From Controversy A multi-attribute to Consensus: decision analysis for decommissioning California’s offshore oil platforms Max Henrion, Phd CEO, Lumina Decision Systems Advancing the Policy Frontier: Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis Annual Conference March 19-20, 2015 Bringing clarity to difficult decisions Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Oil and gas platforms in the Federal and State Waters of Southern California Santa Barbara Co. Platform Harmony Platform A Los Angeles Co. Source: Earthguide.ucsd.edu fuels/images/platforms.jpg Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. How big are offshore oil platforms? A segment of Platform Harmony before installation 375,000 tons steel for all 27 California platforms Cars Large crane Truck Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. How big are offshore oil platforms? Harmony, the largest platform in California, is 1198 ft deep. modified from http://synclaire.net/blog/2008/02/oilplatform-comparison Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Life under the platforms • Platform jackets provide habitat for a substantial marine ecosystem • Common biota include a thick encrustation of mollusks, rockfish breeding, seals, sea lions, and other visiting marine mammals. • Rigs are popular for recreational diving and fishing Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Selected stakeholder organizations Federal and California gov. Owner operators of oil platforms Commercial and sport fishing Environmental groups Recreational divers Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Project client: Skyli McAfee, Executive Director Multidisciplinary Consulting Team Advisory Committee Brock Bernstein, PhD Max Henrion, PhD Surya Swamy Lumina Team lead, Project manager Decision analyst Todd Anderson Doug Anthony San Diego State University Santa Barbara County Lumina Model developer Ann Bull Daniel Pondella, PhD Sarah Kruse, PhD John de Witt Occidental College Ecotrust Marine ecology, fisheries Economist Federal Minerals Management Service Proserv Offshore Bowdoin College Policy analysis Astrid Scholz, PhD Andy Bressler Ecotrust Economist Peter Cantle Bioresources Tim Setnicka Superintendent Channel Islands National Park (ret.) Researcher Laurel Fink Bridget McCann Texaco (ret.) Researcher Offshore engineering Air quality and emissions Federal policy, coastal management Marine ecology Legal and management Robert Byrd Alison Dettmer Dominic Gregorio Linda Fernandez Grigg Gitschlag Alan Hager Sean Hecht Sonke Mastrup Michael McGinnis Mark Meier Mark Page Alan Winer California Coastal Commission Calif. State Water Resources Control Board University of California Riverside National Ocean and Atmospheric Admin California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife UCLA California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife University of California Santa Barbara State Lands Commission University of California Santa Barbara University of Southern California Fisheries Coastal management, air emissions Regulation, compliance Decomm. engineering Coastal management Water quality Environmental policy Resource management Legal & regulatory Environmental law Resource management Decommissioning history, sociology Regulation, compliance Fisheries Air emissions Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. PLATFORM: Decommissioning Decision Support Tool in . • The team worked with OST, the advisory committee, and other stakeholders to structure the model and evaluate the decision tree options against multiple attributes, and to analyze sensitivities and uncertainties. • PLATFORM is an interactive tool to empower stakeholders to explore alternative scenarios and preference models. Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Multi-attribute decision analysis Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Decommissioning Options: Pruning the decision tree Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Partial removal (“rigs to reefs”): Cut off at 85 ft below mean sea level 85 ft Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Multi-attribute decision analysis Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Economic costs of decommissioning Influence diagram of direct costs. Ovals identify uncertainties Tornado diagram: Range sensitivities Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Probability distributions over decommissioning costs Partial removal Complete removal Uncertainty about cost of complete and partial removal: Distributions calibrated to estimation errors in 120 past estimates from 40 decommissioning projects (Byrd, et al). Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Multi-attribute decision analysis Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Attribute: Air quality Local emissions for Platform Harmony • for HLV, transport, and disposal • Complete removal: 600 tonnes NOx, 21 t PM10, 29,400 tons CO2 • Partial removal: 89 t NOx, 3 t PM10, 4,400 t CO2 HLV: Heavy Lift Vessel Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Multi-attribute decision analysis Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Defining and scoring an attribute: Impacts on Marine Mammals Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Multi-attribute decision analysis Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Attribute: Strict compliance with platform leases requiring complete removal Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Multi-attribute decision analysis Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Assessing Swing Weights by Attribute SMARTS: Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Tool with Swing weights (Edwards & Barron,1994) • Rate by swing – i.e. importance of change from worst to best outcome • Select attribute with largest swing weight (100) • Order from largest to smallest • Select weight for each attribute Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Tornado chart: sensitivity to swing weights and uncertainties Each bar shows the effect on a variable of changing swing weight from 0 to 100 Prefer complete removal Compliance weight is the only variable that could change preference from partial to complete removal Higher level favors complete removal only for Compliance and Ocean access weight Prefer partial removal Sensitivity to Cost uncertainty (change from 10th to 90th percentile) is smaller than 7 preferences (swing weights) Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Exploring scenarios: Selecting an option for each Platform Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Changing swing weight on compliance How weight on Strict Compliance changes the preferred decision Platforms ordered by depth: Cost and environmental impact of complete removal increases with depth, so partial removal is preferred. Number of platforms for which complete removal is preferred increases with the weight on strict compliance. Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. The essence of decision in one page Full removal Partial removal: Rigs to Reefs Strict compliance with leases Requires waiver of leases Restore ecosystem integrity Retain most biological production Clear ocean access Retain recreational fishing Significant environmental impacts on air, water, and ecosystems Much reduced environmental impacts on air, water, ecosystems Expected cost $1.09 billion Expected saving over $500 million Operators save over $500 million Split savings between operators and 55%+ to Ocean Conservation Fund Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Driving the Public Policy Decision Process “By clearly identifying the issues, synthesizing the best multi-disciplinary science, daylighting the uncertainty, and providing for unbiased review, the tool .. was successful in distilling the rhetoric to meaningful discussion of trade offs and values. Further, the tool was made available to the public, its assumptions and approach were transparent. Constituents had the opportunity to import various scenarios and learn the best approach. With this tool, sound legislation was passed that will serve California and our marine resources well.” Skyli McAfee, Executive Director Emphasis added Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. Outcomes • Developed legal options to waive “strict compliance”, change ownership of reefs to State, and mitigate liability • Proposed split savings between operators and 55%+ to Ocean Conservation Fund • Clarifying the size of environmental impacts of complete removal helped shift opinion towards partial removal (“rigs to reefs”), now supported by (almost) all stakeholders: • “Rigs-to-Reefs” bill AB 2503 passed almost unanimously by California State house • Signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger on Sep 30, 2010 Platform operators, fishermen, marine biologists, most environmental groups, and California legislators • Decommissioning of first platforms likely in 2015 to 17 Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc. From Controversy to Consensus: A Multi-attribute Decision Analysis for Decommissioning California’s Offshore Oil Platforms Max Henrion, Brock Bernstein, & Surya Swamy Q&A Copyright © 2015 Lumina Decision Systems, Inc.
© Copyright 2024