George H. W. Bush tried it, but the courts defeated him.
George W. Bush tried it, but the courts defeated him, too.
And now Obama and his underlings at the US Department of the Interior have given Shell Oil permission to drill offshore in the Beaufort Sea, and if anything goes wrong, nobody can fix it.
“Beaufort Sea” sounds like an obscure little body of water, but it actually encompasses about 170,000 square miles, and that’s a lot of water, all of it sitting right at the top of the world, all around the North Pole, where sea ice would make it virtually impossible to clean up an oil spill.
But not to worry!
Shell Oil promises that nothing will ever go wrong, and denizens of the Arctic like bowhead whales and the Inupiat people won’t even know that huge wells have been drilled in the seabed.
Never mind that sometimes something goes wrong with oil in the Arctic, like a 267,000 gallon spill at Prudhoe Bay in February 2006, which nobody even noticed for almost a week, although that was an onshore spill and significantly easier to notice than a spill hundreds of feet underwater.
It’s a peculiar little factoid about the spill at Prudhoe Bay that all that oil leaked out of a hole that was only 1/4th inch in diameter. 267,000 gallons of oil ran out a tiny little hole, not much bigger than a soda straw!
But enough oil to fill up a couple of million cans of soda ran through that tiny hole, no bigger than a soda straw, before anybody even noticed.
And that was a hole in a pipeline, where all you have to do is turn a valve and the flow of oil will stop, so you can patch that tiny hole.
So what could go wrong a few hundred feet under what’s left of polar ice? What could go wrong where enormous well-head pressure makes a pipeline look like a soda straw? What could go wrong where nobody can clean up oil under ice that plays a crucial role in the climate of Planet Earth?
What could go wrong?
Nothing, says Shell Oil, and we might as well believe them, while we can.





10 Comments
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About The Seminal
Advanced search
Reaction in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune…
Change you can believe in.
Sigh…
This totally bums me out. I voted for Obama on one issue, and this was the one. I will NOT make that mistake again.
Excuse me, but HOW and WHEN was this approved?
While I was googling around for this diary, I noticed some happy news in an older ScienceDaily article from 2003, which doesn’t really demonstrate quite as much as its feel-good headline implies.
“Research Shows Little Effect From Arctic Offshore Oil Drilling; Study Reveals Thriving Oceanographic System,” says the headline, and isn’t that delightful!
As far as it went, this article was based on sound research by John Trefry, an oceanographer at Florida Tech.
Wonderful! So what’s the problem with drilling on and offshore in Alaska?
The problem is that the most catastrophic damage so far inflicted on the North Pacific Ocean didn’t originate with offshore drilling in the first instance, but rather with transporting oil from a variety of sources, in the infamous Exxon Valdez.
This spill was actually worse than almost anyone remembers, because the real extent of the damage only slowly became apparent over a period of years, and even environmental news-junkies who closely monitored the story may be surprised to learn that oil from the Exxon Valdez eventually covered 11,000,000 square miles of ocean.
11,000,000 square mile of ocean, covered with oil.
But because this disaster didn’t occur during extraction of oil from the seabed, it can be neatly excluded from consideration in the categories offshore drilling and its potential impact on the ocean, and Professor Trefry’s research can generate a feel-good headline and happy descriptions of pristine seas.
Thanks, I will add this to my Obama scandals list. It will be item 91.
Is that list published somewhere, Hugh?
Change we’ve come to expect.
Grumpy, if you click on my name, it will take you there.