NOAA's Response and Restoration Blog

An inside look at the science of cleaning up and fixing the mess of marine pollution


7 Comments

At the U.S.-Canadian Border, Surveying a World War II Shipwreck for History and Oil

Historical photo of the Coast Trader at port in San Francisco.

The Coast Trader, first launched in 1920, was sunk by a Japanese torpedo in 1942. (San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park)

On June 2, 2016, an underwater survey team is looking at what they believe to be the wreck of the 324-foot-long Coast Trader, a U.S. Army-chartered freight ship sunk somewhere off the Washington coast during World War II. The shipwreck being surveyed is located near the entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca just across the border of Washington state and British Columbia in Canadian waters.

The Coast Trader sank on June 7, 1942 after the Imperial Japanese Navy’s deadly I-26 submarine torpedoed it on its journey between Port Angeles, Washington, and San Francisco, California. Its precise location on the seafloor remained unknown until a 2010 survey by the Canadian Hydrographic Service. A wreck with the same dimensions and basic shape as the Coast Trader lies in 450 feet of water just two miles from where the ship’s master reported his ship was attacked.

The survey team is led by archaeologist James Delgado, director of maritime heritage for NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, and Michael Brennan, archaeological director for the Ocean Exploration Trust, which was founded by underwater explorer Robert Ballard, who years ago discovered the wreck of the Titanic.

Joining the team at the University of Rhode Island’s Inner Space Center is Frank Cantelas, archaeologist for NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration Research, along with naval architects, corrosion and oil spill response experts from the U.S. Coast Guard, and a Canadian historian from the Vancouver Maritime Museum. While the Coast Trader appears to rest in Canadian waters, it is just north of Washington’s Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.

Natuical chart showing approximate location of Coast Trader wreck between Washington state and Vancouver Island.

A map of what was believed to be the approximate location of the wreck of the Coast Trader, on the border of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary and Canada. The likeliest scenario of oil release from most sunken wrecks, including the Coast Trader, is a small, episodic release that may be precipitated by disturbance of the vessel in storms. However, NOAA’s modeling shows that a worst-case scenario spill would oil shorelines on the southern coast of Canada’s Vancouver Island. (NOAA)

Why the interest in a 74-year-old wreck? History and the threat of oil pollution. While the Coast Trader was a pretty typical ship of its era, the wreck is now considered historically significant for being one of a handful of ships sunk on this side of the Pacific during World War II.

In addition, in 2013, it was one of the priority shipwrecks NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration, along with the National Marine Sanctuaries program, identified for its potential risk of spilling oil. While the Coast Trader was carrying a cargo of newsprint when it sank, it was also loaded with more than 7,000 barrels of a heavy fuel oil known as Bunker C.

The marine archaeologists looking at the wreck will be trying to confirm that it is in fact the Coast Trader, and they’ll be searching for clues as to whether the ship’s hull is still intact and likely still holding its fuel.

Our 2013 assessment of the Coast Trader’s pollution potential [PDF] reports the following about the ship’s sinking and its potential condition:

The explosion blew the hatch covers off the cargo hold and sent rolls of newsprint flying through the air. Survivors of the attack reported looking down into the hatches and seeing a “sea of oil and water” in and around the damaged portion of the ship and that “quite a bit of fuel oil surrounded ship.” The vessel eventually sank by the stern and the survivors watched as each of the hatch covers were blown off in succession as the ship sank.

Based on the large degree of inaccuracy in the reported sinking location and the depths of water the ship was lost in, it is unlikely that the shipwreck will be intentionally located. Although the survivor reports of the sinking make it sound like substantial amounts of oil was lost when the vessel sank, it is not possible to determine with any degree of accuracy what the current condition of the wreck is and how likely the vessel is to contain oil since the shipwreck has never been discovered.

The only way to conclusively determine the condition of the shipwreck will be to examine the site after it is discovered.

Hopefully, we’ll soon find out if this wreck actually is the long-lost Coast Trader. You can watch video of the underwater survey as it takes place at http://www.nautiluslive.org/.

UPDATED JUNE 2, 2016: The survey team has confirmed that this wreck is, with very little doubt, the Coast Trader. Here are a few photos of the livestream exploration of the wreck:


1 Comment

Looking Back: Six Years Since Deepwater

beach-grasses (4)Wednesday, April 20, is the six-year anniversary of the blowout on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico.  That terrible incident was the start of a three month-long oil spill that spilled millions of gallons per day until the well was capped on July 15, 2010.    The cleanup took years to complete, the natural resource damage assessment was just finalized this spring, and restoration activities will take decades to complete.  Many long-term research projects are underway and we are still learning about the effects of the spill on the environmental and the coastal communities of the Gulf of Mexico.

On April 4, 2016, the court approved a settlement with BP for natural resource injuries stemming from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. This settlement concludes the largest natural resource damage assessment ever undertaken. It is safe to say that scientists will be publishing papers and results for decades.  For many of the people involved, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill is considered THE SPILL, the same way the generation of scientists that worked on the Exxon Valdez Spill in Alaska almost 30 years ago consider that event.  We even keep track of events in a rough vernacular based on those incidents.  Post-Deepwater, or Pre-OPA (the Oil Pollution Act, passed in 1990, the summer after the Exxon Valdez spill).  But while those spills generate most of the publicity, policy interest, and research, responders in NOAA and the U.S. Coast Guard and other agencies know that spills are a routine occurrence.  Since the Deepwater Horizon spill, NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration has responded to over 800 other incidents.  Most are ones that you’ve probably never heard off, but here are a few of the larger incidents since Deepwater.

Enbridge Pipeline Leak, Kalamazoo, Michigan:  On July 25, 2010, while the nation was fixated on the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, an underground pipeline in Michigan also began gushing oil. More than 800,000 gallons of crude oil poured out of the leaking pipeline and flowed along 38 miles of the Kalamazoo River, one of the largest rivers in southern Michigan. The spill impacted over 1,560 acres of stream and river habitat as well as floodplain and upland areas, and reduced recreational and tribal uses of the river. A natural resource damage assessment was settled in 2015 that will result in multiple resource restoration projects along the Kalamazoo River.

Two kayakers on the river with vegetation visible on the water in foreground.

Kayaking on the Kalamazoo River. (NOAA)

Exxon Mobil Pipeline Rupture, Yellowstone River, Montana:  On July 1, 2011, an ExxonMobil Pipeline near Billings, Montana, ruptured, releasing an estimated 31,500 to 42,000 gallons of oil into the iconic river, which was at flood-stage level at the time of the spill.  Oil spread downstream affecting sensitive habitats.

Paulsboro, New Jersey Rail Accident and Release: On November 30, 2012, a train transporting the chemical vinyl chloride derailed while crossing a bridge that collapsed over Mantua Creek, in Paulsboro, N.J., near Philadelphia. Four rail cars fell into the creek, breaching one tank and releasing approximately 23,000 gallons of vinyl chloride. A voluntary evacuation zone was established for the area, and nearby schools were ordered to immediately take shelter and seal off their buildings.

Molasses Spill, Honolulu, Hawaii: On September 8, 2013, a faulty pipeline operated by Matson Shipping Company leaked 233,000 gallons (1,400 tons) of molasses into Hawaii’s Honolulu Harbor.  A large fish kill resulted.

Texas “Y” collision, Galveston, Texas:  On March 22, 2014, the 585 foot bulk carrier ‘M/V Summer Wind’ collided with an oil tank-barge, containing 924,000 gallons of fuel oil.  The collision occurred at the intersection or “Y” in Lower Galveston Bay, where three lanes of marine traffic converge: vessels from the Port of Texas City, the Houston Ship Channel and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.   The collision breached the hull of the tank barge, spilling about 168,000 gallons of fuel oil spilled into the waterway. A natural resource damage assessment is underway, evaluating impacts to shoreline habitats, birds, bottlenose dolphins, and recreational uses.

Refugio State Beach Pipeline Rupture, California:   On May 19, 2015, a 24-inch crude pipeline ruptured near Refugio State Beach in Santa Barbara County, California. Of the approximately 100,000 gallons of crude oil released, some was captured and some flowed into the Pacific Ocean.  The spill raised many challenges. The spill occurred in an especially sensitive region of the coast, known for its incredible diversity of marine life and home to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. The Refugio spill site is also the site of one of the most historically significant spills in U.S. history. Just over 46 years ago, off the coast of Santa Barbara, a well blowout occurred, spilling as much as 4.2 million gallons of oil into the ocean. A natural resource damage assessment for the Refugio spill is underway, focusing on impacts to wildlife, habitat, and lost recreational uses.

Two people in cleanup suits with a shovel stand on a beach with oiled rocks.

Two cleanup crew members work to remove oil from the sand along a portion of soiled coastline near Refugio State Beach, on May 23, 2015. (U.S. Coast Guard)

Barge APEX 3508 Collision, Columbus, Kentucky:  On September 2, 2015, two tug boats collided on the Mississippi River near Columbus, Kentucky, spilling an estimated 120,500 gallons of heavy oil.  The oil sank to the river bottom and had to be recovered by dredge.

Train Derailment, West Virginia:  On February 16, 2015, a CSX oil train derailed and caught fire in West Virginia near the confluence of Armstrong Creek and the Kanawha River. The train was hauling 3.1 million gallons of Bakken crude oil from North Dakota to a facility in Virginia. Of the 109 train cars, 27 of them derailed on the banks of the Kanawha River, but none of them entered the river. Much of the oil they were carrying was consumed in the fire, which affected 19 train cars, and an unknown amount of oil reached the icy creek and river.

Each year NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration is asked to respond to an average of 150 incidents, and so far this year we have been asked for help with 43 incidents. Most of these were not huge, and include groundings in Alaska, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii; five sunken vessels, fires at two marinas, a burning vessel, and an oil platform fire; nine oil spills and a chemical spill; and multiple “mystery sheens”—slicks of oil or chemicals that are spotted on the surface of the water and don’t have a clear origin. Since 1990, we have responded to thousands of incidents, helping to guide effective cleanups and protect sensitive resources. Also since 1990 and with our co-trustees, we have settled almost 60 spills for more than $9.7 billion for restoration. We hope that we will never have to respond to another “Deepwater” or “Exxon Valdez”, but should a large disaster occur, we will be ready. In the meantime, smaller accidents happen frequently and we are ready for those, too.

Doug Helton and Vicki Loe contributed to this post.


Leave a comment

How Much Oil Is on That Ship?

The massive container ship Benjamin Franklin pulls into the Port of Seattle.

The container ship Benjamin Franklin, the largest cargo ship to visit the United States, arrives in Elliott Bay at the Port of Seattle on February 29, 2016. Credit: Don Wilson/Port of Seattle

Like many people with an interest in the maritime industry, I’ve been following the story of the huge container ship Benjamin Franklin that recently visited Seattle’s port.

The news stories about it were full of superlatives. It was the largest cargo vessel to visit the United States, measuring 1,310 feet in length, or longer than the height of two Space Needles.

This massive ship can carry 18,000 shipping containers, known in the business as 20-foot equivalent units or TEUs. That is more than double the cargo of most container ships calling on the Port of Seattle. Loaded on a train (and most of them will be) those containers would stretch more than 68 miles, or the distance from Tacoma, Washington, to Everett.

Considering this ship’s massive size made me wonder how much fuel is on board. After some research, I found out: about 4.5 million gallons. That makes it just a bit bigger than my sailboat which holds only 20 gallons of fuel.

Understanding the potential volumes of oil (either as fuel or cargo) carried on ships is a major consideration in spill response planning.

All tank vessels (tankers and barges) and all non-tank vessels (freighters, cruise ships, etc.) larger than 400 gross tons have to have vessel response plans. Key metrics in those plans include listing the maximum amount of oil that could be spilled (known as the worst case discharge) and the maximum most probable discharge, which, for non-tank vessels, is generally defined as 10% of the vessel’s total fuel capacity.

What about other types of vessels? How much oil in the form of fuel or cargo do they typically carry?

Here are some approximate numbers, many of which are pulled from this Washington State Department of Ecology report [PDF]:

  • Small speedboat (12–20 feet): 6–20 gallons
  • Sailing yacht (33–45 feet) : 30–120 gallons
  • Motor yacht (40–60 feet) : 200–1,200 gallons
  • Large tanker truck: 5,000–10,000 gallons
  • Small tugboat (30–60 feet): 1,500–25,000 gallons
  • Petroleum rail car: 30,000 gallons
  • Boeing 747 airplane: 50,000–60,000 gallons
  • Ocean-going tugboat (90–150 feet): 90,000–190,000 gallons
  • Puget Sound jumbo ferry (440 feet): 130,000 gallons
  • Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen’s yacht M/V Octopus (416 feet): 224,000 gallons
  • Bulk carrier of commodities such as grain or coal (500–700 feet): 400,000–800,000 gallons
  • Large cruise ship (900–1,100 feet): 1–2 million gallons
  • Inland tank barge (200–300 feet): 400,000–1.2 million gallons
  • Panamax container ship that passes through the Panama Canal (960 feet): 1.5–2 million gallons
  • Container ship Benjamin Franklin (1,310 feet): 4.5 million gallons
  • Ocean-going tank barge (550–750 feet): 7 million–14 million gallons
  • T/V Exxon Valdez and similar large oil tankers (987 feet): 55 million gallons

Thanks to developing technologies, such “mega-vessels” as the Benjamin Franklin appear to be on the rise, a trend we’re watching along with the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation and University of Washington.

How will these larger ships carrying more oil affect the risk of oil spills and how should NOAA prepare for these changes? Stay tuned.


Leave a comment

Alaska Updates Plan for Using Dispersants During Oil Spills

Humpback whale and seabirds at surface of Bering Sea with NOAA ship beyond.

By breaking crude oils into smaller droplets, chemical dispersants reduce the surface area of an oil slick as well as the threats to marine life at the ocean surface, such as whales and seabirds. (NOAA)

While the best way to deal with oil spills in the ocean is to prevent them in the first place, when they do happen, we need to be ready. Cleanup is difficult, and there are no magic remedies to remove all the oil. Most big oil spills require a combination of cleanup tools.

This week the Alaska Regional Response Team, an advisory council for oil spill responses in Alaska, has adopted a revised plan for one of the most controversial tools in the toolbox: Chemical dispersants.

How Dispersants Are Used in Oil Spills

Dispersants are chemical compounds which, when applied correctly under the right conditions, break crude oils into smaller droplets that mix down into the water column. This reduces not only the surface area of an oil slick but also the threats to marine life at the ocean surface. By making the oil droplets smaller, they become much more available to natural degradation by oil-eating microbes.

Dispersants are controversial for many reasons, notably because they don’t remove oil from the marine environment. Mechanical removal methods are always preferred, but we also know that during large oil spills, containment booms and skimmers can get overwhelmed and other pollution response tools may be necessary. This is a big concern especially in Alaska, where weather and remote locations increase the logistical challenges inherent in a large scale oil spill response.

Although dispersants get a lot of attention because of their extensive use after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, they actually are used rarely during oil spills. In fact, dispersants have only been applied to about two dozen spills in the United States in the last 40 years. The only time they were tested during an actual spill in Alaska was during the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989.

Some oils like light and medium crude are often dispersible and others, like heavy fuel oils, often are not. In some cases dispersants have worked and in others they haven’t. The results of the Exxon Valdez testing were unclear and still subject to debate. So, why have a plan for something that is rarely used and may not be successful?

Probably the biggest reason is pragmatic. Dispersants work best on fresh, unweathered oil. Ideally, they should be applied to oil within hours or days of a spill. Because time is such a critical factor to their effectiveness, dispersants need to be stockpiled in key locations, along with the associated aircraft spraying and testing equipment. People properly trained to use that equipment need to be ready to go too.

A New Plan for Alaska

Airplane sprays dispersants over an oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico.

Although only used once in an Alaskan oil spill, dispersants have already been an approved oil spill response tool in the state for a number of years. This new plan improves the decision procedures and designates areas where dispersant use may be initiated rapidly. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

Now, dispersants have already been an approved oil spill response tool in Alaska [PDF] for a number of years. This new plan improves the decision procedures and designates areas where dispersant use may be initiated rapidly while still requiring notification of the natural resource trustees, local and tribal governments, and other stakeholders before actual use.

Alaska’s new plan specifies all the requirements for applying dispersants on an oil spill in Alaskan waters and includes detailed checklists to ensure that if dispersants are used, they have a high probability of success.

The new plan sets up a limited preauthorization zone in central and western Alaska, and case-by-case procedures for dispersant use elsewhere in Alaska. The plan also recognizes that there are highly sensitive habitats where dispersant use should be avoided.

In addition, preauthorization for using dispersants exists only for oil spills that happen far offshore. Most states have similar preauthorization plans that allow dispersant use starting three nautical miles offshore. The new Alaska plan starts at 24 miles offshore.

We realize that even far offshore, there may be areas to avoid, which is why all of the spill response plans in central and western Alaska will be revised over the next two years. This will occur through a public process to identify sensitive habitats where dispersant use would be subject to additional restrictions.

Planning for the Worst, Hoping for the Best

As the NOAA representative to the Alaska Regional Response Team, I appreciate all of the effort that has gone into this plan. I am grateful we developed the many procedures through a long and inclusive planning process, rather than in a rush on a dark and stormy night on the way to an oil spill.

But I hope this plan will never be needed, because that will mean that a big oil spill has happened. Nobody wants that, especially in pristine Alaskan waters.

Any decision to use dispersants will need to be made cautiously, combining the best available science with the particular circumstances of an oil spill. In some cases, dispersants may not be the best option, but in other scenarios, there may be a net environmental benefit from using dispersants. Having the dispersants, equipment, plans, and training in place will allow us to be better prepared to make that critical decision should the time come.

At the same time, NOAA and our partners are continuing to research and better understand the potential harm and trades-offs of dispersant use following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. We are participating in an ongoing effort to understand the state of the science on dispersants and their potential use in Arctic waters. (The University of New Hampshire is now accepting comments on the topic of dispersant efficacy and effectiveness.)

You can find Alaska’s new dispersant policy and additional information at the Alaska Regional Response Team website at www.alaskarrt.org.

For more information on our work on dispersants, read the April 2015 article, “What Have We Learned About Using Dispersants During the Next Big Oil Spill?” and July 2013 article, “Watching Chemical Dispersants at Work in an Oil Spill Research Facility.”


Leave a comment

When Boats Don’t Float: From Sunken Wrecks to Abandoned Ships

Derelict boat in a Gulf marsh.

Ships end up wrecked or abandoned for many reasons and can cause a variety of environmental and economic issues. After Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, thousands of vessels like this one needed to be scrapped or salvaged in the Gulf of Mexico. (NOAA)

The waterways and coastlines of the United States are an important national resource, supporting jobs and providing views and recreation. However, the past century of maritime commerce, recreation, and even warfare has left a legacy of thousands of sunken, abandoned, and derelict vessels along our coasts, rivers, and lakes.

Some of these sunken shipwrecks are large commercial and military vessels such as the USS Arizona in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; the Edmund Fitzgerald in the Great Lakes; and the recent tragic loss of the 790 foot cargo ship El Faro and its crew off the Bahamas.

These large vessels may be environmental threats because of their cargoes, munitions, and fuel, but many also are designated as submerged cultural resources—part of our maritime heritage. Some even serve as memorials or national historic landmarks. Unless they are pollution hazards, or shallow enough to be threats to navigation or become dive sites, most are largely forgotten and left undisturbed in their deep, watery resting sites.

But another class of wrecks, abandoned and derelict boats, are a highly visible problem in almost every U.S. port and waterway. Some vessels are dilapidated but still afloat, while others are left stranded on shorelines, or hidden just below the surface of the water. These vessels can have significant impacts on the coastal environment and economy, including oil pollution, marine debris, and wildlife entrapment. They become hazards to navigation, illegal release points for waste oils and hazardous materials, and general threats to public health and safety.

Large rusted out ship in shallow water surrounded by corals.

Some shipwrecks, like this one stranded among coral in American Samoa, can become threats to marine life and people. (NOAA)

Most derelict and abandoned vessels are the result of chronic processes—rot and rust and deterioration from lack of maintenance or economic obsolescence—with vessels slowly worsening until they sink or become too expensive to repair, and around that point are abandoned.

Others are mothballed or are awaiting repair or dismantling. If the owners can’t afford moorage and repairs, or if the costs to dismantle the ship exceed the value of the scrap, the owners often dump the boat and disappear. Many vessels end up sinking at moorings, becoming partially submerged in intertidal areas, or stranding on shorelines after their moorings fail. These vessels typically lack insurance, have little value, and have insolvent or absentee owners, a problematic and expensive combination.

Another source of abandoned vessels comes from major natural disasters. After large hurricanes, coastal storms, and tsunamis, a large number of vessels of varying sizes, conditions, and types may be damaged or set adrift in coastal waters. For example, approximately 3,500 commercial vessels and countless recreational vessels needed to be salvaged or scrapped after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the Gulf Coast in 2005. And remember the empty squid boat that drifted across the Pacific Ocean after the 2011 Japan earthquake and tsunami?

NOAA’s interests in this wide range of lost or neglected ships include our roles as scientific advisers to the U.S. Coast Guard, as stewards of marine living and cultural resources (which extends to when these resources are threatened by pollution as well), and as the nation’s chart maker to ensure that wrecks are properly marked for safe navigation.

This week we’re taking a deeper dive into the many, varied, and, at times, overlooked issues surrounding the wrecks and abandoned vessels dotting U.S. waters. As recent events have shown, such as in a recently discovered leaking wreck in Lake Erie and a rusted tugboat left to rot in Seattle, this issue isn’t going away.

First, check out our infographic below exploring the different threats from wrecked and abandoned ships and a gallery of photos highlighting some examples of these ships, both famous and ordinary. UPDATE 11/16/2015: Take a look at the stories featured during this deep dive:

Illustration showing a sunken, abandonedship sticking out of the water close to shore, leaking oil, damaging habitat, posing a hazard to navigation, and creating marine debris on shore.

Sunken and abandoned ships can cause a lot of potential damage to the environment and the economy. (NOAA)


Leave a comment

How Do Oil Spills Get Cleaned up on Shore?

Beach cleanup crew members use a shovel to place gathered oil and affected sand into a bag on a beach.

Cleaning up oil from shorelines is a messy job. Beach cleanup crew members use a shovel to place gathered oil and affected sand into a bag as they clean up along a beach near Refugio State Beach, California, May 21, 2015. Cleanup teams used shovels and their hands to gather affected soil and ocean debris along oil impacted beaches north of Santa Barbara. (U.S. Coast Guard)

We often say that no two oil spills are alike, but one thing spills have in common is that cleaning oil off of shorelines is a messy business.

If a ship sinks or an oil pipeline ruptures, the primary goals of spill responders are to contain the oil source to stop any (more) oil from leaking and to prevent already spilled oil from spreading. However, weather conditions and ocean currents may overwhelm containment booms and other offshore oil spill response strategies. That means escaping oil may reach shorelines both near to and far from the initial oil spill location.

But when oil stains shorelines, what methods and equipment do responders use to remove it? And how is that different from cleaning up oil out at sea?

Here at NOAA, we have a library full of spill response manuals, technical reports, scientific journal articles, job aids, case histories, and guidance documents describing the methods used to clean up shorelines. And after every major oil spill there are advances in shoreline cleanup methods and equipment.

Here we present some commonly used shoreline cleanup options. Keep in mind that all response options, including what responders call “natural recovery” (letting oil break down naturally in the environment), have potential trade-offs. This means we have to take into consideration the impact of the cleanup methods themselves as we assess the overall environmental impacts of any action.

There are, of course, nuances in cleanup strategies at every oil spill that reflect the specific oil type, local environmental conditions, shoreline habitats, shore access, and a host of safety and logistical considerations. These variables will influence the particular cleanup strategy responders use at any one spill.

And at most oil spills, a combination of cleanup methods will be used (but not necessarily in the order shown here). Let’s take a look at each of these methods.

Responding to oil spills on shore: This graphic shows an overview of people using eight methods for cleaning up oil from shorelines. 1. Shoreling flushing/washing: Water hoses can rinse oil from the shoreline into water, where it can be more easily collected. 2. Booms: Long, floating, interconnected barriers are used to minimize the spread of spilled oil. 3. Vacuums: Industrial-sized vacuum trucks can suction oil from the shoreline or on the water surface. 4. Sorbents: Specialized absorbent materials act like a sponge to pick up oil but not water. 5. Shoreline cleaners and biodegradation agents: Chemical cleaners that act like saops may be used to remove oil, but require special permission. Nutrients may be added to help microbes break down oil. 6. Burning. Also referred to as

Responding to oil spills on shore: This is an overview of the various methods for cleaning up oil from shorelines, from flushing and vacuums to sorbents and heavy machinery. (NOAA)

1) Shoreline Flushing: This method uses water to remove or refloat stranded oil, which allows it to be more easily recovered as a slick on the water. One of the lessons learned from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill was to be very careful about water pressure and temperature to avoid causing more harm to the shoreline.

2) Booms: These long, floating barriers are used to keep spilled oil off the beach, or to collect it after being flushed from the beach into the immediate waters.

3) Vacuums: Large industrial vacuums can suction oil off the beach or shoreline vegetation.

4) Sorbents: These specialized materials, which can take forms such as square pads or long booms, are engineered to absorb oil but not water.

5) Shoreline cleaners and bioremediation agents: There are a variety of chemical cleaners for oiled shorelines that usually require special approval for their use. Surface washing agents [PDF] are used to soften and lift oil off of surfaces or structures that have been oiled, such as beach rocks, docks, and riprap. Bioremediation agents, on the other hand, often take the form of fertilizers that help speed up natural microbial degradation processes. However, conventional cleanup methods (e.g., booms and sorbents) typically are used first to their fullest extent to remove the worst oiling, while these alternative measures usually play a secondary role (if any).

6) Burning: Responders sometimes will perform controlled burns, also referred to as “in situ burning,” of freshly spilled oil floating on the water’s surface or on marsh vegetation.

7) Manual recovery: This method involves using good old buckets, shovels, rakes, and other hand tools to remove oil from shorelines. It is very labor-intensive but is often a primary tool for a response when access for larger equipment is impractical, such as on remote beaches or those without road access.

8) Mechanical removal: When access is possible and won’t cause too much damage to the shoreline, responders may bring in heavy machinery, such as back hoes or front-end loaders, to scoop up and haul away oiled materials in bulk.

Two bobcat digging machines scoop oil from a beach.

Heavy machinery was brought in to remove oil from a beach in Puerto Rico in 2007. (NOAA)


Leave a comment

Orange Oil Is the New Black

Sorbent pads soaking up orange oil on the surface of a creek.

Even something as pleasant-smelling as orange peel oil can have potentially harmful effects on aquatic life. A view of the spill with some absorbent cleanup materials not far from Orange, New Jersey. (U.S. Coast Guard)

Orange is a common color in oil spill response.

Life jackets, rain gear, and the work vests worn by responders are often orange to make them easier to see. And don’t forget the bright orange U.S. Coast Guard helicopters that may be on scene. Floating booms are often orange for the same reason.

But generally the oil they are responding to is black or another dark color. But recently we had an orange oil spill.

No, the oil wasn’t orange colored; it was actually the oil extracted from orange peels. It is a byproduct of orange juice manufacturing and used as a flavoring and in a variety of fragrances and household cleaners.

On June 15, 2015, about 700 gallons of orange peel oil was spilled into a creek near the Passaic River, which flows into New York harbor. A large rain storm caused a wastewater pump to fail and water backed up into the facility producing the orange oil. The orange oil then was inadvertently pumped out of the facility into the creek.

Crews managed to temporarily dam the creek using sheets of plywood, keeping most of the oil from reaching the river. The spill happened in East Hanover, New Jersey, oddly not far from the city of Orange, New Jersey, (named for King William III of England, also known as William of Orange).

So why do we care about a seemingly harmless (and nice-smelling) product such as orange oil? Edible oils may be less toxic than crude oils, but spills of animal fats and vegetable oils can kill or injure wildlife. They also can end up suffocating aquatic life because microbes in the water take advantage of the temporary feast but in the process use up large amounts of the oxygen dissolved in water, leaving little oxygen for other aquatic creatures to use. This was the case when 1,400 tons of molasses were accidentally released into Honolulu Harbor in 2013, killing a number of fish.

Back to the scenario near Orange, New Jersey: a major compound in orange oil is limonene, which in very high concentrations can be toxic to fish and freshwater plankton. Fortunately, U.S. Coast Guard personnel overseeing the response reported that the responders were able to use absorbent pads to quickly sop up the released oil, which remained far below toxic levels.

Furthermore, any remaining orange oil would likely evaporate or disperse in the water over the course of several days to a couple weeks, leaving behind a sweet-smelling cleanup scene.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 696 other followers