1.11.5 Liability concerning Antarctic mineral resource activities

XV-2. Comprehensive measures for the protection of the Antarctic environment and dependent and associated ecosystems
The Representatives,
Recalling the adoption on 2 June 1988, by the Fourth Special Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting on Antarctic Mineral Resources of the Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities and the importance of the issue of liability.
Recommend to their Governments that:
A meeting be held in 1990 to explore and discuss all proposals relating to Article 8 (7) of the Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities.

Extract from Report of XVIth ATCM, Annex B(viii)
Report to the XVIth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting on the meeting held pursuant to Recommendation XV-2 Recommendation XV-2 on 'Comprehensive measures for the protection of the Antarctic environment and dependent and associated ecosystems' envisaged that a meeting be held in 1990 to 'explore and discuss all proposals relating to Article 8(7) of the Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities'.
Pursuant to this mandate the meeting was held on Thursday 29 November 1990 in Viņa del Mar, Chile, and was attended by representatives of the 26 Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties and 10 other Contracting Parties to the Antarctic Treaty. Professor Francisco Orrego Vicuņa, Representative of Chile, was elected Chairman.
In accordance with the terms of Recommendation XV-2 the meeting heard all the proposals and views on the issue of liability that were expressed in the course of these deliberations. The following delegations made statements on this occasion: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Chile, the People's Republic of China, Denmark France, Germany, Greece, India, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, South Africa, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America.
The Meeting agreed that on the basis of all proposals and views expressed on the subject, the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties may consider further the issue of liability at the appropriate time.

1.11.6 Report of the Group of Experts on Mineral Exploration and Exploitation, London 1977

1. The Group of Experts was established in accordance with Recommendation VIII- 14, operative paragraph 4, and the Report of the Special Preparatory Meeting held in Paris in June 1976. The Group met between 20 and 29 September 1977.
2. The Group conducted its business according to the terms of reference established at the Special Preparatory Meeting and guidelines submitted to the Plenary.
3. At its first session the Group elected Dr M.W. Holdgate (United Kingdom) as its Chairman.
4. The Group adopted the following agenda:

5. The attached record of the discussions and conclusions of the Group of Experts is presented in the following order:
6. In presenting their Report to Plenary the Group noted that the implementation of all the guidelines, including the proposals for scientific research, set out in the Report would demand substantial effort before exploratory drilling or the extraction of hydrocarbons or other minerals began (if this in fact were to occur) in the Antarctic.
7. The Group also stressed that these guidelines would need regular review as technology and scientific understanding advanced. The standards, pollution levels, environmental impact and other parameters referred to in the Guidelines and Report would also need careful quantification.

I. Guidelines on appropriate methods for mineral exploration and exploitation in the Antarctic, and for the protection of the environment Introduction
8. The Group of Experts consider that were it thought possible to commence mineral exploration or exploitation in the Antarctic, guidelines would need to be developed and agreed covering scientific baseline studies, site studies, environmental impact assessment and many technical details of the actual operation of activities related to minerals.
9. Not only should existing international agreements such as those on safety at sea, pollution from shipping, dumping at sea and other marine environmental matters be upheld, but consideration should be given to the development (in pursuance of Recommendation VIII-11) of special rules related to the exacting climatic conditions of the Antarctic, and the importance of safeguarding its unique environment and ecosystems.
10. Programmes of scientific research, monitoring and information exchange should be set in hand, according to procedures established by Consultative Meetings under the Antarctic Treaty, so as to provide as complete a foundation as possible before exploration or exploitation is likely to be considered.
Geological and Geophysical Investigations Prior to Exploratory Drilling for Hydrocarbons
11. Areas which may contain hydrocarbons are likely to be identified only after extensive, basic geophysical and geological surveys. Before any exploratory drilling was undertaken there would be a need for further detailed geological and geophysical studies and the investigation of environment factors that determine the feasibility of safe drilling operations. This second category of information should include sea-state data; weather trends during different seasons; currents; pack-ice distribution, types and pressures; iceberg size, frequency, drift rate and direction; and location of contemporary iceberg scour. Information is also needed about the composition, stability and strength of sea-bed sediments and strata on which installations might be based.
12. Most established geological and geophysical techniques, including geological and geochemical surveys and magnetic, gravimetric and seismic profiling systems, can be used safely and successfully for exploration for mineral resources in the Antarctic at appropriate seasons. Their initial environmental impact is likely to be no greater than that of present research activities, and can probably be controlled in the way that research is controlled (for example under the Agreed Measures for the Protection of Antarctic Fauna and Flora), but revised standards may be required should there be a marked increase in the scale of these activities.
13. Seismic techniques using high explosives as an energy source are required for geophysical research on deep crustal structures, and may be used occasionally in hydrocarbon exploration at sea, to confirm the findings of other methods. However, the detonation of explosives can have severe local impact on the biota and their use should be kept to a minimum. They should not be used on land (or in fresh waters) of biological or geomorphological interest.
Exploratory drilling for hydrocarbons at sea
14. Before any exploratory drilling is undertaken, there should be foundation investigations using methods such as high-resolution seismic and a range of physical studies of sea-bed conditions at the proposed drill site.
15. Because of the special environmental conditions and environmental sensitivity, any exploratory drilling in the Antarctic should be arranged with particularly thorough attention to safety precautions, both in the design of the equipment and installations and in its operation.
16. Floating structures used for exploratory drilling in the Antarctic should conduct their operations so as to be able to stop drilling rapidly and move away when threatened by icebergs, and subsequently recover their boreholes, without risk of pollution. Because it is most efficient to undertake such disconnection in an orderly way, early warning of approaching icebergs and storms that might also require movement off station is essential.
17. There is a divergence of expert opinion on how far technological developments might permit exploratory drilling from installations on the sea bed within the mid- term (10-25 years). Such developments would allow operations in areas inaccessible at present (although not below ice shelves). It would be essential for such installations (and similar sea-bed installations used in exploitation) to be located in areas not liable to iceberg scour.
18. Platforms and other installations for use for oil exploration or exploitation in the Antarctic should, wherever possible, be constructed outside the region and towed to their location. On-shore bases for the support of exploratory and exploitative activities should be kept as few and as small as possible and sited with great care so that the least possible environmental damage results. Installations for oil exploitation in the Antarctic should be as self-contained as possible.
19. Under the exacting conditions of the Antarctic, and because of its environmental sensitivity, special attention should be given to the thorough training of technical personnel and to the elaboration and enforcement of strict codes of conduct governing drilling operations.
Design of installations for the exploitation of hydrocarbons at sea
20. There is no technology presently suited to year-round oil production in the Antarctic. The concepts behind such potential technology are being developed actively, and may lead in the direction of self-contained, unmanned installations on the sea bed. It is important that guidelines are agreed to ensure that design, installation and maintenance are to the highest standard so as to prevent pollution, waste of energy and other resources, and hazard to human life. These guidelines will need continual review as the technology is developed.
21. Risk analyses should be performed to identify possible modes of failure of installations under the extreme environmental conditions of the Antarctic (which would need careful definition to this end), or through accident, and provision should be made for redundant paths or systems to insure against serious failure.
22. High standards should be set for the processing of hydrocarbons exploited in the Antarctic. As a general rule, gas should not be flared but used to provide energy for local needs, re-injected, or exported from the Antarctic. Water emerging with the oil should be re-injected.
23. Storage systems should be designed so as to ensure that hydrocarbons are separated from displaced seawater in accordance with agreed standards.
24. Further studies are needed in order to develop suitable vessels for use in the the transportation of hydrocarbons from the Antarctic. These vessels should conform to advanced design standards and include systems for the prevention of the discharge of oily ballast water or polluted seawater south of 60 South.
Mineral Exploration and Exploitation on Land
25. Exploratory drilling is unlikely to be undertaken widely on land in the Antarctic, but should be carefully localised and controlled so as to minimise the disturbance of vulnerable Antarctic soils and the importation of chemical and microbial contamination.
26. Although the mining of minerals on land in the Antarctic is not likely in the foreseeable future, were it to occur severe local impact could be caused. This could also result from quarrying of aggregate and rocks for use in construction. Processing of ores would demand substantial energy and water, and generate large volumes of wastes. Sites and associated transport routes for any such mining or quarrying need a thorough environmental evaluation, and its operation would need careful monitoring to minimise damage.
Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Protection or Rehabilitation
27. Methods for environmental impact assessment in the Antarctic should be developed in accordance with recent developments in the concept. Such assessments should involve the close association of environmental scientists, specialists in the technology of mineral exploration and exploitation, and others concerned with the regulation of such activities. Impact assessment should be so conducted as to aid the adjustment of proposed developments so as to reduce their environmental effects, and should lead on to continuing monitoring.
28. Methods for the containment, recovery or safe dispersion of oil spilled at sea in the Antarctic in all but ideal conditions do not exist at present, and need urgent development. Research on this topic (or on that described in the following paragraph) should not, however, involve the deliberate release of oil into the sea in the Antarctic.
29. Knowledge is insufficient at present to allow reliable estimation of the impact of possible oil spills on Antarctic ecosystems, and it is vital that research on this subject be expanded.
30. There are no effective methods for the full restoration of sites on land, on ice, or at sea in the Antarctic disturbed by mineral exploration or exploitation. Artificial re- vegetation of land areas, as practised in the Arctic, does not appear appropriate in the Antarctic because of differing habitat conditions and a lack of suitable indigenous plant species. The most that can be done is to grade land surfaces and remove all possible extraneous material.
II. Record of the discussion of the Group of Experts.
A . Review of the present state of technology for exploration and exploitation of minerals in the Antarctic

i. General considerations
31. In discussing mineral exploration and exploitation techniques it is desirable to discriminate between the position on land (and there between ice-free and ice- covered terrain) and at sea. Marine situations should be examined in three categories: areas of sea bed situated beneath floating ice shelves several hundred metres thick, areas beneath pack ice that persists for nine or more months in the year, and areas beneath seas open for at least three summer months.
32. It is useful to distinguish three successive stages in the process commencing with exploration and ending in the exploitation of minerals.. These stages are:
33. Although there is a wide range of opinions concerning the likely location and extent of hydrocarbon and other mineral deposits in the Antarctic, at present there is no proof that significant deposits exist south of latitude 60 South. However, the Group agrees with a number of previous national and international evaluations, including those by SCAR, that exploration for hydrocarbons on the continental margins around Antarctica is foreseeable, and commercial exploitation is a possibility in the longer term. The exploitation of metallic minerals and fossil fuels on land appears much less probable in the foreseeable future, while there are more accessible deposits in other regions, but it would be unwise to exclude it completely. Should offshore oil or gas reserves be exploited, moreover, there could be onshore mining of rocks and quarrying of aggregates for use in construction. While the technology for exploration for, and exploitation of, hydrocarbons has received most urgent attention therefore, some attention has been given to that employed for other minerals.
34. The Antarctic remains one of the world's least known regions. Much of its land surface is mantled in ice, and its shallow seas obscured by ice shelves and pack. The development and application of geophysical methods, especially those employing remote sensing, are vital to its exploration for science, irrespective of possible mineral exploitation. Only approximately 1 per cent of other geologically comparable areas contain hydrocarbon resources, so that most of this exploration is unlikely to lead to possible commercial development.
35. Exploration or exploitation of hydrocarbons seems likely to be technically feasible at some time, but estimates of the likely time scale vary and there was a wide divergence of views in the Group. No delegation believed that exploratory drilling in the Antarctic would begin in less than five years, and most of the experts considered that it was unlikely in less than ten years. The time scale for possible exploitation is even more uncertain, but in the much less exacting conditions of the North Sea, ten years elapsed between exploratory drilling and the commencement of exploitation.
36. It is important that a sufficient environmental data base to allow wise decisions about the conduct of exploratory drilling is obtained. Information is needed about sea states and depths; the persistence of storms and of spells of good weather; currents; pack ice (including pressures in pack); iceberg size, depths, frequency and rate of movement; and the depths of iceberg scour in areas that might be explored for hydrocarbons. In such areas information is also needed on the composition and stability of sea-bed sediments and rocks to which structures might be moored or on which they could be based. Areas of faulting and slumping, which could threaten the integrity of structures, need to be defined. Techniques to determine all these features are available (including side scan sonar and high-resolution seismic studies of the sea bed) but this programme of data gathering could well take ten years.
37. The design of structures for drilling, production, oil collection, processing, storage and transportation of the final products from the Antarctic must be based on recommended practices. Guidelines will need to be laid down to ensure that structures are designed, installed and maintained in a manner that provides safeguards against pollution, the waste of resources, or risks to life.
ii. Geophysical and other exploratory techniques
38. Geophysical exploration needs to be combined with other techniques. On land the continued mapping of ice thickness and sub-ice relief and the extension of geological investigations are needed as well as gravimetric, magnetic or seismic investigations if crustal structures are to be defined. At sea bathymetric surveys and geological sampling of the sea bed are important, alongside more specialised geophysical techniques.
39. Aeromagnetic techniques using a fairly widely spaced network of traverse lines are particularly appropriate to the search for basins containing substantial thicknesses of sediment. At sea, methods involving the sampling of water just above the sea bed in the search for traces of hydrocarbon seepage is another possible environmentally safe technology, as a supplement to the seismic studies that are likely to be instituted on an increasing scale.
40. Seismic surveys undertaken at sea involve two kinds of technique. Reflection methods, now widely used by the petroleum industry, involve long multi-channel arrays and energy sources which include non-explosive systems (such as 'air guns'). Despite the problems posed by sea ice, these systems can be used in many parts of the Antarctic at certain seasons. They can give penetration of the sea bed for up to 10-15 km, which is sufficient for exploration for hydrocarbon minerals and they have no damaging impact on the marine flora and fauna. However, additional velocity iknformation may be required, and therefore many commercial operations also use refraction methods to a limited degree. These methods involve 'air guns', or occasionally high explosives. Use of explosives is not considered essential in exploring for hydrocarbons, and it has been prohibited in some regions (such as the Norwegian continental shelf) because of the severe local damage it can cause to the marine biota.
41. Refraction seismic studies using explosives, on the other hand, are unavoidable at present in certain fundamental fields of crustal geophysics where the aim is to study deep structure (to 30-40 km) as when examining the relationship between the Antarctic and other continents.
42. While satisfactory geophysical methods appear to be available for scientific exploration and the search for minerals in Antarctica, there are dangers in over- generalisation.One thing is, however, clear.The present ignorance of the structure of much of the Antarctic land and continental margin , coupled with the hostile environment and the extent of ice cover, means that the exploratory phase is likely to be prolonged in most areas, before exploratory drilling could be considered.
iii. Drilling and other extraction techniques
43. Considerable experience of drilling has been gained on land in the joint Japanese- New Zealand-United States Dry Valley Drilling Project. Technology developed in the Arctic could be used under certain conditions to explore for and exploit hydrocarbons on land in the Antarctic. Conversely no technology exists for drilling through moving ice-sheets on land and it is unlikely that there will be much incentive to develop it.
44. In considering off-shore drilling technology it is useful to discriminate between strictly technological aspects (for example relating to platforms, drilling systems or prevention of blow-outs) and environmental factors determining the period for which drilling is feasible and the special hazards to be guarded against.
45. It is important to discriminate between drilling to only shallow depths to obtain geological samples of sea-bed strata for scientific purposes and exploratory drilling for hydrocarbons. The latter requires blow-out preventers and other safety devices while the former may not. Generally shallow drilling to confirm sea-bed geology should precede deep drilling for hydrocarbons.
46. Technology already exists for drilling from dynamically positioned mobile structures in depths below 1,000 m. It appears theoretically possible in the Antarctic in areas free of ice and where massive icebergs are infrequent for at least three months in summer. Such areas are rare and of very limited extent. Thorough studies of environmental conditions in such areas would be required before operations could be conducted without risk.
47. The Group was informed by several delegations of the development of technology (such as large floating caisson structures) in their countries that would allow drilling in deeper waters and in areas covered with Arctic pack ice throughout the year. Such technology would need very careful evaluation before its use was considered in the Antarctic, but it might allow the exploration of larger areas on the Antarctic margin (but not the regions below thick ice shelves).
48. Experience off Labrador has come from the use of a Pelican-type dynamically positioned ship. Such a vessel may not be ideal for exploratory drilling in the Antarctic and a floating dynamically positioned structure may be preferable.
49. Ice conditions in the Antarctic, which differ in many ways from those in the Arctic, pose certain special problems. There is an annual discharge to the oceans around Antarctica of about 4,000 km3 of icebergs, many of which persist for several years. Antarctic icebergs are much larger, and many could not readily be towed away from a drilling platform. A platform would therefore need to be able to cease work and move away if threatened. Experience off Labrador confirms that towing can change the direction of drift of the smaller icebergs sufficiently to approximately halve the number of times the drilling vessel needs to disconnect from the borehole, but in the Antarctic the benefit might be considerably less. Towing is at present impracticable with icebergs exceeding two million tonnes weight, and when the sea is rough, or the berg inconveniently shaped or unstable.
50. Technology exists for shutting down and disconnecting from wells, and re- entering them afterwards without risk of pollution, but it is desirable to conduct the shut-down process in an orderly fashion because this facilitates re-entry, and hence an effective 'early warning' system of approaching icebergs would be needed. Forecasts of the frequency of such encounters are also required since drilling would be unacceptably protracted if it had to stop very often. Such operations would also demand reliable meteorological information in advance of developing storms. Environmental studies designed to ensure the safety of exploratory drilling activities appear to need urgent development.
51. Exploratory drilling is not an end in itself. It costs large sums, and is undertaken in the hope that it will lead on to exploitation. Hence the technology for exploration and exploitation needs to be considered together, but there is the important difference that while the former can be done satisfactorily in areas of sea open for three months in summer, the latter demands operations for a much longer period, for which there is no technology appropriate to the Antarctic at present.
52. It is important to discriminate between the process of drilling (whether for exploration or production wells) and the control of production. Drilling is always done at present from ships or platforms at the sea surface, but there are several systems allowing control of production wells by structures on the sea bed. At present all of these are in shallow water and many are controlled from a surface vessel to which oil is piped.
53. Existing technology does not appear suitable for exploratory drilling in those parts of the Antarctic seas covered almost throughout the year by pack and fast ice of many years' accumulation or by floating ice shelves and glaciers. For these reasons most of the seas on the Antarctic margin are inaccessible for exploratory drilling at present, and fixed or floating platforms of the kind used in oil exploitation today seem equally unsuited to these areas. Technology permitting drilling from installations on the sea bed in other regions is being developed and may help to overcome this obstacle except in those areas where icebergs ground on the sea bed. Advances are also being made in the design of systems both for drilling and operating production wells on or below the sea bed in deep waters. The water depth presents no inherent problem because such systems would be unmanned and their maintenance would be likely to be undertaken by submarines rather than divers. Such systems have not yet been developed for the conditions prevailing in the Antarctic.
iv. Construction techniques for on-shore and off-shore installations
54. At present several kinds of platform are used in oil exploitation at sea. Fixed structures of concrete or steel are being used today in depths of water down to 130 and 300 m respectively, and have been developed for safe operation even in seismic zones. One floating platform, linked by risers to production wells, is in use in the North Sea. About 100 underwater well-head systems are in use, mainly in shallow water and none below 300 m. Despite considerable advances in the design of platforms, risers (the link between ocean floor and surface platform) and safety devices, none of these platform systems is suitable in their present form for installation in the Antarctic. While considerable progress has been made in developing surface platforms to withstand storms, and pack ice, none is proof against icebergs on an Antarctic scale. At the present, the design of equipment for use in oil exploitation in the Antarctic remains in the conceptual stage.
55. The first action in evaluating a newly discovered oilfield is to determine its size, and where the technology for exploitation is very expensive, a field needs to be very large if it is to be worth exploiting. In the Antarctic a further constraint would be imposed by limited access. It is difficult to envisage any Antarctic oilfield being exploited if it were only accessible to transport removing the production for three months of the year even though this period would suffice for the actual drilling of wells.
56. In the North Sea, using today's technology (but with year-round access), before an oilfield is exploited the potential recoverable reserves need to be of the order over 100-200 million barrels. In the Antarctic it is likely that only very large fields would be attractive for exploitation. The limit will however depend on world energy costs and on the available technology in the future. Should oilfields be found and technology allow their exploitation, it would be unwise to assume that they might not become
57. Any structures used for oil exploitation in the Antarctic would almost certainly be constructed in a region of warmer waters outside the region and towed to the point of installation. There are no technological problems in this process, but seas in the area of installation would need to be ice-free at least for the period of 1-3 days needed for correct positioning.
58. The logistic support of exploitation activities will also need careful planning. It could involve the construction of supply bases on land in the Antarctic if there were suitable sites nearby, or outside the region (the latter being the more likely). Structures used in the Antarctic are likely to be more self-contained than those used elsewhere, in less exacting climates. These features are likely to reduce the extent of major construction activities on land with their associated environmental impact.
59. Should mineral exploration or exploitation occur on-shore the associated construction of bases for support personnel, processing plant, or other installations would be possible adapting technology already developed in Arctic regions and in the building of the larger Antarctic stations.
v. Processing and storage operations: hydrocarbon minerals at sea
60. All oil emerging from a well is a mixture of liquid hydrocarbons, gas and (especially as the exploitation of a field continues) water. The gas needs to be separated from the oil before the latter can be transported (since transport of oil in tankers takes place at atmospheric pressure). The hydrocarbon gases produced are generally either flared (burned) or re-injected thereby maintaining pressure and helping continued exploitation. The water is separated from the oil and can also be injected back into the oil reservoir or into some other strata.
61. Existing technology for this separation and reinjection could be employed in any fixed or floating surface production platforms used in the Antarctic (it would be more difficult to liquefy the separated gas and remove it for marketing). Some gas could be used as a fuel, for power drilling and other operations: the Group advises that gas should not generally be flared in the Antarctic (Guidelines paragraph 15). Appropriate technology which has also been developed and tested in production wellhead structures on the sea bed, operated by remote control from the surface, could be developed as an integral part of the perfection of such submerged structures for use in the Antarctic.
62. Substantial storage capacity might be required at installations at sea from which separated oil was loaded directly into ships, because of the inevitable interruption of surface shipping operations by storms, and occasionally by heavy pack or icebergs. Even sub-sea installations loading into submarine tankers might require considerable capacity.
vi. Processing and storage operations: minerals on land
63. If minerals were exploited on-shore in the Antarctic, it is likely that they would also (as elsewhere in the world) need to be enriched before transport away from the mining area. This processing would demand substantial installations, although the technology would be likely to be the same as was applied elsewhere, for example in the Arctic. Large amounts of fuel would be required since the processing of such ores is an energy-intensive process. Large volumes of water would also be needed - again demanding energy, in most parts of the Antarctic, to melt ice. substantial volumes of wastes would be produced.
vii. Transport techniques
64. Transport would be required for two purposes should mineral exploration or exploitation occur in the Antarctic. It would be needed to support personnel and installations and to remove the products of their activities. Present technology, as used to supply Antarctic bases, would be adequate for the support role although the volume of equipment and numbers of people moved might be much greater (in exploratory drilling two or three service ships might be needed to support the 100 or so men on a rig and the tugs employed in iceberg towing). Small storage bases might be needed on shore should this be possible near enough to areas being explored. However, exploitation of hydrocarbons would require a considerable increase in the number of personnel at drilling installations, with the possible resulting need to build land bases with the least possible damage to the environment.
65. It seems likely that separated oil would be loaded directly into ships at installations at sea for removal from the Antarctic. Either specially designed surface vessels or submarines could be used to remove oil. Information obtained during the voyage of the 'Manhattan' may allow the design of tankers that could operate commercially through Arctic pack ice. The attraction of submarines lies in their greater certainty of year-round access. The concepts behind the design of both types of vessel are being explored actively, and it is likely that technology would be available by the time Antarctic oil exploitation became possible on other grounds. Pipelines, however, provide a third option. Their use is unlikely in many parts of the Antarctic, especially because of iceberg scour but also because there is little attraction in removing oil from the open sea to coastal areas which might be no more easily accessible by tankers; modern techniques of tunnelling in the sea floor at depths of up to 300 m could possibly be developed to the point where pipelines could be adequately protected.
B. Environmental impact of mineral exploration and exploitation
66. The Group of Experts could not undertake a thorough study of the impact of mineral exploration and exploitation on the Antarctic environment. However, the discussion of the technical aspects of mineral exploration and exploitation in the Antarctic showed that the question of the impact of these activities on the environment has been studied very inadequately and that there is an urgent need for a further examination of this problem. The Group considers that measures for the protection of the Antarctic environment need to be worked out prior to any commercial exploration for, or exploitation of mineral resources in Antarctica, should such activities occur there.
67. The Group had before it the Report of the SCAR Group of Specialists on the Environmental Impact Assessment of Mineral Exploration/Exploitation in Antarctica(EAMREA) prepared at the request of the Eighth Consultative Meeting and the Special Preparatory Meeting in Paris in June 1976. Attention was also drawn to a number of other papers, including those presented to the Special Preparatory Meeting in Paris by the Soviet Delegation and by the Australian Delegation, and the summary of the Report on Environmental Impact Assessment by Dr D.H. Elliot. The Group of Experts considered that the EAMREA Report, taken in conjunction with the other papers, provided a useful starting point for the assessment of the likely impact on the Antarctic environment of various possible technological developments and for the development of a programme to provide more precise assessments.
68. The Group advised the Consultative Meeting that technological and ecological experts need to work together in the further evaluation of these questions. Only through a direct interaction of this kind will it be possible to define the ways in which new technological advances may alter physical and chemical properties of the Antarctic as a habitat and apply the most recent advances in scientific understanding of Antarctic environments and ecosystems so as to predict the ecological changes that are likely to result. A series of carefully prepared expert seminars or workshops bringing together appropriate specialists may well provide the most effective forum for this dialogue.
69. More research will unquestionably be required before satisfactory predictions can be made of the nature and scale of the impact of possible alternative mineral exploration and exploitation technologies in the Antarctic. Opinions expressed in the Report (e.g. in paragraphs 12, 13 and 26 of the Guidelines and paragraphs 39, 40 and 50 of the Record of the Group's discussions should be regarded as provisional, pending such research). The Group did not attempt to specify all the subjects needing attention, but did identify the following areas:
Ecologists who were members of the Group stressed the need for selection, based on a critical analysis of existing knowledge, in the development of this research programme. It would be quite impossible to measure all environmental variables, or describe all Antarctic ecosystems in detail. The dialogue between technological and ecological experts described in paragraph 68 should have as a major objective the selection of key factors and organisms for detailed study.
70. The first of these areas of research is equally important if the potential of the Antarctic as a source of minerals is to be evaluated. The Group recorded its view that the estimate published in the Oil and Gas Journal for November 1976 and quoted in the Report of the SCAR EAMREA Group that 45 billion barrels of oil and 115 trillion cubic feet of gas 'may' occur on parts of the Antarctic continental margin, even with the qualifications attached to it by the EAMREA Group, was only a speculation and should not be cited unless supported by much firmer evidence.
71. There are other fields of research which the Group noted as essential if exploration for minerals in the Antarctic was to be properly directed, and its impact predicted and controlled. The studies mentioned in paragraph 69(ii) above fall into this category and form part of the data base that the Group considered was essential before exploration for hydrocarbons could safely begin on the Antarctic margin. The following other topics were mentioned:
72. If mineral exploration or exploitation were to occur in the Antarctic it would be essential to monitor both the operations themselves and consequential changes in the environment. There would need to be a system providing immediate warning of an accident leading to significant pollution and monitoring of the dispersion and effects of the pollutants released, and of the effectiveness of any measures for containment or recovery. This would be particularly difficult under Antarctic conditions.
C. Measures for the prevention or restoration of damage to the environment
i. Prevention of Pollution by Oil
73. Problems of oil pollution can arise during drilling (whether for exploration or production), extraction, processing, storage or transportation under both normal operations and in the event of accident.Some delegations considered that these problems may be especially acute in the very cold Antarctic seas where the natural degradation of oil is likely to be extremely slow.
74. Thorough surveys in advance of drilling are essential for the prevention of pollution. High-resolution seismic studies can detect layers where gas pockets may be encountered near the surface. Pressure measurement is also desirable during drilling. In a permafrost environment frozen hydrates (or hydrates and oil) may sometimes be encountered and present an added hazard.
75. At any time during drilling, fluid under pressure (gas, oil or water) may be encountered. It is therefore important to maintain at all times all the equipment and materials necessary to control unexpected pressure. This equipment includes blow- out preventers, communications and remote control equipment, reserves of mud, and additives and degasification equipment. It should be noted that these muds may contain special additives to make them suitable for use in the Antarctic and these have a potential to cause some local pollution if released in the environment. When the well has reached a certain depth casing is carried out. Casing of a well is a very important safety factor, and it will be necessary to determine the length of each casing appropriate to the nature of the rock formation and the pressures that may be encountered. Cementing practices must be good enough to ensure that oil cannot escape laterally through the casing into flanking rocks and ultimately to the surface. Over-design is essential in exploration wells in new areas.
76. Additional pollution prevention measures should include proper procedures for well work-over (including the cleaning of operating systems, and replacement of components). These are naturally vulnerable operations because some control equipment is often itself taken out of use, and precautions must be especially strict in extreme environments.
77. Accidents on oil rigs, leading to environmental hazard, commonly involve human error and no technology can eliminate this, but it can reduce its probability and the scale of the consequences. Generally speaking human errors are commonest in routine operations involving less qualified personnel. In opening up a new region, in an exploratory phase, highly skilled staff are likely to be employed and the risk of error reduced. Because the Antarctic is a peculiarly hostile environment, more than normal care is likely to be taken during the early stages. The risks from human error are likely to increase once there is a transition from exploration to exploitation, with a strong element of routine. But there is no reason to predict a higher likelihood of human error in the Antarctic than elsewhere (the reverse is more likely) because operating conditions are never likely to be easy. Therefore, the training of personnel is an essential element in these safety precautions, and this must include 'refresher' courses bringing staff up to date with new methods.
78. On drilling platforms at sea the prevention of pollution is of the first importance because opportunities for rehabilitation if spillage occurs are few or non-existent under the exacting conditions of the Antarctic. It is essential to undertake exploration cautiously, to prevent blow-outs. It is essential to be able to stop and re-start drilling, and to abandon and re-enter wells without risk of pollution: wherever possible equipment should be recovered before the link with a well is severed but in emergency a platform can move off station in under a minute without risk of pollution. With sound technology, training and vigilance, the risk of blow-outs would be very small.
79. The maintenance and repair of Antarctic installations and anti-corrosion measures (for example the use of sacrificial anodes) may also have some environmental impact.
80. Where drilling takes place on land it is important that minimal damage is done to permafrost soils (wells being sealed as to avoid this), that reservoirs of fuel used to power drilling are located on an insulated bed, that all fuel tanks are surrounded by bunds to contain spillage, that care is taken to minimise contamination with oil, muds, chemicals and micro-organisms, that all debris is incinerated or removed, and that the land area is afterwards rehabilitated as far as possible It is particularly important to ensure that water does not penetrate and freeze between the casing strings of wells, since the resulting expansion could cause bursting and pollution.
81. The techniques of risk analysis, covering fire as well as the other hazards identified above should be applied in the design of all equipment for use in oil exploration or exploitation in the Antarctic, and a substantial safety margin provided. Fire is equally a hazard on land, where its threat is increased by the generally unavailability of liquid water for fire-fighting except in limited areas near freshwater lakes and the sea.
82. Oil storage below the sea depends on the displacement of sea water from the tanks. The interface is always kept within the tank, and there are reliable ways of preventing hydrocarbons being discharged, but when water is drawn off it is necessary to separate the oil. Special techniques and standards will need to be drawn up for seabed storage systems in the Antarctic.
83. A major risk of oil spillage probably lies in the transfer from production wells to storage and thence to tankers. If seabed pipelines are used, it will be because technology allows their burial below the depth of iceberg scour, in stable areas not liable to substantial movements.
84. Tankers to be used in the Antarctic will almost certainly be specially built. In addition to being ice strengthened and having greater power such tankers will presumably operate within the guidelines of the safety and marine pollution prevention conventions to which the Antarctic Treaty nations are signatory. The ship design, construction and equipment features may include segregated ballast, double hulls or double bottoms, crude washing, inert gas systems, and discharge monitoring and control devices or some combination of these. The adoption of such features would prevent pollution through the discharge of oily ballast water, which remains a significant source of marine pollution in other areas. It is anticipated that Treaty Countries would operate their ships in an environmentally safe manner with special regard for the fragile nature of the Antarctic environment.
85. There are few suitable sites for tanker terminals on land in the Antarctic. If oil were brought ashore and then exported in tankers, bilge and ballast handling and treatment facilities might be needed (depending on ship design, discussed in paragraph 84), and the scale and nature of these must be geared to local needs. A standard for the permissible maximum oil concentration in process water discharged to the sea should be set, together with standards for volatile hydrocarbons released to air: both must depend on assessments of the environmental quality to be sustained. It is important to note that if tankers arrived in the Antarctic in ballast, from ports elsewhere, the ballast water could contain a range of dissolved industrial effluents, and these could bring low concentrations of new contaminants to the Antarctic even if oil levels in the emissions were satisfactorily controlled.
ii. Prevention of pollution from mining and processing minerals on land
86. Major local pollution could be caused by mining, quarrying and processing of coal or hard rock mineral resources on land in the Antarctic, especially for elements like iron, where large volumes of spoil would be produced. Such mining or the quarrying of construction materials on land could release large amounts of dust, contaminate drainage with metal salts, and produce tailings or waste heaps with high concentrations of toxic metals. Not only could these have a deleterious effect on land, freshwater and inshore marine biota in the vicinity, but they could also be a hazard to human health, especially if water supplies were contaminated.
iii. Rehabilitation
87. Areas of Antarctic land damaged by mineral exploration and exploitation cannot be rehabilitated in the fashion adopted in the Arctic, involving the fertilisation of the soil and the sowing of the seeds of vascular plants. The two vascular plant species native to the region are unlikely to be suited to cultivation in this way, the introduction of alien species would contravene conservation agreements (and be unlikely to succeed) and the bryophyte vegetation of coastal areas in the Maritime Antarctic is equally unsuited to propagation. t seems likely therefore that the most that could be done to restore land sites disturbed by man would be to remove all equipment and imported debris and shape any disturbed land so as to favour the slow process of natural colonisation. The rehabilitation of disturbed ice sites on land, or of areas of sea bed, (other than a clean-up procedure to remove extraneous debris) does not appear feasible except by slow natural processes.
88. Should oil be spilled at sea in the Antarctic, especially in periods of high wind and waves or among ice, its recovery or even containment does not appear possible using present technology. It is essential to take every precaution to prevent the spillage of oil in the Antarctic because of the risk of unacceptable impact on the environment, but in case such spillages occur, research into means of containment and recovery of oil, and perhaps the further development of non-toxic biodegradable dispersants should be pursued.

1.11.7 Report of the Group of Ecological, Technical and Other Related Experts on Mineral Exploration and Exploitation in Antarctica.

1. The Group of Experts was established in accordance with Recommendation IX-1, operative paragraph 3. The Group met in Washington, D.C., between 25 and 29 June 1979, 'with a view to developing scientific programs aimed at:

2. The Group at its first session elected Dr Robert Rutford (United States) as its Chairman.
3. The Group adopted the revised agenda.

I. Outline of scientific programs on environmental impacts

4. It was the understanding of the Group that the unique Antarctic ecosystem is closely related to neighbouring ecosystems and that gross perturbation in one area of the Antarctic may have effects, however attenuated, both in the Antarctic and in other areas. The Group recognized that a better understanding of the Antarctic ecosystem as a whole was an important objective. The Group of Experts considered that the purpose of the scientific programs with which it was concerned was to obtain information critical to decisions concerning the possibility of the exploration for and exploitation of mineral resources in Antarctica, should these activities occur.
5. The Group agreed that scientific, technological, and economic factors indicate little likelihood of the commercial exploitation of Antarctic mineral resources other than offshore hydrocarbons in the foreseeable future. Accordingly, scientific programs to deal with the impacts of mineral activity should be concerned primarily with that resource.
6. The Group considered that the Report of the Group of Experts to the Ninth Consultative Meeting and the SCAR/EAMREA report identified information needs and gaps in knowledge that are little changed since those reports were presented. The Group noted that the question of geological hazards is referred to in the Report by the Group of Experts to the Ninth in other sections but is not specifically cited in Section IIB. No major technological advances were noted that would negate or alter the areas of concern identified in those reports.
7. The Group, noting the three stages of mineral resource activity identified in paragraph 32 of the Report of the Group of Experts of the Ninth Consultative Meeting, considered the kinds of environmental risks and impacts directly associated with each of these stages:
It was noted that the impacts from many of these activities might be more drastic in the Antarctic because of the severe environmental conditions, and strict regulation would be necessary were these activities to occur.
8. The Group suggested that basic and baseline information on the Antarctic environment is required in order to predict, mitigate, and monitor possible impacts resulting from mineral resource exploration and exploitation, should such activities occur.
9. It is possible that there is available, as a result of the research activities of the various nations during the past years, considerable information that through compilation and analysis, might satisfy part of this information requirement as well as more clearly identify those areas where further information is required. The Group acknowledged the admonition of the previous Group of Experts that it would be quite impossible to measure all of the environmental variables or describe all Antarctic ecosystems in detail. The selection of key factors is critical to these studies.
10. Ongoing and planned research activities (inter alia, BIOMASS, ISOS, POLEX) that will concentrate on the Antarctic marine and coastal systems should take account of the requirements for information outlined in this report in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.
11. In attempting to fulfill the mandate set forth in the first part of its terms of reference, the Group agreed that more time and expertise than was available at the meeting would be necessary for the preparation of detailed research proposals. In this connection, however, the Group concluded that in relation to the possible exploitation of hydrocarbons (see para. 5) it would be more cost effective to contribute towards an improved understanding of the Antarctic ecosystem by means of sharply focused programs primarily devoted to the marine environment.
12. The Group also concluded that the following four specific areas were particularly deserving of attention:
13. In the light of these conclusions, the Group felt that it could take a significant step towards the development of appropriate research programs by concentrating on the subjects needing attention' set out in paragraph 69 of the Report of the Group of Experts in order to distinguish between the various sources from which relevant information might be derived, viz:
14. The approach adopted was to consider each of the major 'subjects needing attention' and to tabulate them in four columns (see Table on page 254). The Group did not attempt to differentiate between programs that would be undertaken by governments and programs that could be undertaken in the course of exploration and exploitation, should this occur.
15. While the Group was conscious that a great deal of relevant information could have been listed in columns I and II, it was taken as being self-evident that new or additional research would take account of relevant earlier work and of information that might be expected to become available from national programs and programs co- ordinated under the auspices of SCAR. Absence of an entry into columns I and II was not to be interpreted to imply irrelevance. It was to be taken, rather, that an entry implies either that a special contribution towards an improved understanding in that field could be made by analysis of past observations and research programs or that a special effort should be made to bear in mind the relevance of results derived from existing programs.
16. In drawing up the table the Group had in mind additional purposes which might not be immediately apparent. These were:
17. The Group recognized that this tabulation could be considerably refined by bringing to bear on it additional relevant scientific and technological expertise, including the discipline of systems analysis.
18. Bearing in mind that the tabulation represented only a framework within which appropriate research programs might be developed, the Group believed that the detailed development of research programs might best be remitted to SCAR which would profitably involve its Working Groups, Groups of Specialists and other expert opinion (see Section 5 of the SCAR/EAMREA Group Report). It was also noted that this consideration was in accord with the advice given in para. 68 of the Report to the Group of Experts to the Ninth Consultative meeting.
19. The Group, noting the need for the development of research programs aimed at improving predictions of the possible impact of hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation in Antarctica, proposed that the Representatives at the Tenth Consultative Meeting should recommend to their governments that they encourage SCAR, through their National Antarctic Committees, to define programs, taking account of the report of this meeting, with the objectives of:
20. The Group was conscious that SCAR had already indicated that costs would be involved in responding to initiatives on this subject, and it was agreed to draw this to the attention of the Consultative Parties prior to the Tenth Consultative Meeting.
II. Outline of scientific programs on prevention and rehabilitation
21. The Group of Experts considered Section IIC of the London Report as an excellent summary of the possible ways that pollutants might be introduced into the Antarctic environment by mineral resource exploration and exploitation. They acknowledged that the prevention of damage to the environment is largely dependent on the establishment of safeguards to prevent the introduction of pollutants and to protect areas of special significance, both terrestrial and marine. The problem of prevention of such damage is not restricted to the Antarctic although the unique environmental conditions found there require the development of special safeguards. The application of results from ongoing scientific and technological research in other areas, combined with research specifically related to the impacts of the Antarctic environment on exploration and exploitation activities, will assist in the development of measures for the prevention of damage to the Antarctic environment.
22. The development of science programs related to the restoration and/or rehabilitation of damage resulting from mineral resource activities will depend on the acquisition of an understanding of the Antarctic ecosystem and an assessment of the possible impacts on that ecosystem. It was deemed premature by the Group to attempt to outline scientific programs dealing with these matters at this time. Further consideration should be given to these subjects at a later time by the Consultative Parties.
III. Oil contamination of the Antarctic marine environment
23. As suggested by Recommendation IX-6, reports were submitted by Japan and by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on oil contamination of the Antarctic marine environment. In addition, Argentina submitted a suggestion for the study of pollution in the Antarctic.
24. The Group particularly noted the following pathways of man-made oil contamination identified in the Japanese report:
25. The Group particularly noted the following from the Soviet Report:
26. The Group noted with interest the data presented in the Soviet Report concerning the low levels of hydrocarbons detected in the areas where observations were made. The Group urged the Consultative Parties and others operating ships or conducting activities that might introduce oil into the environment to continue their efforts to reduce possible oil contamination.
27. The determination of baseline levels of contamination of the Antarctic marine environment by oil has been included as a part of the suggested scientific programs aimed at improving the prediction of the impacts of possible mineral exploration and exploitation in the Antarctic.
28. The Group noted that up to now the most significant introduction of oil into the Antarctic marine environment appeared to be from the operation of ships. They further noted that both national and international groups were conducting research on oil contamination of marine areas by ships, and on means for its reduction, and that some of this research would be applicable to the Antarctic environment. They also noted that current research on the effects of oil in the Arctic marine environment resulting from offshore oil development would be useful in appraising effects such activity in the Antarctic, should it occur. The results of these programs should be taken into account before similar programs are drawn up for the Antarctic.
29. There was inadequate time to consider the Argentine and Japanese suggestions for the study of pollution in the Antarctic. The Group suggests that the Tenth Consultative Meeting direct the attention of SCAR to these proposals and to the other documents submitted to the Group.

Members of the Group of Experts.
Under the chairmanship of Dr M.W. Holdgate (UK) were:
Dr P. Lesta; Dr H.R.G. Laguinge; Mr N.L. Bienati (Argentina); Mr L.F. Backen; Mr T.B. Curtin (Australia); Dr T. van Autenboer; Mr H. Nolard (Belgium); Dr O. Gonzalez-Ferran; Mr E. Gonzalez (Chile); Mr Jean-Paul Bloch; MrJ. Nauwelaers; Mr C. Cochard; Mr A. Poueyto; Mr B. Renard; Mr P. Deffrenne; Mr M. Dorel; Mr J. Duval (France); Mr M. Wakasa; Dr Y. Yoshida (Japan); Mr R.B. Thomson; Mr T.B. Caughley (New Zealand); Mr E. Bergsaker (Norway); Prof. Dr A. Urbanek; Prof. K. Birkenmajer (Poland); Dr D.C. Neethling (South Africa); Mr F.G. Larminie; Dr R.J. Adie (UK); Dr G. Bertrand; Mr J. Dugger; Dr B. Gerswick; Dr J.C. Behrendt; Lt Cdr J.J. McClelland Jr (USA); Dr V.V. Golitsin; Prof. M.G. Ravich; Mrs T. Ovchinnikova (USSR).

In this report the term 'continental margin' is used to include the continental shelf, continental slope and continental rise.
The Group of Experts was informed that this figure originated from an unpublished, highly provisional calculation, using methodology which has since been revised, in an internal document within the United States Geological Survey.

Next Section - 1-12