Offshore decommissioning horizon scan: Research priorities to support decision-making activities for oil and gas infrastructure.

Thousands of oil and gas structures have been installed in the world's oceans over the past 70 years to meet the population's reliance on hydrocarbons. Over the last decade, there has been increased concern over how to handle decommissioning of this infrastructure when it reaches the end of its operational life. Complete or partial removal may or may not present the best option when considering potential impacts on the environment, society, technical feasibility, economy, and future asset liability. Re-purposing of offshore structures may also be a valid legal option under international maritime law where robust evidence exists to support this option. Given the complex nature of decommissioning offshore infrastructure, a global horizon scan was undertaken, eliciting input from an interdisciplinary cohort of 35 global experts to develop the top ten priority research needs to further inform decommissioning decisions and advance our understanding of their potential impacts. The highest research priorities included: (1) an assessment of impacts of contaminants and their acceptable environmental limits to reduce potential for ecological harm; (2) defining risk and acceptability thresholds in policy/governance; (3) characterising liability issues of ongoing costs and responsibility; and (4) quantification of impacts to ecosystem services. The remaining top ten priorities included: (5) quantifying ecological connectivity; (6) assessing marine life productivity; (7) determining feasibility of infrastructure re-use; (8) identification of stakeholder views and values; (9) quantification of greenhouse gas emissions; and (10) developing a transdisciplinary decommissioning decision-making process. Addressing these priorities will help inform policy development and governance frameworks to provide industry and stakeholders with a clearer path forward for offshore decommissioning. The principles and framework developed in this paper are equally applicable for informing responsible decommissioning of offshore renewable energy infrastructure, in particular wind turbines, a field that is accelerating rapidly.

Integrating ecosystem services into crop protection and pest management: Case study with the soil fumigant 1,3-dichloropropene and its use in tomato production in Italy.

Ecosystems provide the conditions for producing food, regulating water, and providing wildlife habitats; these, among others, are known as ecosystem services (ESs). Food production is both economically and culturally important to southern European farmers, particularly in Italy where farmers grow flavorsome tomatoes with passion and pride. Growers rely on pesticides for crop protection, the potential environmental impact of which is often questioned by regulators and other stakeholders. The European regulatory system for the approval of pesticides includes a thorough evaluation of risks to the environment and is designed to be protective of ecosystems. The consideration of ESs in environmental decision making is a growing trend, and the present case study provides an example of how ESs evaluation could be used to enhance agricultural practices and regulatory policy for crop protection. By attacking plant roots, nematodes may affect the growth and yield of fruit and vegetable crops, and the income earned by farmers at harvest time. Available solutions include chemical treatments such as 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D), physical treatments (solarization), and biological treatments (biofumigation). In order to characterize the risks and benefits associated with the use of 1,3-D in crop protection, ESs and socioeconomic analyses were applied to its use in the control of nematodes in tomato cultivation in southern Italy. The present study confirmed the benefits of 1,3-D to tomato production in Italy, with significant positive effects on production yields and farm income when compared to limited and transient potential impacts on services such as soil function. It was confirmed that 1,3-D allows farm income to be maintained and secures tomato production in these regions for the future. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:801-810. © 2016 SETAC.

Integrating ecosystem services into risk management decisions: case study with Spanish citrus and the insecticide chlorpyrifos.

The European regulatory system for the approval of pesticides includes a thorough evaluation of risks to the environment and is designed to be protective of ecosystems. However, a decision to ban an agrochemical could also potentially have a negative impact on the value of ecosystem services, if resulting changes in crop management are damaging to ecosystems or result in negative socio-economic impacts. To support regulatory decision-making, consideration of ecosystem services to identify best environmental management options could be a way forward. There is generally a growing trend for the consideration of ecosystem services in decision making. Ecosystems provide the conditions for growing food, regulate water and provide wildlife habitats; these, amongst others, are known as ecosystem services. The objectives of this case study were to bring a holistic approach to decision making by valuing the environmental, social and economic benefits derived from the use of chlorpyrifos in Valencian citrus production. Spanish growers harvest between 5 and 6 milliont of citrus annually, worth an estimated €5 to 7 billion in food markets throughout Europe. The approach highlighted the potential for unintended negative consequences of regulatory decisions if the full context is not considered. In this study, rather than a regulatory restriction, the best option was the continued use of chlorpyrifos together with vegetated conservation patches as refuges for non-target insects. The conservation patches offset potential insecticidal impacts to insects whilst maintaining citrus production, farm income and the amenity value of the citrus landscape of Valencia. This was an initial proof-of-concept study and illustrates the importance of a wider perspective; other cases may have different outcomes depending on policies, the pesticide, crop scenarios, farm economics and the region.

A framework for net environmental benefit analysis for remediation or restoration of contaminated sites.

Net environmental benefits are gains in value of environmental services or other ecological properties attained by remediation or ecological restoration minus the value of adverse environmental effects caused by those actions. Net environmental benefit analysis (NEBA) is a methodology for comparing and ranking net environmental benefits associated with multiple management alternatives. A NEBA for chemically contaminated sites typically involves comparison of several management alternatives: (1) leaving contamination in place; (2) physically, chemically, or biologically remediating the site through traditional means; (3) improving ecological value through onsite and offsite restoration alternatives that do not directly focus on removal of chemical contamination; or (4) a combination of those alternatives. NEBA involves activities that are common to remedial alternatives analysis for state regulations and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, post-closure and corrective action permits under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, evaluation of generic types of response actions pertinent to the Oil Pollution Act, and land management actions that are negotiated with regulatory agencies in flexible regulatory environments (i.e., valuing environmental services or other ecological properties, assessing adverse impacts, and evaluating remediation or restoration options). This article presents a high-level framework for NEBA at contaminated sites with subframeworks for natural attenuation (the contaminated reference state), remediation, and ecological restoration alternatives. Primary information gaps related to NEBA include nonmonetary valuation methods, exposure-response models for all stressors, the temporal dynamics of ecological recovery, and optimal strategies for ecological restoration.