Alaska Still Struggles to Recover from Exxon Valdez Spill

To: cripplecreek

21 posted on 03/24/2009 4:39:13 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)

To: Justice Department

I already know how to post an article on FR, Mr. Eric Holder.

22 posted on 03/24/2009 4:44:18 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist ("President Obama, your agenda is not new, it's not change, and it's not hope" - Rush Limbaugh 02/28)

Yeah, I didn’t think the spill was that big a deal either.

23 posted on 03/24/2009 4:44:41 PM PDT by Jacquerie (More Central Planning is not the solution to the failure of Central Planning.)

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

There’s nothing wrong with saying that the oil spill was a huge catastrophe for that area. Sometimes really bad things happen. This was a bad thing. I was there and I saw it first hand. It’s hard to describe how enormous the problem was.

Sure, there are natural oil springs all over and all the time. But you also have to consider concentration in one place as well. One guy peeing in a lake doesn’t pollute it, but a whole city doing it will. It’s all about concentration and scale.

That said, I also think that much of the cleanup effort did more harm than good. Turns out that critters that live on the beaches, while they don’t like thick gooey crude very much, they like being steam-cleaned even less. In my opinion, the cleanup effort was meaningless and a waste of time and resources. And it left mostly sterile beaches.

There is phenomenal natural recovery happening. Crude oil is a natural, organic substance. Nature will eventually take care of it. It won’t be back to “normal” for a long time yet. But it will recover. Many of the badly oiled beaches now look much as they did before the spill, though you can overturn rocks and still find pockets of sticky crude.

It was a bad deal, and it would have been better if it didn’t happen. But it did, and it was probably inevitable. Some better oil-containment preparations would’ve helped, but wouldn’t have totally got it all. A double-hull wouldn’t have prevented it. Fact is, a human being (the 3rd mate) made a very ordinary human mistake, and that sort of thing is always going to happen. Sometimes they’re going to make mistakes that really suck. It’s part of the price of civilization.

IMHO. :-)

24 posted on 03/24/2009 4:47:14 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)

You misread my position.

25 posted on 03/24/2009 4:48:27 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)

Zulima Palacio is in big trouble, there’s not one slight against Palin.

26 posted on 03/24/2009 4:52:54 PM PDT by MaxMax (RINO=RAT!)

You misread my position.

What is it?

27 posted on 03/24/2009 4:56:33 PM PDT by Jacquerie (More Central Planning is not the solution to the failure of Central Planning.)

28 posted on 03/24/2009 4:57:45 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)

I live 10 miles from Prince William Sound. I fish and hunt there on a regular basis. The bounty of salmon, crab, shrimp,and venison in my freezer attests to the fact that is fully recovered. The only areas that are sterile is where extensive "clean up" was done. Otherwise, you cannot find any evidence that the spill occurred. Yeah, you can find an occasional "tarball" but they have been proven over and over to come from naturally occurring oil seeps.

Please don't confuse the DU sleepers with facts. ;-)

29 posted on 03/24/2009 5:04:28 PM PDT by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the occupation media.)

Hey Joe you disappoint on this one...I was in Alaska in 1991. Cruise with 7 ports of call including Valdez. No oil in the harbors outside of what one would expect in any harbor that has boats...Was there again 2 years ago...The place is great....

30 posted on 03/24/2009 5:25:00 PM PDT by goat granny

“Oil Remains: The Persistence, Toxicity, and Impact of Exxon Valdez Oil

Visitors today experience the spectacular scenery and wildlife of Prince William Sound and the North Gulf of Alaska. However, one of the most stunning revelations of Trustee Council-funded monitoring over the last ten years is that Exxon Valdez oil persists in the environment and in places, is nearly as toxic as it was the first few weeks after the spill.”

31 posted on 03/24/2009 5:43:26 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)

32 posted on 03/24/2009 5:47:13 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy ( As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities. - D)

Perhaps this group is fishing for more money? Went whale watching, found whales no oil...saw seals (hundreds) along the shore, eagles thick as flies... bald and golden..also saw some deer near one of the towns...Mendenhall glacier was great..I just find this hard to believe...I still love most of your pictures and posts..you sure do find interesting things....

33 posted on 03/24/2009 5:59:49 PM PDT by goat granny

A State and Federal Partnership

The Trustee Council was formed to oversee restoration of the injured ecosystem through the use of the $900 million civil settlement. The Council consists of three state and three federal trustees (or their designees). The Council is advised by members of the public and by members of the scientific community.

34 posted on 03/24/2009 7:01:38 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)

I do not agree with the premise of the article.

35 posted on 03/24/2009 7:31:38 PM PDT by SeaWolf (Orwell must have foreseen the 21st Century US Congress when he wrote 1984)

36 posted on 03/24/2009 7:38:40 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)

Thanks for the link, I am familiar with it, check it every now and then to see what they are up to. I am still a doubter.

37 posted on 03/25/2009 12:45:24 PM PDT by SeaWolf (Orwell must have foreseen the 21st Century US Congress when he wrote 1984)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794