Search USGSSearch

USGS · ofr20091225

Natural offshore oil seepage and related tarball accumulation on the California coastline — Santa Barbara Channel and the southern Santa Maria Basin; source identification and inventory

Abstract

Oil spillage from natural sources is very common in the waters of southern California. Active oil extraction and shipping is occurring concurrently within the region and it is of great interest to resource managers to be able to distinguish between natural seepage and anthropogenic oil spillage. The major goal of this study was to establish the geologic setting, sources, and ultimate dispersal of natural oil seeps in the offshore southern Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara Basins. Our surveys focused on likely areas of hydrocarbon seepage that are known to occur between Point Arguello and Ventura, California. Our approach was to 1) document the locations and geochemically fingerprint natural seep oils or tar; 2) geochemically fingerprint coastal tar residues and potential tar sources in this region, both onshore and offshore; 3) establish chemical correlations between offshore active seeps and coastal residues thus linking seep sources to oil residues; 4) measure the rate of natural seepage of individual seeps and attempt to assess regional natural oil and gas seepage rates; and 5) interpret the petroleum system history for the natural seeps. To document the location of sub-sea oil seeps, we first looked into previous studies within and near our survey area. We measured the concentration of methane gas in the water column in areas of reported seepage and found numerous gas plumes and measured high concentrations of methane in the water column. The result of this work showed that the seeps were widely distributed between Point Conception east to the vicinity of Coal Oil Point, and that they by in large occur within the 3-mile limit of California State waters. Subsequent cruises used sidescan and high resolution seismic to map the seafloor, from just south of Point Arguello, east to near Gaviota, California. The results of the methane survey guided the exploration of the area west of Point Conception east to Gaviota using a combination of seismic instruments. The seafloor was mapped by sidescan sonar, and numerous lines of high -resolution seismic surveys were conducted over areas of interest. Biomarker and stable carbon isotope ratios were used to infer the age, lithology, organic matter input, and depositional environment of the source rocks for 388 samples of produced crude oil, seep oil, and tarballs mainly from coastal California. These samples were used to construct a chemometric fingerprint (multivariate statistics) decision tree to classify 288 additional samples, including tarballs of unknown origin collected from Monterey and San Mateo County beaches after a storm in early 2007. A subset of 9 of 23 active offshore platform oils and one inactive platform oil representing a few oil reservoirs from the western Santa Barbara Channel were used in this analysis, and thus this model is not comprehensive and the findings are not conclusive. The platform oils included in this study are from west to east: Irene, Hildago, Harvest, Hermosa, Heritage, Harmony, Hondo, Holly, Platform A, and Hilda (now removed). The results identify three “tribes” of 13 C-rich oil samples inferred to originate from thermally mature equivalents of the clayey-siliceous, carbonaceous marl, and lower calcareous-siliceous members of the Monterey Formation. Tribe 1 contains four oil families having geochemical traits of clay-rich marine shale source rock deposited under suboxic conditions with substantial higher-plant input. Tribe 2 contains four oil families with intermediate traits, except for abundant 28,30-bisnorhopane, indicating suboxic to anoxic marine marl source rock with hemipelagic input. Tribe 3 contains five oil families with traits of distal marine carbonate source rock deposited under anoxic conditions with pelagic but little or no higher-plant input. Tribes 1 and 2 occur mainly south of Point Conception in paleogeographic settings where deep burial of the Monterey Formation source rock favored generation from all three members or their equivalents. In this area, oil from the clayey-siliceous and carbonaceous marl members (Tribes 1 and 2) may overwhelm that from the lower calcareous-siliceous member (Tribe 3) because the latter is thinner and less oil-prone than the overlying members. Tribe 3 occurs mainly north of Point Conception, where shallow burial caused preferential generation from the underlying lower calcareous-siliceous member or another unit with similar characteristics. It is very desirable to be able to clearly distinguish the naturally occurring seep oils from the anthropogenically derived platform oils. Within the “training set” of oils and tars (388 samples), the biomarker parameters are sometimes sufficient to allow unique discrimination of individual platform oils. More often however, platform samples and seep samples with sources geographically close to each other are too similar to each other, with respect to the biomarker parameters, to definitively differentiate them on that basis alone. In some cases other parameters can be helpful. These other parameters are related to the degree of biogeochemical degradation or weathering that the oils or tars have experienced. These components include the typical oil distribution of n-alkane hydrocarbons and isoprenoids pristane and phytane. All of the platform oils in our sample set contain these components. On the other hand, the seep oils or tars have been exposed to significant biodegradation while in the near subsurface. The majority, but not all of seep oils or tars have been biodegraded up to or beyond the loss of n-alkanes and isoprenoids. Seep oils found in the vicinity of Coal Oil Point or Arroyo Burro are apparently the least weathered and are particularly likely to retain significant n-alkanes and isoprenoids. Therefore the combination of chemometric fingerprinting and the presence or absence of n-alkanes and isoprenoids help to differentiate anthropogenic production oils versus natural seeps oils and tars. The differentiation is not always definitive because of the close chemical similarity of some samples and the variability in the biodegradation progression. This is the case near Coal Oil Point, and near Platform A (Dos Cuadros Field) where seep oils and Platform Holly and Platform A oils are genetically very similar and cannot be definitively distinguished after a period of a few days of weathering. In contrast, oils from the Point Conception platforms can be distinguished on the basis of chemometric fingerprinting alone. In the middle of this spectrum are oils from Platforms Harmony, Heritage, and Hondo, where it is expected that oil weathering would take on the order of two weeks to a month to produce tarballs similar to those seen near Point Conception. In this case there is a much greater degree of weathering needed to proceed from produced oil to the biodegraded tar characteristic of tarball stranded on the beach. Tar deposition on beaches was monitored as part of cooperative with the County of Santa Barbara Energy Division and the U.S. Geological Survey during 2001-2003. We found tar deposition varies on a seasonal basis. In general, tarballs accumulate at a faster rate or remain longer on all beaches during the summer and fall months. The reasons for this are unclear based on our limited observations, however we speculate that factors such as prevailing winds and currents combined with more quiescent wave conditions favors the accumulation and preservation of tarballs on the beach during the summer and fall months. In contrast, winter storms, with much greater wave action remove beach sand and other materials, and stormy seas tend to break up oil that might weather into tarballs. Natural seepage is affected by the spring/neap tidal cycle; however, the link to tar deposition is unclear. Longer periods of monitoring are needed to address the variability in the data and provide a more robust statistical analysis.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 34.134541681937364° to 35.146862906756304° latitude; -121.014404296875° to -119.32250976562499° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T.D. Lorenson, Frances D. Hostettler, Robert J. Rosenbauer, Kenneth E. Peters, Jennifer A. Dougherty, Keith A. Kvenvolden, Christina E. Gutmacher, Florence L. Wong, William R. Normark. 2009. Natural offshore oil seepage and related tarball accumulation on the California coastline — Santa Barbara Channel and the southern Santa Maria Basin; source identification and inventory. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20091225

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona