ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland LTD. 2012 Program .../media/Nanoq/Files/Hearings...ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland LTD. 2012 Program Block 2 (Qamut) 2D-Seismic Survey Final

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland LTD. 2012 Program Block 2 (Qamut)

2D-Seismic Survey

Final Environmental Impact Assessment

For submission to: Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum Imaneq 29 Post-box 930 3900 Nuuk Greenland Distribution: BMP: 1 Electronic Copy and 1 Hard Copy ConcocPhillips: 1 Electronic Copy DONG E&P: 1 Electronic Copy Nunaoil : 1 Electronic Copy 08 JUNE 2012 1113340084

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland Ltd - i - Environmental Impact Assessment

08 June 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Structure of the Preliminary and Final EIA ........................................................................ 1

2 Legal and Regulatory Setting .............................................................................................................................. 2 3 Project Description .............................................................................................................................................. 2

3.1 Scope of Work ......................................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Alternatives Considered .......................................................................................................................... 6

4 Environmental Baseline....................................................................................................................................... 7 4.1 Physical Environment .............................................................................................................................. 7

4.1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7 4.1.2 Regional Setting ..................................................................................................................... 7 4.1.3 Marine Weather ...................................................................................................................... 8 4.1.4 Oceanography ...................................................................................................................... 10 4.1.5 Ice Climatology ..................................................................................................................... 16

4.2 Biological Environment .......................................................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Plankton ............................................................................................................................... 20 4.2.2 Invertebrates ........................................................................................................................ 21 4.2.3 Marine Fish ........................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.4 Seabirds ............................................................................................................................... 22 4.2.5 Marine Mammals .................................................................................................................. 23 4.2.6 Protected Areas ................................................................................................................... 28 4.2.7 Species of Concern .............................................................................................................. 29

4.3 Land and Sea Use ................................................................................................................................. 29 4.3.1 Commercial Fisheries .......................................................................................................... 29 4.3.2 Subsistence Fishing ............................................................................................................. 30 4.3.3 Subsistence Hunting ............................................................................................................ 30 4.3.4 Other Vessel Traffic ............................................................................................................. 31

5 Methods Used for the Environmental Impact Assessment ............................................................................... 32 5.1 Purpose and Approach .......................................................................................................................... 32 5.2 Scope of Assessment ............................................................................................................................ 33

5.2.1 Selection of Valued Ecosystem Component ....................................................................... 33 5.2.2 Interaction of Project with the Environment ......................................................................... 33 5.2.3 Temporal and Spatial Boundaries of the Assessment ........................................................ 34 5.2.4 Determining Impact Significance ......................................................................................... 34

6 Potential Impacts and Project Mitigation ........................................................................................................... 35 6.1 Effects of Airborne Emissions from Project Vessels ............................................................................. 35 6.2 Effects of Discharges from Project Vessels .......................................................................................... 37 6.3 Effects of Underwater Sound on the Marine Environment.................................................................... 40

6.3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 40 6.3.2 Overview of Sound Terminology .......................................................................................... 40 6.3.3 Project Sound Sources ........................................................................................................ 40 6.3.4 Acoustic Behaviour in Arctic Waters .................................................................................... 40 6.3.5 Underwater Acoustic Modelling ........................................................................................... 40 6.3.6 Marine Invertebrates ............................................................................................................ 41 6.3.7 Marine Fish ........................................................................................................................... 42 6.3.8 Marine Birds ......................................................................................................................... 44 6.3.9 Commercial Fisheries .......................................................................................................... 44 6.3.10 Subsistence Hunting and Fishing ........................................................................................ 45 6.3.11 Marine Mammals .................................................................................................................. 45

6.4 Effects of Vessel Traffic ......................................................................................................................... 58 6.5 Effects of Vessel Lighting ...................................................................................................................... 61 6.6 Effects of Introduced Species from Ballast Water Exchange ............................................................... 62 6.7 Effects of Unplanned Events and Accidental Spills .............................................................................. 63

7 Cumulative Effects Assessment ....................................................................................................................... 67 7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 67 7.2 Methods ................................................................................................................................................. 68 7.3 Results ................................................................................................................................................... 69 7.4 Interpretation and Mitigation .................................................................................................................. 70

7.4.1 Identification of Mitigation Measures ................................................................................... 70 7.4.2 Determination of Significance .............................................................................................. 70

8 Environmental Protection Plan .......................................................................................................................... 74

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland Ltd - ii - Environmental Impact Assessment

08 June 2012

8.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 74 8.2 Environmental Policy during the Project ............................................................................................... 74 8.3 Standards, Controls, Consultation and Notification .............................................................................. 75 8.4 Plans Included in or Related to the Environmental Protection Plan ..................................................... 76

8.4.1 Safe Operations Plan ........................................................................................................... 76 8.4.2 Simultaneous Operations Plan ............................................................................................ 76 8.4.3 Waste Management Plan ..................................................................................................... 77 8.4.4 Ballast Water Management Plan ......................................................................................... 77 8.4.5 Fuel Spill Response Plan ..................................................................................................... 77 8.4.6 Marine Mammal and Seabird Observation Program ........................................................... 78 8.4.7 Passive Acoustic Monitoring Plan ........................................................................................ 78 8.4.8 Ice Management Plan .......................................................................................................... 79 8.4.9 Emergency Response Plan ................................................................................................. 79 8.4.10 Fisheries Impact Management Plan .................................................................................... 80 8.4.11 Environmental Studies Plan ................................................................................................. 80 8.4.12 Mitigation Reporting/Oversight Plan .................................................................................... 80

9 Study Limitations and Future Research ............................................................................................................ 80 9.1 Study Limitations and Data Gaps .......................................................................................................... 80 9.2 Future Research .................................................................................................................................... 81

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1-1 Survey Data .................................................................................................................................... 5 Table 3.1-2 Array Specification .......................................................................................................................... 5 Table 3.1-3 Acoustic Properties of the Airgun Array ......................................................................................... 6 Table 3.1-4 Specifications of PAM System ........................................................................................................ 6 Table 4.1-1 Qamut Block Wind Statistics from MSC50 Hindcast Data Node M3018543 ................................. 9 Table 4.1-2 Qamut Block Wave Statistics from the MSC50 Hindcast Data Node M3018543 ........................ 16 Table 4.2-1 Overview of Seabird Species Found within the Qamut Block ...................................................... 24 Table 4.2-2 Overview of Marine Mammal Species found within the Qamut Block ......................................... 27 Table 4.2-3 Summary of Species of Concern Potentially Occurring in the Qamut Block ............................... 29 Table 5.2-1 Matrix Combining Impact Consequence and Probability to Determine Overall Impact

Significance ................................................................................................................................... 35 Table 6.1-1 Estimated Fuel Consumption for Seismic Survey and Support Vessels during the

Proposed 2012 Program ............................................................................................................... 36 Table 6.1-2 Total Air Emissions for the Proposed 2012 Program ................................................................... 36 Table 6.1-3 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the Proposed 2012 Program ........................................... 36 Table 6.1-4 Summary of Impacts from Airborne Emissions on Air Quality ..................................................... 37 Table 6.2-1 Types of Waste Potentially Generated from the Project Vessels ................................................ 38 Table 6.2-2 Summary of Impacts from Discharges on VECs .......................................................................... 39 Table 6.3-1 Summary of Impacts from Seismic Sound on Marine Invertebrates, Marine Fish,

Seabirds, and Subsistence Hunting and Fishing ......................................................................... 44 Table 6.3-2 Summary of Impacts from Seismic Sound on Marine Mammals ................................................. 54 Table 6.3-3 Summary of Impacts from Vessel Sounds on Marine Mammals ................................................. 58 Table 6.4-1 Summary of Impacts from Vessel Traffic on VECs ...................................................................... 61 Table 6.5-1 Summary of Impacts from Vessel Lighting on Seabirds .............................................................. 62 Table 6.6-1 Summary of Impacts from Ballast Water Exchange on VECs ..................................................... 63 Table 6.7-1 Summary of Impacts from Minor Unplanned Events and Accidental Spills on VECs ................. 66 Table 6.7-2 Summary of Impact from Major Unplanned Events and Accidental Spills on VECs ................... 67 Table 7.3-1 Areas Affected by cSEL in Qamut Block and RSA ...................................................................... 70 Table 7.4-1 Summary of Cumulative Impacts from Seismic Sound on Marine Mammals and Fish on

a Regional Level ........................................................................................................................... 71

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland Ltd - iii - Environmental Impact Assessment

08 June 2012

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1-1 Proposed 2D Seismic Survey Location ........................................................................................ 82 Figure 3.1-2 Seismic Source Layout ................................................................................................................. 83 Figure 3.1-3 Geometry of Airgun Array (Starboard) ......................................................................................... 84 Figure 3.1-4 3,940 in³ Array Far-field Pressure Signature ................................................................................ 85 Figure 3.1-5 Frequency Spectrum Including Surface Ghost ............................................................................ 86 Figure 4.1-1 Regional Setting for the Project .................................................................................................... 87 Figure 4.1-2 Mean Temperature for February (left) and August (right) ............................................................ 88 Figure 4.1-3 Mean Annual Air Temperature at West Greenland Weather Stations ......................................... 88 Figure 4.1-4 Time Series of the Winter (December to March) Index of the NAO from 1865/1866 to

2010/2011 ..................................................................................................................................... 89 Figure 4.1-5 Wind Roses at Selected Locations in Northeast Baffin Bay ........................................................ 89 Figure 4.1-6: Qamut Block Wind Distribution from the MSC50 Hindcast Data Node M3018543 ..................... 90 Figure 4.1-7 Frequencies of Fog at Three West Greenland Stations ............................................................... 91 Figure 4.1-8 General Ocean Surface Circulation around Greenland ............................................................... 92 Figure 4.1-9 Model Currents at 50 Metres (Tang Model) ................................................................................. 93 Figure 4.1-10 Qamut Licence Area 29 Days Maximum Tidal Range ................................................................. 94 Figure 4.1-11 Qamut Licence Area 29 Days Maximum Tidal Current Magnitude and Direction ....................... 94 Figure 4.1-12 Qamut Temperature and Salinity Profiles during Summer .......................................................... 95 Figure 4.1-13 Fronts of West Greenland Shelf Large Marine Ecosystems ........................................................ 96 Figure 4.1-14 Sound Speed Profiles typical of Oceanic Conditions in Arctic Waters ........................................ 97 Figure 4.1-15 Qamut Block Wave Distribution from the MSC50 Hindcast Data Node M3018543 .................... 98 Figure 4.1-16 Mean Monthly Extent of the North Water Polynya ....................................................................... 99 Figure 4.1-17 Major Iceberg Sources and General Drift Pattern in West Greenland Waters .......................... 100 Figure 4.2-1 Distribution of Important Bird Species in Baffin Bay .................................................................. 101 Figure 4.2-2 Seasonal Distribution and Migratory Routes of Narwhal in West Greenland and the

Eastern Canadian Arctic ............................................................................................................. 102 Figure 4.2-3 Beluga Migration Routes and Wintering Grounds in Baffin Bay Region .................................... 103 Figure 4.2-4 Seasonal Distribution and Migratory Movements of Bowhead Whales in Northwest

Greenland ................................................................................................................................... 104 Figure 4.2-5 Seasonal Distribution of Walrus in Baffin Bay ............................................................................ 105 Figure 4.2-6 Summer (July to September) Home Range for Polar Bears (Baffin Bay Sub-Population)

from 1991 to 1997 ....................................................................................................................... 106 Figure 4.2-7 Protected Areas in Northwest Greenland ................................................................................... 107 Figure 4.3-1 Annual Revenue Generated by the Northern Shrimp and Greenland Halibut Fisheries

in Greenlandic Waters between 2008 and 2010 ........................................................................ 108 Figure 4.3-2 Overview of Commercial Fisheries in Northeast Baffin Bay ...................................................... 109 Figure 6.3-1 Source-path-receiver Model ....................................................................................................... 110 Figure 6.3-2 Underwater Sound Propagation of a Marine Seismic Survey .................................................... 110 Figure 7.2-1 Seismic Survey Lines (red lines) and VSP Source Location (red circle) for the

Aggregate cSEL Scenario. ......................................................................................................... 110 Figure 7.2-2 Sources (red circles) and Receivers (green triangles) for the Model Transects that

Extend beyond the RSA. ............................................................................................................ 111

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Acronyms, Glossary and References Appendix B International and Local Legal Framework Appendix C Physical Environment Appendix Appendix D Acoustics Technical Report Appendix E Summary of Selected Valued Ecosystem Components Appendix F Environment Interaction Matrix Appendix G Impact Assessment Terminology Appendix H Decision Tree for Assessment of Impact Consequence Appendix I Summary of Project Mitigation and Environmental Protection Plans Appendix J Marine Mammal and Seabird Observation and Passive Acoustic Monitoring Plans

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland Ltd - 1 - Environmental Impact Assessment

08 June 2012

1 Introduction

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland Ltd., DONG E&P Grønland A/S and Nunaoil A/S (referred to collectively as “ConocoPhillips”) are pleased to submit an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to the Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) for a proposed 2D-seismic survey in Block 2 (Qamut Block). This region is located in northeast Baffin Bay, licence number 2011/11. The 2D-siesmic survey would occur from early August to mid-September 2012, with the option of extending to 1 October 2012 if ice conditions, weather conditions, sea state or other factors delay the program.

This report describes the “Final EIA”. It was prepared by revising or amending the EIA that was submitted to BMP in mid-March 2012. A non-technical summary in English, Greenlandic and Danish was submitted at the same time. That version of the EIA will be referred to as the “Preliminary EIA”. BMP released the Preliminary EIA Report to the public for a consultation period that was eight weeks in length. ConocoPhillips’s responses to Information Requests from this consultation with stakeholders and communities formed the basis for producing the Final EIA.

The Final EIA Report has been prepared by Golder Associates A/S and INUPLAN A/S, in consultation with ConocoPhillips. It was produced in accordance with the January 2011 BMP “Guidelines for preparing an Environmental Impact Assessment [EIA] report for activities related to hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation offshore Greenland” and December 2011 BMP “Guidelines for application, execution and reporting of offshore hydrocarbon exploration activities (excluding drilling) in Greenland”, including Appendix G (“Guidelines to environmental impact assessment of seismic activities in Greenland waters”, 3rd revised edition) prepared by Danish Center for Environment and Energy (DCE).

ConocoPhillips is aware that Block 2 (Qamut) is closer to the Melville Bay Reserve than other licence areas. It also recognizes that there is an overlap of the proposed seismic survey region with Narwhal Protection Zone I (NPZ-I) in northeast Baffin Bay, where “seismic activities shall be avoided or of limited extent (a few widely spaced (>10 km) lines)”, and consequently, if operations occur in NPZ-I between 1 June and 15 October, that “a detailed shooting program is subject to BMP approval, and if approved, impact studies on narwhal shall be considered” (NERI 2010). ConocoPhillips is concerned about the possible effects of underwater sound on marine mammals during the survey period mentioned above. It will support programs carried out on these effects by DCE and the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources (GINR). ConocoPhillips understood before submission of the Preliminary EIA that more discussion with BMP or DCE about seismic operations in NPZ-I would be necessary during the application process, and that it was important to address all aspects of this subject in a proper and appropriate way. This situation was taken into account during preparation of the Final EIA.

ConocoPhillips looks forward to applying its experience from many years of operations in Alaska and other northern locations to exploration activities in northeast Baffin Bay. It welcomes the opportunity to interact and engage with members of communities, the authorities, and other stakeholders about the seismic survey proposed for 2012.

1.1 Project Overview

The proposed exploration program in northeast Baffin Bay during 2012 involves a 2D-seismic survey in the central part of Block 2 (Qamut). This program, referred to as “the Project” below, is described in Section 3 of this report. ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland Ltd is “Operator” during exploration activity in Qamut Block. DONG E&P Grønland A/S is a “Partner”; Nunaoil A/S is a “Partner” as well.

1.2 Purpose and Structure of the Preliminary and Final EIA

An EIA has been performed on the Project because BMP decided that it has the potential to have significant impacts on the environment, either by itself, or in combination with other planned exploration activity, in northeast Baffin Bay this year. This decision was made after ConocoPhillips submitted a detailed Scope of Project Report to BMP on 1 February 2012.

The offshore setting of the Project, and the nature of the exploration activity that would occur during the Project, have a strong influence on the purpose and structure of the EIA. It has three objectives: determine if the Project will have an effect on the marine environment in a specific and broader sense of potential impact; identify the


08 June 2012

extent of possible effects; and develop or specify means to mitigate, or reduce where possible, the identified possible effects. Possible effects of the environment on the Project are also addressed.

To meet the objectives mentioned above, the physical and biological environments, and land & sea use in Qamut Block, were described from a local and regional point of view. A project description was also developed. A summary of the national and international legal frameworks that provide guidance and set limits on the Project, and on methodology used for impact assessment, was prepared. An assessment was performed on the Project, including potential impacts of the exploration program on the marine environment at local and regional scale, as well as cumulative effects and trans-boundary effects. Other work was conducted during preparation of the Preliminary EIA, including acoustic modeling to investigate cumulative effects from multiple operations occurring at the same time in northeast Baffin Bay, and assembly of an Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for the Project. This plan was based on the assessment, on regulatory requirements in Greenland, and on “best practice” in other jurisdictions.

After the Preliminary EIA Report was submitted to BMP in mid-March 2012, it was released to communities, agencies, and other stakeholders by posting on for a review and consultation process that was eight weeks long. Responses to Supplemental Information Requests that resulted from this process were used to prepare the Final EIA. BMP will make a recommendation about the Final EIA to the Greenland Government. A decision will be made by the Greenland Government to approve the Project, in whole or in part, with or without conditions, and grant a licence for it to proceed.

The Final EIA Report is structured as follows:

• Section 2 provides a brief overview of the Greenland and International legal and regulatory frameworks.

• Section 3 introduces the Project activities, location, survey plan and other details; provides BMP’s required tables (four in total), and describes alternatives considered during design of the Project.

• Section 4 presents the exisiting physical and biological environment as well as land & sea use in the Project area.

• Section 5 describes the impact assessment methodology, and how the assessment was performed.

• Section 6 presents the impact assessment on the residual effects from project activities on valued ecosystem components (VECs).

• Section 7 describes acoustic modeling and assessment of cumulative effects of underwater sound on marine mammals and fish in a regional setting.

• Section 8 contains the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP), including the mitigation measures that ConocoPhillips will be applying to Project activities.

• Section 9 describes data gaps and subjects for research that were identified during the assessment process.

Figures are located at end of the main text before a series of appendices. Please refer to these appendices for references, a list of acronyms and abbreviations, a glossary,a summary of the legal and regulatory frameworks, a technical report on acoustic modelling, supporting information on EIA methodology, a summary of project mitigation measures, a Marine Mammal and Seabird Observation (MMSO) Plan, and a table with attachments containing ConocoPhillips’s responses to Supplemental Information Requests.

2 Legal and Regulatory Setting

Greenlandic legislation, regulations and guidelines applicable to the Project are listed in Appendix B. Table B-1.

Greenland and Denmark are signatories to a number of international agreements and thus have obligations under several international conventions with regards to the use, administration, and protection of the environment and wildlife. Those potentially applicable to seismic surveys in Greenlandic waters are described in Appendix B, Table B-2.

3 Project Description

The section provides, in accordance with BMP Guidelines (December 2011 version, including Appendix G), a description of the proposed exploration activity, the area where this work will occur, schedule, and equipment and materials for the 2D-seismic survey that ConocoPhillips is proposing to undertake in Qamut Block. Table 3.1-1

http://www.nanoq.gl/�


08 June 2012

contains the details that BMP has requested on the seismic survey. This table, and the other three tables that are specified in the Guidelines, are found at the end of Section 3.1. The location of the survey is shown in Figure 3-1, including a lay-out of the planned seismic lines. This survey grid is a modification of the survey grid that was included in the Preliminary EIA Report. This change was agreed to at a meeting between ConocoPhillips and DCE in Copenhagen on 22 May 2012. The reasons for this change are described in more detail below.

3.1 Scope of Work

The offshore exploration program that ConocoPhillips is proposing for West Greenland in 2012 is a 2D-seismic survey in northeast Baffin Bay, including collection of marine gravity and magnetic data. Roughly 3,000 line-kilometres (line-km) of high quality 2D-seismic reflection data, as well as marine gravity and magnetic data, will be collected in the survey region during the Project. ConocoPhillips will use this data to conduct a detailed geological and geophysical evaluation of the license area.

The Project location will be in the central, eastern and northern parts of the Qamut Block. The survey region extends into the west-central part of Narwhal Protection Zone I (NPZ-I) and northern part of NPZ-II.

Four sail lines extend slightly north of the licence area boundary for line-tie purposes. During preparation of the Preliminary EIA, ConocoPhillips discussed the possibility of obtaining a supplementary or additional exploration licence for the tie-in lines with BMP. It was decided that an extra licence would not be required for this part of the survey.

The portion of the survey that is located in NPZ-I was discussed at a meeting between ConocoPhillips and DCE in Copenhagen on 22 May 2012. This part of the survey has been changed, which ConocoPhillips brought to BMP’s attention after the meeting with DCE. It was agreed that modifying the survey grid in NPZ-I would address concerns about proximity to the Melville Bay Reserve, line spacing in NPZ-I, and possible impacts of underwater sound on narwhals during the seismic survey period.

The background and basis for the modification is as follows: ConocoPhillips believes that two of the primary sub-surface targets (possible hydrocarbon reservoirs) in the Qamut licence area extend into the region that is part of NPZ-I. To mature these leads, and determine whether or not an exploration well is justified, additional seismic data in the form of either a 3D survey or an approximately one km by one km 2D-seismic survey is required. ConocoPhillips decided to pursue the 2D solution. In order to limit exposure to underwater sound in the NPZ-I area, the 2D survey plan has been altered to cover only the area occupied by the identified leads, leaving a small number of widely-spaced 2D lines for regional mapping. Two measures are being implemented in this regard:

• The total amount of seismic data within NPZ-I will be reduced by removing every other north-south line in the area between the mapped leads. This effectively removes roughly 100 line-km of acquisition from the survey. To meet the licence obligation of acquiring 3,000 line-km of 2D-seismic data, ConocoPhillips will add roughly 100 line-km of acquisition to the area southwest of the NPZ-I boundary.

• Great effort will be expended to execute a shooting pattern that alternates operations inside NPZ-I with operations outside NPZ-I. The goal is to not operate continuously in NPZ-I for long periods of time.

The proposed schedule for the Project is early August to mid-September, with an option of extending it to 1 October if the seismic survey is delayed by weather conditions, ice conditions, sea state, or other factors. It would proceed for four to six weeks, and take place 24 hours per day, seven days per week based on safe operations when sea ice is not present.

Three vessels have been chartered to carry out the Project, including: one ice-class seismic survey ship; one ice-class chase vessel; and one support and re-supply vessel. The CGGVeritas M/V Princess will be used to conduct the 2D-seismic survey (including collection of marine gravity and magnetic data). The chase ship and support/re-supply ship will be the M/V Thor Supplier and the M/V Thor Beamer, respectively. This information was mentioned in the Preliminary EIA. In early June 2012, it was necessary for ConocoPhillips to change these ships. They have been replaced by equivalent vessels, including the Artemis Angler as the seismic ship, F/F Meredian as the chase ship, and MV Arctic Star as the support/re-supply ship (which may act as a second chase ship). The airgun array and single streamer that will be used by the Artemis Angler will be identical to the airgun array and single streamer that would have been used by the Princess. CGGVeritas will also continue to be the seismic contractor for the survey.


08 June 2012

ConocoPhillips decided that the Final EIA would not be altered to reflect this change in the fleet, since it was an operations planning adjustment that is not uncommon during seismic surveys when release of a ship, or ships, from a previous charter has been delayed, or when any or all of the proposed ships are not available for other reasons. The change is not regarded as material or significant for environmental assessment purposes. It will be addressed by ConocoPhillips as part of the “Application Package” process for the 2012 program in Qamut Block (which is distinct or separate from the EIA process described in Section 1.2), or in a Supplementary Filing or Submission to BMP. Consequently, mention of the Princess, Thor Supplier or Thor Beamer in the rest of Section 3, or in other sections of the Final EIA, was left as is.

Health, Safety & Environment (HSE) performance was taken into account during selection of CGGVeritas as the contractor for the seismic survey, including policies, procedures, vessels, and equipment that were “fit for purpose” in Arctic environments, including conditions in northeast Baffin Bay. This factor was included in the evaluation to lower the likelihood, as much as possible, of the seismic survey having impacts on the environment in the survey region.

The Princess is a dual-source, multi-streamer seismic ship well-suited for performing the 2D seismic survey described below. This vessel has integrated geophysical and navigation data acquisition systems, full quality assurance capabilities and onboard positioning and seismic data processing facilities. The seismic source on the ship consist of tuned arrays of G-gun II airguns. The Princess is equipped with a full acoustic system to position the in-water seismic equipment. Standard quality control products available in real-time include brute stacks, signal-to-acoustic ratio analyses on shot gathers, and near-trace displays.

The Princess will be using or deploying a single airgun array for seismic signal generation. A seismic receiver cable (or streamer) will be towed behind the vessel for recording the reflected signal. Details of the air gun array are provided in Tables 3.1-2 and 3.1-3 at the end of this section. The M/V Princess will sail along a total of 50 pre-planned sail lines and release high pressure air to provide a down-going pressure wave at regular intervals. The sail lines are planned to infill the existing license database in order to obtain a regular grid of seismic data to allow an adequate definition of subsurface structures. A line change plan for the seismic survey will be developed. This plan needs to be flexible, and take sea ice and glacial ice conditions, weather conditions, sea state and other factors at the time of survey into account. The survey vessels, equipment and material brought into Qamut Block will leave the licence area at the end of the survey. CGGVeritas has a strict “no spill” policy during operations in Arctic waters. There are no planned discharges into the sea, with the exception of normal discharges permitted by the authorities under Greenlandic regulations or international conventions. No waste disposal is planned, on land, during port calls. No ballast water discharge is contemplated, unless re-ballasting to set or establish an ice draft for any of the ships, or related to re-fuelling, is needed. Re-fuelling may or may not occur during the survey period. It is possible that ship-to-ship transfer from the support/re-supply vessel will be done if re-fuelling is required.

The marine gravity and magnetic measurements will be recorded along the sail lines. The system for collecting gravity data is hull-mounted; the magnetic data is obtained with a submerged system that is towed behind the Princess. No energy or sound is emitted by either system when the data are obtained. Equipment for these measurements will be provided by Austin Exploration Inc. The survey ship will not deviate from the sail lines to collect this information. It is normal industry practice to collect gravity and magnetic data during seismic surveys. The ship will use two systems for depth measurements during the survey. The Princess is equipped with an Atlas Echograph 461 echosounder for navigation and safety purposes. A single-beam bathymetry system will be used for survey purposes only, to accurately measure water depths along the sail lines. This system is a Kongsberg EA600 echosounder that operates at a frequency of 12 kHz, 32 kHz or 200 kHz. The two echosounders are the only active (hull-mounted) sound sources on the Princess that ConocoPhillips is aware of.

It is noted that a simultaneous operations plan, with mitigation added that is related to reducing effects of underwater sound on marine mammals in a regional setting, will be developed and implemented by the three operators in northeast Baffin Bay before their programs, if approved, begin in 2012. The usual purpose of this plan, in addition to safety related to transit and manoeuvring when several ships are operating in one area, is to minimize problems with data quality or integrity when two or more seismic surveys are occurring at the same time. Addition of mitigation to a simultaneous operations plan is not a standard practice. It is one of the actions that the operators will be taking to reduce possible impacts of underwater sound on marine mammals from a cumulative effects point of view. This situation is also discussed in Section 7 and 8 of the Final EIA.


08 June 2012

All of the steps outlined in the BMP Guidelines (December 2011 version, including Appendix G), involving operation of an airgun array during a seismic survey, will be followed. These steps, including any survey-specific procedures and measures developed by ConocoPhillips for the Project, are being implemented to reduce or mitigate the effects of underwater sound on the marine environment that are related to operation of the airgun array.“Best Practice” during seismic surveys at sea will be employed throughout.

A Safe Operations Plan, or equivalent, including an Emergency Response Plan (for example, procedures for responding to accidental discharges and environmental incidents), is being developed by ConocoPhillips and CGGVeritas. This plan is mentioned in the EPP for the Project (Section 8), but it is not attached to the Final EIA at this time. An Ice Management Plan for the Project is also being developed by ConocoPhillips, assisted by CGGVeritas and other companies. A multi-tier or multiple-level approach, involving actions or procedures before, during and after the survey, will be followed. An important part of this plan, which is summarized in the EPP (Section 8), but not attached to the Final EIA at this time either, will be “ice avoidance” at tactical (near-ship) level. Towing of bergy bits and small icebergs is not anticipated during the survey.

A Marine Mammal and Seabird Observation (MMSO) Plan has been be developed by ConocoPhillips, and will be carried out during the seismic survey. This plan is summarized in the EPP (Section 8), and attached in Appendix J (Marine Mammal Management Plan). The Princess will be using a Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) system during the survey period. Table 3.1-4 contains the details requested by BMP on this system. A plan or approach for PAM during seismic operations is discussed in the EPP (Section 8). A mitigation airgun will also be used. It is part of the approach that will be implemented by ConocoPhillips to mitigate impacts of underwater sound on marine mammals.

Table 3.1-1 Survey Data

Specify Description Provided Type of survey (2D, high resolution (3D), well testing, other) 2D seismic survey ConocoPhillips

Map of the area with all transect lines shown please refer to Figure 3.1-1 ConocoPhillips

Start and end dates for the survey Planned operation is from the beginning of August 2012 to middle of September; however, ConocoPhillips requests an option to operate until 1 October 2012 in case of delay caused by weather, sea ice, sea state, or other issues.

ConocoPhillips

Expected duration of seismic program four (4) to six (6) weeks ConocoPhillips

Duty cycle of operation (in hours/24 hours); number of hours in the dark per 24 hours

24 hours per day, 7 days per week, based on safe operations when sea ice is not present (i.e., when conditions are “open water” or ice-free” only, and ships can operate safely)

ConocoPhillips

Number and types of accompanying vessels two (2) chase vessels ConocoPhillips

Intended use of icebreakers. Will survey be carried out in ice?

Icebreaker will not be used. Seismic survey will not occur when sea ice is present – “open water” or “ice-free” conditions only. Ice management plan being developed (mostly involves glacial ice, but sea ice will not be overlooked in this plan, or at sea).

ConocoPhillips

Table 3.1-2 Array Specification

Specify Description Provided Number and names of vessels towing airgun arrays one (1) vessel; CGGVeritas M/V Princess ConocoPhillips For each vessel provide geometric layout of complete airgun array with individual volume specified (in PSI per airgun and in3 per airgun) please refer to Figure 3.1-2 and 3.1-3 CGGVeritas

Size of total array (in3 and PSI for the entire array) 3,940 in³ (one array consisting of three sub-arrays, as shown in attached diagram), CGGVeritas

Firing rate in shots/sec. Will sub arrays fire simultaneously or alternate? firing rate: 10 sec/shot; the sub-arrays will fire simultaneously CGGVeritas

Operation speed of the vessel in km/hours or knots. approximately 5 kt over bottom CGGVeritas


08 June 2012

Table 3.1-3 Acoustic Properties of the Airgun Array

Specify Description Provided Far field pressure signature of total airgun output (provide figure) please refer to Figure 3.1-4 JASCO Frequency spectrum of the far field airgun signature (broadband) (provide figure) please refer to Figure 3.1-5 JASCO Source level (source factor) of airgun array on acoustic axis below array given in all of the following units dB re 1 μPa peak- peak (broadband) 262.4 dB re 1 Pa JASCO

dB re 1 μPa rms (Over 90%* pulse duration) (provide duration for rms calculation) *as defined in Malme et al., 1986; Blackwell et al., 2004

247.1 dB re 1 μPa, duration is 33.5 milliseconds (ms) JASCO

dB re: 1 μPa2s. per pulse 232.8 dB re: 1 Pa2s JASCO Energy, joule/m2 per airgun pulse 9,643 J/m² JASCO

Signal duration. (Define how it is measured) 33.5 ms (90% rms pulse duration as defined in Malme et al., 1986) JASCO

Map showing modeled sound pressure levels (rms*), peak-peak and sound exposure level (μPa2s) for the survey area and surroundings (to levels likely to affect marine mammals or nearest land) * rms calculated by the 90% energy approach for derivation of the duration (Malme et al., 1986; Blackwell et al., 2004).

please refer to Appendix D JASCO

Provide description of the acoustic propagation model, including assumptions of sound speed profiles. please refer to Appendix D JASCO

Table 3.1-4 Specifications of PAM System

Specify Description Provided

Number of hydrophones 4 Seiche Measurements Ltd. Threshold of the recording system band width20Hz to 200kHz +/–3dB

Seiche Measurements Ltd.

Sample rate of the recording system

low frequency cetaceans samples up to 98kHz higher frequency cetaceans (such as porpoises) sampling rate of 500kHz


Where will hydrophones be placed?

behind the vessel mounted on the trailing equipment (rigging / lead-ins), the exact distance aft has not been determined by CGGVeritas


Will there be duty cycling of recordings? In that case when will the PAM system be used?

equipment will be recording and manned continuously CGGVeritas / ConocoPhillips

Name of software WindowsXP,“Ishmael”, Pamguard Sigview Seiche Measurements Ltd.

Species covered all vocalizing species Seiche Measurements Ltd.

Estimated range accuracy, m. as per manufacturer’s specifications Seiche Measurements Ltd.

3.2 Alternatives Considered

ConocoPhillips is committed to acquiring additional seismic data as part of its license requirements. It has an obligation to obtain a minimum of 3,000 line-km of 2D-seismic data during Exploration Phase 1.

A number of methods have been evaluated for accessing the Qamut sub-surface configuration and hydrocarbon potential. Different geophysical methods can be applied to an area to evaluate its sub-surface geology, including marine gravity surveys, marine magnetic surveys, and marine controlled source electromagnetic surveys, in addition to marine seismic data acquisition. However, seismic surveys are the only viable means of providing enough detail of the sub-surface to better understand the hydrocarbon potential of the licence region, and identify locations for possible drilling sites. Investigating the Qamut Block without acquiring additional seismic data is not possible, and a “no activity” option in 2012 cannot be considered at this time.

ConocoPhillips has evaluated the need for 2D- versus 3D-seismic acquisition for the Qamut license. It was concluded that acquisition of additional 2D lines would provide sufficient data coverage to allow interpretation of the strata and structural configuration at this point in the exploration phase. The interpretation of the 2012 seismic data would help to highlight the areas with significant hydrocarbon potential.


08 June 2012

The seismic source will generate an elevated sound level in the northeast Baffin Bay area. ConocoPhillips evaluated alternatives to determine if a solution existed to mitigate the elevated sound levels from a seismic survey in this region. All commercially available seismic airgun systems produce a broadband signal, even though only the lower parts of the frequency spectrum is being recorded in the reflected signal. Methods for reducing the high frequency content have been investigated during Joint Industry Projects (JIPs), but no successful methods have been developed. Alternative seismic signal generation has also been investigated. However, both the watergun and the marine seismic vibrator are not commercially available. The current prototypes appear to produce a frequency spectrum that cannot be used for seismic imaging of deep basins. ConocoPhillips concluded that an airgun system is the only available seismic source for the Qamut seismic survey.

ConocoPhillips evaluated different options for airgun volume to see which volume was needed to produce the required data quality for the proposed 2012 survey. Several seismic surveys have been undertaken in the Baffin Bay area; different airgun volumes have been used during these surveys. For example, employing up to 5,016 in3, as in the Kanumas 1992 seismic survey, does not appear to provide uplift compared to the 4,100 in3 volume used in 2009 and 2010. Reducing the volume to 2,050 in3 in volume, as in the 2000 survey, has an effect on data quality, especially in the deeper parts of the area, and would reduce the value of the seismic data for understanding the structural development of the basins and structures. The proposed airgun volume of 3,940 in3 will produce the best seismic image.

The seismic acquisition lines proposed for the 2012 seismic survey are pre-planned to in-fill existing seismic data to provide sufficient data coverage over the most prospective sub-surface areas. The current survey layout is the most effective based on the current data base. Other layouts are possible, but these lines would lead to an irregular grid pattern. This pattern could create a requirement for more data, and consequently, a longer survey period, which is not desirable.

With respect to timing of the proposed survey, early August 2012 to mid-September 2012 was deemed the most appropriate period. The actual duration will be dependent on ice conditions, weather conditions, sea state, and other factors at time of survey, but deploying a streamer up to 10 km in length means that data acquisition must occur during a period when sea ice is absent or at a minimum in Qamut Block.

4 Environmental Baseline

4.1 Physical Environment

4.1.1 Introduction

This section of the EIA describes the physical environment of northeast Baffin Bay. It includes information that is relevant to assessment from a regional point of view, as well as information that applies at local (block or licence) level. The following subjects are covered: the setting in Baffin Bay; marine weather; oceanography (including acoustic conditions and bathymetry/seabed); and ice climatology (including sea ice and glacial ice). The Strategic EIA on northeast Baffin Bay (NERI 2011) is not as comprehensive on physical environment as it is on biological environment, and consequently, the approach taken below is detailed and thorough to support the assessment on the Project.

4.1.2 Regional Setting

Baffin Bay is situated between the Arctic Ocean and the Labrador Sea (northwest Atlantic Ocean), between the west coast of Greenland and the east coast of Baffin Island (Canada). The coastal features around Baffin Bay are mountainous, and contain many ice sheets and glaciers, particularly the massive Greenland Ice Sheet (or the “Inland Ice”).

Baffin Bay is about 1,400 km long by 550 km wide and is characterized by relatively shallow sills at its connections with the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans, and by a deep and large abyssal plain in its center. Three narrow (width of the order of 50 km or less) channels connect Baffin Bay to the Arctic Ocean: Smith Sound (through Nares Strait) to the north, Jones Sound to the northwest, and Lancaster Sound to the west (Figure 4.1-1) with sill depths of 250, 120 and 125 m, respectively. On its southern boundary, Baffin Bay is connected to the Atlantic Ocean (via the Labrador Sea) by the much wider and deeper Davis Strait, which has a sill depth of about 650 m and a width of about 170 km at the 500 m isobath, or contour of equal depth.


08 June 2012

4.1.3 Marine Weather

4.1.3.1 Atmospheric Circulation

The pattern of atmospheric circulation over Baffin Bay exhibits large changes between winter and summer, and may vary from year to year. In January (winter), in addition to a high pressure system over and north of northern Greenland), a high pressure system, often referred to as the “polar vortex”, covers the eastern Canadian Arctic, centered over Baffin Island (Cappelen et al. 2001). A low pressure region develops south and east of Greenland, focused on the Icelandic Low, extending over the Norwegian Sea toward northern Europe. As a result of this pressure pattern, northerly winds will typically prevail over most of Baffin Bay. The pattern usually lasts from November until April or May. In July (summer), the mean pressure gradients are weak, especially around Greenland, resulting in variable wind conditions determined by passing cyclones. Cyclonic activity can occur anywhere in the Greenland area, with most storms or cyclones affecting Baffin Bay arriving from the south to southwest. In winter, if storms follow this track frequently, a warmer, wetter period results, contributing to less severe sea ice conditions along the northwest Greenland coast. A good summary of the regional meteorology and energy balance is found in DMI-DTU (2011).

4.1.3.2 Air Temperature

Maps of air temperature compiled by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) reveal a large west to east gradient in winter, with colder temperatures in western Baffin Bay, while in summer, an almost uniform distribution of temperatures occurs over Baffin Bay (Figure 4.1-2). Mean temperatures in winter are about -20°C, with lows of about -40°C occurring in late winter over unbroken, snow-covered ice in Melville Bay and near the coast of Baffin Island. In summer, the air temperatures are similar to ocean surface temperature in these areas, though the local air temperature, at sea, can be as low as -5°C from time to time during this period. Summer temperatures as high as +5°C, or greater, have been observed at reporting stations along the northwest Greenland coast Valeur et al., 1996).

4.1.3.3 Inter-Annual Variability: North Atlantic Oscillation

Air temperature, wind and other meteorological parameters exhibit large amounts of year-to-year or inter-annual variability in northeast Baffin Bay. Air temperature measurements at coastal weather stations along the west coast of Greenland reveal large variations over time scales ranging over periods of two or three to many years (Figure 4.1-3). The inter-annual variability in annual air temperatures are associated with the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index, computed as the normalized difference in sea level pressure between southwest Iceland and Gibraltar (Figure 4.1-4). Above (below) normal air temperatures off West Greenland are associated with below (above) normal values of the NAO index. A persistent and strong negative North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index was responsible for southerly air flow along the west of Greenland (northerly winds, in winter, are the long-term norm), which caused anomalously warm weather in winter 2010 to 2011 and summer 2011 (Box et al. 2011).

4.1.3.4 Wind

Due to the atmospheric circulation pattern noted above, northerly to northwest winds occur frequently in western and central Baffin Bay. Inflow takes place mainly through Smith Sound, Lancaster Sound and Jones Sound, while outflow is through Davis Strait. In both the north-western and north-eastern portions of Baffin Bay regions, gale-force winds often occur. In contrast to this pattern, Melville Bay is in somewhat sheltered by northern Greenland while the coastal area further to the southeast is exposed to south-southeast winds. In summer, south-southeast winds are dominant, particularly near the Greenland coast (Valeur et al. 1996).

A comprehensive wind-wave hindcast dataset (MSC50) prepared by Environment Canada (2012) was used to characterize the wind conditions of northeast Baffin Bay. This is shown in Figure 4.1-5. The time-series data were processed with a time-step of three hours, and provide continuous data for the period 1958 to 2008 inclusive. A complete description of the dataset and the hindcast method is provided by Swail et al. (2006). North-westerly winds are dominant in the western portion of northeast Baffin Bay, while winds are primarily from the southeast in the eastern part of the area. In between, at roughly long. 64°W, a transitional regime occurs. The wind intensifies toward the coast with more frequent wind at speeds greater than 10 m/s at the two sites closest to the Greenland coast. These results are consistent with the results reported by Valeur et al. (1996). Similar results are reported by DMI-DTU (2011), based on DMI’s High Resolution Area Model.


08 June 2012

The Environment Canada MSC50 datset was also used to characterize the winds in the vicinity of the Qamut Block. The diagram in Figure 4.1-5 was derived from the entire time-series (1958 to 2008); a summary table can be found in Table 4.1-1. The yearly rose demonstrates a wind dominantly from the east to southeast with little contribution from other quadrants. The seasonal pattern, from January to December, features dominant east to southeast winds that veer to southerly winds in spring and summer (May, June and July) with a light winds from the north to northwest sector on Figure 4.1-6 occur mainly in May and June. The winds return to more easterly in the fall to winter period (September to December) with a stronger regime in October. The most energetic period is the fall and winter (October to March), when the mean wind speeds are above 4 m/s, and estimated maximum speeds, above 20 m/s, in November, December and February. Lower mean and maximum wind speeds are seen during summer (June to August) with a lower mean speeds of 2.9 m/s in June and lower maximum speeds of 16.2 m/s in July.

Table 4.1-1 Qamut Block Wind Statistics from MSC50 Hindcast Data Node M3018543

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year Mean wind speed 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 2.5 2.8 3.4 4.4 5.5 4.5 3.8 3.7 Dominant direction WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW SE SE SE ESE SE WNW WNW WNW

Maximum wind speed 14.6 17.0 13.2 11.3 12.5 13.0 14.3 13.5 15.6 16.5 17.1 16.0 17.1

Direction of max. wind SE SE SSE SSE ESE ESE SE ESE E SE SE SE SE

4.1.3.5 Precipitation

Due to the low moisture content of the air masses involved, precipitation in the Baffin Bay area is small, about 200 mm/yr, according to Valeur et al. (1996). Precipitation falls mostly in summer and fall along the northwest Greenland coast, occasionally as rain, but mainly as snow, based on observations at Upernavik (Valeur et al. 1996). The precipitation events result from passage of storms associated with atmospheric fronts. In summer, light snow or drizzle may fall from low stratus clouds. In winter, light snowfall occurs near leads and polynyas in the established ice cover. Before this ice cover is fully developed, heavy snow showers typically occur (Valeur et al. 1996).

4.1.3.6 Visibility

The predominant cause of reduced visibility in Baffin Bay is fog, which occurs mainly during the summer months. The frequency of fog events will increase during the spring, and peaks in June/July. The frequency of fog decreases by late August (Valeur et al., 1996) and through September to October as the sea surface temperatures warm following the clearing of sea ice. Coastal weather station data at Aasiaat, Nuuk and Paamiut (Figure 10 in Hansen and Buch, 2004) indicates that the highest frequency of fog occurs in July (10-18%). Fog conditions tend to decrease in August (8-5%) and further decrease in September (3-8%) and October (


08 June 2012

The two icing nomograms in Overland et al. (1986), or the four used by the US Navy, showing light, moderate and heavy icing as a function of air temperature and wind speed at specified sea surface temperatures, are often referred to. The first set is shown in DMI-DTU (2011), and not reproduced here.

4.1.4 Oceanography

4.1.4.1 Bathymetry and Seabed

The bathymetry of northeast Baffin Bay is relatively well-known at regional scale. It is shown on appropriate small-scale Danish and Canadian charts, and is available in digital form as the General Bathymetric Chart of the Ocean (GEBCO) and International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO) gridded data. A value-added version of the IBCAO has been used for regional mapping and acoustic modeling during the EIA. This information, including isobaths derived from the elevation surface, appears to be more accurate, and more extensive, than isobath polygons available in digital format from DCE. Water depths are shown on Danish charts 1600, 1700, 3100 and 3200 at 1:250,000 scale, and consist of track or line soundings augmented by spot soundings over the historical period of charting by Danish authorities. The region is characterized by a complex continental shelf of varying width along the coast north of Disko Island. This shelf has been deeply incised by submarine valleys or canyons that were formed by glacial action (outflow from the Inland Ice) in the past.

The most prominent seabed feature in Qamut Block is Isfjeldbanke (Iceberg Bank), centered roughly 90 to 100 km south-southeast of Savissivik, in the central and eastern part of the licence area, bounded on the east by a deep submarine canyon and on the north (between the coast and the licence boundary) by a similarly deep depression. This bank has minimum depths of less than 100 m on Danish chart 3100, and occupies a large area that is less than 200 m deep. The outline of the bank is not entirely accurate compared to ConocoPhillips bathymetry derived from proprietary seismic surveys carried out by TGS Nopec and other companies, but minimum water depths are similar, and it is satisfactory for planning and assessment purposes during the EIA.

Sediment properties and benthic ecology at and below bottom on the continental shelf and slope, and on the abyssal plain at depths of 2,000 m or greater, are not well-known in northeast Baffin Bay, with the possible exception of the North Water region in northern Baffin Bay between northwest Greenland and Devon and Ellesmere Islands in northern Canada. Some reconnaissance box coring and piston or gravity coring has been done by Canadian, American and Danish scientists during international expeditions, in addition to more detailed (site-specific) work carried out by Shell Kanumas A/S during summer/fall 2011 at and near locations proposed for stratigraphic drilling in 2012.

It is very likely that frequent scouring (or gouging) of the seabed by icebergs is a key process that affects sediment properties and benthic ecology on the shelf and upper slope in northeast Baffin Bay when the keels of these icebergs come into contact with the bottom. This suggestion is based on the high numbers of icebergs in these waters, discussed further in Section 4.1.5, that could produce scours during drift or movement in response to currents and the surface wind field. This scouring will typically occur when depths are varying and become shallow, but also, it can happen when the keel depth increases as a result of rotation (roll-over) or other motion of the iceberg. Ice scours have been mapped in several offshore areas where hydrocarbon exploration or production occurs. It is almost certain that scouring takes place along the east Greenland coast, and especially, along the west Greenland coast north of Davis Strait, where high numbers of large icebergs are calved, and transported by the West Greenland Current across banks and other shallow areas on the shelf. Depending of the draft of the large icebergs involved, scouring could occur down to water depths of 250 m on the upper slope. The scours could be as deep as four to six metres in some locations (K Been, pers. comm. 2012) if soft clay sediment is present.

The scours in-fill over time with material that settles through the water column to the bottom, or from boundary layer transport along the seafloor. Depend on the amount of scouring that takes place, it can lead to an upper seabed that consists of mostly or only scoured/in-filled material over periods as short as 50 or 60 to a few hundred years in areas prone to frequent scouring (Smale et al. 2007). The pattern of past and present scours that cross each other can have an important impact on the seabed. When silt or clay soils are disturbed, they generally lose some of their strength, and may absorb water. This process is known as “remoulding”. It can take a long time for the clay soil to regain its strength after remoulding. Sands also lose strength and become looser when they are disturbed, but strength gain can be relatively rapid under wave or other hydrodynamic loading. These observations are related to scouring in the Beaufort Sea, off Sakhalin Island, and off Newfoundland and Labrador, but it is likely the same situation applies in northeast Baffin Bay. Other aspects of scouring by icebergs are discussed in Appendix C.


08 June 2012

4.1.4.2 Circulation

The surface circulation of Baffin Bay is primarily cyclonic (counter-clockwise) with an inflow of warm and more saline water (the West Greenland Current) on the east side of Davis Strait, and a broader outflow of cold and less saline water (the Baffin Current) on the west side of the strait. This pattern is shown in Figure 4.1-8.

The West Greenland Current that enters eastern Baffin Bay consists of two components (Buch 2000, 2002 and Myers 2009):

• a modified East Greenland Current component, closest to the coast, carrying water of polar origin (from the Arctic Ocean) northward, after it rounds Cape Farewell; and

• a current component originating from the Irminger Sea and North Atlantic Current, located to the west of and below the East Greenland Current component.

The Atlantic Water component (Irminger Current and North Atlantic water from the Labrador Sea) is significantly larger than the East Greenland Current component. Clarke and Johnson (1984) estimated 11 Sverdrup (Sv, equal to 106 m3/s) of volume transport for the Atlantic Water versus 3 Sv for East Greenland Current component, for example. As it moves north, a significant portion of the West Greenland Current turns offshore when it encounters the Davis Strait sill, which diverts this water to the interior of the Labrador Sea (Myer et al. 2009). The remaining water continues to flow north, and enters Baffin Bay through Davis Strait. The remaining East Greenland Current component (on the shelf), at this point, is greatly decreased in volume. The properties of this water have been significantly modified by local run-off and interaction with the slope water component (Buch 2000, 2002, NERI 2009). The relatively warm and saline water forming the slope current component flows along the slope and outer shelf, and can be traced as far north as Thule (Buch 1990, 2000, 2002).

A recent estimate of transport by the West Greenland Current indicates that the inflow of the warmer and more saline sub-surface component along the slope is about 1.5 Sv, and that the inflow of the colder and less saline surface component, on the shelf, is about 0.4 Sv (Curry et al. 2011). Seasonality is important; a stronger influx of water from the slope component occurs during fall and early winter (Curry et al. 2011, Tang et al. 2004). Variability from year to year and decade to decade appears to be significant as well. Myer et al (2009), for example, described quasi-decadal variability with the longest consistent period of enhanced transport over a 50-year record taking place during the 2000s. This longer-term variability is probably influenced by the North Atlantic Oscillation (Buch 2002).

As it flows northward along the east coast of Baffin Bay, the West Greenland Current is strongly affected by the topography of the shelf. The West Greenland shelf is deeply incised by large fjords and canyons. Using a numerical circulation model, Tang et al. (2004) described the topographic control and spatial variation of the currents. The results of their simulations illustrate stronger currents along the southern part of the northwest Greenland shelf, and weaker and more variable currents north of lat. 72° N. Canyons divert part the flow toward the coast and off the shelf, particularly to the south and north of Disko Island. When it enters northern Baffin Bay near the North Water Region (see “Sea Ice by Seasonal Period” below), the West Greenland Current mixes with Arctic Ocean outflow that enters Smith Sound from Nares Strait, and essentially ends as a distinct ocean current (Buch 1990, 2000, and Ingram et al. 2002). The combined outflow through Smith, Jones and Lancaster Sounds then drives the south-setting Baffin Current, with estimated volume transport ranging from 0.7 to 2.1 Sv (Tang et al. 2004). Other aspects of regional circulation in Baffin Bay are described in Appendix C.

Except for a small number of moorings deployed by the Bedford Institute of Oceanography (BIO) operational model atlas (Wu and Tang 2011) were retrieved from the BIO database (DFO ODI database 2012). A summary of the analysis is presented below.

The results from the southernmost mooring located in deep water demonstrate both velocity maxima and means that increase with depth, while the second mooring, located further north on the slope and in shallower water, demonstrate similar current strength from surface to bottom. Currents are not strong in general (mean speed


08 June 2012

deep measurement does not demonstrate as much seasonality, but summer currents are still stronger than winter ones overall.

4.1.4.3 Tides

The tides of Baffin Bay are predominantly semi-diurnal and the major semi-diurnal constituent M2 is characterized by an amphidromic point located at about lat. 70° N, almost in the middle of Baffin Bay (Greisman et al. 1986). Both semi-diurnal (components of the tide that occur twice each day) and diurnal (components of the tide that occur once each day) tidal waves propagate anticlockwise (cyclonically) from this amphidromic point.

Tidal amplitudes increase away from the amphidromic point and are higher in the Davis Strait and Smith Sound regions where the M2 constituent of the tidal heights reaches amplitudes of the order of a meter and more. Strong fortnightly modulation (spring and neap) in the tidal elevations is observed in northern Baffin Bay and Kane Basin (Ingram et al. 2002).

No tidal gauge or other tidal records for the Qamut Block were found in the public domain. The closest record on the northwest Greenland coast is from Foulke-Havn about 300 km north of the area, on the east coast of Smith Sound. Recent modeling studies undertaken by the Bedford Institute of Oceanography (Collins et al. 2011) can be used to provide quantitative estimates of the tides in the Qamut Block. A map of the tidal heights over the region, including the license area, was obtained by running and extracting a 29-day prediction at regular intervals (every 0.1 degree) from lat. 74.5° N to 76.5° N and from long. 70.75° W to 61.25 °W. The results were combined to represent maximum (spring tides) tidal range and the current magnitude that can be expected in this region, as shown in Figure 4.1-10 and Figure 4.1-11. The model results indicate that the tidal range and tidal currents increase toward the northwest, as described above. The maximum tidal currents (Figure 4.1-11) also exhibit a substantial increase of current strength over the Qamut Block due to shallower depth, and particularly on the eastern side, with magnitudes above 20 cm/s.

4.1.4.4 Water Mass Distribution and Structure

The water column of northern Baffin Bay, following Tang et al (2004), consists of three layers:

• a colder and relatively fresh surface layer (temperature 0 to -1°C, salinity less than 33.5 practical salinity units(psu) equivalent to parts per thousand) in the upper 100 to 300 m of the water column;

• a warmer and more saline intermediate layer (temperature +1 to +2°C, salinity up to 34.5 psu) from about 300 to 800 m; and

• a colder and slightly less saline (compared to intermediate water) deep layer (temperature less than 0°C, salinity greater than 34 psu) from 1,200 m down to the bottom.

There is a northward deepening of isopycnals (contours of equal density) in the upper 200 m, supporting the existence of a west-setting current in northern Baffin Bay, as well as a temperature minimum at roughly 100 m depth (which is a remnant of winter cooling), and a temperature maximum at 500 to 800 m depth (Tang et al. 2004).

The upper layer consists of inflow from the Arctic Ocean through Nares Strait and other passages to the west and northwest, and to a lesser extent, inflow along the West Greenland shelf (Tang el al. 2004). The on-shelf component of the West Greenland Current, described in Section 4.1.4.2, carries the latter water north. The middle layer, known as West Greenland Intermediate Water, is related to influx of relatively warm and saline water from the northwest Atlantic Ocean. This water is also transported north, along the slope and outer shelf, by the West Greenland Current. It is warmer during winter compared to the summer period. The temperature of this water mass is not uniform, and is reduced as it circulates (Tang et al. 2004). The origin and fate of the deep layer in Baffin Bay, over the abyssal plain, known as Baffin Bay Deep Water from 1,200 to 1,800 m, then as Baffin Bay Bottom Water from 1,800 m to the bottom, involves vertical processes in the basin itself, rather than advection (inflow) from external areas, such as the Labrador Sea. Deep water exchange with other basins does not occur. Other aspects of water column structure and water mass properties in Baffin Bay are described in Appendix C.

To examine the water column structure of the Qamut Block in more detail, data from the World Ocean Atlas (NOAA 2012) were extracted and processed. The data represent a composite of profiles (a mean or average) collected over a number of years, sometimes back to the early 1900s or eariler. The temperature and salinity profiles provided represent “climatology”, rather than a given profile at a specific date and time in northeast Baffin


08 June 2012

Bay. A one-degree latitude, west to east longitudinal profile from long. 70°W to 62°W centred on lat. 75.25° N, was extracted from the 0.25 degree resolution available dataset and averaged to create the profile. Temperature and salinity profiles during summer can be found in Figure 4.1-212.

From July to September, the Qamut Block is characterized by a thin surface layer (roughly, the upper 25 m of the water column) of warm (about 1.5°C) and fresh (less than 33 psu) water above the three water masses, mentioned above, that Tang et al. (2004) described. The lower (deep) water mass, is not present in the licence area, since only a small region in the northeast part of the block has water depths approaching the upper limit of this water mass.

Overall, the water column is slightly colder westward except for the thin surface layer in which warmer temperatures occur from west to east. It is also generally fresher, to the west, in the upper 200 m of the water column. According to Buch (1990, 2000), this surface mixed layer originates from the melting of (winter) sea ice, together with run-off from land, and the melting of glacier ice. This forms a thin, less saline layer of water during spring. Due to the intensification of solar radiation in summer and to the vertical salinity stratification, the heat is stored within this thin layer and temperatures increase significantly.

The water structure is more strongly stratified during the summer from west to east in the licence area, with higher temperatures at the surface and lower sub-surface temperatures. This could be due to higher sea ice melting volume on the western part of the area and/or stronger vertical mixing over the shallow banks present on the eastern part.

No upwelling areas were identified by NERI (2006, 2011) along the northwest Greenland coast, but strong vertical advection due to the tides along or across the steep slopes of banks can occur. This is supported by the temperature profile data reported by Valeur et al. (1996). These vertical mixing areas would be located where the tidal currents are strongest.

4.1.4.5 Large-Scale Variability due to Winds, Air-Sea Fluxes and Fronts

In the upper layer of the water column, from the time of sea ice break-up in late June through to ice freeze-up in early November, there are large temperature and salinity gradients in both the vertical and horizontal domain. An example of this situation is the vertical temperature-salinity distribution at an oceanographic station off Upernavik in July 2009 (Ribergaard 2010). The vertical gradients in this section, in the form of elevated water temperatures of up to 5°C in a thin layer at the surface, develop from the vertical exchanges of heat between the ocean and the atmosphere, in this case, during summer after melting of sea ice. Winds are also important in northeast Baffin Bay. Strong winds result in vertical mixing of water properties to greater depths; when winds are weak, the water column can be more stratified, causing larger vertical gradients. In addition, depending on direction, winds can drive the upwelling of nutrient-rich deeper water to the surface. West or north-westerly winds can lead to upwelling at the shelf edge off northwest Greenland and also along ice edges, when the ice edge is laying to the west. Precipitation and evaporation can decrease or increase the salinity of surface and near-surface waters as well. However, these vertical exchanges result in smaller changes to salinity than those due to ice melt and formation processes in northeast Baffin Bay. Variability of water column properties, which can be considerable in this region, has important effects on the presence and abundance of marine life.

Oceanic fronts, or large horizontal gradients in water properties, are also important biologically active zones in northeast Baffin Bay. Munk et al. (2003) reported that “...the establishment of hydrographical fronts are of primary importance to the plankton communities in the West Greenland shelf area, influencing the early life of fish and the recruitment to the important fisheries resources”. Mossbech et al. (2002) also noted that “fronts, upwelling areas and marginal ice zones are examples of...hydrodynamic discontinuities [in Greenland waters] where high surface concentrations of phytoplankton, zooplankton, and shrimp and fish larvae can be expected”.

The West Greenland Current Front (WGCF) closely follows the shelf break and the steep upper slope along the northwest Greenland shelf until it reaches long. 52° W where the slope becomes notably less steep and therefore no longer stabilizes the WGCF (Aquarone et al., 2009). This is shown in Figure 4.1-313. This front results in eddy generation that enhances cross-frontal exchange of heat, salt and nutrients, as well as zooplankton and juvenile fish. The Mid-Shelf Front (MSF) is found over the mid-shelf roughly parallel to the coast. It roughly separates the two components of the West Greenland Current, described above in Section 4.1.4.2, from each other as both continue to flow north and the on-shelf component is modified during summer and fall by fresh water from various sources, including meltwater from the Inland Ice. The front between these two components of


08 June 2012

the West Greenland Current is weak from January to May and relatively strong the remaining part of the year, with maximum strength in September and October (Hansen et al. 2004).

Other frontal features occur in northern Baffin Bay, such as those measured off Cape York at the boundary between the relatively warm waters of the remaining West Greenland Current in this area and the cold Arctic waters exiting Smith Sound (Melling et al. 2001). The current measurements reveal large-scale or deeply penetrating horizontal gradients, or frontal features, as well as smaller frontal features occurring near the surface.

4.1.4.6 Sea Ice Melt and Upwelling

The near-surface frontal features in the upper layer of northeast Baffin Bay are primarily associated with sea ice break-up and melting, iceberg movement and melting, and direct meltwater run-off along the northwest coast of Greenland. The contribution of the first process to surface and near-surface water column properties is described in this section.

The melting of sea ice in early summer results in reduced salinity waters at the surface of northeast Baffin Bay, since the salinity of first-year sea ice is typically about 8 psu, which is considerably less than the surface water salinities of about 30 psu in this region. The average thickness of the sea ice during the melt season is in the range of 1.5 to 2.0 m (NERI 2011).

In summary, a significant amount of fresh water enters the upper part of the water column in northeast Baffin Bay when this ice melts during the break-up and clearing process on the northwest Greenland shelf. This pattern is described in more detail in Section 4.1.5.1. The volume of water involved is roughly 1.1x1011m3. Appendix C describes how this estimate was calculated, and contains other details on the significance of fresh water input from sea ice melting.

Another important attribute of sea ice break-up and melting in early summer is the location of the remaining West Ice in central Baffin Bay through June and into July. Upwelling along the pack ice edge has been shown in other Arctic regions to be an important mechanism. This was noted, for example, by Buckley et al. (1979) and Dumont et al. (2010), involving enrichment of nutrients in the upper layer of the ocean due to transport of the surface waters away from the ice edge under favourable wind conditions which are replaced by higher nutrient waters from depth, and also from beneath the ice itself. In the case of Middle Ice Pack, this means upwelling could occur during periods of westerly to northwest winds, which are not as prevalent as south-easterly winds in northeast Baffin Bay during summer, but still common (DMI-DTU 2011). The importance of ice-edge upwelling to increased ocean productivity levels has been noted in northwest Baffin Bay by Borstad and Gower (1984) and off southwest Greenland by Pederson et al. (2003).

A novel form of localized “upwelling” is possible in northeast Baffin Bay. It does not involve ice-edge processes, but rather, the effect an iceberg has on the upper part of the water column when it is moved by wind or surface currents through the ocean, including the momentum “wake” of glacial ice it creates, which trails behind the iceberg when it is drifting. The water column is locally displaced, bringing up deeper water that is nutrient-rich. Ice in the wake, and the iceberg itself, will continue to melt, contributing fresh water to the surface layer, which continues to be locally altered and mixed, but on a diminishing basis, until the ice disappears. Other aspects of this situation are described in Appendix C.

4.1.4.7 Freshwater Run-off from Land and Icebergs

Freshwater inputs to the sea from land sources are important to the oceanography of northeast Baffin Bay, especially the inshore and shelf regions. Freshwater of land origin can take three forms: direct run-off from rivers and streams along the West Greenland coast, including the extensive fjords; melting of outflow glaciers at tidewater (including drainage via meltwater channels in these glaciers that enters the ocean directly); and the export of glacial ice to the sea in the form of icebergs, which subsequently melt as they move away from the coast.

The total mass loss of Greenland glacial ice will result in considerable amounts of freshwater inputs to Baffin Bay in summer months. The total freshwater volume discharge for all of West Greenland, resulting from loss of ice sheet mass, has been estimated as approximately 2x1011 m3/yr. This total is derived from ice sheet volume reductions (Box et al. 2011) and from iceberg volume fluxes (Valeur et al. 1996). The total freshwater discharge occurs as both run-off and melt into the ocean at the shoreline and at tidewater glaciers, as well as from iceberg calving. Nearly all of this freshwater would be released during the period from mid-May to mid-September during


08 June 2012

times of above zero degree air temperature and clearing of sea ice cover. The total volume of freshwater released from land sources of 2x1011 m3 is approximately twice that of freshwater input from sea ice melt over the shelf areas for all of eastern Baffin Bay. This input was estimated to be 1.1x1011 m3; it was described in Section 4.1.4.6.

Direct meltwater run-off occurs from late spring to late summer (Box et a

Documents

ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland LTD. 2012 Program .../media/Nanoq/Files/Hearings...ConocoPhillips Global NVE Greenland LTD. 2012 Program Block 2 (Qamut) 2D-Seismic Survey Final