Elsevier

Marine Geology

Volumes 332–334, 1 December 2012, Pages 163-173
Marine Geology

Methane and minor oil macro-seep systems — Their complexity and environmental significance

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2012.02.014Get rights and content

Abstract

The two main observations characterising marine and lacustrine methane macro-seeps are ebullition through holes in the sea- or lake-bed, and hydroacoustic “flares” in the water column. This paper reviews multi-year, multi-scale, and multi-discipline results from three seep locations in the North Sea and combines the knowledge with recent seafloor and water column results from seeps in the Santa Barbara basin, California, a seep off West Africa, seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, and in Lake Baikal, Russia. We have identified a total of 12 characteristics of methane and minor oil macro-seeps that are not only geological in nature, but also biological and geochemical. These are shown to impact the marine environment in different ways, not least in benefactory manners, as primary producers (mainly bacteria and archaea) tend to bloom during seepage. Therefore, the seepage is inferred to have a fertilizing effect on both the seafloor and the water column, which may be of broad ecological and biological significance. The study concludes with a holistic conceptual seep-model which is expected to be of interest to a broad range of researchers in the fields of oceanography and limnology.

Highlights

► They can alter the topography of the seafloor. ► They introduce allochtonous minerals (including nutrients) to the seafloor and water column. ► Most of the dozen identified environmental effects of seeps are positive for the ecology in the ocean and lakes. ► The most derogatory effect is perhaps added carbon to the atmosphere.

Introduction

The continental margins are unique in that they include the most productive waters of the world and support over 90% of global fish catches (Pauly et al., 2002). They span the globe and range in depth from the photic zone (0 to ~ 200 m) to parts of the aphotic and the ocean mesopelagic zones (200–1000 m). Because of the depth range (0–500 m), the associated hydrocarbon seeps occur both in the photic and aphotic zones, and also within the stability range of methane gas hydrates. When studying the impact of seepage on the continental shelf's seafloor and ecology, it is therefore very difficult to discern between true seep (allochtonous) effects and the normal continental water mass and topographical/current (autochthonous) effects, including up-welling of water masses, on the near-field and far-field biosystems.

In this communication, we describe a number of known environmental effects of seepage that we rate as significant for various reasons. Although the release of methane into the atmosphere, is obviously rated as a negative environmental effect (climate factor), most of the other effects seem to be harmless, or even positive with regard to the local and general marine and lacustrine ecology. The same can also be said about some natural offshore oil seeps. Lately, the seepage of methane and heavier hydrocarbons through the seafloor and through lake beds have achieved increasing scientific focus for various reasons (Niemann et al., 2005, Whelan et al., 2005, Judd and Hovland, 2007, Jensen et al., 2008a, Jensen et al., 2008b, Wegener et al., 2008, Hovland et al., 2010, Plaza-Faverola et al., 2010, Valentine et al., 2010, Wessels et al., 2010, Brothers et al., 2011, Dondurur et al., 2011, Hammer et al., 2011, Krylova et al., 2011, Pape et al., 2011, Redmond and Valentine, 2011, Reitz et al., 2011, Solomon et al., 2011, Batang et al., 2012). One of the reasons is that scientists and the general public are becoming more concerned about the carbon cyclus, in general, and the radiative (greenhouse) gases in particular (Hovland et al., 1993, Kennett et al., 2000, Mienert et al., 2005, Etiope et al., 2008, Westbrook et al., 2009, Canet et al., 2010, Brett et al., 2011). Historically, only specialized branches, such as the marine acoustics industry, military, and fisheries, were concerned with gases and oil emanating from and migrating through the water column (Link, 1952, Landes, 1973, Hovland and Judd, 1988, Brooks et al., 1991, Thrasher et al., 1996, Anderson et al., 1998, Fichler et al., 2005, Dembicki and Samuels, 2007).

Offshore macro-seeps are relatively rare compared to the more common micro-seeps (e.g., Judd and Hovland, 2007). Furthermore, they require special equipment for detailed study, such as remotely and autonomous operated vehicles (ROVs and AUVs), plus aricraft and satellites for oil on the water surface (Thrasher et al., 1996, MacDonald et al., 2002). This means that their characteristics with respect to changes over time, i.e., variation in flux and composition as well as the impact on the local physicochemical environment, are currently poorly sampled and understood. In contrast to micro-seeps, macro-seeps are acoustically and/or visually detected in the water column. Dependent on water depth, they produce streams of bubbles and droplets that rise through the water column towards the surface (Leifer et al., 2004, Judd and Hovland, 2007, Valentine et al., 2010). Within the central and northern North Sea, there are three, fairly well-studied macro-seep locations that have been studied over several years: the Tommeliten seep area (56°29.90′N, 2°59.80′E) (Hovland and Sommerville, 1985, Hovland and Judd, 1988, Niemann et al., 2005, Judd and Hovland, 2007, Wegener et al., 2008, Schneider von Deimling et al., 2010), the Scanner pockmark seeps (58°28.5′N, 0°96.7′E) (Hovland and Sommerville, 1985, Hovland and Judd, 1988, Hovland and Thomsen, 1989, Dando and Hovland, 1992, Judd and Hovland, 2007), and the Gullfaks seeps (61°10.1′N, 2°15.8′E) (Hovland and Judd, 1988, Hovland, 2007, Judd and Hovland, 2007, Wegener et al., 2008). Although each of them are located in different geological settings, they have one main aspect in common: – they occur as long-lasting macro-methane seeps, some of which have heavier hydrocarbons associated with them.

Apparently, the first suggestion that such seepage may induce a positive effect on marine biosystems has been that it may cause an increase in the total nutrients and primary production levels in the seawater column and within the seafloor (Hovland et al., 1985a, Hovland et al., 1985b), suggesting that seepage can play a very important role for the North Sea fish stock (Judd and Hovland, 1992). The main basis for this inference was the remarkable find, in 1983, of 38 different meiofaunal species on one 10 kg carbonate sample (methane derived authigenic carbonate, MDAC) at the 25/7 pockmark micro-seep location (Hovland and Judd, 1988, Hovland and Thomsen, 1989). The inference was also founded on observed fish and numerous patches of fluffy, white bacterial mats at locations where reduced fluids seep through the seafloor.

Previous listings of the environmental effects of macro-seepage on the environment have included only a handful of effects (Dando and Hovland, 1992), and is listed as being:

  • 1)

    Changes in the topography

  • 2)

    Changes in the physical (i.e., sedimentological and mineralogical) composition of the seafloor

  • 3)

    Changes in the chemical composition of the seafloor

  • 4)

    Development of hardgrounds at seeps

  • 5)

    Changes in species composition due to the seeps.

Since then, several studies have shown how the added carbon source from beneath the seafloor not only feeds into the chemosynthetic community, but also benefits higher trophic animals (e.g., Reilly et al., 1996, MacDonald et al., 2002). This has also been proven at the Håkon Mosby mud volcano (HMMV), where meio- and macro-faunal organisms such as copepods, amphipods, and pycnogonids consumed recycled organic matter from symbiont-hosting and pure chemosynthetic species living directly on sulphur and methane oxidizing bacteria thereby demonstrating methane seep associated lifestyles partly unlinked the photic zone driven carbon flux (Decker and Olu, 2010).

The inference that marine seeps could also affect the atmosphere was realized and discussed by Hovland and Judd (1988), which was later elaborated on (Hovland et al., 1993), and finally more-or-less proved by MacDonald et al. (2002). Based on results from innumerable surveys and studies performed over the last 25 years, the objective of this communication is to highlight how macro-seeps not only impacts the geology, but also the chemistry, acoustics and not least, the biology of ocean and lakes. Furthermore, our aim is to stimulate awareness on these effects and to widen the list of documented significant environmental effects of macro-seeps. Although we will use results from numerous seep locations around the world (e.g., Judd and Hovland, 2007, and later publications), it is the study of the three seep locations in the North Sea, that forms the main basis for our new assessment (Fig. 1). Furthermore, a comparison has been made with results from other macro-seeps, both in shallow and deep water (> 200 m) (Fig. 2). Our analysis concludes with a general holistic conceptual model, illustrating the most important characteristics of macro-seepage. Thus, we list a total of 12 multidisciplinary aspects, suggesting that future seep studies will best be carried out with a high degree of complexity borne in mind.

Section snippets

The Tommeliten seep area

The so-called Tommeliten δ-structure is a 3 km wide, near-circular salt diapir with its summit located about 1000 m below the seafloor (Hovland and Sommerville, 1985). Sub-surface salt domes (salt diapirs) are notoriously leaky geological mega-structures, and are often associated with surface seep manifestations, both terrestrially and in the marine environment (Berryhill, 1987, Hovland and Judd, 1988, Hovland, 1990, Scmuck and Paull, 1993, Thrasher et al., 1996, Heggland, 1998, Taylor et al.,

Other pertinent methane macro-seeps

In this chapter, important new insights from the following regions, including seeps and a blowout will be reviewed, as they add some new factors to our list of significant effects of seeps, in general:

  • 1)

    The Santa Barbara Seeps (e.g. Hornafius et al., 1999, Kinnaman et al., 2010)

  • 2)

    The REGAB deep-sea pockmark seeps (e.g. Olu-Le Roy et al., 2007)

  • 3)

    Lake Baikal (e.g. Leifer et al., 2011)

  • 4)

    Deep-water GoM seeps (e.g. Solomon et al., 2011)

  • 5)

    The Deepwater Horizon (Makondo) blowout (e.g. Redmond and Valentine, 2011

Discussion and conclusions

To sum up what the significant effects of methane macro-seeps in the North Sea are, we may turn the question round and ask, what if there were no macro-seeps, such as the ones we have described? This may actually be easier to answer, than just listing our findings again. Without seepage in the Scanner area for example, there would most probably only be a flat, featureless sediment surface, like the one that remains in the area, between all the pockmarks there (Hovland and Judd, 1988, Judd and

Acknowledgements

Statoil ASA is thanked for the release of data. The crews on the ‘Normand Tonjer’, ‘Skandi Ocean’, ‘Lador’, ‘Edda Fonn’, and ‘Acergy Viking’ are thanked for their professional work at the North Sea seep locations. Two anonymous reviewers are thanked for their useful and constructive comments.

References (87)

  • M. Hovland et al.

    Characteristics of two natural gas seepages in the North Sea

    Marine and Petroleum Geology

    (1985)
  • M. Hovland et al.

    Cold-water corals - are they hydrocarbon seep related?

    Marine Geology

    (1997)
  • M. Hovland et al.

    Do Norwegian deep-water coral reefs rely on seeping fluids?

    Marine Geology

    (2003)
  • M. Hovland et al.

    The global flux of methane from shallow submarine sediments

    Chemosphere

    (1993)
  • M. Hovland et al.

    Unit-pockmarks and their potential significance for prediction of fluid flow

    Journal Marine and Petroleum Geology

    (2010)
  • S. Jensen et al.

    Stable isotope probing identified a methane sustained Methylomicrobium in the sediment beneath a deep-water coral reef off the coast of Norway

    FEMS Microbiology Letters

    (2008)
  • A. Mazzini et al.

    Comparison of strikingly different authigenic carbonates in a Nyegga complex pockmark, Norwegian Sea

    Marine Geology

    (2006)
  • J. Mienert et al.

    Ocean warming and gas hydrate stability on the mid-Norwegian margin at the Storegga Slide

    Marine and Petroleum Geology

    (2005)
  • S.C.M. O'Hara et al.

    Gas seep induced interstitial water circulation: observations and environmental implications

    Continental Shelf Research

    (1995)
  • T. Pape et al.

    High-intensity gas seepage causes rafting of shallow gas hydrates in the southeastern Black Sea

    Earth and Planetary Science Letters

    (2011)
  • A. Plaza-Faverola et al.

    Fluid distributions inferred from P-wave velocity and reflection seismic amplitude anomalies beneath the Nyegga pockmark field of the mid-Norwegian margin

    Marine and Petroleum Geology

    (2010)
  • A. Plaza-Faverola et al.

    Repeated fluid expulsion through sub-seabed chimneys offshore Norway in response to glacial cycles

    Earth and Planetary Science Letters

    (2011)
  • A. Reitz et al.

    Source of fluids and gases expelled at different cold seeps offshore Georgia, eastern Black Sea

    Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

    (2011)
  • M.H. Taylor et al.

    Trapping and migration of methane associated with the gas hydrate stability zone at the Blake Ridge Diapir – new insights from seismic data

    Marine Geology

    (2000)
  • W. Weibull et al.

    Fluid migration dierctions inferred from gradient of time surfaces of the sub seabed

    Marine and Petroleum Geology

    (2010)
  • J. Whelan et al.

    Surface and subsurface manifestations of gas movement through a N-S transect of the Gulf of Mexico

    Marine and Petroleum Geology

    (2005)
  • A.J. Anderson et al.

    Bubble populations and acoustic interaction with the gassy floor of Eckernförde Bay

    Continental Shelf Research

    (1998)
  • H.L. Berryhill

    Late Quaternary facies and structure, northern Gulf of Mexico

    American Association of Petroleum Geologists

    (1987)
  • M.T. Brett et al.

    Allochthonous and autochthonous contribution to consumers: emerging issues workshop report

    Limnology and Oceanography Bulletin

    (2011)
  • J.M. Brooks et al.

    Chemical aspects of a brine pool at the East Flower Garden bank, northwestern Gulf of Mexico

    Limnology and Oceanography

    (1979)
  • L.L. Brothers et al.

    More than a century of bathymetric observations and present-day shallow sediment chracterization in Belfast Bay, Maine, USA: implications for pockmark field longevity

    Geo-Marine Letters

    (2011)
  • S. Bünz et al.

    Acoustic imaging of gas hydrate and free gas at the Storegga slide

    Journal of Geophysical Research

    (2004)
  • J. Cartwright et al.

    Seal bypass systems

    AAPG Bulletin

    (2007)
  • C.J. Clayton et al.

    Comparison of seepage and seep leakage rates

  • P.R. Dando et al.

    Ecology of a North Sea pockmark with an active methane seep

    Marine Ecology Progress Series

    (1991)
  • C. Decker et al.

    Does macrofaunal nutrition vary among habitats at the Håkon Mosby mud volcano?

    Cahiers de Biologie Marine

    (2010)
  • H. Dembicki et al.

    Identification, characterization, and ground-truthing of deepwater thermogenic hydrocarbon macroseepage utilizing high-resolution AUV geophysical data

    Offshore Technology Conference, OTC, Houston, Texas, USA, 30 April–3 May, paper no 18556

    (2007)
  • G. Etiope et al.

    Reappraisal of the fossil methane budget and related emission from geologic sources

    Geophysical Research Letters

    (2008)
  • C. Fichler et al.

    North Sea Quaternary morphology from seismic and magnetic data: indications for gas hydrates during glaciation?

    Petroleum Geoscience

    (2005)
  • R. Geletti et al.

    Gas seepage linked to salt structures in the Central Adriatic Sea

    Basin Research

    (2008)
  • Geoteam
  • J.S. Hornafius et al.

    The world's most spectacular marine hydrocarbon seeps (Coal Oil Point, Santa Barbara Channel, California): Quantification of emissions

    Journal of Geophysical Research

    (1999)
  • M. Hovland

    Do carbonate reefs form due to fluid seepage?

    Terra Nova

    (1990)
  • Cited by (53)

    • Comment on “Greenhouse gas emissions from marine decommissioned hydrocarbon wells: Leakage detection, monitoring and mitigation strategies” by Christoph Böttner, Matthias Haeckel, Mark Schmidt, Christian Berndt, Lisa Vielstädte, Jakob A. Kutsch, Jens Karstens & Tim Weiß

      2021, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
      Citation Excerpt :

      In the southern part just across the border on the Norwegian side (concession block 1/9) lies the well-known Tommeliten seep area (Schneider von Deimling et al., 2015; Hovland et al., 1993) situated above a subsurface salt dome. Subsurface salt domes as indicated on Fig. 3C of Böttner et al. (2020) like Tommeliten “are notoriously leaky geologic megastructures and are often associated with surface seep manifestations on land and on the seafloor” (Hovland et al, 2012). Römer et al. (2021) shows also such a seafloor methane seepage relation to salt diapirism for the German North Sea.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text