An assessment of toxic metals content in the marine sediments of the Shuaiba Industrial Area, Kuwait, after the oil spill during the Gulf War

1996 ◽  
Vol 34 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 203-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Al-Muzaini ◽  
P. G. Jacob

A field study was carried out involving seven fixed sampling stations. The sampling locations were selected to cover the distribution of pollutants in the Shuaiba Industrial Area (SIA), which was contaminated with oil released from oil wells and broken pipelines and with a vast amount of burnt and unburnt crude oil from the burning and gushing oil wells. The samples were collected biweekly between July 1993 and July 1994. The concentrations of V, Ni, Cr, Cd and Pb were determined and compared with the previously collected baseline data to assess the degree of environmental damage caused due to the oil spills during the Gulf war. The average concentrations (mg/kg) of various elements in the marine sediment were 17.3 for V, 30.8 for Ni, 55.5 for Cr, 0.02 for Cd and 1.95 for Pb. Our results show that even after the heavy spillage of oil, associated metal concentrations were not very high compared with previously reported base line values.

1999 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Fiocco ◽  
Alun Lewis

Introduction: The purpose of any oil spill response is to minimise the damage that could be caused by the spill. Dispersants are one of the limited number of practical responses that are available to respond to oil spills at sea.When oil is spilled at sea, a small proportion will be naturally dispersed by the mixing action caused by waves. This process can be slow and proceed to only a limited extent for most situations. Dispersants are used to accelerate the removal of oil from the surface of the sea by greatly enhancing the rate of natural dispersion of oil and thus prevent it from coming ashore. Dispersed oil will also be more rapidly biodegraded by naturally occurring microorganisms. The rationale for dispersant use is that dispersed oil is likely to have less overall environmental impact than oil that persists on the surface of the sea, drifts and eventually contaminates the shoreline. The development of modern dispersants began after the Torrey Canyon oil spill in 1967. Many lessons have been learned since that spill, and consequently the modern dispersants and application techniques in use today have become an effective way of responding to an oil spill. For example, the dispersant response to the Sea Empress spill in 1996 demonstrated that dispersants can be very effective and prevent a much greater amount of environmental damage from being caused (6). This chapter describes the chemistry and physics of dispersants, planning and decision-making considerations, and finally their practical application and operational use in oil spill response.


1992 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Shaw

Major oil-spills, such as occurred following the grounding of the tanker Exxon Valdez in March 1989 in Prince William Sound, Alaska, account for only a small fraction of the total anthropogenic input of petroleum to the marine environment. Yet major spills can result in significant and even acute impacts, trigger ecological changes requiring decades for recovery, and command considerable public attention. Thus catastrophic oil-spills in general, and the Exxon Valdez spill in particular, differ from other chronic human alterations of coastal marine systems.Estimates of the fate of the 38,000 metric tons of crude oil lost by the Exxon Valdez are imprecise, but perhaps 30–40% evaporated, 10–25% was recovered, and the rest remains in the marine environment. Roughly 1,500 km of coastline were oiled in varying degrees. Much of this coastline consists of gravel beaches into which oil penetrated to depths as great as 1 m.The ecological effects of the spill on the marine environments of Prince William Sound and adjacent coastal areas of the Gulf of Alaska were extensive, but natural recovery, aided by clean-up efforts, is expected. Judging by the consequences of other oil-spills affecting rocky shorelines, as well as previous natural and anthropogenic disturbances to Prince William Sound, it appears likely that most affected biotic communities and ecosystems will recover to approximately their pre-spill functional and structural characteristic within from five to twenty-five years.This oil-spill had major social effects. Many individuals, whether personally present or viewing the spill around the world on television, were saddened by the environmental damage, and felt that an important public trust had been broken. These feelings, together with dissatisfaction with the results of early clean-up efforts, gave rise to popular sentiment in favour of every possible clean-up and mitigation effort — regardless of cost, effectiveness, or possible negative consequences.The response to the Exxon Valdez oil-spill by government and the oil industry revealed serious inadequacies in the plans and institutions for dealing with major marine oilspills in the United States. Attempts to recover spilled oil, and to respond to the spill's environmental consequences, were hampered by a low level of preparedness and lack of clear agreement about the goals of response efforts. Attempts are under way to improve oil-spill prevention and response capabilities in Alaska and the rest of the United States. However, these efforts are not yet complete, and it remains to be seen whether an improved response will be made to the next major oil-spill.


1985 ◽  
Vol 1985 (1) ◽  
pp. 429-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. P. Fraser

ABSTRACT Guidelines are suggested for advance planning for the use or non-use of dispersants to combat oil spills. These guidelines are intended to expedite the decision to use dispersants in the event of an oil spill, where that will minimize environmental damage. These guidelines can be applied readily to any geographical area to answer the following questions: (1) Are there locations where dispersant application should normally be allowed? (2) In these locations, what rate of dispersant application should be allowed? (3) Are there locations where dispersant application should normally be avoided? The logic behind these guidelines is explained so that exceptions can be identified and so that changes in the guidelines can be made as advances are made in the state of the art. These guidelines provide for control over dispersant usage while allowing application (in most instances) at rates which can disperse floating oil effectively.


1991 ◽  
Vol 1991 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Craik

ABSTRACT The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority is charged with conservation of the Great Barrier Reef while allowing reasonable use to continue. One of the major challenges facing the authority is the risk of a major oil spill in the Great Barrier Reef region. An oil spill contingency plan, Reefplan, developed for the Great Barrier Reef region and part of Torres Strait, is a component of the Australian National Plan to Combat Pollution of the Sea by Oil. The authority provides scientific advice to the on-scene coordinator, who is in charge of responding to any spill. This paper reviews the history of oil spills in the Great Barrier Reef and discusses the authority's role in prevention and preparation for oil spills. The difficulty of coping with a large spill and the issue of environmental damage are highlighted, given the relatively remote nature of the region, the sparse population, and the logistic difficulties of working in such an area.


2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 949-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Hobbie ◽  
Andrew J. Garger

ABSTRACT The Water Quality Insurance Syndicate has offices in lower Manhattan in New York City, and the events of September 11th remain vivid. However, in its aftermath it was difficult to envision the broad reaching ripple effects resulting from the event. Among the effects is the clash of two major issues: the increasing use of criminal sanctions in reaction to spills of oil and hazardous substances, and the practical and emotional consequences of both possible and actual terrorist events. For the past several years, the responsible party and its insurer have faced the use of criminal sanctions when a spill occurs. Criminal sanctions are typically used to combat intentional environmental misconduct. In the realm of oil spills, common actions may include the deliberate dumping of oil and negligence or unintentional conduct leading to a spill. In the post 9–11 United States, the first question presented at an oil spill is not how much oil has been spilled, but rather was the spill caused by an act of terrorism?. Government officials may treat the location of an oil spill as a crime scene, which will transform and complicate a pollution event. A recent explosion on a gasoline barge at an oil and gas storage facility in Staten Island, New York illustrates the point. A leading national newspaper devoted the first five paragraphs of its lead story on the explosion to a discussion of whether or not there was a terrorist attack Was the clean up of that spill hampered because of the terrorism investigation? We will probably never know, because the gasoline that escaped from the barge quickly evaporated so the cleanup was minimal. The next spill, however, might be a crude oil spill where every minute in response time counts. While the shipowner is trying to minimize the spill, the F.B.I, might have already taken control of the spill scene to conduct an investigation and effectively locked out the spill responders and their equipment, greatly increasing the cost and complexity of the cleanup, the environmental damage that is done, and the possibility that the shipowner's actions are found to be insufficient, increasing the possibility of criminal sanctions. The threat of terrorism is real. But we must now work to integrate our response to the terrorism threat to our existing spill response infrastructure that has been developed under OPA, and not unnecessarily increase a shipowner's exposure to criminal liability.


Baltica ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (special) ◽  
pp. 3-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergej Suzdalev ◽  
Saulius Gulbinskas ◽  
Vadim Sivkov ◽  
Tatiana Bukanova

The Baltic Sea is facing exceptionally intensive marine traffic. Oil products in addition to other cargo types are being transported in this marine area. Therefore, the risk of potential oil pollution is very high. Although, the Baltic Sea has not experienced catastrophic oil spills, there have been spills causing serious environmental damage in the region. Construction of oil terminals and planned growth of Russian oil export through Baltic Sea ports along with the operation of large oil enterprises and oil drilling platforms make maritime safety a priority task for the Baltic Sea region. The publications collected in present Baltica Journal Special Issue set sights on the improvement of oil spill management in the South–Eastern Baltic Sea as well as stimulate the appearance of new transnational response agreements in the region.


2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 495
Author(s):  
Harry Houridis ◽  
Mellor Peter

April 2014 marked the four-year anniversary of the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster; a rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico that killed 11 workers and led to the worst offshore oil spill in US history. Oil gushed from the sea floor for 87 days before the well was capped an estimated 5 million BBL spilled into the Gulf, inflicting untold environmental damage. The event highlighted how little the industry knows about containing deep-water oil spills or about how oil spreads. Oil washed up hundreds of miles away on coastlines in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida, but scientists struggled to determine where all of the oil had gone. Had some of it evaporated or was it hiding below the surface? Had it been carried by currents to the Gulf’s deep waters or perhaps even further? No one can say for sure. The resulting science highlighted that oil drifts along the surface of ocean water at 97% of current speed, but at only a fraction of the wind speed. During the Deepwater Horizon Disaster, the tracking buoys sat too proud and were driven the wrong way by the wind. It is essential to track the currents, since they account for at least 95%–98% of the ultimate oil spill trajectory. WorleyParsons designed, developed and deployed an oil spill tracking buoy (OSTB) to provide a scientific instrument for capturing only the surface currents. The specific gravity of each buoy is such that it tracks surface currents. Material selection and manufacture, ocean validation and telecommunication engineers came together to produce such a device, which is largely underwater but can continue to communicate with satellites.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 2172-2192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara J. Goldsmith ◽  
Tara K. Waikem ◽  
Tara Franey

ABSTRACT Recently, there have been a number of key developments related to oil spill-related liability worldwide. These developments include: the recent expansion of damages under the European Union Environmental Liability Directive to all marine water; proposed changes to the Canadian offshore oil legislation that would allow for the specific recovery of environmental damages; implementation of US legislation which directs recovered funds from an oil spill to be used in the affected area; and more. This paper will identify and describe the various environmental liability regimes in different regions of the world which contain requirements for the restoration of natural resources affected by these incidents. The paper also will highlight similarities and differences among these regimes, as well as some of the synergies in actual practice. In addition, and to the extent possible, the paper will provide some of the lessons learned and best practices relative to the determining environmental damage liability under the different regimes.


2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 953-955
Author(s):  
Daniel Chan Kok Peng

ABSTRACT The world's perspective on security issues had greatly changed after the events of the 9/11 incident. Great strides to enhance maritime security were made following that incident. We see nations working together for a safer environment as seen in the rapid adoption and implementation of the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code in July 2004. Historically, most oil spill response activities took place in coastal waters and coastlines due to collision and grounding of vessels. We must now also consider the possibility of oil spills occurring in ‘non traditional’ areas due to terrorism and piracies. The threat of terrorism is very real. The “USS Cole” at Aden, Yemen on October 2000 and “MT Limburg” off the coast of Yemen on October 2002 were examples. Many regions of the world with high maritime traffic are considered hot spots for such terrorist and piracy activities. For instance, certain parts of the Malacca Strait are known for piracy and sea robberies. These activities may well lead to major oil spills. Vessels are considered “soft targets” for a terrorist attack. These incidents will generate high publicity and may create devastating environmental damage. The consequences are too severe for us to ignore as the economic impact may cripple the global economy. Oil spill responses are complex and each incident presents their own challenges. Oil spill response organizations have little exposure when dealing with an incident resulting from a terrorist attack. What considerations are given to the oil spill responder's safety? Oil spill response organisations must factor in such scenarios into their contingency plans. In the bigger picture of a major incident the role of the oil spill responder may not be the primary focus of an incident command. They have to be proactive to make necessary preparations and security arrangements with government agencies and security providers. The author will use the case history of the ‘Limburg,’ to which the Alliance responded, as an example to illustrate the response and responder security issues that arise during such an event.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document