I thought I would run out of things to write about the latest oil disaster, but one recent report suggested that the volume of oil released is now equal to an Exxon Valdez spill every 3.5 days. Many think that the original leak has expanded as the damaged infrastructure has worn away. This problem is far from under control. A calamity is unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico. Some recent images of the oil reaching the Louisiana costline can be found here.
A disaster of this size is unparalleled. The environmental damage will last for decades, and will be catastrophic for marine life (and the fishing and tourism industries).
The Gulf of Mexico was already polluted. A similar oil well blowout occured in 1979, and pollution from sewage and fertilizer run-off created a dead zone in the region of 8000 square miles. This source states that annual pollution loadings can be:
* over 800,000 tons of nitrogen
* over 200,000 tons of phosphorus
* 100 million tons of dredged sediments
* over 2,000 tons of toxic substances from coastal industrial and municipal sites (four of the top five states in the U.S. in total surface discharge of toxic chemicals are Gulf States - Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas)
* approximately 1,000 tons of pesticides from coastal agriculture
* over 6,000 tons of produced waters from near-shore oil and gas platforms
source
We are killing the oceans, or at least big business is doing it on our behalf. They will continue to do so until we react strongly enough to this kind of news. Sure, you can stay away from BP gas stations, but where will you go? The Chevron next door?
Profit is everything to a corporation. While there is profit in pollution, it will continue.
Showing posts with label disaster. Show all posts
Showing posts with label disaster. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
The Cost of Progress
As I type, up to 25000 barrels of oil per day are gushing into the Gulf Of Mexico. The explosion which destroyed the Deepwater Horizon oil platform also claimed 11 lives. Already we are looking for someone to blame as it becomes clear that the flood of oil from the sea floor is proving difficult to stop, and that contingency plans for a spill were inadequate or non-existent. At this point, it will probably turn out to be the worst oil disaster in US history since the volume of oil is not limited to the contents of an oil tanker.
Last week, the main proposal was to burn off the oil. Not surprisingly, this has had little effect. Even if it had, the fire would have produced an airborne cloud of toxins while the most dense chemicals would have dropped to the sea floor. You can read about in-situ burning here. The best clean up technique appears to be rapid containment and removal, but this has not happened.
What could have caused this catastrophe? This is central to the topic of blame. Obama sent SWAT teams to inspect similar rigs, suggesting to the public that terrorism could have been suspected. However, industry insiders and educated observers suspect a more logical cause.
"The problem is that when you drill into these formations, and then try to inject cement into the hole/gaps to prevent leakage, the curing process for that creates heat. That heat can, if not controlled, cause the gas to escape the frozen crystals. If a lot of gas is released all at once, as could happen during the cement/curing process, it can cause a blowout where the cementing is occurring, or force gas and/or oil up the pipeline to the drilling rig on the surface."
Our friends at Halliburton were involved in the construction of the well. There is an article here which covers their role. Halliburton is a "world leader" in cementing well heads.
"Halliburton performed a variety of services on the rig, including cementing, and had four employees stationed on the rig at the time of the accident. Halliburton's employees returned to shore safely, due, in part, to the brave rescue efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard and other organizations.
Halliburton had completed the cementing of the final production casing string in accordance with the well design approximately 20 hours prior to the incident. The cement slurry design was consistent with that utilized in other similar applications."
In 2007, the U.S. Minerals Management Service noted that over 14 years, around half (39) of the well blowouts in the area were due to cementing problems. Halliburton's cementing was blamed for an Australian blowout last year (the well leaked oil for 10 weeks).
Interestingly, Halliburton announced that it would acquire an oil and gas well fire control company less that a month ago. At the very least, this is disaster capitalism at it's finest.
So, who is to blame? It certainly looks like Halliburton had a part to play. The BBC asked a similar question here, where a point was made which most of us like to ignore. Many corporations operate with little concern for anything other than profit. We see that all the time. Would they continue to take such risks if the potential profits declined? In other words, if we consumed less, we would see fewer disasters. We have to accept at least a small portion of the blame.
You may remember the documentary, Who Killed The Electric Car. The answer to the question posed in the film explores similar issues. Real change has to come from the top and the bottom.
Last week, the main proposal was to burn off the oil. Not surprisingly, this has had little effect. Even if it had, the fire would have produced an airborne cloud of toxins while the most dense chemicals would have dropped to the sea floor. You can read about in-situ burning here. The best clean up technique appears to be rapid containment and removal, but this has not happened.
What could have caused this catastrophe? This is central to the topic of blame. Obama sent SWAT teams to inspect similar rigs, suggesting to the public that terrorism could have been suspected. However, industry insiders and educated observers suspect a more logical cause.
"The problem is that when you drill into these formations, and then try to inject cement into the hole/gaps to prevent leakage, the curing process for that creates heat. That heat can, if not controlled, cause the gas to escape the frozen crystals. If a lot of gas is released all at once, as could happen during the cement/curing process, it can cause a blowout where the cementing is occurring, or force gas and/or oil up the pipeline to the drilling rig on the surface."
Our friends at Halliburton were involved in the construction of the well. There is an article here which covers their role. Halliburton is a "world leader" in cementing well heads.
"Halliburton performed a variety of services on the rig, including cementing, and had four employees stationed on the rig at the time of the accident. Halliburton's employees returned to shore safely, due, in part, to the brave rescue efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard and other organizations.
Halliburton had completed the cementing of the final production casing string in accordance with the well design approximately 20 hours prior to the incident. The cement slurry design was consistent with that utilized in other similar applications."
In 2007, the U.S. Minerals Management Service noted that over 14 years, around half (39) of the well blowouts in the area were due to cementing problems. Halliburton's cementing was blamed for an Australian blowout last year (the well leaked oil for 10 weeks).
Interestingly, Halliburton announced that it would acquire an oil and gas well fire control company less that a month ago. At the very least, this is disaster capitalism at it's finest.
So, who is to blame? It certainly looks like Halliburton had a part to play. The BBC asked a similar question here, where a point was made which most of us like to ignore. Many corporations operate with little concern for anything other than profit. We see that all the time. Would they continue to take such risks if the potential profits declined? In other words, if we consumed less, we would see fewer disasters. We have to accept at least a small portion of the blame.
You may remember the documentary, Who Killed The Electric Car. The answer to the question posed in the film explores similar issues. Real change has to come from the top and the bottom.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Sitting on a Volcano
Twenty-five years ago, the worst non-nuclear industrial accident ever happened in the city of Bhopal:
Thousands of people died in the days that followed, and many more have suffered from the long term effects of exposure to methyl isocyanate and the abandoned chemical wastes which have polluted the water supply over the last twenty five years.
People in the US often think that this kind of tragedy cannot occur in the most industrialized nations. The Love Canal disaster was an eye-opener for many Americans, and contributed greatly to the reasons for the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund scheme, which was designed to clean up other dangerous waste dumps across the country, as they were discovered. Read all about Superfund here
Want to know which sites are near you? Take a look at the EPA site here, but bear in mind, the sites on the National Priorities List are just those deemed large enough and dangerous enough to warrant clean up action by the EPA. There are many smaller yet extremely hazardous sites across the US, and many of those have probably been forgotten long ago....
Thousands of people died in the days that followed, and many more have suffered from the long term effects of exposure to methyl isocyanate and the abandoned chemical wastes which have polluted the water supply over the last twenty five years.
People in the US often think that this kind of tragedy cannot occur in the most industrialized nations. The Love Canal disaster was an eye-opener for many Americans, and contributed greatly to the reasons for the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund scheme, which was designed to clean up other dangerous waste dumps across the country, as they were discovered. Read all about Superfund here
Want to know which sites are near you? Take a look at the EPA site here, but bear in mind, the sites on the National Priorities List are just those deemed large enough and dangerous enough to warrant clean up action by the EPA. There are many smaller yet extremely hazardous sites across the US, and many of those have probably been forgotten long ago....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
