Sarah Chasis's Blog: Saving Wildlife and Wild Places

Offshore Drilling Is – and Will Remain – A Risky Business

2010-05-07T21:44:38Z

“At the source of every error which is blamed on the computer you will find at least two human errors, including the error of blaming it on the computer.” – Author Unknown

As talk in the Gulf (and in Washington, DC) turns from the technological glitches that caused the Deepwater Horizon spill to the technological fixes we can use to solve this problem and ensure the future safety of our oil and gas drilling activities, I think it’s worth pointing out that – at the end of the day, no matter what changes we make – offshore drilling will remain a risky business. Despite everyone’s best efforts, nothing in this world is 100% perfect or safe. As NRDC commented this past fall when Secretary Salazar asked for comments on the Draft Proposed Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program:

“It was just last September that at least a half-million gallons of crude oil were released from platforms, tanks, and pipelines throughout the Gulf of Mexico as a result of Hurricane Ike. Nearly 685,000 gallons of petroleum products were released from 125 spills from platforms, rigs, and pipelines on the OCS as a result of previous Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Even the best technology cannot eliminate operational and human error or the devastating impacts from accidents in offshore oil and gas operations. The inevitable dangers of offshore oil and gas exploration are tragically clear from the blowout of a well on the West Atlas Montara platform in the Timor Sea. On August 21, 2009, the blowout began spewing somewhere in the range of range of 17,000 to 120,000 gallons of oil per day. As of September 21, 2009 the blowout continues to spew oil, with the oil slick now visible from satellite and covering 7,530 square miles. The plugging of the well is at least three weeks away. Despite a statement by the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association that this is a “very, very rare incident”, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority is as of yet unable to stem the continuous flow of oil into the Timor Sea. The spill is located along the edge of Australia’s continental shelf in an area frequented by loggerhead turtles, dolphins, and endangered species like the pygmy blue whale and referred to as “one of the world’s last true wilderness areas” by Tourism Australia.

There are few effective techniques to clean massive spills of this type. As Bob Masters of the Kimberley Professional Fisherman's Association described of the efforts to mitigate the impacts of the Timor Sea blowout: ‘[M]illions of dollars worth of red emperor, snapper, cod and coral trout are found in the waters known as the northern fishing ground … When dispersants are used to clean up this light crude it forces the dispersed oil into the water column and that's where the fish stocks are and the marine life, living in the water column.’ According to the National Academy of Sciences, current cleanup methods can only remove a small fraction of the oil spilled into the ocean. Scientists investigating the long-term impacts of the Exxon Valdez spill estimate that nearly 20,000 gallons of oil from that spill remain in Prince William Sound, continuing to harm threatened and endangered species and undermine their recovery. Marine mammals, sea birds, fish, shellfish, and other sea life are extremely vulnerable to oil pollution and the long-term toxic effects can impair reproductive success for generations.”

In brief, the impacts of expanded offshore drilling pose the risk of oil spills ruining the country’s coastal and ocean resources – beaches and rich ocean waters that belong to the public – and threatening the jobs, health, and recreation of people who live, work, and vacation along the coasts. From seismic survey impacts in the exploration stages, to drilling muds and cuttings and produced water from oil wells, to oil spill impacts – oil and gas exploration and development is a risky business that affects all forms of ocean life and the industries that rely on healthy oceans. Read the NRDC fact sheet for more information (pdf).

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t pause, take a step back and evaluate what happened at Deepwater Horizon. It also doesn’t mean that we should just sit on our hands and not try to stem the flow of oil gushing into the Gulf’s waters. Rather, we need to have a better understanding of what risks we’re willing to take. The industry has reassured us time and again that oil and gas drilling are safe, but accidents do happen and the environmental and economic consequences of these accidents can be massive. The country deserves a better understanding of what’s at risk so that we can make better decisions about our energy future.

NRDC supports imposing a moratorium on all new drilling activities offshore and a suspension of the processes the Administration now has underway to plan for future offshore drilling until an independent investigation can be completed that assesses the causes of the current spill, how such spills can be avoided in the future, the adequacy of containment and clean-up measures for spills generally, and the implications of these findings for drilling in, or adjacent to sensitive and ecologically important areas. NRDC sent a letter to President Obama outlining our recommendations for how we can protect marine life and coastal communities from similar spills in the Gulf or elsewhere.

The American public deserve answers to these questions before new drilling activities and planning processes go forward.

TAKE ACTION: Tell President Obama to Impose a Moratorium on New Offshore Drilling

Governor's Proposed Cuts Threaten Endangered Whales in New York

2009-03-20T15:07:10Z

There was a great article in the New York Times this week about North Atlantic right whales, which the author referred to as "one of the most endangered, and closely watched, species on earth." The article indicates that the whales are having a good year for births, though its worldwide population is only estimated somewhere between 325 and 400 whales.

These whales have been heard singing in New York Harbor (listen and see where here) thanks to the first year of a whale monitoring program run by Cornell University that is designed to help us protect the right - and other endangered whales - from fatal ship strikes as they swim in the path of shipping lanes close to shore.

The timing on the Times' piece was eerily relevant for New York, as it went to print while continued funding for the program is sitting on the chopping block in Albany. On the same day this story ran, the head of the whale monitoring program, Christopher Clark, was in Albany with one of NRDC's ocean policy analysts, Alison Chase, presenting the progress he has made, and fighting for its continued funding, along with other important New York ocean and Great Lakes initiatives.

The whale monitoring work has taught us that endangered whales are swimming just off New York's coasts - sometimes as close as 10 miles from Times Square. The project uses a system of acoustic monitors to listen for endangered whales in New York's waters. Armed with this data, we can implement programs such as the one off Massachusetts, where a system of buoys listens for whales and alerts ships if whales are in the area, allowing ships to slow down so they don't run over them. The baseline data is also important to making sure we're siting offshore energy outside of their migratory pathways.

But in order to make this research a worthwhile investment, we need funding for the remaining two years of research through the Environmental Protection Fund in the state budget. This is just one of many important ocean and Great Lakes initiatives at risk of losing funding in the state budget through the EPF right now. Others include:

Restoring Great South Bay, its clam fishery and eelgrass. The 3 million clams seeded in Great South Bay have spawned nearly 300 million baby clams. This brings us great hope that the hard clam fishery can return, and these shellfish can help improve water quality in the bay.
Implementing a ground-breaking state program to reduce bycatch in New York fisheries, a practice that significantly adds to plummeting fish populations. The term "bycatch" refers to the unwanted marine life that commercial fishing boats throw back either dead or dying because they don't want or can't keep it.
Monitoring the health of commercially and recreationally important fish populations in order to better understand and manage them.

Without further funding, the money used to already get these multi-year projects off the ground will be a waste. That's why we need the state to make an investment of at least $8.5 million for ocean and Great Lakes projects in FY 2009-10, as part of an expanded EPF. (Tell the state legislature you want them to restore funding for New York's ocean and Great Lake resources here.)

These are challenging fiscal times, and, with steep budget shortfalls projected and tight staffing, we understand that the legislature is facing difficult decisions about what projects they are able to fund. But we also know that healthy ocean and Great Lakes resources are directly tied to a healthy New York economy.

Now, more than ever, they should not be cut. In fact, a council made up of nine state agencies (New York Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council) recently released a draft report that called for immediate action to restore New York's ocean and Great Lakes resources because of severe environmental and economic decline, including record beach closings and struggling commercial fisheries.

The EPF was established as a dedicated revenue source so that our critical environmental programs can be carried out in both good and bad economic times. Yet, Governor Paterson's 2009-10 budget slashes the EPF, including a more than 60 percent cut to ocean and Great Lakes funding. This money helps pay for on-the-ground action and important research. And without it, we will lose much of the progress New York State has made to restore these resources.

This is the opposite of what the state should be doing to protect the people and economy that rely on healthy ocean and Great Lakes resources.

To make matters even worse, a report issued by the Environmental Advocates of New York earlier this month has raised concerns that EPF recipients might not receive their funds from last year. The state must get the funds promised into the hands of the contractors moving these projects forward.

An editorial in the New York Times today said failure to fund the whale monitoring program "means a loss of valuable research data and the possibility of more ship strikes. And it also means a loss to our imagination." I couldn't agree more. And failure to fund New York's ocean and Great Lakes initiatives in the EPF will also mean a loss to our local economy.

Bush's New Marine Monuments: The Good, the Bad and Next Steps

2009-01-06T17:19:08Z

Today President Bush is announcing his creation of 3 new national marine monuments in the Pacific Ocean totaling 195,000 square miles - the Marianas, Pacific Remote Islands and Rose Atoll National Marine Monuments.

In doing this the President took an important and exciting step in the right direction -- but it's only a step. It falls short of fully protecting the areas being designated and protects significantly less ocean area than had been proposed by conservation groups.

Here's a closer look at what's good about this announcement, what's bad, and what the next administration can do to expand much-needed ocean protections.

GOOD:

He picked worthy areas that include unique ocean features like the Mariana Trench, which is the deepest place in the world's oceans, and areas of rich biological diversity around several Pacific islands and atolls - areas that contain pristine coral reefs, numerous species of sea birds, shore birds, ocean fish, as well as endangered sea turtles and whales.

Commercial fishing is prohibited within 50 nautical miles of the islands and atolls.

BAD:

The monuments are not as large or as well-protected as many had hoped. For example, the protected areas extend 50 nautical miles from shore rather than out to the limits of U.S. jurisdiction (200 nautical miles), thereby excluding deeper ocean waters and the sea life within them.

While the Mariana Trench itself received protection, the executive order only protects the area from the rim of the trench to the sea floor, not the rim of the trench to the ocean surface. Thus portions of the ocean waters above the trench and the wildlife within those waters are left unprotected.

The monuments are not fully protected. For example, recreational fishing could still be permitted and there are no restrictions on the military's use of sonar, which can be lethal to whales and other marine mammals.

WHAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION CAN DO BETTER:

The monuments should be fully protected and the areas expanded to include ocean waters out to 200 nautical miles. Dozens of scientific studies show that fully protected marine reserves have more and bigger fish than similar habitats that are fished, which makes them highly productive. Studies also show they have greater biodiversity than similar fished areas, which makes them more resilient in the face of climate change and other threats.

To get the benefits marine protected areas have to offer as centers of productivity and resilience, the incoming administration should be systematic about creating a national network of marine protected areas that benefits the full range of ocean systems surrounding the country.

Finally, we need fundamental reform in the management of our ocean resources if we are to protect ocean habitats so that fish and other ocean animals can thrive, have clean beaches that are safe to swim in and seafood that's safe to eat. We are looking to the new administration to do the heavy lifting that's needed to revive the oceans - for example, by truly ending overfishing, by being international leaders on controlling destructive fishing practices like bottom trawling, by cleaning up the ocean "dead zones" and by protecting us from the prospect of oil rigs off our beaches.

There are reasons to be hopeful. The incoming administration under President-elect Obama has selected Dr. Jane Lubchenco, a world-class scientist and conservationist to head the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). NOAA is the agency with jurisdiction over ocean fisheries, marine sanctuaries, coastal zone management and other important ocean programs.

What President Bush has begun, we will look to Dr. Lubchenco and others in the incoming administration to greatly expand on.