Seep Tents Masters Project

1. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Seep Tents Masters Project External Review

2. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Group Members • Group Project Manager—Erin Mayberry • Secretary/Recorder—Wendy Stanford • Treasurer—Farah Shamszadeh • Data Manager—Ali Ger • Client Contact—Misty Gonzales

3. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Advisors • Faculty Advisors: • Christopher Costello • Natalie Mahowald • Project Advisor: • Mel Willis

4. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Background • Natural gas and oil seep from the ocean floor in the Santa Barbara Channel • In 1982, ARCO installed 2 concrete and steel pyramids to capture the gas • These are the only tents in the world • The tents are currently operated by Venoco, Inc.

5. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Background • Gas emitted is mostly methane • The seeps are considered a natural source of air pollution in the county • The Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District is exploring additional seep tents as a method to reduce methane emissions

6. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Problem Statement • Is it environmentally advantageous to install additional seep tents to capture naturally released hydrocarbons? Further, is it economically and legally feasible to install additional seep tents?

7. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: study area Maps courtesy of the UCSB Hydrocarbon Seeps Project http://seeps.geol.ucsb.edu/ Area studied by the UCSB Hydrocarbon Seeps Research Group

8. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: study area • Water quality impact area • Same area as geologic study • Air quality and health impact area • Santa Barbara County, CA • Both will have specific section in final document on potential impacts outside of study area

9. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: study area • Terrestrial impact area • Scenario 1: Assume project will use Venoco’s existing facilities • Assessment of impact of increased production levels at Venoco • Scenario 2: Engineering data from APCD include separate processing or co-generation facilities • Evaluate impacts in addition to Scenario 1

10. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: geology • UCSB Hydrocarbon Seeps Project • Reservoir (?) • Flux (?) • Natural variation (?) • Final analysis will include low, medium, and high estimates

11. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: seep tents • Size, number, materials and structure, placement: • Scenario 1: Determined by the results of the A.D. Little engineering estimate ordered by the APCD • Scenario 2: These data are not available. We assume that the project will duplicate the 1982 ARCO project. Design will be updated if possible.

12. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: use of the gas • Who will use the captured gas? • Scenario 1: Gas will be sold openly on the market • Scenario 2: Venoco will contract to sell the gas exclusively to UCSB

13. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: use of the gas • How will the captured gas be used? • Scenario 1: Gas is sold on the market, used for either heat or electricity • Scenario 2: Gas is sold to UCSB • To eliminate the need for an additional electricity generation facility, we assume the gas will be used for heating only • Scenario 3: Gas is sold to UCSB • Engineering report includes co-generation facility, gas used for heating and electricity

14. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: use of the gas • How will the gas be processed? • Assume it is not feasible to construct a new facility to process the gas • Assume the gas will be cleaned using the processing facilities available at Venoco, Inc.’s Ellwood Onshore Facility

15. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: use of the gas • Which pipelines will be used? • Existing pipelines from ARCO tents will be used • New tents will tap into the existing pipelines • (?) Can existing pipelines accept the increased capacity of the new tents? If not, will pipelines need to be built?

16. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: use of the gas • How will the gas be transported to the user? • Gas will be transported via existing infrastructure

17. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: ownership • Who legally owns the captured gas? • The gas is not fugitive gas • Owned by lessee

18. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: planning period • When would the tents be implemented? • How long would it take to finance, get permits for, engineer, build and implement the tents? • Plan to get data from engineering study or original ARCO seep tents Environmental Impact Statement

19. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Critical Assumptions: planning period • What is the useful life of the seep tents? • What is the life of the seeps? • Data from UCSB Hydrocarbon Seeps research group • What is the life of the tents? • Data from engineering study or original ARCO EIS

20. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Areas of Research • Four areas of research: • Economic feasibility study (Wendy) • Legal feasibility study (Farah) • Water quality & ecologic impact study (Ali) • Air quality & climate impact study (Misty)

21. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research II: economic feasibility • Calculate the Net Present Value of future gas sales for the next 20 years • Discover the processing sequence of the gas • Determine at what point gas is sold • Discover who has been gaining revenue from gas sales • Construct time series of past revenues • Determine the potential amount of gas captured by seep tents • Calculate potential future sales revenues of gas for the next 20 years • Perform Monte Carlo Sensitivity Analysis

22. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research II: economic feasibility • Technology Costs • Determine what the existing infrastructure is that supports the collection and processing of seep gases • Determine whether new tents will tie into existing infrastructure or will require additional supporting construction • Estimate engineering costs of construction of seep tents • Estimate fixed costs of installation of seep tents • Discover past maintenance costs of seep tents and infrastructure • Estimate future costs of maintenance of seep tents • Estimate future costs of potential new infrastructure

23. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research II: economic feasibility • Legal and Permitting Costs • Determine permitting fees • Estimate potential fines • Determine the value of potential emissions reduction credits

24. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research III: legal feasibility • Objective: recommendations for the project to be consistent with applicable regulations • In the lifetime of the project there will be 4 phases: • Phase 1: Construction • Phase 2: Operation • Phase 3: Maintenance • Phase 4: Abandonment

25. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research III: legal feasibility • Data collection • What are the federal, state and local agencies that regulate each phase of the project? • Source: Santa Barbara County Clerks’ Office • For each agency, what are the applicable policies and regulations? • Source: Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe/ Legal Research Database

26. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research III: legal feasibility • Analysis • Is each phase of the project consistent with these policies and regulations? • If inconsistent, what are the policy and regulatory constraints on: 1. The site 2. The design 3. The operation

27. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research IV: marine impacts • Goal: To develop a qualitative model that will predict the water quality and related marine ecology impacts of possible seep tent installation • Objectives: • Determine the fate and transport of the seep hydrocarbons • Determine present state of the seep ecology • Gather data about the measured impacts of the ARCO tents • Use the information above as inputs to predict likely impacts of new seep tent installations using the selected scenario

28. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research IV: marine impacts • Ecology and environmental nature of the seeps • What are the surface, long shore and subsurface currents? • How do these currents affect the fate and transport of the seep hydrocarbons in the water column? • How do the hydrocarbons biodegrade? • What is the seep ecology? • What is the species composition and abundance compared to non-seep sites?

29. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research IV: marine impacts • Impacts of seep tents on the marine ecology and water quality • Impacts of the ARCO tents? • Most likely ways that the seeps tents alter benthic ecology? • Links between the benthos and pelagic ecology? • What are the likely water quality impacts of additional seep tents? • Will there be a detectable impact of the tents on selected hydrocarbons concentrations? • How much will the tents reduce the total seep gas emissions into the atmosphere?

30. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research V: air quality & climate • Quantify total volume of VOCs and compare them to other natural sources by obtaining information from the SBCAPCD and UCSB • What types of gas are released? • What is the area of the seepage at the surface? • What is the flux of gas from the surface? • What are other natural sources of VOCs? • What is the total quantity of other natural sources?

31. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research V: air quality & climate • Review ozone concentrations in the county • What are the processes of ozone production? • What are typical ozone concentrations in SB throughout the seasons? • What environmental factors contribute to ozone production?

32. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research V: air quality & climate • Determine the overall contribution of methane to global greenhouse gases emitted from the seeps using data from UCSB Geology Department • How much methane is emitted from the surface? • What is the global balance for methane? • Global Warming Potential • IPCC (impact on radiation)

33. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research V: air quality & climate • Compare current ozone levels with estimated new levels from reduced geogenic emissions due to capture by the seep tents • Urban Airshed Model (from EPA) • Install model • Run model • Confirm that model accounts for mobile sources

34. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research V: air quality & climate • Calculate potential impacts of VOC reductions due to tenting of geogenic sources • How much will VOCs be reduced by tenting? • How will this effect ozone production? • How will this effect county ozone levels?

35. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Research V: air quality & climate • Estimate amount of air toxics released from the seeps • What is the flux of toluene and benzene? • What are the health risks associated with these air toxics? • What are the relative sources of these toxics in the county emissions inventory? • Determine ARCO's calculations of emissions from the seeps

36. Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Final Project Report • We will deliver a final document detailing our findings by April, 2002 • The report could be used for public review of the possible seeps tents development project

37. Questions? Thank you for your feedback