|
|
Challenge ID |
OTM:019 |
||||
|
1 |
Title |
Reconnaissance survey for EIA |
||||
|
2 |
Theme ID |
ON 4.1: Environmental monitoring - Baseline historic mapping of environment and ecosystems |
||||
|
3 |
Originator of Challenge |
Onshore: OTM |
||||
|
4 |
Challenge Reviewer / initiator |
Statoil, Ardan-Africa, Eni, Chevron |
||||
|
|
General description |
Overview of Challenge |
||||
|
5 |
What is the nature of the challenge? (What is not adequately addressed at present?) |
It is critical that our operations have minimal detrimental impact on the environment. The earlier we can start our EIA planning, the better we can meet this objective. Accurate and detailed mapping helps us perform a comprehensive desktop element of the EIA which is supported by a ground survey that is well planned and targetted. |
||||
|
6 |
Thematic information requirements |
3. Obtain detailed vegetation information, 4. Obtain detailed land-use information, 5. Identify location and condition of transport infrastructure, 6. Identify inland water bodies and determine water quality, 7. Determine air quality, 10. Fauna a |
||||
|
7 |
Nature of the challenge - What effect does this challenge have on operations? |
The ability to commence the EIA as early as possible (i.e. without leaving the office) helps us to ensure that our surveys are well planned, time on-the-ground is spent efficiently, and that our baseline is comprehensive. This ensures that overall projec |
||||
|
8 |
What do you currently do to address this challenge?/ How is this challenge conventionally addressed? |
Currently use inadequate mapping, and thus have to deploy on-the-ground surveys sooner than we would like. |
||||
|
9 |
What kind of solution do you envisage could address this challenge? |
Very high to medium resolution EO data to derive land cover and current and use information.
|
||||
|
10 |
What is your view on the capability of technology to meet this need? – are you currently using EO tech? If not, why not? |
EO could be a useful complimentary technology |
||||
|
|
Challenge classification |
|
||||
|
11 |
Lifecycle stage |
Pre license |
Exp. |
Dev. |
Prod. |
Decom. |
|
Score from impact quantification [1] |
2 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
12 |
Climate classification |
NOT CLIMATE SPECIFIC |
||||
|
13 |
Geographic context/restrictions |
Generic onshore (Unspecified) |
||||
|
14 |
Topographic classification / Offshore classification |
Generic onshore (Unspecified) |
||||
|
15 |
Seasonal variations |
Any season |
||||
|
16 |
Impact Area |
Environment, operational cost reduction, strategic decision enabler |
||||
|
17 |
Technology Urgency (How quickly does the user need the solution) |
Immediately (0-2 years) |
||||
|
|
Information requirements |
|
||||
|
18 |
Update frequency |
Semi-annually |
||||
|
19 |
Data Currently used |
|
||||
|
20 |
Spatial resolution |
|
||||
|
21 |
Thematic accuracy |
|
||||
|
22 |
Example formats |
|
||||
|
23 |
Timeliness |
Within a month |
||||
|
24 |
Geographic Extent |
District area to reservoir footprint |
||||
|
25 |
Existing standards |
|
||||
[1] Impact quantification scores: 4 – Critical/ enabling; 3 – Significant/ competitive advantage; 2 – Important but non-essential; 1 – Nice to have; 0 – No impact, need satisfied with existing technology