Monday, May 10, 2010
Exxon Valdez: Example for an Ecosystem
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The Overview
Response the Last
What Needs to Be Done?
Independence and Political Significance: Response 3
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
The Politics of Disaster
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Response the Second: Doming (yes, ok, I really love that word)
This article focuses on a technological aspect of the oil spill: a set of technology that could be used to help clean up or stop the spill. The traditional methods we hear about are mostly using booms (no, not as in cannon, this actually refers to long barriers used to contain spills), dispersing the oil with chemicals, or burning (yeah, sounds like a great idea. See this problem we have? Let’s set it on fire!) Right now, they are mostly using booms to try and contain the spill as they set down a plan of action. One of these plans involves a method called the dome technique.
The dome technique, or doming, involves placing a very large steel box (125 tons, four stories tall) over the very large well gushing oil, trapping the oil in the box and consistently funneling the oil through a pipeline to a vessel on the surface. Doming hasn’t been used on such a big spill before, but they want to give it a try. The problem is, the dome is already risky, and in order for it to be effective they would actually need multiple domes. And of course, this is only a temporary solution.
You can tell by the frantic nature of the solution that this spill is a pretty big deal. In fact, this spill seems to be redefining the game in what can be done about spills. The varied approaches to dealing with the spill gives an insight into something – we really don’t know much about this spill. How it happened (the exact mechanical malfunction) is not understood, the estimate of how much oil will spill has changed and nearly doubled after the first few days. This spill is obviously a catastrophe (any map of how wide it has spread can show that, especially taking into account how deep it may go) but it seems the regulators may not know enough to pick how to properly contain it yet.
Besides being from a well-renowned and respected news source, this report comes without a hint of bias and with many direct quotes from important people involved, so to me its credibility feels sound. It isn’t making ganders that are improbable or trying to play anything up, just focusing on the task at hand – detailing one of the many options being considered to deal with this crisis.
What's doming got to do with it?
First Response
This article seems to be a call to quell the masses. Although it goes through the ‘usual suspects’ of facts about the spill, calling on the expert guesses, but then begins to detail and compare previous oil spills. It brings in the famous Exxon Valdez, as well as the Ixtoc I and “oil spilled by retreating Iraqi forces when they left Kuwait in 1991”. This article leans towards the social, reassuring us that this big and scary disaster is not the biggest and scariest one we’ve seen. Yes, it admits, this crisis is a huge deal for the environment, the economy, and the oil industry, that shouldn’t be taken lightly. But overall it leans in the direction of reassurance – taking all those facts and muting them with previous oil spills that are all cleaned up and dandy now. While not obviously pointing it out, this article definitely wants its reader to believe that this huge disaster will be handled properly, ending on a quote about the resilience of the gulf and giving the whole thing a title that leans towards the nonchalant. Though I can understand the need to comfort people at a time when it looks like black sludge will be taking over miles of ocean and shoreline, the way this person frames the ‘don’t worry, be happy’ vibe doesn’t seem completely credible. How can you compare an oil spill on land to one on sea? What were the specific circumstances of the other spills? Where are the hard facts, not just a few volume numbers and statistics? Most importantly, one must think of the long term affects of oil spills - the wildlife that are killed, livelihoods gone, ecosystems interrupted. Overall, though I appreciate this ‘call to calms’ approach to tackling the hot-button issue, I don’t find myself indulging in the fantasy that things will be alright.
Pay attention to the gadget
Get ready for everyone to make jokes about how expensive the gas is! ...oh wonderful.
So, just how bad is this thing? How bad could it be?

