Just look at this map:

This is the area which has been set aside for oil and gas drilling by the Federal government.
Now keep in mind seven simple things:

1. Trouble happens, whatever plans made – think of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, in April 2010.
2. A drill under sea is a hole through a particularly thin layer of earth crust, prone to unexpectedly enlarge from hole to large gap – think quakes.
3. You can’t easily access down there in deep water a troublesome drill – think storms.
4. When oil gushes out, it is transported by currents to pollute far and away – think home…
5. These currents flow from the drilling area towards Kangaroo Island, along both the north and south coasts – think oil slick everywhere…
6. That kind of damage is ecologically irreversible (most of the Gulf of Mexico is practically a dead or sick zone now) – think disaster zone.
7. Once polluted, Kangaroo Island is economically dead – think selling your home or business at crushed prices (if you can…) and moving away.

Many people are not aware of this highest level threat to Kangaroo Island and the whole surrounding area, despite the very informative post created in July 2011 by Geoff and Margi Prideaux, part of the network of wardens of the Island’s whales and other cetaceans (and also makers of an excellent sour dough bread, by the way).

So here it is, copied as is. Read it slowly, ponder the implications… and use the sample letter to write to the Federal minister who approved all this. This decision needs to be reversed, it’s a major matter of life and death.

Dr Gabriel Bittar, Kangaroo Island
*****************************************

Oil risk too high for Kangaroo Island

On Friday 8th July 2011, the Bight Petroleum Corporation was granted permits to explore for oil and gas by Federal Minster for Resources, Energy and Tourism, Martin Ferguson.

While the decision to grant the permits to explore the region west of Kangaroo Island is disappointing, we can still use our Federal environment laws to influence the outcome. Extra ‘conditions’ have been applied to these permits and this is a signal that we still have some opportunity to ensure that the risks of seismic testing and eventually an oil rig are contained. The Bight Petroleum Corporation must be made to jump through some difficult hoops.

How the Government reacts to the next stage of the process will tell us if they are serious about protecting Kangaroo Island’s tourism, fisheries and marine environment.

We believe influencing the Minister now is incredibly important and we urge anyone who is personally interested to send a letter or email to Minister Burke urging that he should fully use these environment laws to fully assess the impact of what Bight Petroleum Corp proposes.

A draft letter

We have drafted a letter that everyone is free to use as it stands or as a guide. Either open this letter in your own email browser, copy and paste the letter or email below or simply use this as a starting point for your own letter or email.

The Hon Tony Burke MP
Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.
PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Telephone: (02) 6277 7640
Fax: (02) 6273 6101
Email: Tony.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au

Dear Minister Burke,
We have heard and have concerns that the Bight Petroleum Corp has been granted a permit to explore for oil and gas off the west coast of Kangaroo Island (permit areas EPP41 and EPP42).

This is a region of critical importance to both Kangaroo Island’s fishing communities (commercial and recreational) and the wildlife associated with the Island’s ecotourism industry.

We are alarmed that we have had no say in this process for such a risk placed on our doorstep.

We understand that you have the option to decide that Bight Petroleum Corp’s activities are a ‘Controlled Action’ and that you can determine their assessment should be through an ‘Environmental Impact Statement’ or ‘Public Environment Report’ or else by a ‘Public Inquiry’.

We urge you to decide that this level of assessment is applied and that your decisions are based on solid technical and scientific evidence, not the company’s promises; that you verify that there will be no impact from exploration or extraction.

The petroleum industry’s track record of oil spills gives us no confidence that we can rely on anything less than your full and robust assessment. We urge you to use the full weight of Australia’s environment legislation.

Yours sincerely,

More information

The following information is provided to help anyone wishing to influence the Governments process to ensure they fully use Australia’s Federal environment laws to fully assess the impact of what Bight Petroleum Corp proposes.

Quick links

The legal process explained
Two phases of operation: exploration and then extraction
The risks: from extreme noise pollution to oil spills
The importance of the Kangaroo Island Pool, Canyons and Eyre Peninsula Upwellings
Formal detail of the granted permits
Useful links

The legal process explained

We have a window coming to use our Federal environment laws and to influence Federal Environment Minister, Tony Burke to get the best possible outcome we can. How Minister Burke reacts to the next stage of the process will tell us if the Federal Government is serious about protecting the Island’s tourism, fisheries and marine environment.

Bight Petroleum Corp now has to submit what is called a referral to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999. This referral needs to meet certain standards, and to explain how the company will reduce risks. However, the standards are typically quite low, and the oil and gas industry has not experienced much scrutiny at this stage. We have no way of knowing when Bight Petroleum Corp will submit their referral. It could be in a week. It could be six months.

There are two points of influence we can have right now. The first is that Minister Burke needs to hear from the Island that we want him to fully use these environment laws to fully assess the impact of what Bight Petroleum Corp proposes. This means we want the Minister to decide that Bight Petroleum Corp’s activities are what is called a ‘Controlled Action’ and that we want a transparent assessment through what the legislation calls an ‘Environmental Impact Statement’ or ‘Public Environment Report’ or else by a ‘Public Inquiry’.

Anything less than these formal options and Minister Ferguson’s assurances that we can trust the Government will be shown to be hollow and meaningless.

The second point of influence is more technical and difficult. When Bight Petroleum Corp submits their referral, it will be posted on the Government website and comments from the public and experts will be invited. There will be only 10 working days to do this. We are preparing a comment and would welcome hearing from others wishing to do so as well.

We believe that influencing the Minister now is incredibly important and we urge anyone who is personally interested to send a letter or email to Minister Burke urging that he should fully use these environment laws to assess the impact of what Bight Petroleum Corp proposes.

back

Two phases of operation: exploration and then extraction

The Bight Petroleum Corporation need to apply for two separate phases of operation. Their ‘exploration phase’ is the first and is what is being considered now. During this phase, they are exploring to see if there is a good potential to find oil and gas. If they complete this phase and believe there is a good potential they will find oil and gas, they will then apply to set up whichever rigs and shipping they deem appropriate. This is known as the ‘extraction phase’.

We need to know that the Government will make their decision about how Bight Petroleum can operate in both of the phases through an Environmental Impact Statement, Public Environment Report or a Public Inquiry. Anything less than these options and the Governments assurances will be shown to be hollow and meaningless.

The risks: from extreme noise pollution to oil spills

When they are still in their ‘exploration phase’, the risk involved relate to very high pressure and potentially destructive noise, detectable within the water column.

The petroleum industry uses a technique which involves projecting high-energy sound pulses into the water column to generate seismic waves that can penetrate into the earth’s crust beneath the sea. The sound waves that reflect back can then be studied to show geological structures of types often associated with petroleum deposits.

Pneumatic air-guns are the most common energy source for these so called ‘seismic surveys’, which are usually conducted by towing an array of air-guns just below the sea surface behind a ship.

During seismic surveys, a predominantly low frequency high intensity sound pulse is emitted every few seconds by the array of guns, at a sound pressure level that is determined by the survey. Surveys typically operate 24 hours/day over a period of one or two months. Sound pulses from these surveys are often detectable underwater hundreds of kilometres away.

While the seismic surveys are taking place, fishing vessels and divers will not be permitted in the area. There is solid scientific evidence that the impact of the emitted sound pulses are dangerous to marine mammals and fish species that have air-filled swim bladders. Impacts can range from hearing damage through to death.

When they move into their ‘extraction phase’ noise is no longer the issue. We then enter a risk period of oil spills.

When oil is spilled in the ocean, it initially spreads in the water (primarily on the surface, in a slick sometimes many meters deep), depending on its relative density and composition. The oil slick formed may remain cohesive in calm seas or may break up in rough seas. Waves, water currents and wind can force the oil slick to drift over large areas, impacting the open ocean, coastal areas, marine and terrestrial habitats in the path of the drift.

In the weeks and months following an oil spill, oil that contains volatile organic compounds partially evaporates, losing between 20 and 40 percent of its mass and becoming denser and more viscous (more resistant to flow). The oil residue either disperses in the water or forms a thick mousse with the water. Part of the oil residue may sink to the seabed. Some residue will eventually congeals into sticky tar balls.

Over time, oil residue deteriorates, disintegrates and decomposes through exposure to sunlight and microorganisms. The rate of these processes varies depending on the availability of nutrients, oxygen, and microorganisms, as well as temperature. If oil reaches the shoreline or coast, it interacts with sediments such as beach sand, gravel, rocks, boulders and vegetation. This residue can be toxic to marine and coastal wildlife and has potential far-reaching impacts as it enters the marine food chain.

Oil spills present the potential for enormous harm to deep ocean and coastal fisheries. The immediate effects of toxic and smothering oil waste may cause a mass mortality and contamination of commercial fish, prey species and other marine wildlife. Long-term ecological effects may be worse, interrupting the food chain on which fish, marine mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds depend and on which their reproductive success is based. Commercial fishing enterprises can be affected permanently.

The importance of the Kangaroo Island Pool, Canyons and Eyre Peninsula Upwellings

The Kangaroo Island Pool, Canyons and Eyre Peninsula Upwellings have been studied extensively. The physical, chemical and ecological processes including their importance to primary production as well as the locations of whale aggregations is well known.

Water current patterns for this region rise up from the canyons and shelf break and wrap around the western end of Kangaroo Island flowing across the northern coastline.

The nutrient-rich upwelling in this region enhances the production of plankton communities that support seasonal aggregations of krill, small pelagic fish and squid, which in turn attract sharks, medium and large pelagic and predatory fish (of commercial importance), marine mammals (such as whales, dolphins, and New Zealand fur seals) and seabirds.

This region is of critical importance to both Kangaroo Islands fishing communities (commercial and recreational) and the wildlife associated with the Island’s ecotourism industry.

Formal detail of the granted permits

The following details have been provided by the Australian Government through Minister Ferguson’s announcement.

Minister Ferguson is quoted as saying:

“The exploration activities to be undertaken in the Bight region will also be subject to additional conditions, attached to the two permits, recognising the region’s importance in terms of tourism, agriculture and the marine environment.
“Local communities can have confidence that the highest and most stringent safety standards will apply to exploration, with any future work subject to further environmental and regulatory approval processes.”

Granted Permits

EPP41 (released as S10-1), straddling the Duntroon and Ceduna Sub-basins of the Bight Basin off South Australia, has been awarded to Bight Petroleum Corp. The company proposes a guaranteed work program of 768 km2 of new 3D seismic surveying, bathymetry surveying, geochemical sampling surveying, an exploration well and geotechnical studies to an estimated value of A$63.625m. The secondary work program consists of 1969 km2 of new 3D seismic surveying, two exploration wells and geotechnical studies to an estimated value of A$156.2m. There was one other bid for this area.

EPP42 (released as S10-2), straddling the Duntroon and Ceduna Sub-basins of the Bight Basin off South Australia, has been awarded to Bight Petroleum Corp. The company proposes a guaranteed work program of 235 km of new 2D swath seismic surveying, bathymetry surveying, geochemical sampling surveying and geotechnical studies at an estimated value of A$3.975m. The secondary work program consists of an exploration well, 405 km of new 2D swath seismic surveying and geotechnical studies to an estimated value of A$49.9m. There were no other bids for this area.

Additional Conditions

In addition to the standard exploration permit terms and conditions, the permits awarded to Bight Petroleum Corporation are subject to the following conditions:

1. a well-design and integrity-monitoring plan to assure well integrity within each well drilled, to include detail of maintenance for the active life of the well including quarterly compliance reporting;
2. independent certification by the original provider, prior to installation, that each blowout preventer has been satisfactorily tested to design pressures;
3. a report detailing hydrocarbon spill mitigation technologies and risk mitigation processes that it will deploy throughout the drill and maintain for the active life of the well; and
4. a report delineating relevant operational risks identified and associated risk mitigation strategies and processes that will be deployed by the permittee and any third party contractors involved in the drilling operation.

Useful links

1. Map of all the acreage leases just granted
2. Bight Petroleum’s website
3. EPBC Act environment assessment process
4. Minister Ferguson’s permit announcement
5. Australian Maritime Safety Authority comment about the impacts of oil spills
6. Scientific paper on the impacts of the Prestige oil spill on lobster, fin fish and shrimp fisheries in the Northern Iberian shelf, north west Spain
7. Scientific paper on the impacts of the Prestige oil spill on marine mollusks, north west Spain
8. Scientific chapter on the effects of the Prestige Oil Spill on the biota of north west Spain
9. Scientific paper on the impacts of the Hebei-Spirit oil spill on local finfish and shelfish fisheries, Korea
10. Scientific paper on the impacts to the resident orca populations from the Exxon Valdez spill, Prince William Sound, USA
11. Scientific paper estimating the impacts to whales and dolphins from the Deepwater Horizon spill, Gulf of Mexico, USA
12. Scientific paper estimating natural resource damages for 23 Florida cases using physical fates and biological modeling, from the Deepwater Horizon spill, Gulf of Mexico, USA
13. Scientific paper on persistence, toxicity, and long-term environmental impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Prince William Sound, USA
14. Scientific paper on Big oil, big consequences, and the big unknown: exploring the legal, regulatory, and environmental impact of the Gulf oil spill: disasters and ecosystem services deprivation: from Cuyahoga to the Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico, USA
15. General readership paper on fish, mollusks and other sea animals’ use of sound, and the impact of human created noise in the marine acoustic environment

Geoff and Margi Prideaux
Kangaroo Island
Monday, 11th July 2011