At NEBA Analytics, we specialize in understanding the key ecological, social human use (active and passive), economic (public and private interest values), technical, health and safety risks, environmental risks, and geographical considerations associated with each site application.
Based on these data, we develop strategies designed to balance the risks, benefits and tradeoffs associated between competing alternatives.
Our advanced analytics and data-driven strategies provide an objective, quantitative, scientifically based, and transparent basis for decision-makers to make informed choices. Additionally, this approach provides a basis for stakeholders to understand decisions.
NEBA enables decision-makers to make informed choices that maximize environmental and socioeconomic benefits while managing site risks and costs effectively by:
The separation of various metrics within a graphical presentation is critical for allowing stakeholders to understand the following:
NEBA data presentations clearly depict metrics that highlight the individual trade-offs between options.
At NEBA Analytics, we understand the importance of science communication. We use reports, presentations, web-based dashboards, video, and public meetings to reach stakeholders. Our charts, graphs, and other visual aids make complex information easy to understand and remember. We avoid jargon and technical terms, opting instead for clear, simple language and relatable examples that are accessible to a general audience. Importantly, we create opportunities for public feedback and input, fostering a two-way communication process that builds trust and transparency.
As the leader in Offshore Oil & Gas NEBA-based Comparative Assessment (NEBA-CA), our experience includes decommissioning applications in the Arabian Gulf, Australia, California, Caribbean, Gulf of Thailand, Gulf of Mexico, Mediterranean Sea, and the North Sea.
Based on recent science over the past 15 years, offshore subsea structure can provide significant quantifiable ecological and socioeconomic benefits to the public. These values should be considered in long-term decision-making.
With 35+ years of experience in NRDA ecological and socioeconomic injury and compensatory restoration economics approaches. These NRDA cases include oil and chemical spills under OPA, and releases under CERCLA (i.e., Superfund). Our experience includes the Exxon Valdez in 1990 up to and through the Deepwater Horizon incident, and subsequent incidents.
Spill support includes NRDA emergency response and management, coordination with the natural resource trustees, quantification of ecological and human use injury, compensatory restoration, field study development, data analysis, and collection.
Although subsea structure design and layouts differ between Offshore Oil & Gas and Offshore Wind Energy Development (OSW), the NEBA-CA approach is directly applicable to OSW development and management.
Like Oil & Gas, offshore wind subsea structure can provide significant quantifiable ecological and socioeconomic benefits to the public.
NEBA Analytics is working to incorporate NEBA-CA into decision-making for offshore wind energy.
Experience includes many oil spill emergency responses, plus numerous drills and development of tactical response plans. These typically include assessment of remedial (cleanup and response using NEBA) and natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) liabilities [e.g., NRDA in the US and damage assessment in the European Union under the Environmental Liabilities Directive (ELD)]. Clients are supported through all phases of spill response (pre-planning, incident response, and post-incident). The importance of upfront ephemeral data collection during response in documenting baseline and post-spill conditions is paramount to liability management. Mr. Nicolette supports the responsible party in discussions and negotiations with the regulatory agencies (i.e., Trustees) throughout all phases.
NEBA has been applied to both state and federal contaminated sites across the US, Europe and the Middle East. These applications have helped clients to understand the risk-benefit “breakpoint” (e.g., the point at which the proposed remedial action provides a marginal benefit compared to projected risks) when evaluating intrusive remedial actions.
“The NEBA framework should be useful when the balance of risks and benefits from an action at a site is ambiguous. That ambiguity arises when the site retains significant ecological value; when the actions are themselves environmentally damaging; when the ecological risks from the in-situ condition are relatively small, uncertain, or limited to a component of the ecosystem.” Efroymson, Nicolette, and Suter (2004)
Ecosystem service valuation approaches are used to evaluate land assets based upon the ecosystem services they provide. These include ecological habitat, and socioeconomic services (both active and passive use values). Understanding the eco-asset values associated with a portfolio of landholdings will assist in land acquisition, divestiture, and conservation decision-making.
NEBA can be incorporated into the development of permitting documents (EIS, EIA, BA, etc.) to support the selection of preferred alternatives and project development offsets. Resulting decisions can achieve environmental objectives in a timely and cost-effective manner while providing a transparent basis for comparing the risks, benefits and tradeoffs associated with the competing alternatives.
Ecosystem service valuation approaches have been applied to assist in the evaluation of competing land development designs associated with both Brownfield and Greenfield development. This work helps our clients to develop land use designs that maximize ecosystem service values. Documentation of these values help obtain approval of land use designs and provide support for addressing permitting requirements.
How much is enough? We identify, evaluate, and determine Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) injury and compensatory restoration alternatives, including supplemental environmental project (SEP) valuation.
Through both market and non-market valuation, we can develop rigorous economic models and analysis that give more insight and clarity into the existence, magnitude and uncertainty of impacts, benefits, and costs associated with decisions affecting natural resources.
We provide expert witness and litigation support related to NRDA, environmental impact assessment, land conservation, and site remediation. We have developed expert reports and written affidavits to support technical findings and have provided testimony through deposition.
NEBA Analytics Managing Director, Joseph Nicolette, co-authored the first formalized NEBA Framework (Efroymson et. al., 2004). The NEBA Framework is recognized by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the USEPA Science Advisory Board (USEPA SAB), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Internation
NEBA Analytics Managing Director, Joseph Nicolette, co-authored the first formalized NEBA Framework (Efroymson et. al., 2004). The NEBA Framework is recognized by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the USEPA Science Advisory Board (USEPA SAB), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP), and the Australian Marine Safety Authority (AMSA), among others.
NEBA Analytics has 35+ years of experience in over 100 NEBA, NRDA, and ecosystem service valuation related projects across 30 U.S. States and 20 countries - including the Exxon Valdez through Deepwater Horizon. Mr. Nicolette is nationally and internationally recognized for his contributions in developing NEBA approaches.
NEBA is consistent
NEBA Analytics has 35+ years of experience in over 100 NEBA, NRDA, and ecosystem service valuation related projects across 30 U.S. States and 20 countries - including the Exxon Valdez through Deepwater Horizon. Mr. Nicolette is nationally and internationally recognized for his contributions in developing NEBA approaches.
NEBA is consistent with OMB 2024 Guidance for Assessing Changes in Environmental and Ecosystem Services in Benefit-Cost Analysis.
NEBA related applications of ecosystem service valuation has increased substantially over the past 25 years. Most recently, the NEBA framework was adapted (Nicolette et. al., 2023) into the offshore Oil & Gas decommissioning process (i.e., a NEBA-Based Comparative Assessment (NEBA-CA), including incorporation of multigenerational ecosyst
NEBA related applications of ecosystem service valuation has increased substantially over the past 25 years. Most recently, the NEBA framework was adapted (Nicolette et. al., 2023) into the offshore Oil & Gas decommissioning process (i.e., a NEBA-Based Comparative Assessment (NEBA-CA), including incorporation of multigenerational ecosystem service values (ecological, social) within decision-making.
We are working to incorporate NEBA-CA into decision-making for offshore wind energy.
Nicolette, JP., Nelson, NA., Rockel, MK., Rockel, ML., Testoff, AN., Williamson, LD., Johnson, LL., Todd, VLG. (2023). A Framework for a Net Environmental Benefit Analysis Based Comparative Assessment of Decommissioning Options for Anthropogenic Subsea Structures: A North Sea Case Study. Frontiers Journal of Marine Science. 9: 1020334 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.1020334
Efroymson, R., Nicolette, J. and Suter, G. 2004. A Framework for net environmental benefit analysis for remediation or restoration of contaminated sites. Environmental Management. September 2004. Vol. 34: (3): pp 315-331.
Acknowledged and Contributing Author. Wayne R Munns Jr, Veronique Poulsen, William R Gala, Stuart J Marshall, Anne W Rea, Mary T Sorensen, and Katherine von Stackelberg. 2017. Ecosystem Services in Risk Assessment and Management. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 2017, Volume 13:1, 62–73 DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1835
Nicolette, J., Goldsmith, B., Wenning, R., Barber, T., and Colombo, Fabio. 2013, Experience with NRDA Restoration of Environmental Damage. Book Chapter 9: entitled “The E.U. Liability Directive: A Commentary”, edited by L. Berkamp and B. Goldsmith. Published March 14, 2013, Oxford Press. Pages 181-219.
Watson, S.M., McLean, D.L., Balcom, B.J., Birchenough, S.N.R., Brand, A.M., Camprasse, E.C.M. … Nicolette, J.P., …Peter I. Macreadie. (2023). Offshore decommissioning horizon scan: Research priorities to support decision-making activities for oil and gas infrastructure. Science of the Total Environment. 878: 163015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163015
Testoff, AN., Nelson, NA., Nicolette, JP. (2022). A Quantitative Method for Evaluating Ecological Risks Associated with Long-Term Degradation of Deep-Sea Plastic-Containing Infrastructure. The APPEA Journal. vol. 62(1), 141–158. doi:10.1071/AJ21113.
Nicolette, J., Burr, S., and Rockel, M. 2013. A Practical Approach for Demonstrating Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship through a Net Ecosystem Service Analysis. Sustainability 2013, 5, 2152-2177; doi:10.3390/su5052152, Published May 10, 2013.
Office of Management & Budget, Guidance for Assessing Changes in Environmental and Ecosystem Services in Benefit-Cost Analysis (Feb. 28, 2024),' https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/ESGuidance.pdf [hereinafter Ecosystem Services Guidance].
Take the first step and contact us to discuss your needs.
Email us and we will get back to you soon.
Georgia, United States 30183
Joseph Nicolette jnicolette@neba-analytics.com 678-451-8288
