LIBRARY
MAIN CATALOG (Electronic Resources/LUMCON Library)
Click here to search the Dispersants Bibliography
Click here to search Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development Bibliography
ABOUT THE LIBRARY
The LUMCON Library collection was originally housed in Ellender Memorial Library, located at Nicholls State University in Thibodaux, Louisiana. After completion of the DeFelice Marine Center in 1986, the collection was moved to its present location. Since that time, the Library has become an active resource center for LUMCON faculty and staff as well as Consortium member institutions, visiting researchers, students, and the public.
The library contains a computer lab and several study spaces available to visiting students, scientists, or groups (such as attendees of a writing retreat).
The collection and development of library materials reflects LUMCON’s research programs. The collection has approximately:
- 4,600 monographs
- 5,800 bound volumes
- 200 journal titles
- 26 current journal subscriptions
- 850 maps
- 35 atlases
- 3,600 government documents
- 1,500 reprints
In addition, the library houses a complete collection of research products generated by DeFelice Marine Center personnel since LUMCON’s inception.
HOURS OF OPERATION
- The LUMCON Library is staffed Monday through Friday from 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM. All visitors are welcome during these hours.
- The Library is closed to the public on weekends, state holidays, and when the librarian is not on site. Before visiting the facility, please call 985-851-2875 to ensure the Library will be open.
- All LUMCON staff, summer students, and resident visitors have 24-hour access to the Library. If the doors to the Library are locked, the security guard will open them for you.
CIRCULATION
- Books can be checked out by filling out a card at the circulation desk. The length of time a book can be checked out varies depending on the patron’s status. Books may be renewed by contacting the department, but all items are subject to recall at any time.
- Interlibrary loan service is available for LUMCON faculty, postdocs, lab personnel, and summer students. Although we strive to get items at no charge, the patron may be asked to pay for interlibrary loan charges under certain circumstances.
- Reserve items, reference materials, and journals must remain in the Library. The Library has no photocopier, but copies or scans can be made in the LUMCON main office.
- All materials must be checked out before removal from the Library, without exception.
- Library materials can be placed on reserve for summer classes. A list of items to be placed on reserve should be provided to the librarian as soon as possible.
- When returning material that has been checked out, please drop off items at the circulation counter.
Food is not allowed in the Library under any circumstance. Drinks are only allowed with prior approval by the librarian or the security guard.
INTERNSHIP PROGRAM
The LUMCON Library is available as an internship site for graduate-level students who have completed at least two semesters toward a Master’s degree in Library and Information Science. Applications will be accepted on a continuing basis and internships may be completed during any semester. Prior library experience or an undergraduate degree in science is desirable, but not necessary. Credits will be awarded based on the number of person-hours completed (40 person-hours per credit hour).
The internship will consist of both field experience, encompassing many operations of a special library, and a special project in technical services. The Librarian will give the intern an overview of reference services, technical services, library administration, and budgeting, and will guide the intern through special projects. The LUMCON Library uses SIRSI/Dynix’s Symphony Integrated Library System as well as OCLC for Cataloging/Interlibrary Loan services.
Contact the Librarian for more information or to apply for an internship.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank the following individuals for their guidance and input when creating the Dispersants Bibliography:
-
- Victoria Broje, Per Daling, Alun Lewis, and Francois-Xavier Merlin offered valuable assistance in the early phases of this project. Per Daling’s support was especially noteworthy, by providing conference proceedings that otherwise could not be obtained.
- Deborah Ansell, ITOPF’s librarian, contributed by sharing her sizeable list of library holdings on dispersant publications with us, and filling in gaps where existing citation information was incomplete.
- Likewise, Julie Anne Richardson, librarian for Environment Canada, compiled a publication listing on dispersants housed in her collection, which provided us with additional citations for our project.
- Qianxin Lin at Louisiana State University provided API conference proceedings for us to use in transcribing abstracts.
- Nancy Kinner at the Coastal Response Research Center provided encouragement, focus, and connected us with some of the aforementioned people.
- Finally, Don Davis and Karen Reeder Emory at OSRADP deserve special mention for all of their help and direction during the span of this project.
The LUMCON Library is a member of the International Association of Aquatic and Marine Science Libraries and Information Centers (IAMSLIC), the Southeast Affiliate of IAMSLIC Libraries (SAIL), and the Louisiana Library Network and Information Consortium (LOUIS). Additionally, the Library has access to OCLC Cataloging/Interlibrary loan services.
Click here to search LUMCON’s e-Library catalog using the LOUIS portal.
DISPERSANTS BIBLIOGRAPHY
A series of experimental studies was carried out as part of the Baffin Island Oil Spill (BIOS) Project to define the behavioural, physiological and biochemical reactions of three arctic marine benthic invertebrate species exposed to chemically dispersed crude oil. Behavioural responses and patterns of hydrocarbon accumulation and release observed in the bivalves and the urchin during the 1981 field spill were similar to those observed during the laboratory simulations. Ostial closure, loss of responsiveness to mechanical stimuli and narcosis were characteristic of the bivalves. Exposed urchins displayed a functional loss of tube foot and spine behaviour. Detailed hydrocarbon analysis indicated different uptake dynamics among the species. The effects of dispersed oil were immediate and short lived and resulted in temporary accumulation of hydrocarbons. Depuration of these stored hydrocarbons occurred during the experimental recovery period. In vivo biodegradation of hydrocarbons was indicated in the bivalves. Physiological parameters measured in bivalves exposed to oil included elements of scope for growth, activity of aspartate aminotransferase and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase. Dose-response relationships between physiological rates and hydrocarbon body burden were apparent
Several years ago, Exxon Company, International, found itself with a need for a rugged system for open ocean use in applying dispersant which could be quickly installed on supply boats and would use readily available parts at remote offshore drilling sites. Fire monitors appeared promising, since they had been used effectively to disperse some minor spills in the past, and visually they appeared to produce a relatively-uniform spray pattern. Calculations also showed that fire monitors could potentially cover three to four times the area covered by a conventional boom because of a wider swath and the potential for greater boat speed due to a lesser effect of pitching and rolling on monitors that on booms. Exxon conducted several test programs to more thoroughly evaluate fire monitors for dispersant application, and these programs are the subject of this paper. The first test program involved the testing of numerous nozzles with modifications and monitor elevation angles to determine what combination would give the most uniform dosage in the likely offshore wind conditions. Once a nozzle was selected, the droplet pattern from the monitor nozzle and from a conventional dilute spray boom were analyzed using high speed video. These tests were followed by application tests of Corexit 9527 by fire monitor, dilute boom, and neat boom to spilled oil at the Imperial Oil Limited Wave Basin in Calgary. The major content of this paper deals with the results of those tests. Finally, at-sea tests were successfully conducted in the North Sea
In developing contingency plans for exploratory drilling programs, Exxon Company, International (ECI), explored a variety of available options for dispersant application. ECI found that the arrival of ADDS-Back-equipped C-130 aircraft to remote drilling sites could take one or two days after notification. A quicker initial response could be provided by the offshore supply boats assigned to a well if they were equipped with dispersant spray capability. Based on calculations of educator flow rates, moderate-sized fire monitors were found to potentially apply dispersant at four times the rate of boom systems. Visually, the spray pattern from an adjustable fire nozzle appeared to provide relatively uniform coverage of the water surface, but tests were conducted to document this observation. In addition, ECI sought to select a fire monitor nozzle that optimized dosage uniformity and reach. Tests were conducted at Exxon’s research facility near Friendswood, Texas, to compare the performance of a Clean Gulf Cooperative spray boom and a 300-gpm-fire monitor in spraying chemical dispersant. These tests included measurements of the drop size distribution from both the monitor and the spray boom systems and evaluation of the distribution of water in the spray impact patterns of several different fire nozzles mounted on the monitor. Drop size tests with the monitor used the fire nozzle that produced the most uniform spray impact pattern combined with the longest reach. Additional tests were conducted to determine the effect of reduced surface tension (as in a dispersant-seawater mixture) on drop size
The Alaska Regional Response Team (RRT) is in the process of developing preconsultation and pre-approval plans allowing for the limited use of dispersants on oil spills in Alaskan marine waters. “General Alaska Dispersant Use Criteria” briefly reviews the present data base for the use for oil dispersing chemicals and establishes a three-part classification system for the use of dispersants in Alaskan coastal waters. This system is being applied to Alaskan areas in a site- and resource-specific manner. The general criteria and the application of the classification system to Cook Inlet have been subjected to public comment from the oil and fishing industry, approved by the RRT, subjected to public comment from the oil and fishing industry, approved by the RRT, and incorporated into the Alaska Regional Contingency Plan. At present, this classification system is being used to develop dispersant use guidelines for Prince William Sound, a much different regime, both physically and biologically, from Cook Inlet
The extreme concern about today’s large oil spills and their impact on the environment has necessitated the consideration of oil dispersants as possible cleanup agents. For this reason, a joint effort between the U.S. EPA and the U.S.S.R. Central Scientific Research Institute has been initiated to examine the various oil dispersants and application methods and to establish a uniform series of acceptance tests. Concurrent with laboratory tests of several present-day dispersants, a spraying and mixing system has been developed along the lines of the Warren Spring Laboratory system. A continuing program of testing has been begun both in the laboratory and field to develop the optimum operating parameters of the system prior to the full-scale field tests at a spill of opportunity later this year
Tissues from a number of marine species were treated with a variety of solutions, including 1% of the major ‘detergent’ (B.P. 1002) used in an attempt to disperse the oil from the ‘Torrey Canyon’ and 1% each of the three major constituents of B.P. 1002, two of which are nonionic surfactants. The extracts were submitted to vertical starch-gel electrophoresis in order to measure both the effect of the detergent in facilitating the breakdown of cellular structure (extractability), and the irreversible effect on activation or inhibition of various enzymes and other proteins. The proteins studied include a variety of NAD- and NADP-linked dehydrogenases, esterases, blood and nerve haemoglobins, plasma proteins, egg white and yolk proteins, and r-phycoerythrin. The results confirm the general opinion that detergents increase the extractability of proteins from cells. Ion particular lipoprotein systems are altered, e.g. ‘fast’ serum lipoprotein in fishes (and other vertebrates). Other effects are also observed, e.g. sole but not turbot haemoglobin is rendered relatively insoluble, probably because the detergent stabilizes haemoglobin binding to other components in the erythrocyte. Certain enzymes, e.g. some esterases and amylases, are activated--a not surprising observation. However, a few enzymes are altered in electrophoretic mobility or in activity in a way that one might not expect, e.g. bass Morone labrax lactate dehydrogenase. The results indicate that ‘oil-spill’ detergents and their constituent surfactants are biochemically quite powerful agents. It is too early to attempt to correlate in vitro and in vivo observations but there is an indication that starch-gel electrophoresis provides a useful supplement to more conventional methods used in the studies on complex pollution problems
The effects of crude oil and three oil spill dispersants (Corexit 9600, 9550 and 7664) on nitrogenase activity in the cyanobacteria Nostoc sp. were examined. The addition of oil to Nostoc sp. cultures resulted in a catastrophic decline in nitrogenase activity with activity ceasing 7 h after treatment. The addition of a dispersant with the oil did not ameliorate this effect. Cultures exposed to high concentrations of dispersants showed lower rates of nitrogenase activity than untreated cultures. However, it is unlikely that dispersant concentrations of this magnitude would occur in the field. At the lowest concentration tested, which approximates the manufacturer's recommended application rate, the effects of the dispersant appear to be negligible
Anything worthwhile takes time and effort. In 1989 the tanker Exxon Houston broke free of her offshore mooring and ran aground. Dispersants were brought to Hawaii as a potential response tool. This was a wake up call that our coastlines and economy were vulnerable to a large-scale event. Although not needed in this instance, this awakening produced the 1992 signed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Oceania Regional Response Team (RRT) and the state of Hawaii, preauthorizing the Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to use dispersant to combat oil spills in Hawaiian waters. It was very restricted in its applicability, but it was a good beginning. A revised and greatly improved dispersant pre-approved MOA was signed in April 1999. Explanation of the elements that worked to obtain agreement and the special considerations unique to Hawaii is addressed. The evolution of the state’s acquisition of a large-scale dispersant application system, and the ultimate development of a unique three-party MOA is discussed. Community interest focused on obtaining an Airborne Dispersant Delivery System (ADDS) and an adequate and immediately available stockpile of dispersant. It was envisioned to have the state of Hawaii come up with the necessary funding, the U.S. Coast Guard use their C-130 aircraft, and the local industry financed oil spill Cooperative, Clean Islands Council (CIC) maintain the system. This presentation discusses the challenges; issues and problem solving required accomplishing the acquisition of this large-scale system. It further discusses the Hawaii response community’s continuing efforts to ensure this vital response tool is ready and able to perform in an emergency
This paper discusses the use of dispersants in the United Kingdom and describes the work undertaken to improve the laboratory test for the assessment of oil spill dispersant efficiency together with some of the supporting ongoing work in the field of dispersant evaluation. The revolving flask test used to measure the efficiency of oil spill dispersants was originally developed by Petrofina Ltd., but has been modified to meet the requirements of a simple test procedure to select dispersants for use at sea in accordance with the regulatory requirements of the U.K. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Test results depended on operator technique and equipment. A program involving manufacturers, oil companies, and users was undertaken to improve the technique and precision of the test. Reproducibility between laboratories was on the order of ±10% mean. The test has been correlated with spraying trials at sea in which a carpet of oil was sprayed with a commercially available dispersant and the amount of oil dispersed into the sea by wave action was visually assessed
This report describes the Rotortech TC3 underslung spray bucket, designed for the aerial application of dispersants. The bucket can be carried beneath most helicopters and is coupled to the fuselage by a simple hook arrangement. Flight trials with the bucket were carried out to assess the characteristics of the spray and the results are discussed in terms of the criteria for effective aerial dispersant spraying at sea
The effects of three hydrocarbon dispersant agents (Corexit 9527, Hydrogamosol LT and OSR LT 126) on the bacterial flora of the marine environment are analysed in 2-square-metre basins filled with lagoon seawater. Four months after the first treatment, oil slicks were no longer visible, whereas the appearance of the untreated reference slick had hardly changed. The treatment of 10-litre crude-oil slicks causes an appreciable and long lasting increase in the bacterial population
Sea bacteria (CUES 299) was found to produce biodispersant for treating oil spills. Optimal production of dispersant production was arrived at by using different culture mediums that had varied carbon sources and salt concentrations present. For effectiveness tests, Arabian Light crude was chosen. Biodegradation efficiency was demonstrated by the elimination of hydrocarbons below Tridecane. Degradation efficiency for other specific hydrocarbons was as foillows: 88% for Tridecane, 52% for Tetradecane, 21% for Pentdecane, 23% for Hexadecane, and 23% for Heptadecane
Experiments performed to determine the survival of developing eggs and prolarvae exposed to 7 types of oil dispersants in a wide range of concentrations showed that all the oil dispersants were toxic to the fish oven in the lowest concentrations tested (0.5 and 0.1 mg/l)
A study was conducted to investigate the rate of survival of developing eggs and prolarvae of Platichthys flesus flesus from the Black Sea with varying concentrations of oil dispersants. Findings showed all dispersants studied to be toxic even in the lowest concentration (0.5 and 0.1 mg/l)
The acute toxicities of the water soluble fraction of crude oils or the aqueous solution of individual hydrocarbons were compared with the field exposure concentrations to dissolved hydrocarbons under crude oil slicks and emulsion plumes from chemically dispersed slicks. The exposures were related by expressing LC50 values for differing times and varying concentrations as a product (mean concentration x time = ppm-hours). Field exposures to soluble hydrocarbons under oil slicks on open water or in plumes of efficiently dispersed slicks are very low (from 150 to 1 million times lower) compared with exposures to cause half mortality for more than 50 marine species. This is so because oil slicks are thin, generally with average thickness between 0.1 and 0.01 mm. A high water-to-oil ratio limits the concentration of total oil to 10 to 100 ppm in the top meter of water, and 1 to 10 in 10 m. The soluble and volatile hydrocarbons quickly evaporate to the atmosphere from the slick or from near-surface waters. The field exposure of organisms in the water column is low initially and is transitory. Thus, oil spills and the chemical dispersion of slicks are unlikely to have measurable adverse effects on larval, juvenile, or adult marine organisms in the water column
Oil slicks should be dispersed in shallow nearshore waters to prevent oil from stranding. Field and laboratory studies show that chemically dispersed oil causes fewer adverse biological effects, and those are transitory. Spilled oil attains an average thickness of 0.1 mm or less in an hour or two on the water surface. Thus maximum concentrations in water are 100 ppm at 1 m and 10 ppm at 10 m. Most volatile/soluble hydrocarbons that cause toxicity evaporate from the slick in a few hours. Soluble hydrocarbons under field slicks and in chemically dispersed oil plumes are generally a factor of 150 to 1 million lower than those found to cause mortality of a wide range of organisms in laboratory studies. Chemical dispersants appear to protect some organisms, apparently by reducing oil droplet “stickiness.” A relatively few mechanically dispersed crude oil droplets, compared to many chemically dispersed droplets, caused (1) increased larval abnormalities in herring egg exposures and (2) increased petroleum content in adult coho salmon tissue. Chemical dispersion of crude oil prevented (1) mortality of mature mangrove trees in Panama and (2) adverse effects on intertidal organisms in Maine and immediate subtidal organisms in the Arctic. An oil spill is large or small relative to the receiving water. Scenarios of large and small spills show that there are no environmental reasons for not using chemical dispersants. A review of control capabilities shows that spills exceeding 160 m3 (1000 bbl)/day can only be accomplished by multiengine aircraft spraying dispersant, with mechanical methods assisting in critical areas. This assumes that the oil is dispersible. If not, most oil from spills over 160 m3/day may strand on shores. To be most effective, dispersant spraying must be initiated early, meaning that preapproval is necessary. Reduced adverse environmental effects along with greater control capabilities indicate that chemical dispersants should be used even in shallow nearshore waters
Four research oil spills of Murban and La Rose crude oils were made off New Jersey. Two slicks were immediately sprayed with a dispersant; two, after 2 h. Average oil contents by IR analysis of a CCl4 extract of water samples collected 30-90 min under immediately treated slicks at 1, 3,6, and 9 m were 0.7,0.7,0.3, and 0.2 mg/L for La Rosa and 3.1,2.4,0.5,and 0.4 for Murban. The highest concentrations were 3 mg/L for La Rose and 18 mg/L for Murban. Oil concentrations for dispersion delayed 2 h were ≤1.1 mg/L, slightly higher than found under untreated oil sampled immediately after discharge. The dispersed oil weathered very rapidly with evaporation of C1-C10 hydrocarbons greatly exceeding solution. Dissolved hydrocarbons were not found at the method detection limit of 0.01 μg/L. The measured C1-C10 hydrocarbons were residual in dispersed oil droplets, and their sum did not exceed 50 μg/L
Four research crude oil spills discharged on the open ocean were chemically treated with a dispersant. The underlying water was then analyzed to determine (1) the dispersion of oil into the water column, and (2) the rate of loss (weathering) or low molecular-weight hydrocarbons from the dispersed oil. These tests of chemical dispersion are thought to accelerate the natural weathering processes. This would result in higher concentrations of oil penetrating to greater depths, and accelerated escape of volatile hydrocarbons to the atmosphere. The mechanism for this behavior was expected to be the mixing of dispersed droplets having high specific surface areas in near-surface water, causing rapid loss of volatile hydrocarbons. An untreated slick, although constantly exposed to the atmosphere, may be less susceptible to evaporation than dispersed oil because its lower surface-to-volume ratio tends to retard transport (by diffusion) of volatile hydrocarbons. Oil emulsified in water is removed from most of the wind's influence, so that it does not travel as far as a surface slick
Oil spilled on water undergoes alteration by physical, chemical, and biological processes. Rapid physical processes include spreading, movement with winds and water currents, evaporation of volatile components, solution, water-in-oil emulsification, dispersion as small droplets into water, spray injection into the air, and sedimentation. This paper reviews the weathering and documented temporary effects of oil spills, and summarizes the advantages of chemically dispersing oil slicks. No attempt is made to gave complete literature citations, but rather to select recent studies that highlight the various processes involved. For some processes, there are abundant studies; for others, few. Some areas require additional investigations to substantiate preliminary information
During a three-week period in 1970 an estimated 65, 000 barrels of 34° API gravity crude oil were discharged from the Chevron Main Pass Block 41C Platform, 11 miles east of the Mississippi River Delta. Two thousand barrels of chemical dispersants were sprayed on the platform and surrounding water surface. It is estimated that between 25-30% of the oil evaporated during the first 24 hours, 10-20% was recovered from the water surface, less than 1% dissolved, and less than 1% of the oil was identified in sediments within a 5-mile radius of the platform. The remaining oil emulsified and dispersed to undetectable levels, biodegraded, or photooxidized. The highest measured concentrations in water at the platform and at 1 mile were: oil-in-water emulsion, 70 to 1 ppm; dissolved hydrocarbons, 0.2 to 0.001 ppm; dispersant 1-2 to unmeasurable (
Over a 2-day period in late September 1979, the American Petroleum Institute (API) discharged nine 10- or 20- barrel volumes of Alaskan Prudhoe Bay crude oil in a test area offshore of Long Beach, California. Two untreated slicks served as controls; three were sprayed with a self-mix dispersant from a DC-4 aircraft; three were sprayed with the same dispersant from a boat; and one was sprayed with a second dispersant from a boat. Movies and still photographs were taken from the air, and from under the aerially treated slicks. Over 900 water samples were collected from under the slicks. These samples were analyzed for total oil and for loss of low-molecular-weight hydrocarbons. Aerial and underwater photography showed marked color changes for the better dispersed slicks. Chemical analysis showed 45 to 80 percent of the oil was dispersed by aerial treatment. Treating the “lens” of the thicker oil by boat dispersed 60 percent of the oil, while treating the entire slick uniformly dispersed from 50 to 10 percent. The two tested dispersants varied in their effectiveness, confirming prior laboratory tests. Under the best-dispersed slicks, the highest oil concentrations were 20 to 40 parts per million at 1 meter, observed 10 to 15 minutes after treatment. Other high oil concentrations were from 10 to 15 ppm at 1, 3, and 6 m; and 1 to 3 ppm at 9 meters, 1 hour after treatment; thereafter concentrations decreased. Dispersed oil very rapidly lost volatile hydrocarbons (C1 to C10). Less than 1 percent of the oil dispersed naturally under the untreated slicks
A rationale is presented for the correlation of laboratory generated dispersant data to the spill situation in the field. Discussion and tabular presentation of data supports the rationale, which incorporates application factors for dispersant toxicity and effectiveness data to initial concentrations of oil and dispersants in the water column after dispersant application in the field. The EPA’s current research projects on oil spill dispersants are summarized
A brief history of the development of the standard EPA dispersant effectiveness and toxicity tests is outlined. The standard tests are presented and discussed. An analysis of variance is performed on the data developed by three independent laboratories in order to determine the reproducibility of standard test procedures. In the standard effectiveness test, oil is applied to the water surface in a cylindrical tank. Dispersant is applied in a fine stream and then mixing energy is supplied by a pressurized water stream. The tank contents are recirculated after which samples are withdrawn for extraction and spectrophotometric analyses. The standard toxicity test involves exposing three species (Pimephales promelas, Fundulus heteroclitus, and Artemia salina) to dispersant and oil/dispersant mixtures. From these tests a curve relating organism survival to material concentrations is developed to determine median tolerance limits. Separate discussion sections include the statistical analyses of 'testing the test' results for reproducibility and the rationale for selecting the test procedures as presented
This paper reviews the methods of oil spill cleanup used at Milford Haven following the Sea Empress incident. The use and constant monitoring of dispersant effectiveness are recounted, as well as a mention of a new de-emulsifying surfactant at the spill site. An oil spill information system software was employed to model the movement of the spill, and the shoreline oil clean-up, recovery and treatment evaluation system (SOCRATES) module handled manpower and equipment use planning
This database consists of citations found in journals, conference proceedings, government reports and gray literature covering over 40 years of published research on oil spill dispersants. Citations were collected from 1960 through June 2008. This bibliography was compiled and edited by John Conover, Associate Librarian at LUMCON, and funded by a grant from the Louisiana Applied and Educational Oil Spill Research and Development Program (OSRADP).
EFFECTS OF OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT BIBLIOGRAPHY
Quarterly Issues
|
Compilations
|
- Biology
- Ecological, anatomical, and physiological effects of oil and/or gas, Species as biomarkers, PAH uptake and bioaccumulation, etc.
- Chemistry/Geochemistry/Geology
- Biochemistry, Biodegradation, Bioremediation, Hydrocarbon degradation, Environmental sampling, Soil contamination, etc.
- Engineering/Physics
- Technological advancements in facility/equipment design and use, Spill response and recovery equipment, Physical properties of oil and gas, etc.
- Environment/Ecosystem Management/Spills
- Environmental assessment and management, Oil and/or gas spill description and analysis, etc.
- Socioeconomic/Regulation/General
- Social and economic ramifications, Politics, Governmental policy and legislation, Organizational policy, General interest, etc.
This bibliography is a quarterly compilation of current publications (citations with abstracts) from a wide variety of electronic and print information sources relating to offshore oil and gas development. It is compiled and edited by John Conover, Associate Librarian at LUMCON. Items listed may or may not be available at the LUMCON Library. Items without annotations were unavailable for perusal prior to publication.
All questions about using library facilities, locating library resources, or searching LUMCON catalogs should be directed to the Librarian.