LESSONS OF THE EXXON VALDEZ By Art Davidson
From ARTIC REFUGE: A Circle of Testimony


Seeking approval to develop Prudhoe Bay, the oil industry assured congress
and the American public that it had the technology to operate pipelines and
tankers safely. When the Exxon Valdez ran aground in the spring of 1989, we
were shocked by images of dying birds and otters-and felt betrayed by the
oil industry. Their assurances had proved to be false.
    "The public, particularly in America, has been misled for many years. A
myth has been perpetuated that a large oil spill is solvable. There is no
magic solution or cure."
    These words came not from an environmentalist, but from Dr. Ian White,
director of the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation, the
industry's own nucleus of oil spill expertise. In the aftermath of the Exxon
Valdez, Dr. White said, "The truth is that the problem is much more
difficult than the media, politicians, and even parts of the industry itself
are willing to acknowledge."
    Now wanting to drill for oil in the Arctic Wildlifr Refuge, the oil
industry is offering us the same assurances, virtually word for word, that
we heard thirty years ago. Then as now, we are told that they have new
technologies that allow oil development without harming the environment. We
would do well to remember that this is the same industry, the same pipeline,
the same tankers, and the same North Slope oil that devastated Prince
William Sound.
    "I knew immediately this was an uncontrollable volume of oil," said Fank
Iarossi, president of Exxon Shipping. "All these contingency plans, all this
planning and everything did not anticipate ever having to respond to a spill
this big."
    Iarossi and others within the industry had known for years that they
couldn't handle a spill of this magnitude. Yet, for more than thirty years
that's exactly what the industry promised it could do.
    As it turned out, oil skimmed from the water during the first
seventy-hours after the Exxon Valdez went aground was approximately 1
percent of what the industry had said it could recover in this amount of
time.
    "I had the world's largest checkbook," said Iarossi. "I could purchase
or mobilize anything in the world that would have helped. But there was no
power on earth that could recover that oil once it broke loose.
    "I'd say the lesson to society is that a spill like this can happen: no
matter how low the probability, the potential is still there for it to
happen. Another lesson is the inadequacy of current technology. What we have
is just not good enough."
    As oil companies push to drill in the Arctic Refuge, we are, once again,
being asked to believe they have the ability and commitment to protect
Alaska's environment. Once again, we are being asked to put our trust in
their promises.
    If nothing else, the Exxon Valdez teaches us that a place as special as
Prince Willliam Sound can be ravaged by accident-and that, sooneer or later,
through human or mechanical error, a serious accident is going to occur. Are
we willing to risk it happening in the Arctic Refuge?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]