Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Water

Why Sarah Palin and Chevron May Be Responsible for the Next Massive Oil Spill in Alaska

By Shannyn Moore, Huffington Post. Posted March 31, 2009.


Currently 6 million gallons of crude oil sit at the base of a volcano that has erupted 19 times in the last eight days.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Mount Redoubt is awake. Our governor is not. I'm beyond annoyed.

Currently, 6 million gallons of Alaska crude oil wait at the base of a volcano that has puked, spewed and gone half mad 19 times in the last 8 days. The years of colonization have made flaccid the response of many Alaskans. For good reason; collective PTSD from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and subsequent 20 year wait only to have the Supreme Court deliver Exxon a reach-around while Alaskans grabbed their ankles fuels collective disillusionment. It's ironic we need petroleum products to deal with an oil company. Sadly, our governor couldn't remember "Exxon v. Baker" when asked by Katie Couric about Supreme Court decisions she disagreed with. The 20th solemn observance of the catastrophic spill last week would have been an appropriate time for a statement, but she was loudly silent. It is a very real possibility that history could be repeated.

The Drift River marine terminal started operating in 1967. Brilliant. I know, let's put an oil storage facility at the base of a volcano. You would think it was the secret lair of the Evil Dr. Cheney; or some hilariously funny and misguided plotline from an Austin Powers film. Pipelined in from another facility, it merely holds the crude until it's ready to ride to the refinery across the inlet.

One of the reasons given for leaving 6 million gallons of crude in the storage tanks is stability; the tanks are much more stable when they have something in them. Chevron referenced Katrina and the need to keep the tanks heavy enough so they don't float away in a flood. The environmental coupon clippers decided to risk Cook Inlet in order to save empty storage tanks. DID I MENTION THEY ARE AT THE BASE OF AN ACTIVE AND EXPLODING VOLCANO? Drift River is also permitted by the EPA to treat ballast water from tankers. Were the storage tanks emptied of oil, they could be filled to safe and stable weight levels with sea water-called BALLAST when it's in a boat.

The volcanic eruption of 1989 was severe, but Cook Inlet was not at risk - the storage tanks had been emptied. 20 years later, industry initially wouldn't release the amount of oil left in the tanks citing a threat to "homeland security". So, by that logic, the terrorists would attack if they knew the crude supply in a storage facility was running a little low? REALLY? The Palin Administration, the Coast Guard, and the EPA rolled with that and regurgitated the corporate line of drivel without question. Why don't the terrorists attack the Port of Valdez? They release their crude number every day. Finally, due to relentless pressure from Cook Inlet Keepers, Chevron finally owned the fact they decided to store 6 million gallons of crude oil at the base of Mt Redoubt.

After months of seismic activity, rumblings, belches...well, all the volcanic foreplay you would expect before an eruption...why are 6 million gallons of oil still there? That's over half the size of the reported Exxon Valdez oil spill. The Coast Guard, Chevron and the State have collectively admitted that there is a lack of response equipment if the Drift River oil tanks rupture or collapse.

According to state statutes for lease conditions;


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: oil, exxon, chevron, valdez, sarah palin

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Water! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
more in common with Sarah than you think
Posted by: SoapySmith on Mar 31, 2009 3:27 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is misleading. Drift River has been upgraded to withstand flashfloods caused by a volcanic eruptions and discharges into the Drift River (melting ice snow and debris). The terminal should not have been built where it is. The problem is that people do not understand geologic time and what the geologic record teaches us about past events, future events and the environment itself. A case in point is this author's belief in human induced global warming no doubt. Wrong deary. Just as wrong as those that permitted the placement of the Drift River terminal.

While profanity is not allowed for those commenting it seems it is OK for the authors?? This author is obviously a bit radical and as such cannot be believed or taken seriously. If the eruptions worsen (they seem to be diminishing at this point) it may be a good idea to drain the tanks and provide ballast; however, ballast has its own environmental and integrity issues. In any regard, this issue has nothing to do with Palin. She is a catastrophe onto herself, but not in the way that this left leaning author portrays. Other than a regard for human life, I suspect Palin is as liberal as the author.

SoapySmith, RealAlaskan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The oil companies were right!!
Posted by: AJR Journal on Apr 1, 2009 8:59 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the 1970's, when the pipeline was first discussed, the oil companies proposed running the pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Edmonton, Alberta (Canada). This pipeline would have fed crude into the huge North American network, with refining capacity all over the place.
Instead, politics got involved. Politicians, trade unions, protectionists, construction companies, and suppliers all cried like babies. The oil can not be shipped to Japan (makes sense. Look at a map). All pipe and supplies had to be American (stupidly protectionist). One of the arguments for the All-American pipeline was the fact that we may, in the future, go to war with Canada(!).
As a result, oil flows south to the terminals, is then loaded on tankers bound for the West Coast, and arrives at the most under-refineried coast of the USA.
There would never have been the Exxon Valdez spill had we followed the oil companies recommendations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The oil companies were right!!
Posted by: AJR Journal on Apr 1, 2009 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the 1970's, when the pipeline was first discussed, the oil companies proposed running the pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Edmonton, Alberta (Canada). This pipeline would have fed crude into the huge North American network, with refining capacity all over the place.
Instead, politics got involved. Politicians, trade unions, protectionists, construction companies, and suppliers all cried like babies. The oil can not be shipped to Japan (makes sense. Look at a map). All pipe and supplies had to be American (stupidly protectionist). One of the arguments for the All-American pipeline was the fact that we may, in the future, go to war with Canada(!).
As a result, oil flows south to the terminals, is then loaded on tankers bound for the West Coast, and arrives at the most under-refineried coast of the USA.
There would never have been the Exxon Valdez spill had we followed the oil companies recommendations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The oil companies were right!! Posted by: Johnny Hempseed
Chevron is guilty of supressing battery technology.
Posted by: Johnny Hempseed on Apr 1, 2009 2:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chevron should be forced to license thier patents to manufacturers of electric cars now!
peas in

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Environmental criminals!
Posted by: AnnaKay on Apr 15, 2009 7:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chevron again! Those big oil companies don’t care about people’s health and impact on environment. Look at Chevron in Ecuador. They dumped over 18 billion gallons of oil and toxic water into the streams. Today the drinking water is contaminated and over 1,000 people have died from cancer and thousands more are sick with skin disease and respiratory illness and Chevron still does not want to admit they did something wrong.
If you want to find out more about what is surely the largest environmental disaster on the planet, read this blog, http://www.thechevronpit.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement