The explosion of BP‘s Deepwater Horizon Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 saw 11 workers perish and 4.9 million barrels oil gush into the sea over 87 days.
Go deeper with GlobalData
The immediate impact on the region was clear to see. Oil smothered brown pelicans became synonymous with the disaster. Fours year on, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is conducting the official investigation into the impacts of the spill, is yet to release its assessment, which it won’t do until the litigation process concludes.
The National Wildlife Federation (NWF), which has over 4 million members and supporters nationally, has conducted its own report into the ongoing impact of the spill compiled from available scientific peer reviewed research and data. The NWF found the oil spill is having a significant sustained impact that includes increased mortality, sickness and a reduced oyster harvest.
Heidi Vella: Why did the NWF decide to conduct this report?
Ryan Fikes: We continue to hear from our members and our sportsmen on the impacts of the spill, as well as a lot of questions they have around the spill; such as, "is the seafood safe to eat? Is everything OK out there? What is gong on? We are not hearing much in terms of information made available to the public…"
From our perspective the least we could do is compile and summarise the scientific studies that have been released to date and that are scientifically valid in order to help put in perspective some of the ongoing wildlife impacts.
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataMuch of the research surrounding this spill on wildlife impact is not public and, basically, it is shrouded in litigation around the National Resource Damage Assessment [whereby authorised public bodies evaluate the impacts of oil spills, ship groundings, and hazardous substance releases on natural resources] cost. It will not become publicly available until the litigation is settled. Until then we have to gleam what we can from what is made available based on the research that is provided.
Reducing the risk of fire hazard is an integral but challenging part of designing and engineering an offshore oil and gas rig.
HV: Can you summarise some of the report’s findings?
RF: In terms of bottlenose dolphins there have been 900 – almost a thousand – that have been found dead or stranded since the spill in April 2010. In 2013 they [dolphins] were found dead at nearly three times the normal rate of annual strandings.
Bottlenose dolphins known to be in one very heavily oiled section of Louisiana in Barataria Bay have been noted to have unusual lung damage and immune system problems. NOAA has continued to investigate these mortalities, conducting what they call a UME (usual mortality event) and that investigation is ongoing. They look into a number of potential causes but the primary cause they are investigating is the 2010 oil spill.
Sea turtles are another example, more than 500 dead sea turtles have been found every year for the past three years. This is again a very dramatic increase over the normal rate of stranding that are seen every year. We also know, due to information that was made public around the natural resources assessment process, that tens of thousands of sea turtles were within the oiled area of the spill and they were observed via aerial imagery at the time of the spill in the known boundaries of surface oiling.
Sperm whales in the northern gulf have been found to have levels of DNA damaging metals in their system much higher than sperm whales elsewhere in the world. Although there has not been a definite link to the oil spill, these are metals that have been known to be present in oil from that [Deepwater Horizon] well.
Those are just some examples of the impacts to species.
HV: Is it difficult to definitively say that these impacts can be attributed to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill?
RF: In some cases the impacts are known to be directly tied to the spill. Of course, a lot of the hard data in terms of the direct number of birds that were killed from the oil spill or the number of fish that were washed-up due to direct death from oiling are a large part of the data that is not publicly available, but those are easy to link. Much of the studies that are ongoing now are looking at a number of ways, such as finger printing of oil, contaminants and looking at comparative studies from species that were known to have occurred within oiled areas and those that were not so that there is a point reference and a baseline to compare against.
HV: Does it surprise you that the oil spill is still having an impact four years on?
RF: No, it doesn’t surprise me at all. We have just now seen, almost 20 years later, populations recovering from Exxon Valdez; such as the otter populations in Prince William Sound. Exxon Valdez oil spill was a very contained area and here [Gulf of Mexico] the impacts are far more widespread and more difficult to assess. But almost anyone you talk to anticipates that we will continue to investigate the impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill for ten to twenty years.
Speaking of ongoing research that will be continuing to investigate the impacts of the spill, this is one of the reasons very early on why BP [voluntarily] put forward $500m dollars into the Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative (GOMRI). That program takes $50m a year over the course of 10 years to investigate the impacts, as well as conducting scientific research to asses both modelling, monitoring and clean up, and so on, of future spills to really understand the state and transport of spills, disbursement technology and impacts.
HV: Some testing found carcinogenic present in animals – is this a concern for the human food chain?
RF: We know that oil and any hydrocarbon is potentially carcinogenic and yes, that does include to humans, but there are seafood safety regulations and that is why there were closures of fisheries post-spill, including both fish and oyster fisheries. Before they open those fisheries back up to be consumed by the public they have to undergo rigorous testing to ensure public health and safety.
Those regulated, commercial fisheries there are processes in place to ensure safety. That does not mean in areas impacted by the spill that had heavy oil or in areas that still have oil in marshes, such as places on our Louisiana coastline, that there is not artisanal fisheries and people who are fishing out there on their own for sustenance that could not be ingesting some of these hydrocarbons or contaminated species. There is still a lot of unknown, which is why there is still ongoing research.
The National Academy of Science has a Gulf research programme and one component of that programme is human health. It looks at everything from potential impacts when there was oiling on the beach, carbons that people were breathing in, including those on active clean up, to potential for ingested contaminated food.
A bill to protect offshore oil and gas whistleblowers is still waiting to be enacted.
HV: BP has called the report a "piece of political advocacy — not science" according to the National Geographic – what is your response?
RF: It is not a piece of political advocacy but an opportunity to inform and educate the best that we can our members and stakeholders and the general public. The average member of our community is not going to know to go to the Academic Search Premier online journal and look for these research articles, the few that has made it through the peer review process, and then read it. As a scientist for the NWF my job is to make sure I am serving the science available, summarising that in a way that is digestible by the public and making that available so they can see that the impacts are ongoing.
In regards to the political advocacy; we do hope that having that information encourages members of the public to speak-up for the needs they have within their communities and across the region and to voice concerns they have so they can be addressed going forward.
HV: What action would you like to see happen going forward?
RF: Ultimately we want to start moving forward to remedy the harm that was done to the environment. It is four years since the spill, it is also two years since the restore act was passed and it is also coming-up to one year since the initial comprehensive plan was released by the council, and yet we still have not seen one restoration project on the ground from this money.
At the NWF we would really like to see transparency and progress from the restore council and the restore act which will ultimately help us to get projects happening on the ground. There is a hearing next week that is going to take a look at and assess where things are going with the restore act and look at implementation moving forward. This is a commerce hearing so we are hoping this might shed some light on how things will move forward and hopefully there will be a call to action for improved efficiency and transparency moving forward.
HV: What can be done to restore the Gulf?
RF: The NWF is about to release a report that is going to highlight our Gulf wide restoration priorities. The key to restoring these critical ecosystems is focusing on estuaries. This is the place where fresh water coming from our streams meets our marine environment and creates these zones that are incredibly diverse and make up a number of habitats ranging from salt marches to mangroves to sea grass beds and are incredibly productive as nursery habitats for as much as 95% of our commercially and recreationally important species.
There are some tangential funds that have begun to start moving. There are funds with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, which has funding through its Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund. They have implemented their first round of projects and will be announcing in the coming months the second round of projects.
Some high level recommendations to improve the gulf include encouraging congress and the administration to reform oil and gas leasing practises and permitting requirements to better safeguard people, communities and the wildlife. I think that is the bottom line.
.gif)
