Nature & Environment
Greenpeace Criticizes 'Useless' Arctic Oil Spill Plan
Catherine Griffin
First Posted: Feb 04, 2013 10:02 AM EST
It's the last great frontier and one of the most pristine pieces of wilderness left on Earth: the Arctic. Yet as the Arctic region becomes more accessible due to climate change, it opens itself up to commercial projects such as shipping, mining and oil exploration. Now, environmental groups are speaking out against the response plan currently being drafted in case an oil spill ever occurs in the area.
There is huge incentive to start oil exploration in the Arctic, even if drilling conditions are harsh. Rough weather and the remoteness of the area are both huge concerns. Yet the U.S. Geological Survey estimates that there could be as much as 60 billion barrels of oil in the region, which has prompted companies such as Shell to start oil exploration.
This interest was what prompted the 21-page document by the eight-nation Arctic Council, which details what countries will do to respond if an oil spill occurs in the Arctic. Although it is due to be approved in May, Greenpeace and other groups are calling the plan both inadequate and vague.
"The document doesn't get to grips with the risks of a spill in a meaningful way," said Ruth Davis of Greenpeace in an interview with the Guardian.
The document itself sets up 24-hour emergency contacts in the eight nations that make up the Arctic Council. It also seeks national rules to allow quick transport of clean-up equipment across maritime borders, better monitoring and joint training exercises. However, the document is also non-binding.
Greenpeace and other organizations are worried that because the document is so vaguely worded it won't force countries to do anything when it comes to oil spills. In addition, the document neglects to provide details on the number of ships or personnel that would be required to cope with a spill if one did occur.
These worries aren't unfounded. Exxon Valdez ran aground in Alaska over 20 years ago, but oil is still being unearthed in pockets beneath the sand. The real disaster was that the tanker spilled in an area that had been relatively untouched--a situation which could also occur in the Arctic.
Ministers from the Arctic Council are due to discuss the plan at a meeting in Sweden tomorrow.
See Now:
NASA's Juno Spacecraft's Rendezvous With Jupiter's Mammoth Cyclone
©2024 ScienceWorldReport.com All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission. The window to the world of science news.
More on SCIENCEwr
First Posted: Feb 04, 2013 10:02 AM EST
It's the last great frontier and one of the most pristine pieces of wilderness left on Earth: the Arctic. Yet as the Arctic region becomes more accessible due to climate change, it opens itself up to commercial projects such as shipping, mining and oil exploration. Now, environmental groups are speaking out against the response plan currently being drafted in case an oil spill ever occurs in the area.
There is huge incentive to start oil exploration in the Arctic, even if drilling conditions are harsh. Rough weather and the remoteness of the area are both huge concerns. Yet the U.S. Geological Survey estimates that there could be as much as 60 billion barrels of oil in the region, which has prompted companies such as Shell to start oil exploration.
This interest was what prompted the 21-page document by the eight-nation Arctic Council, which details what countries will do to respond if an oil spill occurs in the Arctic. Although it is due to be approved in May, Greenpeace and other groups are calling the plan both inadequate and vague.
"The document doesn't get to grips with the risks of a spill in a meaningful way," said Ruth Davis of Greenpeace in an interview with the Guardian.
The document itself sets up 24-hour emergency contacts in the eight nations that make up the Arctic Council. It also seeks national rules to allow quick transport of clean-up equipment across maritime borders, better monitoring and joint training exercises. However, the document is also non-binding.
Greenpeace and other organizations are worried that because the document is so vaguely worded it won't force countries to do anything when it comes to oil spills. In addition, the document neglects to provide details on the number of ships or personnel that would be required to cope with a spill if one did occur.
These worries aren't unfounded. Exxon Valdez ran aground in Alaska over 20 years ago, but oil is still being unearthed in pockets beneath the sand. The real disaster was that the tanker spilled in an area that had been relatively untouched--a situation which could also occur in the Arctic.
Ministers from the Arctic Council are due to discuss the plan at a meeting in Sweden tomorrow.
See Now: NASA's Juno Spacecraft's Rendezvous With Jupiter's Mammoth Cyclone