Gulf Oil Spill: real-time web news, politics, and scientific facts

Today, British Petroleum hopes to take careful aim and secure a hastily developed steel tower over one of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill's primary leaks. Once secured, the oil that accumulates inside will be drained out from above. No easy task and there is much concern as to whether the tower can withstand Gulf currents and remain in place.

There is a constant stream of news bites coming from the broadcast media and most every environmental or conservation group is issuing calls to action to repeal offshore oil drilling permits. Rather than presume that I have anything more illuminating to contribute, I will leave you with three interesting information sources:

NEWS:
Real-Time Gulf-Crisis Web Site: Set up by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), this web site compiles breaking news reports on the Gulf oil spill throughout the day, in addition to providing an updated listing of FAQs. CBD is a proactive organization that uses the courts to produce results - so you won't find much love for oil companies or ineffective government agencies here but it's a good one-stop-shop for the latest news.

POLITICS:
Interesting video segment from Keith Olbermann/MSNBC that documents some of the political history behind U.S. offshore drilling including Cheney/Halliburton and Interior Secretary Salazar/oil industry connections and even info about BP, years ago, passing on additional technological backups that could have prevented the oil blowout because they were deemed too costly - before BP reported record profits.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

SCIENCE:
We don't need to be rocket scientists to understand that oil is not good for the environment, but where is the objective science that measures and confirms that assumption? SeaWeb has issued a special report on the effects of oil, listing a variety of scientific studies and reports in abstract (ie: summary) format - you have to search for the complete article, although many are freely offered on the web via links. The studies are listed in categories covering the impact on humans, marine mammals, marine ecosystems, corals, and more. Click here to download the report in PDF.

We will all watch the events in the Gulf unfold and hope that the leak will be arrested soon. But the impact it will have on the Gulf of Mexico's ecosystems and shoreline economies will be felt for perhaps decades. Long after the last drop of oil has been mopped up, we need to keep the pressure on our elected officials in re-evaluating strategies that involve more drilling, when developing alternative energy sources should be our number one priority.

Oil Rig Disaster: potential harm to whale sharks

President Obama's announcement several weeks ago, wherein he would consider issuing offshore oil drilling licenses along the southeastern seaboard and portions of the Gulf of Mexico, drew criticism from many conservation groups as it appeared to be a reversal of his position during his presidential campaign. From a public relations standpoint, once you take on a controversial position, the last thing you need is to add fuel to the fire. Or should I say fire to the oil.

As you probably know, a massive floating oil rig off the coast of Louisiana suffered an explosion and fire, sank and, as of yesterday, is reported to be leaking oil from some yet to be defined source underwater.

Here's a post from SharkDivers, bringing up the issue of the oil threat to whale sharks that cruise the area. Unfortunately, this could be only the beginning. . .

Oil Spill in the Gulf - Whale Shark Impact?

Sunday, April 25, 2010

For the past two years we have been covering whale shark aggregations off the coast of Morgan City, Louisiana.

Upwards of 40-100 animals at a time have been sighted here year after year and have become both industry and major media news.

Scientist Eric Hoffmayer has been studying these groups as far out as 100 miles from shore and that's where this week's news from the Gulf takes a decidedly nasty turn.

The Swiss-based Transocean Ltd's Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded and sunk last week, leaving many in the region to worry about ongoing oil seeping from the wellhead at 5000 feet. The worst case scenario has happened and now experts agree close to 1000 barrels a day are leaking to the surface or close to 42,000 gallons of oil.

Oil clean-up crews have dumped over a million gallons of chemical oil dispersant into the region and more is sure to come in an effort to break up the oil on the surface. As whale sharks feed on the surface this oil and chemical dispersant does not bode well for these peaceful giants of the Gulf.

Alaska & Arctic Oil Drilling: moves of protest within government

While many conservation groups bemoaned the recent U.S. administration's announcement of oil drilling, all is not lost. The proposed strategy, which included areas in Alaska and the Arctic, has led many to either believe that President Obama is back-tracking on campaign promises or that (as I believe) he is compromising in an attempt to gain bipartisan support for future climate and energy legislation.

However, while conservation groups are initiating email and letter write-in campaigns to voice their protest, there are significant wheels in government that are turning that could also make a difference. Here is an excerpt from an article from Los Angeles Times writer Kim Murphy about various actions which we should be watching:

What's next for oil in the Alaskan Arctic?

"Just because the Obama administration has finally settled on its strategy for offshore oil and gas development on the Outer Continental Shelf, don't think the issue of what happens in the Alaskan Arctic is settled -- far from it.

Already, lots of new developments are underway. New briefs have been filed in the attempt to stop Shell Offshore Inc.'s plan to drill exploration wells in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas; a new Government Accountability Office report criticizes the Minerals Management Agency in Alaska for how it conducts its environmental reviews; and now the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is turning attention back to the classic battleground over Arctic oil, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The agency announced it is beginning its first update in more than two decades of the conservation plan for the 19.2-million-acre refuge that lies west of the Prudhoe Bay oilfields on Alaska's North Slope -- home to grizzly bears, moose, wolverines, Dall sheep, birds, a massive herd of caribou and, if you're feeling optimistic, as much as 10.4 billion barrels of oil.

About 8 million acres of the refuge already are protected as wilderness. The new study could recommend additional areas for wilderness protection (read: no oil drilling, ever) including, conceivably, the so-called 1002 area of the coastal plain designated by Congress to study for possible oil development.

'There are no avenues of discussion closed off to the public,' Fish and Wildlife Service spokesman Bruce Woods said."

Read the entire article to learn who, within government, is supporting the protection of the Alaskan/Arctic wilderness and what is going on behind the headlines.

Arctic U.S. Waters: off limits to commercial fishing by December

Here's another press release, this time from Oceana.org, regarding the closing of U.S. waters north of Alaska's Bering Strait to commercial fishing (the Arctic Fishery Management Plan) . The federal closing recognizes the lack of sufficient scientific data on fish populations and the impact from climate change, overfishing, and other environmental or man-made factors.

While encouraging, the downside is that the Minerals Management Service is moving full speed to allow for oil drilling in the same region. With heavy lobbying from the oil industry, permits are being granted without updated and sufficient scientific impact studies and data - the opposite approach of the Arctic Fishery Management Plan.

This exemplifies the ongoing tug-of-war that goes on in Washington DC: energy vs. the environment. At some point, politics and commerce will need to realize that objective, unbiased scientific research data will need to be the final referee.

U.S. Closes Arctic Waters to Industrial Fishing

Regulations call for more science before any fishing allowed in U.S. Arctic; conservationists call for same approach for oil and gas

November 3, 2009
Washington, DC

Final regulations protecting almost 200,000 square miles of U.S. Arctic waters from industrial fishing were released today and will be effective starting December 3, 2009. The new regulations close all U.S. waters north of Alaska’s Bering Strait to commercial fishing to allow time for more science to assess the health of Arctic ocean ecosystems and the potential impacts of large-scale fishing given the impacts the Arctic is already facing from climate change and ocean acidification. The regulations do not affect subsistence fishing, and are in fact designed to help protect Arctic ocean ecosystems central to subsistence. Conservationists hailed the regulations and called for a similar approach for other industries and in other nations.

“This is ‘doing it right’ in the Arctic—there is a desperate need for more science to be done before we add any more stress to an area already feeling the heat of climate change,” said Dr. Chris Krenz, Arctic Project Manager for Oceana. “We need a rush of scientists into the Arctic, not an armada of cargo ships, oil platforms and fishing trawlers.”

The same U.S. Arctic waters protected from fishing are squarely in the crosshairs of the oil industry. Last month the Minerals Management Service (MMS) approved a plan for drilling in the Beaufort Sea next summer, and a similar plan for the Chukchi Sea is currently under review with a decision expected this month. Conservationists, scientists, local communities and others have called for a science-based precautionary approach for oil that is now in place for fishing, especially given the higher risks of oil spills in the Arctic and the inability to contain, control or clean up an accident in the icy waters of the Arctic.

The Arctic is home to thousands of people who rely on ocean ecosystems as central to a subsistence way of life practiced for generations. Climate change and ocean acidification are already placing stress on those ecosystems, and adding additional pressures from fishing or oil and gas activities could push them past the brink. Arctic communities showed strong support for the Arctic fishing protections and have expressed concern that activities from oil and gas, including seismic testing and the risk of oil spills, could adversely impact bowhead whales and other animals that are vital sources of food for local peoples.

President Obama’s Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force is likely to recommend addressing the changing Arctic conditions as a national priority and using an ecosystem based management approach to protect, maintain and restore the health of the nation’s marine ecosystems. The Arctic Fishery Management Plan exemplifies this approach.

“MMS has given the green light to drill in the U.S. Arctic Ocean next July using the same inadequate and out of date science that led fisheries managers to close the region to commercial fishing,” said Krenz. “One of the reasons Americans elected President Obama is because they believe in sustainable development based on sound science and demonstrated response capabilities. MMS and Shell continue on an unrelenting course that MMS records indicate are likely to bring a major spill and calamity to the Arctic.”

The U.S. State Department is in discussions with other Arctic nations to expand these same fishing protections across international boundaries. These Arctic fishing regulations set a worldwide precedent of putting management in place before commercial fishing occurs.

Politicians Recognize Global Warming: but oil drilling looms

A report was just released by the White House that declares that harmful effects from global warming are already hear and worsening. Now for many of you who have followed this issue, your first response might be "Well, duuuuh." But this is the first climate change report from the current administration and it is the strongest to date emanating from the White House.

"This is not a theoretical thing that will happen 50 years from now," said co-author Anthony Janetos of the University of Maryland. "Things are happening now."

Interestingly, this report was based on a report initiated near the end of the Bush administration who was forced by a lawsuit to produce a draft for Congress that was notably different from their typical dodge-and-weave approach.

Political machines - and, I dare say, humans in general - are inclined to act when disaster is on their doorstep. Proactive or long-term strategies seem to run counter to their nature, so this report is important as it basically states that the ostrich can no longer hide in the sand.

Jane Lubchenco, director of NOAA, says, "This report provides the concrete scientific information that says unequivocally that climate change is happening now and it's happening in our own backyard."

As encouraging as this report might appear as an indication of the current administration's commitment to change, we must still be diligent and even skeptical. Last week, a Senate committee voted to open millions of acres of the eastern Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas drilling. The energy industry is still committed to status quo, expanding a dwindling supply of fossil fuels, and has yet to fully embrace the need and development of alternative energy sources. Therefore, their continued pressure and influence on the political decision makers is as strong as ever.

Oceana.org has some suggestions and steps you can take. Make sure your political representatives know how you feel and let's watch the Obama administration closely to ensure that we get the necessary change that was promised and, more importantly, that the environment needs.

Offshore Oil Drilling: Santa Barbara County readies a ban

In California, Santa Barbara County supervisors are preparing to reinstate a "ban" on offshore drilling, reversing a controversial decision made 8 months ago. The county will deny permits for onshore processing, which effectively halts any new offshore drilling - the actual drilling being something the county has no jurisdiction over. The new position reflects a change of heart (and a change in the board's make up) in favor of alternative energy sources before drilling is even considered.

"I feel strongly that we've been a national leader in conservation and alternative energy," said board member Doreen Farr. "That's the direction we need to go. We can't drill our way out of this."

But not everyone is in agreement. Many Santa Barbara County residents have no problem with tapping into undersea resources, contending that evolving technology has minimized the risk of catastrophic spills. "It's irresponsible not to develop offshore drilling and production, with a serious eye to making certain it's safe -- which it can be," said Joni Gray, a supervisor who represents the Santa Maria and Lompoc areas.

The new proposed resolution will be considered next week, the timing being in conjunction with an Interior Department hearing in San Francisco on offshore drilling. While there are those who advocate that offshore drilling technology has improved, the memory of the disastrous 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill is still fresh in the minds of many.

Invent Now! - the new mantra for the Energy Age

In the United States, both presidential candidates are saying that our energy policy (or lack of one) needs to be addressed for the sake of both our daily energy needs and to address the issue of global warming. All well and good.

But I am concerned with the attention put on immediate drilling, particularly in heretofore protected areas like the Arctic regions. We have all heard the arguments that it will take 10 to 15 years to realize any fuel from such exploration, but that's the case whether we drill in the Arctic or in any of the currently approved areas, 80% of which has been untouched.

No, my concern is with catch phrases like "Drill now! Drill now!" - as if drilling will be the silver bullet panacea, after which we can all go back to driving our SUV's. Having grown up watching this nation's commitment to science and invention that ultimately put men on the moon, I ask why not "Invent now! Invent now!" We are faced with a massive scientific and social undertaking - to develop multiple technologies that will allow us to shift from a centuries-long dependence on fossil fuel. There's no getting around it - no single solution will fix it all.

Before we commit to more drilling, more status quo, let's harness the same inventive energy that took man into the Industrial Age, and then the Space Age, and the Computer Age - and let's dedicate ourselves to the Energy Age, to finding new solutions rather than recycle the old solutions and continue to destroy the planet one carbon ton at a time.

Here's some more information from the Ocean Conservancy.