential) Medium & Lower Priority research projects (22 Identified)

Implementation of Prioritised Research cont. Medium priorities (as a proposal to JIP Phase 2): –Develop Measurement Standards for Sound Source Characterization –Beaked Whale Issue: Nitrogen Bubble Formation –Collect and Analyze Marine Mammal Observer (MMO) Data –Alternative Sound Sources and Sound Reduction: Alternate Seismic Exploration –Development and Improvement of Autonomous Buoys for PAM –Epithelial/Hair Cell Damage in Fish Ears –Audiograms – Fish –Anatomical Ear Models of Larger Whale Species (for developing audiograms) –Active Acoustic Monitoring (AAM) –Marine Mammal Observers (MMO) Methods and Effectiveness

Research Projects Initiated 1 Sound Source Characterisation –Seismic 3-D characterisation –Single/Cluster measurement –Sound attenuation review –Industry sound inventory review 2 Physiological Effects –TTS in Odontocetes –Blood nitrogen uptake –Mysticete hearing 3 Behavioral Reactions & Biological Significance 4 Mitigation & Monitoring –PAMGuard –Active Acoustic Monitoring –Acoustic vector sensor –MMO data methods & potential use –Silencing technologies review 5 Research Tools –Tagging development workshop –GPS/Depth Tag field testing 6 Other –Conference support –Publications support –Communication

Animal Tagging Technology Development Objectives: –Assess the capability of current tags –As necessary, support development of tagging technology to provide tools applicable for assessment of interaction of E&P sound and marine life Tagging developments: –Record relevant aspects of animal behaviour (breathing, dive profiles, swimming speeds, etc.) –Improve tag durability and duration of recording (temporal and data rate) –Tag deployment, data transmission and tag recovery –Improve battery life –Parameters which facilitate a better understanding of biological significance for key species –Sound exposure / received levels Field testing and proof-of-concept

Migrating Feeding Breeding Resting Behavior iBehavior jBehavior kBehavior m T1 ia T1 i b T1 j b T1 j a T1 j c T1 k b T1 k c T1 mc Adult SurvivalReproduction T2 ax T2 bx T2 bz T2 cz Population Viability Biological Significance T3 x T3 z Behavior Orientation Breathing Vocalization Diving Resting Life Function Migration Feeding Breeding Defense Vital Rate Survivorship Reproduction (age-specific) NRC PCAD Model Provides Context

Tagging Developments / Challenges Exposure of animals will not always be avoidable –Assessment of exposure Questionable links between fine scale behavioral effects and higher level effects, especially population level effects –Transfer functions will take a long time to develop –Will always lead to additional questions that cannot be answered If operations focus on managing risks at the vital rate level, tools are needed to establish effects at the life function level and relate how these could affect reproduction and/or survival –How do you assess levels of change in feeding? How long does it take before affected animals resume feeding? –How much change in migration route is needed to become consequential to reproduction or survival? –What do demographics tell us? –What are key biological rates, and how does assessment relate to these?