Replies

The oil spills in Alaska differ in nature substantially from an atoll in the pacific ocean. If you don't believe me, come up here in the winter when most of the new well drilling takes place. With these spills taking place in the winter, the material spilled is usually on ice or snow, which is chipped up, then the material is transfered to an ice melter where it is turned to liquid and the spilled substances are seperated off and properly disposed of. I am speaking from my experience of 16 years in the oilfield industry in Alaska. I have wittnessed something as innocuous as tobacco juice spit on the side of the road classified as a hazardous spill, no joke. I submit to you that it is only in the interest of job preservation or continued funding that these EPA and safety/spill employees mandate the documentation of these minor spills.

Do you have any idea of the training required by the oil companies for Alaska based oilfield employees? I have been through hours of training in hazmat and oilspill related classes. This training is not job specific, instead it is required for all oilfield related jobs in the state of Alaska.

The oilfields in Alaska are the most enviromentally sound on the face of the earth, and for them to be characterized in any other manner only serves a political or financial agenda of the articles originator and his/her sympathizers.

I will first readily admit that I don't have your experience in Alaska. I posted the article because it is clearly something to consider when considering drilling somewhere else in a wildlife refuge; no matter how hard everyone tries, in a complex technological system, accidents happen. Most accidents tend to be minor and are rarely a problem. Major accidents kinda by definition tend to be a problem. Efforts should be expended to avoid major accidents.

The report, which is the only source I've seen, has a timeline of major events and a brief description of what was affected. Spills on ice are noted. The proximity of some spills to a nearby river is also noted.

Actually, I consider it more environmentally dangerous that an oil storage facility could be threatened by a lahar (meltwater/mud torrent) generated by a volcano. Who approved the site study for THAT one?

1989-90 Eruption of Redoubt Volcano, Alaska, and the First Test Case of a USGS Lahar-Detection System (take a look at it for the pictures, if nothing else)

Stop. You have too many facts for the liberals here. It could kill them. Then your going to fell real bad.