So when was the last time you saw a news story about sound science or environmental issues?
Okay, now might not be a good time to ask that question, considering we are in the midst of trying to figure out how to contain the thousands of gallons of oil that are spewing into the Gulf of Mexico from BP‘s rented oil rig, Deepwater Horizon.
In case you’ve been in a coma for the past two weeks or finishing up your graduate degree, here’s what happened. On April 20th., 2010 the oil rig, which is on lease from Transocean caught on fire and eventually collapsed and sank into the gulf.
Video courtesy of AlJazeera
Apparently a safeguard called a “blowout preventer” failed to controlled the natural gas bubble or “kick” that can occur when capping these wells with cement and sent these unfortunate affects into motion. The reason for the failure is unknown at this time until the companies responsible can do a more thorough investigation into the disaster.
Most of the stories you are probably finding in the news is more about politics and economics of the spill that the environmental effects. Bloomberg reported that BP has lost $30 million dollars as a result of the spill as of today and will lose more as the days go on.
BP had asked the U.S. government for assistance in the clean up but were initially rejected by President Obama. Yet, the Obama Adminstration
did sign off on expanding offshore drilling this past March in the hopes of pushing forward energy and climate legislation that would lead the country beyond our reliance on petroleum. And of course, the federal government is now spending money to oversee the cleanup.
AP Photo/Patrick Semansky
Economics and politics should be put on the backburner of this situation for the time being. The main concern for both the companies involved and the government should be on protecting the surround habitats from the effects this spill will have on their ecosystems.
I can assure you that the fishermen who are volunteering their ships and services to aid in the cleanup have these ecosystems as the forefront of their concern. Their livelihoods are dependent on it.
AP Photo/The Times Picayune, Ted Jackson
It seems the only time the biological science are mentioned in the news are when catastrophes such as this occur. The one scientific story that has developed from all this, and was reported in the May 5th issue of the New York Times is the use of chemical dispersants that have been thrown onto the spill in order to help contain it, with seemingly little forethought to the adverse affects.
Very little is known about these dispersants and what chemicals go into the manufacturing of them as the companies that produce them say there a “proprietary” ingredients that they want to guard for commercial reasons. What should be propriety are these companies responsibility to be sure that they aren’t doing more harm than good to the ecosystems they insist they are helping to protect.
Why is the public so misinformed about topics such as this? With the amount of oil drilling that is done on daily basis it must be assumed that spills such as the one April 20th are bound to happen and the possible solutions such as chemical dispersants should be understood by the general public so they can help shape policy to handle these situations in ways that best suit them and the environments they live in.
This is the problem with scientific journalism in today’s age. The public is poorly informed. These are issues that affect citizens everyday lives. You don’t think they do? Ask the fishermen on the gulf coast if this concerns them.
Dr. Janet MacFall, associate professor of Elon University’s Environmental Studies department feels that the public relies on the news for such information when she says that, ” the majority of citizens don’t read scientific journals for news about science”, their primary resource for scientific information is going to be news organizations.
Because the gulf coast fishermen live hand in hand with their environments, they understand what is and isn’t best for the ecology of the areas live. They have even suggested using hay instead of chemical dispersants because it is cheap, would effectively absorb the oil, environmentally friendly, and sustainable. An ideal solution for all parties involved. They’ve been doing their own research for decades and even centuries by living within these ecosystems.
Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images
Instead of building the $365 million rig, and spending BP spending $500,000 a day to rent it (Bloomberg), they could be putting that money into research and development of alternative and sustainable energy sources, as I’m sure President Obama and the citizens he is suppose to serve hoped they would. Besides the continuous “empty talk” commercials these oil companies air on TV, saying they are working on developing these alternatives, they need to be showing the public what they are coming up with and beginning to implementing it, not just talking about it.
Where are we, as citizens going to get sound science news in the near future. Perhaps it will be from citizens themselves. Dr. Jeffrey Coker of Elon’s Biology department feels that, “citizens are capable of conducting sound research and sharing with the public their findings.
By putting science in their own hands, citizens will be more informed of issues that are important to them and more likely to take action, much like the fisherman offering their assistance in the gulf coast oil spill.
The more we talk about this spill in the news, perhaps we can persuade these oil companies to take more proactive actions and responsibility for what they are doing to harm ecosystems and our livelihoods. It is clear that with efforts such as those mentioned above, the horizon of the deep water won’t be so murky.
For a live tracker and video stream of the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico which can be downloaded and embedded into your website visit the PBS website.