This chapter examines the possibility of using depleted oil and gas fields in the North Sea area for CO2 storage. An important issue in this regard is the relationship with the removal obligations that exist offshore, instead of removing the installations after the oil/gas production has ceased, the possibility to re-use the depleted reservoir for CO2 storage could entail that the offshore installations and pipelines have to be kept in place. This article looks into this possibility from both an international law perspective and national law of three North Sea coastal States: the Netherlands, United Kingdom and Norway.
There has been increased interest for seabed mining activities within the national jurisdictions of coastal states. Interest in exploration and exploitation activities has largely been concentrated in the exclusive economic zones of five states namely: New Zealand, Australia, Namibia, Mexico and Papua New Guinea. The approach, policy positions or decisions adopted by these countries in relation to seabed mining within their jurisdictions has generally been cautious, with due regard to the precautionary principle. These have ranged from permanent bans, moratoria, strategic environmental assessments and reviews by environmental agencies. Through a comparative legal analysis of these cases, it is possible to distil a structure for decision-making on seabed mining that can be used by coastal States.
The work is ongoing at the United Nations for a third UNCLOS implementation agreement on conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction. It could lead to a major improvement in international law of the sea and to a more equitable system of exploitation of marine resources. A crucial issue among the main topics is the regime of marine genetic resources that involves several still pending questions, in particular whether it will be based on freedom of the sea or common heritage of mankind or a third sui generis approach. Other notable questions relate to access to the resources, benefit-sharing (both non-monetary and monetary benefits?), inclusion of genetic resources of the water column, intellectual property rights (compulsory disclosure of the origin of marine genetic resources involved in patents?), role of traditional knowledge, “straddling” genetic resources. No generally agreed solutions have yet been found to such questions. Given the political and legal difficulties and intricacies of many among the issues under discussion, the work needs to be pursued by the States involved in a spirit of moderation and through an effort of constructive imagination.
The chapter explores the question of delimitation of jurisdiction in the Arctic as a fundamental starting point for discussing the regime for exploration for and exploitation of seabed resources in an area of the world which is subject to competing state and commercial interests, and so a source of potential conflicts. The author starts by pointing out the difficulty of establishing a precise scientific knowledge basis as to the seabed resources contained in the Arctic. Most of the chapter is then dedicated to the question of competing claims and the analysis of Arctic states agreements and disputes regarding the establishment of baselines, the delimitations of the states territories and the applications to establishing the outer limits of continental shelf submitted to the CLCS. The chapter also reviews the national Arctic strategy of the five Arctic coastal states. The author advances several proposals on possible ways of resolving disputes.
This chapter reviews the main delineation principles currently applied in order to determine maritime jurisdiction of the coastal state over the seabed, as defined in Article 76 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, the Convention), and interpreted by the courts (Section 2). Then, the chapter continues by reviewing the Norwegian experiences with setting the country’s maritime boundaries, as a concrete application of the principles identified. The elements related to the organisation of the work for the purpose of submissions to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) (Section 3), the mapping the outer limits (Section 4) and to the cooperation with neighbouring states (Section 5) are successively analysed. The chapter ends with an overview of the currently identified resources on the Norwegian continental shelf (Section 6).
This chapter gives a short introduction to the very long history of how western societies has perceived and to some extent experienced the deep ocean floor from the perils of the seafarers in the sixteenth century to UNCLOS III. It argues that the perception of the seafloor often leads to actions and organized activities as resources are discovered and attempted appropriated. The chapter consists of four major parts as a parallel to four major phases of the cultural appropriation of the sea floor. After an introduction (Section 1), it starts with the Carta Marina from 1539 describing the dangers of crossing the surface of the sea and the first attempts for soundings and measuring of tidal waters (Section 2). In the second major part (Section 3), the first attempts to measure the deep sea and to use the seafloor as a place for cables are discussed. The third period (Section 4) introduces the powerful alliance between science and navies leading up to important research project as ‘The Challenger’ and ‘Meteor’ really increasing the knowledge of the seafloor. The last major section (Section 5) is devoted to the regulation of the seafloor ending with UNCLOS III and the scientific development underpinning it.
This chapter examines the legal issues associated with the use of sub-seabed transboundary geological structures including saline aquifers for storage or disposal purposes focusing on the geological sequestration of carbon dioxide or carbon capture and storage (CCS). Following an introduction to geological sequestration the chapter examines the issue in the context of the transboundary effects of storage. The chapter examines the work to develop guidelines that has been undertaken in the context of the Protocol to the London Dumping Convention. Subsequent sections of the chapter examines how these issues have been or could be dealt with in delimitation agreements, framework agreements and joint development agreements. The chapter also considers the status of disposal projects in areas of overlapping maritime entitlements.
Yearbook is also available online. To learn more about the online version, please click
Yearbook of International Disaster Law aims to represent a hub for critical debate in this emerging area of research and policy and to foster the interest of academics, practitioners, stakeholders and policy-makers on legal and institutional issues relevant to all forms of natural, technological and human-made hazards. This Yearbook primarily addresses the international law dimension of relevant topics, alongside important regional and national dimensions relevant for further development of legal and policy initiatives.
Volume One features a thematic section on the Draft Articles of the ILC on the “Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters” as well as a general selection of articles, and an international and regional review of International Disaster Law in Practice, plus book reviews and bibliography.