Regional Updates



Oils Well that Ends Well? The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and its Aftermath
by Dr. David Secord


Introduction

Dead baby sea lions, oiled cormorants laboring to preen themselves, and sticky swaths of oil covering the rocky shores of North America's legendary pristine wilderness, were the images that invaded the world's consciousness via television after the Exxon Valdez ran aground on Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska on the night of March 24th, 1989. This spill, the largest in US history, dumped nearly 11 million gallons of Alaskan North Slope crude oil into the wild and ecologically rich waters of this spectacular corner of the Northeastern Pacific Ocean.

While the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) galvanized the Pacific Northwest and the nation, it was hardly exceptional by global standards: EVOS ranked 40th in volume among large spills worldwide between 1967 and 1994. Major oil spills have occurred, and continue to be a real risk, all along the Pacific Coast, as oil is being shipped by sea from Alaska to Puget Sound in Washington State and being drilled for off the coast of California.

History

Black Gold. Texas Tea. The Beverly Hillbillies struck it rich because they were lucky enough to live on top of something. American society is addicted to the use of fossilized fuel. As long as we have this fossil-fuel thirst to quench, oil, like milk, will occasionally be spilt. Oil spills have occurred as long as humans have been moving the stuff around the globe, (through pipelines, off ships, tankers, trucks, and humans). As such, oil spills are inevitable as long as we live in a world where human error (a sleepy tanker pilot) and the fickle finger of fate (high seas, submerged rocks) cannot be controlled.

While the spilling of oil into nature by humans occurs vastly more often now than it has historically, it is important to bear in mind that oil is a natural product and it does occasionally seep out on its own. In places where this happens frequently, such as the submarine canyons off the coast of Santa Barbara, California, the organisms that live nearby have evolved, through many generations of natural selection and metabolic adaptations to living in an oil-rich environment.

The critical difference for the sea otters, seaweeds or mussels hit by the crude oil in Price William Sound in March of 1989 was that they didn't have the Santa Barbara passports -- or genes. Millions of gallons of crude oil arriving all at once was not something their ancestors had experienced for thousands of years, and so it took them by surprise. The sticky, toxic oil killed individual organisms outright by making them sick. It reduced their populations indirectly by interfering with their reproduction. And the spill interfered with the heat-trapping insulation of fur or feathers that otters and birds use to stay warm in cold high-latitude waters. EVOS was a massive perturbation of an ecosystem accustomed to the physical disturbances by the ocean but not to the extreme of the EVOS.

The oil was not the only insult to the environment of Prince William Sound. Exxon spent $2 billion cleaning up the spill in 1989 and 1990. However, much of this effort was focused only on cleaning the beaches by washing them with high-pressure heated seawater. This caused the death of many of the intertidal organisms that had survived the oil itself. Additionally, the sediments washed offshore by this procedure smothered the subtidal organisms that had not been affected by the initial oil spill. While there undoubtedly is some value in cleanup activities after oil spills, it will take careful research (virtually absent prior to the spill) to ensure that our cures for oil spills are not worse than the initial sickness.

Current Status

As with many human diseases, an ounce of prevention in environmental crisis management is often worth a pound of cure. Many of the habitats and populations affected by the EVOS have started to recover while others are lagging behind. Despite all the money spent on cleanup, legal expenses, and research by Exxon, state, and federal governments, it is difficult to assess the real effects of the spill for many kinds of organism. For many species, there was no prior knowledge of population data; and therefore, it is difficult to say specifically how they were affected by the spill. While this paucity of prior data, critical in learning from the spill, is one of its greatest tragedies, efforts to restore Prince William Sound based on available data are ongoing.

Important for the aftermath of future spills is planning ahead for their inevitability despite our best regulatory and technological precautions. This means knowing enough about the basic ecological interactions and population dynamics of species to be able to gauge the environmental consequences of spills with some degree of accuracy. Only with quality basic research, will science be able to prevent the uncertainty that fuels tremendous waste of time and money in legal battles or dubious cleanup practices.

Regulations

The 1990 Oil Pollution Act was written in the aftermath of the spill in Prince William Sound. It defines much more clearly the elements of, defenses to, and limits on legal liability of companies responsible for oil spills. The Act is designed to compensate the public for losses in natural and economic resources caused by an oil spill. Governments of states, tribes, or foreign governments must then use funds recovered under the act to restore, rehabilitate, replace or acquire the equivalent of resources that are harmed by the spill. The complete text of various provisions of the Oil Pollution Act makes interesting reading.

Connection to Environmental Science

The mechanism of evolution (of traits such as oil tolerance) by natural selection is discussed on pages 110-120. The photograph on page vii is typical of the assemblages of rocky intertidal organisms on the shores of Prince William Sound, where EVOS occurred. The sources and effects of chemicals in the environment (including crude oil) are discussed on pages 346-351. A perspective on media coverage of EVOS is given on page 450, and a discussion of the general effects of pollution on organisms (including a photograph of oiled seabirds) occurs on pages 473-474. Finally, pages 536-546 contain an excellent discussion of the nature of the American oil resource, including its extraction from sensitive environments in Alaska and elsewhere in the Far North.

Hyperlinks

Exxon Spill Photos
This site contains many of the photographs of the spill and subsequent cleanup efforts.

Restoration of EVOS
This site, supported by the State of Alaska Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, contains lots of information on restoration efforts in the aftermath of EVOS, as well as historical information pertaining to the spill.

US Coast Guard Oil Spill Reactions
This site describes the activities of the United States Coast Guards National Response Center, which receives reports of oil and other chemical spills 24 hours a day, 365 days per year.

American Petroleum Institute - Effects of EVOS
This site, supported by the American Petroleum Institute, contains about 25 articles on the biological, archaeological, and physical effects of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. It may be instructive to compare results of studies supported by the oil industry to those financed by other organizations.

Oil Spills Public Information Center
This page, supported by the Oil Spills Public Information Center and a consortium of several libraries in the state of Alaska, contains up-to-date data on both the scientific and legal events now taking place as a result of the spill. It also contains audio of Captain Joseph Hazelwood radioing the U. S. Coast Guard to report that the Exxon Valdez had run aground.

Oil Pollution Act of 1990
This very interesting website supported by the United States Department of Transportation contains the complete text of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 passed by the United States Congress in response to EVOS, including specific provisions pertaining to oil shipping in Prince William Sound.

References

Brown, R. Scott and Ian Savage. "The Economics Of Double-Hulled Tankers." Maritime Policy and Management 23(2), 167-175, 1996.

Day, Robert H. and Stephen M. Murphy. "Effects of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill on Habitat Use by Birds in Prince William Sound, Alaska." Ecological Applications 7(2): 593, 1997.

Foster, M.S. and A. P. De Vogelaere. "Damage and Recovery in Intertidal Fucus Gardneri Assemblages Following the "Exxon Valdez" Oil Spill." Marine Ecology Progress Series 106(3): 263, 1994.

Murphy, Stephen M., Robert H. Day and Keith R. Parker. "Effects of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill on Birds: Comparisons of Pre- and Post-Spill Surveys in Prince William Sound, Alaska." The Condor 99(2): 299, 1997.

Paine, R. T., Jennifer L. Ruesink, Adrian Sun, Elaine L. Soulanille, Marjorie J. Wonham, Christopher D. G. Harley, Daniel R. Brumbaugh, and David L. Secord. "Trouble on Oiled Waters: Lessons from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill." Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27: 197-235, 1996.

Rice, S.D., R.B. Spies, D.A. Wolfe, and B.A. Wright, editors. Proceedings of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill symposium. American Fisheries Society Symposium 18. Bethesda: 931, 1996.

Weiner, A., C. Berg and M. Kuwada. "The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Habitat Protection as a Restoration Strategy." Restoration Ecology 5(1): 44, 1997.

Wiens, John A. "Oil, Seabirds, and Science." BioScience 46(8): 587, 1996.

Home
[ Chapter Guide | Career Center | Regional Updates | Making a Difference | Order a Textbook | Home ]


© Prentice-Hall, Inc.
A Simon & Schuster Company
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458

Legal Statement