Dispute over Exxon Valdez cleanup data gets messy
Scientists from NOAA and Exxon dispute whether the Prince William Sound ecosystem is recovering from the Exxon Valdez spill. NOAA scientists claim that the Sound is still staggering from a major ecological blow and that crude oil weathering products are contaminating vast numbers of Alaskan wildlife. Exxon scientists claim that most of the biota of the Sound is returning to full strength and is largely free of oil from the spill. At the heart of the dispute is the technique of hydrocarbon fingerprinting to identify the source of crude. Exxon scientists claim that government scientists do not know how to interpret the data, and that what they claim is contamination from Valdez crude actually comes from other sources, such as diesel soot from the smokestacks of ships used to collect fish for study. NOAA scientists claim that hydrocarbon fingerprinting is an inappropriate method for tracking oil-spill damage to biota, due to the varied ways in which living organisms metabolize petroleum.
- OSTI ID:
- 6165979
- Journal Information:
- Science (Washington, D.C.); (United States), Vol. 260:5109; ISSN 0036-8075
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Identification of hydrocarbon sources in the benthic sediments of Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska following the Exxon Valdez oil spill
Fingerprinting hydrocarbons in the biological resources of the Exxon Valdez spill area
Related Subjects
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
INTERLABORATORY COMPARISONS
OIL SPILLS
WATER POLLUTION
PETROLEUM
WEATHERING
PETROLEUM INDUSTRY
US NOAA
ALASKA
COASTAL REGIONS
COASTAL WATERS
DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
ENERGY SOURCES
FOSSIL FUELS
FUELS
INDUSTRY
NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
NORTH AMERICA
POLLUTION
SURFACE WATERS
US ORGANIZATIONS
USA
020900* - Petroleum- Environmental Aspects
540320 - Environment
Aquatic- Chemicals Monitoring & Transport- (1990-)