Student Name

ENVS: 150

Carlson

5/25/06

 

Publication: enn.com

Date Published: May 17, 2006

Author: Deborah Zabarenko, Reuters

Title: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Still a Threat

 Link: http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/4273

 

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Still a Threat, Study Says

 

1.                  The Central issue in this article is that the 1989 oil spill from the Exxon Valdez still threatens wildlife around Alaska's Prince William Sound.This finding could add $100 million to cleanup costs for Exxon Mobil Corp., who has already paid $900 million to help clean up the worst tanker spill in U.S. history.

2.                  The stakeholders in this situation include Exxon and Mobil, who have recently joined together, the Alaskan government, Prince William Sound, as well as the ecosystem, including all animals exposed to the spill.Exxon and Mobil are involved of course because they are responsible for the oil spill and the millions of dollars paid to help the recovery of the affected area.The Alaskan government is also responsible in this situation as a stakeholder because they are the ones affected primarily by the oil spill.They are being paid millions of dollars to help recover the ecosystem, and are still fighting with Exxon Mobil to a pay more dividends.Prince William Sound is the main site of the oil spill, therefore this is the community who is most affected by the tragedy.This is because the ecosystem has drastically changed, forcing many to seek jobs and new homes elsewhere.The ecosystem and all organisms living within it are affected because the oil spill has harmed many and altered the natural state of life.

3.                  Actions taken or proposed include the fact that Exxon Mobil has spent nearly $900 million toward recovery of Prince William Sound, and are possibly going to have to pay over $100 million more if the Alaskan government can prove that continuing environmental damage caused by the spill, and that the damage could not have been anticipated when a settlement with Exxon was signed in 1991.This could hopefully help Prince William Sound recover much more efficiently.

4.                  This article isnít really missing anything from what I have read.It brings up both sides of the argument including Exxon Mobil and its spokesman, Mark Boudreaux, as well as the state of Alaska and the U.S. government.Also, it included that a 350 peer-reviewed study of Prince William Sound will appear in the June 15 print edition of the American Chemical Society's journal Environmental Science & Technology, which is supposed to provide evidence that Exxon Mobil did in fact conduct scientific studies.

5.                  The scientific basis of this issue is that due to the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, Prince William Sound is still polluted with over 100 tons of remaining oil.This is considered very harmful to the ecosystem, including all organisms within it.

6.                  The financial issues involved include the $900 million dollars that Exxon Mobil has paid due to the oil spill, and the possibility that they could be asked to pay $100 million more.

7.                  My opinion is that Exxon Mobil is just trying to cover up the fact that Prince William Sound is not even close to becoming fully recovered from the accident.This would postpone any possibility of making more payments to the Alaskan government, and keep money in their pockets.I believe from what the article says and from the video we watched in class on the oil spill, that Prince William Sound still desperately needs funds fro recovery, and that it should be a top priority for the U.S. government to take care of.I agree that Exxon Mobil should have to pay more, there should be plenty of evidence (100 tons of lingering oil!) that the sound is not fully recovered.