CORDIS proporciona enlaces a los documentos públicos y las publicaciones de los proyectos de los programas marco HORIZONTE.
Los enlaces a los documentos y las publicaciones de los proyectos del Séptimo Programa Marco, así como los enlaces a algunos tipos de resultados específicos, como conjuntos de datos y «software», se obtienen dinámicamente de OpenAIRE .
Resultados aprovechables
The 'Spill response experience' (Spreex) project was proposed as a coordination action in response to the EC DG Research call after the Prestige accident. On 13 November 2002 the Bahamian-flag tanker Prestige ran into trouble during a storm 34 km off Cape Finisterre and began to leak its cargo of 77 000 tonnes of oil. After drifting for six days along the coast, the tanker broke in half about 225 km off shore, having spilled about 11 000 tonnes of oil.
Several hundred kilometres of coastline were coated in oil sludge by the disaster, especially Galicia but also Asturias, Cantabria and Basque country in Spain as well as several departments in western France. The Prestige accident highlighted EU shortcomings with respect to technologies and in systems and resources for spill response effectiveness.
Based on existing experience for response to oil spills, the Spreex project partners came to the following conclusions:
1) A continuous dialogue between researchers and end users, as has been accomplished was deemed necessary for optimum response preparedness. Through research, boosting the application of the existing technologies and leveraging new technologies and synergies, solutions to gaps identified by spill response end users can be achieved.
Rationale: Spreex's strategy of building the state of the art reports drawing on past experience, on-going measures and research results, prior to making statement on the gaps and opening debates with end users and authorities have proven practical and useful. Spreex was initiated in reaction to the Prestige accident and Spreex observations on spill response preparedness should not be on stand-by until another big accident occurs.
2) Spill response research cannot be justified by market pull and can only be effective in filling existing gaps through the joint development of national and EU programmes such as FP7.
Rationale: Spill response and systems and services supply are not part of a competitive business scenario, since administrations are the main and almost sole customers. Spill consequences may be catastrophic, but the cost of the response systems and their maintenance cannot be weighed against economy, nor can security preparedness. The responsibility of minimizing the consequences of spill accidents is the responsibility of local, regional and national administrations. Preparedness is structured on the contingency response plans using local resources proportionate to national resources and plans or perhaps even at a European level, depending on the accident's magnitude and potential impact.
3) Spill response research needs to be based on past experience from previous accidents but must not be limited solely to the most recent scenarios and to the reaction to previous accidents: it must be proactive by anticipating the risks of new possible postulated accidents with short-term, medium-term and long-term perspectives.
Rationale: The transport of products by sea is constantly increasing in traffic volume, carrier tonnage and product diversity. This brings not only increasing environmental risks but also risks for human life and, more directly, for the responders and crews. As each accident is different from those previous, research should anticipate new potential accidents so as to address the existing systems and organisational gaps covering both pollution from both port and shore terminals, as well as safety aspects. Spill response research financing should not decay on time elapsed from past spill accidents as if it only reacted to media after accidents and must anticipate on the preparedness for potential accidents.
4) Research must address not only new technologies, but also the integration of existing technologies not fully incorporated into spill response on efficient systems addressing different applications and needs.
Rationale: Technologies may exist but not be applied or integrated for responder use. Some security technologies and surveillance systems can be adapted for spill detection and response. No new vessels dedicated to spill response are likely to be built. Multipurpose vessels, occasional vessels and their equipment and systems as well as all the supporting services need further research to improve effectiveness while working in different scenarios and tasks. Research may not be the entire solution for all gaps, as there is always a synergic component. EMSA within its mandate is already fostering European synergies on some of the gaps in debate. However, technology research is complementary and demonstrations and validation need research contribution that can only be fulfilled by EU research programmes.
5) Sea transport of oil and other products involves various administrations with different missions and competences. Spill response is multidisciplinary. Industries and services may not be grouped in existing sectors. A spill response research framework must be outlined at a European level to avoid major gaps and to enable access to international databases, while at the same time avoiding duplication of efforts and facilitating the coordination of human resources and response means when needed.
Rationale: For example, spill detection includes sensor technologies, processing, integration and platforms on land, from the air or via satellite. Unmanned vehicles (UAVs) and balloons have also been in use. Models include meteorological and hydrological data, and must include changing properties at the spill (weathering) or the dispersed product as it constantly changes over the time as a result of external conditions.
The 'Spill response experience' (SPREEX) project was proposed as a coordination action in response to the EC DG Research call after the Prestige accident. On 13 November 2002 the Bahamian-flag tanker PRESTIGE ran into trouble during a storm 34km off Cape Finisterre and began to leak its cargo of 77,000 tonnes of oil. This accident highlighted EU shortcomings with respect to technologies and in systems and resources for spill response effectiveness.
Project partners identified numerous broad issues which were deemed more relevant for spill response preparedness and effectiveness based on past experiences prior to the Prestige spill. The most important gaps are the following:
1) Spill detection sensors with resolution and capabilities on harsh sea conditions, on submerged oil spill detection and also on thickness and spill weathering information. Systems integrating data from different sensors and platforms which include new aerial carriers such as AUV.
2) Models combining meteorological and hydrodynamic data, Metocean forecast for oil drift and coastal approach. Compare oil spill models used by national authorities in Europe, to develop a common oil spill model which can be used for all EU waters. This model should satisfy a basic set of criteria and only utilize standard input (Metocean, maps, oil data etc.) Validation in exercises and in real spills.
3) Real time information systems, should be available through user-oriented presentation to oil spill responders and concerned authorities, supported by full availability of the basic information on the main characteristics of the transported products, traceable to a common open database on widely accepted formats, and should use artificial intelligence algorithms on data processing and distribution.
4) Decision Support Systems (DSS) based on information from real time, providing the framework for contingency planning, local response, and coordinated response on major accidents. The DSS should provide the framework for contingency planning, local response, and coordinated response on major accidents. Models and DSS tools shall be used for training, on preparedness exercises and refined and validated on real spills, including modelling of weathering processes of the oil and potential impacts on ecosystem and socio-economic resources in coastal/marine areas. The DSS not intended to make a decision by itself, but should provide integrated and filtered data, tools, models and scenarios which may assist in the decision making process. The DSS may assist both the experienced responder and the concerned authorities, including cost assessment service, response dimensioning and a resource allocation service.
5) Limitations of ships equipment, booms and containment techniques in rough seas, or in strong currents impair response efficiency. Need for equipment testing procedures and performance assessment of the recovery systems in operation conditions, extended to rough sea conditions and to different products and viscosity. Design accounting for spill changes by weathering and oil mixing with water requires improved skimmers and effective water separation by decanting and on-board heating capacity for handling. Dedicated response vessels are no longer being built and response vessels should have a multipurpose design. Occasional response ships have also been prepared and are ready to install suitable response adapted equipment. These vessels could broaden their use to a wider range of pollutants, all receiving improved guidance (remote sensing, forecasting, etc).
6) Dispersants decision and application guidelines. Drift, fate, medium- and long-term effects of the dispersed product need to be assessed by previous tests on the different coastal resources and modelled on tests experience. New dispersants applicable on more open windows and spill products. National and local product approval for use needs an EU framework for testing, databases, knowledge and stock and dispensing platforms which requires cooperation/communication between regulators, national authorities and laboratories. Widely accepted test procedures throughout Europe must be developed and validated through experimental approach in lab and at sea.
7) Effects of dispersed oil and assessment and quantification of socioeconomic impacts on fisheries, tourism and other human activities needs commonly accepted methodologies and tools for preparedness, decision making, for assessment, shore logistics and criteria for clean-up completion. Shore logistics and preparedness for disposal of mixed wastes after spill accidents (from sea recovery and coast cleaning) must be included in contingency planning.
8) Need for procedures, resources and candidate sites for bioremediation: Need to activate the use of biological techniques to stimulate biodegradation of oil spills: biostimulation, biaugmentation and phytoremediation to be accepted as secondary clean up techniques. Further evaluation of benefits, effectiveness and performance of commercial products on short-term, medium-term and long-term bases, and better knowledge of health effects associated with release of bioremediation agents is needed. Lack of harmonisation of preparedness tools impedes consistency and continuity on shore logistics, and NEBA application must be conducted with harmonised and complete maps of coastal sensitivity.
Buscando datos de OpenAIRE...
Se ha producido un error en la búsqueda de datos de OpenAIRE
No hay resultados disponibles