GREEN4SEA Conference & Awards

5 Apr 2017
Learn More
GREEN4SEA Conference & Awards

5 Apr 2017
Learn More

BOEM: Seismic surveys harm marine life in Gulf of Mexico

boem

The US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) announced the availability of a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for evaluating potential environmental effects of geological and geophysical (G&G) activities within the Gulf of Mexico’s (GOM) Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and adjacent state waters.

BOEM prepared the Programmatic EIS with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) as cooperating agencies.

The Final Programmatic EIS considers G&G activities, including seismic surveys (deep-penetration and high-resolution geophysical), sidescan-sonar surveys, electromagnetic surveys, and geological and geochemical sampling.

The Final Programmatic EIS also evaluates mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts of G&G activities on marine resources, such as sound impacts to marine species and bottom-disturbance impacts on benthic communities and cultural resources.

The statement found that seismic surveys harm significantly marine species, such as dolphins and whales, as the air-gun blasting used involves blasting compressed air down to the seabed, lasting for weeks or months each time.

Credit: BOEM

However, responding to this, International Association of Geophysical Contractors (IAGC) President, Nikki Martin, said that the PEI “jeopardizes one of the most important regions for energy resources, the U.S Gulf of Mexico.”

“While we are still reviewing the details of the final PEIS, it appears to remain overly precautionary with seriously flawed marine mammal effects analysis for seismic activities and is unsupported by best available information, thus leading to the proposed alternative which poses non-scientific and unnecessary restrictions on geophysical surveys.”

The American Petroleum Institute (API) also criticized the PEIS, accusing it for “false interpretation of scientific data.”

Related Posts


Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterGoogle+0Share on LinkedIn0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Explore Our Group Sites:

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies.more information

Close