Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Article Index for
Exxon
Shopping
Valdez
Website Links For
Exxon Valdez
 

Information About

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill





EARLY STAGES OF THE SPILL

On March 23 , 1989 , the Oil Tanker '' Exxon Valdez '' departed from the Valdez Oil Terminal in Valdez, Alaska (on its 28th voyage), heading South through Prince William Sound , with a full load of Oil . Captain Joseph Hazelwood radioed to the Coast Guard station that he would be changing course in order to avoid some ''growlers'', small Iceberg s which had drifted into the sound from the Columbia Glacier . The captain received permission to move into the northbound lane. Before retiring to his Cabin , Captain Hazelwood instructed his third mate Gregory Cousins to "start coming back into the lanes" once the ship was abeam Busby Island Light , some 2 minutes ahead.

Although Cousins did give the instructions to the , the vessel hit Bligh Reef . It is not known whether Cousins gave the orders too late or the helmsman did not follow instructions properly.

The spilled oil affected 1,900 km of Alaskan Coast line, though there are conflicting estimates of how much Oil spilled. Exxon reported 10.8 million gallons (40,900 m³), but all other estimates are much higher, generally around 30 million Gallons (110,000 m³) {Link without Title} {Link without Title} .


CLEANUP MEASURES


A trial burn was conducted during the early stages of the spill, in a region of the spill isolated from the rest by a fire-resistant boom. The test was relatively successful, but because of unfavorable weather no additional burning was attempted in this cleanup effort. Mechanical cleanup was started shortly afterward using booms and skimmers, but the skimmers were not readily available during the first 24 hours following the spill, and thick oil and Kelp tended to clog the equipment. Transferring oil from temporary storage vessels into more permanent containers was also difficult because of the oil's weight and thickness. In addition, a trial application of dispersants was performed. The use of dispersants proved to be controversial. Less than 4,000 US gallons (15,000 L) of dispersant were available in Valdez, Alaska, and no application equipment or aircraft. A private company applied dispersants on March 24 with a helicopter and dispersant bucket. Because there was not enough wave action to mix the dispersant with the oil in the water, their use was discontinued.


LEGAL BATTLES

An award of $287 million for actual damage and $5 billion for Punitive Damage s was awarded by an Anchorage jury in 1994. The punitive damages amount was based on a single year's profit by Exxon at that time.

Exxon appealed the ruling and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court Of Appeals ordered the original judge Russel Holland to reduce the amount. On December 6 , 2002 the judge announced that he had reduced the damages to $4 billion, which he concluded was justified by the facts of the case and not grossly excessive.

Exxon appealed again, sending the case back to court to be considered in regard to a recent Supreme Court ruling in a similar case, which caused Judge Holland to actually increase the punitive damages to $4.5 billion, plus interest.

Exxon is again appealing, some seventeen years after the incident. The case currently sits in the 9th Circuit Appellate Court , and oral arguments were heard on January 27, 2006; a ruling is expected by September of 2006. {Link without Title}

Exxon's official position states that punitive damages greater than $25 million are not justified because the spill resulted from an accident, and because Exxon spent an estimated $2 billion cleaning up the spill, and a further $1 billion to settle civil and criminal charges related to the case. However in court it was argued that allowing a "known drunk" to captain the ship was reprehensible.

Some factors to consider when weighing the justice of a large punitive damages penalty are:
  • Although Exxon acted admirably in paying for cleanup efforts, they also subsequently recovered a significant portion of their cleanup and legal expenses through insurance claims, tax writeoffs, and by an increase in the price of their products.

  • The original $5 billion amount was based on annual profits in 1989.

  • Exxon immediately set aside the unpaid $5 billion, and has been collecting interest on that amount since 1994. By now, the amount of interest earned on that amount may be larger than the original punitive damages were in the first place.

  • Exxon made an agreement with the Seattle Seven , which will result in them recovering around $750 million of any punitive damages they eventually have to pay.

  • $4.5 billion in 1989 dollars is more than $7 billion in 2005 dollars, due to inflation.


The Exxon Valdez damages assessment is notably important in the environmental resource in question, an assessment reached with the use of Contingent Valuation techniques.


THE SHIP

In the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez incident U.S. Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act Of 1990 , including a clause prohibited vessels that had caused oil spills of more than 1 million US gallons (3,800 m³). In April 1998 the company argued in a legal action against government that the ship should be allowed back to Valdez, since the regulation was unfairly directed at Exxon alone (no other ships meet this criterion). In addition, requirements were made for a gradual phase in of a a double-hull design, providing an additional layer between the oil tanks and the ocean.

The Exxon Valdez supertanker was towed to San Diego , arriving on July 10 and repairs began in July 30 , 1989 . Approximately 1,600 tons of steel were removed and replaced. In June 1990 the tanker, renamed ''SeaRiver Mediterranean'', left harbor after $30 million of repairs.


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Both the long and short-term effects of the oil spill have been studied comprehensively. Thousands of animals died immediately; the best estimates include 250,000 sea birds, 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 250 bald eagles, up to 22 orcas, and billions of salmon and herring eggs. Despite a thorough cleanup, and little visual evidence apparent even only one year later, the effects of the spill continue to be felt today. In the long term, reductions in population have been seen in various ocean animals, including stunted growth in pink salmon populations. Sea otters and ducks also showed higher death rates in following years, partly because they ingested contaminated creatures. The animals also were exposed to oil when they dug up their prey in dirty soil. Researchers said some shoreline habitats, such as contaminated mussel beds, could take up to 30 years to recover. While it will take years for a solid long term study, some interim effects have already been noted;

  • Rockweed - The Rockweed is once again growing on boulders where the spill occurred.

  • Salmon - Pink Salmon Harvests have varied in the years since the spill.




SOCIAL IMPACT

In addition to the environmental effects of the spill, the disruption to the lives of the people affected is noteworthy. Native American groups in the area were impacted, and the fishing industry also experienced serious changes as a result. For example, commercial fishing was closed for the remainder of 1989, so many fishermen went elsewhere to work. Unfortunately for the local industry, many seafood markets also turned elsewhere to purchase products, and some never returned. In the years following the spill, a very high percentage of the fishermen and associated companies declared bankruptcy. The promise of a punitive damages award from Exxon was not realized in the difficult years that followed the spill, and caused much frustration. For example, Bob Van Brocklin, the mayor of Cordova , a nearby fishing community, committed suicide, and requested that his ashes be scattered on Bligh Reef , where the Exxon Valdez grounded. {Link without Title}


EXTERNAL LINKS



REFERENCES


  • Alaska Oil Spill Commission. 1990. Spill: The Wreck of the Exxon Valdez. Final Report. Juneau: State of Alaska. 1990.

  • National Transportation Safety Board. 1990.Marine Accident Report: Grounding of the U.S. Tankship Exxon Valdez: on Bligh Reef, Prince William Sound, near Valdez, Alaska, March 24, 1989. Washington, D.C.: NTSB. NTSB/MAR-90/04.

  • Piper, E. 1993. The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Final Report, State of Alaska Response. Anchorage: Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation.

  • U.S. Coast Guard. 1993. T/V Exxon Valdez oil spill: Federal On Scene Coordinator's report. Vol. 1. Washington, D.C.: Dept. of Transportation.