Category Archives: fossil fuels

Common Dreams: ‘Risky and Reckless’: Environmental Groups Renew Fight Against Shell

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/06/02/risky-and-reckless-environmental-groups-renew-fight-against-shell

‘Risky and Reckless’: Environmental Groups Renew Fight Against Shell

‘This is the largest, loudest, and dirtiest exploration plan ever proposed in the American Arctic Ocean,’ conservation alliance says

‘Kayaktivists’ from the sHellNo! Action Council greet a Shell drilling rig in Washington state’s Port Angeles on April 17. (Photo: Backbone Campaign/flickr/cc)

A coalition of environmental and conservation groups on Monday renewed their challenge of a federal lease which opened nearly 30 million acres of Arctic waters to offshore drilling and was recently upheld by the U.S. Department of the Interior.

The coalition, which includes the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, the World Wildlife Fund, and several other environmental organizations, filed a report with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Anchorage, Alaska outlining their intent to challenge the 2008 lease, which they called “risky and reckless.”

“Drilling in the Arctic is a recipe for disaster,” said David Yarnold, president and CEO of the National Audubon Society, one of the groups in the coalition. “It’s reckless and defies common sense. Oil and water don’t mix.”

“There’s no worse place on earth to drill for oil than the Arctic Ocean, and no company with a worse recording trying than Shell,” added Nathaniel Lawrence, Arctic director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. “And as reckless as it is to drill there, it could do even more harm by pumping all that carbon into the atmosphere, since science tells us Arctic oil has no place in a world grappling with the challenge of climate change.”

In May, the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management gave conditional approval for oil giant Shell to drill into the Arctic Ocean’s Chukchi Sea after conducting a review of the company’s environmental and safety plans. The coalition on Monday called the review “rushed and cursory” and said it “inadequately assessed its threats and effects.”

“There’s no worse place on earth to drill for oil than the Arctic Ocean, and no company with a worse recording trying than Shell.”
—Nathaniel Lawrence, Natural Resources Defense Council

In addition to the potential release of significant carbon emissions, activists have long warned that fossil fuel exploration in Chukchi Sea would harm endangered species which rely on the Arctic’s pristine ecosystems to survive, and that an accident in those remote waters could be more devastating than the 2010 BP oil spill which killed 11 workers and poured millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

Moreover, offshore drilling in the Arctic—which could start as early as July—also puts a heavy burden on Indigenous populations in the area, particularly those that rely on whaling.

“The lease sale decision…is directly contrary to President Obama’s commitment to take essential action to limit the worst effects of climate change for future generations,” said Earthjustice.

A month before Shell’s drilling plan was approved, one of its rigs failed a Coast Guard inspection, while another was held in port over pollution control problems. And in 2012, the oil giant’s Kulluk drilling rig was wrecked during an exploratory mission that was ultimately abandoned.

“Interior unlawfully approved Shell’s problem-riddled Arctic drilling plan. In doing this, it has failed the communities and wildlife of this region,” said Erik Grafe, Earthjustice staff attorney. “Allowing oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean takes us in the wrong direction on combating climate change and downplays the catastrophic consequences of an oil spill here. Shell proved itself unprepared in 2012, and it remains so today and should not be permitted to drill in our fragile Arctic Ocean.”

Friends of the Earth climate campaigner Marissa Knodel added, “This is the largest, loudest, and dirtiest exploration plan ever proposed in the American Arctic Ocean. Shell’s revised Exploration Plan sets us on the path toward climate catastrophe as the latest science says Arctic oil must be kept in the ground in order to have a chance at keeping the planet safe. The only place for these dirty fossil fuels is in the ground.”

“Shell Oil’s planned exploration of the Chukchi Sea poses heavy burden and risk on Inupiat cultural livelihood,” said Faith Gemmill, executive director of Resisting Environmental Destruction on Indigenous Lands (REDOIL). “Moving forward with drilling in the Chukchi Sea without any concrete measures to address a large oil spill in broken ice conditions is a perilous venture that could have disastrous consequences for the Inupiat and their whaling way of life. No amount of profit is worth the potential loss of a culture’s livelihood.”

The lawsuit is just the latest move in the fight against Shell’s offshore drilling plans. In recent weeks, activists in Seattle have blockaded terminals holding one of the oil giant’s rigs, organized a “flotilla rally” to oppose the company’s operations, and protested from kayaks in an action they dubbed ‘Paddle in Seattle.’

Common Dreams; Oil Change International: Tar Sands on Life Support: Report–Evidence of struggling tar sands sector suggests opportunity to slow the rate of growth ‘significantly’

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/05/29/face-rising-climate-movement-tar-sands-life-support-reportOCI-Briefing-OnTheEdge_FINAL+

Oil Change International credits a growing people’s climate movement for slowing tar sands growth. (Photo: Chris Yakimov/flickr/cc)

With dozens of carbon-intensive tar sands projects delayed or on hold, a new report released Friday confidently declares: “The case for the tar sands is crumbling.”

A new analysis by Oil Change International identifies 39 projects—representing more than 1.61 million barrels per day (bpd) of potential tar sands oil production capacity—that companies are currently unable or unwilling to invest in.

That’s good news for the climate and the environment, as well as for frontline communities that bear the brunt of the toxic tar sands production.

And it’s bad news for the tar sands sector, which now finds itself “struggling to justify many new projects,” says Hannah McKinnon, senior campaigner on private finance at Oil Change International.

According to the report, On the Edge: 1.6 Million Barrels per Day of Proposed Tar Sands Oil on Life Support (pdf), the delayed and on-hold projects include three open pit mine projects with a combined capacity of over 450,000 bpd, and over 30 drilling projects with nearly 1.2 million bpd capacity. The total extractable tar sands oil in these projects is almost 13 billion barrels. If all of that resource was extracted and burned, around 7.8 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide would be emitted—equivalent to 40 years of emissions from 51 average U.S. coal-fired power plants.

Furthermore, the Oil Change analysis found that an additional 550,000 bpd of production capacity is owned by companies that have filed for bankruptcy—”another clear indicator of weakness in the sector,” the authors write.

A number of factors have led to this decline, the report says, pointing to plummeting oil prices; shifting politics in the ‘tar sands capital’ of Alberta, Canada; and the rise of both alternative energy technologies and the grassroots climate movement.

“The combination of citizen action to block pipelines and development and the rising tide of climate policies and alternative technologies, which are together leading to lower oil demand growth and lower oil prices, signal very strong headwinds for an oil source that is both high cost and high carbon,” the report reads. Should such conditions persist, it goes on, “the rate of growth may slow significantly in the coming years—potentially avoiding lock-in of a significant amount of [greenhouse gas] emissions.”

Still, the authors warn against growing complacent in the face of an industry that will fight tooth and nail to maintain its dominance.

“This report is some good news for the climate, but the battle is far from over. Every day of delay for tar sands projects is a good day for our future, but this is an industry determined to dig it up,” said Lorne Stockman, Research Director at Oil Change International. “But while the industry puts its head down and tries to charge ahead, people around the continent are rising up to defend our communities and climate, and their efforts are clearly paying dividends.”

Hakaimagazine.com: Reefs de Rigueur; Fish earstones may offer a verdict on the environmental value of oil rig reefs.

Hakai Magazine
 
by Nsikan Akpan
Published May 26, 2015

Life swarms to an oil rig the moment its massive steel legs plunge into the ocean. Algae, barnacles, anemones, sponges, and other less-mobile creatures latch onto the hard metal structures. Darting fish soon join the fray. But petroleum wells dry up after a couple of decades, and traditionally this has spelled the end of a rig: the steel legs, and the habitat they create, are decommissioned, dismantled, and hauled away.

In 1979, the United States introduced the concept of the “rig-to-reef,” wherein an oil platform’s legs are left in the water post-decommissioning to retain the constructed ecosystem. Soon after the first rig reefs were built along Florida’s coast, these artificial ecosystems began popping up everywhere. And soon after that, the protests started-the most famous being in 1995 when Greenpeace occupied Shell’s Brent Spar platform in the North Sea for nearly a month.

There are a number of points of tension over oil rig reefs. Some are ideological or political-“All offshore oil leases were granted on the reassurance that the seafloor would be returned to as near natural conditions as possible,” says The Ocean Foundation’s Richard Charter-while some challenge the ecological value of the reefs themselves.

The central scientific dispute over rigs-to-reefs is one that has dominated the debate for 40 years: do the structures actually encourage growth of reef-dwelling species or do they merely attract marine life that’s passing by?

Without a clear understanding of rig reefs’ effects, the international response has been mixed. Following Greenpeace’s 1995 protest, plans for rig reefs in the North Sea stalled. Elsewhere, oil rig reefs blossomed. In Texas, more than 140 rigs have added to the state’s artificial reefs since 1990. Over the next 10 years more than 6,500 oil rigs are due for decommissioning. How many will be turned into reefs is still up for debate.

For their part, oil companies like rig reefs because it saves them money-to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in saved decommissioning costs-as do US state governments, which often get a kickback for some of the money saved. Environmentalists are torn.
A novel scientific technique, however, may offer a way to resolve this long-running controversy by finally giving scientists a way to determine whether reef fish treat these rigs like a home or like a hotel.

In 2008, fish ecologist Ash Fowler and his team ventured onto the water off northwestern Australia. There, four separate oil rigs were being decommissioned. When the steel structures were hoisted onto the ship’s deck, dozens of red-belted anthias spilled forth. (This seafloor-dwelling species is often found hiding in the drilling wellhead.) The team collected the fish and returned to shore, where they chemically examined each fish’s earstones, or otoliths.

Much like a tree’s trunk, otoliths grow annual rings. As these rings grow, they absorb chemicals from the surrounding environment. By firing a laser at the otoliths, Fowler and his colleagues learned that each oil rig gave the fishes’ earstones a distinctive chemical composition. The overall shape of the earstone honed the geographical marker, allowing the otolith to serve as a home address.

“Otoliths are used to identify fish stocks over regional scales, but with our technique, we could identify home [oil rig] structures over distances as short as 10 kilometers,” says Fowler.

This geolocating technique can be used for almost any artificial structure, says Fowler, because the chemical distinctions between sites are based on common elements found in seawater (rather than, for instance, the pollution that might seep from a drilling site). As such, the technique can also distinguish oil rig reef fish from those living on natural reefs nearby. If combined with a genetic screen for lineage, Fowler’s otolith technique may reveal whether fish live around the same rigs for generations, or are just passing through.

Separating oil rig fish from natural reef fish has been a major challenge for the handful of scientists who have tried to compare the ecology of rigs-to-reefs with natural environments.

In a 2003 report, researchers from the US Minerals Management Service found that a single natural reef supported more than two million fish, which would be comparable to the number found in 1,000 oil rig reefs. More recently, a 2014 study argued that California’s oil rigs have become a fertile ground for juvenile fish, making the rigs one of the most productive fish habitats in the world. But without the ability to separate permanent resident fish from visitors, properly interpreting these studies becomes difficult.

Milton Love, an ecologist who worked on the 2014 study, doubts that answering the scientific question will actually end the debate over rigs-to-reefs. Even if the rigs are responsible for creating a bountiful ecosystem, he says, it’s an artificial creation that carries the risk of introducing invasive species, such as orange cup coral or Australian spotted jellyfish into new environments. In the Gulf of Mexico, commercial fishermen love the artificial reefs because they attract red snapper and other profitable catch, but the steel legs sticking up from the seafloor strip shrimpers of their ability to trawl the seafloor. Some conservationists want the rigs removed, but that would mean the animals that live stuck to the metal frame would die and wind up as waste dumped into the sea or on shore.
 
“In the end,” says Love, “the decision has nothing to do with anything except your moral compass.”
 
 
 

Geographic Region: Oceania, North America
Oceanographic Region: Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean
Species: Fish
Scientific Fields: Chemistry, Ecology, Engineering
Cite this Article: Nsikan Akpan, “Reefs De Rigueur,” Hakai Magazine, May 26, 2015, accessed May 26, 2015, http://bit.ly/1J077iB.

Daily Kos: Surprise! Company whose pipeline burst in Santa Barbara has extensive record of safety violations by Meteor Blades

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/21/1386603/-Surprise-Company-whose-pipeline-burst-in-Santa-Barbara-has-extensive-record-of-safety-violations

Thu May 21, 2015 at 09:04 AM PDT

byMeteor BladesFollow

Refugio State Beach oil spill

attribution: U.S. Coast Guard
A section of Refugio State Beach tainted by oil from burst pipe.

Since 2006, the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has logged more than 175 maintenance and safety violations by the company whose pipeline burst in Santa Barbara County, California, Tuesday night. That makes its rate of incidents per mile of pipe more than three times the national average, according to an analysis by the Los Angeles Times, which found only four companies with worse records. But those infractions only generated $115,600 in fines against the company, Plains All American Pipeline, even though the incidents caused more than $23 million in damage.It was initially reported that 500 barrels of oil had leaked from the broken pipe, but authorities later said the total could be in the realm of 2,500 barrels, 105,000 gallons. The leak contaminated a portion of Refugio State Beach and nearby patches of ocean. A crew from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is handling clean-up on land, while the U.S. Coast Guard is handling the job on the water.

Gov. Jerry Brown declared a state emergency, a move which frees up emergency state money and resources for the cleanup. Authorities shut down both Refugio and El Capitan beaches, but most people camping in the popular area had already fled because of fumes from the leak. Camping reservations have been canceled through May 28.

Julie Cart, Jack Dolan and Doug Smith report:

The company, which transports and stores crude oil, is part of Plains All American Pipeline, which owns and operates nearly 18,000 miles of pipe networks in several states. It reported $43 billion in revenue in 2014 and $878 million in profit.The company’s infractions involved pump failure, equipment malfunction, pipeline corrosion and operator error. None of the incidents resulted in injuries. According to federal records, since 2006 the company’s incidents caused more than $23 million in property damage and spilled more than 688,000 gallons of hazardous liquid. […]

Plains Pipeline has also been cited for failing to install equipment to prevent pipe corrosion, failing to prove it had completed repairs recommended by inspectors and failing to keep records showing inspections of “breakout tanks,” used to ease pressure surges in pipelines.

The area tainted by the leak is popular for camping, fishing, surfing, kayaking and watching seals, sea lions and numerous species of birds. Until 2013, the state was responsible for monitoring and inspecting some 2,000 of the 6,000 miles of pipelines in California, but that task was then turned over the federal Department of Transportation.The company has expressed its regrets for the leak. Perhaps it would regret the situation more if fines for its repeated violations did more than empty out the petty cash drawer for the weekend

"Be the change you want to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi