Oil Weathering Final 11-04-07

Oil Weathering and oils transported in the
North Sea
Demo A: Inventory, Classification and Risk Assessment
of Oil Transport on the North Sea. Report No A4.
Prepared by SINTEF and the Norwegian Coastal Administration (NCA)

Merete Øverli Moldestad (SINTEF), Alun Lewis,
Morten Hauge(NCA) and Jon-Arve Røyset(NCA)
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive summary.................................................................................................................. 4
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5
2 Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 5
3 Crude oils and fuel oils..................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Crude oils .................................................................................................................... 5
3.1.1 Crude oil composition.................................................................................... 5
3.1.2 Crude oil classification................................................................................... 6
3.1.3 European crude oils ...................................................................................... 7
3.2 Refined oil products ..................................................................................................... 8
3.2.1 Distillation of crude oil ................................................................................... 8
3.2.2 Properties of refined oil products from distillation of crude oil ...................... 10
3.2.3 Conversion or ‘cracking’ processes ............................................................. 14
3.2.4 Residual Fuels Oil (RFO) ............................................................................ 18
3.2.5 On-land uses for RFO ................................................................................. 19
3.2.6 Terminology and specification of residual burner fuel oils............................ 20
3.2.7 Residual marine bunker fuel oils.................................................................. 22
3.2.8 Residual marine bunker fuel oil properties................................................... 24
3.2.9 Summary of refined oil products.................................................................. 26
4 Oils transported in the North Sea .................................................................................. 27
4.1 Overview.................................................................................................................... 27
4.1.1 North Sea crude oils.................................................................................... 28
4.1.2 Imported crude oils...................................................................................... 28
4.1.3 Refined oil products produced and consumed in North Sea states.............. 29
4.1.4 Shipping of refined oil products as cargoes ................................................. 31
4.1.5 Residual marine bunker fuel oils.................................................................. 32
4.2 Norwegian crude oils ................................................................................................. 33
4.2.1 Oil production in the southern North Sea..................................................... 33
4.2.2 Oil production in the northern North Sea ..................................................... 34
4.2.3 Oil production in the Norwegian Sea ........................................................... 38
4.2.4 Ship transport of Norwegian crude oils ........................................................ 40
4.3 UK crude oils ............................................................................................................. 42
4.3.1 Overview of UK crude oil supply and consumption...................................... 42
4.3.2 UK crude oil production ............................................................................... 43
4.3.3 Ship transport of UK crude oils .................................................................... 50
4.4 Danish crude oil production and transport 2004 ......................................................... 52
4.5 Russian crude oils ..................................................................................................... 54
4.5.1 Background................................................................................................. 54
4.5.2 Current crude oil export routes from Russia ................................................ 56
4.5.3 Norwegian monitoring of oil transport from northern Russia ........................ 57
4.5.4 Crude oil imported into EU countries from Russia ....................................... 57
4.5.5 North Sea transport routes of Russian crude oil exported to EU countries .. 58
4.6 Crude oils imported from elsewhere........................................................................... 59
4.6.1 Crude oils imported from the Middle East.................................................... 63
4.6.2 Crude oils imported from North Africa.......................................................... 65
4.6.3 Crude oils imported from West Africa .......................................................... 66
4.6.4 Crude oils imported from the South America ............................................... 67
4.7 Conclusions: Crude oils transported in oil tankers in the southern North Sea ............ 68
4.8 Recommendation of oils to be tested ......................................................................... 71
2
3
5 Weathering of oil at sea .................................................................................................. 73

5.1 Weathering processes ............................................................................................... 73
6 Weathering methodology in the laboratory................................................................... 75
6.1 Bench-scale weathering studies ................................................................................ 75
6.2 Meso-scale flume basin studies ................................................................................. 76
7 Operational tools for prediction of weathering behaviour ........................................... 77
7.1 Modelling of oil weathering behaviour ........................................................................ 77
7.2 Weathering prediction based on laboratory studies.................................................... 82
7.3 Use of oil weathering predictions by Norwegian authorities........................................ 83
8 Examples of weathering behaviour of a selection of crude oils and fuel oils ............ 84
8.1 Weathering behaviour of a selection of different Norwegian crude oils ...................... 84
8.2 Weathering behaviour of some crude oils transported in European waters ................ 88
8.3 Weathering behaviour for some residual fuel oils....................................................... 91
9 Weathering behaviour related to different combat methods ....................................... 94
9.1 Why is knowledge about oil properties, fate and weathering behavior of
importance? .................................................................................................................... 94
9.2 Lifetime of a slick on the sea surface ......................................................................... 94
9.3 Mechanical recovery .................................................................................................. 97
9.4 Use of chemical dispersants ...................................................................................... 98
10 Use oil spill response simulations for contingency planning and NEBA-analysis .. 102
10.1 The "Net Environmental Benefit Analysis” (NEBA) approach ................................... 102
10.2 “Oil Spill Contingency and Response” (OSCAR) model system ............................... 102
10.3 Case study - Use of OSCAR in contingency planning around a coastal oil terminal. 103
10.3.1 Oil spill scenario modelling ........................................................................ 105
10.3.2 Potential effects in the water column ......................................................... 105
10.3.3 Development of Dispersant-Effectiveness Maps for Decision Support....... 107
10.4 Use of OSCAR simulations for the Governmental Oil Spill preparedness in Norway 108
11 Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 111
12 References .................................................................................................................. 113
APPENDIX A:Crude oil data for some Russian crude oils ................................................ 115
APPENDIX B Weathering predictions for Grane crude oil................................................. 117
APPENDIX C Crude oils in SINTEFs Oil Weathering Database......................................... 127
3
4
Executive summary
The physical and chemical properties of crude oils vary to a large extent. The properties of
various residual fuels oils differ even within the same IFO-grade due to differences in the
refinery processes, the quality of the feed oil to the refinery process and variable addition of
distillate to give a viscosity at 50°C in accordance with the specifications. Variation in
physical and chemical properties influences the weathering properties for oil at sea. Good
laboratory data as input to models is therefore crucial in order to obtain realistic model
predictions of the weathering properties.
Model predictions reveal a large variation in the weathering properties and behaviour of
different crude oils and the various heavy fuel oils, and this variability must be taken into
account in oil spill response planning and decision-making during response operations. In
order to be able to make right and rapid decisions during a combat operation, knowledge
about weathering behaviour is crucial. For doing reliable contingency planning including
scenario based NEBA-analysis and environmental risk assessment (ERA), is it important to
have relevant documentation of the weathering properties of the specific oil as input to
models.
The report presents an overview over the span of residual fuel oils and crude oils, their
weathering properties and properties related to different combat methods. A description of
the Norwegian methodology for charaterisation of weathering properties and use of
weathering data in Norway is also presented. Different classification systems for crude oils
and fuel oils respectively is presented and discussed.
The report also gives an overview of the crude oil volumes that are transported in the
southern part of the North Sea. From that overview a top 36 crude oils that represent 90% of
all the crude oils transported have been identified. To fill gaps in weathering property data it
is recommended that 9 of these crude oils undergo laboratory weathering analysis.
For establishing a better system for responding to spills of residual fuel oils 7 types of RFOs
is recommended to undergo laboratory weathering analysis.
4
5
1 Introduction
The Safety at Sea project in the Interreg IIIB North Sea programme concentrates on bulk
transport of oils in the south part of the North Sea. The Demonstration project A (Demo A)
within the Strand 2 : Routing and Safe Seaways focuses on Inventory, classification and risk
assesment of oil transport in the North Sea. This report is part of Demo A and subtask A4
covering oil weathering data. Other reports within this task is a report from subtasks A1 and
A2 with title “Inventory, Classification and Risk Assesment of Oil Transport in the North Sea
Region”The report presents an overview over the span of residual fuel oils and crude oils,
their weathering properties and properties related to different combat methods. A description
of the Norwegian methodology for charaterisation of weathering properties and use of
weathering data in Norway is also presented.
2 Objectives
The objective is to give a description of the broad range of crude oils and residual fuel oils,
weathering behaviour at sea, methodology for testing and prediction of weathering
behaviour and the weathering properties related to combat operations.
3 Crude oils and fuel oils

3.1 Crude oils
3.1.1 Crude oil composition
Crude oil is a complex mixture of thousands of chemical components. The relative
compositions vary, giving rise to crude oils with different chemical and physical properties.
Typical component groups in crude oils are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 : Chemical component groups in crude oils.
5
6
3.1.2 Crude oil classification

In Norway, crude oils are often classified into four categories based on their crude oil
properties and properties at sea:
• Paraffinic crude oils

Typical properties: density 0,80-0,85 kg/m3, medium pour point (ca. -10 to 6°C),
medium wax content (<5 wt%), much light n-alkanes, medium to high evaporation
• Waxy crude oils
Typical properties: high pour point (ca. 6 to 30°C), high wax content (>5 wt%), more
heavy paraffins (>C30), medium evaporation
• Napthentic crude oils
Typical properties: density 0,86-0,95 kg/m3, low pour point (<-10°C), low wax and
asphaltene content, lacking n-alkanes, low to medium evaporation
• Asphalthenic crude oils
Typical properties: high density (0,90-0,95 kg/m3), low pour point (<-10°C), high
asphaltene content (> 0,4 wt%), low evaporation
Condensates are very light oils with high content of light volatile components.
Figure 2 Categorisation of Norwegian crude oils.
6
7
Categorisation of some Norwegian crude oils is shown in Figure 2. Such a categorisation of

crude oils is useful when comparing different crude oils and their weathering behaviour at
sea, e.g. emulsification and life-time at sea. Crude oils from different categories have
different weathering behaviour. The weathering behaviour within a category show similar
trends however, even the extent of the different processes may be different that e.g. may be
crucial for the decision making during combat operation. For doing reliable contingency
planning including scenario based Net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA) and
environmental risk assessment (ERA), is it important to have relevant documentation of the
weathering properties of the specific oil (see 10.1). Data for the oil can be used as input to
model tools that also can be used in contingency planning and decision making during
response operations. Examples with different oil types are discussed in chapter 8.
ITOPF classifies oils in group I to IV based on density:
• Group I : lower than 0,80 kg/m3

• Group II : 0,8-0,85 kg/m3
• Group III : 0,85-0,95 kg/m3
• Group IV : higher than 0,95 kg/m3
In the Netherlands, a classification system for the environmental behavior of oil at sea has
been made based on API gravity and percentage of spilt oil floating at sea surface after 72
hours.
• Light crude oil :

API gravity >40° (Density <0,825)
60% or less remaining at sea surface after 72 hours
• Medium crude oil :
28°<API gravity<40° (0,825<density<0,887)
60-75% remaining at sea surface after 72 hours
• Heavy crude oil :
API gravity<28° (Density>0,887)
75% or more remaining at sea surface
The percentage remaining oil at sea surface is calculated with the ADIOS2 model
(Koopsmans and Bovelander, 2003). Emulsification is not taken into account in this system.
These two very simplified classifications are based on density/API of fresh oil and not on the
weathered properties when spilt at sea. Weathering properties is crucial for the “time-window
of opportunity” for the different combat methods.
3.1.3 European crude oils

A list over the crude oils transported to Rotterdam in 2004 was presented in Demo report A1
and A2. Data for some of these oils are available in SINTEFs oil database and show that the
7
8
properties of these oils are very different. The weathering behaviour of the most transported
crude oils is presented in chapter 8.2.
Figure 2 shows that the span in the Norwegian crude oils is large. Data for Russian crude
oils is not very available, however, some data reported indicate that also Russian crude oils
represent a broad range of oils (see APPENDIX A:Crude oil data for some Russian crude
oils).
3.2 Refined oil products
3.2.1 Distillation of crude oil

Crude oil is converted into refined oil products at an oil refinery. All oil refineries employ
‘atmospheric distillation’ (distillation conducted at atmospheric pressure) as the primary
process for the conversion of crude oil into refined oil products (Figure 3). The crude oil is
heated and split into ‘fractions’ on the basis of the range of boiling point. The ‘lightest’
fraction with the lowest boiling point range is petroleum gas (propane and butane).
Figure 3 Atmospheric distillation of crude oils into various oil products.
8
9
The main products of the atmospheric distillation of crude oil are distillate fuels, such as
gasoline (petrol), kerosene (jet fuel), light gas oil (diesel fuel for cars and trucks) and heavy
gas oil (fuel for some marine diesel engines in ships). The residue from the crude oil that
does not distil below 350°C is known as the ‘atmospheric residue’ or ‘long’ residue.
An oil refinery that processes only ‘light’ crude oils that contain a very high proportion of the
distillate fuels may not require any further processing. Some ‘light’ crude oils can be distilled
into naphtha, gasoline, kerosene and diesel fuel and yield only a small proportion of
atmospheric residue.
‘Heavier’ crude oils require more processing because they basically yield a lower proportion
of distillate fuels and a higher proportion of atmospheric residue. This atmospheric residue is
distilled again (under reduced pressure, although not a pure vacuum) in the ‘Vacuum
Distillation’ process. The reduced pressure enables less volatile oil components to boil at
lower temperature. The distillates from vacuum distillations are Vacuum Distillates, such as
Vacuum Gas Oil and some grades of lubricating oils. Not all of the atmospheric residue will
be boiled at reduced pressure (at up to a temperature equivalent to 570°C at normal
pressure) and some residue will remain. This is known as the ‘vacuum’ (or ‘vac’), or ‘short’
residue.
The refinery distillation processes converts the crude oil into a number of refined products
(Figure 4).
Light Naphtha
Heavy Naphtha
Crude oil Kerosene
Gas oil
Vac distillates
Atmos. residue
Vac residue
Figure 4 Conversion of crude oils into refined oil products by distillation.
Different crude oils contain different amounts of the refined oil products that can be
separated by distillation (Figure 5).
An indication of the proportion of light distillates or residues that can be obtained from a
particular crude oil is indicated by its density or API Gravity. These are shown in Figure 5.
9
10
‘Light’ crude oils such as Forties, Brent or Ekofisk yield a high proportion of distillates while
‘heavy’ crude oils, such as Souedie (from Syria) and Alba and Captain (from the UK)
produce a high proportion of atmospheric residue (80% weight in the case of Captain crude
oil). The atmospheric residue is subsequently converted into vacuum distillates and vacuum
residue by vacuum distillation.
3.2.2 Properties of refined oil products from distillation of crude oil

The physical properties of the refined oil products produced depend on the crude oil and the
processing that is used.
10
11
Table 1 contains some of the properties of the refined oil products that can be produced
from a ‘light’ crude oil (Ekofisk) by atmospheric and vacuum distillation.
11
12
Table 1 Properties of refined oil products produced by distillation of Ekofisk crude oil
Cut °C Density at Viscosity Pour

15°C cSt Point
kg/m3 °C
50°C 100°C 150°C
15 - 65 659
Light naphtha
15 - 80 670
80 - 150 750
Heavy naphtha 100 - 150 759
80 - 175 758
150 - 230 795 1.3
Kerosene 175 - 230 803 1.4
150 - 250 801 1.4
230 - 375 849 3.5 1.5 -6
Gas oil 175 - 400 842 3.0 1.3 -3
230 - 400 853 4.0 1.6 +3
375 - 550 903 7.9
Vacuum 375 - 565 905 8.8
distillate 400 - 565 909 10.7
375 - 580 906 9.9
375 + 929 23.3 7.0 24
Vacuum
550 + 972 311.2 42.1 33
Residue
565 + 977 419.8 51.7 34
12
13
API Gravity
44.5º 38.1º 37.5º 30.0º 31.8º 24.1º 19.7º 19.1º

100%
Light naphtha 90%
80%
Heavy naphtha
70%
% Weight
60%
Kerosene
50%
Gas oil 40%
30%
Vac distillates 20%
10%
Vac residue
0%
ALBA
CAPTAIN
URALS
FORTIES
SOUEDIE
EKOFISK
BRENT
TROLL
Figure 5 Proportions of refined oil products produced by distillation from different crude oils.
13
14
3.2.3 Conversion or ‘cracking’ processes

Increasing demand for transportation fuels such as gasoline, kerosine and diesel fuels has
led to increasing use of conversion or ‘cracking’ processes at more modern refineries. If the
crude oil has a high proportion of oil components in the ‘atmospheric residue’ and ‘vac
residue’ boiling range, other ‘conversion’ processes can be used to convert these high
molecular-weight compounds into more valuable distillate fuels.
These conversion processes can use heat, high-pressure steam, catalysts or the addition of
hydrogen to break down the heavier distillates and residues into distillate fuels. Examples
are:
• ‘Thermal cracking’ processes, such as ‘visbreaking’ and coking
• ‘Catalytic cracking’ (or ‘cat cracking’)
• ‘Hydrocracking’.
Thermal cracking uses heat alone to convert a proportion of the higher molecular-weight
components into smaller, lower viscosity distillates. When applied to the atmospheric or
vacuum residues, thermal cracking can convert about 25% volume into distillate (thermal
gas oil). The thermal cracking technique has also found use in ‘visbreaking’, where the high
viscosity of vacuum distillation residues is reduced by partial conversion to lower molecular
weight components, some of which are left in the visbreaker residues. The severity of
visbreaking – the temperature and duration – determines the properties of the residue
produced.
A more effective conversion of heavier molecules to lighter fractions is achieved using

catalytic cracking. The aluminium-based catalyst enables conversions of up to 75% of the
heavy gas oil into gasoline. The residue from catalytic cracking of a middle distillate is known
as light cycle oil, heavy cycle oil and cycle oil slurry (which contains fine particles of
catalyst).
Higher molecular weight, and therefore higher boiling point, hydrocarbons have a lower ratio
of hydrogen to carbon than low-boiling hydrocarbons and this is undesirable for good ignition
properties if the derived distillate fractions are to be used as fuels. Hydrogen can be added
under pressure (150 to 180 bar) at 400ºC+, the process is known as ‘hydrocracking’, to
produce distillate fractions that have better ignition qualities, but this can be an expensive
process. If there is no large-scale local demand for residues, they may be subjected to a
‘coking’ process.
Coking involves heating the residues to 525ºC in a drum for prolonged periods so that
petroleum coke is produced and the lighter fractions – naphtha and diesel oil - that are
produced are distilled off.
14
15
These processes produced ‘cracked’ distillates that need further refining to make them
suitable for inclusion in distillate fuels. None of these processes results in total conversion
into distillate fuels; there is always a proportion of a residue from each of these processes.
The properties of the distillates produced by these conversion or ‘cracking’ processes

depend on the process and on the crude oils used.
The properties of ‘cracked’ distillates from ‘cat cracking’ and ‘visbreaking’ are shown in Table
2 for a typical paraffinic Middle Eastern crude oil and an asphaltic crude oil from Venezuela.
Distillates produced from paraffinic crude oils are of lower density and viscosity than
equivalent materials produced from the heavier, asphaltic crude oil. The pour points of the
distillates produced from the paraffinic crude oil are higher due to the higher wax content.
Distillates produced by ‘cracking’ are of higher density and higher viscosity than the
equivalent boiling range cut isolated by distillation. They also have higher Pour points and
the sulphur is concentrated in the distillate by the cracking process.
The properties of ‘cracked’ residues; cat cracker slurry and visbreaker residue, produced
from the two crude oils are shown in Table 3, together with the properties of the atmospheric
and vacuum residues produced by distillation.
Atmospheric distillation of the paraffinic crude oil produces a low density and low viscosity
residue. The residue from vacuum distillation has a slightly higher density, but a much higher
viscosity, being a deeper ‘cut’ into the atmospheric residue.
The densities of the residues from ‘cracking’ processes are much higher because the
chemical structure of the oil has been changed by the cracking processes. Cracked residues
contain a much higher proportion of unsaturated and aromatic material, compared to
distillation residues. This is particularly noticeable for the cat cracker residue, which has a
very high density, but the lowest viscosity because it is the residue from cracking a middle
distillate fraction and not the whole crude oil. The density of the visbreaker residue is the
highest of all the residues, yet its viscosity is between that of the atmospheric and vacuum
residues. The asphaltene content of the residues is also increased by the cracking process.
The properties of the residues produced from the asphaltic crude oil also show similar
trends, except that the crude oil is heavier, thus giving rise to higher density and viscosity
residues in each process. The asphaltic crude oil residues have lower pour points, reflecting
the higher wax content of the paraffinic crude oil. Similarly, the residues produced from the
asphaltic crude oil have higher asphaltene contents than the equivalent residues produced
from the paraffinic crude oil.
15
16
Table 2 Distillates produced from conversion or ‘cracking’ processes (from Clark, 1990)
Paraffinic crude oil Asphaltic crude oil

Atmos. Catalytic Visbreaker Atmos. Catatalytic Visbreaker
Property distillate cracker cycle distillate distillate cracker cycle distillate
oil oil
SG (relative density) at 15ºC 0.846 0.948 0.906 0.862 0.979 0.962
Kinematic viscosity at 40ºC (cSt) 4.3 5.1 9.2 7.3 6.9 12.5
Pensky-Martens Flash Point (ºC) 110 110 125 105 104 120
Pour Point (ºC) -9 -6 +9 -5 -4 +1
Conradson carbon 10% residue (% 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.05 0.6 0.7
mass)
Sulphur content (% mass) 1.3 3.3 2.3 0.8 1.5 1.2
Asphaltene content (% mass) nil nil nil nil nil nil
Vanadium content (ppm) nil nil nil nil nil nil
Distillation: initial boiling point (ºC) 220 215 295 230 215 285
Distillation: 50% recovered at (ºC) 290 300 350 305 320 364
Distillation: final boiling point (ºC) 350 365 390 365 Above 390 Above 390
16
17
Table 3 Residues produced from conversion or ‘cracking’ processes (from Clark, 1990)
Paraffinic crude oil Asphaltic crude oil

Property
Atmos. Vacuum Cat Visbreaker Atmos. Vacuum Cat Visbreaker
Residue Residue Cracker residue Residue Residue Cracker residue
slurry slurry
SG (relative density) at 15ºC 0.890 0.908 0.995 0.998 0.975 0.982 1.043 1.011
Kinematic viscosity at 50ºC (cSt) 380 20,100 180 1,620 5,500 - 2,100 -
Kinematic viscosity at 100ºC (cSt) 45 950 25 92 335 11,500 175 2685
Pour Point (ºC) +12 +15 +24 +27 +3 +5 +8 +9
Ash content (% mass) 0.015 0.04 0.25 0.07 0.08 0.12 0.32 0.14
Conradson carbon residue (% mass) 10.5 18.5 9.5 19.0 13.8 20.6 12.2 22.4
Sulphur content (% mass) 4.2 5.3 4.5 3.3 2.8 3.3 3.0 2.6
Asphaltene content (% mass) 3.0 6.0 1.5 10.0 6.6 10.4 2.2 13.6
Vanadium content (ppm) 50 90 0 100 320 550 2 600
17
18
3.2.4 Residual Fuels Oil (RFO)

Residual Fuel Oil (RFO) can be made from a wide range of residues and often include a
small proportion of distillate components. The residues can include residues from different
refinery processes, such as:
• Atmospheric distillation,
• Vacuum distillation,
• Thermal cracking processes, such as ‘visbreaking’
• Residues from other conversion processes such as catalytic cracking and
hydrocracking.
RFO is a by-product of the production of much higher value distillate fuels and has a very
variable composition being a blend of several possible residues and many possible diluents
(all of those in Table 2 and Table 3 plus some more). Historically, the residue from
atmospheric distillation (‘long’ residue) was used to produce RFOs, but most RFOs are now
made from the residues from vacuum distillation (‘short’ residue) and residues from thermal
and catalytic cracking operations.
The viscosity of the blend of residues is reduced by the addition of a diluent (or ‘cutter stock’
or ‘flux’) that is available at the oil refinery where the residues are produced. The diluents
that are available will depend on the refining processes being carried out in that refinery.
These primary diluents may include relatively low-value cracked distillates from various
processes including catalytic cracking, thermal cracking and may occasionally include
CCCO (Cat Cracker Cycle Oil) and cat cracker slurry oil (clarified oil), but these components
may only be used on an intermittent basis. CCCO has long been recognised by the
petroleum industry as a potent dermal carcinogen. In the absence of cracking or conversion
processes being conducted at an individual refinery, the distillate diluent may be an
uncracked distillate such as Vacuum Gas Oil.
There is no standard blend of residue and distillate used to produce RFOs, even at an
individual oil refinery. There may be several different residues mixed in differing proportion,
depending on the crude oil being processed, the cracking and conversion processes
conducted at the refinery and the requirements of the local market for higher-value refined
products.
Various distillate ‘streams’ (cracked or uncracked) may be used to reduce the high viscosity
of the residues to a lower value so that the RFO may be stored in tanks, pumped and
shipped. The distillate is added to produce a RFO viscosity of approximately 500 to 700 cP
at 50ºC. The quantity of distillate required to do this depends on the viscosity of the residues
and the viscosity of the distillates available.
18
19
3.2.5 On-land uses for RFO

Refineries in the EU coastal nations produce approximately 65 million tonnes of RFO each
year. Some of this is consumed in inland uses for power generation and other industrial
uses, but the maximum sulphur content of oil for these purposes is now limited to a
maximum of 1%. In addition, the use of oil-fired power stations has declined as more natural
gas fuelled power plants have been built.
Low sulphur RFO (less than 1% sulphur) is available for the inland market, but supply is
limited. Production of low-sulphur RFO is achieved mainly by processing low-sulphur crude
oils. Low-sulphur crude oils tend to be higher wax content crude oils - the relationship is not
absolute and exceptions can easily be found, but there is a broad correlation.
The basic property required of any fuel oil that is to be used in a burner application (or
furnace) is that it must be capable of being burned in its intended application to deliver the
energy that it contains.
The fuel oil must also be capable of being stored and pumped prior to use. It should not
contain levels of contaminants or impurities at levels that would impede the use, or cause
damage to, the equipment in which it is being used. These requirements can be assessed
from properties of a heavy fuel oil, including those detailed in Table 4.
Table 4 Properties and their significance for heavy fuel oil use.
Heavy Fuel Oil Property Significance

Viscosity As discussed below
Density High density fuels (indicative of a high proportion of cracked
components) have reduced specific energy. Fuel oil density
also affects water separator centrifuge effectiveness.
Pour point Indicative of storage temperature required.
Flash point Must be above 60ºC for most applications.
Water content A contaminant that may interfere with combustion.
Ash content Indicates the material that cannot be burned and that may
cause abrasion problems and deposits.
Conradson carbon Indicative of combustion and deposit forming tendencies
residue or Ramsbotton
carbon residue
Asphaltene content Indicative of combustion and deposit forming tendencies
Sulphur content Indicative of sulphur oxide emissions and need for alkaline
lubricating oils.
Vanadium content Causes combustion problems
Aluminium content Indicates presence of catalyst ‘fines’ (small particles) of
aluminium oxide that can cause abrasion damage in engines
Gross calorific value Amount of energy generated by burning fuel
19
20
RFO is often has too high a viscosity for direct use and needs to have more lower-viscosity
‘flux’ or ‘cutter stock’ added so that it can be used in a specific application.
Fuel oil specifications are principally based on viscosity at a specified temperature. The
residual and additional ‘cutter stock’ components will be blended in appropriate proportions
to achieve the required viscosity at the specified temperature. The particular temperature
that is most relevant depends on the specific application.
Because the hydrocarbons in the residual components of heavy fuel oil are difficult to ignite
and to encourage to burn cleanly, the heavy fuel oils need to be atomised. Atomisation takes
place in most applications (furnaces, boilers and process heaters) in specially designed oil
burners and in diesel engines at the injectors. The main physical property of a fuel oil that
governs how well it can be atomised is its viscosity at the atomiser nozzle temperature. This
can be a very high temperature, but the viscosity at 100ºC is often used as an indicator of
likely performance.
3.2.6 Terminology and specification of residual burner fuel oils

The terminology of residual fuel oils used in burners is vague and can be confusing. RFO
was originally used only in industrial boilers and furnaces and became known as ‘boiler oils’
or ‘furnace oils’.
The early specifications for burner and furnace oils were primarily based on viscosity. The
method for determining oil viscosity was the Redwood 1 viscometer in the UK, the Saybolt
viscometer in the USA and the Engler instrument in Europe. In many countries, three main
grades (light, medium and heavy) have been marketed for many years. The specification
was often based on viscosity and expressed in the appropriate units. The Redwood, Saybolt
and Engler viscosity were eventually replaced by measurements of kinematic viscosity in
centiStokes (cSt).
The BS (British Standard) classification BS 2869:83 separately specifies the properties of
petroleum fuels for oil engines and for burner fuels, i.e. fuels for heaters, boilers and
furnaces is shown in Table 5.
Oil companies have marketed oils to meet these specifications, but not always with exactly
the same names.
20
21
Table 5 BS 2869:83 Classification of residual burner fuels

Fuel description Residual fuels
BS 2869: 83 classification E F G H
“Fuel Oil
“Fuel oil “Fuel oil “Fuel oil
Extra
Old designation Light” Medium” Heavy”
Heavy”
Kinematic viscosity at 80ºC max. 13.50 35.0 85.0 130.0
(cSt)
Kinematic viscosity at 50ºC max. 36.2 128 422 740
(cSt)
Flash point, PM closed (ºC) min. 66 66 66 66
Water content % vol (v/v) max. 0.5 0.75 1.00 1.00
Sediment % mass (m/m) max. 0.15 0.25 0.25 0.25
Ash % mass (m/m) max. 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.20
Sulphur content % mass (m/m) max. 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0
A similar system was developed in the USA and the ASTM (American Society for the
Testing of Materials) issues specifications for fuel oils in general and specifically for fuels for
diesel engines. ASTM D396-80 - Standard Specification for Fuel Oils - covers a range of fuel
oils from light distillate to heavy residual fuel oil for use in furnaces or boiler plant. The ASTM
uses numbers, 1 to 6, instead of the letters used in the BS classification. The definitions of
the residual grades of fuel oil are:
No. 4 (Light) Fuel: A fairly low viscosity gas oil fuel type. This grade is usually a light
distillate, but can sometimes be a heavy distillate, provided that the specified SG can be
met. Preheating not usually required for handling or burning.
No. 4 Fuel: This grade may be a heavy distillate or a light residual fuel oil. Preheating
not usually required for handling or burning.
No. 5 (Light) Fuel: Preheating may be required, depending on climate and equipment.
No. 5 (Heavy) Fuel: Preheating may be required for burning and, in cold climates, may
be required for handling.
No.6 Fuel: Preheating required for burning and handling.
The ASTM specification contains a limited number of specified properties for these grades of
fuel oil.
21
22
3.2.7 Residual marine bunker fuel oils

The other way of using RFO has been as the main component in residual marine bunker fuel
oils.
Some 15 million tonnes of RFO produced by oil refineries in the EU was used this way each
year. A second stage of viscosity reduction is needed to produce residual marine bunker fuel
oils of different viscosity grades from Residual Fuel Oil (RFO). The addition of more diluent
may take place at a blending plant away from the oil refinery or on board the bunkering
barges by in-line blending of the most viscous residual marine bunker fuel oil grade
available, normally IFO-380, with another diluent.
The basic component of all grades of residual marine fuel oil is RFO. The amount of distillate
required to reduce the viscosity to the specified maximum viscosity at 50ºC (for the IFO
grade classification and for the ISO 8217 RM grade classification) depends on the viscosity
of the RFO and the grade of residual marine bunker fuel oil required.
The ISO (International Standards Organisation) 8217 specification for marine bunker oils
was substantially revised and a new standard was issued in November 2005. There are now
10 grades of IFO (Intermediate Fuel Oil) or RM (Residual Marine) residual marine bunker
fuel oils. The main features of the ISO:8217 2005 specifications are shown in Table 6.
In the case of a straight-run (atmospheric distillation) residue produced from a light,

paraffinic crude oil there may be no need for any diluent; the residue may have a viscosity of
close to 380 cP at 50ºC. However, a major viscosity adjustment is normally necessary,
especially when dealing with residues produced from heavy crude oils or from residues
produced from vacuum distillation, cracking and/or conversion processes. The second stage
of viscosity reduction of the Residual Fuel oil will be carried out using a much more readily
available diluent than those used in oil refineries to produce Residual Fuel Oil. It is common
to use MDO (Marine Diesel Oil) or the slightly heavier MGO (Marine Gas Oil), since these
are available for sale as distillate marine bunker fuels from the same blending plant of
bunker barge.
The final composition of a residual marine bunker fuel oil can therefore vary in many
aspects; the residues and distillate from which the ‘parent’ RFO was blended and the
distillate diluent used to adjust the residual marine bunker fuel oil to the required viscosity
grade. The main specification maxima and minima - with the exception of the sulphur
content - can easily be achieved by blending almost any RFO with any suitable and
available diluent.
Some companies have added another 500 cSt grade using the ISO naming conditions: RME
500 = RMG specification except viscosity of 500.
22
23
Table 6 ISO 8217: 2005 Specification for residual marine bunker fuel oils
Characteristic Unit Limit Category ISO-F-

RMA RMB RMD RME RMF RMG RMH RMK RMH RMK
30 30 80 180 180 380 380 380 700 700
Density at 15°C kg/m³ max. 960,0 975,0 980,0 991,0 991,0 991,0 991,0 1010,0 991,0 1010,0
Kinematic viscosity at 50°C mm²/s max. 30,0 30,0 80,0 180,0 180,0 380,0 380,0 380,0 700,0 700,0
Flash point °C min. 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Pour point (upper)
- winter quality °C max. 0 24 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
- summer quality max. 6 24 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Carbon residue % max.
10 10 14 15 20 18 22 22 22 22
(m/m)
Ash % max.
0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,15 0,15 0,15 0,15 0,15 0,15
(m/m)
Water % max.
0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5
(V/V)
Sulphur % max.
3,50 3,50 4,00 4,50 4,50 4,50 4,50 4,50 4,50 4,50
(m/m)
Vanadium mg/kg max. 150 150 350 200 500 300 600 600 600 600
Total sediment potential % max.
0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10
(m/m)
Aluminium plus silicon mg/kg max. 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Used lubricating oil (ULO) The fuel shall be free of ULO (d)
- Zinc mg/kg max. 15
- Phosphurus max. 15
- Calcium max. 30
23
24
3.2.8 Residual marine bunker fuel oil properties

The properties of a grade of marine residual fuel oil are very dependent on the actual
refinery process (e.g. thermal cracking, catalytic cracking and hydro cracking) and type of
crude oil used to produce the RFO from which the bunker fuel is blended.
Refining a waxy or a paraffinic crude oil produces a RFO with a high wax content and often
a high Pour Point. Refining an asphalthenic crude oil produces a RFO with a high
asphalthene content and high viscosity. The amount of cutter stock/distillate needed to
obtain the right viscosity at 50°C will therefore vary depending on the quality of the
distillation residue (Lewis, 2002 and Moldestad et al., 2002). The viscosity as a function of
temperature is shown for some fuel oils in Figure 6. The figure shows that e.g. three IFO 180
from different refineries have the same viscosity at 50°C, however, at more realistic sea
temperatures the viscosity is very different (from 7000 to 20 000 cP at 15°C).
Figure 6 Viscosity as a function of temperature for some IFO's.
Some chemical and physical properties of three IFO 180s are contained in Table 7 and
show that even the oils are defined as nominally the same grade (IFO 180) the chemical and
physical properties are different.
24
25
Table 7 Physical and chemical properties for three IFO 180 (RM180) from different
refineries.
Oil Density Vol% Pour Sulphur Dynamic Kinematic Dynamic
(g/mL) evaporated point wt.% viscosity viscosity viscosity
at 250°C (°C) (cP) (cSt) (cP)
250°C+
residue
5°C 50°C 5°C
(10s ) (1000s ) (10s-1)
-1 -1
IFO-180 Statoil 0.9559 18 -12 2.0 9400 180 182000
IFO-180 Shell 0.9725 8 -6 0.5 25000 180 143000
IFO-180 Esso 0.9474 3 24 0.7 48000 180 69300
The use of RFO produced in the EU to produce marine bunker fuels has become more
limited with the introduction of SECAs (SOx Emission Control Area) in the Baltic Sea, the
North Sea and English Channel. This limits the sulphur content of residual marine bunker
fuel oils to 1.5%, in contrast to the 4.5% permitted for most grades in the ISO specification.
Low sulphur RFOs, produced from low-sulphur crude oils, will need to be used to produce
the required low-sulphur residual marine bunker fuel oils for use in EU waters. Low sulphur
crude oils tend to be high wax content crude oils and the Pour Point of the RFO produced
from them is higher than the Pour Point of high-sulphur RFO.
The maximum permitted Pour Point for the major grades of residual marine bunker fuel oil is
+30ºC. It is anticipated that the low-sulphur residual marine bunker fuel oils to be used in EU
waters will be of a significantly higher average Pour Point than those that are currently used.
25
26
3.2.9 Summary of refined oil products
The main products of oil refining are fuels and these can be categorised as four broad
categories:
• Distillate Fuels; produced by atmospheric distillation at the oil refinery and

including:
− ‘Light distillates’ such as naphtha (or Light distillate feedstock) and
(gasoline (petrol).
− ‘Middle distillates’ such as kerosene (jet fuel), diesel fuels and heavier gas
oils.
• Residual Fuel Oils (RFOs); the residues remaining after the distillation of the
lighter fuels and residues from other conversion processes.
• Intermediate Fuel Oils (IFO) grades of residual marine bunker fuel oil are
produced by blending some of the refinery distillates, or distillate fuels, into the
Residual Fuel Oil (RFO).
• Other refined oil products produced in much smaller quantities include

solvents, petroleum coke, lubricants, bitumen and wax.
Distillate fuels are the most valuable refined oil products. The refinery processes will be
optimized to produce the maximum amount of distillate fuels from the crude oil used
processed. The production of RFO is a by-product of the production of distillate fuels.
Residual Fuels Oils (RFOs) are often therefore produced in greater quantity than can be
consumed by the local market. Because of the high viscosity of RFO it cannot be exported
by pipeline. It is often carried as cargo in product tankers.
26
27
4 Oils transported in the North Sea

4.1 Overview
The North Sea is a major crossroads for the seaborne transportation of crude oil and refined
oil products. Oil is produced, processed and consumed in the coastal states of the North
Sea and oil is transported through the North Sea from countries outside of the EU to
destinations all over the world.
The trading patterns of crude oils and refined oil products depend on several factors and
change with time. The general rule is that the shortest transport route is the least expensive,
so the least distance from oil production to final use (refining in the case of crude oils) is
often preferred. However, this general rule may be modified by technical, financial and
political factors. As discussed in Chapter 3, crude oils have different chemical composition
and this is reflected in the proportions of different refined oil products that can be prepared
from them. ‘Light’ (low viscosity with a high proportion of gasoline, kerosene and diesel oil),
‘sweet’ (low sulphur content) crude oils are generally preferred over ‘heavy, ‘sour’ crude oils
because they can be processed to yield more high-value products. Light, sweet crude oils
are higher in price than heavy, sour crude oils, but some oil refineries can only process
certain types of crude oil and the price differential may not be relevant.
Oilfields become exhausted with time and new oilfields are developed; the individual crude
oils available on the market change with time. All crude oils are commodities; they are
traded on the market. There has been an increasing trend for crude oil cargoes to be traded
on the ‘spot’ market, rather than on the basis of long-term supply contracts. The price and
availability of individual crude oils can fluctuate over a wide range under the influence of
world events. Political tension or war in one part of the world can cause a predicted shortage
of oil, so the price of all crude oils rises, but some will rise more than others. The
Netherlands is a major oil trading ‘hub’; cargoes of crude oil are bought and sold on a daily
basis and involving large sums of money. The market is dynamic; what may seem as small
fluctuations in crude oil prices can yield huge profits (or losses). Oil consumption is a direct
indicator of economic performance of modern industrialised countries and, as the economy
strengthens or weakens, the quantities of oil produced and consumed will vary.
All of these factors mean that the identities and quantities of crude oils and refined oil
products being transported in the North Sea will change with time. The following description
will concentrate on the situation in recent years; 2003 to 2005.
There are several sources of oils transported by ship in the North Sea:
27
28
4.1.1 North Sea crude oils

Crude oils produced from the offshore oilfields in the Norwegian and UK sectors (and to a
lesser extent in the Danish sector) of the North Sea and in the Norwegian Sea. Crude oils
from some individual oilfields are transported from sub-sea wellheads by sub-sea pipelines
and combined into blends of individual crude oils. Some of these blends of crude oils are
exported directly from the offshore installations, while others are taken by shuttle tankers or
through sub-sea pipeline networks to the onshore oil terminals. These crude oils are then
transported by oil tankers to ‘domestic’ refineries (oil refineries within the country of
production) or are exported to other countries, both inside and outside the EU.
4.1.2 Imported crude oils

There is substantial transport of Russian crude oils through the Baltic Sea and into the North
Sea. Some of this crude oil is transported to the refining complexes in the Netherlands and
Belgium. Many countries in NW Europe also import crude oil from other areas such as the
Middle East and North Africa.
28
29
4.1.3 Refined oil products produced and consumed in North Sea states
There are oil refineries in many of the EU coastal states (Table 8 and Figure 7).
Table 8. Oil refineries in NW Europe
Charge capacity
Barrels/day
No of oil Atmospheric Vacuum
refineries distillation distillation
Belgium 5 857,629 297,630
Denmark 2 176,400 22,000
Finland 2 251,800 98,200
France 13 1,979,488 862,692
Germany 15 2,344,192 1,088,703
Ireland 1 71,000 0
Lithuania 1 190,000 89,300
Netherlands 6 1,221,873 418,718
Norway 2 310,000 0
Sweden 5 434,000 135,600
United Kingdom 11 1,876,939 910,214
As described in Chapter 3.2, refined oil products can be categorised as three broad
categories:
• Distillate Fuels; produced by atmospheric distillation at the oil refinery and

including:
− ‘Light distillates’ such as naphtha (or Light distillate feedstock) and
(gasoline (petrol).
− ‘Middle distillates’ such as kerosene (jet fuel), diesel fuels and heavier
gas oils.
• Residual Fuel Oils (RFOs); the residues remaining after the distillation of the
lighter fuels and residues from other conversion processes.
Other refined oil products produced in much smaller quantities include solvents, petroleum
coke, lubricants, bitumen and wax.
29
30
Figure 7. Oil refineries and pipelines (crude oil and oil products in NW
Europe). From Refineries & Oil pipelines in Europe 2006. EUROPIA
(European Petroleum Industry Association) and Concawe – the oil
companies’ European association for environment, health and safety in
refining and distribution.
30
31
The amounts of refined oil products produced and consumed in the world is very large. The
consumption figures for 2005 are shown in Table 9 for the entire world and for the EU 25
Member States.
Table 9 Consumption of refined oil products in 2005
2005
Consumption of
refined oil World European Union 25
products
Thousand Million tonnes Thousand Million tonnes

barrels /day / year barrels /day / year
Light distillates 25,319 1,087 3,428 147
Middle distillates 29,584 1,440 6,859 334
Residual Fuel Oil 10,150 553 1,689 92
Others 17,406 804 2,797 125
TOTALS 82,459 3,884 14,772 698
* includes crude oil used as fuel in refineries
BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2006
4.1.4 Shipping of refined oil products as cargoes

The general shipping pattern of the European oil trade is of crude oil being imported from all
around the world into the EU and being refined at the many different refineries. The most
valuable refined oil products are the light distillates and the production of these at the oil
refineries will be almost matched to local consumption.
There is a great deal of intra-EU trade in refined oil products. The refining complexes in
Belgium and the Netherlands process a large quantity of crude oil into fuels destined for
other countries. Distillate products such as gasoline and jet fuel are moved from the
refineries in continental Europe by road, rail, barge and overland pipelines to their point of
use.
The UK – being an island – exported by sea approximately 23 million tonnes of refined oil
products in 2003; 6 million tonnes each of gasoline, gas oil and RFO, 2 million tonnes of
naphtha, plus 3 million tones of other refined oil products. The UK also imported about 17
million tonnes of refined oil products in 2003; 7 million tonnes of jet fuel and smaller
individual amounts of most oil products. These imports were from oil refineries in the
Netherlands, Belgium and France.
31
32
The Netherlands exported a total of approximately 17 million tonnes of refined oil products
by sea in 2003. Some of this was exports to the UK. The amounts of refined oil products
exported by sea from Belgium, France and Germany were approximately 2, 4 and 3 million
tonnes.
Two refined oil products, the heavier grades of gas oil and Residual Fuel Oil (RFO) tend to
be produced ‘in excess’; more is produced, almost as a by-product, by refining the crude oil
into light distillates than is required for local consumption. Heavy gas oil can be transported
by pipeline; RFO cannot and is transported by train, barge or product tanker.
The Russian Federation is a very major exporter of refined oil products. Russia exported a
total of 81.4 million tonnes of refined oil products in 2005. The proportion of exported refined
oil products was approximately 55% RFO, 35% gas oil and 10% others. A total of
approximately 45 million tonnes of RFO was exported and 70%, approximately 31.5 million
tonnes, was exported via the Baltic Sea and out into the North Sea. The other 13.5 million
tonnes was exported via the Black Sea and into the Mediterranean Sea.
Residual Fuel Oils (RFO) carried as cargoes in tankers of various sizes (from small product
tankers with 5,000 tonnes or less cargo, up to VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers) carrying
300,000 tonnes of RFO. Both the Erika and the Prestige were carrying RFOs; the Erika was
loaded with a ‘cracked’ residue-based RFO at Dunkirk. The Prestige was loaded with a
straight-run RFO from Russia via Ventspils.
4.1.5 Residual marine bunker fuel oils

All large vessels use residual marine bunker fuel oils as fuel. As described in Chapter 3,
there are seveal different grades, the most popular being IFO-380 (or ISO-F-RM-380) and
IFO-180 (or ISO-F-RM-380). World-wide sales of IFO 380 account for approximately 70% of
the total volume of residual marine bunker oils being supplied. IFO-180 accounts for
approximately 25% of the volume, with the other grades accounting for only about 5% of the
volume of total sales.
Approximately 30 - 35 million tonnes of residual marine bunker fuel oil is currently sold each
year in the EU with over 60% being sold in the ARA (Antwerp-Rotterdam-Amsterdam)
region. In the past, much of this residual marine bunker fuel oil has been produced from
high-sulphur content RFO imported from Russia. However, the introduction of SECAs in the
Baltic Sea and North Sea means that there is no European market - inland or marine bunker
- for the 30+ million tonnes of Russian RFO currently exported through the Baltic Sea and
this is now being increasingly exported to the Far East. High-sulphur RFO from European
refineries will either have to be processed to reduce the sulphur content - an expensive
option for low-value product - or it will join the Russian RFO in being exported out of the EU
marine area.
32
33
4.2 Norwegian crude oils

Norway is a major producer and exporter of crude oil.
4.2.1 Oil production in the southern North Sea

There are 15 fields (11 oil and 4 gas) in the southern North Sea (Figure 8) and 3 fields are
being developed. Ekofisk serves as a hub for petroleum operations in this area, with several
fields utilising the infrastructure for further transport in the NORPIPE system. From Ekofisk,
oil is exported by pipeline to Teesside in the UK, while gas is sent by pipeline to Emden in
Germany.
Figure 8 Oilfields and infrastructure in the Norwegian sector of the southern North Sea
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate – Facts 2006
33
34
The producing oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the southern North Sea are listed in Table
10, together with the estimated production for 2006 and the transport route of the oil.
Table 10 Oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the southern North Sea

Estimated
Oilfield production Transport route for produced oil
in 2006
(barrels/day)
Ekofisk 290,000
Eldfisk 66,000
Embla 11,000
Gyda 14,000 These crude oils are transported by pipeline to the
Hod 7,000 Ekofisk facility and then through the sub-sea NORPIPE
Tambar 15,000 to Teesside in the UK
Tor 6,000
Ula 25,000
Valhall 87,000
Varg 26,000 Oil is offloaded from the production vessels onto shuttle
Glitne 10,000 tankers.
Almost all of the crude oils from the oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the southern North
Sea are transported to the UK in the sub-sea NORPIPE pipeline. This mixture, or blend, of 9
individual crude oils (plus several other crude oils added in the UK sector) is known as
“Ekofisk” or “Ekofisk Blend”. Some of it is shipped in UK waters to UK refineries and some is
exported.
Crude oil from the Varg and Glitne oilfields are loaded offshore (and are known as “offshore
loaders”), either for transport to Norway or foe export.
4.2.2 Oil production in the northern North Sea

There are 28 fields in the Northern North Sea, and 3 fields are being developed. There are
three the three main areas of oil production in the northern North Sea; Tampen, Troll /
Oseberg and Heimdal / Balder.
The Tampen area holds many of the largest oil fields on the Norwegian continental shelf,
such as Statfjord, Snorre and Gullfaks. The Troll field plays a very important role for gas
supplies, but significant oil production has also developed. The Oseberg area includes
Brage and Veslefrikk, in addition to the Oseberg fields. Oil production from the Oseberg area
is declining, but will remain important for many years to come. Some of these fields border
on the British continental shelf and are tied back to fields on the British side. Oil and gas
from fields in the northern North Sea are transported by tankers or by pipeline to land
facilities in Norway and the UK.
34
35
Figure 9 Oilfields and infrastructure in the Norwegian sector of the northern North Sea
35
36
The producing oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the northern North Sea are listed in Table
11, together with the estimated production for 2006 and the transport route of the oil.
Table 11 Oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the northern North Sea

Estimated
Oilfield production in Transport route for produced oil
2006
(barrels/day)
Gullfaks 127,000 Oil is exported via loading buoys to shuttle tankers.
Gullfaks Sør 70,000 Oil is transported to Gullfaks A for storage and
further transport by shuttle tankers.
Visund 32,000 Oil is transported to Gullfaks C and exported by
Tordis 41,000 tankers.
Vigdis 65,000 Oil is sent to Gullfaks A for storage and export.
Statfjord 86,000 Oil is loaded to tankers from one of the three oil
Statfjord Nord 26,000 loading systems at the field.
Statfjord Øst 14,000 Oil is transported by pipeline to Statfjord C for
Sygna 9,000 processing, storage and export
Snorre 126,000 Oil is transported to Statfjord A for final processing
and export.
Oseberg 112,000
Brage 19,000 Oil is sent by pipeline to Oseberg and through the
Oseberg Sør 61,000 Oseberg Transport System (OTS) to the Sture
Oseberg Øst 16,000 terminal.
Tune 3,000
Veslefrikk 28,000
Grane 204,000 Oil is sent by pipeline to the Sture terminal.
Troll Phase II 197,000 Oil is transported in the Troll Oil Pipelines I and II
to the oil terminal at Mongstad.
Fram 23,000 Oil is transported by pipeline to Troll C for
Kvitebjørn 54,000 processing and on to Mongstad through the Troll
Oljerør II pipeline.
Murchison 2,000 Oil is piped through the Brent sub-sea pipeline
system to Sullom Voe in the Shetlands.
Balder 108,000 Oil is exported via loading buoys to shuttle tankers
Jotun 12,000 Oil is exported via loading buoys to tankers.
Huldra 4,000
Vale 7,000
There are six ‘streams’ of crude oil from the Norwegian sector of the northern North Sea:
• Gullfaks Blend; crude oils from the Gullfaks and associated fields that is
loaded at the Gullfaks field and transported from there by tanker, either to oil
ports in Norway or exported.
36
37
• Statfjord Blend; crude oils from the Statfjord and associated fields that is
loaded at the Statfjord field and transported from there by tanker, either to oil
• Oseberg Blend; crude oils from the Oseberg and associated fields that is
taken by the sub-sea Oseberg Transport System (OTS) pipeline to the onshore
Sture terminal. The Oseberg Blend is then shipped from Sture, either to oil
• Troll Blend; crude oils from the Troll and associated fields that is taken by the
sub-sea Troll oil pipelines to the onshore Mongstad terminal. The Troll Blend is
then processed by Mongstad refinery or shipped from Mongstad, either to oil
• The “offshore loaders” at the Balder and Jotun fields.
• A small amount of Murchison crude oil joins the other UK sector crude oils to
become Brent Blend crude oil that is transported to Sullom Voe by sub-sea
pipeline and shipped from Sullom Voe to oil terminals in the UK, or is exported.
37
38
4.2.3 Oil production in the Norwegian Sea

Draugen was the first field to come on stream in the Norwegian Sea (Figure 10) in 1993. 8
fields are currently producing in this area, after Kristin and Urd came on stream in 2005.
Figure 10 Oilfields and infrastructure in the Norwegian Sea

38
39
Table 12 Oilfields in the Norwegian Sea

Estimated
Oilfield production in Transport route for produced oil
2006
(barrels/day)
Draugen 81,000 The oil is exported by tankers.
Heidrun 145,000 Oil is transferred to tankers at the field and shipped to
Mongstad and Tetney (UK).
Åsgard 109,000 Oil and condensate are temporarily stored at the field
and shipped to shore by tankers.
Kristin 47,000 Light oil is separated and stabilised then transferred to
a storage ship tied to the Åsgard C loading buoy for
Mikkel 5000 storage and shipping.
Condensate is separated from the gas and stabilised
on Åsgard B before it is exported from the field
together with Åsgard’s own condensate.
Njord 22,000 The oil is offloaded from the storage vessel, Njord B, to
tankers for transport to the market.
Norne 76,000 The oil is transferred to tankers for transport.
Urd 47,000 The wellstream is processed on the Norne vessel, and
oil/condensate are stabilised and offloaded together
with oil or condensate from the Norne field.
39
40
4.2.4 Ship transport of Norwegian crude oils

The majority (91.3%) of crude oils produced in Norwegian waters in 2004 was exported by
oil tanker transport (Table 13). Nearly 13 million tonnes (8.7% of the total) was shipped from
the “offshore loader” fields back to Norway. This is in addition to the crude oil that was
produced and transported to the Sture and Mongstad terminals by sub-sea pipelines and
subsequently processed at Mongstad and Slagen refineries.
Over 70% of the total quantity of crude oil that was transported by oil tanker, about 105
million tonnes, was of the Ekofisk, Gullfaks, Statfjord, Oseberg and Troll blends. The
greatest quantity of Norwegian crude oil that is shipped is of Ekofisk Blend and nearly 34
million tonnes of this was shipped from Teesside in the UK in 2004.
Table 13 Ship transport of Norwegian crude oils
Quantity shipped in 2004

(thousand tonnes)
Domestic
Norwegian transport
crude Oil Shipped from within Export TOTAL
Norwegian
waters
Ekofisk Blend Teesside, UK 0 21,933 21,9331
Gullfaks Blend Gullfaks field 2,233 17,778 20,012
Statfjord Blend Statfjord field 112 18,992 19,104
Oseberg Blend Sture terminal 330 16,927 17,257
Troll Blend Mongstad terminal 213 15,520 15,734
Norne Norne field 2,431 6,066 8,497
Heidrun Mongstad or Tetney, UK 0 7,604 7,604
Draugen Draugen field 331 6,481 6,811
Grane Sture terminal 392 5,922 6,314
1
There is uncertainty about this export figure. 21,933 kt is the official number we have received from
Statistic Norway, but our calculations show 34,050 kt. The total we found is about 12 million
tonnes larger than the 21,933 kt figure from Statistics Norway. We have not found an explanation for
this deviation. The 34 million tonnes total includes 18 million tonnes that was exported from
Teeside terminal to the UK and 16 million tonnes that was exported from Teesside to the rest of the
world (France, USA, Germany etc.). The Ekofisk Blend crude oil arrived at the Teesside terminal via
NORPIPE, but the figure 34,050 kt refer to the individual cargoes leaving Teesside. The majority of
the oil cargoes exported from Tesside were owned by Norway, but some (9,880 kt) were owned by
the UK. Our figure 34.050 kt refer only to crude oil described as having the "owner country" as
Norway. All the other figures in table 13 are checked and they are in accordance with the official
statistic.
40
41
Åsgard Åsgard field 2,513 2,216 4,729

Balder Balder field 3,959 38 3,997
Jotun Jotun field 574 1,648 2,222
Njord Njord field 0 1,351 1,351
Varg Varg field 54 958 1,012
Glitne Glitne field 0 872 872
Totals 13,232 124,383 137,616
41
42
4.3 UK crude oils
4.3.1 Overview of UK crude oil supply and consumption

The UK is a major crude oil producer, importer, exporter, refiner and consumer of refined oil
products.
Crude oil production

Crude oil production in the UK in 2003 was approximately 98 million tonnes and in 2004 was
approximately 87 million tonnes. The vast bulk of crude oil production is from offshore
oilfields. Oil and gas production from the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) peaked in 1999 and
is now in decline.
Crude oil imports

The UK imported a total of 48.5 million tones of crude oil in 2003, and 32.5 million tonnes
(73% of total crude oil imports) were from Norway. Most of this Norwegian crude oil was
delivered direct to the UK (Teesside) via the sub-sea NORPIPE pipeline from Ekofisk field.
Crude oil exports

Total crude oil exports from the UK amounted to approximately 70 million tonnes in 2003.
The majority (21.5 million tonnes) was exported to the USA. 35 million tones in total were
exported to the Netherlands, France and Germany.
Crude oil processing and consumption in the UK

There are 9 major UK oil refineries with a total distillation capacity of slightly less than 100
million tonnes of crude oil:
• Coryton, Essex
• Grangemouth, Stirlingshire
• Humber Refinery, South Killingholme
• Fawley Refinery, Southampton
• North Tees Refinery, Cleveland
• Stanlow Refinery, Ellesmere Port
• Pembroke Refinery, Pembroke
• Milford Haven Refinery, Milford Haven
• Lindsey Oil Refinery, Immingham
In 2003, 84.5 million tonnes of refined oil products were produced; 22.6 million tonnes of
motor spirit (petrol), 5.3 million tonnes of aviation turbine fuel, 27.6 million tonnes of gas oil
and 11.5 million tonnes of fuel oil. The total UK demand for these refined oil products was
approximately 80 million tonnes. 23.3 million tonnes of refined oil products were exported
and approximately 17.3 million tonnes were imported.
42
43
4.3.2 UK crude oil production

There are currently around 164 individual oilfields producing in the UK offshore sector (mainly in
the North Sea) and there are 85 offshore oil platforms and 18 floating oil installations
In 2004, 25.3 million tonnes of individual crude oils from 69 of these fields were sent by sub-sea
pipelines and combined for shipment from 22 “offshore loading” points (Table 8).
The 62 million tonnes of crude oils from the remaining 95 fields were sent by sub-sea pipelines to
oil terminals at:
• Forties terminal: 30.3 million tonnes of Forties Blend (a blend of 47 individual UK crude
oils). (Composition in Table 9). 7.3 million tonnes of this were taken to Grangemouth
refinery by overland pipeline.
• Sullom Voe terminal:18.4 million tonnes of Brent Blend (a blend of 19 individual crude
oils). (Composition in Table 10).
• Flotta terminal: 5.2 million tonnes of Flotta Mix (a blend of 15 crude oils). (Composition in
Table 11).
• NORPIPE terminal: 5 million tonnes of Ekofisk Blend (a blend of 13 individual UK crude
oils, in addition to the 34 million tonnes of Ekofisk Blend - itself a blend of 9 Norwegian
crude oils). (Composition in Table 12).
• Flotta West terminal: 2.6 million tonnes of Foinaven crude oil
• Nigg Bay terminal: 0.3 million tonnes of Beatrice crude oil.
43
44
Figure 11 Oilfields and infrastructure in the UK sector of the North Sea
44
45
Table 14. Offshore loaders of UK crude oils in 2004
Loaded offshore
Crude oil in 2004
(thousand tonnes)
Alba 3,668
Captain 3,651
Guillemot W 2,961
Beryl 2,668
Harding 2,118
Douglas 1,880
Blake 1,578
Gryphon 1,502
Guillemot A 1,133
Pierce 820
Statfjord 732
Banff 489
Leadon 413
Ardmore 377
Fife 318
Ross 238
Curlew 223
Kittiwake 153
Flora 130
Kyle 128
Angus 91
Fergus 77
TOTAL 25,348
45
46
Table 15 Composition of Forties Blend crude oil in 2004
Crude oil Crude oil

% %
Elgin 14.86 Thelma 0.90
Nelson 10.82 Arkwright 0.84
Shearwater 7.77 Everest 0.81
Forties 6.73 Fleming 0.78
Mungo 6.37 Beauly 0.70
Scott 4.17 Hannay 0.64
Andrew 4.13 Balmoral 0.61
Bruce 4.00 Lomond 0.49
Franklin 3.88 Cyrus 0.47
Madoes 3.36 Keith 0.44
Britannia 3.29 Tiffany 0.43
Telford 2.81 Larch 0.35
Erskine 2.69 Seymour 0.33
Heron 2.24 Hawkins 0.30
Arbroath 1.76 Beinn 0.25
Toni. 1.71 Drake 0.25
Brae Area 1.64 Egret 0.21
Machar 1.43 Monan 0.09
Mirren 1.42 Stirling 0.08
Miller 1.35 Montrose 0.07
Kingfisher 1.33 Brimmond 0.05
Buchan 1.12 Glamis 0.05
Marnock 1.02 Birch 0.03
Skua 0.96 TOTAL 100
46
47
Table 16 Composition of Brent Blend crude oil in 2004
Crude oil %
Magnus 20.83
Brent 12.62
Dunbar 12.29
Loyal 10.04
Cormorant (North and South) 9.33
Hudson 7.97
Alwyn North 6.20
Columba B/D 5.41
Kestrel 3.67
Dunlin, 3.46
Heather 2.06
Eider 1.91
Grant 1.50
Columba E 0.82
Ellon 0.64
Dunlin South West 0.61
Lyell 0.40
Deveron 0.21
Don 0.02
Total 100.00
47
48
Table 17. Composition of Flotta Mix crude oil in 2004
Crude oil %
MacCulloch 26.67
Claymore 24.00
Piper 12.68
Galley 10.85
Scapa 7.14
Ivanhoe 3.52
Saltire 3.14
Rubie 3.07
Tartan 2.52
Highlander 1.99
Rob Roy 1.97
Petronella 1.53
Renee 0.85
Chanter 0.04
Iona 0.04
Total 100.00
48
49
Table 18 Composition of Ekofisk Blend crude oil delivered to Teeside terminal in 2004
Crude oil %
Ekofisk (Norway) 48.26

Valhall (Norway) 14.48
Eldfisk (Norway) 10.98
Ula (Norway) 4.16
Gannet A- G (UK) 4.03
Tambar (Norway) 2.50
Gyda (Norway) 2.33
Jade (UK) 2.16
Judy (UK) 2.07
Embla (Norway) 1.83
Janice (UK) 1.47
Hod (Norway) 1.16
Tor (Norway) 1.00
Auk (UK) 0.93
Clyde (UK) 0.76
Joanne (UK) 0.62
Orion (UK) 0.44
Halley (UK) 0.36
Fulmar (UK) 0.34
Leven (UK) 0.13
Total 100.00
49
50
4.3.3 Ship transport of UK crude oils

The UK crude oils were shipped by tanker from the 22 “offshore loaders” (Table 8) to UK ports
and oil terminals near oil refineries, or were exported directly to other countries. Similarly, the UK
crude oils and crude oil blends delivered by sub-sea pipelines or oil tankers to the 6 oil terminals:
• Forties terminal (Forties Blend)
• Sullom Voe terminal (Brent Blend)
• Flotta terminal (Flotta Mix)
• NORPIPE terminal (Ekofisk Blend)
• Flotta West terminal (Foinaven crude oil)
• Nigg Bay terminal (Beatrice crude oil).
were shipped either to UK oil ports and terminals, or were exported abroad.
The UK ports at or near oil refineries are:

• Milford Haven
• Pembroke Dock
• Rivers Hull & Humber
• Southampton
• Liverpool
• London
• Grimsby & Immingham
Table 10 contains details of the 77 million tonnes of the 28 crude oils or crude oil blends shipped
from the “offshore loaders” and terminals and divides the ship traffic into “domestic shipping”
(transport within UK waters) and export ship traffic.
Over 50% of total ship traffic of UK crude oils is of Forties Blend (26.5% of total quantity
transported by ship) and Brent Blend (23.9%) and over 35% of domestic ship traffic is of these
two crude oil blends. An additional 40% (to give 90%) of the total quantity of UK crude oils
transported by oil tankers is of a further 10 crude oils or crude oil blends; Flotta Mix, Ekofisk
Blend (UK), Alba, Captain, Foinaven, Beryl, Harding, Guillemot W and Douglas.
Data on vessel movements through the Dover Strait in 2004 showed that the average size of
crude oil tankers transiting the Dover Strait was approximately 105,000 tonnes dwt, but this was
split between VLCCs (250,000+ tonnes dwt) en route from mainly Rotterdam to the USA and
tankers with an average dwt tonnage of 85,000 tonnes engaged in taking UK crude oil to NW
Europe.
50
51
Table 19. Ship transport of UK crude oils in 2004

UK DTI (Department of Trade and Industry Oil & gas Department)
Quantity shipped in 2004

(thousand tonnes)
UK crude Oil Shipped from Domestic

transport
Export TOTAL
within UK
waters
Forties Blend Forties Forth terminal 3,858 16,531 20,389

Brent Blend Sullom Voe terminal 1,369 17,018 18,387
Flotta Mix Flotta terminal 950 4,116 5,066
Ekofisk Blend (UK) Teesside terminal 2,849 2,192 5,041
Alba Alba field 461 3,207 3,668
Captain Captain field 1,011 2,641 3,652
Foinaven Flotta West terminal 448 3,032 3,480
Beryl Beryl field 1,320 1,347 2,667
Harding Harding field 1,775 343 2,118
Guillemot W Guillemot W field 1,330 629 1,959
Douglas Douglas field 0 1,880 1,880
Blake Blake field 1,023 555 1,578
Gryphon Gryphon field 0 1,502 1,502
Guillemot A Guillemot A field 504 629 1,133
Pierce Pierce field 741 79 820
Statfjord Blend Statfjord field 537 195 732
Banff Banff field 163 326 489
Leadon Leadon field 63 413 476
Ardmore Ardmore field 48 329 377
Fife Fife field 0 318 318
Ross Ross field 146 92 238
Beatrice Nigg terminal 238 0 238
Curlew Curlew field 0 223 223
Kittiwake Kittiwake field 41 112 153
Fergus Fergus field 63 77 140
Flora Flora field 0 130 130
Kyle Kyle field 63 65 128
Angus Angus field 0 91 91
19,001 58,072 77,073
51
52
4.4 Danish crude oil production and transport 2004
Crude oil thousand % cum % Transport route

tonnes
Dan 5,280 27.15 27.15
Halfdan 4,254 21.88 49.03
Gorm 2,123 10.92 59.95
Skjold 1,241 6.38 66.33
Tyra 622 3.20 69.52
Tyra SE 499 2.56 72.09
Oil via Gorm E to Fredericia via sub-
Valdemar 422 2.17 74.26
sea pipeline
Svend 280 1.44 75.70
Harald 270 1.39 77.09
Kraka 171 0.88 77.97
Rolf 92 0.47 78.44
Roar 84 0.43 78.88
Regnar 16 0.08 78.96
Lulita 16 0.08 79.04
Dagmar 2 0.01 79.05
79.05
Siri 596 3.06 82.12 Oil to seabed storage tank then by
tanker to shore
Nini 1,270 6.53 88.65 To Siri then by tanker to shore
Cecilie 267 1.37 90.02 To Siri then by tanker to shore
10.97
South Arne 1,941 9.98 100.00 Oil to seabed storage tank then by
tanker to shore
Total 19,447 100.00
Three blends:
• 79% total of DUC (a blend 15 oils and condensates, principally Dan 34%, Halfdan 28%,
Gorm 14% and Skjold 8%).
• 11% total of Siri (a blend of mainly of Nini 60%, Siri 28% and Cecilie 12%).
• 10% total of South Arne crude oil.
52
53
Crude oils shipped in the southern North

Sea
thousand
All Danish crude oils to: %
tonnes
Sweden 5,105 39.42
Germany 1,943 15.00
France 1,557 12.02
Belgium 1,283 9.91
UK 1,277 9.86
Finland 1,061 8.19
Netherlands 725 5.60
Totals 12,951 100.00
53
54
4.5 Russian crude oils
4.5.1 Background
Following a massive reduction at the time of the break-sup of the Soviet Union in 1991, crude oil
imports into Europe from the Russia Federation have been increasing sharply in recent years
from 70 million tonnes in 1995, to 165 million tonnes in 2004 to a predicted 200 to 250 million
tonnes in 2006. In contrast to figures for Norway and the UK, estimates of Russian crude oil
production and exports, and particularly predictions of future exports, vary with source and it is
difficult to ensure that the figures given are accurate.
Crude oil produced in Russian oilfields is initially transported through Transneft’s pipelines.
Russia (and the Former Soviet Union (FSU)) has a massive overland pipeline system to transport
crude oil from the oilfields where it is produced (mainly in the European part of Russia) to where
it is to be refined and used. Transneft exclusively operates and manages Russian crude oil
pipelines. Part of the crude oil is delivered to Russian oil refineries and the rest is exported
abroad. Europe is the major importer of Russian crude oil and Transneft has three ways of
exporting Russian crude oil to Europe:
• shipping ports;
• pipelines;
• railways.
In 2003, shipping ports handled 91.74 million tonnes (54.1% of total crude oil exports), 67.75
million tonnes (39.9%) was exported through pipelines and 10.21 million tonnes (6.0%) was
exported by railways. In addition, there is crude oil in transit. In 2003, Transneft exported 3.79
million tonnes of Kazakhstan crude oil by pipelines, and shipped 12.58 million tons of Kazakhstan
crude oil, 2.62 million tons of Azerbaijan oil and 60,000 tons of Turkmenistan oil from the ports in
2003.
Most of Russian crude oil is of a blend known as ‘Urals’ (as it was mixed in the Volga-Urals
region) or as REBCO (Russian Export Blend Crude Oil, formerly ‘Soviet export blend’) with an
API gravity of around 32o (0.86 – 0.87 kg/l) nd 1.8% sulphur content. Additionally, there is also
transport of REBCO by train from the Baltic Sea to the Barents Sea region for further
transportation.
Urals crude oil, or REBCO, flows through the 60,000+ km long “Druzhba” (‘Friendship’) pipeline
to Eastern Europe, as well as via the Soviet oil ports on the Black Sea (mainly Novorossiysk, but
also Odessa and Tuapse) and on the Baltic Sea (formerly Ventspils, but now Butinge and mainly
Primorsk). The Druzhba overland pipeline system connects with 17 countries, including
Azerbaijan Belarus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
54
55
Figure 12 Oil infrastructure in Russia 2 (From Russia Energy Survey 2002, International Energy Agency)
55
56
4.5.2 Current crude oil export routes from Russia

Crude oil from Russia is currently exported by;
• Overland pipeline to Eastern Europe and then into Western Europe
• By sea through the Baltic Sea
• By sea through the Black Sea
• Minor amounts by other routes (Table 20).
In 2004, just over 50 million tonnes of Russian crude was exported through Baltic Sea ports, over
42 million tonnes through the Russian port of Primorsk. Not all this crude oil was destined for
Europe, but all of it passed through the Baltic Sea and into the North Sea.
Table 20 Transport routes of Russian crude oil in 2004 (Eugene Khatukov & Ellen
Starostina, Centre for Petroleum Business Studies, Oil and Gas Journal, Apr 3rd 2006).
2004
Transport route Million
Mb/d tonnes / %
year
Eastern Europe (overland pipelines)
Druzhba Northern branch 0.89 44.68 27.05
Druzhba Southern branch 0.33 16.57 10.03
Total through overland pipelines 1.22 61.25 37.08
Black Sea (ports - terminals)

Novorossiysk 0.85 42.68 25.84
Tuapse 0.10 5.02 3.04
Odessa (Ukraine) 0.03 1.51 0.91
Pivdenny (Ukraine) 0.04 2.01 1.22
Total through Black Sea ports 1.02 51.21 31.00
Baltic Sea (ports – terminals)

Primorsk 0.84 42.17 25.53
Butinge (Lithuania) 0.14 7.03 4.26
Vysotsk 0.02 1.00 0.61
Total through Baltic Sea ports 1.00 50.21 30.40
Barents Sea (Murmansk) 0.01 0.50 0.30
Total through Barents Sea ports 0.01 0.50* 0.30
Far East
De Kastri (port) 0.01 0.50 0.30
Sakhalin-2 (terminal) 0.03 1.51 0.91
Total through Far East ports 0.04 2.01 1.22
TOTAL 3.29 165.18 100.00
* This figure is a lot lower than that monitored by the Norwegian Coastal Administration – see text
on next page.
56
57
4.5.3 Norwegian monitoring of oil transport from northern Russia

The Norwegian Coastal Administration monitors the ship traffic from northern Russia that passes
close to the Norwegian coast on its transit towards the North Sea
(http://www.kystverket.no/default.aspx?aid=9140379
In 2004, 11.75 million tonnes of oil (crude oil and refined oil products) from northern Russia was
transported past the Norwegian coast in 245 vessel voyages (an average of nearly 48 thousand
tonnes for each voyage). 6 million tonnes of this was of Russian crude oil. The vast majority of
this was en route to the Netherlands.
4.5.4 Crude oil imported into EU countries from Russia

The EU statistics database EUROSTAT contains details of crude oil imports declared by the EU
25 countries. The 2005 figures for the 17 countries within the EU that declared imports of
Russian crude oil are contained in Table 21.
Table 21 EUROSTAT figures for imports of crude oil from Russia in 2005
2005
Imports of crude oil from
(thousand
Russia
tonnes)
Germany 38,293*
Italy 18,441
Poland 17,382*
The Netherlands 17,339
Belgium 13,171
France 9,452
Lithuania 8,652*
Spain 8,548
Finland 8,507
Sweden 7,140
UK 6,474
Hungary 6,453*
Greece 6,144
Czech Republic 5,555*
Slovakia 4,876*
Austria 1,533*
Portugal 134
Totals 178,094
57
58
The figures given in bold and with an asterisk* are for countries connected to Russia by the
“Druzhba” pipeline. There is a slight discrepancy between the total quantity of crude oil exported
in Tables 14 and 15; 165 million tonnes in Table 14 and 178 million tonnes in Table 15. However,
they do form a broadly consistent set of figures.
Poland and Lithuania are on the Northern Branch of “Druzhba” and Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech
Republic and Germany are on, or near, the Southern Branch of “Druzhba”. Some, if not all, of the
Russian crude oil imported into these countries was delivered by the overland pipeline. According
to Table 14, 61.25 million tonnes were delivered by this method. The total amount of Russian
crude oil imported into all these countries is nearly 83 million tonnes. All of the Russian crude oil
imported by Germany cannot have been supplied by the overland pipeline; some (between at
least 5 and 10 million tonnes) was transported by sea to Germany from the Baltic Sea ports.
4.5.5 North Sea transport routes of Russian crude oil exported to EU countries
Approximately 100 to 110 million tonnes of Russian crude oil were exported by sea and this was
split almost equally between ports in the Baltic Sea (50.2 million tonnes) and in the Black Sea
(51.2 million tonnes).
If the sea transport of Russian crude oil to the countries had followed the logical transport routes:
• The oil ports of Finland and Sweden in the Baltic Sea would have been supplied by
exports from Russia via the Baltic Sea
• The oil ports in the North Sea would have been supplied by exports from Russia via the
Baltic Sea
• The oil ports of Italy, Greece, southern France, Spain in the Mediterranean Sea would
have been supplied with Russia crude oil exported via the Black.
However, the total imports of Russian crude oil into the Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands,
Belgium and the UK (all with ports in the Baltic and North Seas) is 52.6 million tonnes, which is
more than that apparently exported through Baltic Sea ports, and this ignores the Russian crude
oil imported into northern France and northern Spain. There is thus some uncertainty about the
total quantity of Russian crude oil transported through the North Sea; it is certainly 35 million
tonnes (51.2 million tonnes, less the 15 million tonnes imported by Sweden and Finland in the
Baltic Sea), but is probably in excess of 50 million tonnes, perhaps 60 million tonnes, with some
shipments to Spain and northern France originating in the Black Sea and not the Baltic Sea. The
figures used in this report are contained in Table 22.
58
59
Table 22. Transport routes of Russian crude oil imported into the EU
Imports of crude 2005

oil from Russia Thousand Crude oil transport route
into tonnes
Germany 5,000 Baltic Sea / North Sea (western ports)

17,339 Baltic Sea / North Sea
The Netherlands
6,000 Barents Sea / North sea
Belgium 13,171 Baltic Sea / North Sea
France 5,000 Baltic Sea / North Sea (northern ports)
Spain 3,000 Baltic Sea / North Sea / Atlantic (west)
UK 6,474 Baltic Sea / North Sea
Totals 55,984
4.6 Crude oils imported from elsewhere

The EUROSTAT statistics of crude oil imports for the 17 EU member states listed in Table 22
have been analysed to identify the sources of all crude oil imports.
These 17 countries imported a total of just over 611 million tonnes of crude oil in 2005 (Table 23).
Russia was the major supplier of crude oil to the EU, and 178 million tonnes of crude oil was
imported, by all methods, from Russia. Norway made the second largest contribution of 90.7
million tonnes and Saudi Arabia was the third largest overall supplier.
59
60
Table 23 EUROSTAT total crude oil imports into 17 EU coastal states in 2005, by country of
crude oil source. (Inter EU transfers and contributions less than 1% of the total have been
omitted for clarity).
2005
Crude oil imported into EU Totals
%
from (thousand
tonnes)
Russian Federation 178,094 29.14
Norway 90,744 14.85
Saudi Arabia 61,189 10.01
Libya 50,917 8.33
Iran 34,116 5.58
United Kingdom 29,036 4.75
Kazakhstan 22,383 3.66
Algeria 22,217 3.64
Nigeria 19,188 3.14
Denmark 12,951 2.12
Iraq 12,265 2.01
Mexico 10,610 1.74
Syria 8,980 1.47
Kuwait 7,625 1.25
Venezuela 6,846 1.12
Azerbaijan 6,738 1.10
Angola 6,522 1.07
All countries of the world 611,193 100.00
There were large regional variations in the quantity and source of imported crude oils within the
EU.
Germany imported the greatest amount of crude oil into the EU with a total of just over 112
million tonnes, (Table 24) and the majority was from Russia, but (as described in Sections 1.4.3
and 1.4.4) the majority of this was through overland pipelines. Norway and the UK were major
suppliers of crude oil to Germany; imports from these two countries totalled nearly 32 million
tonnes, nearly 30% of German crude oil imports.
60
61
Table 24. EUROSTAT figures for crude oil imported into Germany in 2005 by country of
crude oil source.
2005
Crude oil imported into
Totals
Germany
(thousand
From
tonnes)
Russian Federation 38,293
Norway 17,288
United Kingdom 14,671
Libya 12,914
Kazakhstan 7,289
Algeria 4,572
Saudi Arabia 4,136
Syria 3,403
Nigeria 2,125
Denmark 1,943
Venezuela 1,333
Azerbaijan 920
Netherlands 613
Egypt 580
Brazil 491
Iran 474
Tunisia 257
Poland 246
Angola 211
Congo 127
Italy 85
Lithuania 61
Mexico 36
Cameroon 26
All countries of the world 112,314
Substantial amounts of crude oil, a total of 18.3 million tonnes, were imported into Germany from
North Africa (Libya, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt). 8 million tonnes were imported from the Middle
East (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Kuwait).
Italy was the second largest importer of crude oil within the EU. The majority of this crude oil,
over 23 million tonnes was from Libya, shipped across the Mediterranean Sea, followed by crude
oil from Russia shipped via the Black Sea. There was also a large amount, nearly 31 million
tonnes, from the Middle East. Only 3.4 million tonnes came from Norway.
61
62
Table 25 EUROSTAT figures for crude oil imported into Italy in 2005 by country of crude oil
source.
2005
Crude oil imported into
Totals
Italy
(thousand
From
tonnes)
Libya 23,344
Russian Federation 18,441
Saudi Arabia 12,584
Iran 9,559
Iraq 5,855
Norway 3,405
Kazakhstan 3,025
Azerbaijan 2,903
Algeria 2,890
Syria 2,562
Nigeria 1,635
Cameroon 1,079
Egypt 693
Kuwait 273
Tunisia 87
Mexico 86
Angola 80
Venezuela 36
88,537
All countries of the world 89,492
62
63
4.6.1 Crude oils imported from the Middle East

In recent years, crude oil imports into Europe from the Middle East have declined from a
maximum of 230 million tonnes 1998 to 125 million tonnes in 2005 as imports of crude oil from
Russia have increased. The Middle East (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Kuwait) supplied
just over 20% of the total crude oil imports into the EU in 2005 (Table 26). The major individual
supplier to the EU in the region was Saudi Arabia with 10% of total EU crude oil imports.
Table 26 Middle East crude oil imports into the EU
2005
Crude oil imported Totals
%
into EU from (thousand
tonnes)
Saudi Arabia 61,189 10.01
Iran 34,116 5.58
Iraq 12,265 2.01
Syria 8,980 1.47
Kuwait 7,625 1.25
Total Middle East 124,175 20.32
Each of the countries in Table 14 has many oilfields, but each export a limited number of export
crude oil blends. The major export blend crude oil from Saudi Arabia is Arab Light and this is
loaded at the Juaymah, King Fahd and Ras Tanura terminals. Arab Extra Light is also loaded at
Ras Tanura. Iran produces a range of export blend crude oils from its numerous oilfields; Iran
Light, Medium and Heavy loaded at Kharg Island, plus some individual crude oils loaded such as
Sirri and Foroozan Blend.
Information concerning the identity of individual crude oil cargoes imported into the EU is difficult
to find. The production of crude oil for each country in 2001 is available and is contained in Table
18.
63
64
Table 27 Production of export blend crude oils in the Middle East in 2001
Saudi Arabia %
Arab Light 64.94
Arab Extra Light 16.88
Arab Heavy 9.09
Arab Medium 6.49
Arab Super Light 2.60
100
Iran %
Iran Heavy 35.32
Iran Light 26.02
Azadegan 14.87
Sirri 11.52
Lavan Blend 7.43
Foroozan Blend 4.83
100
Iraq %
Basrah Light 66.67
Kirkuk 33.33
100
Syria
Syrian Light 80.00
Souedieh 20.00
64
65
4.6.2 Crude oils imported from North Africa

A similar analysis of crude oils imported into the EU from North Africa was conducted and is
presented in Table 19. 12.4% of crude imported into the EU came from North Africa. The major
North African oil exporter to the EU was Libya which supplied a total of 76 million tonnes of crude
oil in 2005 (8.3% of total EU crude oil imports). 23 million tonnes was imported by Italy.
Table 28 North Africa crude oil imports into the EU
2005
Crude oil imported Totals
%
from (thousand
tonnes)
Libya 50,917 8.33
Algeria 22,217 3.64
Tunisia 1,480 0.24
Egypt 1,354 0.22
Total North Africa 75,968 12.43
There are several major export blends from Libya and Algeria and these, plus the proportions of
2001 production, are presented in Table 29.
Table 29 Production of export blend crude oils in North Africa in 2001
Libya %
Es Sider (Libya) 33.82
Sarir (Libya) 30.92
Brega (Libya) 11.59
Bouri (Libya) 7.73
Sirtica (Libya) 5.80
Zueitina (Libya) 5.31
Amna (Libya) 4.83
100
Algeria %
Algerian Condensate (Algeria) 44.44
Saharan Blend (Algeria) 44.44
Zarzaitine (Algeria) 11.11
100
65
66
4.6.3 Crude oils imported from West Africa

A similar analysis of crude oils imported into the EU from West Africa was conducted and is
presented in Table 30. 4.9% of crude imported into the EU came from West Africa. The major
West African oil exporter to the EU was Nigeria which supplied a total of 30.1 million tonnes of
crude oil in 2005 (4.9% of total EU crude oil imports).
Table 30 West Africa crude oil imports into the EU
2005
Totals
Crude oil imported (thousand %
from tonnes)
Nigeria 19,188 3.14
Angola 6,522 1.07
Cameroon 3,381 0.55
Congo 609 0.1
Gabon 478 0.08
Total West Africa 30,178 4.94
There are several major export blends from Nigeria and Angola and these, plus the proportions
of 2001 production, are presented in Table 31.
Table 31 Production of export blend crude oils in West Africa in 2001
Nigeria %
Qua Iboe 21.08
Escravos 20.62
Forcados 20.62
Bonny Light 19.34
Brass River 8.48
Oso Condensate 6.42
Pennington 3.44
100
Angola %
Cabinda 38.94
Girassol 17.7
Soyo 13.27
Nemba 12.39
Palanca 11.5
Kuito 6.19
100
66
67
4.6.4 Crude oils imported from the South America
A similar analysis of crude oils imported into the EU from South America was conducted and is
presented in Table 32. 3.3% of crude imported into the EU came from South America. The major
South American oil exporter to the EU was Mexico which supplied a total of 10.6 million tonnes of
crude oil in 2005 (1.7% of total EU crude oil imports). Major importers of South American crude
oils were Spain and France.
Table 32 South American crude oil imports into the EU
2005
Totals
Crude oil imported (thousand %
from tonnes)
Mexico 10,610 1.74
Venezuela 6,846 1.12
Brazil 2,551 0.42
Total South America 20,007 3.28
There are several major export blends from Mexico and Venezuela and these, plus the
proportions of 2001 production, are presented in Table 33.
Table 33 Production of export blend crude oils in South America in 2001
Mexico %
Maya 59.69
Isthmus 22.40
Olmeca 17.91
100
Venezuela %
BCF 17 39.64
Furrial 15.61
Bachaquero 14.87
Tia Juana Light 11.89
Zuata Sweet 8.92
Boscan 5.1
Tia Juana Heavy 3.96
100
67
68
4.7 Conclusions: Crude oils transported in oil tankers in the southern

North Sea
The transport of crude oils to and from the coastal states of the EU has many regional variations;
the transport patterns in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, plus the
Atlantic coast, will be different. This section concerns transport of oils by tanker in the southern
North Sea and draws on information presented in earlier sections of this chapter. Other sources
of information are information supplied by the Norwegian Coastal Administration and
EUROSTAT. The information concerning individual cargoes is confidential and the quantities
have been aggregated and the routes generalised to preserve this confidentiality.
The crude oils transported by oil tanker in the southern North Sea will be on voyages that start,
finish, or transit through the southern North Sea. The oils carried will be:
• Norwegian crude oils, shipped from offshore loaders to Norway or exported to NW

European countries (principally Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, UK), plus
crude oil blends shipped from onshore terminals for domestic use or export (Table 7,
Section 10.2.4).
- This includes Ekofisk Blend crude oil transported by the NORPIPE sub-sea pipeline
to the UK and shipped from Teesside to UK ports or exported.
- Crude oils shipped from the Norwegian Sea or northern North Sea offshore loaders,
or Sture and Mongstad terminals, to the USA or Canada are excluded since the
shipping routes pass through the northern, not southern, North Sea
• UK crude oils, shipped from offshore loaders to Norway or exported to NW European
countries, plus crude oil blends shipped from onshore terminals for domestic use or
export (Table 13, Section 10.3.3).
• Russian crude oils, shipped from the Baltic Sea to NW European countries (but
excluding purely Baltic Sea traffic to Finland or Sweden) or in transit to other destinations.
• Middle Eastern, North African, South American and West African crude oils,
imported into the NW European countries, but excluding France, since the tanker routes
would not enter the southern North Sea.
68
69
Table 34 Crude oils shipped in the southern North Sea in 2004
Crude oils shipped in the southern North Cum

TOTALS %
Sea in 2004 %
Baltic REBCO (Urals) Russia 55,984 16.14 16.14
Ekofisk (Norway shipped from UK) 43,736 12.61 28.75
Forties Blend (UK) 20,388 5.88 34.62
Statfjord Blend (Norway) 18,992 5.47 40.10
Brent Blend (UK) 18,388 5.30 45.40
Gullfaks Blend (Norway) 17,355 5.00 50.40
Arab Light (Saudi Arabia) 15,232 4.39 54.79
Oseberg Blend (Norway) 15,106 4.35 59.15
Danish crude oils 12,951 3.73 62.88
Troll (Norway) 6,979 2.01 64.89
Draugen (Norway) 6,040 1.74 66.63
Flotta mix (UK) 5,066 1.46 68.09
Es Sider (Libya) 4,753 1.37 69.46
Grane (Norway) 4,749 1.37 70.83
Norne (Norway) 4,611 1.33 72.16
Sarir (Libya) 4,345 1.25 73.41
Balder (Norway) 3,997 1.15 74.57
Arab Extra Light (Saudi Arabia) 3,959 1.14 75.71
Algerian Condensate (Algeria) 3,792 1.09 76.80
Saharan Blend (Algeria) 3,792 1.09 77.89
Captain (UK) 3,651 1.05 78.95
Syrian Light (Syria) 3,514 1.01 79.96
Foinaven (Flotta West) (UK) 3,479 1.00 80.96
Alba (UK) 3,199 0.92 81.88
Heidrun (Norway) 3,192 0.92 82.80
Guillemot W (UK) 2,961 0.85 83.66
Iran Heavy (Iran) 2,679 0.77 84.43
Beryl (UK) 2,668 0.77 85.20
Jotun (Norway) 2,222 0.64 85.84
BCF 17 (Venezuela) 2,218 0.64 86.48
Åsgard (Norway) 2,216 0.64 87.12
Arab Heavy (Saudi Arabia) 2,132 0.61 87.73
Harding (UK) 2,118 0.61 88.34
Iran Light (Iran) 1,974 0.57 88.91
Douglas (UK) 1,880 0.54 89.45
Brega (Libya) 1,629 0.47 89.92
Totals 346,908 100
69
70
347 million tonnes of 100 different crude oils were shipped in the southern North Sea in 2004
(Table 28). (Only the 37 crude oils that contribute a cumulative total of 90% of the total volume
shipped in the southern North Sea are shown in Table 28).
Several trends are evident:
• The largest volume of an individual crude oil (56 million tonnes or 16.1% of the total) was
of Russian Export Blend Crude Oil (REBCO, also known as Urals Baltic) shipped from
mainly to Russian port of Primorsk via the Baltic Sea and into the North Sea. 30 million
tonnes of this crude oil was en route to Belgium and the Netherlands. An additional 6
million tonnes was transported from northern Russia and this also went to the
Netherlands.
• 43.7 million tonnes (12.6% of the total) of Ekofisk Blend (produced mainly in Norwegian
waters, but shipped from Teesside in the UK) was the second largest volume of an
individual crude oil blend being shipped through the southern North Sea. Approximately
25 million tonnes were shipped within UK waters to oil terminals and refineries within the
UK, the rest was exported, 6.2 million tonnes to the USA, 6 million tonnes to France, 3.4
million tonnes to Germany and 3 million tonnes to the Netherlands.
• A further 4 crude oils: Forties Blend (20.3 million tonnes, 5.9% of total), Statfjord Blend
(19 million tonnes, 5.5% of total), Brent Blend (18.4 million tonnes, 5.3% of total) and
Gullfaks Blend (17.4 million tonnes, 5.0%) – when added to the volumes of REBCO and
Ekofisk Blend – accounted for 50% of the total quantity of crude oils transported by ship in
the southern North Sea.
• Other crude oils that were shipped in large volumes were; Arab light (15.2 million tonnes,
4.4% of total), Oseberg Blend (15.1 million tonnes, 4.4%) and the combined Danish-
produced crude oils (13 million tonnes, 3.7%).
70
71
4.8 Recommendation of oils to be tested
In order to be prepared in case of an oil spill, a number of crude oils and fuel oils should be
characterized with respect to weathering properties.
The selection of crude oils to be tested is based on the total volume transported (Table 34). The
weathering properties of the Norwegian crude oils are mostly investigated (see Table 41). Baltic
REBCO is the total of all Russian crude oils many of the Russian crude oils are blended. We
suggest testing 3 different Russian crude oils or crude oil blends. The recommendation of crude
oils to be tested is shown in Table 35 and the fuel oils in Table 36.
Table 35 Recommendation of crude oils to be tested with respect to weathering properties.

Oil Country Amount Comment
transported in
%
Baltic REBCO Russia 16,14 Suggest to test at least three Russian
crude oils representing a wide spectra
in physico-chemical properties
Brent blend UK 5,3 Important crude oil, limited weathering
property data available, blend may vary
over time
Gullfaks blend Norway 5 Only old weathering data available –
not representative for today’s properties
need to be updated
DUC Denmark DUC is a blend which represent about
80% of the Danish oils
Es Sider Libya 1,37 Important crude oil, transported in
European water. Waxy crude, Available
weathering data unknown
Saharan blend Algeria 1,09 Important crude oil, transported in
European waters. Available weathering
data unknown
Captain UK 1,05 A very heavy North sea crude oil
71
72
Table 36 Recommendation of fuel oils to be tested with respect to weathering properties.
Residual Fuel Comment

Oil
RFO Erika ‘Cracked’ residue based RFO from Dunkirk refinery.
Some data available.
RFO Prestige ’Straight-run’ residue based RFO from Russia via
Ventspils. Some data available.
RFO ARA Recent cargo import. Need to source from the
Netherlands.
IFO-380 Low sulphur (>1.5%) “SECA compliant” IFO - 380 grade.
Need to source from bunkering port in Baltic Sea.
IFO-380 Low sulphur (>1.5%) “SECA compliant” IFO - 300 grade.
Need to source from bunkering port in France or UK.
IFO-500 New grade likely to increase in use in future.
IFO-180 Low sulphur (>1.5%) “SECA compliant” IFO grade.
72
73
5 Weathering of oil at sea

When oils are spilt at sea different weathering processes alter the properties of the oil as a
function of time and weather conditions. Evaporation of volatiles, water-in-oil emulsification (w/o-
emulsions) and natural dispersion (o/w-emulsion) are important weathering processes taking
place when oil is spilled at sea. The emulsification of water in the oil contributes to a change in
properties of the spilled oil and increases the total volume of pollutant. The natural dispersion
contributes to a removal of the oil from the sea surface into the water column. The behaviour of
spilled crude oils and refined oil products depends on the ambient conditions (e.g. temperature,
sea-state, currents) and on the chemical composition of the oil. Large variations in oil properties
cause them to behave differently when spilled at sea. The naphtenic Gullfaks crude spilled at the
"Braer" incident in the Shetlands has a low content of waxes and asphaltenes, which are
important compounds for stabilizing water-in-oil (w/o) emulsions formed on the sea surface. This,
combined with heavy sea state, resulted in consequences that were much less severe than might
have been expected (Harris, 1995). Almost all of the 84,000 tons of the spilled Gullfaks crude oil
was natural dispersed into the water column as o/w-emulsions (Lunel et al., 1996). In the "Amoco
Cadiz" and the "Metula" spills, persistent "chocolate mousse" has contaminated the shorelines
for years after the initial spill (Grundach et al., 1996; Baker, 1995). Knowledge about weathering
behaviour of crude oils and fuel oils is therefore of importance for environmental risk assessment
of a spill, for contingency planning, response analysis, net environmental benefit analysis (NEBA)
and for rapid and right decision making in the case of an oils spill.
5.1 Weathering processes

When a crude oil is spilt at sea a number of natural processes take place, which change the
volume and the chemical properties of the oil. These natural processes are evaporation, water-in-
oil (w/o) emulsification, oil-in-water (o/w) dispersion, and dissolution of oil components into the
water column, spreading, sedimentation, oxidation and biodegradation. A common term for all of
these natural processes is weathering. Figure 13 illustrates the various weathering processes
taking place. The relative contribution of each process varies during the duration of the spill
(Figure 14).
Figure 13 Weathering processes that take place when oil is spilt on the sea surface.
73
74
The behaviour of spilled crude oils and refined oil products depends on:
• physico-chemical properties of the spilled oil and its propensity to disperse into the water
column or to form stable water-in-oil (w/o) emulsions on the sea surface.
• release conditions (the rate and amount of oil spilled, surface release or underwater release,
presence of gas etc.).
• the ambient conditions (e.g. temperature, sea-state, currents).
Evaporation, natural dispersion and emulsification are the most important processes affecting the
fate of the oil on the sea surface, and the relative importance of the different processes with time
is illustrated in Figure 14.
Figure 14 Weathering processes’ relative importance with time.
74
75
6 Weathering methodology in the laboratory

6.1 Bench-scale weathering studies
In Norway, the weathering properties of crude oils and fuel oils are studied in the laboratory using
a “stepwise” weathering procedure of the “fresh” crude oil including evaporation and water-in-oil
emulsification. The laboratory data from various weathered oil samples generated in the
laboratories form the basis for the input in SINTEF Oil Weathering Model (OWM) for prediction of
the weathering behaviour of oils at different weather conditions. A detailed description of the
SINTEF weathering methodology including small- and meso-scale laboratory testing of oils and
modelling of weathering behaviour of oils is given by eg. Daling et al., 1990, Johansen, 1991,
Hokstad et al., 1993, and Daling and Strøm, 1999.
A small-scale laboratory procedure to characterize the weathering properties of different oils has
been refined and standardized (Daling et al., 1997). To isolate influence of different weathering
processes (i.e. evaporative loss, photo-oxidation and water-in-oil emulsification), topped oil
residues and water-in-oil emulsions (altogether 16 weathered samples) are prepared in a “step-
wise” way from the fresh oil as schematically shown in Figure 15. These weathered samples
represent various stages (weathering times) at sea. The samples are characterized to determine
the changes in physico-chemical and emulsifying properties as well as the chemical dispersibility
(Daling et al., 1990). The experimental data created from this laboratory investigation (see Table
37) form a basic input for predicting the weathering behaviour of the different oils at sea by use of
the SINTEF Oil Weathering Model (OWM).
Figure 15 Stepwise weathering (evaporation and water-in-oil emulsification) of crude oil. The
four water-free samples are evaporation residues. Emulsions with three different water contents
(water-to-oil ratios = WOR) are also prepared.
75
76
6.2 Meso-scale flume basin studies

When studying weathering effects on different oils, it is important that the oils are exposed to
weathering conditions as realistic as possible. At SINTEF, a meso-scale flume basin has been
constructed (Figure 16). Cedre in France has a similar “Polludrome”. The flume has been
carefully designed to simulate the weathering processes (i.e., evaporative loss, photo-oxidation,
natural dispersion, emulsification, dissolution etc.) which take place at sea. The elliptical flume is
9 m in circumference, 0.5 m wide and has a water depth of 0.4 m giving a volume of
approximately 1.75 m3 of sea water circulating in the flume. Wave energy is supplied by an
adjustable wave generator. Various wind velocities and water currents can be created by two
fans placed in a wind tunnel and water pumps at the sea bottom (Singsaas et al., 1993).
Figure 16 SINTEF meso-scale flume basin for weathering studies of oils.
A large number of experiments have been carried out in the flume basin under different
environmental (i.e., tropical, North Sea and arctic) conditions by varying parameters like oil type,
temperature, wave-energy, salinity etc. The flume basin has demonstrated to provide reliable
conditions for studying the weathering properties of different oil types and for testing the
performance of dispersants. The flume basin acts as a link between bench-scale laboratory
studies and full-scale field experiments. Correlations between experiments in the SINTEF flume
and ground-truth data from field experiments are discussed by Strøm-Kristiansen et al., 1997.
The flume basin has become an important supplement to the small-scale (stepwise) weathering
procedure to give data input to the SINTEF-OWM used for predicting oils behaviour at sea. The
SINTEF methodology for investigating weathering properties at sea, as described above, has
now been adopted by oil spill laboratories in France, Italy, Vietnam UK and USA.
76
77
7 Operational tools for prediction of weathering behaviour

7.1 Modelling of oil weathering behaviour
The laboratory data from various weathered oil samples generated in the laboratories form the
basis for the input in models for prediction of the weathering behaviour of oils at different weather
conditions.
The behaviour of spilled crude oils and refined oil products on the sea surface depends on the
prevailing conditions (e.g. temperature, sea-state, current) and on the chemical composition of
the oil. Large variations in oil properties cause them to behave differently when spilled at sea.
The SINTEF OWM is one weathering model which relates oil properties to a chosen set of
conditions (oil/emulsion film thickness, sea state and sea temperature) and predicts the rate in
change of an oils properties and behaviour on the sea surface (Aamo et al., 1993; Daling et al,
1997), and is schematically shown in Figure 17.
Figure 17 Schematic diagram of the input data to the SINTEF OWM and the predicted output
oil properties.
The predictions obtained are a useful tool in Environmental Impact Assessment studies,
contingency planning and NEBA. The predictions are in this report presented over a time period
of 15 minutes to 5 days after the oil spill has occurred. This covers potential spill situations where
the response time is short (e. g. close to terminals) to offshore spills where the response time can
be several days.
The spill scenario (e.g. sub-sea or surface blowouts, tanker spills, pipeline leakage etc.) and
release rate chosen when using the SINTEF OWM is of importance. A surface release at a rate
of 1.33 metric tons per minute was chosen as the spill scenario in this report. For residual fuel
oils an initial film thickness of 20 mm and terminal film thickness of 2 mm are used.
77
78
The validity of the predictions has in recent years been documented by correlation studies to field
data from experimental oil spills (Daling and Strøm, 1999 and Moldestad et al., 2004). Examples
from field trial in 1994 are shown in Figure 20 and Figure 21. The weathering predictions are
based on weathering data from laboratory studies as described in 6.1. Example of input data is
shown in Table 37. The correlations between oil weathering values predicted by the SINTEF-
OWM (based on laboratory and meso-scale weathering input data) and ground-truth data were
very good.
The strength of the SINTEF-OWM lies in the continuous evolution of empirical algorithms based
on good data from experimental field trials performed for the last 15 years in Norway. The
importance of having good experimental laboratory weathering data of the specific oil as input to
the model is also a key element for obtaining reliable weathering predictions. Synthetic
weathering data derived from crude assay data of the fresh oil give only tentative predictions, and
with accuracy that is not satisfactory in connection to good contingency planning and as a
reliable support for countermeasure decision making. Example of emulsion viscosity and mass
balance (lifetime) at sea for a crude oil at summer and winter conditions is shown in Figure 18
and Figure 19. All weathering prediction for one crude oil is shown in APPENDIX B Weathering
predictions for Grane crude oil.
78
79
Property: VISCOSITY OF EMULSION

Oil Type: STATFJORD C BLEND
Description: TBP from Statoil
OWModel 3.0.1
Data Source: SINTEF Applied Chemistry (2000), Weathering data used
© 2006
Surface release - Terminal Oil film thickness: 1 mm

Release rate/duration: 1.33 metric tons/minute for 15 minute(s) Pred. date: Mar. 16, 2006
Wind Speed (m/s): 15 Chemically dispersible (<1700 cP)

Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Reduced chemical dispersibility
Wind Speed (m/s): 5 Poorly / slowly chemically dispersible (>14500 cP)
Wind Speed (m/s): 2
Winter Conditions (5 °C)

100000
10000
Viscosity (cP)
1000
100
10
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Summer Conditions (15 °C)

100000
10000
Viscosity (cP)
1000
100
10
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Based on viscosity measurements carried out at a shear rate of 10 reciprocal seconds.

Chemical dispersability information based on experiments under standard laboratory conditions.
Figure 18 Prediction of emulsion viscosity at sea at winter and summer conditions (example).
79
80
Property: MASS BALANCE

Oil Type: STATFJORD C BLEND
Description: TBP from Statoil
OWModel 3.0.1
Data Source: SINTEF Applied Chemistry (2000), Weathering data used
© 2006

Evaporated
Surface
Naturally dispersed
Temperature: 5 °C Wind speed: 10 m/s

100
80
60
Mass (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

100
80
60
Mass (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 19 Prediction of mass balance at sea at winter conditions (example).
80
81
Property: Evaporation
Temperature (°C) : 10
Wind Speed (m/s): 7,5 - 10
2.0 © 2002
Initial film thickness (mm) : 10
Pred. Dato: April 30, 2003
Termianl film thickness (mm) : 1
100
90 Sture 1994
80
Field data
Evaporation (Vol%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 20 Predicted evaporation with SINTEFs OWM and field data from field trial in the
North Sea 1994 with Sture blend crude.
Property: Emulsion viscosity

Temperature (°C) : 10
Wind Speed (m/s): 7,5 - 10
Initial film thickness (mm) : 10 2.0 © 2002
Terminal film thickness (mm) : 1 Pred. Dato: April 30, 2003
100000
Sture 1994
Field data
Emulsion viscosity (cP)
10000
1000
100
10
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 21 Predicted emulsion viscosity with SINTEFs OWM and field data from field trial in
the North Sea 1994 with Sture blend crude.
81
82
7.2 Weathering prediction based on laboratory studies
The input data is based on the laboratory weathering studies of the oils (Table 37) as described
in Chapter 6.1.
Table 37 Example of experimental data from laboratory weathering investigation of Troll

crude oil used as input to the SINTEF-OWM
Oil type Troll North Sea Crude
Data source SINTEF
Product Crude
Location North sea
Year 1995
Description Troll crude
Lab weathering data: Fresh Oil topping (vapour TBP-curve
crude temperature
o
150 200 C+ 250 Temperature, Volume,
o o o
Property C+ residue C+ C %
residue residue
o
Boiling (liquid) temp., C - 210 255 300 90 3,04
Volume topped, % 0 8 15 24 150 9,57
Residue, wt% 100 93 87 78 180 13,83
Specific gravity, g/l 0,893 0,903 0,909 0,919 240 24,49
o
Pour point, C -39 -15 -9 3 320 45,71
o
Flash point, C 3 50 80 119 375 57,21
o
Viscosity at 13 C, cP 27 49 83 200 420 63,59
Viscosity 50% emulsion, - 343 593 1300 525 83,78
cP - 1815 2673 4790 565 87,00
Viscosity 75% emulsion, - - - -
cP - 75 75 75
Viscosity max water, cP - 0,09 0,07 0,13
Max water content, % - 0,78 1 1
Halftime water uptake, hr
Stability ratio
-1
Chemical dispersibility (viscosity ranges, cP at shear 10 s )
Dispersible: < 3000 cP
Reduced dispersibility: 3000 – 7000 cP
Poorly/slowly dispersible: > 7000 cP
82
83
7.3 Use of oil weathering predictions by Norwegian authorities
The SINTEF OWM is implemented at Norwegian Coastal Administration (NCA). NCA is

responsible for the governmental oil spill contingency in Norway. The Norwegian Coast Guard
has acquired the model as an important support tool in the governmental oil spill contingency,
both when it comes to training and rehearsals in the governmental contingency organisation, and
also when planning and dimensioning the governmental oil spill contingency. With major acute oil
spill incidents the model is used in an early phase of the contingency response. In the Norwegian
Coast Guard contingency organisation dedicated personnel is responsible for the use of the
model and producing information about the behaviour of the oil on sea. Together with other
information, the results from running the model give the operation management a foundation for
making decisions on which combat methods are most suitable, e.g. if the use of dispersants
might be a possibility. In addition, the model gives a display of the amounts of oil that might be in
the marine environment and which problems you face concerning the extent of the collection and
the disposal of oil from the sea.
83
84
8 Examples of weathering behaviour of a selection of crude

oils and fuel oils
8.1 Weathering behaviour of a selection of different Norwegian crude
oils
Examples of evaporation, pour point, density of oil, water uptake and emulsion viscosity for a
broad selection of Norwegian crude oils are shown in Figure 22, Figure 23, Figure 24, Figure 25
and Figure 26. Figure 22 shows high evaporation for the Midgard condensate. The paraffinic
crude oils Statfjord and Åsgard have a higher evaporation than the other crude oils. The
asphaltenic crude oil Grane has a much lower evaporation. Figure 23 shows that the pour point
of the waxy Norne crude oil is high all the time. For Åsgard and Statfjord the pour point is
increasing to the same level as for Norne due to high evaporation. Figure 25 shows that the
water emulsification ability is very different for the crude oils. Åsgard emulsify 50% water after
some days at sea, Statfjord emulsifies 70%. The Midgard condensate does not emulsify, this is
typical for condensates. Emulsion viscosity is important for oil spill combat operations. Figure 26
shows that the viscosity of the crude oils after some days at sea varies from 10 000 to 70 000 cP
but that the increase.
Figure 27 shows that the lifetime at sea for Åsgard and Grane crude oils and Midgard
condensate is very different. The condensate has a very high evaporation and is easily dispersed
naturally into the water. Grane has a longer lifetime at the surface due to lower evaporation and
natural dispersion than Åsgard.
Typical weathering behavior for different categories of crude oils (categorization according to
Figure 2) is:
• Paraffinic crude oils like Statfjord and Åsgard:

High evaporation, medium viscosity, medium natural dispersion
• Waxy crude oils like Norne:

Medium to high evaporation, medium to high viscosity, high pour point, low to medium
natural dispersion
• Naphtenic crude oils like Troll:

Medium evaporation, low emulsifying, high natural dispersion
• Asphaltic crude oils like Grane:

Low evaporation, high viscosity, medium to low natural dispersion
The weathering behavior of crude oils may be very different when spilt at sea and has to be
taken into account during a combat operation.
84
85
Property: Evaporative loss

2.0 © 2002
Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Pred. Dato: Febr, 28. 2006
Grane
Sea temperature 15°C
100 Midgard condensate
90 Norne
80 Statfjord
70
Troll
Evaporated (%)
60
Åsgard
50
40
30
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 22 Evaporation at sea for a selection of Norwegian crude oils at sea temperature
15°C.
Property: Pour point

2.0 © 2002

50
40
Grane
30
Midgard condensate
20
Pour point (°C)
Norne
10
Statfjord
0
Troll
-10
Åsgard
-20
-30
-40
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 23 Pour point at sea for a selection of Norwegian crude oils at sea temperature 15°C.
85
86
Property: Density of oil

2.0 © 2002
Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Pred. Dato: Febr, 28 2006

980
960 Grane
940 Midgard condensate
920
Density (kg/m3)
Norne
900
Statfjord
880
Troll
860
Åsgard
840
820
800
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 24 Density of emulsion for a selection of Norwegian crude oils at sea temperature
15°C.
Property: Water content

2.0 © 2002

100
90 Grane
80
Midgard condensate
70
Water content (%)
Norne
60
50 Statfjord
40
Troll
30
Åsgard
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 25 Water uptake at sea for a selection of Norwegian crude oils at sea temperature
15°C.
86
87
Property: Viscosity of Emulsion

2.0 © 2002

100000
Grane
Midgard condensate
10000
Norne
Viscosity (cP)
Statfjord
1000
Troll
Åsgard
100
10
1
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 26 Emulsion viscosity at sea for a selection of Norwegian crude oils at sea
temperature 15°C.
Figure 27 Lifetime at sea for different crude oils and condensate.
87
88
8.2 Weathering behaviour of some crude oils transported in European

waters
The weathering properties of some the crude oils imported to Rotterdam in 2004 are shown in
Figure 28, Figure 29, Figure 30 and Figure 31. The crude oils shown are selected among the oils
imported in largest volume in 2004. The weathering predictions are based on laboratory data as
described in 6.1 and 7.2. The predictions show a large variability in fate and behaviour of
different crude oils at sea.
Some crude oil data for a limited number of Russian crude oil is presented in Appendix A. It is
likely that the variability in weathering behaviour for the Russian crude oils is very large as also
seen for the Rotterdam oils presented here.

2.0 © 2002
Arabian Heavy
60 Arabian Light
Gullfaks A/B
50
Kuwait export blend
Oseberg C
40
Evaporated (%)
Ural Baltic (Russian export

blend)
30 Åsgard
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 28 Evaporation at sea for some selected crude oils imported to Rotterdam at sea
temperature 15°C.
88
89
Property: Pour Point

2.0 © 2002
Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Pred. Dato: Febr. 28, 2006
Arabian Heavy
50 Arabian Light
Gullfaks A/B
40
Kuwait export blend
30
Oseberg C
20
Pour Point (°C)
Ural Baltic (Russian

10 export blend)
Åsgard
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 29 Pour point at sea for some selected crude oils imported to Rotterdam at sea
temperature 15°C.

2.0 © 2002
Arabian Heavy
100 Arabian Light
90 Gullfaks A/B
80 Kuwait export blend
70 Oseberg C
Water content (%)
60 Ural Baltic (Russian

export blend)
50 Åsgard
40
30
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 30 Water uptake at sea for some selected crude oils imported to Rotterdam at sea
temperature 15°C.
89
90

2.0 © 2002
Arabian Heavy
100000 Arabian Light
Gullfaks A/B
Kuwait export blend

10000
Oseberg C
Viscosity (cP)
Ural Baltic (Russian export

blend)
1000 Åsgard
100
10
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 31 Emulsion viscosity at sea for some selected crude oils imported to Rotterdam at
sea temperature 15°C.
90
91
8.3 Weathering behaviour for some residual fuel oils

The weathering behaviour of some residual fuel oils is shown in Figure 32, Figure 33, Figure 34
and Figure 35. Generally, fuel oils have low evaporation (the cutter stock added is also a
distillation product lacking the lightest components from crude oils). The pour point is very
different, fuel oils based on paraffinic crude oils like IFO 180 from Esso refinery at Slagen has a
high pour point. The viscosity of fuel oils is high. Although the viscosity of the three IFO 180 oils
is the same at 50°C (180 cSt at 50°C), the viscosity at realistic spill temperatures may be very
different (Figure 35).

2.0 © 2002
IFO 30
100
IFO 180 Esso
90
IFO 180 Shell
80
IFO 180 Statoil
70
Evaporated (%)
IFO 380
60
50 Prestige
40
30
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 32 Evaporation at sea for some selected IFO’s at sea temperature 15°C.
91
92
Property: Pour Point

2.0 © 2002
Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Pred. Dato: Febr. 28, 2006
IFO 30
30
IFO 180 Esso
25
IFO 180 Shell
20
IFO 180 Statoil
15
Pour Point (°C)
IFO 380
10
Prestige
5
-5
-10
-15
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 33 Pour point at sea for some selected IFO’s at sea temperature 15°C.

2.0 © 2002
Sea temperature 15°C IFO 30

100
IFO 180 Esso
90
IFO 180 Shell
80
IFO 180 Statoil
70
Water content (%)
60 IFO 380
50 Prestige
40
30
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 34 Water uptake at sea for some selected IFO’s at sea temperature 15°C.
92
93
Property: Emulsion viscosity

2.0 © 2002
IFO 30
1000000
IFO 180 Esso
IFO 180 Shell
100000 IFO 180 Statoil

Viscosity (cP)
IFO 380
10000 Prestige
1000
100
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 35 Emulsion viscosity at sea for some selected IFO’s at sea temperature 15°C.
93
94
9 Weathering behaviour related to different combat methods

9.1 Why is knowledge about oil properties, fate and weathering
behavior of importance?
One of the main reasons for studying the properties of oils on the sea surface is its effect on oil
spill countermeasures. Good knowledge about the specific oils properties is crucial in connection
with Net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA), contingency planning and decision making in
spill situations. This knowledge will form the basis for rapid and right decision-making during
combat operations.
Some examples of the direct impact of emulsion properties in oil spill response operations are
described below.
9.2 Lifetime of a slick on the sea surface

One of the first tasks in an oil spill response operation is to assess the lifetime of the slick on the
sea surface. If the oil’s estimated lifetime is short mobilisation of oil spill countermeasures may
not be needed.
The two processes contributing to the removal of oil from the sea surface is evaporation and
natural dispersion. For most crude oils natural dispersion is the main contributor to removing oil
from the sea surface. Figure 36 shows predictions of the lifetime of slicks of different oils on the
sea surface. A slicks lifetime on the sea surface is very dependent on the release conditions and
weather conditions. The example below is only representative to one specific set of release
conditions (i.e. thick enough to form emulsion on the surface), temperature and wind speed.
94
95
Property: Remaining surface oil

2.0 © 2002
Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Pred. Date: April, 26. 2004
IFO 650
Summer Conditions (15°C)
100
IFO 380
90
80 IFO 30
70
Remaining oil (%)
Grane
60
Statfjord
50
40 Åsgard
30
20
10
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 36 Predicted lifetime of different oils at the sea surface. The oil is removed from the
surface by evaporation and natural dispersion.
The relatively light Åsgard crude has a limited lifetime on the sea surface while the heavy bunker
fuel oils are persistent to natural dispersion and can survive for weeks and months on the sea
surface.
The thickness within an oil slick varies highly in a surface release spill. Figure 37 shows predicted
lifetime of a Norwegian crude oil as function of oil film thickness and wind conditions. The
predictions show how important it is to make priority to the thick w/o-emulsion within the slick
during a response operation.
95
96
PROPERTY: REMAINING OIL ON SEA SURFACE
2.0 © 2002
2 m/s 5 m/s 10 m/s 15 m/s
Pred. Dato: July. 29, 2004
0.3 um film thickness (sheen BAOAC code)

100
remaining on sea surface (%)
80
60
40
20
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
2.0 © 2002
2 m/s 5 m/s 10 m/s 15 m/s
5 um film thickness (rainbow BAOAC code)

100
80
60
40
20
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
2.0 © 2002
2 m/s 5 m/s 10 m/s 15 m/s
50um film thickness (metallic BAOAC code)

100
80
60
40
20
0
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 37 Lifetime of Heidrun crude oil at different oil film thickness.
96
97
9.3 Mechanical recovery

Past experiences from Norwegian field trials have shown that the effectiveness of many
mechanical clean up operations is reduced due to a high degree of leakage of the confined oil or
w/o-emulsion from the boom systems (especially in high current). This leakage is especially
pronounced if the viscosity of the oil or the w/o-emulsion is lower than 1000 mPas (at a shear
rate of 10s-1) (Nordvik et al., 1992). It is therefore often recommended to let the oil weather to a
viscosity of minimum 1000 mPas before recovery in order to optimize the recovery operation.

2.0 © 2002
Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Pred. Date: April, 26 2004 IFO 650
IFO 380
Winter Conditions (5°C) IFO 30

1000000
Grane
Statfjord
100000 Åsgard
Viscosity (mPas)
limited weir skimmer

efficiency
10000
Area for limited efficieny for

skimmers
1000 limit for boom leakage
100
0,25 0,5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Figure 38 Predicted viscosities of a selection of crude oils and fuel oils.
When using skimmers to recover oils both too high viscosity and too high pour point may reduce
the efficiency of the skimmer. Tests performed by SINTEF using a weir skimmer showed that the
efficiency may be reduced for semi-solid and solidified oils (i.e. oils with a high wax content and
pour point values higher than 10-15°C above ambient sea temperature) and for oils with
viscosities above approximately 10000-20000 mPas (Leirvik et al., 2001). For oils with viscosities
above these values, or with high yield stress values, skimmer equipment requiring the oil to
passively spread towards the skimmer may render useless, and special equipment for high
viscous oil recovery may be needed. Picture from testing of weir skimmer with weathered Norne
oil is shown in Figure 39.
Figure 38 shows variations in emulsion viscosities between different oils with weathering on the
sea surface. As for limitations in skimmer efficiency some of the oils will always have viscosities
above the critical limit, some will obtain critical viscosities with time on the sea surface, and some
will never cause problems in a mechanical recovery operation even after days of weathering on
the sea surface. Knowledge about the viscosity of the emulsions formed is crucial in the choice of
skimmer equipment concept both in contingency planning and in the case of a spill situation.
97
98
Figure 39 : Weir skimmer and the waxy Norne crude oil (weathered).
9.4 Use of chemical dispersants

One of the means in oil-spill contingency for combating oil slicks is the application of oil spill
dispersants. Dispersant are working in the same way as a household soap, stabilizing the
formation of small oil droplets, enhancing the mixing of oil into the water. The purpose of using oil
spill dispersants is to remove spilled oil from the surface and dilute it into the bulk of the water
column as droplets at a faster rate than occurring naturally. The appropriate use of dispersants
could prevent subsequent shoreline pollution or damage to other sensitive areas / resources. A
schematic picture of how dispersants work is shown in Figure 40.
Effective use of dispersants depends on chemical interactions between the added chemicals and
naturally occurring components within the oil (e.g. wax, asphaltenes, resins). Oils have different
chemical composition, causing variations in their ability to interact with the dispersants. This
gives a great variation in the potential for use of dispersants between different oils. Viscosity and
pour point will also be important to the effect of the use of chemical dispersants. A high viscosity
or high pour point of the oil will give poor mixing between oil and chemical dispersant, and will
also cause the oil to resist being mixed into the water by wave energy.
98
99
Figure 40 Dispersion of oil into water.
The methodology used in Norway for defining the "window of opportunity" for use of dispersants
is described in detail by Daling and Strøm (1999). Laboratory data on weathering properties and
dispersibility is used as input to the OWM for prediction of the "window of opportunity". Figure 41
shows the "window of opportunity" divided into categories (easily, reduced and poorly
dispersible) for a selection of Norwegian crude oils with weathering on the sea surface.
99
100
Figure 41 Window of opportunity for the use of chemical dispersants for a selection of
Norwegian crude oils.
Figure 41 shows examples on the “time-window” for effective use of dispersants for different
Norwegian crude oils. As the oils hold different chemical properties, the potential for use of
dispersants is not directly correlating with the viscosity of the emulsion. The predicted “window of
opportunity” for use of dispersants is important to take into account in oil-spill contingency
planning and in operational decision making in spill situations.
100
101
8.4 Use of chemical dispersants in European countries

The national attitude to the use of oil spill dispersants differs in European coastal States
countries for a number of reasons. These reasons include previous experience in use of
dispersants both through experimental filed trials and real oil spills incidents and the nature of the
waters under national control. The difference in national attitudes to dispersant use are based on
commonly shared principles of minimizing the damage that may be caused by oil spills; the
differences arise from the different conditions in the seas, not a disagreement about the potential
usefulness of oil spill dispersants in oil spill response.
The European coastal States can be broadly grouped into four geographical areas:
• Baltic Sea coastal States
• North Sea coastal States
• Atlantic Ocean coastal States
• Mediterranean Sea coastal States
Some States have coastlines in two of these geographical areas.
The Baltic Sea coastal states - the Contracting Parties to the Helcom Convention – have evolved
a policy that has generally preferred mechanical containment and recovery (booms and
skimmers) to dispersant use. This is because the Baltic Sea is an almost enclosed sea with very
limited water exchange with the North Sea, has low salinity, ice-cover in winter and the sensitivity
of the ecological resources. Dispersant use could be permitted in some circumstances.
The North Sea coastal States – the Contracting Parties to the Bonn Agreement – have evolved a
policy that is broadly in favour of dispersant use in the North Sea because there is sufficient
water exchange for dispersant use and sea conditions often limit the usefulness of mechanical
recovery. National regulations control the use of dispersants on spilled oil in shallow water. North
Sea coastal States with smaller areas of water of limited depth, such as the Netherlands, have
historically favoured mechanical recovery, but dispersant use would now be permitted in certain
circumstances.
Of the Atlantic Ocean coastal States, France and the UK (both also being North Sea coastal
States) have large stockpiles of oil spill dispersants, specialized dispersant spraying equipment
and fully developed approval procedures for dispersant purchase and use. Other States, such as
Spain and Portugal, are developing dispersant policies.
The general attitude of the Mediterranean Sea coastal states – Contracting Parties of the
Barcelona Convention – is intermediate between that of the North Sea coastal states and the
Baltic Sea states; dispersants can be used, but their use is restricted in areas of shallow water
with limited water exchange.
101
102
10 Use oil spill response simulations for contingency

planning and NEBA-analysis
This chapter is also reported by Daling et al., 2002.
10.1 The "Net Environmental Benefit Analysis” (NEBA) approach

The general goal of any oil spill response is very clear: the response should reduce the negative
effects (environmental, amenity or financial) that could be caused by the oil spill if no response
were undertaken. This is easy to define in principle, but much more difficult to translate into
practice because it does not define concrete performance targets. It is necessary to predict the
total amount of damage that an oil spill would cause before estimating how much of this damage
would be prevented by the proposed response. This process has been formalized as the NEBA
process ("Net Environmental Benefit Analysis") of a combat operation (e.g. Baker, 1995 and
1997). It requires considering the overall environmental effects of the response and non-
response, rather than concentrating on more limited, but much more easily defined aspects, such
as the amount of oil recovered, dispersed or burned or the consequences to one particular
natural resource.
10.2 “Oil Spill Contingency and Response” (OSCAR) model system

The OSCAR model system has been developed to supply a tool for objective analysis of
alternative spill response strategies. OSCAR provides a basis for comprehensive, quantitative
environmental impact assessments in the marine environment. Key components of the system,
shown schematically in Figure 42, are SINTEF’s Oil Weathering Model (see chapter 7.1), a three-
dimensional oil trajectory and chemical fates model (Reed et al, 1995b), an oil spill combat model
(Aamo et al., 1996), and exposure models for fish and ichthyoplankton (Reed et al, 1995a, 1996),
birds, and marine mammals (Downing and Reed, 1996). The model calculates and records the
distribution in three physical dimensions plus residence time of a contaminant on the water
surface, along shorelines, in the water column, and in the sediments. The model is embedded
within a graphical user interface in WINDOWS NT, which facilitates linkages to a variety of
databases and tools. The latter allow the user to create or import wind time series, current fields,
and grids of arbitrary spatial resolution.
102
103
Environmental
Data Base
Oil Response
Characteristics Options
Data Base Data Base
FATES COMBAT
SINTEF - OWM
Spill Trajectory Strategic
Oil Weathering
and Response Model
Model
Plume Model
Biological Exposure Models

Passive Drift (fish eggs, larvae)
Active Swimming (adult fish)
Migration and Feeding (birds,
marine mammals)
Measures of Success:
Mass Recovered or Dispersed
Reduced Environmental Exposures
- ashore
- water surface
- water column
adm4200/tegner/paper/MR3-96.eps
Figure 42 Schematic overview of the OSCAR system.
An oil and chemical database supplies chemical and toxicological parameters required by the
model. Results of model simulations are stored at discrete time-steps in computer files, which are
then available as input to biological exposure models. OSCAR therefore represents a very strong
established basis for development of a comprehensive system for Net Environmental Benefit
Analysis. The OSCAR model system is under continuous development, with the present focus on
improving the description of the exposure to the water column. This includes e.g. a more detailed
quantitative picture of the chemical exposure of dispersed oil, dissolved oil compounds (and
eventually dispersants) and of the potential biological effects / risk to marine organisms as
function of dilution and oil weathering of different spill scenarios with and without dispersant
response.
10.3 Case study - Use of OSCAR in contingency planning around a

coastal oil terminal
Both the Norwegian Authorities and oil companies use OSCAR for designing more optimal,
functional and cost-effective contingency solutions for offshore and coastal areas.
This section gives examples from the development of a dispersant use contingency plan for the
Sture oil terminal in Norway. Details of the legislative framework and development process
behind the plan are described in Reed et al., 1997. The terminal receives oil via a pipeline from
the Oseberg field. The terminal is situated in the open Hjeltefjord (Figure 43) with the main axis
from north-west to south-east. Typical for most of the Norwegian coastline, the area is rich in
wildlife resources, as well as aqua-culture installations. Due to strong currents in the fjord
(typically 0.5 m/sec.), the potential for use of traditional mechanical booming and recovery can be
103
104
limited. Dispersant application is therefore an interesting option. However, the decision on

whether or not use dispersants in given spill situation must be made extremely rapidly, due to the
short oil drifting time (a few hours) from the terminal to sensitive sites.
4 40« 4 40« 4 50« 5
Protected Areas
in Hjelte Fjord
60 Fens Fjord
50«
60
50«
Fedje Fosnøy
60
40«
Hje
Radøy
lte
60
40«
Fjo
Seløy
rd
Alvøy
Sture Terminal
Holsnøy
One
Dispersion zone
Nature reserve (Land)
Recreation area (Land)
Permanently licensed for salmon/marine species
Temporarily licensed for salmon/marine species
Permanently licensed for shellfish
Nature reserve (Sea)
Blomøy
Recreation area (Sea)
Spawning grounds
60 Aqua culture
30«
Suitable for fish farming
0 5 km Askøy
60
1996 30«
4 40« 4 40« 4 50« 5
Figure 43 Natural resources of interest around the Sture terminal in Hjeltefjorden.
104
105
10.3.1 Oil spill scenario modelling

OSCAR was used to simulate a series of 24 oil spill scenarios to quantify the environmental
effects of alternate spill response strategies under various environmental conditions (5 and 10
m/s wind), spill sizes of 10 and 100 m3 were used, representing the most probable events. For
each spill scenario, three response options were compared:
1. No response:
2. Mechanical response ;
3. Mechanical response, combined with dispersant application from helicopter starting
after 1 ½ hours.
In general, the scenario simulations using the OSCAR model show that the existing mechanical
response capability is adequate for response to spills up to 100 m3 except in a few situations. In
these cases, the inclusion of dispersant application from helicopter, using a large spray bucket
will prevent oil from reaching sensitive shorelines.
10.3.2 Potential effects in the water column

The proper use of dispersants results in the removal of oil from the water surface to the water
column. The resulting dispersion of oil droplets increases the total hydrocarbon concentration
(THC) in the water column. In addition, dissolution of water-soluble oil components from the
droplets may increase the dissolved hydrocarbon concentration, and therefore the potential for
toxic effects.
The OSCAR Model is three-dimensional, and produces realistic, verified water column
concentrations of both total and dissolved hydrocarbons. These dissolved oil compounds, called
Water Accommodated Fraction (WAF), are generally considered to be the main source for a
potential acute toxic effect on marine organisms (e.g. Neff, 1995, McAuliffe, 1987). Many
Norwegian coastal areas are used extensively for aqua-culture, in which fish are confined to
relatively small areas within the top 10 or 15 m of the water column. Potential exposure of
confined fish is therefore of considerable interest, both in terms of possible toxic effects as well as
tainting of flesh. The recent version of OSCAR (“OSCAR-2000”), allows to record detailed
information on both the total oil (THC) and of the WAF composition (up to 26 individual
compounds or component groups) in the water column in space and time (Reed, 2001).
Figure 44 depicts the modelled total oil concentration (THC) in the water column 3 hours after a
100 m3 oil spill, with mechanical response. The wind is from the north-west at 5 m/s; the currents
are towards the south at 25 cm/s. The vertical section at the top of the figure gives the
concentration profile along the axis of the arrow. Maximum concentrations are in the range 0.1 to
0.5 ppm. The application of dispersants 90 minutes after the release increases the peak THC-
concentrations in the area of application (Figure 44) to 10-20 ppm locally. The vertical section in
fig. 11 shows that this concentration is mixed down to about 12 m, as compared to about 6 - 8 m
in the case of natural dispersion. This difference in vertical mixing occurs because the application
of dispersant reduces the mean drop size from about 350 um to less than 50 um (Lunel, 1993),
thus decreasing the buoyancy.
105
106
Figure 44 Total simulated hydrocarbon concentrations (THC) in the water column 3 hours
after release. A): Mechanical response, 5 m/s wind, 25 cm/s current towards southeast. Section
at top shows vertical concentration profile along axis of arrow. B): Mechanical response,
combined with dispersant application after 90 minutes.
Figure 45 shows the time series of maximum computed concentrations of the volatile aromatics
(benzene - toluene - xylene, BTX) of the WAF for three cases: no response at 10 m/s, and
application of dispersants after 1.5 hour for both 5 and 10 m/s winds. The potential for highest
concentration of volatile aromatics in the water column is within the first hour after release.
Thereafter, the concentration will decrease due to the rapid evaporation rate of these aromatics
from the surface slick. The concentration becomes higher at 10 m/s wind (breaking waves)
compared to 5 m/s (non-breaking waves) due to dissolution into the water column from the
naturally dispersed oil droplets. By the time the dispersant is applied, most of these low
aromatics have already been removed from the surface oil by the processes of evaporation and
dissolution. The BTX concentration profile predicted in Figure 45 is in good agreement with
measurements under oil slicks ( e.g. Brandvik et al 1996).
106
107
200
180 Dispersant, 10m/s
160 Dispersant, 5m/s
Concentration (ppb)
No respons, 10m/s
140
120
100
80
Dispersant treated at 10 m/s
60
40
20
0
0 Dispersant 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
No respons
Treatment
Time (days)
Figure 45 Maximum computed concentration of BTX’es (benzene-toluene-xylenes) beneath

the oil slick during simulation of a 100 m3 spill. The two curves for 10 m/s winds, with and without
dispersant application, overlie each other prior to dispersant application (1.5 hours after release),
and only small differences in the BTX concentration are observed after treatment.
10.3.3 Development of Dispersant-Effectiveness Maps for Decision Support

Maps to support decision-making were developed for the geographical area around the terminal.
These maps are color transparencies printed to the same scale as the standard marine chart of
the area, such that they can be overlaid without obscuring reference points on the chart. The
maps show the percentage of a slick which is expected to disperse prior to beaching, given that
the slick is properly treated (i.e. 1:20 dispersant-to-oil ratio). Maps were produced both for spills
at the terminal, and for slicks which may escape from the terminal area into the open fjord.
Figure 46 shows a map simulating spill releases at the terminal. Such maps were developed for a
given current field and wind speed, with variable wind direction. In addition to the percentage of a
slick, which is expected to disperse prior to beaching, these maps include time-of-travel contours
showing drift time from the terminal. The times-of-travel are minimum expected times, since they
are based on maximum observed currents. Figure 46 is an example for currents into the fjord
(towards the southeast) at 25 cm/s, and winds of 5 m/s in any direction. The figure shows that, for
the given current and wind conditions, treatment of a slick with dispersant within 2 hours of
release will generally disperse the main parts of the oil and hence avoid beaching.
Such dispersant-effectiveness maps generated as a part of the oil spill contingency plan, are
intended for use as a support for decision-making both during an actual oil spill response action
and during table-top exercises.
107
108
Figure 46 Dispersant-use map for oil slicks at the oil terminal, with currents towards the
southeast at 25 cm/s, and winds at 5 m/s. The contours show drift times of the spill from the
terminal.
10.4 Use of OSCAR simulations for the Governmental Oil Spill

preparedness in Norway
An environmental risk analysis (see Figure 47) and an oil spill contingency assessment related to
governmental oil spill preparedness have recently been conducted by the Norwegian Pollution
Control Authority (SFT, Hansen et al. 2000). By use of the OSCAR model system, specific
contingency needs have been identified for regions covering all Norwegian waters, including
Svalbard. A contingency level was specified for each geographical region based on dimensioning
108
109
scenarios (oil spills from ships) and national objectives. Each contingency level was
characterised by response time requirements as well as specific requirements towards oil
recovery systems, chemical dispersant systems, emergency off-loading systems, remote sensing
and surveillance, beach cleaning capabilities and human resources.
Colour codes: Low (green), Moderate (yellow), High (red).
Figure 47 “Potential damage categories” for various regions along the Norwegian coast.
Assessments based on environmental risk analysis A) Winter time, B) Summer time (from
Hansen et al., 2000).
Figure 48 shows an example of OSCAR simulation of a spill scenario from one of the region: a
tanker accident in the Oslo Fjord, where 15000 tons of Balder Crude oil was released within 2
hours. The figure summarizes the mass-balance 7 days after release without any response, and
by using the present available response resources in the region (mainly mechanical recovery
systems). Without any response, about 80% of the oil (i.e. about 250% of w/o-emulsions relative
to the amount of oil released) will come on shore, while with response this will be reduced to
about 45%.
109
110
Slagen no response
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
Evaporated
Surface
60 %
Mass balance
Dispersed
Cleaned
50 %
Sediment
Stranded
40 % Decayed
Outside Grid
30 %
20 %
10 %
0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (days)
A
Slagen_new_mek
100 %
90 %
80 % Evaporated
Surface
70 % Dispersed
Cleaned
60 % Sediment
Mass balance
Stranded
50 % Decayed
Outside Grid
40 %
30 %
20 %
10 %
0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (days)
B
Figure 48 OSCAR-simulation of a tanker accident in the Oslo Fjord, with release of 15000
tons of Balder Crude oil. Mass balance 7 days after release. A): No response, B): Use of
available response resources in the region (mainly mechanical recovery systems).
The OSCAR model system have demonstrated to be a very useful tool in pre-spill scenario
analysis in order to quantify fate, oil weathering and potential environmental effects - both on sea
surface and in the water column using alternative response strategies (including use of
dispersants). OSCAR is extensively used today in contingency planning and Net Environmental
Benefit Analyses (NEBA) as a basis for designing functional and cost-effective oil spill
contingency solutions. Such scenario-based response analysis have been performed both in
connection to contingency planning of specific Norwegian coastal and offshore locations /
regions, as well as for dimensioning and optimizing of the governmental oil spill preparedness.
110
111
11 Conclusions
This report has shown:
o The physical and chemical properties of crude oils vary to a large extent.
o The properties of various residual fuels oil differ even within the same IFO-grade due to
differences in the refinery processes, the quality of the feed oil to the refinery process and
variable addition of distillate to give a viscosity at 50°C in accordance with the
specifications.
o Variation in physical and chemical properties influences the weathering properties for oil
at sea.
o Good laboratory data as input to models is therefore crucial in order to obtain realistic
model predictions of the weathering properties at sea.
o The model predictions reveal a large variation in the weathering properties and behaviour
of different crude oils and the various heavy fuel oils, and this variability must be taken
into account in oil spill response planning and decision-making during response
operations.
In order to be able to make right and rapid decisions during a combat operation, knowledge
about weathering behaviour is crucial. For doing reliable contingency planning including scenario
based NEBA-analysis and environmental risk assessment (ERA), is it important to have relevant
documentation of the weathering properties of the specific oil as input to operational model tools.
111
112
The report also gives an overview of the crude oil volumes that are transported in the southern
part of the North Sea. From that overview a top 36 crude oils that represent 90% of all the crude
oils transported have been identified. To fill gaps in weathering property data it is recommended
that 9 of these crude oils undergo laboratory weathering analysis.
For establishing a better system for responding to spills of residual fuel oils 7 types of RFOs is
recommended to undergo laboratory weathering analysis.
The recommended oils are shown in Table 38 and Table 39.
Table 38 Recommendation of crude oils to be tested with respect to weathering properties.

Oil Country Amount Comment
transported in
%
Baltic REBCO Russia 16,14 Suggest to test at least three Russian
crude oils representing a wide spectra
in physico-chemical properties
Brent blend UK 5,3 Important crude oil, limited weathering
property data available, blend may vary
over time
Gullfaks blend Norway 5 Only old weathering data available –
not representative for today’s properties
need to be updated
DUC Denmark DUC is a blend which represent about
80% of the Danish oils
Es Sider Libya 1,37 Important crude oil, transported in
European water. Waxy crude, Available
weathering data unknown
Saharan blend Algeria 1,09 Important crude oil, transported in
European waters. Available weathering
data unknown
Captain UK 1,05 A very heavy North sea crude oil
Table 39 Recommendation of fuel oils to be tested with respect to weathering properties.
Residual Fuel Comment

Oil
RFO Erika ‘Cracked’ residue based RFO from Dunkirk refinery.
Some data available.
RFO Prestige ’Straight-run’ residue based RFO from Russia via
Ventspils. Some data available.
RFO ARA Recent cargo import. Need to source from the
Netherlands.
IFO-380 Low sulphur (<1.5%) “SECA compliant” IFO - 380 grade.
Need to source from bunkering port in Baltic Sea.
IFO-380 Low sulphur (<1.5%) “SECA compliant” IFO - 300 grade.
Need to source from bunkering port in France or UK.
IFO-500 New grade likely to increase in use in future.
IFO-180 Low sulphur (<1.5%) “SECA compliant” IFO grade.
112
113
12 References
Aamo O.M., M. Reed, P.S. Daling, Ø. Johansen, 1993: A laboratory-based weathering model:
PC version for coupling to transport models. In Proceedings of the 16th AMOP seminar,
Environment Canada.
Aamo, O. M., K. Downing, M. Reed., 1996: Calibration, verification, and sensitivity analysis of the
IKU oil spill contingency and response (OSCAR) model system. (In Norwegian). Report No.
42.4048.00/01/96. 87 p. 1996
Baker J.M.: 1995: “Net Environmental Benefit Analysis for Oil Spill Response”. Proceedings of
the 1995 Oil Spill Conference, API, Washington DC, 1995. pp. 611-614.
Baker J.M.: 1997: “Differences in Risk Perception: How Clean I Clean?”. Issue Paper at the 1995
Oil Spill Conference, API, Washington DC, 1997
Brandvik, P.J., T. Strøm-Kristiansen, A. Lewis, P.S. Daling, M. Reed, H. Rye, 1996: The
Norwegian Sea trial 1995. Offshore testing of two dispersant application systems and
Simulation of an underwater pipeline leakage a summary paper. Proceedings of the 19th
AMOP Seminar, June 12-14, 1996, Calgary Canada, pp.1395-1416.
Daling, P. S., O.M. Aamo, A. Lewis, and T. Strøm-Kristiansen, 1997: IKU Oil Weathering Model -
predicting oil’s properties at sea. 1997 International Oil Spill Conference, Fort Lauderdale,
Florida. 2 - 10 April, pp. 297-307.
Daling, P. S., P.J. Brandvik, D. Mackay, Ø. Johansen, 1990: “Characterization of Crude Oils for
Environmental Purposes”. Oil & Chemical Pollution 7, 1990/91, pp. 199-224.
Daling, P.S., I. Singsaas, M. Reed., O. Hansen, 2002: Experiences in Dispersant Treatment of
Experimental Oil Spills. In: Spill Science & Technology Bulletin, Vol. 7, Nos. 5-6, pp.201-213.
Daling, P.S.; T. Strøm: 1999: “Weathering of Oil at Sea; Model/field Data Comparisons”. Spill
Science & Technology Bulletin, 1999, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp 63-74.
Downing, K., M. Reed., 1996: Object-oriented migration modeling for biological impact
assessment. Ecological Modeling 93, pp203-219, 1996.
Grundach, E.R., J.M. Neff, D.I. Little, D.A. Aurand, 1996: Evaluation of historic spill sites for long-
term recovery studies. In Proceedings of the 1995 Oil Spill Conference, API, Washington, DC,
1995. p. 974, 1996.
Hansen,O., Ø. Schreiner, B. Bratfoss and G, Lenes, 2000: “Dimensioning of governmental oil
spill preparedness based on risk analysis”. SFT-report TA-1755/2000, ISBN-number 82-7655-
396-6.
Harris, C, 1995: The Braer incident - Shetland Island, January. In Proceedings of the 1995 Oil
Spill Conference, API Washington, DC, 1995, pp. 813-820, 1995.
Hokstad, J. N., P.S. Daling, A. Lewis, and T. Strøm-Kristiansen, 1993: Methodology for testing
water-in-oil emulsions and demulsifiers Description of laboratory procedures. In Proceedings
Workshop on Formation and Breaking of W/O Emulsions. MSRC, Alberta June 14-15 24p.
1993.
Johansen, Ø., 1991: Numerical modelling of physical properties of weathered North Sea crude
oils. DIWO-report no. 15. IKU-report 02.0786.00/15/91. Open. 1991.
Khatukov, E and Ellen Starostina, Centre for Petroleum Business Studies, 2006. Oil and Gas
Journal, Apr 3rd 2006.
Koopsmans, M.P. and R. Bovelander, 2003: Vervoer van verschillende soorten olie en
chemicalien van en naar de Nederlandse zeehavens ontsloten. RIKZ/OS/2003. 169X (in
Dutch).
113
114
Leirvik, F., M.Ø. Moldestad, Ø. Johansen, 2001: Kartlegging av voksrike råoljers tilflytsevne til
skimmere. SINTEF Report. 2001.
Lewis, A. 2002 : Composition, properties and classification of heavy fuel oils. 3rd R&D Forum on
High-density Oil Spill Response, Brest March 2002.pp 11-25.
Lunel, T., 1993. Dispersion: Measurement of oil spill drop sizes at sea. Proceedings of the 1993
International Oil Spill Conference, pp. 794-795
Lunel, T., J. Rusin, N. Bailey, C. Halliwell, L. Duvis, 1996: A successful at sea response to the
Sea Empress spill. In Proceedings of the 19th AMOP Seminar, 12-14 June 1996, Canada, pp.
1499-1520, 1996.
McAuliffe, C.D., 1987: Organism exposure to volatile / soluble hydrocarbons from crude oil spills
– a field and laboratory comparison. Proc. of the 1987 Oil Spill Conference, American
Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., pp.275-288.
Moldestad, M.Ø., P.J. Brandvik and P.S. Daling, 2004 : Development of Data Sets from
Experimental Oil Spills for OWM Algorithm and Model Testing and Validation, STF66 A04025.
Moldestad, M.Ø., P.S. Daling and F. Leirvik, 2004 : The Prestige oil – properties and weathering
at sea. Interspill 2004, Trondheim, Norway June 2004.
Moldestad, M.Ø., P.S. Daling, I. Singsaas, 2002: Weathering and chemical dispersibility of heavy
fuel oils in cold waters. 3rd R&D Forum on High-density Oil Spill Response, Brest March
2002.pp. 133-148.
Neff, J.M., W.A. Stubblefield, 1995: Chemical and Toxicological Evaluation of Water Quality
following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. In: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan
Waters. Wells P.G., Butler J.N., Hughes, J.S., (Eds.). ASTM STP 1219, pp.141-177.
Nordvik, A.B., P. Daling, F.R. Engelhardt, 1992: Problems in the interpretation of spill response
technology studies. In: Proceedings of the 15th AMOP Technical Seminar, June 10-12,
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, pp. 211-217.
NPD (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) and Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, March 2006.
Facts, The Norwegian Petroleum Sector 2006. www.npd.no
Reed, M., 2001: AMOS Report no. 15: Technical Description and Verification Tests of
OSCAR2000, A Multi-Component 3-Dimensional Oil Spill Contingency And Response Model.
SINTEF Report no. STF66 F01044. Confidential.
Reed, M., D. French, H. Rines, H. Rye., 1995b: Three-dimensional Oil and Chemical Spill Model
for Environmental Impact Assessment. Proceedings of the 1995 International Oil Spill
Conference, pp.61-66
Reed, M., O.M. Aamo, K. Downing., 1996: Calibration and Testing of IKU’s Oil Spill Contingency
and Response (OSCAR) Model System. Proceedings of the 1996 Arctic and Marine Oil Spill
Program (AMOP) Technical Seminar, pp.689-726. 1996.
Reed, M., O.M. Aamo, P.J. Brandvik, P.S. Daling, P.E. Nilsen, G. Furnes, 1997: Development of
a Dispersant Use Plan for a Coastal Oil Terminal. Proceedings of the 1997 International Oil
Spill Conference. pp 643 – 654.
Reed, M., O.M. Aamo, P.S. Daling, 1995a: “Quantitative Analysis of Alternate Oil Spill Response
Strategies using OSCAR”. Spill Science and Technology Bulletin, vol. 2 no. 1. pp. 67-75.
Singsaas, I., P.S. Daling, H.V. Jensen, 1993. Meso-scale laboratory weathering of oils. ESCOST-
Report No 2. IKU Report 22.2042.00/04/93.
Strøm-Kristiansen, T., A. Lewis, P.S. Daling, J.H. Hokstad, I. Singsaas, 1997: Weathering and
dispersion of naphthenic, asphaltenic and waxy crude oils. In: Paper to 1997 International Oil
Spill Conference. Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 2-10 April, pp. 631-636.
UK Department of Trade and Insdustry, Oil and Gas Department. www.og.dti.gov.uk
114
115
APPENDIX A:Crude oil data for some Russian crude oils
115
116
Table 40 Data for some Russian crude oils. “Motor fuel: resources, quality, substitutes”,
P.V.Chulkov, 1998.
Oil Density Viscosity Pour Wax Asphaltens Evap Evap

at 20°C, at 20°C, Point (wt%) (wt%) up to up to
g/cm3 mm.cm./c (°C) 200°C 300°C
(%) (%)
Ural and Volga-region

Arlansk 0,8918 39,7 -34 3,4 5,8 18,7 42,8
Bavlinsk 0,8830 25,8 -48 4,1 6,1 19,2 42,4
Zgirnovk 0,8567 17,7 -6 1,7-5,1 0,2 8,6 50,8
Kamenolozgsk 0,8110 4,7 -47 4,05 0 33,9 61,9
Kuleshovsk 0,8240 4,0 -14 4,0 0,7 35,0 63,6
Mukhanovsk 0,8462 13,3 -27 6,9 2,2 26,0 54,0
Romashinsk 0,8620 14,2 -42 5,1 4,0 24,0 49,0
Sernovodsk 0,9160 - -35 3,4 5,7 15,8 26,5
Tuimazinsk 0,8560 19 -29 4,1 3,4 26,4 53,4
Shkapovsk 0,8624 13,8 -24 4,1 3,3 25,7 52,3
Republic of Komi
West-Tebuksk 0,8490 13,8 -14 3,7 1,5 26,0 50,0
Usinsk 0,8369 - 3 10,8 0,68 25,4 52,2
Yagersk 0,9449 86,3 -10 1,4 3,7 0,4 18,8
West Sibirian
Megionsk 0,8560 7,1 -35 2,28 1,13 27,2 59,2
Samatlor 0,8426 6,1 <-33 2,3 1,94 30,6 58,2
Ust'-Balyk 0,8704 25,1 -20 2,3 2,3 19,3 42,8
Shaimsk 0,8269 6,8 -2 2,9 0,8 32,0 58,0
island Sakhalin
Ekhabinsk 0,8695 7,7 <-30 3,1 0,9 27,2 60,4
North Kavkaz
Malgobek 0,8463 7,7 3 7,0 1,35 30,9 59,5
Novo-Dmitrievsk 0,8271 5,2 3 4,4 1,13 34,2 63,1
Ozeksuatsk 0,8230 6,3 20 17,5 0,38 24,2 58,1
Troetcko-Anastas'evsk 0,9067 37,8 -54 1,0 0,81 8,2 48,3
116
117
APPENDIX B Weathering predictions for Grane crude oil.
117
118
Property: EVAPORATIVE LOSS

Oil Type: GRANE (SINTEF)
Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
Data Source: IKU Petroleum Research (1997), Weathering data used
© 2006

Wind Speed (m/s): 15

Wind Speed (m/s): 5
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

20
Evaporated (%)
10
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

20
Evaporated (%)
10
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
118
119
Property: FLASH POINT FOR WATER-FREE OIL

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006

Wind Speed (m/s): 15 No fire hazard

Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Fire hazard in tankage (<60 °C)
Wind Speed (m/s): 5 Fire hazard at sea surface (below sea temperature)
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

200
150
Flash Point (°C)
100
50
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

250
200
Flash Point (°C)
150
100
50
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Based on flash point measurements of weathered, water-free oil residues.
119
120
Property: POUR POINT FOR WATER-FREE OIL

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006

Wind Speed (m/s): 15 Chemically dispersible

Wind Speed (m/s): 5 Poorly / slowly chemically dispersible
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

40
20
Pour Point (°C)
-20
-40
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

40
20
Pour Point (°C)
-20
-40
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
Based on pour point measurements of weathered, water-free oil residues.
120
121
Property: VISCOSITY FOR WATER-FREE OIL

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006


Wind Speed (m/s): 5
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

100000
Viscosity (cP)
10000
1000
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

10000
Viscosity (cP)
1000
100
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
121
122
Property: WATER CONTENT

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006


Wind Speed (m/s): 5
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

60
40
Water content (%)
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

80
60
Water content (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
122
123
Property: VISCOSITY OF EMULSION

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006

Wind Speed (m/s): 15 Chemically dispersible (<12000 cP)

Wind Speed (m/s): 5 Poorly / slowly chemically dispersible (>30000 cP)
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

100000
Viscosity (cP)
10000
1000
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

100000
10000
Viscosity (cP)
1000
100
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

Chemical dispersability information based on experiments under standard laboratory conditions.
123
124
Property: DENSITY OF EMULSION

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006

Wind Speed (m/s): 15 Oil stays on surface (<1025 gm/l)

Wind Speed (m/s): 10 Oil sinks (>1025 gm/l)
Wind Speed (m/s): 5
Wind Speed (m/s): 2

1050
1025
1000
Density (gm/l)
975
950
925
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

1050
1025
1000
Density (gm/l)
975
950
925
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
124
125

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006

Evaporated
Surface
Naturally dispersed

100
80
60
Mass (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

100
80
60
Mass (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
125
126

Description:
OWModel 3.0.1
© 2006

Evaporated
Surface
Naturally dispersed

100
80
60
Mass (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days

100
80
60
Mass (%)
40
20
0
0.25 0.5 1 2 3 6 9 12 1 2 3 4 5
Hours Days
126
127
APPENDIX C Crude oils in SINTEFs Oil Weathering Database
127
128
Table 41 Norwegian crude oils on which SINTEF has performed extensive laboratory
weathering studies, with resultant data incorporated into the SINTEF Oil Weathering Model
(OWM). August 2006.
Balder 1996 Oseberg Øst 1999

Brage 1994 Oseberg Sør 1999/2000
Draugen 1994/2000 Ringhorne 2002
Ekofisk Blend 1989/2000 Skarv 2002
Embla 2000 Sleipner condensate 1994
Forseti 2002 Sleipner - Vest 1998
Fram 2000 Smørbukk 1994/2002
Frøy 1995 Smørbukk Sør 1994/2002
Glitne 2002 Snorre Blend 1992/2004
Goliat 2002 Snorre B 2004
Grane 1998/2004 Snøhvit condensate 2001
Gullfaks A/B 1989 Statfjord A 1991/2000
Gullfaks C 1996 Statfjord B 2000
Gullfaks Sør 1996 Statfjord C 2000
Gyda 2000 Sture blend 1993
Heidrun 1993/2003 Tambar 2001
Tau 1999 Tordis 1996
Elli 1999 Troll B 1995
Elli South 1999 Tyrihans Nord 2003
Kristin 1997/2006 Tyrihans Sør 2003
Lavrans 1997 Ula 1989/1999
Lillefrigg 1996 Vale 2001
Linerle 2005 Valhall 2000
Midgard 1992 Varg 2000/2004
Njord 1997/2000/2002 Veslefrikk 1991
New Oseberg Blend 2006 Vigdis 2004
Norne 1996/1998 Visund 1998/2000
Oseberg A 1993/2004 Volve 2005
Oseberg C 1995/2004 Yme 1996
Oseberg Etive 1989 Åsgard A 2002
128
129
Table 42 International crude oils on which SINTEF has performed extensive laboratory
weathering studies with resultant data incorporated into the OWM.
Crude oil Country Tested (year)

Aquila Italy 1999
Alaskan North Slope USA 1993
Alpine CPF USA 2001
Arabian Heavy Saudi Arabia 1991
BCF-17 Venezuela 1993
Bonnie Light Nigeria 1993
Brent blend UK 1993
Cook Inlet USA 2001
DUC (Danish Underground Consortium) Denmark 1993
Endicott USA USA 2001
Foinaven UK 1995
High Island USA 2001
Kuwait crude oil Kuwait 2002
Marlim Brasil 2003
Milne Point Unit USA 2001
Murban Abu Dhabi Saudi Arabia 1993
Neptune Field Composite USA 2001
Pampo Brasil 2003
Roncador Brasil 2003
Schiehallion UK 1995
Siri Denmark 1997
South Arne Denmark 1998
129

Oil Weathering Final 11-04-07

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oil Weathering Final 11-04-07

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oil Weathering and oils transported in the

Prepared by SINTEF and the Norwegian Coastal Administration (NCA)

5 Weathering of oil at sea .................................................................................................. 73

3 Crude oils and fuel oils

Figure 1 : Chemical component groups in crude oils.

3.1.2 Crude oil classification

• Paraffinic crude oils

Figure 2 Categorisation of Norwegian crude oils.

Categorisation of some Norwegian crude oils is shown in Figure 2. Such a categorisation of

ITOPF classifies oils in group I to IV based on density:

• Group I : lower than 0,80 kg/m3

• Light crude oil :

3.1.3 European crude oils

3.2 Refined oil products

3.2.1 Distillation of crude oil

Figure 3 Atmospheric distillation of crude oils into various oil products.

Crude oil Kerosene

Figure 4 Conversion of crude oils into refined oil products by distillation.

3.2.2 Properties of refined oil products from distillation of crude oil

Cut °C Density at Viscosity Pour

44.5º 38.1º 37.5º 30.0º 31.8º 24.1º 19.7º 19.1º

3.2.3 Conversion or ‘cracking’ processes

A more effective conversion of heavier molecules to lighter fractions is achieved using

The properties of the distillates produced by these conversion or ‘cracking’ processes

Paraffinic crude oil Asphaltic crude oil

Paraffinic crude oil Asphaltic crude oil

3.2.4 Residual Fuels Oil (RFO)

3.2.5 On-land uses for RFO

Heavy Fuel Oil Property Significance

3.2.6 Terminology and specification of residual burner fuel oils

Table 5 BS 2869:83 Classification of residual burner fuels

3.2.7 Residual marine bunker fuel oils

In the case of a straight-run (atmospheric distillation) residue produced from a light,

Characteristic Unit Limit Category ISO-F-

3.2.8 Residual marine bunker fuel oil properties

Figure 6 Viscosity as a function of temperature for some IFO's.

3.2.9 Summary of refined oil products

• Distillate Fuels; produced by atmospheric distillation at the oil refinery and

• Other refined oil products produced in much smaller quantities include

4 Oils transported in the North Sea

4.1.1 North Sea crude oils

4.1.2 Imported crude oils

Table 8. Oil refineries in NW Europe

• Distillate Fuels; produced by atmospheric distillation at the oil refinery and

Table 9 Consumption of refined oil products in 2005

Thousand Million tonnes Thousand Million tonnes

4.1.4 Shipping of refined oil products as cargoes

4.1.5 Residual marine bunker fuel oils

4.2 Norwegian crude oils

4.2.1 Oil production in the southern North Sea

Table 10 Oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the southern North Sea

4.2.2 Oil production in the northern North Sea

Table 11 Oilfields in the Norwegian sector of the northern North Sea

4.2.3 Oil production in the Norwegian Sea

Figure 10 Oilfields and infrastructure in the Norwegian Sea

Table 12 Oilfields in the Norwegian Sea

4.2.4 Ship transport of Norwegian crude oils

Table 13 Ship transport of Norwegian crude oils

Quantity shipped in 2004

Åsgard Åsgard field 2,513 2,216 4,729

4.3 UK crude oils

4.3.1 Overview of UK crude oil supply and consumption

Crude oil production

Crude oil imports