http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A06E1DD123CF933A25754C0A9649D8B63&ref=alaska
A
vast amount of environmental safety groups are rallying against Shell as they
prepare to begin offshore drilling. In fact, they are filing a lawsuit challenging
Shell to respond to how they plan on dealing with the situation of a potential
oil spill. The Interior Department’s Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement approved Shell with their plans to “cap a runaway well and clean up
any spilled oil.” In their defense, they meet regulations on drilling safety
according to department officials. However, environmental advocates declare
that Shell has no plan of action to care for the endangered wildlife or
shorelines! Currently, no technology has been 100% effective at cleaning up oil
spills. Shell has filed a lawsuit to pre-empt litigation from environmental
activists, this has been ineffective, but both sides plan to attend court in
Anchorage. Possible solutions to this issue would be coming up with technology
that could assist people in cleaning up oil spills. Another solution would be
taking preventative measures on equipment, with extra research on drilling
locations, so that there would be less of a chance of oil spill. Barriers to
these solutions do exist. Technology is not always made available and deep studies
into ocean floors aren’t always predictable. Personally, I believe both sides of the
argument are valid. If we do not care for our environment now, we will pay for
it later on. In contrast, oil is almost a necessity now-a-days; we use it for
cars, stoves, lawnmowers, and heaters. The simplest solution would be to find
an alternative fuel source that won’t bankrupt any other department. Oil is not
a renewable resource!
I think that the controversy in this situations is ignorant. Obviously Shell was doing what they thought would benefit their company. SO they acted without thinking, so of course someone was going to point out the oil spills are not 100% guarenteed to NOT happen.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the environmental groups, if Shell isn’t certain that they could prevent an oil spill or effectively clean one up, than they shouldn’t risk destroying the Arctic ecosystem by drilling. Besides oil won’t last forever, our efforts should go towards finding alternate fuel sources.
ReplyDeleteI think that Shell wanting to drill without a proper safety plan is something that should be stopped. Along with all other businesses, Shell only cares about the money. I think that in court they should be forced to follow safety measures like the ones you listed above. They need to find a way to drill with a safe clean up. Of course a different source of fuel would be ideal, but oil is what they are focused on right now. I think that oil is necessary, but could be collected in a less messy, harmful way if better technology were used.
ReplyDelete