[en] Highlights: • Compared combinations of SSDI and traditional response options with no intervention • Mechanical and in-situ burning removed a small fraction of floating oil. • SSDI substantially reduced the amount of surfacing oil by dispersing oil at depth. • SSDI increased weathering (dissolution and degradation) rates in water column. • SSDI decreased volatile emissions and so lessened human and wildlife exposure. - Abstract: Oil spill model simulations of a deepwater blowout in the Gulf of Mexico De Soto Canyon, assuming no intervention and various response options (i.e., subsea dispersant injection SSDI, in addition to mechanical recovery, in-situ burning, and surface dispersant application) were compared. Predicted oil fate, amount and area of surfaced oil, and exposure concentrations in the water column above potential effects thresholds were used as inputs to a Comparative Risk Assessment to identify response strategies that minimize long-term impacts. SSDI reduced human and wildlife exposure to volatile organic compounds; dispersed oil into a large water volume at depth; enhanced biodegradation; and reduced surface water, nearshore and shoreline exposure to floating oil and entrained/dissolved oil in the upper water column. Tradeoffs included increased oil exposures at depth. However, since organisms are less abundant below 200 m, results indicate that overall exposure of valued ecosystem components was minimized by use of SSDI.

[en] 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.

[en] Highlights: • Subsea dispersant injection (SSDI) can be added to oil spill response (OSR) options. • CRA tool assists decision-maker evaluating relative risk trade-offs of OSR options. • Oil spill model quantified exposure for a hypothetical deepwater oil spill. • Relative densities and recovery times with exposure quantify relative risks. • Inclusion of SSDI reduced risks to wildlife, shorelines and most aquatic life. - Abstract: Subsea dispersant injection (SSDI) was a new oil spill response (OSR) technology deployed during the Deepwater Horizon accident. To integrate SSDI into future OSR decisions, a hypothetical deepwater oil spill to the Gulf of Mexico was simulated and a comparative risk assessment (CRA) tool applied to contrast three response strategies: (1) no intervention; (2) mechanical recovery, in-situ burning, and surface dispersants; and, (3) SSDI in addition to responses in (2). A comparative ecological risk assessment (CRA) was applied to multiple valued ecosystem components (VECs) inhabiting different environmental compartments (ECs) using EC-specific exposure and relative VEC population density and recovery time indices. Results demonstrated the added benefit of SSDI since relative risks to shoreline, surface wildlife and most aquatic life VECs were reduced. Sensitivity of results to different assumptions was also tested to illustrate flexibility of the CRA tool in addressing different stakeholder priorities for mitigating the impacts of a deepwater blowout.

[en] Highlights: • Thousands of VOC data collected near Deepwater Horizon spill site are analyzed • Statistical evidence indicates that SSDI did indeed reduce worker exposure to VOC • Incidents of peak concentrations were reduced by ~6 to 19 fold by SSDI • Data suggest that a more prompt use of dispersant would further reduce VOC exposure Controversy remains on the use of Sub-Sea Dispersant Injection (SSDI) during the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) spill to minimize the exposure of responders on surface vessels to volatile organic compounds (VOC). Here, we use extensive evidence (>90,000 VOC measurements) collected near the oil well MC252 site during the DWH spill and demonstrate at a high level of statistical confidence that SSDI enhanced the safety and health conditions of the responders at the water surface through the reduction of airborne VOC concentrations in a dose-dependent manner. VOC levels on ships' decks were clearly diminished (p < 0.001) during subsea dispersant use, and incidents of peak concentrations (>50 ppm VOC) that could have been an immediate concern to worker health were reduced by a factor of ~6 to 19 when dispersants were delivered at the intended rate. SSDI thus played an important role in minimizing potential exposure to VOC, and should be embedded in guidelines and regulations for dispersant use.