6 ms·
Ok - I get the 'artificial reef is good' aspect but leaving the topside structures in place? No way is that environmentally safe to do (imo). I’ve been on a fe
by Pick-A-Hill2019 6y ago
Ok - I get the 'artificial reef is good' aspect but leaving the topside structures in place?
No way is that environmentally safe to do (imo). I’ve been on a few rigs over the years and the Topside structures are heavily contaminated with various petrochemicals.
By the time you have decontaminated it sufficiently for it not to be toxic to marine life and doing it at sea with all of the added costs and complexities vs. a full cap and off-shore decommission? Uhmm no, the sums don't add up.
Factor in the the added (admittedly pennies per tonne) value of the the scrap metal and the benefits of just leaving it there are head scratching.
Being fair – perhaps a properly capped well with the jacket left as an artificial reef might make sense, although the chances of it being snagged or snapped in the decades to come by a passing vessel probably outweighs the slight benefits of leaving it there for marine life to inhabit it.
I’m assuming that the proposal in TFA includes the costs of ensuring that all of that rusting infrastructure is properly decontaminated before it slowly corrodes and drops down to the sea bed but the article doesn't seem to mention that.
The costs of ensuring that the topside structure (the 'oil rig' bit that sticks out of the water) is properly decontaminated at sea to a level that would be safe(-ish) for marine life? Yeah, I think HN correctly spotted the smell of bs in the authors' proposal.
- OldHand2018 6y agoThe article includes a link to the US program for turning rigs into reefs [1]. You should read that link. To start, the rig must be a good candidate for acceptance into the program (which includes contamination - or lack thereof) and the operator must generally “donate” half of the money they would save to the US state that will be accepting the rig to pay for the costs involved in maintaining the rig as a reef. [1] https://www.bsee.gov/what-we-do/environmental-focuses/rigs-to-reefs https://www.bsee.gov/what-we-do/environmental-focuses/rigs-t...
- Triv888 6y ago> I’ve been on a few rigs over the years and the Topside structures are heavily contaminated with various petrochemicals. I bet that is nothing compared to what leaked from the well..
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- moneytide1 6y agoCarbon could be considered a resource if you want to grow trees on another terrestrial body with a ballpark atmospheric pressure acceptable range. Volume was the reason this generated the highest spreads with EVE online Auto generated station goods. A properly plugged & sealed tunnel to an aquifer of settled algae over time after blooms (nitrogen release Events) have fallen out of suspension and been compressed by pressure (Mariana Trench been tapped?) is where an oil rig can be intermittently towed in case the tap needs to get turned on that quarter. And soil carried a volume penalty, but that is because there are exoskeletons and tunnels (evidence of centipedes and earthworms that have lived and died - "nature's cupbearer" for healthy soil) that create high surface area in a sediment mixture. Imagine rooting into raw regolith that fungi hasnt already "worked through" (import DNA for micro organisms [1] with even more surface area to process atmospheric N C H O before even introducing "compost-glistening-with-the-sparkles-of-exoskeltons" that is pleasant to smell) [1] https://www.amazon.com/Algae-Research-Supply-Education-Aquaculture/dp/B073TLZGCD https://www.amazon.com/Algae-Research-Supply-Education-Aquac...
- forgotmypw17 6y agoWhenever I hear about "artificial reef" stuff, it smells like someone trying to shirk dismantling and cleanup costs.