When Will We Learn?
March 2013 saw (yet another) devastating oil spill, this time in Arkansas. Surely we should realise that oil extraction and transportation is neither reliable nor safe.
With so many “accidents”, I’m afraid I don’t believe oil companies such as Shell when they say that drilling in the Arctic for oil will be perfectly safe. Nor will the proposed Keystone XL pipeline be without incident, if our recent history is anything to go by.
30,000 gallons of oil was spilled in Minnesota when a train was de-railed, just 2 days before the 80,000 gallon Exxon oil spill in Mayflower, Arkansas.
Certainly, these are “small” oil spills compared to the estimated 750,000 gallons spilled from the Exxon Valdez into pristine Alaskan waters in 1989, the 1 million gallons at Kalamazoo, Michigan in 2010, and the over 200 million gallons leaked into the Gulf coast by BP’s Deepwater Horizon drill in 2010.
(Take a look at Wikipedia’s list of major oil spills throughout the world. It’s a long list. And those are just the big ones).
But the relative “smallness” wasn’t much comfort for the Mayflower residents who were evacuated from their homes, due to the fumes and the fire risk. Most didn’t even know there was an oil pipeline underneath their homes.
Oil pipelines running under your home, fracking in your back yard – it sounds like a nightmare. Could it come true?
A Bigger Oil Problem
Was this “just another” oil spill?
No.
It was worse.
The Arkansas spill involved Tar Sands oil, the oil with the highest carbon content, and also the heaviest oil. That means if it spills into water, it sinks. It’s difficult enough to clean up an oil spill that floats on top of water, when it can be skimmed off.
For tar sands, “remediation” means completely removing every living part of the ecosystem. Water is drained, forests are cleared, and soil and sediment are scraped off.
It’s just devastation.
No wonder Exxon didn’t let the media in to see how they’re “clearing up”.
There was a “no fly zone” over the area, apparently for safety reasons, but more likely to stop media footage.
Rumours flew that this “cleanup” operation involved dumping the heavy crude oil (also called diluted bitumen) into a nearby wetland.
Could it be true?
Old Pipes
This particular pipe which leaked was about 60-80 years old. But the Keystone pipeline will be brand new and so “won’t leak”, according to the oil companies. (They probably said the same thing 80 years ago too).
In an interview on MSNBC, an oil trader admitted there are “hundreds of oil spills a year”. Hundreds? Yikes!
Keystone XL?
The Keystone pipeline will be much bigger than this one which has just ruptured in Arkansas. There’s very little media footage of the damage (media are being kept away), but a video on YouTube shows aerial footage and the spill is considerably more widespread than was immediately obvious.
Of course, much of the Keystone pipeline already exists. The XL part will simply make it easier to transport the oil from Canada to the USA, but if it doesn’t get approved, I’m sure another way will be found. After all, there’s a HUGE amount of profit – and power – at stake.
Local Energy
I can also understand the argument for wanting local energy – i.e. energy produced in you own local area. It makes sense. It can sometimes be troublesome (and expensive) to be dependent on others for vital fuel. And people want jobs.
But why does “local” have to mean fossil fuels? Why does “local” have to involve drilling and even fracking with all its attendant dangers?
Why can’t “local” also be “sustainable”, so that we never have to worry about running out?
Why is it that so many jobs are pledged, yet when these investments finally come to pass, there are fewer jobs than promised? Why can’t we look for jobs in clean, safe, renewable energy instead?
“But renewable energy is so expensive”. Well, un-subsidized renewable energy is now cheaper in Australia than coal and gas. Germany is doing wonders with solar power.
It seems to me that it depends on how much a country wants renewable energy.
When did you ever hear of a “solar spill” or a “wind spill”?
If you enjoyed this article, please Share, Like or Tweet it (buttons below) or leave a Comment – thank you!
I note with interest that this is an American company on American land damaging the health of Americans – and they are trying to cover it up! Americans have got to learn the hard way it seems and perhaps if they had to pay the true cost of fuel for cars they would have a different view point and start looking seriously at alternatives.
For sure, if oil subsidies were removed it would be a whole different ball game. “Alternative” energy would be far more attractive – look at what Germany have done to make solar affordable (without subsidies). But while we continue to depend on fossil fuels, we’ll have oil spills and cover-ups, and it’s the ordinary citizens all over the world – and the animals and birds – who suffer. For the large corporations, it’s just a temporary glitch.
[…] happens when fracking comes near you and what unconventional fossil fuels mean. What does a tar sands oil spill look […]