Category: Civic Issues

Crude oil occurs naturally in the form of droplets, within pores of rock below the ground or on the ocean floor. This material is then drilled and pumped out, transported to refineries in different areas to be processed. A “spill” refers to an instance in which petroleum leaks onto the surface of a large body of water or onto land, which can be incredibly harmful to the environment. Larger spills– when pipelines break, or oil tanker ships sink– do immense damage to sensitive environments, and can have effects that last for years after the inciting incident. These issues increased in the 1960s due to increased petroleum exploration and production on continental shelves; supertankers, which carry 500,000-plus metric tons of oil, are used more commonly and therefore can pose more of a risk in case of an accident occurring. Currently, it is estimated that there are thousands of oil spills per year in the U.S., and 3.5 to 6 million metric tons of oil added to the world’s waterways annually.

There have been many instances of major oil spills throughout history, but 3 notable ones include the Santa Barbara, Prince William Sound, and Deepwater Horizon spills. In 1969, a platform off the shore of Santa Barbara, California blew up and spilled 4 million gallons of oil. In 1989, an Exxon Valdez tanker ran aground in Prince William Sound, Alaska and released 11 million gallons of oil. The most recent incident of these three, which involved the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico, occurred in 2010; an accident occurred with the platform, and resulted in a spill of 134 million gallons of oil. These three instances are certainly not the norm, but it is important to recognize the massive potential for damage in this type of incident.

Oil spills can cause different kinds of damage. Fouling, or oiling, refers to when oil causes some sort of physical harm to animals that impacts their ability to survive. This can involve birds’ wings getting coated with a thick layer of oil, which can both prevent them from flying and prevent proper self-insulation– in some cases, it can result in death via hypothermia. When some furred animals get oil within their coats, it can result in their insulating properties being stripped, which often results in death or sickness. Oil also contains extremely toxic compounds, which can then seep into plant matter or water; when ingested, these compounds can result in stunted growth, immune system problems, heart damage, and even death. Sensitive regions like saltwater marshes and mangroves, which can be greatly damaged by small amounts of environmental variation, are particularly at risk for oil-related harms. Along with this, the spilling of oil on the surface of waterways can result in particular damage for marine life; the thick layer of oil prevents sunlight from coming through, as well as reducing the amount of dissolved oxygen within the water, which can cause death to some of the plants or fish that require certain levels of these phenomenon to live. One less obvious result of oil spills is also economic: due to potential contamination of fish as well as possible vessel or equipment damage, commercial fishing is typically suspended in the region immediately after a spill. Since cleaning up after spills can take months or (in some extreme instances) years, this can greatly damage this part of the economy in those areas.

So how do we control these spills to prevent this damage from occurring? It’s not as easy as it sounds. Some strategies used in the past have been found to actually do more damage; as an example, in 1989 it was discovered that using high-pressure hot water hoses to clean beaches can result in simply spreading the oil elsewhere, instead of properly cleaning it. However, different agencies have come up with a variety of alternative strategies to contain oil spills and remove enough of this harmful substance to allow natural environmental recovery processes to continue.

The NOAA, or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is one of many agencies that works to combat environmental damage caused by oil spills, which often involves wildlife recovery, cleaning, rehabilitation, and more. Other groups include the Office of Response and Restoration, which helps to provide scientific solutions to keeping coasts clean, and the Coast Guard, which works on-site during instances of major spills. In the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, it was determined that those responsible for oil spills have to pay for the cleanup and restoration of affected habitats; organizations like the Natural Resource Damage Assessment thus work with state, federal, and tribal agencies to determine the level of impact and required funding for these incidents.

Some strategies involve physical barriers or techniques for preventing the spread of oil. As an example, booms are floating physical barriers that can be placed at the entrances to channels or harbors, as well as the sources of spills, to prevent spread. Skimmers are used on boats in calm waters, and skim oil from the surface before placing it into collection tanks. Different sorbents can be placed in water to absorb oil, and on-surface oil slick can be caught on fire and burned away (in a technique called in situ burning). Chemical dispersants can also be used to break up the oil atop water surfaces to improve ease of removal. Bioremediation is a strategy that uses specific microorganisms to remove toxic substances like oil; types of bacteria, fungi, archaea and algae can degrade petroleum products into simpler and nontoxic molecules. Fertilizer can be used to help these microbes grow, but this technique is only really usable when the oil approaches the shoreline. In instances of oil existing over water, new research indicates that sunlight may in itself help to remove the substance; it increases photodissolution, or how easily oil dissolves in water, by transforming it into other compounds. This is likely affected by the thickness of the slick and the light’s wavelengths, but further research is required as to how much it can help– some studies suggest that it may have helped to remove up to 17% of the oil following the Deepwater Horizon incident! 

In general, more research is required to determine how to help prevent these spills and contain them. Better equipment is needed to remove onshore oil on sandy beaches and rocky shores, and new regulations need to be passed regarding shipping and environmental rules to decrease the amount of major supertanker oil spills that occur. But work is already being done: in one notable example, some salons are contributing leftover hair to make bioplastic pellets to help pick up oil! There’s tons of potential for the creation of new products to help with this subject, and many organizations are continuing their work to protect our waters from this dangerous material.

https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/oil-spills

https://www.britannica.com/science/oil-spill

https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/large-oil-spills

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-10-03/huntington-beach-oil-spill-full-coverage 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/recycle-hair-salons-1.6373334 

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/sunlight-oil-spills-clean-up-ocean-solar-radiation-deepwater-horizon

https://www.jpost.com/science/article-699167

https://www.marineinsight.com/environment/10-methods-for-oil-spill-cleanup-at-sea/

https://www.futurebridge.com/industry/perspectives-energy/oil-spill-prevention-solutions-and-challenges/

https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/how-manage-damage-oil-spills

 

https://news.stanford.edu/2021/03/23/wildfire-solutions/One environmental issue that has dominated news outlets over the past few years, particularly along the West Coast, has been wildfires. And it’s not just over-publicization; this problem has increased exponentially in recent history, partially as a result of climate change and partially due to fire suppression efforts. From the 1970s to the 2010s, wildfire frequency has increased by 1,200%, and their severity is only getting more prominent. Climate change has resulted in increased droughts, severe winds, longer-lasting dry vegetation, and heat, all of which create hazardous conditions for these events.

Historically, the U.S. sought to prevent fires entirely, funding fire suppression programs that worked to completely quash any and all naturally- or artificially-caused wildfires. However, these programs actually caused more damage than ever; wildfires are meant to naturally occur in dry ecosystems, and the lack of periodic fires resulted in an increase in densely-packed vegetation near forest floors. During modern wildfires, this landscape change has actually increased the severity and spreading speed, putting more people at risk than ever before. In 2021, there were an estimated 58,733 wildfires total, including the Middle Fork and Marshall Fires in Colorado that burned 6,080 acres and destroyed 1,233 homes. In 2022, the Colorado Fire in California burned 687 acres, driven by high winds; as of February 4th, over 40,000 acres are estimated to have been damaged by wildfires. This issue is clearly ongoing, and it’s not just a problem of heat– it’s also a threat to personal health.

Wildfire smoke contains soot and other particles known as PM2.5 particulates, due to their small size– their diameter is only 2.5 micrometers. These tiny particles can taint drinking water, but can also do severe damage to people’s internal organs, particularly their lungs and heart; PM2.5 particles are associated with a dramatic increase of the risk of lung/heart disease. The AQI, or Air Quality Index, measures the levels of pollutants in air and determines the safety of individuals in different areas. Any AQI above 150 is considered unsafe, even for healthy individuals; wildfires in 2020 resulted in the AQI of Portland, Oregon reaching a record high of 500. It is currently estimated that at least 500 elderly people die each year due to wildfire smoke-related issues.

What can be done about this wildfire problem? Several solutions have been proposed, but often come with their own opposition or funding problems.

Some suggest that more federal funding should be funneled into emission reduction and drought mitigation efforts, attempting to slow the ever-increasing effects of climate change. Though this could result in a decrease in hazardous conditions, it would be fairly costly, and would be affected by the continuing debate over national climate change protocol in the U.S.

Wildfires are often caused by an overaccumulation of wood and plant fuels. Prescribed burns, or deliberately-started wildfires in mild areas, would reduce the amount of flammable vegetation and therefore prevent later incidents of severe wildfires. However, this does not address the problem of soot pollution, particularly in areas with denser populations. Others have suggested mechanical treatment of fuel pileup, which includes mowing and forest thinning– not only is this expensive, but it is the subject of controversy due to some comparisons to potentially harmful practices like logging.

Many wildfires are caused by electricity problems, such as faulty utilities or exposed powerlines. Because of this, many proposed fire prevention methods revolve around the management of electric companies and their equipment. Removing hazardous fuel near powerlines could help to prevent wildfires from starting, as well as improved monitoring of different utilities and equipment that are located near wildfire hotspots. In some places, electric companies have opted to shut off utilities entirely during times of extreme risk; however, this has resulted in great controversy. Shutting off utilities entirely is immensely costly, and also forces businesses and schools to close down for the duration of the event– it also causes problems with food preservation and medical equipment, which can be actively dangerous.

Fire prevention is an incredibly important subject, but is not infallible. Because of this, one major avenue of wildfire support systems involves federal investment in firefighting departments across the nation. Volunteer fire departments in particular are historically underfunded and lack the appropriate resources to safely deal with major wildfires. They also often lack healthcare and benefits due to not being recognized as federal employees. Providing these benefits, more funding and resources, and focusing on stationing fire service groups near high-risk regions could help prevent wildfires from doing major damage to highly-populated areas.

One of the major problems with landscape protection services is that land is both a state and a local issue, and therefore requires cooperation between both landowners and state agencies, as well as (on a larger scale) federal organizations. Preventing development in high-risk areas is one proposed solution to the dangerousness of wildfires, but a shortage in affordable housing makes this nearly impossible. However, the passing of regulations to ensure that construction materials are safer and more fire resistant could help improve existing developments; as an example, requiring the use of defensible space (leaving a region around the home bare of any vegetation or flammable materials) ensures a buffer against potential wildfires. Placing more regulations on insurance companies could also help prevent the increasing costs of wildfire insurance, which have become a real problem for many in the West and South. In general, encouraging different levels of government and organizations to fund various fire-prevention efforts allows for further development of new strategies to keep people safe and protect against landscape destruction.

It is clear that wildfire safety is a multi-pronged issue, particularly when it comes to proposed solutions and their potential drawbacks. However, the risk of wildfires has increased drastically over recent history, and the danger it poses to both landscapes and individual health is too great to ignore. It is clear that more funding is required to properly address this issue; the government currently spends under 500 million a year on fire safety and landscape treatment, but it is proposed that an effective and overall treatment plan could cost 5-6 billion over the next 10 years. But where exactly should this money go? Even providing funds doesn’t prevent the various legal problems, permit requirements, and political controversies that come with many of these proposed solutions. As a whole, wildfire prevention is a subject that as yet has no one answer– but the U.S. must start finding one soon, before more people are put at risk.

https://www.resources.org/archives/trends-and-solutions-in-wildfire-management/

https://www.rff.org/publications/explainers/wildfires-in-the-united-states-102-policy-and-solutions/

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/fire/202113

Center for Disaster Philanthropy, 2022 North American Wildfires

https://www.edf.org/climate/4-ways-right-policies-can-help-us-confront-wildfires

https://www.epa.gov/wildfire-smoke-course/why-wildfire-smoke-health-concern

https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/wildfires-and-indoor-air-quality-iaq

https://www.airnow.gov/fires/

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2022/jan/26/wsu-study-finds-air-pollution-brought-on-by-heat-a/

https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2022/01/13/wildfires-heat-West-difficulty-breathing/3351642017198/

Your Central Valley.com, Local cities claim 5 of top 10 worsened U.S. cities for air pollution…

Stanford, Wildfire solutions

In our modern day and age, technology is constantly improving and reaching new heights; our ability to connect with people all over the world, even in the midst of a pandemic, is truly mind-blowing. However, our focus on creating bigger and better scientific innovations means that there are certain aspects of our existence– basic necessities– that we often take for granted. Unfortunately, as the effects of climate change worsen, it is becoming more and more evident that we must provide more of a focus on these necessities, specifically on global access to drinking water, which has been an unfortunately oft-ignored issue over the past several years. Millions of people in the U.S. are currently without consistent, safe access to drinking water; according to a recent study, 17% of people living in rural areas have at some point struggled with unsafe drinking water. Though this problem was most widely publicized with the Flint water crisis, it is a still ongoing issue that greatly affects rural, impoverished, and minority groups, and is only worsened by increasing climate fluctuation.

The recent Flint water crisis brought a great deal of attention to the subject of access to drinking water. After the decision was made to pipe water from the Flint River into homes, the corrosive nature of the polluted water affected pipes throughout the city; this resulted in lead and other contaminants being leached into residents’ drinking water. Many people promptly reported concerns with the high levels of lead in the water and the blood of residents, but government officials denied the problem for some time. And it wasn’t just lead that contaminated the water; bacteria and other pollutants resulted in an outbreak of Legionnaires disease that killed 12 people. Following the peak of the water crisis, inhabitants and scientists led a monumental push to replace lead pipes and fix various problems with the city’s water infrastructure; as of 2018, the government stopped providing water bottles to Flint families, and many considered it the “end” of the problem. But it’s not over. 

Many people in Flint are still receiving water from lead pipes, and even more have reported mass distrust in the water they are receiving. Residents have stated suspicions over the effectiveness of pipe removals and replacements, and even those with access to “clean” water are preferring to use water bottles, regardless of levels of contamination. This is not to say that such wariness is unjustified; the lack of action by the government during the water crisis has resulted in a continuous sense of unease by those previously vulnerable communities. The Biden administration is pushing to correct issues with water supply lines and lower lead levels in drinking water, but some are still hesitant about the actual effectiveness of the infrastructure bill. Government inaction has a clear effect not only on public health but also on public trust; so how should they prove their sincerity in solving these issues? Is there any way to soothe the worries of a traumatized and vulnerable population after so many years of struggle?

The issue of clean water is particularly prominent in indigenous reservations, many of which suffer from pipe problems, faulty water supply systems, and harmful bacteria in the water itself. It is estimated that 10% of indigenous peoples lack access to tap water that is safe to drink. Various rural tribes located in Alaska have been suffering from faulty pipes for years; one study suggested that it could take more than a billion dollars to effectively and permanently fix the problems currently seen in these Alaskan groups, a cost requirement that few are able to actually provide. In the Navajo Nation, children and adults are experiencing a diabetes crisis, because soda and similar sugary drinks are considered safer to consume than the available water. The Warm Springs reservation in Oregon is also notable for its continuous issues with water quality, which in 2021 required water to be shipped to the reservation and inhabitants to boil all water they could access in an attempt to avoid pollutants. Perhaps most damning, the water provided to the Hopi tribe in Arizona contains 3 times more arsenic than is safe to drink. It is estimated that up to 75% of inhabitants on the land are drinking arsenic-contaminated water, and have been struggling with pollutants since 1960.

Organizations like the Water and Tribes Initiative aim to bring awareness to the issue by publishing statistics related to contaminated water in indigenous households. According to their studies, indigenous homes are more likely to lack proper piped water facilities than any other racial group, and even having effective pipes does not ensure uncontaminated water. Deteriorating infrastructure systems require maintenance and more effective operation, but a lack of money in many cases prevents this from being implemented. The WTI has proposed that organizations like the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the United States Department of Agriculture work directly with various tribes to provide money to address specific problems and repair needed facilities; whether this will happen to a significant level is still unclear. 

A more recent example of inefficient governmental response to contaminated water occurred in 2021 in Oahu, Hawai’i. Thousands of families in Hawai’i began to report finding and smelling fuel in their water. Even after homes were flushed to remove these contaminants, tests of the drinking and sanitation water revealed that the high levels of petroleum remained. Soon enough, the problem was linked to a faulty fuel tank in a nearby U.S. Navy facility, which was being piped to the homes of the families on Oahu. When people requested that the tank be drained, the Navy originally protested, but was eventually officially ordered to shut it down. The resistance from the Navy was a point of great criticism, as people pointed out that many had already experienced adverse effects from the contaminated water.

It is clear that many areas in the United States are struggling with the issue of clean water, especially as the effects of climate change continue to worsen. Water systems are incredibly vulnerable to various kinds of environmental crises– including wildfires, hurricanes, droughts, floods, and flash freezes– which only increases the necessity of a proper federal plan to provide access to clean drinking water for all. However, so many years of inaction have resulted in a significant conflict between federal/state governments and the people affected. Distrust has been built up in vulnerable populations, who retain lasting trauma from their struggles. How can the government solve this issue? Is there one program that will effectively help to heal these traumas and replace these faulty systems, or should different organizations attempt to solve them in a state-by-state level? These questions are still being asked all over the country, but one thing is clear: to ensure the safety of everyone, action must be taken as soon as possible.

https://www.popsci.com/environment/tonga-volcano-contaminated-drinking-water/https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/us-pushes-tap-water-win-wary-public-82563921https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2021-06-26/native-americans-clean-waterhttp://www.naturalresourcespolicy.org/docs/water-tribes/wti-full-report-4.21.pdfhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/28/indigenous-americans-drinking-water-navajo-nationhttp://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/Closing%20the%20Water%20Access%20Gap%20in%20the%20United%20States_DIGITAL.pdfhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2021/flint-clean-water-crisis-photos/https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/if-i-could-afford-to-leave-i-would-in-flint-a-water-crisis-with-no-end-in-sight/2016/10/21/4d42f2f0-953c-11e6-9b7c-57290af48a49_story.htmlhttps://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-water-crisis-everything-you-need-knowhttps://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2022/01/28/military-families-exhausted-two-months-into-water-crisis-in-hawaii/https://www.npr.org/2022/01/11/1072346598/hawaii-water-contamination-navy