Sponsored Links

Analysis: Doing nothing might have been best for oil spill

Related Topics

LONDON | Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:21pm EDT

LONDON (Reuters) - It might have been better for the environment to have done nothing about the enormous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico except to keep the oil out at sea, British scientists said on Monday.

Marine biology and environmental experts said they feared the aggressive cleanup operation, during which oil has been set alight and oil-dispersing chemicals have been dumped into the sea, might be more damaging than the oil itself.

Previous experience suggests that containing the oil out at sea but otherwise leaving it alone to disperse and evaporate naturally is better in the long run but is regarded as politically unacceptable, they said.

"One of the problems with this spill is that it has gone from the environmental arena into the economic and political arena, so if you ask how bad it is, that depends on which perspective you're coming from," said Martin Preston, an expert in marine pollution, earth and ocean sciences from Britain's Liverpool University.

"Economically, clearly the impact has been very large, but environmentally the jury is still out. One of the tensions between environment and politics is that politicians cannot be seen to be doing nothing, even though doing nothing is sometimes the best option."

Scientists told the briefing in London that although the Deepwater Horizon rig blowout and explosion, the death of 11 workers and the leak added up to a major incident, they did not yet constitute an environmental catastrophe.

The U.S. government estimates that up to 60,000 barrels (2.5 million gallons/9.5 million litres) of oil a day are spewing from the damaged BP Plc oil well on the seabed about a mile below the surface.

Much of the oil is still far out at sea, but some is starting to drift toward the southern U.S. coast, where Louisiana's fragile wetlands have been hardest hit so far.

BP and the Obama administration have been under pressure from the public to take serious action to clean up the oil.

Opinion polls have shown that the U.S. public disapproved of BP's response to the spill and grew more skeptical about the Obama administration's response in the weeks after the accident.

The spreading oil has halted major fisheries and covered wetlands and beaches from Louisiana to Florida. The public has been horrified by images of birds and other wildlife soaked in oil.

"LEAVE WELL ALONE"

There have been around 20 major spills of more than 20 million gallons since the 1960s. The largest recent spill was in 1991 in the Gulf as a result of the Gulf War when between 240 and 460 million gallons were spilled.

The largest previous spill resulting from a rig blowout like that of the Deepwater Horizon was the Ixtoc 1 off Mexico's Gulf coast in June 1979, which continued for 9 months during which more than 140 million gallons of oil was spilled.

The Exxon Valdez accident in Alaska in 1989 spilled around 10 million gallons.

Simon Boxall, an expert at Britain's National Oceanography Center who has helped analyze various major oil spill cleanups, said several detailed experiments had been conducted since the Exxon Valdez spill, looking at areas that were left alone, as well as at areas cleaned up chemically or mechanically.

"The chemically cleaned up areas have taken the longest to recover and they are still damaged," Boxall said. "The areas that were left alone actually recovered much quicker."

Some 10,000 people were flown in to deal with the Exxon Valdez spill, and Boxall said scientists now wondered whether the "cleanup town" that grew up around it caused more environmental damage than the oil itself.

Christoph Gertler of Bangor University, who has been studying various potential bacterial remedies for oil spills, said reports by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggested that dispersants were "changing the nature of the oil in a very unfavorable way," making it more difficult for naturally occurring marine bacteria to break it down.

Boxall said it was important to remember that oil coming from the BP well was a light crude that would break down and evaporate fairly quickly when it came to the surface.

He said there were three golden rules of oil spills:

"The first is don't spill it in the first place: the second is, if you do spill it, try and pick it up as quickly and easily as possible," he said. "And the third is that in the open ocean, the best thing to do is leave well alone. Unfortunately, politically that always looks like a cop-out."

Scientists agreed that the wetlands of Louisiana were the most sensitive areas at risk, but said that here again a light touch might be the safest solution.

"The more delicate an area is -- and many of these areas around the Gulf coast are very delicate -- the more significant is the risk of making things worse by acting," said Preston. "A rather gung-ho attitude to the cleanup could end up doing more damage than if it had simply been left alone."

(Editing by Maggie Fox and Tim Pearce)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (47)
Rose555 wrote:
What does BP have to do with the Exxon Valdez spill? Exxon Mobil and BP are separate corporations. Let’s also not forget that 13 countries offered their help and expertise immediately after the spill and they were refused by our own government due to the Jones Act (which a president can and usual does suspend during a crisis).

Jun 28, 2010 7:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ArleyWhite wrote:
The lighter components of crude oil may evaporate naturally, but the heavier ones do not, roughly on third to one half of any gallon of crude oil will eventually evaporate, the balnce just hangs around. The idea of doing nothing is totally unacceptable. Human beings are losing income, jobs, homes, livlihoods etc., and the damage to non-human life forms is horrendous. We humans may think we own this planet, but the truth is we don’t, and hopefully soon we’ll begin to behave much more responsibly. BP has monumental mess to clean up, and they damn well better do it or die trying, anything less would be gross negligence.

Arley White

Jun 28, 2010 12:58am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Tubarc wrote:
Mr. President, the oil spilling is a Hydrological issue and your reputation will be associated to your negligence toward a classical science called HYDROLOGY being restrained on its technological advancement regarding the patenting affairs.

The consequences of the oil spill are already a good evidence of the problems that society is facing when honesty is ignored curbing technological development. Clogging a well from spilling oil using simple Hydrodynamic conceptions of transport and deposition of particles is an important technological edge to develop making deep oil drilling safer to the environment. There are many reasons to bring Hydrology science to advanced level in order to foster many technological frontiers.

Furthermore, there is no doubt that down the line deep water drilling industry requires advanced Hydrology for performance and safety. When knowledge is suppressed critical problems are not addressed accordingly on the core. It seems that there is no assurance that injection of mud from the relief well will stop the leaking. Perhaps Soil Science conceptions of Erosion will be needed unless you want to keep the well spilling for a long unpredictable period.

‘For the record mud is a composition of clay that would clog tiny pores but fails on rock fissures.’

There is no assurance that relief wells will halt the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and perhaps you will have to count on widely known hydrodynamic conceptions from Soil Erosion and Conservation on detachment, transport, and deposition of sediments to clog the well nearly what happened in the Dust Bowl a while ago.

For the sake of deep drilling oil industry outcome there is a need to develop well clogging approach by using counter flow deposition employing hydrodynamics conceptions from Soil Science. I believe a well could be clogged in few hours just by employing an appropriate method as the flow is upward against gravity that pulls down.

Jun 29, 2010 6:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.