Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Shipping, Not Drilling, Main Oil Risk for Arctic
Reuters via Yahoo! ^ | Daniel Frykholm

Posted on 02/20/2005 2:11:50 PM PST by Brilliant

HELSINKI (Reuters) - A major oil spill from a tanker is the main danger to the Arctic environment if oil exploration increases in the region, not drilling which is increasingly clean, the author of an eight-nation survey said.

"Shipping has always had risk associated with it, mariners have known that for centuries. There is no such thing as a safe ship -- the Titanic was one," said Dennis Thurston, one of two lead writers of the study, due to be published next year.

"The fear is that an increased search for oil is going to impact the Arctic, but the experience we've had is that activity has already peaked," he told Reuters in an interview Friday.

The survey of potential impacts from oil and gas exploration in the Arctic is part of a wider Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, sponsored by the United States, Russia, Canada and the five Nordic nations.

Norway has lifted a ban on drilling in the little-explored Barents Sea as oilfields further south have begun to mature, and the U.S. government wants Congress to approve drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to boost oil supplies.

Thurston said the study will recommend that countries improve their plans for coordinating handling of a major oil spill in the Arctic seas.

"Three things happen with a big spill: there's a lot of death of animals, there's the long-term effects with oil persisting in the environment and there's the psychological effect," he said.

"Seeing a pristine area covered in oil changes policy, people's perceptions, and it's certainly bad for the oil business," he added. Scientists said last month effects still lingered in Alaska from the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill.

Experts gathered in Helsinki for a three-day working meeting have found that most environmental damage in the Arctic due to oil and gas exploration occurred in previous decades, with new technology now permitting less drilling and low pollution.

"The way people act in the Arctic has changed a lot. (Exploration) is a lot cleaner, it's a lot smaller and it's more focused. The activity level is going down even if the search for oil is ramping up," Thurston said.

He said he believed Norway's decision to lift the drilling ban in the Barents Sea, which prompted loud protests from environmental groups, was unlikely to cause damage.

"The technology is really safe and there's been a tremendous amount of risk assessment done on the Arctic projects. Personally I think they are safe operations," he said.

"The question is transportation of the product, especially with tankers, because there's so much more human error potential," he added.

TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: artic; drilling; energy; environment; oil
How big a share of the shipping industry does the US have? Not much.
1 posted on 02/20/2005 2:11:57 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
This is why western Canadian provinces should be encouraged to secede from Canada. The US could annex them and then build pipelines from Alaska without having to cross any international borders.
2 posted on 02/20/2005 2:22:07 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Well, there already is a pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Valdez. Use it.
3 posted on 02/20/2005 3:11:00 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Norway's lifting of the drilling ban in the Barents Sea is unlikely to cause damage...
The technology is really safe...
Obviously, for Norway things are safe and unlikely to cause damage.
But is it different in the Arctic since shipping and not drilling is now elevated to a dangerous enterprise.
Are such statements the death knell for drilling in Alaska, or does Norway, who's entirely dependent on oil exploration, have influences with opinion formers the U.S. does not have?
4 posted on 02/20/2005 4:51:29 PM PST by hermgem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson