|
|
Challenge ID |
OTM:029 |
||||
|
1 |
Title |
Prelicensing site selection Mapping environment in remote or unexplored areas (crude, comprehensive inventory) |
||||
|
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 |
PEMEX, Statoil, PetroSA, Shell, Eni, Sasol, Exxon, Tullow |
||||
|
|
General description |
Overview of Challenge |
||||
|
5 |
What is the nature of the challenge? (What is not adequately addressed at present?) |
Obtaining an adequate baseline environmental dataset in remote or frontier areas, that have previously been subjected to little or no monitoring is a time consuming process. "- terrain" - medium resolution land cover (habitats) (forest, grassland, etc.) It is critical that O&G operations are proven to be sustainable and that impact on the natural environment is limited. Unbiased and consistent data is required to prove this. For the results of continuous monitoring to be analysed correctly, they must be judged against an accurate baseline. The longer the time-frame that this baseline information has been collated over, the more natural fluctuations it will encompass - this is important.
|
||||
|
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, 10. Fauna and presence and patterns, |
||||
|
7 |
Nature of the challenge - What effect does this challenge have on operations? |
Obtaining baseline information over a large area is time consuming and expensive. It can also be difficult to obtain access to property not owned or under lease. We must ground survey parts of the area, but this can lead to bias or unrepresentative resu |
||||
|
8 |
What do you currently do to address this challenge?/ How is this challenge conventionally addressed? |
Use of existing base maps (which are often inaccurate), together with on-the-ground surveys. |
||||
|
9 |
What kind of solution do you envisage could address this challenge? |
Medium resolution land cover products based on EO data. Resolution depends on covered area and size of monitoring objective. |
||||
|
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] |
4 |
0 |
0 |
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 |
Faster time to production |
||||
|
17 |
Technology Urgency (How quickly does the user need the solution) |
Immediately (0-2 years) |
||||
|
|
Information requirements |
|
||||
|
18 |
Update frequency |
depending on sensor and application |
||||
|
19 |
Data Currently used |
|
||||
|
20 |
Spatial resolution |
|
||||
|
21 |
Thematic accuracy |
80-90% |
||||
|
22 |
Example formats |
Standardized geo-spatial formats (e.g. shapefile, geotiff or KML) |
||||
|
23 |
Timeliness |
Reference data - timeliness not important |
||||
|
24 |
Geographic Extent |
regional area |
||||
|
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