Arctic Oil & Gas Development in Three Countries - Russia, USA, and Greenland
For this week’s blog post, be forewarned - It is a “doozy”. I open with the following recent articles regarding future exploitation of the Arctic frontier to Oil and Gas Development by three different countries (i. e., Russia, USA, and Greenland):
Rosneth and Gazprom Both
Awarded Arctic Shelf Permits
(RT.com; June 6, 2013)
(RT.com; June 6, 2013)
Interior Official
Hears Wide Range Views on Oil Drilling in Arctic
(Lisa DEMER, adm.com; June 6, 2013)
(Lisa DEMER, adm.com; June 6, 2013)
Greenland Halts New Oil
Drilling Licences
(Terry MACALISTER, The Guardian; March 27, 2013)
(Terry MACALISTER, The Guardian; March 27, 2013)
Confused? Perhaps it is best to begin by offering a link to the following concise, yet thorough 16-paged report by Nicholas CUNNINGHAM, Policy Analyst at the American Security Project which might help to put things into “perspective”:
Offshore Drilling in
the Arctic
(Nicholas CUNNINGHAM, 2012)
(Nicholas CUNNINGHAM, 2012)
It would appear that there are a myriad of issues at play when considering offshore drilling within the Arctic frontier. These few quotes from the first two pages of the aforementioned report make this quite apparent:
“…Harsh
drilling conditions, unproven oil spill response, inadequate science
and
fragile ecosystems pose real reasons for caution.” (Abstract, page 1)
“The
Arctic presents unique safety risks for offshore drilling, including harsh
storms, sea
ice, poor infrastructure and long distances from response
centers…” (Summary, page 2)
“The impact of drilling in the
Arctic on the environment is unknown, and scientific
knowledge of Arctic ecosystems is lacking.” (Summary, page
2)
I offer three much larger Arctic Oil Drilling research reports from the following organizations – Lloyd’s of London/Chatham House, the United States Geological Survey (USGS), and the United States Department of the Interior - which also appear to corroborate observations made in the CUNNINGHAM report:
Arctic Oil Drilling Reports:
Arctic Opening: Opportunity and Risk in the High North
(EMMERSON and LAHN, 2012)
(EMMERSON and LAHN, 2012)
An Evaluation of the
Science Needs to Inform Decisions on Outer Continental Shelf Energy Development
in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, Alaska
(HOLLAND-BARTELS and PIERCE, 2011; USGS Circular 1370)
(HOLLAND-BARTELS and PIERCE, 2011; USGS Circular 1370)
Review of Shell’s
2012 Alaska Offshore Oil and Gas Exploration Program
(US Department of the Interior, March 8, 2013)
(US Department of the Interior, March 8, 2013)
Finally, I present additional scientific data gathered and reviewed in the wake of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Disaster (Gulf of Mexico), which might help illustrate what exactly is at stake concerning the geochemistry of toxic organic contaminants, as well as the mobilization of inorganic trace elements (e. g., V, Cr, As, Pb) after oil weathering occurs, and the detrimental environmental impacts an oil spill in the Arctic might incur:
BP/Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill:
Organic Contaminants,
Trace and Major Elements, and Nutrients in Water and Sediment Sampled in
Response to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
(NOWELL et al.; USGS Scientific Investigation Report 2012-5228)
(NOWELL et al.; USGS Scientific Investigation Report 2012-5228)
After the Deepwater
Horizon Disaster
(Jyllian KEMSLEY, Chemical and Engineering News; June 3, 2013)
(Jyllian KEMSLEY, Chemical and Engineering News; June 3, 2013)
The Weathering of Oil
after the Deepwater Horizon Spill:
Insights from the Chemical Composition of the Oil from the Sea Surface,
Salt Marshes and Sediments
(LIU et al., 2012)
(LIU et al., 2012)
Comments
Post a Comment