Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway

Offshore petroleum activities are the focus of highly politicised debates globally. Typically, public debate is sparked by catastrophic events, such as the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and decision-making processes fuelled by the assessment of ‘worst-case scenarios’. However, everyday ‘rout...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Blanchard, Anne, Hauge, Kjellrun Hiis, Andersen, Gisle, Fosså, Jan Helge, Grøsvik, Bjørn Einar, Handegard, Nils Olav, Kaiser, Matthias, Meier, Sonnich, Olsen, Erik, Vikebø, Frode
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13001425
id ftrepec:oai:RePEc:eee:marpol:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:313-320
record_format openpolar
spelling ftrepec:oai:RePEc:eee:marpol:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:313-320 2024-04-14T08:14:37+00:00 Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway Blanchard, Anne Hauge, Kjellrun Hiis Andersen, Gisle Fosså, Jan Helge Grøsvik, Bjørn Einar Handegard, Nils Olav Kaiser, Matthias Meier, Sonnich Olsen, Erik Vikebø, Frode http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13001425 unknown http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13001425 article ftrepec 2024-03-19T10:27:52Z Offshore petroleum activities are the focus of highly politicised debates globally. Typically, public debate is sparked by catastrophic events, such as the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and decision-making processes fuelled by the assessment of ‘worst-case scenarios’. However, everyday ‘routine’ petroleum operations also impact the marine ecosystems and adjoining socio-economic sectors, but the extent and severity of the impacts are uncertain. This paper takes as its point of departure routine operations and their surrounding uncertainties. Particularly, it focuses on the debates of whether to extend routine petroleum operations in vulnerable and valuable parts of Norway, such as the Lofoten area and the Sula Ridge. These conflicts draw on important and for some, epistemological uncertainties that surround the impacts of routine operations. The paper argues that it is necessary to first highlight these uncertainties, rather than marginalise them, and second, recognise that uncertainties are not simply a scientific challenge, but can be a powerful political tool. This paper unpacks and explores uncertainties associated with three phases of routine operations, that are used to steer political actions: (i) the impacts of seismic surveys on fish and marine mammals; (ii) the impacts of drilling mud and drill cuttings on benthic communities such as deep-sea coral reefs; and (iii) the impacts of produced water on the marine environment. The paper discusses the importance of transparency in addressing these uncertainties, and emphasises the need to implement the precautionary principle in a more participatory way. It thus proposes participatory exercises in order to allow the recognition of the epistemological nature of uncertainties. Routine petroleum operations; Uncertainties; Precaution; Lofoten; Article in Journal/Newspaper Lofoten RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) Lofoten Norway
institution Open Polar
collection RePEc (Research Papers in Economics)
op_collection_id ftrepec
language unknown
description Offshore petroleum activities are the focus of highly politicised debates globally. Typically, public debate is sparked by catastrophic events, such as the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and decision-making processes fuelled by the assessment of ‘worst-case scenarios’. However, everyday ‘routine’ petroleum operations also impact the marine ecosystems and adjoining socio-economic sectors, but the extent and severity of the impacts are uncertain. This paper takes as its point of departure routine operations and their surrounding uncertainties. Particularly, it focuses on the debates of whether to extend routine petroleum operations in vulnerable and valuable parts of Norway, such as the Lofoten area and the Sula Ridge. These conflicts draw on important and for some, epistemological uncertainties that surround the impacts of routine operations. The paper argues that it is necessary to first highlight these uncertainties, rather than marginalise them, and second, recognise that uncertainties are not simply a scientific challenge, but can be a powerful political tool. This paper unpacks and explores uncertainties associated with three phases of routine operations, that are used to steer political actions: (i) the impacts of seismic surveys on fish and marine mammals; (ii) the impacts of drilling mud and drill cuttings on benthic communities such as deep-sea coral reefs; and (iii) the impacts of produced water on the marine environment. The paper discusses the importance of transparency in addressing these uncertainties, and emphasises the need to implement the precautionary principle in a more participatory way. It thus proposes participatory exercises in order to allow the recognition of the epistemological nature of uncertainties. Routine petroleum operations; Uncertainties; Precaution; Lofoten;
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Blanchard, Anne
Hauge, Kjellrun Hiis
Andersen, Gisle
Fosså, Jan Helge
Grøsvik, Bjørn Einar
Handegard, Nils Olav
Kaiser, Matthias
Meier, Sonnich
Olsen, Erik
Vikebø, Frode
spellingShingle Blanchard, Anne
Hauge, Kjellrun Hiis
Andersen, Gisle
Fosså, Jan Helge
Grøsvik, Bjørn Einar
Handegard, Nils Olav
Kaiser, Matthias
Meier, Sonnich
Olsen, Erik
Vikebø, Frode
Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway
author_facet Blanchard, Anne
Hauge, Kjellrun Hiis
Andersen, Gisle
Fosså, Jan Helge
Grøsvik, Bjørn Einar
Handegard, Nils Olav
Kaiser, Matthias
Meier, Sonnich
Olsen, Erik
Vikebø, Frode
author_sort Blanchard, Anne
title Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway
title_short Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway
title_full Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway
title_fullStr Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway
title_full_unstemmed Harmful routines? Uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in Norway
title_sort harmful routines? uncertainty in science and conflicting views on routine petroleum operations in norway
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13001425
geographic Lofoten
Norway
geographic_facet Lofoten
Norway
genre Lofoten
genre_facet Lofoten
op_relation http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13001425
_version_ 1796312820894138368