Lois Norrgard: Unlearned lessons from the Exxon spill

Twenty years later, as the oil industry seeks to expand its dirty business in the Arctic, there are more disasters waiting to happen.

By LOIS NORRGARD

Last update: March 24, 2009 - 10:15 AM

On March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez slammed into Bligh Reef, and 11 million gallons of crude oil flooded across the idyllic waters and coastlines of Alaska's Prince William Sound. Twenty years later, the damage wrought by this disaster is far from gone, and it seems that the lessons have yet to be learned.

Approximately 21,000 gallons of oil still remain in the Sound -- lingering oil has been found on the Katmai coast and Kenai peninsula more than 450 miles away. The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council's 2009 report states that in some places the leftover oil remains nearly as toxic as it was in the first weeks after the spill. Experts believe that it will take decades, maybe a century, for the oil to disappear.

Beyond the carnage first found (which included 250,000 sea birds, 1,000 sea otters and 151 bald eagles), no one really knows the long-term effects on the region's wildlife. We do know that species such as the killer whale may never recover, and that the Pacific herring population -- which once drove the region's economy -- is still too low to sustain a commercial fishery.

The lasting extent of this destruction reminds us that no matter how you spin it, oil development is a dirty business. And despite the oil industry's slick advertising campaigns that promote commitment to the environment, companies such as Exxon continue to gamble with our nation's natural future. Follow the 800-mile Trans Alaska Pipeline north from Valdez to America's Arctic to find the next "Exxon Valdez" disaster waiting to happen.

The oil industry has its sights set on the unique, fragile ecosystems of America's Arctic -- particularly the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. The imposing threats of industrialization are compounded by the fact that the Arctic region is already under immense stress from the impacts of climate change.

As the Arctic environment melts at a rapidly accelerating pace, Arctic wildlife, including the threatened polar bear, the endangered bowhead whale, the ribbon seal and the Pacific walrus, are increasingly at risk. Alaska natives, who have sustained themselves for thousands of years on the land and waters of the Arctic, watch their way of life become increasingly imperiled.

Despite the risk of an oil spill in the Arctic Ocean -- the federal government has calculated up to a 50 percent chance of a large oil spill in the Chukchi Sea alone -- no technology exists to clean up a spill in the Arctic's icy conditions.

The United States must implement a science-based approach to managing development in America's Arctic. There must be a timeout on all industrial activity in order to develop a comprehensive conservation and energy plan for this region. Certain areas, such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and priority conservation areas within the Reserve, must be kept off-limits.

As a nation, we must learn from the lessons of the past. Industrial development has no place in America's Arctic until it can be done without significant risk to the region's lands and waters, and the wildlife and people that depend on them. As the lingering effects of the Exxon Valdez have shown us, the risk is just too great.

Lois Norrgard represents the Alaska Wilderness League in Minnesota.

Recent Opinion Exchange stories

Readers Write for Friday, Jan. 29 - March 24, 2009

Readers Write for Friday, Jan. 29 - "A day late and a dollar short" was all Rep. Michele Bachmann could come up with in her shallow analysis of President Obama's State of the Union speech. More

Comment on this story | Read all 2 comments | Hide reader comments

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS