Over the past few months, environmentalists, scientists and journalists have been issuing increased warnings about the decrepit floating storage and offloading facility ‘Safer’, which sits in the Red Sea off the coast of Yemen, describing it as a colossal environmental disaster waiting to happen that could devastate millions of lives.
Built in the late 70s and originally owned by Exxon, the ultra-large, crude oil carrier was purchased by the Dallas, Texas-based Hunt Oil Company in the 80s to store the oil it was extracting from the Yemen desert. The vessel had to be retrofitted for the purpose at the cost of millions of dollars, but that option was consider-ed cheaper and more prudent than building an onshore storage facility considering that Hunt Oil’s contract was only for 15 years.
When Yemen finally showed Hunt Oil the door in the early 2000s after it had been granted extensions, the Safer — there is much irony in the spelling of the name — was left behind. Now 45 years old, it is estimated that the vessel currently holds over one million barrels of oil in its tanks. It has not been maintained for years, several parts of it no longer work, and it is at risk of springing a leak and sinking or exploding. Either spells disaster for Yemen, which has been and continues to be devastated by a civil war that commenced in late 2014.
Sadly, it is perhaps this same conflict that is preventing a solution to the Safer crisis. Over-tures made to those currently in control of the area by countries and organisations in the west, as well as by the UN, to inspect the vessel with a view to safely removing its dangerous cargo, have not proceeded beyond negotiations for more than a year.
Meanwhile, just over two weeks ago, a pipeline in the waters off Southern California sprung a leak, possibly owing to damage caused by a ship’s anchor, spilling a suspected 144,000 gallons of oil into the Pacific Ocean. A state of emergency was subsequently declared and residents were warned not to venture into the water; though unfortu-nately some did. The impact was seen almost immediately with the discovery of injured and dead birds and devastation of marine life, which some US news media reports said have not been that many.
Despite the use of booms, which are floating barriers used to contain an oil spill, there have been reports of 13 barrels of ‘tar balls’ collected on beaches as far as 70 to 100 miles away. Nearby wetlands, home to an array of species, are also threatened. Days after the spill, two class-action lawsuits were filed against the company running the pipeline by businesses that operate on the beachfront and which were forced to close as a result of the spill.
However, yet unknown are the long-term effects on human health and the ecosystem. Today, some 32 years after the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound, the ecosystem there is yet to fully recover and oil can still be found on some beaches. Because of that disaster and others, far more is now known about oil spills, as scientists and environmentalists have had the opportunity to study them over the years. The cleanup, regardless of how thorough it is, never captures everything. And how can it? The toxic chemicals in crude oil contaminate both the water (if it is an ocean spill) and the air (regardless of where the spill occurs). Benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylene, and nitro-gen are among the toxic chemicals present in crude oil extraction. Once these vaporise — and some do when exposed to air — they can cause harm.
Those most at risk are workers on the rigs or vessels where the spills occur and first responders who are tasked with the cleanup. However, toxic vapours can spread to nearby communities, affecting men, women and children, or fishermen on trawlers depending on wind direction. The short-term health effects in the aftermath of a spill include, but are not limited to, dizziness, headaches, nausea, lung problems, skin rashes and blisters. Those affected can also present with mental health issues such as post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression. Furthermore, a study of 88 oil spill cleanup workers found that eight years after their involvement they had developed breathing and lung problems, low blood count, and liver and reproduc-tive problems. Studies are still ongoing with regard to the link between cancers and oil spills, but according to a UN report, people who work in the petroleum extraction industry or live near facilities are at increased risk for cancers, even if there is no spill. The report listed those cancers as multiple myeloma, leukemia, skin, prostate and lung cancer and mesothelioma.
The damage oil spills cause to marine life, both flora and fauna, as well as birds and mammals is also well documented. Aside from the countless scientific studies, the casual observer may have seen the Dawn dishwashing detergent advertisement lauding the product’s efficacy in removing an oil spill’s black gunk from a bird’s feathers. The information on the dangers is readily available, but people choose not to act on it perhaps because of how lucrative oil exploitation is. Yet, no amount of money can replace dead corals or wildlife or retrieve them from extinction.
A recent environmental study done on the ExxonMobil-led Yellowtail Development Project off this country’s coast claims that an oil spill is unlikely. No company exploiting oil goes forward if spills are likely. They would have to halt production for cleanups and pay for those as well, which would mean they are bound to suffer losses. No one wants that, but accidents happen, so yes, spills occur.
The risks of spills today, scientists believe, could be escalated by the frequency and intensity of storms and rising sea levels owing to climate change. It is indeed a vicious circle and would be laughable except that it is not and never will be funny. Oil exploitation is perhaps the most unsafe industry in the world. This is a lesson we will pay dearly to learn.
