4.7 Article

A Tale of Two Spills: Novel Science and Policy Implications of an Emerging New Oil Spill Model

Journal

BIOSCIENCE
Volume 62, Issue 5, Pages 461-469

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1525/bio.2012.62.5.7

Keywords

deep water oil well blowout; natural resource damage assessment; ocean oil drilling policy change; sustaining public trust resources

Categories

Funding

  1. National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis
  2. National Science Foundation [EF-0553768]
  3. University of California, Santa Barbara
  4. State of California
  5. Directorate For Geosciences
  6. Division Of Ocean Sciences [1045252] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Division Of Ocean Sciences
  8. Directorate For Geosciences [1043225, 1043413] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil release posed the challenges of two types of spill: a familiar spill characterized by buoyant oil, fouling and killing organisms at the sea surface and eventually grounding on and damaging sensitive shoreline habitats, and a novel deepwater spill involving many unknowns. The subsurface retention of oil as finely dispersed droplets and emulsions, wellhead injection of dispersants, and deepwater retention of plumes of natural gas undergoing rapid microbial degradation were unprecedented and demanded the development of a new model for deepwater well blowouts that includes subsurface consequences. Existing governmental programs and policies had not anticipated this new theater of impacts, which thereby challenged decisionmaking on the spill response, on the assessment of natural resource damages, on the preparation for litigation to achieve compensation for public trust losses, and on restoration. Modification of laws and policies designed to protect and restore ocean resources is needed in order to accommodate oil drilling in the deep sea and other frontiers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available