Mining Institute, Kola Science Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, Apatity, Russia:

A. I. Kalashnik, Head of Laboratory, Candidate of Engineering Sciences, kalashnik@goi.kolasc.net.ru

The article considers the prospects of the Barents Sea region as a strategic zone of the Russian Arctic in terms of extraction and transportation of oil and gas resources. Attention is focused on possible geodynamic problems arising in the development of offshore oil and gas resources. The world experience of offshore oil and gas reservoir recovery has been analyzed and used to identify characteristic features of field development and to assess risk of emergency situations or accidents leading to socio-economic damage. Examples are given of the anomalous subsidence of the seabed at the Ekofisk field in the North Sea and the sudden destruction of the Deepwater Horizon platform in the Gulf of Mexico. The system analysis has been made for the development of geomechanical processes and geodynamic phenomena in a reservoir (matrix deformation, formation of compaction and decompaction zones, initiation of microcracks, microseismicity, etc.), in overlying rock mass (rock mass deformation, compaction and decompaction zones, activation of tectonic disturbances, seismicity up to generation of mud volcanoes and gas channels) and in bottom soil layers (subsidence of the seabed, movement of bottom soil and rocks, deconsolidation of gas hydrates, landslides, and tsunami waves generation) for long term use of an offshore oil and gas field. The modeling results of mining-induced deformation of the Barents Sea shelf due to transformation of the geodynamic regime are presented. Based on the system studies, the concept of geodynamic safety has been proposed, consisting in the fact that for each mining stage the appropriate special studies should be carried out, on the basis of which the preventive geo-safe measures are developed and implemented according to the algorithm: work planning–hazard identification–risk assessment–geomechanical support–recommendations and measures to reduce risk.
The research was initiated and encouraged by the Academician N. N. Melnikov.

1. Melnikov N. N., Kalashink A. I. Offshore oil and gas recovery: Geomechanics. Apatity : Izdatelstvo KNTs RAN, 2009. 140 p.
2. Fadeev A. M., Cherepovitsyn A. E., Larichkin F. D., Fedoseev S. V. Methods of analysis of the potential hydrocarbon fields in the Russian Arctic. Energeticheskaya politika. 2018. No. 4. pp. 34–47.
3. Bogoyavlensky V. I., Bogoyavlensky I. V. Natural and technogenic threats in prospecting, exploration and development of hydrocarbon fields in the Arctic. Mineralnye resursy Rossii. Ekonomika i upravlenie. 2018. No. 2. pp. 60–70.
4. Llopart J., Urgeles R., Forsberg C. F., Camerlenghi A., Vanneste M. et. al. Fluid flow and pore pressure development throughout the evolution of a trough mouth fan, western Barents Sea. Basin Research. 2018. December.
5. Melnikov N. N., Kalashnik A. I., Kasparian E. V., Kalashnik N. A. Concept of geodynamical monitoring of oil and gas industry objects in the Barents Sea region. Environmental Geoscience. 2015. No. 2. p. 166–174.
6. Vyakhirev R. I., Nikitin B. A., Mirzoev D. A. Offshore gas and oil field construction and development. Moscow : Izdatelstvo Akademii gornykh nauk, 1999. 373 p.
7. Aldred W., Garaya Sh., Plumb D., Bradford I., Cook J. et al. Managing Drilling Risks. Neftegazovoe obozrenie. 2001. Spring. pp. 12–29.
8. Kaiser M. G., Pulcifer A. G. Risks and losses in offshore mining. Oil and Gas Journal. 2007. No. 6. pp. 96–105.
9. Melnikov N. N., Kalashnik A. I., Kalashnik N. A. On providing geodynamic safety of oil and gas objects in the western sector of Russian Arctic. Problemy Arktiki i Antarktiki. 2014. No. 2(100). pp. 95–103.
10. Postflight analysis of ‘probably the worst’ oil catastrophe in history of the USA. Oil and Gas Journal. 2010. No. 11. pp. 24–28.
11. Rodríguez-Ochoa R., Nadim F., Cepeda J. M. Risk Analysis of Earthquake-Induced Submarine Slope Failure. Geotechnical Safety and Risk V : Proceedings of the 5^th International Symposium. Amsterdam : IOS Press, 2015. pp. 815–820.
12. Løvholt F., Bondevik S., Laberg J. S., Kim J., Boylan N. Some giant submarine landslides do not produce large tsunamis. Geophysical Research Letters. 2017. Vol. 44(16). pp. 8463–8472.
13. Gardoni P., LaFave J. M. Multi-hazard Approaches to Civil Infrastructure Engineering. Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2016. 573 p.
14. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/9003403 (accessed: 15.04.2019).
15. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/9009935 (accessed: 15.04.2019).
16. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/9046058 (accessed: 19.04.2019).