Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Causes, Cleanup, and Violations

Introduction

Few environmental disasters are as well-known or conjure as immediate a memory as the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989. Until the British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon explosion in 2010, this was the single largest oil-spill disaster in U.S. history. It remains, even today, a significant determinant of the ecological realities that define the Alaskan coastline where the Exxon tanker ran aground. As the discussion below will show, the disaster was marked by a series of irregularities, regulatory oversights, and sheer carelessness on the part of Exxon and its crew. These factors converged to create one of the most challenging environmental response and cleanup efforts known to date. The discussion that follows describes those efforts as well as the corrective actions taken to redress the disaster, the agencies that participated in the response, and the regulatory violations that made such a disaster all but inevitable.

Summary of the Disaster

According to Cleveland (2010), on March 24, 1989, the tanker named the Exxon Valdez departed from Valdez, Alaska, headed for Southern California carrying 53 million gallons of crude oil. The tanker struck Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound just off the coast of Alaska and, according to Cleveland, emptied at least 11 million gallons of oil into the ocean in the space of just six hours. Affecting roughly 1,100 miles of Alaskan coastline, the event had devastating implications for the marine life, wildlife, and human communities in the region.

The causes of the accident were assessed in an initial investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which reported five likely contributing causes to the grounding. Cleveland reports the NTSB's findings as follows: "(1) The third mate failed to properly maneuver the vessel, possibly due to fatigue and excessive workload; (2) the master failed to provide a proper navigation watch, possibly due to impairment from alcohol; (3) Exxon Shipping Company failed to supervise the master and provide a rested and sufficient crew for the Exxon Valdez; (4) the U.S. Coast Guard failed to provide an effective vessel traffic system; and (5) effective pilot and escort services were lacking." (Cleveland, p. 1)

Corrective Actions

First and foremost among corrective actions was the assumption of cleanup responsibilities. Cleveland reports this as the single largest and most complex cleanup effort in environmental disaster history. Because of the remoteness of the location, the rugged terrain, and the treacherous weather conditions, traditional cleanup methods and supply chains were severely hindered. At its height, between April and September of 1989, the cleanup effort involved more than 11,000 personnel, 1,400 vessels, and 85 aircraft (Cleveland, p. 1).

In addition to the cleanup operations, the United States government responded with the passage of federal legislation aimed at forcing the oil industry to improve its regulatory oversight in matters of environmental protection. According to the Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R), the federal government pushed through the rapid passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which called for stricter adherence to environmental standards as well as the imposition of new, more stringent regulations governing oil transport. The events also created an impetus for the permanent presence of environmental monitoring groups in the region, particularly to observe the ecological effects of the disaster over long periods of time.

In light of that ongoing monitoring, it is clear that, despite the various corrective actions taken, the spill's consequences are permanent for the region's human and wildlife inhabitants. According to the OR&R, "in the years since the Exxon Valdez spilled its cargo of crude oil on Bligh Reef, many parts of the Alaskan marine environment have begun to show signs of significant physical and biological change: waters have warmed, ice has receded, and populations of fish and mammals have declined." (OR&R, p. 1)

Conclusion

The Deepwater Horizon disaster helps to demonstrate how little has truly changed in two decades. Even as environmental concerns grow ever more pressing, oil companies continue to act with relative impunity. The sheer profitability of the industry keeps it insulated from many of the safety and environmental standards that apply to other industries. As the most precious finite commodity in the global economy, crude oil operates within its own international orbit, one in which domestic environmental laws and safety regulatory standards may be easily bypassed. As the Exxon Valdez events and the Deepwater Horizon disaster thereafter demonstrate unequivocally, only the occasional catastrophic disaster serves to illuminate the constancy of irregular, illicit, and illegal practices on the part of the oil industry as a whole.

Works Cited

Bluemink, E. (2010). Size of Exxon spill remains disputed. Anchorage Daily News.

Cleveland, C. (2010). Exxon Valdez oil spill. The Encyclopedia of Earth.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2011). Exxon Valdez. EPA.gov.

ExxonMobil. (2010). The Valdez oil spill. Exxonmobil.com.

Leveson, N. G. (2005). Software system safety. MIT.edu.

Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R). (2008). Exxon Valdez oil spill. NOAA National Ocean Service.

Palast, G. (2008). Court rewards Exxon for Valdez oil spill. Gregpalast.com.