Comparative risk assessment of spill response options for a deepwater oil well blowout: Part III. Stakeholder engagement

Highlights: • History of dispersant policy and oil spill stakeholder engagement in U.S. reviewed • Pre-spill stakeholder engagement strengthens oil spill decision making • Advantages and disadvantages (tradeoffs) of potential offshore response strategies considered • Subsea dispersant injection at the source compared to traditional response methods • Quantitative comparative risk assessment (CRA) approaches proposed to clarify tradeoffs. - Abstract: This paper describes oil spill stakeholder engagement in a recent comparative risk assessment (CRA) project that examined the tradeoffs associated with a hypothetical offshore well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, with a specific focus on subsea dispersant injection (SSDI) at the wellhead. SSDI is a new technology deployed during the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill response. Oil spill stakeholders include decision makers, who will consider whether to integrate SSDI into future tradeoff decisions. This CRA considered the tradeoffs associated with three sets of response strategies: (1) no intervention; (2) mechanical recovery, in-situ burning, and surface dispersants; and, (3) SSDI in addition to responses in (2). For context, the paper begins with a historical review of U.S. policy and engagement with oil spill stakeholders regarding dispersants. Stakeholder activities throughout the project involved decision-maker representatives and their advisors to inform the approach and consider CRA utility in future oil spill preparedness.