Is the Exxon Valdez Spill Site Clean?

by Amy Judd | December 18, 2008 at 10:32 am
690 views | 41 Recommendations | 9 comments

Photos

Exxon Valdez

Exxon Valdez

see larger image

uploaded by kyletaylor

2009 will mark the 20th Anniversary of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska, which many scientists say is the most 'notorious human-caused environmental disaster in history'.

From a recent survey at Prince William Sound in Alaska, there is actually very liitle oil left and the parts that remain are not in a place that is harmful to humans, plants, or animals.

Both scientists that work for Greenpeace and for Exxon are still debating whether to declare this area 'clean' or not. The effects over a long term are still not known, and it not known whether the oil residue that is still left behind is interferring with the ecosystem.

Paul Boehm of Exponent International, a scientific consultancy that specialises in chemical contamination, led the survey together with colleagues from two other private companies and two US research universities. The study received funding from the Exxon Mobil Corporation.

Boehm and colleagues collected over 700 samples from 25 sites throughout the sound that were known to have been heavily contaminated by the 1989 spill. Two of the sites are now actively foraged by sea otters, they say.

"We found that the remnants from the spill today are found in small patches at very few beaches," says Boehm. The survey showed that the oil which does remain is deep in cracks between boulders and pebbles, and much of it is degraded.


Meanwhile, Exxon has been forced to pay $6.1 million in violation of a Clean-Act Agreement against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The EPA said that Exxon had not monitored sulfur content in some fuel burned in refinery furnaces, which breaches a 2005 settlement.

Exxon said in a statement that the company discovered some fuel gas streams that had not been addressed in the settlement while conducting an environmental self audit in November 2006 at its Baytown, Texas, refinery.

Exxon said it reported these findings to the EPA, and that all streams now meet EPA standards.

Under the original agreement, Exxon was already required to pay a $7.7 million civil penalty, $6.7 million in environmental projects in areas surrounding the company's refineries and to install pollution controls at six U.S. refineries.

Advertisement
recommend This comment thread is now closed
0
Albert Milliron

Do I feel old!  I lived in Alaska in 1989. 

1
Milieunet

Well, what is clean in this matter. I believe they are never able to clen up for 100 percent.

So damage to the ecological system for long time

0
Uwe Paschen

Exxon should not be let off so easy,  they Caused not only a Natural disaster yet also a precedent and managed to get off fairly easy wish did not send the message out it should have. Why this pollution is still going on by badly maintained tankers and due to a lack of penalties and no real enforcement of the existing laws.

0
Philip Phlogiston

Exxon runs the planet, you silly goose !

0
Philip Phlogiston

Exxon runs the planet, you silly goose !

1
Ted Raynor

I will never trust any study, or anything else for that matter, that is funded by Exxon. Their studies have always shown that the sound is clean. What a surprise!

2
Jennings David L

Twenty years ago 11 million gallons spilled out from the Exxon Valdez.  The captain Joseph Hazelwood was convicted of a misdemeanor charge of negligent discharge of oil.  He was sentenced to 1000 hours community service and a $50,000 fine.  He never had his masters' license revoked.  I find it incredible that the long lasting impact to the environment, the death of countless birds and fish and the huge cost for clean up can be from one person's poor judgement with what appears to be a relatively light penalty.

0
Amy Judd

Hear hear

0
UnderAK sKies

I was out where this happened over the summer.  The Environmental effects are still being felt today.  The salmon numbers are down.  The waste water run-off is still polluting many of the hatcheries that are attempting to re-populate these precious water ways.   Exxon is killing Alaska and it's commodities. 


Exxon SUCKS

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

NowPublic on Facebook

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Albert Milliron
First Flagged at 10:40 AM, Dec 18, 2008 by Albert Milliron
These members have powered this story:

Most Recommended Stories in Environment

Recommendations (41)

Most recently recommended by:
 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from