Dear Shell,

Man, if we The Concerned were in your shoes, we'd be getting antsy. It's been years since you started planning to drill exploratory wells offshore in Alaska's Arctic, and it looks like you're getting closer than ever after all the regulatory hoops, planning and legal objections. We're glad to see that you have a new animated video to inform and reassure the public about your action plan in the unlikely event something goes wrong during the exploration and oil ends up where it's not supposed to be. But we're concerned, as is our habit.

Given how long it has taken the project to progress to this point, we would understand if you're starting to get impatient. But now's not the time to hamstring the effort with a video that doesn't quite live up to the reputation you’ve developed as rational, experienced, risk-averse, cold-water offshore operators.

We're concerned about the remote possibility of an accident, sure, just as we know all sorts of other people are, including yourselves. But we're even more concerned that the animation you've released does a disservice to the plans you've developed and could end up causing more perception problems than it intends to prevent. So we The Concerned have a few notes for you in case the video in question is just a rough draft and there's still time to tweak it a little.

Gulf oil spill hangover

As we're certain you know, there has been a great deal of renewed public interest in oil drilling safety, well blow-out prevention, and oil spill clean-up lately, primarily because of the giant mess at BP's offshore Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico. No matter how rare such an accident truly is, and no matter how different your Alaska project is from the Macondo, the effects are still rippling through the national consciousness.

We do think the video does a decent job of explaining that the offshore leases in Alaska's Arctic lie in comparatively shallow water, and a very good job explaining the various ships, skimmers and bouys that would be deployed in the event of a disaster. We also think it does a great job showing the new Nanuq, the support ship built expressly for the project. And we're reassured to learn that the spill response cooperative you've contracted, Alaska Clean Seas, has been operating across Alaska's North Slope since 1979.

We know that animations aren't photographs. And we know that you're just trying to boil down reams of technical jargon, government permit applications, and bulleted action items. But we're afraid that the video doesn't take into enough account the public's memory.

And that's why we're concerned. You're not BP, Halliburton and Transocean all bundled together, and the Arctic Ocean is not the Gulf of Mexico. Basically, the new video shows an operation that looks an awful lot like the response plan deployed by BP in the Gulf, minus the U.S. Coast Guard and private security contractors, of course.

Still learning how to clean up oil in water

First, we're concerned when you say that Alaska Clean Seas has “over 30 years experience recovering oil in Arctic waters.” No doubt Alaska Clean Seas is experienced and knowledgeable, has a proven commitment to advancing oil recovery technology and tactics in the Arctic region, and it has been a part of operations on Alaska's North Slope for decades. But no company on earth has 30 years experience cleaning up actual oil spills in Arctic waters (knock on wood). We're not sure if you checked with Alaska Clean Seas about that claim, but you might want to.

As most of your critics note, a great fear about Arctic offshore oil exploration is that oil released in cold, icy water is more difficult to clean up than in warmer water. The technology to clean up spilled oil in icy, agitated seas still has a lot of room to improve, and the most advanced gear isn't commercial yet.