• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

inletkeeper

Protecting Alaska's Cook Inlet watershed and the life it sustains since 1995.

MENUMENU
  • About
    • Cook Inlet Watershed
    • Our Team
    • Board
    • History
  • Our Work
    • Clean Water
      • Safe Drinking Water
        • Water Testing FAQ
        • Protect Your Water Source
        • Water Rights in Alaska
      • Clean Boating & Harbors
        • Susitna Valley Lakes and Rivers
        • 2-strokes vs. 4-strokes
        • Boater Resources
        • Sewage Management
      • Pharmaceutical Disposal
    • Healthy Habitat
      • Salmon Safe Farming
      • Pebble Mine
      • Stream Temperature Monitoring Network
      • Stream Temperature Data Collection Standards and Protocol for Alaska
      • Real-time Temperature Sites
        • Anchor River
        • Crooked Creek
        • Deshka River
        • Russian River
      • Cold Water Refugia
    • Strong Communities
      • Climate ActionKit
      • Community Action Studio
      • Alaska Food Hub
      • Solarize the Kenai
      • Drawdown Climate Solutions Series
      • Alaska Farmers Market Association
      • Salmonfest
      • Electronics Recycling
      • Mouth to Mouth Wild Run & Ride
    • Energy & Alaska
      • Climate Change
      • Oil & Gas
        • Lease Sale 258
        • Exploratory Seismic Testing
        • Leasing
        • Transportation and Infrastructure
      • Coal Strip Mining
    • Resource Library
  • Take Action
    • Digital Action Center
    • Ways to Give
    • Write a Letter to the Editor
    • Contact the Media
  • Donate
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Press
  • Report Pollution
  • Shop
Weaker Oil Spill Rules Dovetail with the Need for Stronger Dispersants Safeguards

April 27, 2021 by Bob Shavelson

Weaker Oil Spill Rules Dovetail with the Need for Stronger Dispersants Safeguards

In the complex interplay between corporate profits and environmental protection, it can be hard to connect the dots to understand the larger picture.

Inletkeeper is now engaged on two fronts which at first may appear disconnected, but on closer inspection, reveal a troubling linkage that requires heightened scrutiny.

[Click here now to tell EPA we need the best available science before industry can use oil spill dispersants.]

First, the State of Alaska is working hard to weaken the oil spill prevention and response rules developed after the Exxon Valdez to protect Alaska’s spectacular marine resources and the countless families and businesses they support.

Although Jason Brune – the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) – claims to have heard from “many” Alaskans about the need to change these rules, ADEC cannot or will not tell Alaskans what corporations or individuals have expressed concerns.

The fact is that Alaska’s spill prevention and response rules aren’t broken, and they don’t need a major overhaul. But as climate change continues to melt sea ice and open new shipping lanes, oil, gas and shipping corporations don’t want to be burdened with the extra costs of spill prevention and response in the remote and unforgiving waters of the Alaska Arctic.

So, instead of requiring large corporations to pay the costs for proper safeguards – which could reduce profits –  Brune and his ADEC are simply working to roll-back existing protections.

The second and related issue centers around how big corporations respond to oil spills. From a liability and public relations perspective, industry learned a valuable lesson from the Exxon Valdez: don’t let images of oiled sea otters and tainted coastlines get plastered across the media. Instead, industry now prefers to drive the oil into the water column using chemical dispersants, where it’s “out of sight and out of mind.” 

Case in point: BP pumped over 2 million gallons of dispersants on its exploding underwater wellhead during the BP Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 to keep the giant plume of oil from surfacing for the cameras. 

There’s only one problem: dispersants increase the toxicity of spilled oil to marine life.

Sadly, the toxic consequences from BP’s witch’s brew of oil and dispersants are still unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico today.

That’s why Inletkeeper has joined Alaska Community Action on Toxics and others to sue EPA for refusing to update its dispersants rules with the latest science.

So, if we mix these two issues together – weakened spill protection rules combined with shabby dispersants science – we get a recipe for disaster in coastal Alaska.  Because if industry can cut corners on spill prevention and response, we’ll see more spills, and industry will simply turn to toxic dispersants to hide its spilled oil when the inevitable mishap occurs.

ADEC will issue its new spill rules in the coming months, and we’ll keep you up to date.  In the meantime, Inletkeeper and its partners are pressing ahead with their dispersants litigation against EPA. 

Want to help? Sign this petition to show EPA that Alaskans want current science to drive the use of dispersants. Because when big corporations spill oil in the remote darkness of the Alaska winter, you can bet the first thing they’ll want to do is make that oil disappear.

Filed Under: Clean Water, climate, Energy & Alaska, Government, Healthy Habitat, Local Economies

Previous Post
Next Post

Footer

Homer:
3734 Ben Walters Lane
Homer, AK 99603
tel: 907.235.4068

Soldotna:
35911 Kenai Spur Hwy, #13
Soldotna, AK 99669

DONATE

Copyright © · Cook Inletkeeper