No Arctic science 'silver bullet'
Patti Epler |
Jun 23, 2011
A long-awaited federal report released Thursday points to numerous holes in scientific knowledge about the Arctic that could shed important light on how oil and gas development would affect the area. Now, the question is: what will anyone do with it? The 272-page document will undoubtedly end up in court, on one side or the other, as legal battles over Arctic development continue. Whether the report's numerous recommendations will be followed remains to be seen. Already the Interior Department is under a court order to finish an environmental impact study of the Chukchi Sea -- where Shell Oil, ConocoPhillips and Statoil want to work next summer -- by Oct. 3. Shell says it needs certainty about its permits by then, and Congress is putting political pressure on the White House to issue permits more quickly so companies can get to work. The report by the U.S. Geological Survey is a detailed compilation of decades of research on everything from the biology to the geology to the oceanography of the Alaska Outer Continental Shelf and how what's known -- and not known -- is important to decisions on whether to allow industrial development. It looks at the impacts of climate change, felt especially in the Arctic, and where "energy activities may exacerbate those changes unless careful analysis of risks and tradeoffs is conducted." Beyond climate politics, more Arctic science criticalBut, the report said, it's clear that "more than science is needed" to get beyond the politically charged debate over oil development in the Arctic. To that end, the report, lays out a "structured decision making process" that it encourages Interior Department officials to follow. "While there is a growing base of scientific and technical information for the Arctic … (and) critical science gaps to be addressed, many of the challenges emerging in Arctic oil and gas development decision making are beyond the ability of science alone to resolve," the report concluded. "There is no 'silver bullet.'" The report was requested in March 2010 by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to determine what science gaps exist when it comes to deciding whether to allow exploration and drilling in the Alaska OCS, particularly the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. It was delayed by the Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon blowout and oil spill that killed 11 people in April 2010. In releasing the report Thursday, Salazar was noncommittal about what role it would play in looming permitting decisions. Industry and its supporters have accused the White House of following an environmental agenda to prevent any Arctic oil development; environmental groups are just as critical of the Obama administration for moving ahead with development when there are questions over the ability to clean up an oil spill and risks to threatened and endangered species. "To make responsible decisions, we need to understand the environmental and social consequences of development and plan accordingly," Salazar said in a press release. "This study is helpful in assessing what we know and will help inform determinations about what we need to know to develop our Arctic energy resources in the right places in the right way." The report promises to be a political and legal football as the debate over offshore drilling continues. Shell Oil Alaska spokesman Curtis Smith said the report "goes a long way in validating what we have believed all along: that a significant scientific record exists in the Arctic and that we are well-positioned to add to it." He said industry has provided much of the information in the report over the past 30 years.
|












