In the summer of 2010, an oil spill unlike any before occurred in the Gulf of Mexico. The reason that the incident was so particularly disastrous was that, instead of a ship with a certain quantity of oil spilling partially purified crude on the surface of the ocean in a short period of time. Instead, a well from which the raw crude was coming out under high pressure was gushing underwater, over a period of about 12 weeks. Even after the worst of the leak has been stopped, there was still seepage coming from the well over a year later, escaping the supposedly sealed well. Since much of the oil was coming straight from the source under high pressure, denser components created a phenomenon that had been rarely, if ever, documented before: oil plumes were spreading under the water's surface, following an underwater "channel" and spreading out where it was harder to track and contain. These factors helped to make this oil "spill" one of the largest (if not the largest) in US history, with approximately 5 million barrels released into the waters of the Gulf by August of 2010. And while such a large quantity of oil being released is bad enough, it occurred in an area that was incredibly sensitive to the toxic compounds being released, and very hard to clean when the oil would slip into the swamps and estuaries of the region. Death tolls of various species are high, but many believe that there are many unaccounted for, as individuals would either be lost at sea or possibly go into the swamps where the bodies would not be found after they perished. With all of these impacts and disastrous side effects, it would seem that some sort measure would be made to actively prevent another such incident. However, the Obama administration approved for exploratory drilling to begin in a much more dangerous region: The Arctic Circle.
The Arctic Circle is a largely inhospitable region, especially on the seas. Normally, it is covered in sheets of ice, that sometimes shift and move instead of remaining a single entity. However, with recent climate change trends, the ice of the region has receded further than ever before during the warmer months, and oil companies have moved to try and capitalize on the newly accessible waters, in the hopes of drilling for portions of the supposedly sizable quantity of petroleum that was formerly sealed beneath the region.While the UK has deigned to stop all such activity until at the very least, a system to deal with an accident could be established, the US is allowing for prep work to be done while security measures are developed, with the mindset of preventing an incident like the Deepwater Horizon spill in the gulf. However, if an accident occurs in the Arctic, it will be due to novel causes more likely than not. The sea ice in the region is the most significant factor, being more than a barrier to initial drilling. When the sea freezes back over, the ice will sometimes move in an inexorable fashion, capable of doing extreme damage simply because it moves slowly and can't be redirected (similar to a glacier). Also, apparently, the ice can get "so tall that it scrapes the sea floor," posing a particular danger to the drill site, at the lowest point, where it is hardest to get at and repair. There is also the factor of how thick crude oil gets when exposed to extreme cold, which is standard for the region. This can create a problem with oil flow, causing pressure issues or flow problems. There are various compounds that can be used to counteract the issue of decreased viscosity, but that just adds another risk factor in terms of possible pollutants. Who knows? Maybe they are capable of damaging an organism's fat layer, which would be sure death in a region as cold as the Arctic.
Besides the risk of a spill occurring, the response to clean and fix an incident would run into all sorts of problems due to the fact that the rig would be rather far from land, especially considering that ports would usually be even further away from that, probably in regions where the ice doesn't bind all the boats in the winter. But an accident at a rig in the Arctic Circle would most likely occur at a time of year when support ships won't be able to reach it due to ice and the rough winter weather waters of unfrozen portions. Then there's the matter of how much oil would be on top of the ice, compared to under. I'm sure that even less oil would be recovered, and more allowed to escape if there were a spill in the arctic. Considering how difficult the environment already is to live in, there could be a possibility of the already rather sparse ecosystem disappearing altogether if a leak or spill were to take place in the region. Even the migratory whales would likely suffer buildup of toxins from the spill, as they consume vast quantities of plankton and krill, which are bound to have had some interaction with them. And while the effect of these disappearances would be difficult to figure out before they happen, I would rather not have to find out the hard way.
Deepwater drilling is difficult enough as it is, but due to the dwindling supplies of petroleum in easy to access regions, oil companies are forced to look to alternatives... which, one would hope, would include alternative energy sources to develop, instead of risky drilling locations, but no such luck on the whole.
Extra links:
http://article.wn.com/view/2012/09/05/BP_says_old_oil_from_spill_exposed_by_Isaac/
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/offshore-drilling.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment