Sidoarjo/Lapindo Mud Flow from
A Well in East Java, Indonesia
May 29, 2006
By:
Yulini Arediningsih
Abstract
This paper overview the occurrence of Sidoarjo mud flow, known as Lusi Mud Volcano, the world fastest growing mud volcano, triggered by gas drilling exploration. Since May
29, 2006, Lusi mud volcano in Porong sub-district, East Java, Indonesia has been spurting voluminous hot mud and gas, with uncertain knowledge when it will cease. The progressing eruption has been causing major impact on human life, social, economic and environment in this highly populated region. Breached regulations including Indonesian regulations, constitutions, and APPEGGA rules of conduct are outlined. There are five critical concerns related to ethical and professional conduct arising from the occurrence of Lusi mud volcano. The concerns include negligence to best practise procedures, particularly drilling in high pressure zone; conflict of interest between public, government and private sector; violence to human right, public safety; and crisis management related to mitigating the impacts on environment, social, economic especially in compensation process to the victims.
1. Introduction
Sidoarjo/Lapindo Mud flow, is geologically identified as a mud volcano (Sawolo, et al
2009). It is generally known as Lusi, a short name of Lumpur Sidoarjo. Lumpur means mud in Indonesian language. Lusi mud volcano is located in Porong sub district, Sidoarjo
Regency, East Java Province, Indonesia. It is located about 30 km south of Surabaya, capital city of East Java Province. Porong sub district is quite populous area covering
1
residential areas, agriculture zones and manufacture and business centres that significantly support economic supply of East Java Province.
Lusi is an exceptional mud volcano, as its birth is believed, triggered by drilling activity of a gas exploratory well, called Banjar Panji 1 (BJP-1). However, in controversy, some geoscientists believe it naturally occurs. Lusi’s size is immense, currently almost impacted a flooded area of more than seven square kilometres with thickness of 20 metres (Davies, 2008). The disaster has created multi eruption centres that are still discharging hot mud, and hydrogen sulphide gas up to now (Davies et al, 2007). Location of the BJP-1 well and Lusi mud volcano is shown in Figure 1.
Fig. 1. Banjar Panji-1 location in Brantas Block, Sub district Porong (Sawolo et al, 2009).
Recently, based on a new study by geoscientists from Durham University and Bandung
Institute of Technology, Lusi mud volcano will collapse generating a caldera. The caldera may have depth of more than 140 metres (Davies, 2008). Their study on GPS and satellite data indicates a collapse had impacted the area with rate up to 14.5m/yr.
2
1.1 Chronology of the disaster
Lusi mud volcano eruption began on May 29, 2006, from a spot located about 200 m southwest of BJP-1 well (Mazzini et al, 2007). BJP-1 well was owned by a joint venture of Lapindo Brantas Inc. and Medco Energi Inc.
Lapindo Brantas, Inc., one of the
operator of BJP-1 well, is an Indonesian oil and gas exploration company, established in
1996 and became the Operator of Brantas Block.
Brantas Block is the most gas
productive zone located in the East Java Basin. The East Java Basin contains a significant amount of oil and gas reserves and therefore the region is known as a major concession area for mineral exploration. Regional geology of the basin is briefly overviewed in the next section.
Drilling activity of the well, conducted by Lapindo Brantas Inc., commenced on May 6,
2006. After 3 weeks, on May 28, 2006 they were able to penetrate to depth 9200 feet where Kujung formation of deep gas reservoir. During that time, they had to cope with problematic drilling situation with multi kicks and total loss circulation. Then on May 29,
2006, mixed materials of mud, water and steam started to discharge from underground nearby the well. Two days before the eruption occurred, a major earthquake of 6.3 magnitude struck Yogyakarta, located about 250 km south west from Sidoarjo, on May
27, 2006 (Manga, 2007). It was an unfortunate coincidence that the Banjar Panji-1 wildcat well drilling and earthquake occurred simultaneously. Association of both events with the mud eruption remains indecisive, still debated by geoscientist in order to understand what closely cause the unstoppable eruption.
1.2 Regional geology of the surrounding area
Association between mud volcanoes and faults in active tectonic settings is well understood (Brown, 1990). In East Java, mud volcanoes are widespread as shown in
Figure 2. Mostly they are naturally occurred. There are about five mud volcanoes in the vicinity of Lusi mud volcano along Watukosek fault zone, shown in Figure 3.
Watukosek faults are the major strike faults started from the Arjuno – Welirang volcano complex in south at along the SSW/NNE direction. The concentration of mud volcanoes near Watukosek fault confirms that weak zones adjacent to the fault are conducive and prone to mud volcanism (Sawolo et al, 2009).
3
Figure 2. Map of East Java Province, showing distribution of mud volcanoes (Sawolo et al, 2009)
Figure 3. Location of mud volcanoes along Watukosek faults including Lusi mud
Volcano (Sawolo et al, 2009).
4
Mud volcanism is known to be associated with highly under compacted over pressured shales. Tere is also a clear relationship between mud volcanoes breaching the surface and tectonic movement along faults as evidenced in the mud volcanoes aligned along the
Watukosek fault zone (Mazzini et al, 2009). Kusumastuti et al (2002) point out that stratigraphically, beneath the Java Island is a half-graben lying in the east-west direction, filled with over pressured marine carbonates and marine muds.
1.3 Scientific opinions on how Lusi formed
Occurrence of Lusi mud volcano has attracted groups of geoscientists of international research centres in deducing the cause of the disaster. Their various findings made controversy of the Lusi’s birth. In general, there are two main scientific opinions giving rise conflict of interest between Lapindo Brantas Inc. as drilling operator and Indonesian
Government. It determines how compensation responsibility to be administered to victims of the disaster.
The first finding of a group of geoscientists in United Kingdom, suggests that human error in drilling procedures of the BJP-1 well, activity is the main trigger of initial mud eruption in the vicinity of the BJP-1 well. Ignorance to set protective steel casing during penetration of deep reservoir zone of limestone and over-pressured mud has activated the pressure induced hydraulic fracturing. This caused fractures propagated to the surface, where pore fluid and some entrained sediment started to erupt (Davies et al, 2007).
The second finding of multinational geoscientists, based on the evidence of the BJP-1 drilling problems and the Yogyakarta earthquake, suggests that anomalous seismicity change due to earthquake struck Yogyakarta, has activated displacements on Watukosek major fault zone. The displacement in fact has produced fractures providing flow path for hot mud to discharge to the surface, creating Lusi mud volcano. If the first opinion is believed to cause the Lusi’s birth, consequently the joint ventures of Lapindo Brantas Inc. and Medco Energi Inc. are responsible to compensate the disaster victims. In contrast, if the second opinion is believed as the cause of Lusi’s disaster then, Indonesian government is obliged to administer the compensation to the victims. It is primarily because the mud eruption is considered as a natural disaster.
5
1.4 Violations of regulations, codes or laws of professional and ethical conduct
What happened with Lusi mud volcano eruption has impacted more than thirty thousands of villagers surrounding Porong sub-district to flee from their homes; local businesses to forcedly shut down their manufactures, shops; hectares of various type of plantations mud flooded, and other social and economical issues affected by the disaster. As what primarily assumed, the disaster might have been triggered by drilling activity of the BJP1 well. The drilling activity has been identified, neglecting the procedures of safe drilling, not applying protective steel casing during penetration of deep high pressure zones (Davies et al, 2007) as regulated by the companies (Medco Energi Inc. and
Lapindo Brantas Inc) and local Authorities/Agency in Indonesia ruling the drilling activity of hydrocarbon exploration.
Aside from that, aftermath of the disaster brings about complicated, unsettled situations to the society in countless issues on economic, social, and cultural, and environment which have affected disruption in domestic economic of East Java, even Indonesia in general. Up to 2009, law enforcement in compensation obligation to Lapindo Brantas Inc. is still unresolved peacefully. Administration of compensation process for the victims who have been aggravated by the conduct of Lapindo Brantas Inc. has been very slow.
Until the reform era in 2009 on law enforcement over the Lapindo mudflow case never can be resolved peacefully.
In details, calamity of the Lusi mud volcano eruptions directly and indirectly have breached following regulations.
Indonesian regulations/laws/procedures :
1. Regulation issued by Indonesian Mineral Resources regarding Standard Operation
Procedures on Hydrocarbon Drilling Activity
2. Presidential Instruction No. 1 / 1976 on the synchronization of tasks agrarian field with the field of forestry, mining, resettlement and public works, Law No. 11/1967.
Location of BJP-1 well drilling, and Perda No.16 Sidoarjo regency in 2003
(Abimanyu, 2011).
3. Law No.23/1997 article 46, stated if a legal entity convicted of a crime, then the sanctions are imposed in addition to legal entity, nor against those who give orders or who become leaders in these actions (Abimanyu, 2011).
6
4. Constitution of Indonesia, in particular as ruled in Chapter X, article 28 paragraph 1, regarding human rights. It defines all citizens and residents have equal right before the law. Parts related to the Lusi’s disaster include the right to life, the right to live together as everyone else. the right to receive the same treatment.
5. Official principal foundation of the Indonesian state, called Pancasila. In particular violation to :
•
2nd principal : Just and civilized humanity
•
5th principal : Social justice for the all of the people of Indonesia
The APEGGA Rules of conduct
Almost major issues during conducts of the BJP-1 drilling operation that has triggered the occurrence of the mud eruption as well as slow mitigation process to accommodate the compensation for the victims go against all five rules of conduct of APEGGA.
1. In their areas of practice, hold paramount the health, safety and welfare of the public, and have regard for the environment.
2. Undertake only work that they are competent to perform by virtue of their training and experience.
3. Conduct themselves with integrity, honesty, fairness and objectivity in their professional activities.
4. Comply with applicable statutes, regulations and bylaws in their professional practices. 5. Uphold and enhance the honour, dignity and reputation of their professions, and thus, the ability of the professions to serve the public interest.
2. Discussion
This part will focuses on reviews of five major issues related to ethical and professional conduct related to disaster on Lusi mud volcano. The concerns include negligence to best practise procedures, particularly drilling in high pressure zone; conflict of interest between public, government and private sector; violence to human right, public safety; and crisis management related to mitigating the impacts on environment, social, economic especially in compensation process to the victims.
A report of McMichael (2009), states that drilling risks of hydrocarbon drilling in the
7
Sidoarjo area (Brantas Block) have been well recognized since the Dutch Settlement back to 1900s. Based on Dutch colonial archives of 1910, the area around Sidoarjo-Porong, was considered to have a tendency to gas eruption. Several American oil exploration companies that explored in East Java area in the 1950s were also aware of geological instability of the area (McMichael, 2009). In other words, if the exploration team of
Lapindo Brantas Inc had been aware of this significant information, they would have cautiously carried out the drilling operation to prevent or minimize the occurrence of ags eruption within the area. In turns, public safety can maintained. It appears that negligence to carry out due diligence to identify geological potential hazards surrounding of the area such as volcanism and seismicity level of the adjacent volcanoes, Merapi or Arjuna volcanic complex, located south of Lusi mud volcano as shown in Figure 4 below.
Figure 4. Topographical map of Lusi mud volcano and its surrounding with distribution of magmatic volcanoes (signed by V) with respect to the Watukosek fault, mud volcanoes
( Mazzini et al , 2009).
8
Failure in the BJP-1 well gas exploration operated done by Lapindo Brantas Inc. has clearly demonstrated that they have neglected the public interest and public safety. The operator considers company’s benefit when they initiate the exploration targeting overpressured carbonate gas reservoir. The company even has clearly violated implementation of the principal foundation of Indonesia and Indonesian constitution philosophy which state that all of the country’s natural resources and the national potentials should be utilized for the greatest possible good and happiness of the people
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancasila_(politics). The issuance of Presidential Decree
14/2007 (McMichael, 2009) on disaster response and obligation of Lapindo Brantas Inc to administer the compensation for the victims, in reality, has not enforced the company to fulfill their responsibilities. There have been lack of social justice to protect the weak, as in some extent government existence and credibility conflicted with power of business precedes public concerns.
Inevitable massive Lusi mud volcano eruption, with no established explanation of the cause, since the beginning there has been no agreement whether it is a natural or manmade disaster, makes it unique and complexity in managing the disaster response.
Therefore, the policy actions and crisis management have been controversial. On the other hand, scientific debates in prestigious conferences have been going on, trying to settle the cause. However, an Indonesian court has ruled that this disaster is a natural disaster not caused by Lapindo Inc.’s mining activity. This decision has raised polemic in the society as it conflicts with political concerns since association of the majority shareholder of the company is Aburizal Bakrie, who is also the minister of welfare of
Indonesia and a very influential elite of the leading Party in Indonesia. The role of government in this case is actually quite problematic. It is unclear whether or not to declare that the disaster is Lapindo Inc.’s responsibility or declare it a national natural disaster (so the government is held accountable). This position became more complicated when many people tried to connect this problem with political issues. Besides those institutions, there are no international institutions at all that help victims and provide basic needs (Putra, 2009). Political polemic among the society due to the declaration of the eruption as natural disaster in fact give rise poor crisis management from the companies and government sides. There have been slow rehabilitation process, almost in
9
all aspects of economic, health, social and environment which worsen the nature of the victims. 3. Conclusion
The cause of the lusi mud volcano eruption remains established either as natural disaster or due to unprofessional mis-conduct of the gas drilling operation. This in turns, leads to polemic situation in performing the crisis management especially to mitigate the victims and compensation process. The progressing eruption has been causing major impact on human life, social, economic and environment in this highly populated region.
Indonesian regulations and in particular APEGGA rules of conduct have been violated, aggravated public safety and interest. Negligence to best practise procedures, particularly drilling in high pressure zone; conflict of interest between public, government and private sector; violence to human right, public safety; and crisis management related to mitigating the impacts on environment, social, economic especially in compensation process to the victims are major issues related to professional conducts from the event.
References
Abimanyu, T. 2011. Perspective Effects of Pollution as Mud Lapindo Sidoarjo Evidence on the
environment
and
pollution
Analysis
of
various
problems,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38215855/LUMPUR-LAPINDO, accessed on 1/15/
2011
Brown, K.M., 1990. The nature and hydrogeologic significance of mud diapirs and diatremes for accretionary systems. Journal of Geophysical Research 95
(B6),8969–8982.
Davies, R. J., Swarbrick, R. E., Evans, R. J. and M. Huuse, M. 2007. "Birth of a mud volcano: East Java, May 29, 2006". GSA Today 17 (2): 4.
Davies, R., Swarbrick, R.E., Evans R.J., and Huuse, M. 2007. "Birth of a mud volcano:
East Java, May 29, 2006". GSA Today 17 (2): 4. doi: 10.1130/GSAT01702A.1 http://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/17/2/pdf/i1052-5173-17-2-4.pdf Accessed on 1/15/2011.
10
Davies, R., 2008. World's fastest-growing mud volcano is collapsing, says new research,
Eurekalert,http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-05/duwfm052708.php,
Accessed on 1/20/2011
Kusumastuti, P.., Rensbergen, V., and Warren, J.K. 2002. Seismic sequence analysis and reservoir potential of drowned Miocene carbonate platforms in the Madura
Strait, East Java, Indonesia , AAPG Bulletin, v. 86, (2), 213–232
Manga, M. 2007. "Did an earthquake trigger the May 2006 eruption of the Lusi mud volcano?". Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union) v. 88: 201.
Manga, M., Brumm, M., Rudolph, M.L. 2009. Earthquake triggering of mud volcanoes,
Marine and Petroleum Geology, 26, 1785–1798
Mazzini, A., Svensen, H., Akhmanov, G.G., Aloisi, G., Planke, S., Malthe-Sorenssen, A.,
Istadi, B., 2007. Triggering and dynamic evolution of the LUSI mud volcano,
Indonesia. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 261 (3–4), 375–388.
Mazzini, A., Nermoen, A., Krotkiewski, M., Podladchikov, Y., Planke, S., Svensen, H.
2009. Strike-slip faulting as a trigger mechanism for overpressure release through piercement structures. Implications for the LUSI mud volcano,
Indonesia. Marine and Petroleum Geology 26(8): 1751–1765.
McMichael, H., 2009. The Lapindo mudflow disaster: environmental, infrastructure and economic impact. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 45:1,73 – 83, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00074910902836189 (Accessed on 20/1/2011)
Putra, F. 2009. Crisis Management in Public Administration. Planning Forum Volume,
13/14,
14_crisis_public_admin.pdf Accessed on 1/18/2011.
Sawolo, N., Sutriono, E., Istadi, B., Darmoyo, A.B. 2009. "The LUSI mud volcano triggering controversy: was it caused by drilling?". Marine & Petroleum
Geology 26: 1766–1784
