{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01132852729145211, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.2709677419354835, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A case study of consensus modelling for tracking oil spills

Metocean forecast datasets are essential for the timely response to marine incidents and pollutant spill mitigation at sea. To effectively model the likely drift pattern and the area of impact for a marine spill, both wind and ocean current forecast datasets are required. There are two ocean current forecast models and two wind forecast models currently used operationally in the Australia and Asia Pacific region. The availability of several different forecast models provides a unique opportunity to compare the outcome of a particular modelling exercise with the outcome of another using a different model and determining whether there is consensus in the results. Two recent modelling exercises, the oil spill resulting from the damaged Pacific Adventurer (in Queensland) and the oil spill from the Montara well blowout (in Western Australia) are presented as case studies to examine consensus modelling.