Cleaning up the world's worst oil spills

There’s no tried-and-true way to limit the damage

by Rachel Mendleson on Friday, April 30, 2010 12:00pm - 21 Comments

In the days since a BP oil rig exploded and sank in the Gulf of Mexico, vast amounts of oil have been pouring into the water. The damage is worse than originally thought: the U.S. Coast Guard has revised its earlier estimate, indicating that some 5,000 barrels of oil are spilling into the water off the coast of Louisiana each day. As the slick moves toward the fragile coastline ecosystems, the race to contain it is underway. On Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared the spill “of national significance,” pledging to devote “every available asset” to stopping it.

In the meantime, BP is trying to contain it any way it can: in addition to using skimmers to remove the thickest substance, 76,000 tons of dispersant to break up the oil, and setting up miles of barriers to protect the coast, the company is experimenting with controlled burns—a last-ditch effort that carries environmental consequences. (Though burning oil changes its consistency, making less likely to coat marine life, according to the U.S. Coast Guard’s Rear Adm. Mary E. Landry, it creates a “black plume” of smoke.) Despite past experience with oil spills, there’s no tried-and-true way to contain them. Here’s a look at how the world’s top five marine oil spills were (or weren’t) contained:

5. ABT Summer: On May 28, 1991, there was an explosion aboard the ABT Summer, an oil tanker en route from Iran to Rotterdam. The ship, which was carrying 260,000 tons of oil, caught fire. After three days, it sank 1,300 km off the coast of Angola.* Because it was so far off-shore, there was no rush to clean up the damage; it was assumed that high seas would break up the large slick.

4. Nowruz Oil Field: On February 10, 1983, in the midst of the Iran-Iraq war, an oil tanker slammed into a platform at the Nowruz Oil Field in the Persian Gulf. The conflict delayed efforts to cap the ensuing spill, and an estimated 1,500 barrels drained into the water each day. In March, Iraqi planes attacked the platform, setting the oil slick ablaze. By the time the well was finally capped in September—an Iranian operation that killed 11 people—it had released some 260,000 tons of oil into the sea. The clean-up effort largely centered around the use of skimmers and pumps by Norpol, a Norwegian company.

3. Atlantic Empress/Aegean Captain: On July 19, 1979, two oil tankers, the Atlantic Empress and the Aegean Captain collided off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago during a tropical storm. The ships, which contained nearly 500,000 tons of crude oil between them, burst into flames on impact. Crews successfully extinguished the fire aboard the Aegean and it was towed to shore, but the blaze continued to rage on the Atlantic. After more than two weeks of firefighting efforts, an explosion sunk the ship, which had by then been dragged further out to sea. Dispersants were used to treat the spilled oil, curbing pollutants. In the end, an estimated 280,000 tons poured into the Caribbean—the record for a ship-source spill.

2. Ixtoc I: On June 3, 1979, Pemex, Mexico’s government-owned oil company, was drilling a 3.2 km deep oil well in the Gulf of Mexico, when the Ixtoc I exploded. The blow out, which occurred when the drill ran into high pressure, soon caught fire and caused the platform to collapse. A team of experts arrived quickly at the site, about 970 km south of Texas, but because of poor visibility and seafloor debris, it took divers until the following March to cap the well. In the meantime, between 10,000 and 30,000 barrels of oil poured into the water each day, totaling an estimated 454,000 tons. To slow the flow, mud (and later, steel balls) were dropped into the well. According to Pemex, half the oil burned when it reached the surface, and a third evaporated. Norwegian experts contained the spill using skimming equipment and booms.

1. Gulf War: In the first days of the Gulf War, Iraqi military forces opened the valves at the Sea Island oil terminal in Kuwait, releasing vast amounts of crude oil into the Persian Gulf. The spill, which began on January 21, consisted of up to eight million barrels (between 1,360,000 and 1,500,000 tons), making it the largest in history. Because of the war, clean-up was delayed, but an international effort did eventually get underway. Using smart bombs, Coalition forces were able to seal the open pipelines at the Al Ahmadi facility, and American and Dutch workers built ponds in the desert to store the oil they pumped from the water. Booms and skimmers were used to keep the oil away from the desalination plants, which provided drinking water to residents in the area. In the end, the spill was not as catastrophic as initially feared: roughly half the oil evaporated, two to three million barrels washed ashore and a million barrels were recovered.

(*Corrected from an earlier version, which erroneously stated that the ABT Summer sank 130,000 km off the coast of Angola.)

Bookmark and Share
  • rldipaolo

    You are so full of lies and misinformation. How about Prince William Sound and the tremendous damage and loss of wildlife that happened there due to oil??? Oil is toxic, and you are nothing but a con-man.

    You either work for Big Oil, or are heavily invested in them. Why else would one spread such falsehoods?

  • gawdwit

    The amazing ignorance implicit in the comment by home412AD is a perfect example of the kind of thinking that results when simple-minded people get all their news from Rush Limbaugh and his ilk. Only by remaining utterly ignorant of factual information can a person so willingly make a fool of himself.

    A few facts: natural oil spills are rare and limited in comparison to the huge spills caused by the oil extraction industry. This oil spill threatens an entire estuary, the place where animal and plant life are incubated. I would dare AD to walk up to a group of Alaska fishermen or Gulf shrimpers and tell them that an oil spill is only an "inconvenience".

    Come on AD. We know who "lacks intelligence".

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Avid_Reader Avid_Reader

    Correction needed? Number 5 – ABT
    The article says the spill happened 130,000 Km from shore, the earth is only 40,075.16 kilometers around at the equator http://geography.about.com/library/faq/blqzcircum…
    <after some internet searching>
    it seems its only a typo…wiki says it happened 1,300 Km from shore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Open_Democracy Open_Democracy

    Every oil spill is different because oil varies greatly in viscosity, composition (especially sulphur content), density etc. Some oil floats on water but heavier oils (think tar sand type oils) sink in water. The approach to cleanup varies with the type and volume of oil.

    In late March, the Obama administration announced that it would allow oil explorers access to leases 50 miles offshore from the coast of Virginia that had been held up by legal challenges. This ends a decades-long moratorium on east coast oil and gas exploration. He is also considering opening up the south and mid Atlantic outer continental shelf along the entire coast from Delaware to Florida, an area totalling over 150 million acres.. He is doing this to reduce the United States reliance on imported oil and to create jobs.

    I can only hope that the recent events in the Gulf of Mexico cause him to reconsider his administration's position on this dramatic change in policy. I realize that spills of this magnitude don't happen very often but the cumulative effect of even small and moderate-sized spills can have huge impacts on shoreline and marine ecosystems.

    http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

      Well said, Open_Democracy.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Avid_Reader Avid_Reader

    Musing about Oil Well Plugging: (with no real experience in the matter…)
    What is the pressure of the escaping oil? I wonder if there would be some kind of expanding foam that might be able to plug the hole.

    Or for a "so crazy it could work" idea, how about some large rubber balloon type containers that the marine robots could fasten to the well and when they are full just float to the surface and get collected by ships. Of course tying the balloons under water might be a little difficult, but maybe they could be tied off instead. Or because of the buoyancy of oil, it could be similar to a diving bell. Sink the bell, put it above the well, fill it with oil and eventually it would float to the surface. If it were designed properly, it wouldn’t tip and the oil could be pumped into a tanker. Of course some would spill, but it can’t be any worse than what is happening right now!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/frenchie101 frenchie101

    Obama was not very quick to look after this, I wonder if he will rethink offshore drilling.I was wondering where green peace was, or where the banners they keep hanging are.I guess as the messiah is in charge, they won't worry.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

      And as for Palin's "drill baby drill," how's that workin' out for ya?

  • Home412AD

    Adults are always amused by how easy it is to identify children by their speech and writing. Immaturity is impossible to conceal. I'm sure someone could do a study comparing the lost of wildlife and habitat between the annual summer forest fires of Canada and the five oil spills over the past 30 years. I know what any study would describe as well, in terms of which cause the greater harm and destruction, and a greater loss of income to workers. Yet for some strange reason, we don't see hyperactive children foaming and frothing in the media over forest fires. Natural events have natural consequences, and levelheaded, responsible adults don't become hysterical about life and death.

    A lack of perspective and common sense is normal among the young and inexperienced. Some emotionally disturbed children will only be happy when we all live in holes dug in the ground again, and run around in the woods with stone axes, wearing animal skins. In the meantime, all the mentally unbalanced children can do is hate those they envy, for being better and more important people than they are. A life built on foolish hatred isn't worth much, and never will be.

    • Joseph

      First, there have certainly been more than a mere five oil spills over the past 30 years. In fact there have been eight with over 100,000 tons of oil being spilled (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill), and many more if you count the smaller ones (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_spills).

      And mature adults have been rather concerned about forest fires as well in the past, particularly when they threaten and force the evacuation of local communities. Maybe you've been ignoring the substantial firefighting efforts that have been taking place every summer to protect communities in BC, California, and the Austrailian outback… And to equate events caused by primarily by natural phenomena and those caused by human accidents and error is to neglect the reality of our responsibilities. The fact is, if we choose to drill for oil, any environmental consequences are our particular responsibility. As well, natural oil spills tend to be diffused around the world, whereas human caused spills, while much rarer, are also much more focused into a small area and time where they can have a far greater ecological impact.

      You seem to forget that crude oil is rather toxic to humans as well as wildlife and that this particular slick could threaten the drinking water supply of the Mississippi River and all who draw from it. It also threatens a number of fisheries in the Gulf and has the potential to significantly cost to the fishing industry, a severe problem for the livelihoods of those who depend on it. If nothing else there is the danger of contaminating the food chain for years to come.

      And lastly, your condescending attitude does nothing to advance your argument. If you are not a mere troll or poorly constructed straw man, I suggest you show some maturity and refrain from such ad hominem.

  • Brian

    just to defend my province and all the fire the oilsands projects have been under, i would like to make a comment and realization to you all.

    we have all seen thr ugly images of tailing ponds and massive equipment tearing up the view,and everyone complains. but no one ever says much about the offshore rigs, with the waves gently lapping upon them, "oh its so much better and ecofriendly"
    Well at least the oilsands project can be controled, but those offshore rigs shure can make a mess when things go wrong.

    so please, next time you want to complain about how bad something looks, please remember this oil platform dissaster and be glad, ugly or not, that the oil sands and inland rigs are at least controlled

  • Home412AD

    You're right that I should leave out ad hominem comments. My arguments are: the damage and destruction to wildlife, the terrain, and the environment from forest fires are hugely greater per year than all the damage of all the oil spills and leaks combined. That destruction has absolutely nothing to do with threats to humans, and your mention of people merely exposes the hypocrisy of tree-huggers. We don't see tree-huggers insisting we stop forest fires, as they do with the production of oil, even through the damage from oil is trivial compared to forest fires. Accidents, errors, and responsibility are irrelevant in comparison to the magnitude of difference in cost and destruction. Since the belief that we can run our civilization without oil is obviously deluded, that difference in their reaction to oil spills and forest fires is significant.

    Water does not run upstream from an ocean in a river. It runs downstream, into the ocean. There is no threat to the drinking water of the Mississippi from an oil spill in the Gulf. That image is not rational. Trying to avoid an ad hominen reaction is very difficult when a poster writes something so extremely bizarre.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

      So given that forest fires are natural occurrences, do we really need to add man-drilled oil spills to the mix?

      • Guest

        Well not all forest fires are natural yet also many natural fires are put out by people so it might just be a wash. I have to agree with the above poster. This, in terms of the earths history is nothing. A volcano could make much worse disaster for the earth in a blink. Look what water did to Nashville. Not to say I approve of the spill, just people need to stop being so dramatic about everything THEY contribute to.

    • Joseph

      Now that I think about it your right about the Mississippi (I was thinking that the oil would get into the delta and somehow mix with the local water supply, but obviously they wouldn't use salt water for drinking water so that doesn't work).

      What I would be more worried about would be desalination plants like those that feed Tampa Bay. Obviously those aren't the main source of fresh water for most of the Gulf Coast, but it could still tighten water supplies in some locations.

      And the way I see it, those forest fires that aren't caused by anything we can control (i.e., lightning rather than arson), well there's no point complaining about something that we have no control over. We do our best to minimize the damage, but the reality is, since they're so common, wildlife have adapted to the routine of seasonal forest fires (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_regime).

      On the other hand, an oil spill of this magnitude, all at once, tends to catch the local ecology completely unprepared, and thus has a more substantial destabilizing effect.

  • Jeet

    …and Obama hangs out at the White House rocking with that dinosaur musician who is so bright he had to give away a sizeable amount of his fortune to that street urchin he married. Any glimmer of hope for the world gets dimmere everyday.

  • http://westcoastclimateequity.org/ Robin Martin

    The evidence from the past is hard to ignore. It has been proven time and time again that if we drill for oil, or transport oil, spills will happen. What is also clear is that Oil companies have no idea how to stop or avoid spills from happening in the first place. The question in my mind is, “Why has exploration and drilling or even transportation been allowed to continue without the technology to deal with a disaster when it occurs?”
    Ultimately it comes down to the decisions that governments make.
    When will governments take responsibility for the decisions that they make? When will the attitude that “If something happens, we will deal with it." not be enough? History has proven we do not have the tools to deal with this type of disaster. When will we demand that proven solutions be in instituted to prevent spills from happening in the first place? No blame, no clean up, no reparations needed, because the companies involved have instituted proper fail safe technologies that will not allow for spills to occur, period.
    I wonder if this “lets wait and see” this attitude would fly if the energy source was nuclear?

  • http://www.coldjet.com Deyanira

    la Limpieza Criogénica ayudando a limpiar este terrible desastre
    Preliminary video of GearClean utilizing dry ice blasting for Gulf oil clean-up/boat hull cleaning, http://www.coldjet.com/media/en/downloads/BP%20Oi…

  • http://hendrop06.student.ipb.ac.id ndrew

    that's horrible if it still happened..
    i can't imagine if someday sea will be covered by oil..
    i hope it won't happened..

  • ark99

    Your logic is all screwed, my friend. There is nothing "natural" about an oil platform forcefully gauging into the earth to create a gushing torrent of oil. Nor is it an act of nature when that platform blows up and the gushing torrent starts spilling. The comparison you're making is like comparing a dog digging for a bone with open-pit mining. It doesn't make sense.

  • appalled

    How can you say this? I agree with rldipaolo. There is definitely something wrong with your thinking.
    Remember everyone: Revelation 11:18……God will do this very soon…..

From Macleans