http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories/new-report-says-oil-drilling-will-harm-florida-coasts
December 2, 2009
The 3 to 10 miles the Florida Legislature controls off the state’s coastline has caught the attention of oil lobbyists who want to remove the drilling ban. Environment Florida and the Sierra Club today held a news conference discussing their new report regarding this debate, Oceans under the Gun.
Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil Drilling
Potential Impact of Oil Spills and Oil Exploration
and Development on the Florida Keys
November, 2009
by DeeVon Quirolo
The Florida Keys experienced two major freighter groundings in the early 1990’s, which catalyzed public opinion and drove efforts to create a sanctuary banning oil drilling and exploration activities in the Florida Keys. It also led to creation of an Area to be Avoided by the International Maritime Organization that has moved large vessel traffic further offshore of the area’s coral barrier reef.
Fortunately, neither ship grounding resulted in a major oil spill. However, the cumulative effects of numerous small spills from boats in local waters and run-off from automobiles that travel the Overseas Highway of the Keys degrade water quality on a daily basis. A major spill is a possibility should an errant tanker run aground on our the reef. And oil pollution from offshore production either in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico or even possibly along the northern coast of Cuba could impact the Keys and further compromise Florida’s endangered coral reef ecosystem.
Within the context of the United State’s energy needs, fossil fuels provide a major source of energy from both domestic and foreign sources, while contributing significantly to global climate change, air and water pollution, rising energy costs and international political instability. Alternative transportation fuels, in conjunction with an array of other energy-related strategies, have the potential to help reduce these impacts and deliver the greatest benefit for the environment and the American people. Converting to a sustainable lifestyle for all Americans is the real challenge that will protect the Florida Keys into the future.
Sources of Oil Pollution
It is estimated that ninety to ninety-five percent of the oil pollution that enters the water comes from land-based sources, with oil spills accounting for the remaining five to ten percent. Surprisingly, one of the worst offending sources is the oil that drips innocently from your car onto the street that then trickles into drains that eventually find their way to the sea.
The oil industry is improving but has been a source of chronic pollution for many years. According to a United Nations report, a total of seven million gallons a year is spilled in the Caribbean; half of it from tankers and ships and the other half from offshore oil operations. Since the year 2000, there have been eleven major oil spills worldwide. (1) At this writing in 2009, a major oil spill is occurring off the coast of Australia. Efforts are underway to plug a leak from the oil rig, which has been spilling oil into the Timor Sea for about seven weeks.
According to a 1994 U.S. Coast Guard study, tank barges are the leading source of pollution events involving spills. Double-hull tankers are said to be safer than a single-hull in a grounding incident. The safety benefits are less clear on larger vessels and in cases of high speed impact. In 2005, the average age of oil tankers in the world fleet was 10 years. Most newer tankers are double-hulled, with an extra space between the hull and storage tanks. All single-hulled tankers around the world will be phased out by 2026, in accordance with the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). The United Nations has set a date of 2010 while the U.S. deadline is 2015. U.S tankers are ahead of schedule. American Waterways reports that 80% of all inland and coastal tankers in the U.S. are now double hulled, and that spills have been reduced significantly since 1994 to an annual average of 150,944 gallons. (2)
Hurricanes wreak great damage on oil facilities. The U.S. Coast Guard reports that: “The warm water of the Loop Current fueled Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as they tore through the offshore oil rigs, pipelines and refineries in the central and western gulf. More than 7 million gallons of petroleum products spilled. The largest of the spills poured about 76,000 gallons of condensate, a toxic form of liquefied gas, into Gulf waters. Smaller spills are common. Between 1973—2001, there were more than 239,000 oil spills reported. The hurricanes damaged 457 pipelines, destroyed 113 drilling platforms and forced others to shut down. The U.S. Interior Minerals Management Services (MMS) report, based largely on self-reporting by energy companies, says Hurricane Rita caused 54 spills while Katrina caused 70 spills. Together they caused six spills of more than 1,000 barrels – the equivalent of more than 42,000 gallons from each – and 40 spills of more than 50 barrels. An MMS spokesman acknowledged that the agency relies on energy companies to report spills. They reported no spills that “reached the shoreline, oiled birds or mammals or involved large volumes of oil to be collected or cleaned up.” In addition to polluting the Gulf, hurricane damage contributed to a spike in fuel prices. The disruption in production reduced oil supplies, one reason gasoline shot up to more than $3 per gallon.
Drilling promoters say that new technology makes offshore operations safe and clean, even in hurricane alley. Nevertheless, environmentalists contend that last year’s spills added pollution to the Gulf that is depleting fish populations and causing untold harm to other wildlife. “Out in the Gulf, there’s no monitoring that will tell what the long-term damage may have been,” said Richard Charter, Government Relations Consultant with Defenders of Wildlife. Richard has been a leader of the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) Coalition of grassroots organizations opposing offshore oil drilling and exploration in fragile marine areas. For many years, Reef Relief and other conservation interests have depended upon Richard for updates on this issue.
Impact of Oil Drilling
There’s no doubt about it. America’s dependence on oil for transportation causes massive environmental impacts. The U.S. consumes about 20 million barrels of oil a day. Emissions from transportation accounted for 28 percent of global warming emissions in the United States in 2005. Gasoline and diesel were responsible for 78 percent of transportation-sector emissions.
Global warming is a growing threat to the environment and our way of life. Within a century, the average world temperature could increase by another 2 to 11.5°F. Sea level could rise by 7 to 23 inches, and snow and ice cover will continue to contract. Increased sea temperatures are causing devastating coral bleaching and increased occurrence of coral diseases at the reef. Our heavy reliance on petroleum-based fuels has also created widespread air and water pollution via mercury into the food chain and toxic gases in the atmosphere. Alternative transportation fuels can reduce our dependence on petroleum, but vary greatly in their impact on the environment (3)
The Florida Keys is home to North America’s only living coral barrier reef, the third longest in the world. This fragile, interdependent ecosystem consists of coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses that, together with the upland hardwood hammocks, are home to one-third of Florida’s threatened and endangered species. It is also the backbone of our commercial fishing industry and tourism economy, providing unlimited pleasures from diving, boating, kayaking, photography and sportfishing. Florida’s coastal economy, according to the Florida Ocean and Coastal Council 2008 Florida’s Ocean & Coastal Economies Report, generated $562 billion in 2006 and Florida’s ocean economy generated $25 billion in 2005. (4)
A major oil spill on the oceanside of the Florida Keys could be carried by currents and tides onto our beaches, mangroves, coral reefs, and shallow seagrasses. A spill in the Gulf of Mexico could result in similar impacts since the Gulf Loop Current carries offshore waters into the Lower Florida Keys where the shrimp and lobster breed. From Florida Bay there is a net transport of water through and around the passages of the Keys, to the oceanside barrier reef where the Gulfstream would carry any pollutants north.
Such a spill would endanger the coral reef ecosystem and the myriad of life it harbors including endangered species such as conchs, turtles, manatees, dolphins, roseate spoonbills, plus the direct loss of hard and soft corals, mangroves, and seagrasses. Birds, crabs and other intertidal invertebrates would be heavily impacted. The nursery capacity of mangroves and seagrasses would be diminished along with the beneficial effects of mangroves in filtering pollutants from the land and stabilizing the shoreline. Seagrass losses would increase sedimentation in the water.
A major oil spill would also dramatically affect tourism and commercial fishing. A blowout in the Gulf of Mexico in 1979 inundated Texas beaches for 300 days, with resultant losses of $7.6 million. Commercial fishing for lobster, stone crab, shrimp, and reef fish could be impacted. The Valdez spill, for example, closed the salmon and herring fisheries completely. Sport and commercial species of fish in the Keys depend upon pollution-free nursery grounds and a healthy coral reef to thrive.
Oil and Water Don’t Mix
Perhaps the best study of oil on coral reefs occurred in 1986, when more than eight million litres of crude oil spilled onto a coral reef ecosystem in Panama, the largest recorded spill in the tropical Americas. Many of the plants and animals had been studied before the spill by researchers at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Station located at the site of the spill. Conclusions indicated wide-ranging impacts:
Plants and animals died wherever they came in contact with oil. Oil accumulated along the seaward edge of the Galeta reef flat, directly coating and killing plants and animals, including coral. At high tide, oil accumulated along sand beaches, where it soaked into the sand and settled onto the shoreward reef flat at low tide, killing seagrasses, algae and invertebrates. Oil covered intertidal surfaces of prop roots of the red mangrove, killing oysters and other life on the roots. Relieved of the weight of their leaves, the branches flexed upward, lifting the roots out of the water and thus killing subtidal life that previously escaped direct contact with floating oil. Dead mangrove trees formed a band about 8 to 10 meters wide marking the area where oil accumulated as it entered the mangrove forests. A band of defoliated trees was apparent within 2 months after the spill and widened thereafter.
Immediately after the spill, a bloom of microalgae covered recently killed areas. Populations of animals were severely reduced and only one species had returned to typical abundance after 18 months. Sea urchin densities on the reef flat seaward edge were reduced by about 80% within a few days of oiling. Abundance of the most common corals in depths of less than three meters decreased by 51% to 96% at one reef, by 76% overall and by 54% in depths between 9 to 12 meters. (5).
In a 1993 follow-up study the authors noted, “This summary is intended to alert the environmental community that toxic effects of hydrocarbons will probably persist for at least 20 years in deep mud tropical coastal habitats affected by catastrophic spills.” Two years after the spill, these researchers found the “Numbers of coral, total coral cover, and species diversity based on cover decreased significantly with increased amounts of oiling.” Another study in Panama additionally concluded there is “…Little prospect for rapid reef recovery.”
Oil is a poisonous substance; one drop of crude oil can kill the unborn bird inside its egg or poison adult birds that drink contaminated water. An oiled bird loses its ability to fly, retain heat, hunt or feed. Sub-lethal effects result in ulceration, pneumonia and other diseases, retarded growth of young, and improper organ function. Sea turtles have difficulty distinguishing tarballs from food, with deadly results. Fish and marine life depend upon healthy habitat, nutritional feeding, fleeing predators and sexual attraction, all of which is interrupted by the effects of oil. Invertebrates suffer dramatic losses. Simple life forms that ingest oil spread it up the food chain. Ducks that consumed crayfish subjected to No. 2 fuel oil exhibited oil accumulations in the liver, gall bladder, fat, kidneys and blood. Oil in the water column that doesn’t dissipate affects animals at different stages from the larvae on up. Oil can wipe out whole fish populations. Oil causes trophic cascading impacts, a term used to describe how just one susceptible species can affect each part of its food web and habitat with a multiplier effect lasting many years. Oil trapped in mangrove and seagrass areas can persist and remain toxic for years, taking an estimated 50 years to repopulate to pre-spill levels. According to Richard Charter, “Heavier crude oil has a component that sinks and forms tarballs. They are out of sight, sink to the bottom and are buried in the sea floor. The toxicity can persist for 50 to 100 years. Condensate tends to float on the surface and tends to evaporate and turn to a vapor. But it’s toxic and can kill on contact.”
Contingency Planning
The Exxon Valdez spill and several vessel groundings created U.S. political will to mandate procedures for eliminating accidental spillage and marine debris from offshore rigs and require double hulled tankers. The U.S. Coast Guard has implemented extensive oil spill recovery plans and enlisted local governments to provide facilities to respond to a major event.
Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which holds a responsible party liable for damages caused by an oil spill, including penalties of up to $25,000 per day. It stepped up the requirements for safe entry and transfer of oil and required Vessel Response Plans (VRP) in tankers including designation of services to provide 24-hour computerized data and services relating to damage stability, damage stress analysis, grounding force monitoring, oil outflow estimates, lightering quantities and sequences. Final rules for the VRPs went into effect in 1996 and are administered by the U.S. Coast Guard. In addition, Congress created the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, a $1 billion fund to support the cost of cleanup and damages from oil spills.
State and county governments in California and Washington are requiring additional ground tackle sufficient to secure vessels during a storm, emergency response beacons, fire suppression systems, and escort tugs to further protect coastlines from oil spills. Key West has an oil spill contingency plan and capacity to implement it.
The International Maritime Organization has strengthened the rules under MARPOL to require SOPEPs (Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Response Plans) for tankers of 150 gross tons and above and any other ship of 400 gross tons or more as well as safer management policies through the International Safety Management Code. All this should reduce catastrophic oil spills.
Changing Times Results in New Policies
Offshore oil production continues at full throttle. Beginning in 1954, the federal government offered wide areas of America’s coast to offshore oil exploration and development in the form of leases to oil companies in exchange for upfront fees and a share of sales, or royalties. This policy generated massive opposition from environmentalists. As a result, certain key habitats were protected by annual Congressional drilling bans passed in 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991 that prevented the Interior Department from leasing sensitive offshore tracts.
In Florida, the area south of 26 degrees North Latitude, approximately 100 miles south of the Florida Panhandle, and all waters outside of Lease Sale 181 in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, have been under a Congressional and Presidential moratorium for offshore oil and gas exploration and development, thanks to strong citizen opposition. Keys citizens united in the 1990’s to oppose big oil based on the impact it would have on our coral reefs and tourism. Black Friday was a day when all businesses closed and everyone joined a parade and then spoke out at a public hearing that lasted for over 6 hours.
Legislation signed by President George H. W. Bush in 1990 created the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, banning any and all offshore oil activities within sanctuary boundaries that includes 2600 square nautical miles–the entire Florida Keys from North Key Largo to the Dry Tortugas and the entire bayside of the Keys. The legislation also created an International Area to be Avoided, sanctioned by the International Maritime Organization, that restricts large commercial vessel traffic from sanctuary boundaries and results in moving ship traffic further off the barrier reef. A Presidential Task Force reviewed the 1992-1997 Five Year Plan for Offshore Oil Exploration and Development and recommended a ten-year drilling ban for the 73 leases held by nine oil companies for areas adjacent to the Florida Keys. Unfortunately, the trade-off allowed development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
President Clinton targeted areas for offshore leasing on the basis of consensus building, science-based decision making, and use of natural gas as an environmentally preferable fuel and continued the moratorium for the Keys.
Things looked bleak for oil and gas companies in 1995, especially for those along the Gulf Coast. Energy prices were so low that investment had dried up. Scores of wildcatters and small exploration companies had gone out of business. Few companies had any stomach for drilling in water thousands of feet deep, and industry leaders were focused on opportunities abroad. U.S. Senator Johnston of Louisiana, convinced that the Gulf’s vast reservoirs and Louisiana’s oil-based economy were being neglected, argued that Congress should offer incentives for deep-water drilling and exploration. Working closely with industry executives, he wrote legislation to allow a company drilling in deep water to escape the standard 12 percent royalty on up to 87.5 million barrels of oil or its equivalent in natural gas. As a result, during the George W. Bush administration, the federal Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 1997-2002 offered 384 blocks in deep water 100 or more miles off the costs of Alabama and Florida for lease. “This is intended to recognize the natural gas and oil industry’s desire to expand the area of leasing consideration in a way that is acceptable to other constituents,” noted Cynthia Quarterman, MMS Director. The program generates four billion dollars a year from federal offshore leases and federal and Indian onshore mineral leases. It recognized that the State of Florida was opposed to such activity within 100 miles of our coast, but allowed the first oil rigs in Florida to be built off the Panhandle, a decision that has deeply embittered that local community.
In January, 2006, without public review or comment, Lease Sale 181 in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico was removed from Florida’s jurisdiction and given to Louisiana via a revised “Seaward Boundary Lines Extension in the Federal Register.” The following year, a drilling bill, which the Republican-led Congress passed in its final hours, opened 8.3 million acres of federal waters in the eastern Gulf of Mexico to oil and natural gas rigs, including Lease Sale 181. For the first time, it provided the states a significant share of federal royalty revenues–37.5 percent– to be divided up based on each state’s proximity to production. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee projected that the states would share some $1.2 billion per year by 2022 and a total of $170 billion over 60 years. Louisiana could eventually get more than $600 million a year. (6)
President George W. Bush also revoked previous protections for Bristol Bay, Alaska, while not mentioning the Keys, which was still under his Presidential moratoria. However, once he signed the Congressional bill into law, it had the effect of revoking the ban. Nine coastal governors opposed the legislation but then-Florida Governor Jeb Bush helped write the house bill. As a result, there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of oil and gas deep water activity in the Gulf of Mexico and use of new technological developments and discoveries in these new geological provinces. Advocates to drilling note the area holds an estimated 6-trillion cubic feet of natural gas. That’s enough to heat up to 6-million homes a year for 15 years. But that’s a tiny fraction of what America uses each year, which totals more than 22.4-trillion cubic feet. The estimated amount of oil in the area, 930-million barrels, is even smaller.
Drilling opponents say that it’s not worth the environmental risk and that industry instead should be pushing for more conservation and alternative fuels. Some interpreted this as a win because states such as Florida could keep drilling 125 miles offshore via a dangerous petitioning process to the Interior Department. It also provides a buffer zone for the military mission line that the military says is important to training needs.
Oil interests even ventured into state politics in Florida, resulting in introduction and passage of House Bill 1219 in 2009, which would have allowed the governor and the three-member Cabinet to consider and award drilling leases in state waters as close as 3 miles from shore. The oil industry spent millions to build public support including that of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its local Florida affiliates. Despite the opposition of editorial boards across the state, the bill passed and leases could be awarded up to 10½ miles from the beaches. To date, the Florida Senate has not taken it up and Senate President Jeff Atwater said it was unlikely this Senate would consider it, citing the complexity and importance of the issue. A poll commissioned by the Times-Union and South Florida Sun Sentinel last year suggested 53 percent of respondents favored drilling, but most wanted it at least 125 miles from the coastline, a stunning reversal of the unanimous opposition to oil held by all Floridians in recent years. (7)
On January 16, 2009, after the induction of President Barack Obama, MMS announced the release of the Draft Proposed Five Year Program for Oil Drilling 2010-2015 and sought public comment on all aspects of the new program including energy development and economic and environmental issues in the Outer Continental Shelf areas. The following month, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar extended the comment period by 180 days, tasked the MMS and U.S. Geologic Survey to produce a report on resources and potential impacts, and scheduled 4 regional meetings to be held in April, 2009, to receive additional public input. Citing harmful effects on marine life and oil spills in the Arctic, scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are asking the Interior Department to “drastically reduce plans to open the coast to offshore oil and gas drilling.” A final decision has yet to be announced regarding the future of the program. A more informed approach is being applied. The concept of marine spatial planning—identifying the best use of offshore resources and setting up zones appropriate to those activities—is being considered. A series of public hearings have been held by the President’s Ocean Council to identify the potential for such an approach. This has the potential of protecting the Florida Keys and adjacent areas from oil development.
How Will Drilling in the Eastern Gulf Affect the Florida Keys?
The Gulf Loop Current will carry routine drilling muds into the backwaters of the Lower Florida Keys from Eastern Gulf area activities. The currents would then wrap around the Keys and carry any pollutants up the reef tract. MMS has said drilling anywhere in Lease Sale 181 is “expected to result in small pollution events that could temporarily affect the enjoyment or use of some beach segments in Alabama and Florida.” The agency estimated that over 40 years, there could be up to 870 spills of 2,000 gallons or less.
The U.S. E.P.A., in a study of Lease Sale 181, warned that if there were a spill, “there is as great as a 47% chance that the slick would reach Florida’s coastal waters before dissipating. And routine chemical discharges of such pollutants as barium, chromium and arsenic would introduce significant quantities of contaminants to these relatively pristine waters. All 12 rigs proposed would contribute about 1.65-billion pounds per year of contaminants which could lead to the long term regional degradation of offshore water quality. ”
Oceanographers warn of serious consequences. “We are more at risk from spills in the vicinity of the loop current,” said Christopher Mooers, a University of Miami professor of applied marine physics. “It could affect the beaches and reefs all the way up the East Coast,” said Robert Weisberg, oceanography professor at University of South Florida who has spent years studying the gulf. “If any messy stuff should be at the surface in the vicinity of the loop current, it s going to be carried with it, that’s for sure,” added Wilton Sturges, a retired Florida State University oceanography professor. Sturges did a study for Chevron that showed “Under worst-case conditions the spilled stuff could be brought ashore…much faster than any response team could get there to clean it up. Most bad things happen during nasty weather, when the difficulties of clean-up are at their worst.” Routine drilling muds release thousands of pounds of toxic chemicals into the environment and place Florida at risk of a large or catastrophic spill.
What are the Alternatives?
Florida Senator Bill Nelson tells us: “Well, the U.S. failed in the 1970s to enact a real energy program to get us off oil. Result: Brazil runs on ethanol today, not the U.S.; Germany leads the world in solar power, not the U.S. Meantime, the oil companies are awash in record profits – more than $155 billion last year alone – and not spending enough on refineries or alternative energy, while consumers are getting gouged at the pump. Even worse, it took the U.S. more than 30 years to raise mileage standards on cars and trucks to a paltry 35 miles per gallon. Most of Europe – and the cars that U.S.-based manufacturers sell there – already averages 43 miles per gallon. Japan is approaching 50 miles per gallon. In other words, we are wasting billions of gallons of oil.” (8)
Demand is fueled by consumer dependence on oil and oil-based products derived from non-renewable fossil fuels. We use oil in our cars and other vehicles, it heats and cools our homes, paves our roads, and provides the raw materials for over 3,000 everyday products including our clothing, the roof over our heads, the paint on our walls, the fiber in the carpet, even the watchbands on our wrists. Unless and until we learn to either reduce our consumption or replace our consumer demands with environmentally-friendly alternatives, the need for oil will continue.
Fifty percent of the oil we use goes into our transportation. This is where we must focus by enacting serious conservation measures, such as 40 miles per gallon for our vehicles, and, provide bigger tax breaks for hybrid cars. Raising fuel standards on cars would save more oil that new offshore oil wells in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico could provide. Second, the government – led by the president – must enact a national energy program to transition us from gasoline to alternative and synthetic fuels to power much of our transportation. Ethanol and bio-diesel use would benefit American farmers and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. (9)
Conservation would reduce our overall consumption. This is the Sunshine State–what about solar? The Florida Legislature recently took steps to provide incentives for ownership of solar systems by consumers and businesses. California has made a 10-year commitment including a credit on electric bills for producing extra energy. In the end, it is up to each of us.
Reef Relief recommends these actions we can all do to reduce our dependence on oil:
• Reduce, reuse, recycle.
• Ride bicycles, walk or carpool when possible or drive a hybrid vehicle.
• Recycle used motor oil.
• Avoid over-packaged items.
• Conserve energy. Use fluorescent light bulbs and save half your electric bill. Replace existing appliances with those that minimize energy wasted when turned off,.
• Use non-toxic cleansers, fertilizers, and pesticides.
• Install solar panels at your home or business. Use roof-mounted solar collectors to heat water.
• Become educated and support conservation issues politically such as an energy policy based on renewable energy such as solar.
• Support environment efforts to protect our oceans through volunteer efforts, in-kind donations or membership contributions.
• Vote for environmentally committed candidates.
• Live simply so that others may simply live.
Potential Impact of Oil Spills/Oil Exploration/Development on the Florida Keys 235
DeeVon Quirolo is the retired co-founder of Reef Relief, formerly a global non-profit membership organization dedicated to Protecting Coral Reef Ecosystems. email dquirolo@gmail.com
(1) Oil Spills & Disasters. Infoplease at www.infoplease.com
(2) http://americanwaterways.com/industrystats/transportation/index
(3) Elizabeth Ridlington, Tony Dutzik; Frontier Group & Rob Sargent. Beyond Oil: The Transportation Fuels That Can Help Reduce Global Warming. Florida Environment Environment Florida Research & Policy Center. July 2008
(4) Florida Coastal and Ocean Coalition letter to Florida Governor Crist dated April 27, 2009
(5) JeremyJackson, et. Al. 1989. Ecological Effects of a Major Oil Spill on Panamanian Coastal Marine Communities. Science, V. 243, Jan pp.37-43.
(6) Evans, Ben. Oil Windfalls May Not Fund Environmental Projects. Associated Press. 2/17/07.
(7) Hunt, David. Gov. Crist, Sen. Nelson and Offshore Drilling, Florida Times Union 4/22/09
(8) Senator Bill Nelson. Drilling Isn’t the Answer editorial letter dated 5/21/09.
(9) Dutzik, Tony; Monopolis, Alexios; Telleen-Lawton, Timothy, Sargent, Rob; Aurilio, Anna. The Road to a New Energy Future. Environment Florida Research & Policy Center. October 2006.
Editorial Compilation April 24th, 2009
It’s pretty unanimous that efforts to open up Florida’s coastline and the Eastern Gulf of Mexico to offshore oil drilling is opposed by every major newspaper in Florida. Read the comments here from last year, when the idea was floated while there were upwards of 300 oil lobbyists in Tallahassee. Thank goodness the Florida Senate refused to take up the issue after it passed in the House. We must also be vigilant as to what happens at the federal level via the Minerals Managements Service of the Department of the Interior.
Timor Sea spill monitoring to take years
AAP October 15, 2009, 6:06 pm
AAP © Enlarge photo
The operators of an oil well leaking into the Timor Sea for more than seven weeks could be monitoring the site for years, a scientist says.
Oil has been leaking into the ocean near PTTEP Australasia’s West Atlas rig since August 21, at a rate initially estimated to be up to 400 barrels a day.
Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett on Thursday announced a deal had been struck with the Thai-based company for it to pay for environmental monitoring in the Timor Sea for at least two years.
Two attempts to plug the well in the last week have been unsuccessful and another bid is planned for Saturday.
PTTEP has appointed Australian environmental scientist John Wardrop to manage the immediate and long-term monitoring programs.
Mr Wardrop said the monitoring program was one of the biggest in Australia in response to an oil spill.
“It really depends on how the studies go, some of them may last for one year,” Mr Wardrop told AAP.
“For example, if we find with our water quality sampling, there is no simply no residual oil … there’s probably little chance of that being required in subsequent years.
“Some of these studies I’m sure will go for a number of years.”
The leaking facility at PTTEP’s Montara oilfield is more than 200 kilometres off Western Australia’s Kimberley coast.
Conservationists have been critical of the company and the federal government’s response to the oil spill, which occurred in an area that’s home to a number of endangered species.
West Australian Greens senator Scott Ludlum said on Thursday PTTEP had been keen to downplay the impact of the spill.
Senator Ludlum said a two-year monitoring program was not long enough to monitor the life cycles of some fish species.
“It needs to be at least six years,” Senator Ludlum told AAP.
Reports of dead fish and dolphins in Indonesian waters were concerning, Senator Ludlum said.
“This pollution does not respect international marine boundaries,” he said.
Mr Wardrop said issues surrounding the monitoring of Indonesian waters would be dealt with by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority and the Department of Foreign Affairs.
He said he would be surprised if fish stocks in the Timor Sea were adversely affected by the oil spill.
“I would be surprised if there was an impact on the fisheries as such, that tends not to be that case when you have spills, even very large spills in open bodies of water,” Mr Wardrop said.
“Where we’ve seen damage it’s been very large spills in shore, in shallow waters.”
Mr Wardrop said there was minimal risk of the oil, which he describes as “relatively light”, leaving any residual on the seabed.
But it was possible it could leave a residual on reefs in the area, which were being monitored.
PTTEP said it was on track to make a third pass on Saturday to intercept the leaking well, which it plans to plug with mud.
The company is utilising electro-magnetic equipment that it says has never failed in similar relief efforts.
The company is paying for the costs of clean-up efforts and spill control by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, which has been spraying dispersant to break up the oil slick and monitoring it on a daily basis.
The West News
Federal Scientists Say Limit Drilling
By Jim Tankersley and Josh Meyer
October 12, 2009
Reporting from Washington – The federal government’s top ocean scientists are urging the Interior Department to drastically reduce plans to open the coast to offshore oil and gas drilling, citing threats to marine life and potentially devastating effects of oil spills in Arctic waters.
In a letter sent to Interior officials last month, NOAA recommended excluding large tracts of the Alaska coast, the Atlantic seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico from Interior’s draft offshore drilling plan for 2010 to 2015.
NOAA recommends establishing buffer zones around the Southern California Ecological Preserve off Santa Barbara. In addition, it suggests that its broader recommendations, such as taking greater account of drilling’s effects on marine life, could affect potential lease sales off California.
The agency calls for a ban on drilling in the Arctic until oil companies greatly improve their ability to prevent and clean up oil spills. And it asks Interior to delay new drilling plans until an Obama administration ocean policy task force completes its work late this year.
The comments, dated Sept. 9 and obtained by the Washington Bureau, were included in a letter to Interior officials from NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco. They include an often sharp critique of the offshore leasing plan, developed under Bush, that would open swaths of the California coast and other areas to new drilling.
NOAA says the leasing plan’s assessment of the risks of drilling, such as oil spills, is “understated and generally not supported or referenced.”
For example, in Alaska’s North Aleutian Basin and Chukchi Sea, the agency says it is “very concerned about potential impacts to living marine resources and their habitats, viable commercial and recreational fisheries, and subsistence use of marine resources as a result of future lease sales, exploration, and development.”
The recommendations echo concerns raised by an array of environmental and local community groups, fishermen, Alaska Natives and scientists, said Dr. Richard Steiner, a marine biologist at the University of Alaska who has battled Interior over Alaska offshore drilling.
“The significance is that here we have one federal agency supporting what we have been saying all along regarding the push to lease offshore in Alaska,” he said. The agency’s comments, Steiner added, “put Interior in a corner in all of this.”
The recommendations reflect the ascendance at NOAA of environmentalists such as Lubchenco, a marine ecologist who has been outspoken on ecosystem issues and climate change.
“It is refreshing to hear the voices of marine scientists who were silenced for the past eight years,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which has publicized documents that show Bush officials overruling or downplaying environmental concerns.
“If NOAA’s warnings are not heeded,” Ruch added, “Interior’s offshore leasing plans will again be ensnared in litigation.”
NOAA urges the Minerals Management Service — the Interior division that handles offshore drilling — to consider ocean ecosystems, coastal communities and other environmental factors when finalizing a leasing plan.
The agency stresses the challenges of cleaning up an oil spill in remote, icy waters, which NOAA says would be substantially more difficult than cleaning up a spill elsewhere.
The recommendations highlight the competing pressures on Interior Secretary Ken Salazar as he weighs whether to amend the Bush-era leasing plan.
Republicans have accused Salazar of dragging his feet and stalling domestic energy production, in part because he extended the time for the public to comment on the plan.
Rep. Doc Hastings of Washington, the top Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, recently accused the administration of placing “a de facto ban on offshore drilling.”
The comment period ended last month, with more than 450,000 submissions, including some from conservation groups, governors and industry representatives.
In a comment representative of the oil industry, BP America enthusiastically supported the Bush plan, writing: “The oil and gas exploration and development sector has a strong record of environmental and safety performance. We believe that if new areas are opened, they can be leased, explored and developed safely and in an environmentally sensitive manner.”
Through a spokeswoman, Salazar remained noncommittal Sunday about the NOAA recommendations. Kendra Barkoff said in a statement that the secretary “welcomes the ongoing input and expertise of NOAA and other federal agencies and looks forward to continuing these discussions as he moves toward decisions that will help us build a comprehensive, responsible offshore energy strategy for the country.”
Last month, in a news release announcing the end of the comment period, Salazar said the future leasing plan “must take into account several key considerations, including areas of the ocean that are critical to military training and the nation’s defenses; other economic benefits of the oceans, including fisheries, tourism, and subsistence uses; environmental considerations; existing oil and gas infrastructure; interest from industry; and the availability of scientific and seismic data.”