Environmental Impact Assessment Shallow Coring in Baffin Bay, Northwest Greenland

Transcription

1 Shell Kanumas A/S Environmental Impact Assessment 2012 Shallow Coring in Baffin Bay, Northwest Greenland Shell Kanumas A/S Operator 15 March 2012

2 Shell Kanumas A/S Environmental Impact Assessment Shallow Coring in Baffin Bay, Northwest Greenland, 2012 Shell Kanumas A/S has contracted Grontmij A/S in association with LGL Ltd. to conduct the Environmental Impact Assessment for Shallow Coring in Baffin bay, Northwest Greenland, 2012 Report prepared by LGL Ltd., environmental research associates 22 Fisher Street, P.O. Box 280, King City, Ontario, Canada L7B 1A6, in association with Grontmij A/S Granskoven 8, 2600 Glostrup Denmark, 15 March 2012

3 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES 5 LIST OF TABLES 5 1 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY Regulatory, Policy and Administrative Framework Project Description Environmental Setting Impact Assessment Methods Summary of Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measures Overview of Previous Studies Residual Impacts Cumulative Impacts Data Gaps and Uncertainties 15 2 INTRODUCTION Proponent Scope 16 3 REGULATORY, POLICY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK National Legislation and Guidelines International Treaties, Conventions and Best Practice Shell Environmental Management 18 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Scope and Objectives Program Description Schedule, Location, and Coring Approach Drilling Vessel (M/V JOIDES Resolution) Check-Shot/Vertical Seismic Profiling Other Data Collection Additional Equipment Monitoring for Marine Mammals and Seabirds Logistics Emissions, Discharges and Waste Management 30 5 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT Recent Assessments and Studies 30

4 Page Environmental Setting Overview Physical Environment Weather Oceanography Ice Conditions Biological Environment Primary Productivity Zooplankton Benthic Flora Benthic Fauna Fish (Including Macroinvertebrates) Birds Marine Mammals Human Activities and Resource Use Commercial Fisheries Subsistence and Recreational Fisheries and Hunting Tourism Protected Areas and Threatened Species Protected Areas Threatened Species 70 6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Impact Assessment Methods Spatial and Temporal Boundaries Identification of Potential Impacts Impact Definitions and Evaluation of Impact Significance Magnitude of Impacts Spatial Extent Duration of Impacts Significance of Impacts Level of Confidence Acoustic Modelling Acoustic Modelling Required Modelling Output Key Assumptions in Assessment Approach for Noise Impacts Potential Impacts of Noise Vertical Seismic Profiling and Vessel Noise During Coring Impacts of Underwater Sounds on Marine Mammals Impacts of Vessel Noise on Marine Mammals Impacts of Underwater Sounds on Seabirds Impacts of Underwater Sound on Fish and Invertebrates and Fisheries Potential Impacts of Other Routine Activities Vessel Presence 106

5 Page Vessel Lights Seabed Disturbance Sanitary/Domestic Wastes Potential Impacts of Accidental Events Mitigation Potential Impacts Cumulative Impacts Other Seismic Programs and Shallow Coring Program Assessment Approach Potential Cumulative Impacts on VECs Addressing Data Gaps and Uncertainties Impact Summary ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN Marine Mammals and Check-Shot/VSP Array Noise Survey Planning Operations Acoustic Modelling and Field Program Cumulative Impacts of Other Geophysical Programs Seabirds Systematic Surveys Lighting and Stranded Birds Seabed Disturbance General Ship Operations Fisheries Interactions Emissions, Discharges, and Waste Management Waste Management Emissions and Discharges Other Environmental Conditions Unplanned Events Health, Safety, Security and Environmental Management Systems Communications Reporting 137 LITERATURE CITED 138

6 Page 5 LIST OF FIGURES 1-1 Location of the proposed Baffin Bay shallow coring consortium program in Location of the proposed Baffin Bay Shallow coring consortium program Schematic of riserless drilling. 4-3 Drilling vessel M/V JOIDES Resolution. 4-4 Schematic of Check-Shot / VSP procedure. 4-5 Geometric layout of VSP airguns. 4-6 Schematic of Free Fall Funnel. 5-1 Marine mammal sightings from the August September 2011 Shell seismic off northwest Greenland. 5-2 Beluga winter grounds and mitigation routes. 5-3 Narwhal protection areas. 5-4 (a)tracks of bowhead whales tagged in Disko Bay in 2010 and (b) seasonal home range distributions of bowhead whales from Important walrus and polar bear areas. 5-6 (a)summer and (b) autumn home range of polar bears in Baffin Bay during June- August and September-December Protected areas and areas important to wildlife. 6-1 Potential interactions (Level 1 Matrix) between the Project and VECs. 6-2 Acoustic properties of the proposed 500 in 3 airgun array for VSP operations % rms sound pressure levels (rms SPLs) at JASCO modeling Site 2: Received maximum-over-depth sounds levels. 6-4 Peak-to-peak sound pressure level at JASCO modeling Site 2: Received maximumover-depth sounds levels. 6-5 Spatial overlap between the Melville Bay narwhal population and sound propagation estimates at 198 db SEL, 160 and 150 db (rms). 6-6 Spatial overlap between ringed seals and sound propagation estimates at 186 db SEL and 160 db (rms). 6-7 Oil spill sensitivity of coast lines according to the oil spill sensitivity atlas issued by DCE. 6-8 Location of all proposed offshore exploration programs off northwest Greenland in LIST OF TABLES 1-1 Summary of key mitigation measures. 1-2 Summary of impact predictions for VESs and noise and for seabed disturbance and fish/invertebrate VECs. 3-1 Shell commitment and policy on health, security, safety, environment and social performance. 4-1 Summary of proposed shallow coring sites for Estimated amounts of coring cuttings and mud deposition on the seabed. 4-3 Survey data for the Check-Shot/VSP operations. 4-4 Array specifications for the Check-Shot/VSP operations. 5-1 Selected summary of bird observations during the geophysical site survey off northwest Greenland, 11 August 18 September Density of selected seabirds (number/km 2 ) by monthly period and latitude during the geophysical site survey off northwest Greenland, 11 August 18 September List of offshore species and their conservation status. 5-4 Marine Mammals in the Baffin Bay assessment area. 5-5 Marine mammal quotas (preliminary) for 2012 and numbers hunted in 2010 for areas in and near the Study Area. 6-1 Potential interactions (Level 1 Matrix) between the Project and VECs.

7 Page Acoustic properties of the proposed 4240 in 3 airgun array. 6-3 Densities used to estimate numbers of narwhals that could be exposed to various levels of seismic sounds during the VSP survey proposed during 12 August 29 September Potential proportion (%) of marine mammal VEC populations exposed to hearing impairment (PTS) and behavioural impacts caused by the VSP array. 6-5 Summary of geophysical surveys (shallow coring and seismic) proposed for the Baffin Bay assessment area in Summary of potential impacts, proposed mitigation, and predicted residual impacts of the shallow coring program on VECs. APPENDICES (in a separate document) APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: APPENDIX E: APPENDIX F: APPENDIX G: APPENDIX H: Vessel and Equipment Details Physical Baseline Study Northeast Baffin Bay Review of the Effects of Airgun Sounds on Marine Mammals Review of Potential Effects of Airgun Sound on Fish and Marine Invertebrates Underwater Sound Propogation from Shallow Coring Operations in Baffin Bay Drop Camera-Mediated Borehole Benthic Habitat Survey, September 2011: Northeast Baffin Bay Fundamentals of Underwater Sound Summary of Calculations for Estimates of Percentage of Populations and Number of Individuals Exposed to Check-Shot/VSP Array Noise

8 Page 7 1 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY This section provides a non-technical summary of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for Shell and its Consortium partners shallow coring program proposed to occur offshore northwest Greenland in The summary provides an overview of the regulatory requirements, a description of the Project, an overview of the environmental setting, the methods used to assess impacts, proposed mitigation measures, predicted impacts of noise and other Project activities, and it identifies data gaps and uncertainties. 1.1 Regulatory, Policy and Administrative Framework The EIA was prepared to meet appropriate Greenlandic legislation and regulatory requirements, incorporate relevant international standards, and integrate Shell s policies. Key guidance documents used to prepare this EIA include: Guidelines for preparing an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report related to stratigraphic drilling offshore Greenland, April 2011 (NERI and BMP 2011a) Guidelines for preparing an EIA report for activities related to hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation offshore Greenland, January 2011 (NERI and BMP 2011b). Guidelines for application, execution, and reporting of offshore hydrocarbon exploration activities (excluding drilling) in Greenland, December 2011 (BMP 2011). Guidelines to EIA of seismic activities in Greenland waters, 3 rd revised edition, December 2011 (Kyhn et al. 2011). As required in Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) Guidelines, Best Available Technology (BAT) and Best Environmental Practice (BEP; e.g., NORSOK, OSPAR, and MARPOL) were considered and incorporated into the Project where possible. Shell s Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social Performance Control Framework and Corporate Standards are incorporated into the Project and the EIA. 1.2 Project Description Shell Kanumas A/S (Shell), acting as an operator on behalf of the Baffin Bay operators and licensee consortium (ConocoPhillips, Maersk Oil, Cairn Energy, Nunaoil, GDF SUEZ, Dong Energy, and Statoil), is proposing to conduct a shallow coring program offshore northwest Greenland. The shallow coring or stratigraphic drilling is proposed to occur from early August to early October The coring program would involve the use of one vessel to acquire 11 coring samples at seven sites (Figure 1-1). Six sites are located north of the Qamut license and one site is located in the Anu license. The primary objective of the shallow coring program is to provide an understanding of the age and properties of the sediment and subsurface rock needed to make exploration decisions. Water depths at the coring sites range from about m.

9 Page 8 The coring program will be conducted by the contractor SIEM Offshore/Overseas Drilling Ltd. using the drilling vessel M/V JOIDES Resolution. The vessel, which can accommodate a crew of about 130, will not require resupply, refueling, or crew change. Coring depths are expected to average 500 m and range from m; the amount of time to drill an average core of 500 m is on the order of 4-5 days. The core diameter will be 25 cm. The JOIDES Resolution will use a hollow drill string through which seawater, the drilling fluid, is pumped to lubricate and cool the drill bit and remove cuttings (i.e., sediment and rock) from the borehole. At some coring sites, water-based drilling mud that contains naturally occurring minerals may be injected into the borehole to help remove the cuttings. The drilling vessel maintains position over the coring site by using Dynamic Positioning (DP) thrusters and satellite positioning systems. After coring at a site is complete, a small airgun array will be used to conduct a Check-Shot/Vertical Seismic Profiling procedure. This involves lowering a geophone down the borehole, which records intense sound pulses emitted from the airguns. The airguns will be fired 5 to 10 times per borehole to collect the required data. These data are used to more accurately determine the depth of the borehole in order to relate the borehole to seismic data collected during previous 2-D surveys.

10 Page 9

11 Page Environmental Setting The EIA provides a general overview of the baseline conditions in and near the area of the proposed shallow coring program. The Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) prepared for the Baffin Bay assessment area by the Danish Centre for Environment and Energy (DCE; Boertmann and Mosbech 2011) was a key source of information. Emphasis in Shell s EIA was placed on the biological and socioeconomic components that could be affected by Project activities. Information on fish, invertebrates, seabirds, marine mammals, commercial fisheries, subsistence fisheries, and subsistence hunting was reviewed. As part of the review, the conservation status of species occurring in and near the Project Area as assessed in Greenland (Red List) and internationally was determined. Baseline conditions were reviewed, particularly the distribution and abundance of species and their activities (i.e., breeding, migrating, feeding) near the proposed coring sites. The SEIA identified bowhead whales, narwhals, beluga whales, and walruses as the most sensitive species to seismic noise (from the Check-Shot/VSP array in this EIA). The occurrence of bowheads, belugas, and walruses do not generally overlap with the period when Shell is proposing to conduct shallow coring the exception are belugas that migrate in October in coastal waters. Of most relevance to this EIA are narwhals that summer primarily in coastal waters of Melville Bay and which are considered Critically Endangered on the Greenland Red List. The Melville Bay population is estimated at about 6,000 narwhals but this estimate is thought to be low. Narwhals migrate south to a deep basin of Baffin Bay from mid October to mid December; they feed there during the winter. A Narwhal Protection Zone (NPZ I) has been established in Melville Bay that restricts seismic activity from 1 June to 15 October. The closest shallow coring site is about 9 km from this protection zone. There is a subsistence hunt for narwhals in the coastal waters of Melville Bay that occurs during the same months (August and September) as the proposed coring program. The communities of Savissivik and the settlements of Upernavik participate in this hunt. Savissivik is located about 40 km from the closest coring site. 1.4 Impact Assessment Methods The methods used to assess the impacts of the Project were based in part on those used in the SEIA prepared by the Danish Centre for Environment and Energy (DCE; Boertmann and Mosbech 2011). Key aspects of the environment, typically called Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) in EIAs, were selected for assessment including several marine mammals (narwhal, beluga whale, bowhead whale, walrus, ringed seal, bearded seal, and polar bear), seabirds, fish and invertebrates as well as their eggs and larvae. Commercial fisheries (mostly Greenland halibut and shrimp), subsistence fisheries, and the marine mammal subsistence hunt were considered VECs as well.

12 Page 11 One of the primary aspects of the proposed activity causing concern is the underwater noise created by the small airgun array used in the Check-Shot/VSP procedure and by the DP thrusters of the coring vessel and the impacts that such noise could have on narwhals and other marine mammals. To understand the effect of this noise, Shell conducted acoustic modelling of the Check-Shot/VSP array and the DP thrusters to estimate how far and at what sound levels this noise would travel. This information along with previous studies of how VECs respond to noise, allowed for predictions of whether the Project could have negligible, minor, moderate, or major impacts (magnitude), the size or spatial extent (km 2 ) of the impact, and how long an impact could occur (duration). Each impact prediction is accompanied by a level of confidence. Measures were identified to reduce or mitigate impacts. All of these factors were used to assess whether the proposed Project could significantly affect a VEC. In this EIA, a significant impact is defined as having a major magnitude of any duration or spatial extent; or having a moderate magnitude for a duration of greater than one year and over a spatial extent greater than 100 km 2. The magnitude of impacts can be rated as: Major: An impact on a VEC is rated major if it is judged to result in a 10%, or greater, change in the size or health of a population or the carrying capacity of its habitat, or affect the subsistence resource to an extent that is not socially tolerated. A change in a population can result from an absolute reduction in population size or from displacement of animals to areas outside the area of consideration. Moderate: An impact on a VEC is rated moderate if it is judged to result in a 1 10% change in the size or health of a population or the carrying capacity of its habitat, or noticeably affect the subsistence resource involved; impacts would be socially tolerated. Minor: An impact on a VEC is rated minor if it is judged to result in a <1% change in the size or health of the population or the carrying capacity of its habitat, or only slightly affect the subsistence resource involved. Negligible: Negligible impacts would result in no to very minimal effects to a VEC. 1.5 Summary of Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures The main Project activity of concern is the underwater noise created by the Check- Shot/VSP array, as well as the noise from DP thrusters, and this was the focus of the EIA for each VEC. Particular emphasis was given to narwhals, and the impacts of noise on their hearing and behaviour. The impacts of drill cuttings and mud on marine life on the seafloor (i.e., benthos) near the coring sites were also assessed. The cuttings and mud will smother benthos in the immediate area around the borehole. Other Project activities like routine discharges of grey water (showers, wash water), black water (treated sewage), and macerated food waste and the physical presence of the vessel were also assessed but are not included in this non-technical summary because impacts were considered negligible.

13 Page Mitigation Measures As required by BMP, an Environmental Management Plan was prepared that includes the monitoring and mitigation measures planned to reduce impacts. Mitigation measures incorporate BEP and BAT and as a minimum follow appropriate BMP guidelines and legislation; mitigation measures are summarized in Table 1-1. TABLE 1-1. Summary of key mitigation measures. Check-Shot/VSP Array Noise Avoid Narwhal Protection Zone I Avoid narwhal and beluga migration periods Use of 2 Marine Mammal and Seabird Observers on the coring vessel Ramp up of the array Delay of ramp up for marine mammals seen inside of safety zone (500 m) Shutdown of airguns for marine mammals seen inside of safety zone Only operate during daylight and periods of good visibility Seabed Disturbance Use seawater as primary drilling fluid If muds are required, Attapulgite and perhaps barite (both OSPAR approved) will be used Use video camera to investigate seabed prior to coring to confirm absence of corals or sponges General Ship Operations Vessel will steer a straight course and maintain a constant speed whenever possible Reduce vessel lighting whenever it is safe and possible to do so to reduce chances of attracting seabirds Rescue and release any stranded seabirds Crew will keep a log of sightings and contacts with fishing (and other) vessels Emissions and Discharges Vessel will only use gasoil with a sulphur content of less than 1.5% (weight) Vessel will meet or exceed regulations (MARPOL) for vessel discharges and emissions Unplanned Events Emergency Response, Spill Response, and Ice Management plans Oil spill drills and oil spill kits Vessel will not refuel or require resupply Communications Meet with stakeholders, including communities to provide information about the Project and its potential impacts Notification of the shallow coring program details to BMP, Royal Greenland A/S, shipping and harbour authorities, and hunter associations before the start of the program Establish a grievance mechanism, that offers various ways (e.g., telephone, , personal contact) to enable local stakeholders to contact Shell directly to ensure timely resolution of concerns and complaints Start-up Meeting to ensure Shell and its Contractors fully understand mitigations Shell will contact the DCE prior to survey start to ensure that its monitoring and mitigation plan for marine mammals and seabirds meets DCE protocols

14 Page Overview of Previous Studies A thorough review of previous studies on noise impacts for all VECs was conducted for the EIA. It is important to note that Check-Shot/VSP procedures use small airgun arrays and are limited in duration compared to 2-D or 3-D seismic surveys. As noted earlier, the impacts of noise on marine mammal hearing and behaviour were assessed in the EIA. There is some evidence that belugas can incur temporary hearing loss (or impairment) if they are exposed to seismic noise at close distances. There have been no studies of permanent hearing damage caused by seismic noise. There have been few studies of beluga whale response to seismic surveys and no such studies are available for narwhals. Seismic monitoring programs (Miller et al. 2005) involving intensive aerial surveys and ship-based observations were conducted in the Canadian Beaufort Sea in Results suggest that belugas tended to avoid the area of seismic operations (a 3-D survey) by km. There have been no studies of narwhal hearing impairment or changes in behaviour of narwhals attributable to airgun sounds. For that reason, studies of beluga whales were used to assess potential impacts on both belugas and narwhals Residual Impacts After inclusion of the above-noted mitigation measures, there are no significant residual impacts predicted for the proposed shallow coring program (Table 1-2). All of the potential impacts (for routine activities, seabed disturbance, potential accidental spills of small fuel amounts, and coring vessel noise) considered for VECs have a magnitude rating of negligible, negligible to minor, or minor. The small Check-Shot/VSP array produces much lower sound levels than those made by a larger airgun array used during 2-D and 3-D seismic surveys. Based on a series of precautionary steps, it was predicted that 0.01% of the Melville Bay narwhal population may avoid the Check-Shot/VSP array when coring activities occur closest to the Narwhal Protection Zone I. The proportion of narwhals affected decreases when coring activities occur at farther distances from Melville Bay. Narwhals are not predicted to incur hearing damage from Check-Shot/VSP array noise given that narwhals (and other marine mammals) are expected to avoid at least the immediate area around the array and that mitigation measures (ramp up delays and array shutdowns in a 500 m zone; no airgun use during periods of poor visibility) will reduce exposure to sound levels thought to be high enough to cause hearing damage. Similarly, belugas are not expected to incur hearing damage and residual impacts on hearing were assessed as negligible. The impact of noise on beluga whale behaviour was judged as minor.

15 Page 14 TABLE 1-2. Summary of impact predictions for VECs and noise and for seabed disturbance and fish/invertebrate VECs. Project Activity / VEC Impact Magnitude Significance Check-Shot/VSP Array and DP Thruster Noise Narwhals: hearing Level of Confidence impacts Negligible Not Significant High Narwhals: behaviour impacts Negligible to Minor Not Significant Medium Other marine mammals: hearing impacts Negligible Not Significant High Other marine mammals: behaviour impacts Negligible to Minor Not Significant Medium Seabirds Negligible Not Significant High Marine mammal hunt Negligible to Minor Not Significant Medium Fish and invertebrates (including eggs and larvae) Minor Not Significant Medium Commercial fisheries Negligible to Minor Not Significant High Subsistence fishery Negligible to Minor Not Significant High Seabed Disturbance a Fish and invertebrates (including eggs and larvae) Negligible to Minor Not Significant High a Impacts of seabed disturbance (cuttings and mud) on other VECs were all negligible with high levels of confidence. The level of confidence in predictions for impacts of noise is ranked as medium for narwhal and beluga behaviour because there is no information on how narwhals respond to airgun noise and beluga studies are limited. Similarly, a confidence level of medium was given for fish and invertebrates because of limited information available on the impacts of airgun noise Cumulative Impacts The potential for cumulative impacts from all proposed activities has also been assessed. In addition to the proposed shallow coring program, Shell, ConocoPhillips and Maersk Oil are proposing to conduct seismic surveys during July to September 2012 in the Anu, Napu, Qamut, and Tooq licenses. It is possible that marine mammals, including narwhals, could be exposed to noise from some or all of these seismic and shallow coring operations. It is highly unlikely that the cumulative impact of the three seismic programs and shallow coring program would affect 10% or more (i.e., the criterion for assigning an impact rating of major ) of narwhals in the Melville Bay area. It is far more likely that the combined programs might affect 2-4% of the narwhal population and that impacts would be not significant. The level of confidence in this prediction is low to medium as it is uncertain if cumulative impacts would be additive or whether habituation would occur and behavioural response distances would decrease. Because of this, a precautionary approach has been taken in this impact assessment.

16 Page Data Gaps and Uncertainties One of the data gaps in this EIA is the absence of information on how narwhals respond to seismic noise, i.e., from the Check-Shot/VSP array this reduces the confidence in impact predictions. There is even more uncertainty in how multiple seismic programs and to a limited extent, a shallow coring program, will contribute to potential cumulative impacts on narwhals (and other VECs). Discussions have commenced regarding DCE/GINR-led studies designed to investigate the potential cumulative impacts assessed in this EIA, with emphasis on narwhals. Three studies are planned including those on sound travel of seismic noise, narwhal response to seismic noise, and the impacts of seismic noise on subsistence hunting in Melville Bay. Shell is committed to working closely with BMP, DCE and other Operators to facilitate a successful research program. This program will serve to address data gaps and provide a better basis for mitigation measures in future years.

17 Page 16 2 INTRODUCTION Shell Kanumas A/S (Shell), acting as an operator on behalf of the Baffin Bay operators and licensee consortium (ConocoPhillips, Maersk Oil, Cairn Energy, Nunaoil, GDF SUEZ, Dong Energy, and Statoil), is proposing to conduct a shallow coring program offshore northwest Greenland in The shallow coring or stratigraphic drilling program would involve the use of one drilling vessel to acquire 11 stratigraphic coring samples at seven sites. Six sites are located north of the Qamut license and one site is located in the Anu license. The shallow coring program is proposed to occur from early August to early October This document is the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prepared for the Greenland Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) as part of the application process to acquire an approval to conduct offshore hydrocarbon exploration activities under the Mineral Resources Act (Section 86; BMP 2011). The EIA has been prepared in accordance with the Danish National Environmental Research Institute (NERI 1 ) and BMP s Guidelines for preparing an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report related to stratigraphic drilling offshore Greenland (NERI and BMP 2011a), which is considered an annex to the main BMP Guidelines for EIA report for activities related to hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation offshore Greenland (NERI and BMP 2011b). In addition, BMP s Guidelines for application, execution and reporting of offshore hydrocarbon exploration activities (excluding drilling) in Greenland (BMP 2011) were followed because of the proposed use of a small airgun array for vertical seismic profiling (VSP). 2.1 Proponent 2.2 Scope Shell is the operator for the proposed shallow coring program. Shell has acquired extensive operating and development experience in arctic and sub-arctic regions for over 40 years, and has developed the technology and expertise required to operate safely and effectively in remote and extreme conditions. In 2011, Shell, on behalf of the Baffin Bay operators and licensee consortium, successfully conducted a geophysical survey, including a 2-D high-resolution seismic site survey, at the proposed shallow coring sites for As part of the geophysical site survey, a marine mammal and seabird monitoring and mitigation program was implemented, and valuable data were collected that inform this EIA. This EIA has been prepared to meet the applicable requirements of Greenland legislation and standards, and also follows appropriate international guidance and best practice. The most relevant legislation, standards, and guidance are referenced in Section 3. The geographical scope of this EIA includes the shallow coring sites (in the Anu license and the area north of the Qamut license) and a larger area where potential impacts of the Project could occur (i.e., the Study Area, as defined in Section 6.2; see Figure 4-1 later). LGL Limited, environmental research associates, in association with Grontmij A/S, prepared this EIA. Operational and management information was provided by Shell. 1 Now the Danish Centre for Environment and Energy (DCE)

18 Page 17 The purpose of this EIA is to Provide details of the Project; Describe the environmental components and commercial fisheries and subsistence harvesting activities in the Study Area; Identify and assess the nature, significance, and probability of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed shallow coring program; and Describe appropriate mitigation measures in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP), together with management and monitoring procedures that will seek to avoid or reduce potential impacts. The following sections are included as part of this EIA: Section 1: Non-technical summary Section 2: Introduction (this section) Section 3: Regulatory, Policy and Administrative Framework Section 4: Project Description Section 5: Description of the Environment Section 6: Impact Assessment Section 7: Environmental Management Plan Section 8: Literature Cited A number of technical appendices containing supporting information relevant to the EIA, such as technical vessel specifications, review of the physical environment, detailed literature reviews on the effects of seismic noise on marine mammals and fish/invertebrates, and results of a benthic habitat study are included in support of this EIA and referenced within the text. 3 REGULATORY, POLICY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK This EIA was prepared to meet appropriate Greenlandic legislation and regulatory requirements, incorporate relevant international standards, and integrate Shell s policies. 3.1 National Legislation and Guidelines The following Greenlandic legislation and regulatory requirements for offshore petroleum exploration and environmental protection apply to the proposed shallow coring EIA and to the associated EMP. (This list is not meant to be exhaustive but does provide the key legislation and guidance documents relevant to the proposed shallow coring EIA.) Greenland Parliament Act no. 7 of 7 December 2009 on mineral resources and mineral resource activities (the Mineral Resources Act). NERI (DCE) and BMP Guidelines for preparing an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report related to stratigraphic drilling offshore Greenland, April 2011 (NERI and BMP 2011a) NERI (DCE) and BMP Guidelines for preparing an EIA report for activities related to hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation offshore Greenland, January 2011 (NERI and BMP 2011b). BMP Guidelines for application, execution, and reporting of offshore hydrocarbon exploration activities (excluding drilling) in Greenland, December 2011 (BMP 2011).

19 Page 18 Guidelines to environmental impact assessment of seismic activities in Greenland waters, 3 rd revised edition, December 2011 (Kyhn et al. 2011). NERI (DCE) and BMP Manual for seabird and marine mammal survey on seismic vessels in Greenland, May 2011 (Johansen et al. 2011a). Act no. 929 of 24 September 2009 issued by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency on the Protection of the Marine Environment (replacing Act no. 476 of 30 June 1993 on the Protection of the Marine Environment). Greenland Home Rule Executive Orders including those for protection and hunting of polar bears, walrus, and birds. Greenland Government Executive Orders including those for protection and hunting of large whales, seals, belugas and narwhals. 3.2 International Treaties, Conventions and Best Practice As required in the BMP Guidelines (2011) and NERI (DCE) and BMP Guidelines (NERI and BMP 2011b), Best Available Technology (BAT) and Best Environmental Practice (BEP) must be considered and incorporated into a shallow coring program where possible. International BEP Guidelines (e.g., NORSOK standards), international conventions (e.g., OSPAR), and IMO Conventions (e.g., MARPOL) have been used in the development of the EMP (see Section 7 for details). 3.3 Shell Environmental Management The Project will be conducted within the framework of Shell s internal standards and Business Principles, as well as the environmental, health, and safety policies and procedures of its subcontractors. Environmental, Health and Safety management of the Project will follow the procedures and requirements as described in Shell s HSSE & SP Control Framework and Corporate Standards (Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social Performance; Table 3-1). These policies and management procedures will be bridged to the contractors own management system. Specifically regarding offshore VSP surveys, Shell requires the Project to meet OGP HSE Aspects in a Contracting Environment for Geophysical Operations (2001); IAGC Environmental Guidelines for World-wide Geophysical Operations (2001); and IAGC Recommended Mitigation Measures for Cetaceans during Geophysical Operations (2001). Table 3-1. Shell commitment and policy on health, security, safety, environment and social performance. Commitment Shell is committed to: Pursue the goal of no harm to people; Protect the environment; Use material and energy efficiently to provide our products and services; Respect our neighbours and contribute to the societies in which we operate; Develop energy resources, products and services consistent with these aims; Publicly report on our performance; Policy Every Shell Company: Has a systematic approach to HSSE & SP management designed to ensure compliance with the law and to achieve continuous performance improvement; Sets targets for improvement and measures, appraises and reports performance; Requires contractors to manage HSSE & SP in line with this policy; Requires joint ventures under its operational

20 Page 19 Play a leading role in promoting best practice in our industries; Manage HSSE & SP matters as any other critical business activity; and Promote a culture in which all Shell employees share this commitment. control to apply this policy, and uses its influence to promote it in its other ventures; Engages effectively with neighbours and impacted communities; and Includes HSSE & SP performance in the appraisal of staff and rewards accordingly. 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Shell is proposing to conduct a shallow coring program (i.e., stratigraphic drilling) in the Anu license and the area north of the Qamut license from early August to early October 2012 (see Figure 4-1). The proposed coring program will be conducted by the contractor SIEM Offshore / Overseas Drilling Ltd. using the riserless drilling vessel M/V JOIDES Resolution. The shallow coring program is described below, including the information required in DCE and BMP s Guidelines for preparing an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report related to stratigraphic drilling offshore Greenland (NERI and BMP 2011a), as well as BMP Guidelines for application, execution and reporting of offshore hydrocarbon exploration activities (excluding drilling) in Greenland (BMP 2011). As required in the BMP Guidelines, BAT and BEP have been incorporated into program planning to minimize environmental impacts. This is discussed in the EMP (see Section 7 later in the EIA).

21 Page 20

22 Page Project Scope and Objectives Shell is proposing to acquire 11 stratigraphic coring samples at seven locations (Figure 4-1); six locations occur north of the Qamut license and one location occurs in the Anu license; coring activities are included under prospecting license number 2011/60 and block license number 2011/12, respectively. A geophysical survey was conducted in 2011 to collect data around each coring location for the proposed 2012 shallow coring program. No geohazards related to the seabed topography/features (e.g., boulders and seabed debris) or the subsurface geology (such as shallow gas) were identified at any of 11 proposed coring sites. A methane hydrate stability analysis was also conducted at each site and there is no evidence of hydrates being present. The survey results are available in GEMS (2012). The objectives of the shallow coring program are to provide an understanding of stratigraphic ages and rock properties of the sediment and subsurface rock needed to inform hydrocarbon exploration decisions as well as meet the obligations to acquire stratigraphic coring samples as part of the Qamut, Anu, and Tooq Exploration Licenses. Baffin Bay basin is a previously undrilled area and there are no data available on sediment and subsurface rock properties. 4.2 Program Description Schedule, Location, and Coring Approach Schedule The timing of operations is highly dependent on ice conditions. If open water is present, the JOIDES Resolution is expected to enter Greenland waters on 10 August Coring operations are expected to begin on ~12 August and end on ~29 September. It is estimated the vessel and all crew members will mobilize and demobilize from St. John s, Newfoundland. Mobilization will occur ~2 August and demobilization will occur ~8 October Coring Locations and Approach A summary of coring sites, including locations (see also Figure 4-1) and water depths, is provided in Table 4-1. Rock cores and sediment samples will be acquired at each of the 11 proposed coring sites. The core diameter will be 25 cm. Coring will occur continuously from the seabed to the desired depth. Coring depths are expected to average 500 m and range from m. The actual coring depth will depend upon the type of rock and sediment encountered. The coring depth as well as number of cores will be determined on site as coring data becomes available.

23 Page 22 Table 4-1. Summary of proposed shallow coring sites for Site Number Latitude Longitude Easting (m) Northing (m) Water depth (m) SC '39.178"N 66 49'53.773"W SC '46.177"N 66 35'46.567"W SC '47.692"N 66 25'00.326"W SC '37.064"N 66 17'01.630"W SC '44.983"N 66 06'42.360"W SC '05.058"N 65 58'31.956"W SC '03.609"N 65 44'04.914"W SC '00.120"N 65 04'05.632"W SC '17.586"N 65 05'06.359"W SC '52.834"N 62 36'29.830"W SC '30.924"N 62 33'02.062"W Notes: Exact locations are considered preliminary and will be within the areas covered by the 2011 geophysical site survey. Coordinate Reference System (CRS) is WGS84 UTM Zone 21 (CM 57 W). The exact coring sequence will be determined by meteorological, ice conditions and the nature of the rock strata. It is anticipated that coring operations will begin in the south (at sites SC-10 and SC11) and move northwards. The amount of time to drill a core will depend on core length and coring rate. Based on a 7 m/h coring rate, a coring time of 1.5 to 2 days for a 100 m core to nearly 6-7 days for 800 m core length is estimated. On average, for a 500 m core, the coring time will be of the order of 4-5 days. Note that the coring rate will be variable depending upon the type of rock encountered. Summary of Coring Procedure The JOIDES Resolution is designed to perform riserless drilling (Figure 4-2) and utilize a hollow drill string through which seawater, the drilling fluid, is pumped to lubricate and cool the drill bit and clear cuttings from the borehole. At some coring sites, water-based drilling mud that contains naturally occurring minerals may be injected into the borehole to enhance removal of the cuttings. The actual coring operations are performed by rotary drilling with the use of wireline coring systems. The JOIDES Resolution will maintain position over the coring site via Dynamic Positioning (DP) thrusters. Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) will be used to accurately position the drill ship over the borehole, and for station keeping during coring. After coring is completed at a site, VSP will be conducted for each borehole. Drilling cuttings and mud, emissions, and other discharges are discussed in further detail below.

24 Page 23 Figure 4-2. Schematic of riserless drilling. Drilling Mud and Cuttings Under normal riserless drilling conditions, seawater will be the primary drilling fluid. However, it is likely that some boreholes will require drilling mud to more effectively displace cuttings. Hole sweeps (removal of cuttings) will use a salt water gel (Attapulgite) without other chemicals. If weighted mud is needed, it would be barite suspended by Attapulgite. Attapulgite is a naturally occurring, hydrated magnesium aluminum silicate clay minerals (ISO 1998; Murray 2002). Attapulgite and barite are listed under the OSPAR List of Substances / Preparations Used and Discharged Offshore which Are Considered to Pose Little or No Risk to the Environment (PLONOR; OSPAR 2008). In addition to drilling mud, for certain applications the JOIDES Resolution may introduce cement for borehole closure. The cement used will be approved under the OSPAR PLONAR list. The amount of cement expected to be used during future expeditions will depend on a number of site-specific factors, such as borehole depth and formation conditions. Table 4-2 summarizes the estimated mud and cuttings volumes that may be discharged during the drilling program based on a 500 m core length (average) and 800 m core length (maximum).

25 Page 24 Drilling will result in drill cuttings deposited on the sea floor surrounding the borehole. Drill cuttings consist of the fragments of substrate removed during the drilling of the seabed. The layer of drill cuttings on the seabed is typically thickest around the borehole (typically in a cone shape), decreasing with distance from the borehole. The extent of cuttings dispersion is affected by the water dynamics (e.g., currents, tides). The volume of cuttings will depend on the type of strata being penetrated, the size and the depth of the borehole. For a typical 25 cm diameter borehole, the cuttings volume less the volume of the core (~5%), equates to approximately 5.6 m 3 for each 100 m of strata drilled. Cuttings (and muds) from a 500 m borehole, for instance, could cover an area on the order of 3650 m 2 at 1 cm thickness. An 800 m borehole would produce a covered area of ~5990 m 2 at 1 cm thickness (Table 4-2). Table 4-2. Estimated amounts of coring cuttings and mud deposition on the seabed. Coring Scenario Estimated volume of cuttings (m 3 ) Estimated volume of mud (m 3 ) Estimated volume of cuttings + mud (m 3 ) Estimated area of deposited cuttings and mud (m 2 ) a Estimated radius of depositional area (m) a 500 m bore hole b m bore hole c Total for all 11 bore holes (4,450 m) ,310 d - a Assuming uniform deposition around bore hole and entire depositional area has thickness of 1 cm b Typical bore hole length c Maximum bore hole length d Equivalent to a 183 m x 183 m area - approximately % of Project Area Drilling Vessel (M/V JOIDES Resolution) The JOIDES Resolution (ICE Class 1B; call sign 5BMM3; Figure 4-3) was built in 1978 and underwent a major upgrade in It is owned by Overseas Drilling Limited and is registered in Cyprus. The vessel is designed to perform riserless drilling and is m long, with a beam of 21.3 m, a maximum draft of 7.5 m, and a 6.7 m wide moonpool. The JOIDES Resolution has an optimal transit speed of ~19.4 km/h (10.5 knots). The vessel is equipped with state of the art navigation, radar, ice radar, communication and depth sounding equipment, and a DP system (Nautronix 5002 dual redundant ASK; see Appendix A for further details). The vessel has a diesel fuel capacity of 3,000 metric tonnes.

26 Page 25 Figure 4-3. Drilling vessel M/V JOIDES Resolution. The JOIDES Resolution has seven diesel-electric engines that produce an average total power output of 7 megawatts. Four of these engines are used during transit and three are used to power the 12 DP thrusters that may be used to maintain position over the borehole. Acoustic modelling of DP thruster noise has been conducted for this EIA (see Section 6.7 later) Check-Shot/Vertical Seismic Profiling Check-Shot/Vertical seismic profiling (VSP) is planned for all coring sites, although the number may be reduced due to encountered stratigraphy and operational conditions. The Check-Shot / VSP procedure is used to measure acoustic waves between the surface and a well bore, and, in effect allows for the determination of the target depth of the borehole. Figure 4-4 provides a schematic overview of the check-shot procedure. The check-shot data can be used to produce a depth-traveltime tie and to calibrate the sonic logs and determine accurate drilling depths and their relative position with respect to targets on the seismic reflection profiles.

27 Page 26 Figure 4-4. Schematic of Check-Shot / VSP procedure. Check-Shot/VSP methodology utilizes a downhole tool containing a geophone that is lowered to the bottom of the borehole where the tool is then held stationary. A small array of airguns (deployed from the drilling vessel) is fired 5 to 10 times with a minimum shot interval of 26 sec while the geophone tool is on station. For typical Check-Shot/VSP procedures, each of the sites would likely take less than 5-6 h in total including preparation time (marine mammal watch, airgun ramp up, equipment deployment), Check-Shot/VSP time, and equipment retrieval. Table 4-3 provides the survey data for VSP operations requested in the Seismic EIA Guidelines (Kyhn et al. 2011). The proposed airgun source for Check-Shot/VSP is two 250-in 3 Sercel G guns arranged in parallel cluster 1 m apart (Figure 4-5). The airguns are attached to a buoy and suspended from an aft port crane ~15 m from the ship and at a depth of 2 7 m. Table 4-4 and Figure 4-5 provide array specifications as requested in the Seismic EIA Guidelines (Kyhn et al. 2011). Requested modelling output is provided in Section 6.7.

28 Page 27 Table 4-3. Survey data for the Check-Shot/VSP operations (as per Table required in Seismic EIA Guidelines; Kyhn et al. 2011). Specify Description Provided Type of survey (2-D, high resolution (3-D), well testing, other) Check-Shot/Vertical Seismic Profiling (VSP). Yes Map of the area with all transect lines shown Start and end dates for the survey Expected duration Duty cycle of operation (in hours/24 hours). Number of hours in the dark per 24 hours. See Figure 4-1. Lines are not surveyed during VSP. 12 August 29 September 2012 (VSP will occur periodically). <5-6 h per core hole on ~3 10 day intervals shotpoints per borehole. During daylight hours only. Number of hours of darkness in August: 0 h; September: 8 h; 1-15 October: 12 h. Yes Yes Yes Yes Number and types of accompanying vessels No additional vessels required. Yes Intended use of icebreakers. Will survey be carried out in ice? No icebreakers will be used. Shallow coring and Check-Shot / VSP can only be conducted in open water with light ice. Yes Table 4-4. Array specifications for the Check-Shot/VSP operations (as per Table required in Seismic EIA Guidelines; Kyhn et al. 2011). Specify Description Provided Number and names of vessels towing airgun arrays One drilling vessel: M/V JOIDES Resolution Yes For each vessel provide geometric layout of complete airgun array with individual volume specified (in psi per airgun and in 3 per airgun) See Figure 4-5 a Yes Size of total array (in 3 and psi for the entire array) 500 in 3 and 3,000 psi Yes Firing rate in shots/sec. Will sub arrays fire simultaneously or alternate? Operation speed of the vessel in km/hours or knots shots/s (5 10 shots per borehole with a minimum of 26 sec between shots). Airguns are fired simultaneously Not applicable. a Each airgun can be operated at 2,000 or 3,000 psi. For modelling and assessment purposes, 3,000 psi is assumed. Yes Yes

29 Page 28 Figure 4-5. Geometric layout of VSP airguns. Each airgun can be operated at 2,000 or 3,000 psi Other Data Collection There is potential to perform geotechnical data acquisition (i.e., seabed sampling) with the aim of determining key geotechnical parameters. This may only be required in the boreholes where the top stratigraphic section consists of non-rock materials. If this sampling is performed, it is envisioned to be complementary and in conjunction with the coring operations within the same borehole. For geotechnical testing there are two options: 1) Cone Penetration Testing (CPT) or 2) Grab sample collection with laboratory testing. Grab sampling might also be performed to monitor drill cuttings discharged to sea bed. Seabed sampling will follow NORSOK standard G-001, Rev. 2, October 2004, Annex B Sampling, Sections B.1 B Additional Equipment Free Fall Funnels. The JOIDES Resolution may use Free Fall Funnels (FFFs; Figure 4-6) deployed on the seabed to enable fast borehole re-entry. When deployed, the base of the funnel rests on the seabed and the stinger is buried into the seafloor sediments. During coring operations the FFF becomes covered in drill cuttings. The FFF then subsides into the borehole and disintegrates over time via rusting. FFF s are disposable items and are not recovered. It is anticipated that 5 10 FFF may be deployed.