Decommissioning and abandonment

16

Decommissioning and abandonment

An BSEE (formally MMS) report examines the best options for this work: Report N° 32.701.001/R1 16 th September 2004, An assessment of safety, risks and costs associated with subsea pipeline disposals. See www.mms.gov/tarprojects/480/ScanPower%20Final%20Report.pdf and addenda.

ACTUALPRACTICEFORREMOVAL

ACTUAL PRACTICE FOR REMOVAL

ƒ Driven by political expediency ƒ Not science or logic ƒ Hydrocarbons still being found & recovered ƒ Possible future use for redundant pipelines ƒ Remain as a company asset ƒ Most disused rigid lines are still left in situ ƒ Many removed in Norway and Gulf of Mexico ƒ Most flexibles removed and re-used ƒ Spares stored in Brazil and new ends fitted for reuse ƒ Practice proscribed in Australia The disposal of pipeline assets is not necessarily logical, but instead is dependent upon politics. It might be foolish to remove lines when hydrocarbons are still being developed – and will continue to be until around 2030 or more. Future use could therefore be made of these lines. Therefore, to date, most rigid lines have been decommissioned by cleaning and leaving them in place. Nevertheless, a number of pipelines have been removed in Norway and Gulf of Mexico. Most flexibles have been removed and re-used, particularly in Brazil where many spare lines are stored underwater in a sheltered bay. However, in Australia, such reuse is deemed to be too high a risk.

UKDTIGUIDANCENOTES