Pipelines Reborn: They're Back Thanks to Trump

The day after Donald J Trump fired the first salvos in his war against the EPA and others, he delivered on his promise to double down on fossil fuels with the approval of two pipelines. On Tuesday, January 24th, Trump signed Executive Orders that overturn the Obama administration's decision on the Keystone XL (KXL) and the Dakota Access pipeline (DAPL). This authorizes TransCanada Pipelines to move forward with the 1,179-mile KXL and Energy Transfer Partners can also proceed with the 1,172-mile DAPL.

This is a blow for environmentalists and indigenous people who had fought hard to shut down the KXL and DAPL. Keystone was killed by President Barack Obama after years of protests and DAPL was stalled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the face of massive protests by indigenous people led by the Standing Rock Sioux.

Trump also signed an EO that will eliminate environmental regulations associated with the permitting process.

There are massive environmental costs associated with pipelines. They inevitably spill (click here to see a partial summary of oil spills in 2016). Even more importantly, they contribute climate change causing greenhouse gasses (GHGs) to the atmosphere at a time when we cannot afford further increases (we are currently 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial norms and scientists conservatively estimate that we cannot afford to go beyond 2 degrees Celsius).

DAPL will ferry 570,000 barrels of dirty shale oil from North Dakota to the Gulf Coast. The pipeline imperils the drinking water of 17 million people. The emissions from this pipeline are equivalent to 30 coal plants. According to Oil Change International DAPL will create "101.4 million metric tons of CO2e per year. These emissions are equivalent to 29.5 typical U.S. coal plants or the average emissions of 21.4 million U.S. passenger vehicles."

Each day the KXL can transport 830,000 barrels of some of the dirtiest oil on Earth. The Friends of the Earth reports that the GHGs associated with this pipeline is equivalent to putting 5.6 million new cars on the roads.

The promised reopening of NAFTA will complicate the KXL which will ferry oil from Alberta's tar sands to Texas. Because it crosses a state boundary the permitting process is largely under state department control. However, there are questions as to the viability of the pipeline with oil prices seemingly stuck below $60 a barrel.

More protests and lawsuits can be expected to try to stop this administration from moving forward with pipelines that are harmful to this and future generations.

As explained Bill McKibben,

"This is not a done deal. The last time around, TransCanada was so confident they literally mowed the strip where they planned to build the pipeline before people power stopped them. People will mobilize again."

The DAPL protest has been called off with Sioux leaders looking to fight the decisions in the courts. It will also take time for the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct a full environmental assessment as required by law. But this could be overcome if the Army issues and easement.

Former Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders summed up the situation as follows:

"Millions of people came together all over this country to stop the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines and say we must transform our energy system away from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Today, President Trump ignored the voices of millions and put the short-term profits of the fossil fuel industry ahead of the future of our planet."

Related
Dakota Access Pipeline Halted by Government Despite Judges Ruling (Videos)
The Dakota Access and Protest that Kills Pipelines
TransCanada's Keystone is Spewing Crude Adding Fuel to Pipeline Protests
A Brief Review of the Keystone XL Saga
Why the Keystone XL Pipedream Must Die
Republicans Keep Pushing Keystone XL Pipeline
Reasons Why the Keystone XL is a Pipedream
Keystone XL will Emit 4 Times More Pollution than Originally Thought
Buying Support for the Keystone XL
Business Leaders, Scientists, Economists and Ordinary People Reject the Keystone XL
Comparison of the Keystone XL and Renewable Energy
How Come the Keystone XL is so Hard to Kill

Read More»

Partial Summary of Oil Spills in 2016

Fossil fuels are the primary cause of climate change, they are also prone to spills. Such spills are toxic and they have been a consistent part of the fossil fuel industry since its inception. As long as we extract and transport oil and gas spills are a statistical certainty.

In December, Wired reported that there are about 30,000 oil spills in US waters every year. In October, Hurricane Ivan caused dozens of leaks in undersea oil wells and pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico. Some of these spills will leak for decades. The Taylor Energy site will continue to leak between 84 and 1,470 gallons per day for the next hundred years. The oil slick from this spill stretches over eight square miles on an average day. Taylor Energy has gone bankrupt and they just walked away from the mess they created.

Many spills are covered up by oil companies or under-reported (SkyTruth estimates that spills are at least 13 times bigger than the numbers on record). Those that are reported are often ignored. Spills up to 100,000 gallons are classified by the Coast Guard as "minor or moderate". It is important to understand that even small spills are deadly to marine life. They also represent a health risk for humans. Except in the most extreme and egregious cases, there are no penalties and therefore no incentives for the oil industry to clean up its act.

There are thousands of wells and 2.4 million miles of aging oil pipe infrastructure in the United States alone. In 2015 there were countless oil spills (click here to see a partial list of spills in North America) and in 2016 the sad legacy of fossil fuel industry spills continued. Here is a review of some of those spills in 2016.

On December 5, the Belle Fourche Pipeline pipeline spilled 176,000 gallons of crude oil into the into the Ash Coulee Creek in Billings County, North Dakota. This is about 150 miles from Cannon Ball, where protesters are camped out in opposition to the Dakota Access pipeline (President-Elect Trump has said he supports the pipeline). To make matters worse the creek has frozen over making cleanup operations almost impossible. Water supplies from the creek have been turned off. The Belle Fourche Pipeline Co. is part of the family-owned True companies, which also operates Bridger Pipeline LLC. Like almost every other pipeline company they have a long rap-sheet of spills.

On October 21, there was a pipeline leak in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, involving Sunoco, the company that is behind the Dakota Access Pipeline. An 8 inch pipeline managed by the company leaked 55,000 gallons of gasoline into a major waterway, thereby contaminating the drinking water of some 6 million people in Lancaster County. The gasoline streamed into Wallis Run, a tributary of the Loyalsock Creek that eventually drains into the Susquehanna River, considered to be the third most endangered river in the United States by American Rivers, a non-governmental organization (NGO) dedicated to protecting and preserving rivers around the country. While all pipelines leak, Sunoco Logistics spills crude more often than any of its competitors, having experienced more than 200 leaks since 2010.

On October 9, a 1.2-billion-gallon cooling pond dam at Duke Energy's H.F. Lee plant breached killing millions of chickens at factory farms and contaminating local waterways. The leak in the 120-acre coal ash pond in Goldsboro, North Carolina occurred just minutes after Duke Energy issued a statement claiming that the "Ash basin and cooling pond dams across the state continue to operate safely."

On October 2, 95 metric tons of oil leaked into the North Sea from BP's Clair platform. The leak was 46 miles west of the Shetland Islands. There was no cleanup and a large oil slick was visible from the spill. From 2000 to 2011, there were 4,123 separate oil spills in the North Sea. Oil companies were fined for just seven of them. No single fine was greater than about $25,000.

On September 24, a fuel tanker in the Gulf of Mexico caught fire and burned for days. The tanker Burgos caught fire about seven nautical miles off the coast of the port city of Boca del Rio, Mexico. The tanker was carrying about 168,000 barrels of gasoline and diesel fuel. At the time of the incident, the Burgos was sailing from Coatzacoalcos in eastern Veracruz state to the Pemex terminal, Port Authority Director Juan Ignacio Fernandez said late Saturday.

On September 16, two states were forced to declare an emergency after a Colonial pipeline spilled more than 6,000 barrels or a quarter million gallons of gasoline in Shelby County, Alabama. Ironically the states of emergency declared in Alabama and Georgia were not associated with the environmental damage from the spill but due to concerns about fuel shortages. There was no cleanup because it was deemed unsafe for workers to be in the vicinity of the spill.

On September 7, an oil pipeline belonging to Summit leaked a million gallons of fluid containing crude oil into a creek that feeds the Missouri River on a native American reservation. The spill was the largest in Minnesota’s history was on Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation land approximately 15 miles north of Williston, North Dakota. The leak came from a saltwater collection line owned by Summit Midstream Partners LP. The spill flowed into Bear Den Bay, which leads into Lake Sakakawea, a source of drinking water on the reservation. The fluid flowed into the Missouri River and contaminated fresh water for residents in the surrounding areas.

In July, a pipeline leak near Maidstone, Saskatchewan, spilled about 66,043 gallons or 1,572 barrels of diluted oil sands bitumen into the North Saskatchewan River, killing wildlife and compromising drinking water for nearby communities, including Prince Albert.

On June 21, an oil pipeline belonging to Crimson Pipeline LLC ruptured in Ventura County, California spilling an estimated 29,400 gallons of crude oil into an arroyo that flows through the city of Ventura to the ocean. Ironically the spill occurred just after President Obama signed the PIPES safety bill into law.

On June 2, An oil train derailment and explosion along the Columbia river in Oregon contaminated drinking water. At least 12 rail cars carrying Bakken oil operated by Union Pacific derailed and caught fire. The wreck occurred in the Columbia River Gorge near the community of Mosier in Oregon which is about 70 miles east of Portland. The derailment and subsequent fire forced the evacuation of local schools and nearby homes. The I-84 highway was also closed. The rail line runs adjacent to the Columbia river which is widely used for both recreation and commerce. Residents of the town of Mosier had to boil their water.

On May 20, 21,000 gallons or 500 barrels of oil spilled from the underground San Pablo Bay Pipeline near Tracy in San Joaquin County, California. Owned by San Pablo Bay Pipeline a subsidiary of Shell Oil.

On May 12, Shell's offshore Brutus platform spilled almost 88,000 gallons or 2,100 barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The spill endangered corals, dolphins, whales, tuna and whale sharks. The spill in Shell's Glider field created a 13 mile long by 2 mile wide oil slick in an area 97 miles south of Port Fourchon, Louisiana.

On February 3 and January 25 in the regions of Amazonas and Loreto, Peru at least 84,000 gallons or 2,000 barrels of oil were spilled into local waterways after two pipeline ruptures. The Marañon River, a principal tributary of the Amazon River was among the waterways that were contaminated. For indigenous people these spills polluted the waterways that are their lifeline, they provide food and water for crops and consumption. The spills are known to have killed fish, crocodiles, and plants.

There is no safe way of extracting and transporting fossil fuels. Repeated oil spills show the soulless self-interest of oil companies. Rather than repair or replace existing pipelines they invest in expansion.

As Greenpeace stated, "The long history of oil spills around the world has made one thing clear: the only way to prevent an oil spill is to keep oil in the ground."

Related
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tons in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels
The Costs of Offshore Drilling

Read More»

Liberal Dualism: Canadian Climate Leadership is at Odds with Ramping Up Fossil Fuels

The ruling federal Liberals have canceled one pipeline and approved two others. It is but the most recent example of Canada's one step forward two steps back approach to climate action.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has the laudable goal of wanting to be a climate champion and an economic leader. However, this balancing act is completely undermined when you add increased fossil fuel production to the equation. Canada was criticized at COP22 for expanding its fossil fuel production and now they have compounded the problem by adding a couple of pipelines to the mix.

Contradictory climate and energy policies

Canadian government energy and environmental policy is a checkerboard of seemingly opposing policy positions. The government announced a carbon tax then followed that up with a massive liquefied natural gas (LNG) project. To further illustrate the two faces of this government, they banned tanker traffic off the coast of northern BC while increasing traffic to the south. Most recently they rejected some pipelines while approving others.

Catherine McKenna, minister of environment and climate change has indicated that she is working towards a nation-wide coal phase-out by 2030 and the National Energy Board is being overhauled. The announcement most welcomed by environmentalists was the news that the government has rejected Enbridge's 1,177-kilometre Northern Gateway pipeline that would have carried oil from Bruderheim, Alta., to an export terminal in Kitimat, B.C..

However as with other recent federal announcements the victory was blunted by the approval of the $6.8-billion, 1,150-kilometre Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project that will ferry 890,000 barrels of oil from Alberta to Burnaby, B.C.

This pipeline along with the approval of Line 3 will ferry a million barrels of oil a day to global markets. According to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency the new capacity will generate up 26 megatonnes of emissions annually when fully operational.

Tankers

The duality of this government is further revealed in its contradictory ocean tanker policies. The Canadian government is investing in a $1.5-billion ocean protection plan to improve responses to tanker and fuel spills in the Pacific, Arctic and Atlantic oceans. But they are also increasing the need for such planning by expanding tanker traffic.

The government announced that it will ban crude oil tankers along B.C.'s North Coast, but further south the Kinder Morgan will increase tanker traffic from approximately five to 34 a month. A spill in this ecologically sensitive area will be devastating.

As reported by the Suzuki Foundation this pipeline will result in a seven fold Increase in tanker traffic and push the already fragile population of 80 resident orcas off of B.C.'s south coast to the brink of extinction. It will also Increase greenhouse gas emissions by more than 100 million tonnes each year and threaten the health of communities along B.C.'s coast. There have been some disastrous tanker oil spills and there is no reason to believe that this new tanker traffic will be any different.


Spills

The government announced that it has also approved Enbridge's 1,659-kilometre, $7.5-billion, Line 3 pipeline, that will ferry oil from a terminal near Hardisty, Alberta, through northern Minnesota to Superior, Wisconsin. This is the largest pipeline project that Enbridge has ever built. The NEB signed off on a new Line 3 in April, but with 89 conditions The pipeline will double the amount of oil transported by the pipeline to 760,000 barrels a day. This will mean that Enbridge's mainline system will collectively carry three million barrels a day into the US. The existing line has leaked many times and rather than focus on maintenance Enbridge is focusing on expanding the pipeline's capacity.

As stated by the Suzuki Foundation, "Oil spills will happen and research proves there is no technology to effectively clean them up." We know that these pipelines will leak, such spills are a statistical certainty for all fossil fuel pipelines.

All you need to do is look at the litany of oil spill in Alberta to see just how common spills are. We have seen 25 massive oil spills (over 1000 tons) in the last decade.  In 2015 alone there were dozens of spills.  Transporting fossil fuels poses a very real danger to the public. The repeated spills reveal the fossil fuel industry's soulless disregard for public safety.

New regulations

To address the serious environmental risks associated with an inevitable spill the government has announced a long list of federal requirements that are designed to act as safeguards. While these efforts may minimize the risk of an incident and maximize preparedness when such a spill occurs, it will not prevent a spill nor can it completely clean them up.

The NEB has a list of 157 conditions that must be met and BC has its list of five preconditions. The premiere of BC recently said that the federal government is "very close" to fulfilling their preconditions. Alberta says it plans to cap greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from the oil patch at 100 megatonnes a year.

Government's logic

Prime Minister Trudeau argued that pipelines have lower emissions profiles, are less dangerous and less expansive than rail transport in tanker cars. As reported by the CBC, Trudeau said

"The decision we took today is the one that is in the best interests of Canada...It is a major win for Canadian workers, for Canadian families and the Canadian economy, now and into the future."

The logic for supporting the pipelines comes down to jobs and revenue. According to Kinder Morgan 15,000 jobs will be created during construction, and a further 37,000 direct and indirect jobs will be added when the project is operational. The pipelines will generate $46.7 billion for all levels of government over the next 2 decades.

However many have criticized this logic in Patrick DeRochie, the director of Environmental Defence:

"The approvals raise grave doubts how these and additional pipelines, including Keystone XL and Energy East, can fit with Canada's commitment to the Paris climate agreement," And Media Placeholder added, "much bigger cuts in other emission sources must be made to compensate for more oil-based emissions."

The fight continues

Protests will continue and so will legal challenges. The Kinder Morgan project threatens a BC First Nation near the project's route, other First Nations, including 39 in BC and Alberta, have signed "mutual benefit agreements" with Kinder Morgan who also claims it has reached agreements with First Nations communities where the pipeline crosses a reserve. Nonetheless, with only one third of First Nations approving the pipeline other First Nations say they are ready for a long battle to stop the pipeline.

Mike Hudema, a campaigner for Greenpeace, said in a recent statement:

"Apparently Justin Trudeau's sunny ways mean dark days ahead for climate action and Indigenous reconciliation in Canada. With this announcement, Prime Minister Trudeau has broken his climate commitments, broken his commitments to Indigenous rights, and has declared war on B.C.,". Media placeholder added "If Prime Minister Trudeau wanted to bring Standing Rock-like protests to Canada, he succeeded."

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said she would be "willing to go to jail" to stop the Kinder Morgan. More court challenges are also expected. As reported by the CBC, "There have already been 11 judicial reviews launched over the NEB review, and more court challenges are expected in the coming days."

Take away

The damage to our climate, our water, our land and our air far outweigh the jobs and revenues associated with pipeline projects.

The election of the Liberal party offered hope and signaled the dawn of a new day for climate action in Canada. The Liberals were a major improvement over the Conservatives on energy and environmental matters. The party's commitment to climate action was reiterated in a throne speech and in a mandate letter to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. Shortly after coming to power the Liberals reversed the policies of their Conservative predecessors and showed climate leadership at COP21. They also unmuzzled scientists. They have improved the nation's climate and energy policy and along with provincial leaders Canada is making significant progress on crafting a nationwide renewable energy policy.

The decision to move forward with the pipelines has disappointed may Liberal supporters as it breaks Trudeau's campaign promises. The Liberals appear to be oblivious to the fact that you cannot simultaneously claim to be a climate leader while increasing your production of fossil fuels.

Trudeau campaigned on a climate action platform and while he and his government have made some bold moves to combat climate change he has also significantly increased fossil fuel infrastructure.

Just as pipelines consistently spill, politicians consistently make promises they can't keep.

Related
The Energy East Pipeline is as Good as Dead
The Dakota Access and Protest that Kills Pipelines
Enbridge: If We Can't Build Pipelines we Will Buy Them
Two Down and Two to Go: Half of Canada's Proposed Tar Sands Pipelines Stymied

Read More»

Another Day Another Oil Spill This Time in Alabama (Video)

Although nobody seems to have noticed, between a quarter and a third of a million gallons of gasoline has leaked from a pipeline in the middle of September. The Colonial Pipeline Company reported the spill prompting the governors of Alabama and Georgia to declare states of emergency. The sad fact is that oil and gas spills have become so common that it is no longer construed as newsworthy.

The ecological impact of the spill appears to be secondary to concerns about the interruption of the supply. In Alabama the Pipeline spill triggered a supplier 'Red Alert' and Georgia Gov. Robert Bentley issued an executive order Thursday declaring a state of emergency in Alabama.
The gasoline spill occurred south of Birmingham in Shelby county and shut down a major pipeline connecting refineries in Houston with to New York Harbor. Fuel shortages are expected as a result of having to shut down the pipeline.

Colonial Pipeline, released the following information Thursday afternoon:

"Based on current projections and consultations with industry partners, parts of Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, North Carolina and South Carolina will be the first markets to be impacted by any potential disruption in supply...Colonial has briefed officials in these states and will continue to provide timely information to the public so that employees and contractors began digging out the leaking pipeline."

The pipeline shut down is expected to cause a spike in gas prices. The failure to report the spill in the mainstream media is a disturbing trend that will make it easier for fossil fuel companies to get away with ecocide.




Related
Another Day Another Oil Spill This Time in Alabama (Video)
Repeated Spills Show the Soulless Self Interest of Fossil Fuel Companies
New Pipeline Safety Law Followed by Another Oil Spill
Summary of Fossil Fuel Spills in 2015 (Videos)
The Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

New Pipeline Safety Law Followed by Another Oil Spill

Mere hours after President Obama signed the PIPES safety bill into law, a pipeline spilled thousands of gallons of oil. Protecting our Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety Act of 2016 became law on June 22nd. Within hours of the signing an oil pipeline erupted in Ventura County, California. It was first noticed by a local rancher early Thursday morning.
The spill emanated from a ten inch underground pipeline owned by Colorado-based Crimson Pipeline LLC. It sent an estimated 29,400 gallons of crude oil down into an arroyo that flows through the city of Ventura and reaches the ocean near the Ventura Pier. The spill marks Crimson’s 11th such incident in the last ten years.

The law was drafted in response to a plethora of fossil fuel spills, especially California's Porter Ranch leak which spewed a staggering 97,000 tons of methane. The PIPES act increases safety provisions in the construction and operation of fossil fuels facilities. It also and gives the government expanded authority to act quickly in the event of a spill. This includes new emergency powers for the Secretary of Transportation.

Oil spills are common throughout North America, but they are especially prevalent in California. On May 19, 2015, a corroded Plains All American pipeline spewed 143,000 gallons of crude oil onto Refugio State Beach in Santa Barbara and at least 25,000 gallons poured into the ocean. The spill created a nine mile oil slick. Governor Jerry Brown called it an "environmental disaster" and declared a state of emergency.

Planes All American Pipeline have been been found guilt of a total of 175 safety and maintenance infractions. The Houston company has been indicted on 46 criminal counts and faces fines of around $3 million due to the Santa Barbara spill. 

In December, more than 8,800 gallons of oil leaked in Somis. In May of this year 21,000 Gallons of oil spilled from the underground San Pablo Bay Pipeline near Tracy in San Joaquin County. These spills and the many others in California take place against the backdrop of the epic Santa Barbara oil spill of 1969.

It is a statistical certainty that pipelines will spill. Just as birds fly, and fish swim, oil leaks. The only way to keep the oil from spilling is to stop it from flowing. 

Oil spills have become commonplace, but we cannot afford to be blase. The preponderance of leaks adds to concerns about the existential threat posed by the climate destroying properties of the commodities they transport.

In the past oil pipelines were the lifeblood of our industrial might, however we now know that they are harbingers of an apocalyptic future. These arteries of death, like the hydrocarbons they transport, must be phased out of our energy mix.

Related
Summary of Fossil Fuel Spills in 2015 (Video)
The Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Shell Downplays Crude Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
Oil Spill in Peru is a Life Threatening Emergency for Local Indigenous People (Video)
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Infographic: 13 Oil Spills in 30 Days
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Second Shell Oil Spill in Less than Two Weeks

For the second time in less than two weeks pipelines belonging to Shell have leaked oil. The most recent spill has leaked 21,000 Gallons (500 barrels) of oil near Tracy in San Joaquin County, California. This time the culprit was the company's underground San Pablo Bay Pipeline which transports crude oil from California’s Central Valley to the San Francisco Bay Area. The spill took place on May 20th but Shell did not report the leak until the evening of Monday May 23.

Ironically, this spill took place against the backdrop of the Altamont Pass Wind Farm, one of California's largest wind energy developments. The juxtaposition of an oil spill against a clean energy producing wind farm speaks volumes.

This is the second time that oil has spilled from this pipeline in 8 months and the second time Shell has reported a spill in less than two weeks.

On May 12, Shell spilled almost 90,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. In an interview with WMNF News, Scott Eustis, a coastal wetlands specialist with Gulf Restoration Network discussed the impacts of the May 12 oil spill on the corals, dolphins, whales, tuna and whale sharks.

“All this is happening while the government is considering new leasing in the Gulf. Although we know from this and many other events that there’s not enough clean-up, there’s not appropriate technologies to take care of the Gulf as a natural resource that belongs to all of us, here, and all of us in the United States. So, we’re calling for no new leasing until the government and industry can show that they can take care of our natural resources.”

Cleanup efforts at the spill site near Tracy are focused on the oil that has reached the surface. Oil is visible on a patch of land that is roughly 10,000 square feet in size. However, the majority of the leaked oil remains underground. California's fire marshal has launched an investigation into the spill.

The company claims that, “no release [of oil] is acceptable“. However, Shell's history of spills mirrors the experience of all oil operations. The extraction and transportation of oil is subject to spills. This is an unavoidable fact of life.

In addition to being the leading cause of climate change, oil spills contaminate soil and water with predictable regularity. In recent days there has been an oil spill at Three Oaks High School in Summerside, Prince County, Prince Edward Island.

Every year there are thousands of spills around the world. A summary of some of the fossil fuel spills in North America last year reveals just how common they are. These spills illustrate the dangers of transporting fossil fuels.

Related
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Oil Spill in Peru is a Life Threatening Emergency for Local Indigenous People (Video)
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Infographic: 13 Oil Spills in 30 Days
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half
After a Failed Cover-up Shell Sub-Contractor Pleads Guilty
Greenpeace forces Lego to Dump Shell
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic
Another Offshore Oil Leak this Time from Shell

Read More»

Summary of Fossil Fuel Spills in 2015 (Videos)

Oil spills continued to be a problem in 2015 with a number of major incidents in North America. These spills contaminated both land and waterways and prompted the evacuation of local citizens. Whether by pipe, ship, rail or truck, there are well founded concerns about the safety of transporting fossil fuels. These concerns add weight to the argument that we need to expedite the shift away from fossil fuels. Many consecutive years with substantial numbers of spills illustrate the dangers associated with transporting fossil fuels.

Last year in North America alone there were 34 significant spills starting in January and continuing right through to December.  A New York Times report found that in North Dakota alone there were more than 18.4 million gallons of oils and chemicals spilled, leaked, or misted into the state’s air, land, and waterways between 2006 and 2014. The amount of fossil fuels spilled in the Canadian oil producing province of Alberta is even worse.

Here is a review of 33 fossil fuel leaks that occurred in North America in 2015.

January 6 - Williston, North Dakota: A ruptured pipeline operated by Summit Midstream leaked three million gallons of brine into Blacktail Creek and Little Muddy River, tributaries of the Missouri River.

January 14 - Jackson, Mississippi: A section of the Gulf South natural gas pipeline ruptured and exploded. .

January 17 - Glendive, Montana: The Poplar Pipeline running beneath the Yellowstone River ruptured, spilling some 31,000 gallons of crude oil into the water contaminating water supplies for nearby residents.


January 23 - Tioga, North Dakota: Hess Bakken Investments reported a brine spill of more than 100,000 gallons.

January 26 - Brooke County, West Virginia: The 1,265-mile Appalachia-to-Texas Express ethane pipeline ruptured and exploded.


February 4 - Dubuque, Iowa: An 81-car Canadian Pacific freight train derailed and caught fire in a remote area north of Dubuque on the banks of the Mississippi River.

February 14 - Gogama, Ontario: A 100-car Canadian National Railway train carrying crude from Alberta’s tar-sands region to eastern Canada derailed and caught fire in a remote wooded area.

February 16 - Boomer, West Virginia: A 109-car CSX train carrying millions of pounds of crude oil derailed and exploded shutting down a local water treatment plant.  Three oil train wrecks in February beg the question, how many such disasters will it take before we realize that rail transport of fossil fuels is not safe.


March 1 - Peace River, Alberta: A Murphy Oil Company pipeline leaked up to 17,000 barrels of petroleum product into a type of North American bog habitat called muskeg.

March 5 - Galena, Illinois: A 105-car BNSF Railway train carrying Bakken crude from North Dakota derailed and caught fire near the Mississippi River. Twenty-one cars came off the tracks, and five caught fire.


March 7 - Gogama, Ontario: A 94-car Canadian National Railway train carrying Alberta crude oil derailed and burst into flames two miles northwest of the town of Gogama contaminating part of the Makami River, in the Mattagami River System.

March 9 - Houston, Texas: An unknown quantity of toxic chemicals spilled into the Houston Ship Channel after a bulk carrier collided with a Danish tanker carrying 216,000 barrels of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary-butyl ether, or MTBE.


March 9 - Williston, North Dakota: A truck overflow spilled 1,680 gallons of brine, affecting a nearby creek.

April 11 - Arlington, Texas: Vantage Energy spilled thousands of gallons of fracking fluid that poured out of storm drains and into the streets.

April 13, 2015 - English Bay, Vancouver, B.C.: A ship MV Marathassa leaked 2.3 tonnes or 3,100 liters of fuel.


April 17 - Fresno, California: A Pacific Gas & Electric natural gas pipeline exploded at the Fresno County Sheriff's Office gun range, sending a fireball 100 feet into the air and injuring 14 people, two critically.

May 5 - Drumheller, Alberta: TransCanada’s Sieu Creek natural gas transmission line spilled an undetermined volume of sweet natural gas and hydrocarbon liquid onto agricultural land during planned maintenance.

May 6 - Heimdal, North Dakota: At least six tanker cars caught fire after a BNSF oil train derailed.


May 19 - Goleta, California: An underground pipeline owned by Houston-based Plains All American Pipeline ruptured, leaking up to as much as 330 tonnes. Other estimates suggest that a total of 101,000 gallons of crude oil was spilled with an estimated 21,000 gallons leaking into the Pacific Ocean. Nine miles worth of oil slicks eventually washed up on the shores including Refugio and El Capitan state beaches. This spill is in many respects a repeat of a 1969 spill.


June 3 - Little Rock, Arkansas: A Spectra Energy Corp. natural gas pipeline running beneath the Arkansas River ruptured and exploded, releasing four million cubic feet of gas.

June 9 - Unityville, Pennsylvania: A Williams Gas natural gas pipeline ruptured and leaked, resulting in an explosion and fire.

July 10 - Highland, Illinois: A spill at the Plains All American Pipeline Pocahontas pump station sent 4,200 gallons of crude oil into Silver Creek, which empties into Silver Lake, the water reservoir for the city of Highland.

July 10 - Barwick, Ontario: Fourteen cars of a CN train derailed leaking an estimated 12,000 gallons of petroleum distillates.

July 14 - Culbertson, Montana: A total of 22 BNSF cars came off the tracks spilling 35,000 gallons of crude oil.

July 17 - Fort McMurray, Alberta: A high-pressure pipeline at Nexen Energy's Long Lake oil sands facility spilled five million liters of emulsion (a mixture of bitumen, sand, and water) damaging 16,000 square meters of musket habitat.


August 14 - Chateh, Alberta: A NuVista Energy pipeline leaked an estimated 100,000 liters of bitumen emulsion onto the Hay Lake Indian Reserve.

September 19 - Scotland, South Dakota: A 98-car BNSF tanker train carrying ethanol derailed in a rural area, leaking the volatile liquid into pastureland, where it caught fire.

October 23 - Porter Ranch, California: A natural gas well at a Southern California Gas storage facility continues to leak methane at a rate of more than 66,500 pounds per hour or the equivalent of seven million cars per day.


October 27 - Brownsville, Pennsylvania:A coal train derailed and spilled its load along the Monongahela River near the Alicia Transshipment Facility.

November 7 - Alma, Wisconsin: Twenty-five cars of a BNSF train went off the tracks near the Mississippi River, and leaked 20,000 gallons of ethanol into the water.

November 8 - Watertown, Wisconsin: A 100-car Canadian Pacific train carrying Bakken crude oil derailed in southeastern Wisconsin leaking about 1,000 gallons of product.

November 9 - Des Moines County, Iowa: Two engines and 19 loaded coal cars derailed and overturned when a freight train struck a road grader on the tracks.

December 1 - Watford City, North Dakota: A pump leak at a disposal well owned by Wyoming-based True Oil LLC spilled 17,640 gallons of brine.

Here is a review of the five biggest oil spills of all time:



Related
Video - Train Carrying Oil Derails Illustrating the Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Video - Truck Carrying Oil Crashes and Explodes Illustrating the Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels
The Costs of Offshore Drilling

Read More»

Keystone XL is Rejected Energy East to Follow

TransCanada's tar sands pipelines are being thwarted at every turn. US President Barack Obama has officially rejected the Keystone XL and the new Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to cancel the Energy East.

President Obama rejected the Keystone citing the economics associated with low oil prices. He also said that building the KXL would be inconsistent with US leadership on climate change. The $7 billion dollar, 1,179 mile long KXL would have ferried 800,000 barrels a day of heavy crude oil from the tar sand pits in Alberta Canada to refineries on the Gulf of Mexico.

Last week TransCanada announced a new route for the Energy East pipeline that excluded an oil export terminal in Cacouna northeast of Quebec city. The terminal was abandoned 6 months ago due to a public outcry over the impact the project would have on the habitat of beluga whales.

The $12 billion, 4,600-kilometre Energy East pipeline would transport 1.1 million barrels of crude each day. from Alberta to Canada's east coast. It is scheduled to be completed in 2020 the year that a hoped for global climate agreement would come into effect.

The change comes a matter of days after TransCanada requested a pause in the US State Department's consideration of the Keystone XL pipeline. The request was subsequently denied and then on November 6th the KXL pipeline was cancelled outright after many years of wrangling.

In response to the news, TransCanada said that the fight for the Keystone XL is not over. They are also working on ways of keeping the Energy East afloat. They have submitted new plans for the Energy East to Canada's National Energy Board. The revised route for Energy East pipeline excludes a port in Quebec and goes directly to Irving Oil's massive refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick.

While the company is trying to put a brave face on the cancellation of the Keystone XL and the rerouting of the Energy East, they are having an increasingly difficult time moving forward with their pipedreams.

The situation is destined to get worse for TransCanada as the new Liberal government has promised to prevent oil shipping along Canada's west coast and cancel the Energy East outright. TransCanada explained the rerouting indicated that their decision was made after "conducting thorough studies and consulting with many local communities," Energy East president John Soini said.

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard has questioned the economic, employment and environmental benefits of the Energy East and he said that his province will not just be a passageway for the pipeline. Citing climate and other concerns, environmental groups oppose the building of the pipeline altogether.

Related
A Brief Review of the Keystone XL Saga
Belugas Slow Energy East Pipeline Project
The Energy East Pipedream
Environmental Action Opposing the Energy East Pipeline
Quebecers Protest Energy East Pipeline and Terminal
Environmental Leaders Comment on the Energy East Pipeline
Cities In Ontario and Quebec Opposing Energy East
Video - Stop the Energy East Pipeline
Ahead of Obama's Rejection TransCanada Fails to Suspend the KXL
Why the Keystone XL Pipedream Must Die
Reasons Why the Keystone XL is a Pipedream
Keystone XL will Emit 4 Times More Pollution than Originally Thought
The Fate of the Keystone XL: The Ball is in Your Court Mr President
Refuting the Rationale for Approving the Keystone XL
Comparison of the Keystone XL and Renewable Energy
How Come the Keystone XL is so Hard to Kill
The Politics of the Obama Administration's Keystone Delay

Read More»

Ahead of Obama's Rejection TransCanada Fails to Suspend Ruling on KXL

Shortly after President Obama announced that he would decide the fate of the Keystone XL before the end of his term, TransCanada pipelines submitted a request to suspend their application.

With good reason TransCanada believes that Obama will not rule in their favor. Now that the Iran crisis is behind him Obama will likely use the remainder of his term to focus on climate change.

 Cancelling the KXL would make sense for a President who sees combating climate change as a legacy issue. He has already enacted a slate of actions including improved mileage mandates for American vehicles and the Clean Power Plan.

It would be very hard to marry climate action with the KXL that would ferry 830,000 barrels a day of some of the dirtiest energy on earth.

The KXL would carry tar sands, they are a major carbon bomb that could seriously undermine efforts to reign in emissions. As James Hansen has explained, exploiting the tar sands would mean "game over" for staving off climate change.

The case against the pipeline is also buoyed by massive ongoing protests. Nebraska farmers are fighting against the expropriation of their lands to build the pipeline and environmentally concerned people around the world have come out to say no to the KXL.

The President has previously questioned  the economic benefits of the pipeline. Now these benefits are further compounded by low oil prices.  

TransCanada is hoping that a Republican will win the federal election next year and approve the pipeline. All the Republican presidential candidates have shown unequivocal support for the KXL.

The Obama administration rejected TransCanada's request for suspension on November 4.

Related
Ahead of Obama's Rejection TransCanada Fails to Suspend the KXL
President Obama Vetoes KXL Legislation
Senate Passes KXL Bill
Why the Keystone XL Pipedream Must Die
Sanders Keystone XL Amendment
Video - Sen. Elizabeth Warren on the Keystone XL
Republicans trying to Force KXL on the White House
Keystone XL Loses Another Battle but the War Rages On
Republicans Keep Pushing Keystone XL Pipeline
Republican Congress to Push the Keystone XL
Reasons Why the Keystone XL is a Pipedream
Keystone XL will Emit 4 Times More Pollution than Originally Thought
Buying Support for the Keystone XL
Business Leaders, Scientists, Economists and Ordinary People Reject the Keystone XL
A Brief Review of the Keystone XL Saga
Keystone XL will Fly or Fail Depending on Who you Talk to
The Fate of the Keystone XL: The Ball is in Your Court Mr President
Refuting the Rationale for Approving the Keystone XL
Comparison of the Keystone XL and Renewable Energy
How Come the Keystone XL is so Hard to Kill

Read More»

Cities, Investors and a Prince Support Fossil Fuel Divestment

What do Prince Charles, Investors and the City of Oslo all have in common? They are all recent advocates of divestment from fossil fuels. What started as a grass roots movement has blossomed into a global effort to call for a future with integrity and common sense. Fueled by the divestment movement, the transition to a more sustainable economy is underway.

Fossil fuel divestment is the fastest growing movement in the world with a 50 fold increase in 2014. If we are to reign in emissions we must radically reduce our use of fossil fuels. This is particularly important as we head down the final stretch towards COP21.

The growth of the divestment movement is increasingly mainstream with a total of more than $2.6 trillion having been divested so far. While this will not bankrupt the fossil fuel industry it does send stigmatize the industry and it sends an important message that is resonating around the world.

There are those who say that fossil fuel divestment is little more than a symbolic act. However, a University of Oxford report, authored by the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, disagrees saying, “The outcome of the stigmatisation process, which the fossil fuel divestment campaign has now triggered...poses the most far-reaching threat to fossil fuel companies and the vast energy value chain. Any direct impacts pale in comparison.”

After Paris began restricting cars in the city, Oslo has proposed a ban on private combustion engine vehicles in the city center after 2019. Commuters will have access to more bike lanes and subsidies for the purchase of electric bikes. Even more significantly the newly elected city government has proposed plans to remove fossil fuels from its $9 billion pension fund.

Cities like Seattle pledged to divest a couple of years ago, this move was followed by similar resolutions along the west coast including Portland, Oregon, San Francisco, Santa Monica. Other cities in the US, Europe and Australia have also followed suit. In March London passed a vote calling on the mayor to divest. If it proceeds as planned, Olso would be the first capital city to pledge to divest. These moves are part of the city's effort to adopt a comprehensive plan to slash GHG emissions in half compared to 1990 levels by 2020, and reduce automobile traffic by 20 percent by 2019 and 30 percent by 2030.

There is a powerful logic driving the divestment movement. Buoyed by a powerful moral argument, faith groups are also divesting in droves. A wide range of groups are also divesting from fossil fuels for both moral and practical reasons. These groups range from  educational institutions (including Stanford University’s $19 billion divestment) to pension funds (including $850 billion Norwegian sovereign wealth fund).

Investors are increasingly concerned about fossil fuels. They are aware of the volatility and risks associated with such investments. To stay within our carbon budget and to keep the world from warming more than 2 degrees Celsius we will need to keep the vast majority of known fossil fuel reserves in the ground ultimately stranding these assets and rendering them worthless. This puts huge amounts of oil, gas and coal investments in jeopardy.

A wide range of organizations have expressed concern about the long term value of fossil fuels including the Bank of England, HSBC, the International Energy Agency and the World Bank.  Businesses, utilities and investors are already being impacted by the divestment movement. 

Among those who explore the risks associated with fossil fuels is Hyewon Kong, M.Sc., CFA. She is an Associate Portfolio Manager at AGF Investments Inc., she believes that investors have a role to play in fighting climate change and building a low-carbon, clean economy.

Kong recently moderated a panel discussion in Toronto called The Business of Climate Change, a conversation about the threats posed by climate change and the economic opportunities offered by the global transformation to a low-carbon economy. At this discussion investment bankers, portfolio managers, financial advisors and insurance brokers focused on the issue of climate change.

Investors are often criticized for failing to integrate morality into their buying decisions, however, they are quick to recognize threats to the value of their investments. The economic impacts of unchecked climate change would have economy wide repercussions from basics like food and water, to global infrastructure and the health of humans and ecosystems.

"In our view, the growth of the fossil fuel divestment campaign has been encouraging because it has helped focus the investment community’s attention on the risks, and opportunities, of climate change," Kong explains.

Kong goes on to suggest alternatives to investing in fossil fuels:

"By focusing on the long term, tracking multiple environmental objectives and aligning with key sustainability themes, investors can focus on allocating capital to companies that are offering sustainability solutions...At AGF, our solutions-based approach involves giving investors the opportunity to participate in innovations that are disrupting carbon-intensive industries, such as low-carbon energy and power technologies, waste management and pollution control, waste and waste water solutions, and environmental health and safety."

Prince Charles, recently told some of the world's leading investors that it is vital that finance markets let politicians know that we are serious about acting on climate change. Siting the risks to the financial community, the heir to the British throne said it is important to invest in low carbon projects that will help to keep the world from warming more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. He further stated that such investments need not hurt returns. “All investors must decide whether they are future-takers or future-makers,” he said.

Fossil fuels have immense financial power and influence and they are still the driving force behind the global economy and investment. However, the divestment movement is helping to power a global shift away from fossil fuels and towards low carbon energy sources. Increasingly the fossil fuel industry is seen as the pariah that it is and divestment has played a salient role in helping to bring this awareness into the popular consciousness.

Related
Why Divesting from Fossil Fuels is the Only Option
Fossil Fuel Divestment: Investors Businesses and Power Companies
Fossil Fuel Divestment and Stranded Assets
Why We Must Divest from Fossil Fuels
Why the Fossil Fuel Industry has Reason to be Nervous
Norway Pension Fund Divests from Coal and Invests in Renewables
Rockefeller Brothers Fund to Divest from Fossil Fuels
Risk Assessment Causes Swedish Pension Fund to Divest from Fossil Fuels
United Nations Endorses Divesting from Fossil Fuels
European Commissioner for Climate Action Urges Development Banks to Divest from Fossil Fuels
The Growing Strength of the Fossil Fuel Divestment Movement
The Divestment Movement Comes of Age
Why You Should Divest from Fossil Fuels and Invest in Clean Energy
Video - Why You Should Divest from Fossil Fuels
Infographic - Why You Should Sell Your Fossil Fuel Stock Now (DC Divest)
Video - Growing Momentum for Fossil Fuel Divestment
Divesting from Fossil Fuels will Soon be a Fiduciary Duty
The Global Divest-Invest Coalition and Campaign
Divestment from Coal Foreshadows the Fate of All Fossil Fuels
Climate Change is a Heath Problem and Divestment is the Cure

Read More»

The Arctic is still not Safe from Drilling

Although the Obama administration has effectively shut down Arctic drilling the region is far from being protected from the dangers of  fossil fuel extraction. The President has imposed stringent lease conditions on Arctic oil extraction but other Northern nations do not have such restrictive national laws. Countries  including Russia and Norway continue to set their sights on Arctic oil.

Arctic drilling is a source of concern for many reasons including the risks of a spill.  According to Greenpeace there is a 75 percent chance of a serious spill. This would prove catastrophic in this fragile and remote ecosystem.

There is also the overarching issue of emissions contributions at a time when we already have more known oil reserves that can be safely burned. According to the US Geological Society the Arctic holds up to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves. Ironically, global warming caused largely by fossil fuels makes Arctic drilling even more attractive as there is now less ice to contend with.

Shell withdrew from the Arctic because the project became non-viable due to low oil prices. Citing "current market conditions" the Department of Interior has canceled two future auctions of Arctic offshore oil leases in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. They have also denied requests from Shell and other oil companies to secure more time on their existing leases. They have also indicated that existing leases will not be renewed after their expiration in 2020.

The Obama administration appears to have brought Arctic drilling to an end for the remainder of the President's term. Further, all the leading Democratic contenders for president have indicated that they are against Arctic drilling. However, this does not preclude a return of oil companies to the American Arctic at some future date. If a Republican were to take control of the white house we would almost certainly see such a return.  Republicans in Congress, including Alaska's Lisa Murkowski have already made it clear that they want to extend the life of drilling leases.

While US companies may lead the race to extract Arctic oil, other countries are also looking to exploit the regions fossil fuel reserves. Russia's Arctic drilling operations have been delayed by sanctions over the Ukraine, however early in 2015 cooperation between Russian and Norwegian oil companies suggested that Arctic drilling would proceed despite the sanctions.

For example, the Norwegian company Statoil has increasingly close relations with the Russian oil company Rosneft and together they are planning to drill four wells in Russia. Rosneft has a stake in a license in the Barents Sea operated by Statoil. Russia's second biggest oil producer Lukoil is also working with Norwegian and Swedish firms.

It is only due to tensions over the ownership of the remote Arctic Svalbard islands that we are not seeing even more Arctic drilling cooperation between Norway and Russia.

Related
What Activists can Learn from Shell's Arctic Retreat
Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half
The Unacceptable Risks of Arctic Drilling
Video - The Arctic is Under Threat from Shell and Gazprom
The Race to Exploit the Arctic's Resources Ignores the Costs
Oil Spills in Arctic Waters (White Paper) 
Shell Pauses its Arctic Drilling for 2013
Video of the Oil Rig Belonging to Shell that Ran aground in Alaska
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic
Lawsuit Protecting the Arctic from Oil and Gas

Read More»

The Cost of Oil: BP Reaches $20 Billion Settlement with the Federal Government

In the largest single entity settlement in the Department of Justice's history, BP will have to pay $20.8 for its role in the infamous Gulf of Mexico oil spill in April, 2010. Since the disastrous explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform BP has been engaged in protracted negotiations with the federal government. Now the Department of Justice have finalized the settlement with BP. The settlement comes after years of legal wrangling. In July, the Supreme Court denied the company’s appeal to block benefits for those not directly affected by the spill.

As reported by The Hill, the fine breaks down as follows

• $5.5 billion to settle civil claims under the Clean Water Act
• $7.1 billion for environmental restoration work
• $700 million to compensate for still-unknown damages to natural resources in the region
• $4.9 million to Gulf Coast states affected by the spill
• $1 billion to local communities. Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas will split that portion of the settlement.
• BP has also already spent more than $1 billion on environmental restoration work in the area

Almost $9 billion of the settlement money will be used by for a Gulf restoration fund. This money will be invested in coastal and habitat repair, water quality improvement in wetlands and recreational projects in the region.

Biologists have observed that the 3.19 million gallons of oil that pored into the Gulf is having long term effects that continue to this day.

"This is still the largest environmental penalty under the Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Act, ever," Attorney General Loretta Lynch said. "BP is receiving the punishment it deserves while also providing critical compensation to the damage to the Gulf region."

The punishment will serve as a deterrent that will hopefully prevent similar disasters in the future.

"The steep penalty should inspire BP and its peers to take every measure necessary to ensure that nothing like this can ever happen again," Lynch said.

The $20.8 billion fine is separate from the class-action settlement with businesses and individuals affected by the spill.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy noted that the settlement includes $700 million to address any potential environmental damages that officials have yet to discover.

"Justice is not about dumping a pile of money and walking away," McCarthy said. "It is about investing in sustainable ways that empower and strengthen the Gulf communities over the long term."

The settlement still needs to be approved by a federal court.

Related
BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill
The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill
BP's Gulf Oil Spill: Summary of Research Evidence Five Years Later
The BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Five Years Later
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?
Infographic - BP Oil Spill 4 Years Later
Video - The Ongoing Impacts of the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
The Cost of Oil: BP Barred from Doing Business with the US
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for Tens of Billions
BP's Corporate Irresponsibility
Responsibility for the Costs of the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Offshore Drilling
Managing the Massive Gulf Oil Spill
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half

Shell may be drilling the Chukchi Sea off the coast of Alaska this summer but they will only be able to do half of the drilling they had planned. On Tuesday June 30, the Obama administration announced that it has limited shell's drilling plans in the Arctic citing wildlife protections. The federal government has effectively prevented them from simultaneously boring two wells.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that they want to reduce the noise from the drilling and they are using a 2013 regulation that prohibits drilling less than 15 miles between wells. Shell's plan was to bore two holes 9 miles apart.

Federal regulations demand that Shell have two rigs in the region in case an emergency forces the company to bore a relief well. However, they had planned to put the second rig to work simultaneously drilling a second exploratory well nearby.

This means that while Shell has moved two drilling rigs into the Burger prospect, only one exploratory well can be drilled at a time. Shell will spend $1 billion on the exploratory drilling in the Burger prospect this year bringing their total spend on drilling in the Arctic Ocean to more than $7 billion.

While this will reduce the amount of drilling that will take place in Chukchi Sea this summer, it will likely lengthen the amount of time Shell will be in the Arctic by a number of years. Shell's two rigs Transocean Polar Pioneer and the Noble Discoverer have a very limited drilling window that runs during the ice-out period between July 15th and September 28th.

Before it can begin drilling in the Arctic Shell still needs one more drilling permit from the Interior Department's Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement.

The last time Shell tried to drill in the Arctic it did not go well. They lost control of their rig and it ran aground. It was later revealed that they had inadequate safety equipment.

Related
The Unacceptable Risks of Arctic Drilling 
Video - The Arctic is Under Threat from Shell and Gazprom
The Race to Exploit the Arctic's Resources Ignores the Costs
Oil Spills in Arctic Waters (White Paper) 
Shell Pauses its Arctic Drilling for 2013
Video of the Oil Rig Belonging to Shell that Ran aground in Alaska
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic

Read More»