Federal government can’t solve alone

Internal Link – Arctic Spills

Arctic drilling causes spills - will be worse than BP

Karl Mathiesssen, internally citing Simon Boxall professor at the University of Southhampton 10-2-2013 (The Guardian, "Drilling in the Arctic - what is the environmental impact?", http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/02/drilling-arctic-environmental-impact-greenpeace-piracy)

Dr Simon Boxall from the University of Southampton says that, at present, Arctic drilling does not have the technology to clean up a spill.¶ "Companies will say that it won't happen, we've got so many fail-safes these days that it's a perfectly safe operation. But there's no such thing as a fail-safe. If there was a a fail-safe, we wouldn't have planes crashing... Human error and humans cutting corners means that accidents happen. And there will be a spill in the Arctic. And as with the Gulf of Mexico it'll probably be fumbling in the dark a bit, dealing with it as it happens."¶ But Boxall says that the Arctic climate means an oil spill in the far north could be much harder to clean up than the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico.¶ "The environment in the tropics and certainly in the Gulf of Mexico is such that nature kicks in and it deals with oil that gets spilt in the tropics very efficiently. Even in fairly temperate climates, bacteria take over and they clean up what we leave behind. Now in the Arctic things are very different. In the Arctic it's much much colder first of all, which means that the whole process takes much longer. So we have a problem, the fact that we are putting our oil in the fridge and that keeps it in its natural state.¶ "Problem number two is the spill, when it happens, whether it's from a tanker, whether it's from a drill operation if it's close to the ice edge, will go under the ice and we have no research and no experience with a spill that goes under ice.¶ "Problem number three is that we are working in a remote part of the world. In the Gulf of Mexico we are close to big international airports, we can get big heavy equipment in. There are ships sitting there, there's big industry there. There are small ships ready to deal with clean up and that sort of thing. That infrastructure doesn't exist in the Arctic."¶

Internal Link - Oil Spills

Unfixed design and equipment problems mean that expanding offshore drilling would lead to devastating oil spills – most recent analysis

Banerjee 6/6. Nila Banerjee, writer energy/environment policy for Washington DC Bureau, LA Times, NY Times. 6/6/14. “Flawed drilling gear still in use after BP oil spill, board says.” LA Times. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-gulf-spill-20140606-story.html //NM

Design problems with a blowout prevention system contributed to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster, and the same equipment is still commonly used in drilling four years after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, according to a report issued by the federal Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.¶ The board concluded that the "blowout preventer" — a five-story-tall series of seals and valves that was supposed to shear the drill pipe and short-circuit the explosion — failed for reasons the oil industry did not anticipate and has not fully corrected.¶ Despite improved regulation of deep-water drilling since the disaster, the board found that problems persist in oil and gas companies' offshore safety systems.¶ "This results in potential safety gaps in U.S. offshore operations and leaves open the possibility of another similar catastrophic accident," said Cheryl MacKenzie, lead investigator of the safety board inquiry.¶ The blowout of BP's Macondo well in April 2010 killed 11 men and spewed nearly 5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, making it the worst offshore oil disaster in United States history. Several federal commissions have investigated the missteps that occurred on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the days and hours leading up to the explosion, which investigators said had its roots in corporate mismanagement and inadequate government oversight of the oil industry.¶ The chemical safety board, which examines industrial accidents but lacks regulatory authority, focused its inquiry on the blowout preventer and safety practices. The blowout preventer, or BOP, sits on the ocean floor below the drilling rig. The drilling pipe from the platform runs through the blowout preventer into the earth and toward the oil and gas deposits.¶ If oil or gas, which is under high pressure underground, accidentally comes up the well bore and pipe, the blowout preventer is supposed to cut off the flow higher up to the platform. In the case of the Deepwater Horizon, the lower valves in the blowout preventer closed, letting pressure continue to build, which eventually bent the drill pipe, the safety board study found.

Expanded offshore drilling inevitably causes devastating oil spills

Mufson 12. Steven Mufson, energy and financial reporter, The Post. April 19, 2012. “Two years after BP oil spill, offshore drilling still poses risks.” The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/two-years-after-bp-oil-spill-offshore-drilling-still-poses-risks/2012/04/19/gIQAHOkDUT_story.html //NM

Two years after a blowout on BP’s Macondo well killed 11 men and triggered the largest oil spill in U.S. history, oil companies are again plying the waters of the Gulf of Mexico.¶ Forty-one deep-water rigs are in the gulf. The vast majority of them are drilling new holes or working over old ones, while the other behemoths are idle as they await work or repairs. A brand new rig — the South Korean-built Pacific Santa Ana, capable of drilling to a depth of 7.5 miles — is on its way to a Chevron well.¶ But three recent incidents in other parts of the world show just how risky and sensitive offshore drilling remains.¶ In the North Sea, French oil giant Total is still battling to regain control of a natural gas well that has been leaking for nearly four weeks. Meanwhile, Brazil has confiscated the passports of 11 Chevron employees and five employees of drilling contractor Transocean as they await trial on criminal charges related to an offshore oil spill there. And in December, about 40,000 barrels of crude oil leaked out of a five-year-old loading line between a floating storage vessel and an oil tanker in a Royal Dutch Shell field off the coast of Nigeria.¶ Many experts say that even with tougher regulations here in the United States, such incidents are inevitable.

Oil spills devastate the entire marine ecosystem – plants, animals, and habitats

Graham and Kelley 11. January 16, 2011. Excerpt from National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, "Deep Water: The Gulf Oil Spill and the Future of Offshore Drilling," Report to the President, January 2011. Bob Graham and William K. Reilly, Co-Chairs. The Encylopedia of the Earth. http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/162358/ //NM

The Impact on Nature¶ The Deepwater Horizon oil spill immediately threatened a rich, productive marine ecosystem. To mitigate both direct and indirect adverse environmental impacts, BP and the federal government took proactive measures in response to the unprecedented magnitude of the spill.3 Unfortunately, comprehensive data on conditions before the spill—the natural “status quo ante” from the shoreline to the deepwater Gulf—were generally lacking.4 Even now, information on the nature of the damage associated with the released oil is being realized in bits and pieces: reports of visibly oiled and dead wildlife, polluted marshes, and lifeless deepwater corals. Moreover, scientific knowledge of deepwater marine communities is limited, and it is there that a significant volume of oil was dispersed from the wellhead, naturally and chemically, into small droplets.5 Scientists simply do not yet know how to predict the ecological consequences and effects on key species that might result from oil exposure in the water column, both far below and near the surface.6¶ Much more oil might have made landfall, but currents and winds kept most of the oil offshore, and a large circulating eddy kept oil from riding the Loop Current toward the Florida Keys.7 Oil-eating microbes probably broke down a substantial volume of the spilled crude, and the warm temperatures aided degradation and evaporation8—favorable conditions not present in colder offshore energy regions.9 (Oil-degrading microbes are still active in cold water, but less so than in warmer water.) However widespread (and in many cases severe) the natural resource damages are, those observed so far have fallen short of some of the worst expectations and reported conjectures during the early stages of the spill.10 So much remains unknown that will only become clearer after long-term monitoring of the marine ecosystem. Government scientists (funded by the responsible party) are undertaking a massive effort to assess the damages to the public’s natural resources. Additionally, despite significant delays in funding and lack of timely access¶ to the response zone, independent scientific research of coastal and marine impacts is proceeding as well.¶ A rich marine ecosystem. Particularly along the Louisiana coast, the Gulf of Mexico is¶ no stranger to oil spills.11 But unlike past insults, this one spewed from the depths of the ocean, the bathypelagic zone (3,300–13,000 feet deep). Despite the cold, constant darkness and high pressure (over 150 atmospheres), scientists know that the region has abundant and diverse marine life. There are cold-water corals, fish, and worms that produce light like fireflies to compensate for the perpetual night. Bacteria, mussels, and tubeworms have adapted to life in an environment where oil, natural gas, and methane seep from cracks in the seafloor. Endangered sperm whales dive to this depth and beyond to feed on giant squid and other prey.12¶ A dark tongue of oil invaded sensitive wetlands last May near Grand Isle, Louisiana, despite the presence of booms deployed to stop it. In a hopeful development over the summer, scientists found new plant growth in similarly oiled marshes, indicating that oil had not penetrated into root systems.¶ Patrick Semansky/Associated Press¶ Higher up the water column, light and temperature gradually increase and the ascending sperm whales—and Macondo well oil—encounter sharks, hundreds of fish species, shrimp, jellyfish, sea turtles, and dolphins. As the sperm whales surface for air at the bright and balmy Gulf surface, they pass through multitudes of plankton, floating seaweed beds, and schools of fish. Some of these fish species spend their early lives in the coastal waters and estuaries; others travel along annual migration routes from the Atlantic Ocean to the Gulf. The floating seaweed beds (sargassum), fish larvae, and plankton drift with the surface currents and are driven by the wind—as is the oil rising from below. The critical sargassum habitats lure sea turtles, tuna, dolphins, and numerous game fish to feed on the snails, shrimp, crabs, and juvenile species that seek shelter and food in the seaweed.13¶ Overhead are multitudes of seabirds—among them brown pelicans, northern gannets, and laughing gulls—that in turn feed in the ocean and coastal estuaries.14 Dozens of bird species fly the Mississippi migration route each year, a major attraction for bird watchers, who flock to coastal Louisiana and Texas to catch a glimpse of migrating and resident shorebirds and nesting seabirds. Some of these birds feed on estuarine shrimp, fish, and crabs; others depend on shellfish and other small organisms that populate the expansive mudflats. Larger wading birds stalk their prey in the shallow water of mangroves, marshes, and other habitats that shelter fish and frogs. Raptors, including ospreys, bald eagles, and peregrine falcons, also pluck their prey from any of these environments and carry it to their perches. As the unprecedented volume of oil gushing from the Macondo blowout reached the surface, it had the potential to affect all of these marine and coastal organisms and to wash into the salt marshes, mudflats, mangroves, and sandy beaches—each in its way an essential habitat at one or more stages of many species’ lifecycles.15 And these marine and coastal species are so interdependent that a significant effect on any one has the potential to disturb several existing populations in this complex food web.16

Oil spills from drilling devastate the environment – in particular coral reef populations that are hotspots of biodiversity

Lajeunesse 13. Sara Lajeunesse, reporter, July 10, 2013. Reporting on Charles Fisher, professor of biology at Penn State University. Penn State News. “Biologist investigates lasting ecological impacts of Deepwater Horizon oil spill¶ At the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, in the vicinity of the Macondo well, Charles Fisher discovered previously unseen impacts on coral communities.” http://news.psu.edu/story/281127/2013/07/10/research/biologist-investigates-lasting-ecological-impacts-deepwater-horizon //NM

On five subsequent cruises over the next two years, Fisher and his team have explored for additional sites and revisited the established ones to check the corals' statuses. They have carefully monitored about 50 of the corals that they first discovered in November 2011. Those that were not too heavily impacted seem to be recovering.¶ "When I say recover," notes Fisher, "I don't mean that tissue died and the coral got better. I mean they were covered with slime, but they never died. These corals still do not look as healthy as corals at other sites, and we may have to monitor them for several years before we will know their ultimate fate."¶ The corals that were heavily impacted, on the other hand, are largely not recovering. "We are seeing absolute proof of total death of parts of them," says Fisher. Since corals are colonial, branching animals, parts of them can die while other parts remain alive.¶ Specifically, at the first damaged site they witnessed -- the last site of the October cruise -- the researchers have discovered that 86 percent of the coral colonies show signs of damage, with 46 percent exhibiting impact to more than half the colony, and 23 percent displaying more than 90 percent damage.¶ At each site visited, the researchers deployed markers and set up permanent monitoring stations with a goal of returning to them again and again to monitor both natural processes and, potentially, long-term effects.¶ "At that depth and at those temperatures in the deep sea, life passes at a slow pace," notes Fisher. "These are animals that often live 500 years. They live slow; they die slow. We'll have to monitor the sites for a decade before we'll have very much confidence we know the full extent of the impact."¶ What's Next?¶ The team's second cruise, which took place in December 2010 and made use of the Alvin deep-diving submarine, included Helen White, a geochemist from Haverford College. White used state-of-the art oil fingerprinting technology and determined that the brown muck on the corals did, indeed, include oil from the Macondo well.¶ Fisher's research to date has demonstrated that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill killed some corals. As a result, BP is going to have to pay. But how much and to whom?¶ "People have asked me how much a dolphin is worth, and there is no clear-cut answer," says Timothy Zink, spokesperson for NOAA, the organization that oversees natural resource damage assessments performed by researchers like Fisher, tabulates the check for the parties responsible, and formulates and carries out a plan for restoring the ecosystem.¶ "The public needs to be compensated for its losses, and not just for the resource itself, but for the human use of the resource -- such as recreational fishing, bird watching, and going to the beach -- as well," said Zink. "The final price that BP will pay will be based on the full cost of restoring the environment back to what it was on the day the oil spill happened."¶ Unfortunately for deep-water corals, the full effects of the spill may not be felt for many years, too late for any near-term settlement to fully cover them.¶ "I believe everyone involved would like to settle as soon as we can," says Fisher. "However, the full extent of damage to deep-sea ecosystems may not manifest itself until after a settlement is reached. If corals all over the deep gulf start dying, and we thought only those very close to the Macondo well would die, then we have to reassess the situation." In that case, Zink says, the investigation could be reopened.¶ BP has already paid over $20 billion to cover some of the damages from the spill, and in a November 2012 settlement with the Justice Department, agreed to pay $4 billion in criminal fines. The company has also committed hundreds of millions to research into understanding the effects of oil spills on ecosystems and preventing future disasters.

Oil spills can have long term effects on the environment, including threatened species like sea turtles – BP proves

Michaelson 4/9. John Michaelson, reporter Public News Service with the National Wildlife Federation. Progress Illinois. April 9, 2014. “Environmental Impact Continues Four Years After BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill “http://www.progressillinois.com/quick-hits/content/2014/04/09/impacts-continue-four-years-bp-oil-spill-disaster //NM

Nearly four years after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a new study says the disaster is far from over.¶ Much research remains to be done, said Dr. Doug Inkley, senior scientist for the National Wildlife Federation, but the science shows that wildlife still are feeling the impacts and the oil is not gone.¶ "There is oil on the bottom of the gulf, oil is washing up on the beaches and oil's still in the marshes," Inkley said. "I'm really not surprised by this, to tell you the truth. In Prince William Sound in Alaska, 25 years after the wreck of the Exxon Valdez, there are still some species that have not fully recovered — two-and-a-half decades later."¶ The April 20, 2010, explosion on BP's Deepwater rig killed 11 people and sent more than 4 million barrels of oil into the gulf, in the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history. ¶ The report examined how the spill has affected more than a dozen species in the gulf. Inkley said that includes issues with oysters and tuna, loons and pelicans, sperm whales and dolphins.¶ "Dolphins in the heavily oiled area of Barataria Bay are still sick and dying," he said. "The evidence is stronger than ever, according to NOAA, that these deaths are connected to the oil spill - 900 dolphins since the oil spill began. If you line up those 900 dolphins from head to toe, that's one-and-a-half miles of dead dolphins."¶ The spill also affected five sea turtle species found in the Gulf of Mexico, all of them listed as either threatened or endangered. Pamela Plotkin, director of Texas Sea Grant, said that includes the Kemp's ridley sea turtle, which had seen its population rebound year after year until Deepwater. Now, she said, they're also being threatened by last month's spill in Galveston Bay.¶ "The biggest concern is the oil that has left the bay and has moved south down towards Matagorda Island and the Aransas Wildlife Refuge," she said. "So, that oil that has moved offshore is going right through the migratory corridor of the Kemp's ridley sea turtle."¶ Up to 168,000 gallons of oil spilled in late March when a barge and a ship collided in Galveston Bay, which averages close to 300 oil spills of various sizes each year.

Sea turtles are a keystone species and extirpation or extinction would destroy biodiversity

Wilson et al. l.c. 9., Wilson, E.G., Miller, K.L., Allison, D. and Magliocca, M., researchers Oceana, Oceana – Protecting the World’s Oceans – leading international organization for ocean conservation, Senate Committee. “WHY HEALTHY OCEANS NEED SEA TURTLES: THE IMPORTANCE OF SEA TURTLES TO MARINE ECOSYSTEMS” last citation 2009. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDgQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Foceana.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Freports%2FWhy_Healthy_Oceans_Need_Sea_Turtles.pdf&ei=0_eyU8rUCuLksAS95oKoAw&usg=AFQjCNGO7cKXoaB-sYfjcuriTqA8vR8xxw //NM

Sea turtles clearly play important roles in marine ecosystems. Each sea turtle species uniquely affects the diversity, habitat and functionality of its environment. Whether by grazing on seagrass, controlling sponge distribution, feasting on jellyfish, transporting nutrients or supporting other marine life, sea turtles play vital roles in maintaining the health of the oceans.¶ Unfortunately, over the past few centuries, sea turtle populations have experienced significant declines. Before a species goes physically extinct, it can become ecologically extinct. Ecological extinction, which occurs when the number of individuals in a species becomes so small that it is unable to perform its ecological role, happened to green sea turtles in the Caribbean. At the time of Columbus’ voyages to the Caribbean, sea turtles were so abundant that vessels that had lost their way could follow the noise of sea turtles swimming along their migration route and find their way to the Cayman Islands.93 Current estimates of Caribbean sea turtle populations at that time range from 33 million to 660 million.94 Greens in the Caribbean consumed such large amounts of seagrass, sponges and jellyfish that their virtual ecological extinction resulted in major changes in the structure and function of the marine ecosystem.95¶ Sea turtle populations around the world have dwindled in recent centuries and in many places, continue to decline. For some populations, there is risk not only of ecological extinction, but of physical extinction as well. In the words of Aldo Leopold, one of the most influential conservation thinkers of the 20th century, “To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering.”96 Applying this principle to the oceans, quite simply, we need to keep all of the species. Natural resource managers are moving towards an “ecosystem approach” to managing the oceans. The first step in taking an ecosystem approach is to ensure the survival of the key components of the ecosystems, which unequivocally must include sea turtles. The next step is to ensure their populations actually recover. Increased populations of sea turtles are a key step in restoring the balance among ocean species, an essential step toward restoring healthy ocean ecosystems.

Internal Link - Pollution

Offshore drilling waste discharges exacerbate marine pollution

GOC 13. Global Oceanic Commission, November 2013. “Elimination of pollution that affects the high seas” http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEIQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.globaloceancommission.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FGOC-paper03-pollution.pdf&ei=51mwU8mCG9SxsQSJ3YHwBQ&usg=AFQjCNEZsxMRRFodDCbj5XjcHOZkGPLl-g //NM

Deliberate discharges and dumping operations at sea. The discharge and dumping at sea of certain types of wastes is still considered acceptable under international law (see below), and illegal discharges and dumping operations continue to take place in the high seas with little oversight, from shipping and offshore installations. Offshore oil and gas installations routinely discharge harmful wastes into the sea. A previous assessment under the Bonn Agreement3, for example, strongly suggested that oil pollution from legal discharges to the southern North Sea far exceeded those thought to have arisen from accidental spills4. There is also concern about the potential harmful effects that could arise from seabed mining5. Land-based discharges and emissions. Pollution can travel great distances in the marine environment, as shown by the high concentrations of persistent organic pollutants in the Arctic, mainly caused by pesticide run-off and/or by discharges and emissions of industrial chemicals and waste products to water and air in Europe and North America6. A further indication is the existence of the five gyres, where floating litter concentrates in the middle of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans7.

Offshore drilling creates harmful byproducts and pollution from production and equipment deterioration

Kyle 13. Jessica Kyle, writer EX-PATT magazing, the University of Kentucky and Lexington Patterson’s School Magazine of Foreign Affairs. November 15, 2013. “Combating Pollution: Offshore Drilling & Regional Sea Regimes” http://expattmagazine.com/combating-pollution/ //NM

However, despite the strong economic incentives, the current frantic pursuit of offshore petroleum resources has intense environmental ramifications. Offshore drilling creates harmful byproducts that are discharged into surrounding waters during the drilling process. Additionally, drilling equipment is prone to failure and deterioration, which can lead to dangerous accidents and catastrophic oil spills or gas leaks. Furthermore, as demand for petroleum products continues to increase, oil and gas companies have begun drilling deeper and deeper wells to access previously untapped deposits. The exploitation of deeper fields is generally more challenging to execute, resulting in a greater probability of pollution occurring. Pollution resulting from these aspects of offshore drilling is not only an issue of moral concern, but also has a tangibly negative impact on neighboring states. Regulation of some kind is necessary in order to promote environmentally safer and more sustainable drilling practices and curb the pollution caused by offshore drilling.

Internal Link - Warming

Expanding offshore drilling would exacerbate global warming

- also says warming now

CAP et al 13. Center for American Progress, The Wilderness Society, Alaska Wilderness League. September 30, 2013. America’s Arctic – The Dual Threat of Climate Change and Offshore Drilling. http://www.alaskawild.org/wp-content/uploads/Arctic_Climate_Drilling_021613_FINAL_public.pdf. //NM

CLIMATE CHANGE¶  Rapidly melting sea ice: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 2012 Arctic Report Card documented dramatic changes, including record lows for sea ice and snow extent.¶  Thawing permafrost: Melting tundra is accelerating warming by releasing additional carbon as it thaws, potentially adding 0.4°F –1.5°F to total global warming by 2100.¶  Increased warming from black carbon: Black carbon (a major component of soot), significantly increases climate change by darkening ice surface, causing it to absorb more heat and accelerate warming.¶ OFFSHORE DRILLING¶  In order to stay within the upper limit of warming allowable for maintaining climate stability, the International Energy Agency warned that two-thirds of the world’s proven fossil fuel reserves need to remain in the ground, untouched.¶  Exploiting reserves in the Arctic Ocean has the potential to release an additional 15.8 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere when burned – equivalent to the emissions from all passenger cars and light trucks in the US over a 13 year time period and raising global CO2 concentrations by 7.44 parts per million (ppm).iii 7.44 ppm equals 10% of the total rise in the global CO2 concentration over the past 50 years.iv¶

Expanding offshore drilling would devastate the environment and accelerate climate change – empirics prove

Banerjee 13. Subhankar Banerjee, researcher Center for Research on Globalization. “Arctic Methane Release and Global Warming - Let Us Now Sing About the Warmed Earth” July 30, 2013. GlobalResearch. http://www.globalresearch.ca/arctic-methane-release-and-global-warming/5344315 //NM

Obama in the US, and Harper in Canada, in tandem, are turning North America into a petro–imperial and petro–despot continent. This does not bode well for solving the climate crisis. It’s worth reviewing briefly some of the extraction projects taking place now. Since there has been a lot of discussion about tar sands in Alberta, I’ll focus on a few others:¶ Shell’s drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas in Arctic Alaska (in 2011 I wrote that permits were rubber–stamped, and despite repeated appeals, the Obama administration refused to do an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)—a blatant violation of the National Environmental Policy Act).¶ Massive expansion of gas fracking—onshore that Tara Lohan of AlterNet has been writing about all summer, and also offshore off of the coast of California that we learned last week from a Truthout investigative report (no EIS was done for the California offshore fracking project either).¶ Hyper–deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico (earlier this year Shell announced plan to drill the deepest offshore oil well in the Gulf of Mexico—almost two miles below the water surface, which is twice the depth of BP’s Deepwater Horizon well that caused the worst oil spill in US history).¶ Expansion of coal mining in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming.¶ On July 9 I wrote, “In 2011 Obama sold the Powder River Basin in Wyoming to Big Coal. … Precisely because of this greedy decision two years ago, today the activists in the Pacific Northwest are fighting the coal–port through which (if built) Wyoming coal would go to Asia.” And on July 25 Lynne Peeples wrote on Huffington Post that this coal project “could create more national and global environmental impact than a Canadian company’s proposal to ferry Albertan tar sands to the U.S. Gulf Coast via the Keystone XL pipeline.”¶ Leah Donahey of the Alaska Wilderness League shared with me similar concerns that Obama’s plan for drilling in the Arctic Ocean might have more environmental impact than the Keystone XL pipeline. Last week she wrote to me in an email: “The President is still considering offering new drilling leases in the Arctic Ocean and Shell could be back at this time next year to drill.”¶ My intention here is not to start a debate about which is the worst offender, but to point out that all of these mega extraction projects will cause massive eco–cultural devastations and contribute enormously to global climate change.

Internal Link - Environment (MISC)

Offshore drilling in the outer continental shelf would devastate the environment – 4 reasons

Defenders of Wildlife 14. Defenders of Wildlife, national conservation organization dedicated to wildlife and habitat conservation with federal and international policymakers. niSearch, Free eBook Database. “Outer Continental Shelf Drilling“ 2014. http://nisearch.com/book/long-term-environmental-effects-offshore-oil-gas-development_31512.html. //NM

Ocean Floor. Drilling infrastructure permanently alters ocean floor habitats. Drill rig footprints, undersea pipelines, dredging ship channels, and dumped drill cuttings-- the rock material dug out¶ of the oil or gas well-- are often contaminated¶ with drilling fluid used to lubricate and regulate¶ the pressure in drilling operations. The fluid contains petroleum products and heavy metals. Strewn on the ocean floor, contaminated sediments can be carried by currents over a mile from the rig, sharply reducing populations of small bottom- dwelling creatures that are important to the rest of the food chain and biomagnifying toxic contaminants in fish we eat.¶ Spills, Leaks and Catastrophes. Even with safety protocols in place, leaks and spills are inevitable— each year U.S. drilling operations send an average of 880,000 gallons of oil into the ocean. Then there are the unanticipated catastrophes. In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita destroyed 113 of the oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico and damaged 457 pipelines. Hurricane damage caused at least 124 different spills, totaling over 17,700 barrels (743,000 gallons) of petroleum products. Oil is toxic to the plants and microscopic animals that form the basis of the marine food chain. It also poisons birds, mammals and fish. Those not killed outright can suffer a slow death from debilitating illness and injury.¶ Coastal Economies. Even a medium sized spill can be a major economic disaster in coastal areas dependent on tourism or fishing as a major economic driver. Hundreds of thousands of existing jobs and billions of dollars of economic activity depend on clean coasts and healthy coastal waters. Routine air and water pollution from offshore rigs, coupled with industrialization in sensitive areas, can quickly undermine local economies.¶ Air Pollution. A 2004 inventory of air pollution in the Gulf of Mexico found that OCS oil and gas activities account for the overwhelming majority of air pollutants: 89% of carbon monoxide, 77% of NOx emissions, 72% of volatile organic compounds emissions, 69% of particulate matter emissions, and 66% of sulfur dioxide.¶ Invasive Species. Ships, drilling equipment and even rigs are used and relocated all around the world. Animals that colonize a rig surface in one area essentially get a “free ride” to a new habitat, where they can easily become invasive. The brown mussel (a marine species with impacts similar to zebra mussels), several species of jellyfish, barnacles and other nuisance organisms can be spread by drilling equipment.

Drilling causes cutting and fluid discharges

Melton et al, 10-16-2000 (H. R. Melton, J. P. Smith, C. R. Martin, T. J. Nedwed, H.L. Mairs, D. L. Raught, PHD, Chemical Engineering - ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company¶ PHD, Physical Chemistry - ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company¶ BS, Chemical Engineering, Business Administration - ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company PHD, Environmental Engineering - ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company¶ MS, Ocean Engineering - ExxonMobil Production Company¶ BS, Civil and Environmental Engineering - ExxonMobil Upstream Development Company, respectively; Rio Oil and Gas Conference, OFFSHORE DISCHARGE OF DRILLING FLUIDS AND CUTTINGS -A SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE ON PUBLIC POLICY, http://www.anp.gov.br/meio/guias/5round/biblio/IBP44900.pdf)

Drilling wastes comprise drilling fluids and drill cuttings. There are two basic types of drilling fluids: water-based fluids (WBFs) and non-aqueous fluids (NAFs). WBFs have either fresh water or salt water as the primary fluid phase, while NAFs have either refined oil or synthetic materials as the primary fluid phase. For many wells, drilling conditions (e.g. deviated or horizontal wells, active shales) often require the use of NAFs instead of WBFs for efficient, cost-effective operations. In most cases, both WBFs and NAFs are used in drilling the same well, with WBFs used to drill the shallow portion of the well.¶ Drill cuttings are pieces of the formation being drilled that are returned to the surface with drilling fluid. Solids control equipment separates the cuttings from the drilling fluids so that the drilling fluid can be reused. The cuttings then become a waste stream from the drilling process. A thin coating of drilling fluid adheres to the cuttings. Cuttings volumes depend on the type of fluid used, the depth of the well, and the size of the borehole. Estimated volumes per well range from 130 to 560 m3 per well (Hinwood, et al., 1994, USEPA, 1993).¶ WBF may be discharged intermittently during the drilling process in batches of about 20 to 30 m3 volume or in larger volumes (approximately 200 m3) at the end of the drilling process or when the fluid system is changed out. The estimated volume of WBF discharges per well ranges from 500 to 1700 m3 per well. When NAFs are used, only the fluid that adheres to the cuttings is discharged. The valuable fluid is recycled for further use.¶ WBF consists of water, salts, barite, bentonite and other minor additives. WBF composition depends on the density of the fluid. An example WBF composition for a 1190 kg/m3 fluid is (in wt %) 76 wt% water, 15% barite, 7 % bentonite and 2% salts and other additives (National Research Council (US), 1983). The barium in barite, a sparingly soluble mineral used to increase drilling fluid density, dominates the heavy-metal content of wastes from drilling with either WBF or NAF. Other trace metals are present at much lower concentrations. Neff (1988) compared the ranges of concentrations of metals found in drilling fluids and marine sediments and found that drilling fluids had concentrations of barium and chromium that fell outside the observed range naturally occurring in marine sediments.¶

Drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf would devastate birds, marine mammals, fish, and sea turtles

Defenders of Wildlife 14. Defenders of Wildlife, national conservation organization dedicated to wildlife and habitat conservation with federal and international policymakers. niSearch, Free eBook Database. “Outer Continental Shelf Drilling“http://nisearch.com/book/long-term-environmental-effects-offshore-oil-gas-development_31512.html. //NM

Birds. Spills pose direct mortality dangers through oiling and poisoning by ingestion as animals try to clean themselves and as toxins build up in fish-eating birds. In addition, over 200,000 birds die annually in collisions with oil and gas platforms. Construction of new pipelines will damage sensitive coastal habitats and marshes.¶ Marine Mammals. Seismic surveys conducted during oil and gas exploration cause temporary or permanent hearing loss, induce behavioral changes, and even physically injure marine mammals such as whales, seals and dolphins. Construction noise from new facilities and pipelines is also likely to interfere with foraging and communication behaviors of birds and mammals. Risk of collisions with vessels and exposure to pollutants will also increase. Exposure to petroleum causes tissue damage in the eyes, mouth, skin and lungs of marine mammals. Because they are at the top of the food chain, many marine mammals will be exposed to the dangers of bioaccumulation of organic pollutants and metals. Expansion of offshore drilling activities would further threaten imperiled species like the manatee.¶ Sea Turtles. Dredging of nesting beaches, collisions, and noise disruptions are all potential threats to sea turtles. Hatchlings are also particularly susceptible to oiling because they spend much of their time near the water surface, where spilled oil or tar accumulates.¶ Climate Change. In the face of the climate crisis, the U.S. needs to look for ways to decrease petroleum consumption, not for ways to increase it.

Oil drilling noise disrupts wildlife routes and habitats – studies prove

The Wilderness Society 14. The Wilderness Society, leading American conservation organization composed of scientific and political leaders affiliated with the US Bureau of Land Management. “

Six ways oil and gas drilling is bad news for the environment” The Wilderness Society. 2014. http://wilderness.org/six-ways-oil-and-gas-drilling-bad-news-environment //NM

Disruption of wildlife migration routes and habitats from noise pollution, traffic and fences¶ Biological systems are incredibly complex, and can fall victim to serious ecological consequences when disturbed by human activity. Increased vehicle traffic at oil drilling sites contributes significantly to noise pollution in wildlands. Wild mammals and birds respond to noise disturbances with short-term avoidance behavior, but many studies have shown that these behaviors become habituated. Negative impacts include disruption of songbird communication in breeding and nesting seasons, as well as altered predator and prey dynamics. Mammals habituated to traffic may be more vulnerable to road kill.¶ Jackson Hole’s pronghorn antelope are an unfortunate example of the effects that oil and gas development (in this case, fencing and other infrastructure) have on wildlife's ancient migration routes. The survival of pronghorn antelope in Grand Teton National Park depends on their annual migration from the Upper Green River Valley. This seasonal migration is the second longest mammal migration route in the western hemisphere, clocking in at around 200 miles. But the Jonah oil and gas field has made their age-old trek incredibly difficult, and future energy development will ultimately cut off their route at key passages, threatening their survival as a species.

Ocean life, particularly plankton, critical to overall biodiversity and moderating global warming

Haddock 8. Steven Haddock, project lead and manager Zooplankton Biodiversity Project, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. “The Importance of Marine Biodiversity” http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDUQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mbari.org%2Fnews%2Fpublications%2Far%2Fchapters%2F08_MarineBiodiversity.pdf&ei=y_CyU6XdBoupsQSOiYHwBA&usg=AFQjCNEiBHjxQCRfJcFM9eeLvDruYCtcXw //NM

The oceans cover over 70 percent of Earth’s surface and dominate the living space, accounting for 98¶ percent of the potentially habitable volume. Of this space, most is represented by deep water. This habitat is critical to the health of the planet as it holds more than 10 times the carbon of all terrestrial plants and soil combined. It also has a moderating influence on our planet’s tempera- ture and atmosphere. We cannot truly under- stand what is happening to global climate and the natural environment without understand- ing the state of the deep sea. What is the health of this ecosystem? Is it changing like so many other habitats? What will the future ocean hold? Informed answers to these questions rest on accurate estimates of deep-sea biodiversity and its changes through time.¶ The midwater habitat, defined as the region lying between the sunlit upper ocean and the seafloor, is somewhat like outer space—vast, cold, and three dimensional. But unlike space, it is inhabited by truly alien-looking life forms, from microbes to giant squid. Many of these organisms are difficult to study, but their obscurity is not a reflection of their insignificance. The most abun- dant vertebrates on the planet are not mice or birds, but small fishes, living in the ocean’s twilight zone. The most numerous “bugs” are not ants or even beetles, but little crustaceans called copepods. Although many of these animals are unfamiliar even to marine biologists, they serve many interconnected functions: phytoplank- ton in the sunlit surface waters turn carbon dioxide into oxygen and ultimately sink, sending the carbon down to the seafloor. Plankton feed fish and even sustain animals the size of whales.

Impact – Bio-D

Biodiversity decline causes extinction

Mmom 8 (Dr. Prince Chinedu, University of Port Harcourt (Nigeria), “Rapid Decline in Biodiversity: A Threat to Survival of Humankind”, Earthwork Times, 12-8, http://www.environmental-expert.com/resultEachArticle.aspx?ci d=0&codi=51543)

From the foregoing, it becomes obvious that the survival of Humankind depends on the continuous existence and conservation of biodiversity. In other words, a threat to biodiversity is a serious threat to the survival of Human Race. To this end, biological diversity must be treated more seriously as a global resource, to be indexed, used, and above all, preserved. Three circumstances conspire to give this matter an unprecedented urgency. First, exploding human populations are degrading the environment at an accelerating rate, especially in tropical countries. Second, science is discovering new uses for biological diversity in ways that can relieve both human suffering and environmental destruction. Third, much of the diversity is being irreversibly lost through extinction caused by the destruction of natural habitats due to development pressure and oil spillage, especially in the Niger Delta. In fact, Loss of biodiversity is significant in several respects. First, breaking of critical links in the biological chain can disrupt the functioning of an entire ecosystem and its biogeochemical cycles. This disruption may have significant effects on larger scale processes. Second, loss of species can have impacts on the organism pool from which medicines and pharmaceuticals can be derived. Third, loss of species can result in loss of genetic material, which is needed to replenish the genetic diversity of domesticated plants that are the basis of world agriculture (Convention on Biological Diversity). Overall, we are locked into a race. We must hurry to acquire the knowledge on which a wise policy of conservation and development can be based for centuries to come.

AT: BP Proves Resiliency

BP doesn't disprove - unique conditions checked the impact and we don't actually know its full extent

Graham et al, January 2011 (Bob Graham, Co-Chair¶ William K. Reilly, Co-Chair¶ Frances Beinecke¶ Donald F. Boesch¶ Terry D. Garcia¶ Cherry A. Murray¶ Fran Ulmer; National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, " The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling: Report to the President", http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-OILCOMMISSION/pdf/GPO-OILCOMMISSION.pdf

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill immediately threatened a rich, productive marine ecosystem. To mitigate both direct and indirect adverse environmental impacts, BP and the federal government took proactive measures in response to the unprecedented magnitude of the spill.3 Unfortunately, comprehensive data on conditions before the spill—the natural “status quo ante” from the shoreline to the deepwater Gulf—were generally lacking.4 Even now, information on the nature of the damage associated with the released oil is being realized in bits and pieces: reports of visibly oiled and dead wildlife, polluted marshes, and lifeless deepwater corals. Moreover, scientific knowledge of deepwater marine communities is limited, and it is there that a significant volume of oil was dispersed from the wellhead, naturally and chemically, into small droplets.5 Scientists simply do not yet know how to predict the ecological consequences and effects on key species that might result from oil exposure in the water column, both far below and near the surface.6¶ Much more oil might have made landfall, but currents and winds kept most of the oil offshore, and a large circulating eddy kept oil from riding the Loop Current toward the Florida Keys.7 Oil-eating microbes probably broke down a substantial volume of the spilled crude, and the warm temperatures aided degradation and evaporation8—favorable conditions not present in colder offshore energy regions.9 (Oil-degrading microbes are still active in cold water, but less so than in warmer water.) However widespread (and in many cases severe) the natural resource damages are, those observed so far have fallen short of some of the worst expectations and reported conjectures during the early stages of the spill.10 So much remains unknown that will only become clearer after long-term monitoring of the marine ecosystem. Government scientists (funded by the responsible party) are undertaking a massive effort to assess the damages to the public’s natural resources. Additionally, despite significant delays in funding and lack of timely access¶ to the response zone, independent scientific research of coastal and marine impacts is proceeding as well.

AT: Regulations Solve

Regulations fail in the context of deepwater drilling- BP spill proves

Graham et al, January 2011 (Bob Graham, Co-Chair¶ William K. Reilly, Co-Chair¶ Frances Beinecke¶ Donald F. Boesch¶ Terry D. Garcia¶ Cherry A. Murray¶ Fran Ulmer; National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, " The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling: Report to the President", http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-OILCOMMISSION/pdf/GPO-OILCOMMISSION.pdf)

The rig’s demise signals the conflicted evolution— and severe shortcomings—of federal regulation of offshore oil drilling in the United States, and particularly of MMS oversight of deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. The regulatory context for the leasing procedures and safety and environmental oversight that led up to the Macondo blowout took shape in the 1970s, when two conflicting priorities dominated the political landscape. The first to appear, in the early 1970s, was the public mandate for environmental protection, which prompted enactment of an extraordinary series of sweeping regulatory laws intended, in the language of the National Environmental Policy Act, to “create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony.”4 The second was the nation’s drive for energy independence; it led to new policies designed to increase domestic production and decrease American reliance on foreign energy supplies. Oil served as a catalyst for both: the Santa Barbara oil spill in 1969 helped to promote passage of demanding environmental protection mandates, and the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 amplified the urgency of efforts to make the nation more energy self-sufficient.¶ The federal regulation of offshore drilling awkwardly combined the two priorities, as a series of Congresses, Presidents, and Secretaries of the Interior—responding to competing constituencies in explicitly political ways—sought to reconcile the sometimes conflicting goals of environmental protection, energy independence, and revenue generation. In some offshore regions, oil drilling was essentially banned in response to environmental concerns. Elsewhere, most notably in the Gulf, some environmental protections and safety oversight were formally relaxed or informally diminished so as to render them ineffective, promoting a dramatic expansion of offshore oil and gas production and billions of dollars in federal revenues. The origins of MMS vividly illustrate that political compromise. Secretary of the Interior James Watt created the agency with great fanfare in January 1982, aiming from the outset to promote domestic energy supplies by dramatically expanding drilling on the outer continental shelf. He combined, in one entity, authority for regulatory oversight with responsibility for collecting for the U.S. Treasury the billions of dollars of revenues obtained from lease sales and royalty payments from producing wells.5 From birth, MMS had a built-in incentive to promote offshore drilling in sharp tension with its mandate to ensure safe drilling and environmental protection.¶ Revenue generation—enjoyed both by industry and government—became the dominant objective. But there was a hidden price to be paid for those increased revenues. Any revenue increases dependent on moving drilling further offshore and into much deeper waters came with a corresponding increase in the safety and environmental risks of such drilling. Those increased risks, however, were not matched by greater, more sophisticated regulatory oversight. Industry regularly and intensely resisted such oversight, and neither Congress nor any of a series of presidential administrations mustered the political support necessary to overcome that opposition. Nor, despite their assurances to the contrary, did the oil and gas industry take the initiative to match its massive investments in oil and gas development and production with comparable investments in drilling safety and oil-spill containment technology and contingency response planning in case of an accident.

Framing – Oil industry skews stats

Be skeptical of their evidence - the oil industry consistently misrepresents risks of drilling

Theo Colburn (PhD, President of TEDX) 10-25-2007 ("Written testimony of Theo Colborn, PhD, President of TEDX, Paonia, Colorado before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, hearing on The Applicability of Federal Requirements to Protect Public Health and the Environment from Oil and Gas Development, October 31, 2007" http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/natural_gas/colburn_testimony_071025.pdf)

We also found that the muds used in drilling are not as safe as industry claims. Using data from a drilling operation where there had been a blowout, the pattern of the possible health effects of the chemicals used in that operation, matched the general health pattern of our overall analyses. See Appendix C. It is not general knowledge that when methane surfaces it brings along with it some very toxic gases that are being vented by the tons every year from each operational unit. These include benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene, often referred to as BETX. These VOCs, (Volatile Organic Compounds) plus the VOCs in the products being used and the vast amounts of fugitive methane (which is a VOC and powerful greenhouse gas) plus the NOx (Nitrogen Oxide) produced from diesel and gas burning stationary and mobile equipment to produce and pump the gas are contributing to a growing increase in ozone in the west, that heretofore has been ignored.¶ And it is not general knowledge that when methane surfaces, it is wet, and this water, called condensate water, is often put into an evaporation pit on the well pad, or stored in condensate tanks and later picked up by “water trucks” and moved to large, receiving, open evaporation facilities. It takes fleets of water trucks to handle the volume of water surfacing. Last year, it was estimated that 5,500 condensate tanks across western Colorado released over 100 tons of VOCs each, including BTEX. This gas field activity will be a continuing source of NOx and VOCs for the life of each well, which can be as long as 20 years.¶ We had been unable to find any information on the chemical content of waste pits until we were sent results of a chemical analysis of the residues from six waste pits in New Mexico. The 51 chemicals that were detected in those pits produced a health pattern even more toxic than anything we found in the past. Most important is that 43 of the 51 chemicals detected in the pits were not on our list of chemicals being used during natural gas operations. And 13 of the chemicals were at concentrations above state and federal safety levels. We found out later that except for those eight chemicals, their study design did not include testing for the chemicals on our list of what is used during production and delivery. We also discovered that 84% of the chemicals detected in the pits are on the CERCLA superfund list. See Appendix D.¶ A finding such as this raises a number of questions that only adequately designed testing requirements and protocols can address --- and points out the need for full disclosure. Data such as this also suggests that eventually, as each pit and well pad is closed down, it has the potential to become a new superfund site.