Greenland Minerals

The Norwegian oil contingency
unit dams and recovers 100
tonnes of spilled oil during a
realistic drill in the North Sea
A Canadian think-tank for sustainable energy solutions
has evaluated the oil prospecting regulations of
four Arctic coastal nations and the UK. The report fi nds
Greenland is doing well in several areas, but is lagging
behind on its contingency plan
In reaction to the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico,
Canada’s National Energy Board has reviewed the safety
and environmental requirements governing oil activities in
the Canadian Arctic. The National Energy Board wants to
map information on dangers and risks and safety-related
measures in the vulnerable environment.
As part of the Canadian initiative to protect the Arctic
against an oil spill, the NEB sought to compare Canadian
regulations with those of other Arctic coastal nations –
Greenland, Norway and the US. Russia was not included,
but in its place Great Britain was evaluated.
The Pembina Institute, a Canadian think-tank for sustainable
energy, was given the task of comparing the regulations
in terms of administration, drilling and well activities,
equipment and drilling systems, well checks, independent
safety checks and oil leak contingency plans.
Greenland ready – in theory
The report specifi cally states that it does not include an
environmental assessment, and does not evaluate which
system is best. Yet, the report found that Greenland, the
newest member of the oil group, was ready when it comes
to safety rules governing oil activity at sea.
10
Greenland lagging behind
on oil contingency plan
Most countries have different regulations governing oil
prospecting. Typically, they fall into one of two categories:
prescriptive and tell the operators what to do, or performance-based
and stipulate which targets the operators must
reach.
In Greenland, the rules are performance-based, and they
must incorporate international best practice standards. In
order to make this manageable, Greenland has consolidated
most aspects in the regulations governing oil drilling at
sea in a legislative act, while Norway, by comparison, has
several acts covering the same area.
Disaster Response
According to the Pembina Institute report, Greenland’s
regulations stipulate that the operator must have a health,
safety and environment administration system in place that
fulfi ls the authorities’ requirements, including an accident
response system and previous experience in handling environmental
accidents.
Oil pollution contingency in the Arctic states is, as a rule of
thumb ,split between the oil companies and the regional
and national authorities. A collective strategy for how to
handle disasters is presently being drawn up in the Arctic
Council under the auspices of the Swedish chairmanship.
Greenland requires operators to submit a contingency
plan, which is to be part of the environmental assessment,
but there is no requirement to test the plan. The guidelines
stipulate that the operator must have the equipment
necessary to handle a small-scale oil spill.
Oil & Minerals #2
NORSK OLJEVERNFORENING FOR OPERATØRSELSKAP, NOFO