Onshore disposition of offshore oil and gas platforms: Western politics and international standards
Abstract Onshore-only disposition of retired offshore oil and gas platforms has become a core strategic objective for ocean/environmental advocates and policy makers. Although international oil companies oppose an onshore-only requirement, its rejection is no longer a high priority for them. The ascendancy of onshore-only disposition reflects a rational and predictable response to political attitudes, values, and expectations in Western Europe by both governmental policy makers and petroleum industry strategists. Repercussions from the fight over the disposition of the obsolete Brent Spar offshore oil storage and transfer facility are the proximate cause of the shift. Onshore disposition has been least expensive option for most platforms, but as platforms move further from shore toward deeper waters onshore disposition is more frequently inferior to other disposition alternatives — from both an environmental and economic point of view. If onshore-only disposition were to become an international standard, either de facto or de jure, some offshore producing areas would incur significantly higher disposition costs and lose opportunities to better utilize and protect their marine resources.