Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 185, Issue 12, pp 10281–10295 | Cite as

Effectiveness and potential ecological effects of offshore surface dispersant use during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill: a retrospective analysis of monitoring data

  • Adriana C. Bejarano
  • Edwin Levine
  • Alan J. Mearns
Article

Abstract

The Special Monitoring of Applied Response Technologies (SMART) program was used during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill as a strategy to monitor the effectiveness of sea surface dispersant use. Although SMART was implemented during aerial and vessel dispersant applications, this analysis centers on the effort of a special dispersant missions onboard the M/V International Peace, which evaluated the effectiveness of surface dispersant applications by vessel only. Water samples (n = 120) were collected from background sites, and under naturally and chemically dispersed oil slicks, and were analyzed for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (TPAHs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), and a chemical marker of Corexit® (dipropylene glycol n-butyl ether, DPnB). Water chemistry results were analyzed relative to SMART field assessments of dispersant effectiveness (“not effective,” “effective,” and “very effective”), based on in situ fluorometry. Chemistry data were also used to indirectly determine if the use of dispersants increased the risk of acute effects to water column biota, by comparison to toxicity benchmarks. TPAH and TPH concentrations in background, and naturally and chemically dispersed samples were extremely variable, and differences were not statistically detected across sample types. Ratios of TPAH and TPH between chemically and naturally dispersed samples provided a quantitative measure of dispersant effectiveness over natural oil dispersion alone, and were in reasonable agreement with SMART field assessments of dispersant effectiveness. Samples from “effective” and “very effective” dispersant applications had ratios of TPAH and TPH up to 35 and 64, respectively. In two samples from an “effective” dispersant application, TPHs and TPAHs exceeded acute benchmarks (0.81 mg/L and 8 μg/L, respectively), while none exceeded DPnB’s chronic value (1,000 μg/L). Although the primary goal of the SMART program is to provide near real-time effectiveness data to the response, and not to address concerns regarding acute biological effects, the analyses presented here demonstrate that SMART can generate information of value to a larger scientific audience. A series of recommendations for future SMART planning are also provided.

Keywords

Deepwater Horizon oil spill Dispersant use TPH TPAH Monitoring Dispersant effectiveness 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge tremendous work by all SMART field teams, the support of scientific teams and crewmembers of the M/V International Peace dispersant missions, and the work of those who processed and reviewed the data presented here. We extend our gratitude to Exponent Inc. and BP for making the chemistry data available for these analyses, and to M. Baker and S. Allan for their thoughtful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. We are also grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and thoughtful insights. The information presented here reflects only the views of the authors and not those of their associated institutions. This publication does not constitute an endorsement of any commercial product or intend to be an opinion beyond scientific or other results obtained by NOAA.

Supplementary material

10661_2013_3332_MOESM1_ESM.docx (6.8 mb)
ESM 1(DOCX 6952 kb)

References

  1. Aurand, D., Coelho, D., & Slaughter, S. (2009). The relationship between acute and population level effects of exposure to dispersed oil, and the influence of exposure conditions using multiple life history stages of an estuarine copepod, Eurytemora affinis, as a model planktonic organism. http://rfp.crrc.unh.edu/projects/viewProject.php?PROJECT_ID=15. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  2. Aurand, D., & Coelho, G. (2005). Cooperative aquatic toxicity testing of dispersed oil and the chemical response to oil spills: Ecological Effects Research Forum (CROSERF). http://www.ecosystem-management.net/assets/documents//FINAL%20CROSERF%20REPORT.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  3. Bejarano, A. C., & Farr, J. K. (2013). Development of short acute exposure hazard estimates: a tool for assessing the effects of chemical spills in aquatic environments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (in press) doi:10.1002/etc.2255.
  4. BenKinney, M., Brown, J., Mudge, S., Russell, M., Nevin, A., & Huber, C. (2011). Monitoring effects of aerial dispersant application during the MC252 Deepwater Horizon incident In International Oil Spill Conference, Portland, Oregon, a (pp. 7).Google Scholar
  5. BenKinney, M., Pascal, B., Huber, C., Wood, B., Russell, M., Nevin, A., et al. (2011). Getting SMARTer: recommendations for improving SMART monitoring procedures based on experiences from the Deepwater Horizon response In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2011 International Oil Spill Conference, Portland, Oregon, b (pp. 6).Google Scholar
  6. Berggreen, U., Hansen, B., & Kiørboe, T. (1988). Food size spectra, ingestion and growth of the copepod Acartia tonsa during development: implications for determination of copepod production. Marine Biology, 99(3), 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boehm, P. D., Cook, L. L., & Murray, K. J. (2011). Aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations in seawater: Deepwater Horizon oil spill. International Oil Spill Conference Proceedings, 2011(1), abs371. doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2011-1-371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. BP (2010). Dispersant studies of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill response Interim Report on Surface Application Evaluations Conducted May 17–27, 2010 http://usresponse.bp.com/external/content/document/2911/989647/1/DISP_App_Studies_Monitoring060810FINAL.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  9. Brown, J. S., Beckmann, D., Bruce, L., Cook, L., & Mudge, S. (2011). PAH depletion ratios document the rapid weathering and attenuation of PAHs in oil samples collected after the Deepwater Horizon In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2011 International Oil Spill Conference, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, J. R., Bragin, G. E., Febbo, R. J., & Letinski, D. J. (2001). Toxicity of physically and chemically dispersed oils under continuous and environmentally realistic exposure conditions: Applicability to dispersant use decisions in spill response planning. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida, (pp. 1249–1255).Google Scholar
  11. Conover, R. (1971). Some relations between zooplankton and bunker C oil in Chedabucto Bay following the wreck of the tanker Arrow. Journal of the Fisheries Board of Canada, 28(9), 1327–1330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daling, P. S., Brandvik, P., & Reed, M. (1998). Dispersant experience in Norway: dispersant effectiveness, monitoring and fate of dispersed oil. In B. K. Trudel (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference, Dispersant Use in Alaska: A Technical Update, Anchorage, Alaska, March 18 & 19, 1998 (pp. 111–147): Prince William Sound Oil Spill Recovery Institute, Cordova, Alaska.Google Scholar
  13. Di Toro, D. M., McGrath, J. A., & Stubblefield, W. A. (2007). Predicting the toxicity of neat and weathered crude oil: toxic potential and the toxicity of saturated mixtures. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 26(1), 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diercks, A.-R., Highsmith, R. C., Asper, V. L., Joung, D., Zhou, Z., Guo, L., et al. (2010). Characterization of subsurface polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons at the Deepwater Horizon site. Geophysical Research Letters, 37(20), L20602. doi:10.1029/2010gl045046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fuller, C., Bonner, J., Page, C., Ernest, A., McDonald, T., & McDonald, S. (2004). Comparative toxicity of oil, dispersant, and oil plus dispersant to several marine species. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), 2941–2949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greer, C. D., Hodson, P. V., Li, Z., King, T., & Lee, K. (2012). Toxicity of crude oil chemically dispersed in a wave tank to embryos of Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 31(6), 1324–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gugg, P. M., Henry, C., & Glenn, S. (1999 ). Proving dispersants work. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1999 International Oil Spill Conference, Seattle, Washington, (pp. 1007–1010)Google Scholar
  18. Gulec, I., Leonard, B., & Holdway, D. A. (1997). Oil and dispersed oil toxicity to amphipods and snails. Spill Science & Technology Bulletin, 4(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hansen, B. R. H., Nordtug, T., Altin, D., Booth, A., Hessen, K. M., & Olsen, A. J. (2009). Gene expression of GST and CYP330A1 in lipid-rich and lipid-poor female Calanus finmarchicus (Copepoda: Crustacea) exposed to dispersed oil. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 72(3–4), 131–139. doi:10.1080/15287390802537313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hemmer, M. J., Barron, M. G., & Greene, R. M. (2011). Comparative toxicity of eight oil dispersants, Louisiana sweet crude oil (LSC), and chemically dispersed LSC to two aquatic test species. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 30(10), 2244–2252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Henry, C. B., Roberts, P. O., & Overton, E. B. (1999). A primer on in-situ fluorometry to monitor dispersed oil. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1999 International Oil Spill Conference, Seattle, Washington, (pp. 5).Google Scholar
  22. Lee, R. F., Köster, M., & Paffenhöfer, G.-A. (2012). Ingestion and defecation of dispersed oil droplets by pelagic tunicates. Journal of Plankton Research, 34(12), 1058–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lehr, B., Sky, B., & Possolo, A. (2010). Oil budget calculator, Deepwater Horizon: technical document. A Report to the National Incident Command. http://www.crrc.unh.edu/publications/OilBudgetCalcReport_Nov2010.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  24. Lewis, A., A. Crosbie, L. Davies and T. Lunel. (1998). The AEA ’97 North Sea Field Trials on Oil Weathering and Aerial Application of Dispersants In B. K. Trudel (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference, Dispersant Use in Alaska: A Technical Update, Anchorage, Alaska, March 18 & 19, 1998 (pp. 79–109): Prince William Sound Oil Spill Recovery Institute, Cordova, Alaska.Google Scholar
  25. Li, Z., Lee, K., Kepkey, P. E., Mikkelsen, O., & Pottsmith, C. (2011). Monitoring dispersed oil droplet size distribution at the Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon spill site. International Oil Spill Conference Proceedings, 2011(1), abs377. doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2011-1-377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lin, C. Y., Anderson, B. S., Phillips, B. M., Peng, A. C., Clark, S., Voorhees, J., et al. (2009). Characterization of the metabolic actions of crude versus dispersed oil in salmon smolts via NMR-based metabolomics. Aquatic Toxicology, 95(3), 230–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lunel, T., & Davies, L. (1996). Dispersant effectiveness in the field on fresh oils and emulsions. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1996 Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Programme, (pp. 1355–1394)Google Scholar
  28. Lunel, T., Rusin, J., Bailey, N., Halliwell, C., & Davies, L. (1997). The net environmental benefit of a successful dispersant operation at the Sea Empress incident. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1997 International Oil Spill Conference, Washington DC, (pp. 185–194)Google Scholar
  29. Lunel, T., Swannell, R., Rusin, J., Bailey, N., Halliwell, C., Davies, L., et al. (1996b). Monitoring of the effectiveness of response options during the Sea Empress incident: a key component of the successful counter-pollution response. Spill Science & Technology Bulletin, 2, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McIntosh, S., King, T., Wu, D., & Hodson, P. V. (2010). Toxicity of dispersed weathered crude oil to early life stages of Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 29(5), 1160–1167.Google Scholar
  31. Mitchell, F. M., & Holdway, D. A. (2000). The acute and chronic toxicity of the dispersants Corexit 9527 and 9500, water accommodated fraction (WAF) of crude oil, and dispersant enhanced WAF (DEWAF) to Hydra viridissima (Green hydra). Water Research, 34(1), 343–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. NCP (2012). National Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule http://www.epa.gov/OEM/content/ncp. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  33. Olsvik, P. l. A., Hansen, B. r. H., Nordtug, T., Moren, M., Holen, E., & Lie, K. K. (2011). Transcriptional evidence for low contribution of oil droplets to acute toxicity from dispersed oil in first feeding Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) larvae. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology & Pharmacology, 154(4), 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. OSAT (2010). Operational Science Advisory Team. Unified Area Command. Summary report for sub-sea and sub-surface oil and dispersant detection: Sampling and monitoring. http://www.restorethegulf.gov/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/OSAT_Report_FINAL_17DEC.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  35. Pace, C. B., Clark, J. R., & Bragin, G. E. (1995). Comparing crude oil toxicity under standard and environmentally realistic exposures. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1995 International Oil Spill Conference, February 27–March 2 (pp. 1003–1004)Google Scholar
  36. Paffenhöfer, G. A. (1984). Food ingestion by the marine planktonic copepod Paracalanus in relation to abundance and size distribution of food. Marine Biology, 80(3), 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Perkins, R. A., Rhoton, S., & Behr-Andres, C. (2003). Toxicity of dispersed and undispersed, fresh and weathered oil to larvae of a cold-water species, Tanner crab (C. bairdi), and standard warm-water test species. Cold regions science and technology, 36(1–3), 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Perkins, R. A., Rhoton, S., & Behr-Andres, C. (2005). Comparative marine toxicity testing: A cold-water species and standard warm-water test species exposed to crude oil and dispersant. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 42(3), 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pollino, C. A., & Holdway, D. A. (2002). Toxicity testing of crude oil and related compounds using early life stages of the crimson-spotted rainbowfish (Melanotaenia fluviatilis). Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 52(3), 180–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Posthuma, L., Suter, G. W., & Traas, T. P. (2002). Species sensitivity distributions in ecotoxicology. Boca Raton: Lewis Publisher.Google Scholar
  41. Ramachandran, S. D., Hodson, P. V., Khan, C. W., & Lee, K. (2004). Oil dispersant increases PAH uptake by fish exposed to crude oil. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 59(3), 300–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rhoton, S. L., Perkins, R. A., Braddock, J. F., & Behr-Andres, C. (2001). A cold-weather species' response to chemically dispersed fresh and weathered Alaska North Slope crude oil. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida, (pp. 1231–1236)Google Scholar
  43. RRT 6 (2001). Regional Response Team VI FOSC Dispersant Pre-approval Guidelines and Checklist. Version 4, 2004. http://www.losco.state.la.us/pdf_docs/RRT6_Dispersant_Preapproval_2001.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  44. Singer, Aurand, D. V., Coelho, G. M., Bragin, G. E., Clark, J. R., Jacobson, S., et al. (2001). Making, measuring, and using water-accommodated fractions of petroleum for toxicity testing. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida, (pp. 1269–1274)Google Scholar
  45. Singer, M., George, S., Lee, I., Jacobson, S., Weetman, L., Blondina, G., et al. (1998). Effects of dispersant treatment on the acute aquatic toxicity of petroleum hydrocarbons. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 34(2), 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stoermer, S., Butler, G., & Henry, C. (2001). Application of dispersants to mitigate oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico: The Poseidon Pipeline spill case study. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida, (pp. 1227–1299)Google Scholar
  47. Tan, S. H. (2011). In-situ fluorometry and SMART protocol—The Montara wellhead experience. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2011 International Oil Spill Conference, Portland, Oregon, (pp. 1–15)Google Scholar
  48. USCG, NOAA, USEPA, CDCP, & MMS (2006). Special Monitoring of Applied Response Technologies (SMART). http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/noaa_documents/648_SMART.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  49. USEPA (1994). Title 40.Part 300.Subpart J—use of dispersants and other chemicals. http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=1&SID=e23357cf8c81ee6d93608879bd30e2fa&ty=HTML&h=L&n=40y29.0.1.1.1&r=PART. Accessed 31 May 2013.
  50. USEPA (2003). Procedures for the derivation of equilibrium partitioning sediment benchmarks (ESBs) for the protection of benthic organisms: PAH mixtures. EPA-600-R-02-013. http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/download_files/publications/PAHESB.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.
  51. Wetzel, D., & Van Fleet, E. S. (2001). Cooperative studies on the toxicity of dispersants and dispersed oil to marine organisms: A 3-year Florida study. In American Petroleum Institute (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, Tampa, Florida.Google Scholar
  52. Wu, R., Lam, P., & Zhou, B. (1998). Effects of two oil dispersants on phototaxis and swimming behaviour of barnacle larvae. Hydrobiologia, 352, 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adriana C. Bejarano
    • 1
  • Edwin Levine
    • 2
  • Alan J. Mearns
    • 3
  1. 1.Research Planning, IncColumbiaUSA
  2. 2.National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations