Articles
- Is there a better way?
- 5 Questions about oil spills
- Hundreds attend forum about Gulf of Mexico oil spill
- Exxon Valdez oil spill: Alaskans share lessons learned
- Keeping shellfish safe
- Professionals join together to look at sea-level-rise issues
- Natural products can protect against erosion
- Nature guides become tourists for a day
- Guest Editorial: team collaborates on nutrients and hypoxia
Sea Briefs is a report on the results of the Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium.
Editor: Melissa Schneider
This newsletter
is available in PDF format from:
masgc.org/seabriefs
MASGC supports applied, interdisciplinary marine science research, education and outreach efforts to foster the sustainable development and management of the Mississippi and Alabama coasts and nearshore ecosystems of the Gulf of Mexico
Mississippi-Alabama
Sea Grant Consortium
703 East Beach Drive
Ocean Springs, MS 39564
Phone: 228-818-8838
E-mail: seabriefs@masgc.org
MASGP 09-012-02
5
Questions about oil spills
JOE
BANTA is project manager
for the Prince William Sound
Regional Citizens’ Advisory
Council Environmental Monitoring
Program. Joe has worked for
PWSRCAC since 1990. He has
a background in fishing and
fisheries and grew up in Cordova
and Prince William Sound. He
holds a permit to gillnet for
herring in PWS. During the first
season of response to the Exxon
Valdez Oil Spill, he participated
in wildlife rescue operations. He
has a bachelor’s degree in biology and a master of arts in
teaching from the University of Alaska Anchorage. While he
now manages projects under the Environmental Monitoring
Program, he also has managed projects under the council’s Oil
Spill Prevention and Response Planning Program.
1.
What is the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council?
In a few words, the PWSRCAC is an “anti-complacency group.” But more technically, the council was formed after the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 to provide a voice for communities affected by oil industry decisions in Prince William Sound, the Gulf of Alaska and Cook Inlet. The council is an independent non-profit organization whose mission is to promote environmentally safe operation of Alyeska Pipeline’s Valdez Marine Terminal and associated oil tankers.
2. How do the effects of a technological disaster differ from those of a natural disaster?
We are all probably well aware of natural disasters, such as storms, floods, hurricanes, etc. They can do serious damage to communities and properties, but then the residents of the communities pull together to repair and rebuild their community. Technological, or man-made, disasters tend to have a greater emotional impact on people. Technological disasters can disrupt an ecosystem for many years and tend to disrupt the psychological well-being of communities for long periods of time. With this type of disaster there is a responsible party to blame that has wrought these impacts upon the community. Often these impacts affect community members in an uneven manner.
Technological disasters disrupt communities on multiple levels. The most obvious and tangible disruptions occur when the flow of goods, routine services and jobs are adversely impacted. However, there are other often ignored, poorly defined, poorly understood, intangible adverse impacts stemming from a technological disaster. These include initial negative mental health impacts and chronic long-term psychological and physical impacts. Long after the initial response has ended and the local government has returned to routine day-to-day operations, adverse psychological impacts associated with disaster continue to erode the social fabric of the community. Results of Exxon Valdez oil spill studies indicate that mental health impacts persisted 20 years post-spill.
3.
What is the peer-listening training program and how was it effective?
Many people affected by technological disasters are reluctant to use traditional mental health services. Often those affected might not even be aware they could use such services. Research has shown traditional mental health services may not be effective in dealing with the long-term effects of disasters. One method for addressing these difficulties is the use of informal social support networks with trained peer listeners.
Properly trained peer listeners can provide a number of services to the community, from serving as an available ear to assisting in problem solving to providing referrals to professionals. Peer listeners drawn from the community are more likely to be trusted than outsiders because they possess an understanding of the community and its relationship to the disaster. Surveys done after the Exxon Valdez oil spill indicate that the peer-listener program helped people deal with the stresses of the spill.
4.
What is the PWSRCAC's stance on dispersants and why does the council
take that stance?
After years of promoting research and testing to increase knowledge about dispersants and the environmental consequences of their use, the council in 2006 adopted a position against the use of dispersants in the Exxon Valdez oil spill region. This position was taken because, despite all the years of research and testing, the council couldn't find any good sources of independent, peer-reviewed research that demonstrated dispersants work in our waters.
5. What has the PWSRCAC been able to accomplish to help decrease the chance of catastrophic oil spills?
In more than two decades of existence, the council working closely with industry and regulators has made many contributions to improving the environmental safety of oil-industry operations in Alaska waters. A few of these include:
- Representatives from the council worked closely with Congress and the Coast Guard to establish and implement double-hull requirements pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990;
- The council led the effort, and commissioned much of the technical research, that led to the world-class system of tanker escort tugs operating in the Sound today that are so vital to the safe transport of oil through these waters;
- The council sponsored research and financed much of the hardware for a radar system that detects glacial icebergs that could threaten tankers and other vessels in the Sound, as such icebergs did in connection with the Exxon Valdez oil spill;
- The council sponsored research that led to the installation of vapor controls on tanker loading berths at the Valdez terminal to reduce the release of dangerous air pollution;
- The council sponsored research and collaborated closely with Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. on a plan, now in progress, that will eliminate virtually all dangerous hydrocarbon vapor emissions from the Ballast Water Treatment Facility at the Valdez terminal;
- The council funded or co-funded development of 148 Geographic Response Strategies in Prince William Sound and Kodiak. There are detailed plans for protecting environmentally sensitive areas, such as salmon spawning streams, clamming beaches and haul-outs for seals and sea lions;
- The council retained an expert consultant to analyze fire suppression systems at the Valdez terminal. His recommendations led to a major upgrade of those systems;
- The council has conducted extensive research and advocacy to understand and minimize the threat that non-indigenous marine organisms reaching Prince William Sound in oil tanker ballast water will harm native species, including commercial fish species;
- The council developed resources to explain what a technological disaster is, how it differs from a natural disaster, and what to expect during a technological disaster and in the years afterward. These resources are detailed in our award winning community guidebook and our peer listener training video. Visit www.pwsrcac.org for more information.