1. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Madrid, Jan 24, 2008 Elimination Units for Marine Oil Pollution Application of the EU-MOP system

2. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Unit Types EU-MOP Operational Capabilities EU-MOP Response Rationale Case-studies: Application of EU-MOP in European waters Overall judgment of EU-MOP oil-spill cleaning potential Overview

3. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Unit Types L-size Catamaran L-size MonoCat

4. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Unit Types M-size Catamaran M-size MonoCat

5. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Unit Types S-size

6. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium L-size and M-size Up to Sea State 4 e.g. open ocean / enclosed sea S-size (mainly) Sea State 1 e.g. shallow water / port areas EU-MOP Operational Capabilities

7. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Operational Capabilities Possible Locations for EU-MOP Solution

8. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Response Rationale

9. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Response Rationale Strategic Level

10. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level EU-MOP Response Rationale

11. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP Response Rationale Operational Level

12. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Case-studies: Application in European waters Case-studies of real spill incidents and the application of EU-MOP on: Strategic Level Tactical Level Operational Level have been analysed for real spill incidents in: Spanish waters (Sierra Nava incident) Greek waters (Nordland incident) UK waters (Tenby Harbor incident) Next, the Spanish and Greek case-studies are briefly presented

13. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Strategic Level Analysis: South of Spain (broader risk area) The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill 3 candidate facility sites 4 potential spill sites 1 2 3 1 2 3 4

14. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Strategic Level Analysis: Probabilistic Data (abstract) The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill

15. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Strategic Level Analysis: Simulation Results The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill Type 2: 14 units Type 4: 2 units

16. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Strategic Level Analysis: Simulation Results* *Assumption: the weathering of oil is not taken into account The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill

17. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 350 tonnes spill (Sierra Nava) Scenario based on actual response The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill Spill site Actual response: 1 skimmer and 1 tug boat Removed 35 tonnes in 5 days

18. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 350 tonnes spill (Sierra Nava) Scenario based on actual response (1 facility) and strategic simulation (14 M-size Cat units) The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill Spill site Type 2: 14 units Storage of 14 “Type 2” (M-size Cat) units in Algeciras Weathering of oil taken into account

19. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 350 tonnes spill (Sierra Nava) Simulation results The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill Spill site Type 2: 14 units DAY1 7 “Type 2” (M-size Cat) units dispatched to spill site 120 tonnes removed

20. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill Spill site Type 2: 7 units DAY2 5 “Type 2” (M-size Cat) already at the spill site remove 114 tonnes Tactical Level Analysis: 350 tonnes spill (Sierra Nava) Simulation results

21. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 350 tonnes spill (Sierra Nava) Simulation results: Overall response The Spanish Case: Sierra Nava Spill

22. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Strategic Level Analysis: South of Peloponnesus (broader risk area) Case-study: Application in Greek waters

23. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Strategic Level Analysis: Simulation Results Case-study: Application in Greek waters Type 2: 8 units Type 4: 2 units

24. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Case-study: Application in Greek waters Strategic Level Analysis: Simulation Results* *Assumption: the weathering of oil is not taken into account

25. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 110 tonnes spill (Nordland) Scenario 1 (based on strategic) Case-study: Application in Greek waters

26. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 110 tonnes spill (Nordland) Scenario 1 Simulation Results Case-study: Application in Greek waters 7 “Type 2” (M-size Cat) units dispatched to spill site Full oil recovery within 25 hours

27. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 110 tonnes spill (Nordland) Scenario 2 (comparison with actual response) Case-study: Application in Greek waters Actual response: 1 Aktaia vessel and 1 weir skimmer dispatched from Piraeus Removed 14 tonnes in 8 days

28. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 110 tonnes spill (Nordland) Scenario 2 (comparison with actual response) Case-study: Application in Greek waters Scenario 2: Storage of 12 “Type 2” (M-size Cat) units in Piraeus Weathering of oil taken into account

29. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: 110 tonnes spill (Nordland) Scenario 2: Simulation Results Case-study: Application in Greek waters 5 “Type 2” (M-size Cat) units dispatched to spill site 106 tonnes removed within 35 hours

30. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Tactical Level Analysis: Results assessment (of a number of scenarios) Case-study: Application in Greek waters *In scenario 4, the high figure is due to the fact that only a fraction of the spilled oil was collected because of imposed operational limitations

31. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Operational Level Analysis: swarms of 8 M-size or 8 L-size units considered Case-study: Application in Greek waters

32. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Operational Level Analysis: swarms of 8 M-size or 8 L-size units considered Case-study: Application in Greek waters

33. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium Cost-Benefit Analysis Case-study: Application in Greek waters Greek waters scenario (South of Peloponnesus) considering spill incidents similar to Nordland

34. © © 2005 EU-MOP Consortium EU-MOP is on the right track and is a promising solution for the future of oil confrontation Application of the EU-MOP system