EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
1
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
Macie Anderson, Coco Boothby, Britni Buch and Travis Clark-Melroy
University of Northern Iowa
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
2
Abstract
In March 1989, the Exxon Valdez spilled 11 million gallons of oil into the Alaskan coast,
leaving many plants, animals, and humans devastated. The spill destroyed Alaskan fishing
grounds as well as the fishing and tourism industries. This ecological disaster and its short and
long term effects devastated the Alaskan economy. This paper addresses the Exxon Valdez oil
spill and the complications that arose in the ecosystem and society because of this devastation.
The preparation of the cleanup crews was not adequate, causing severe problems as well. New
policies and government interactions in the aftermath of this oil spill are also discussed. Even
though this spill was very devastating in many aspects, billions of dollars were spent and the
economy destroyed, benefits also came about, including the Oil Spill Act of 1990 and increased
government involvement. Better tankers have also been built, but this has not stopped oil spills
from occurring. Future endeavors should seek to improve how crude oil is transported and
should also look at the possibilities of transitioning to a society that is less dependent on oil
overall.
Introduction
“Twenty years since the Exxon Valdez tanker ran aground on the night of March 24,
1989, spilling nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil, which would coat 1,400 miles of coastline,
Alaska's Prince William Sound is still feeling the effects. Despite the extensive, years-long
clean-up effort, oil can still be found in spots on the Alaskan coast, especially under the surface.
Time Science (Walsh 2009)” This quote from a Time Science article just touches on the severity
of Exxon-Mobil oil spill. The oil spill had many factors in how it occurred. It all started when an
oil tanker that filled up in Valdez, Alaska that was heading to Los Angeles, California was
improperly maneuvered by the third mate of the ship and ran aground due to poor directions
given by the intoxicated captain of the ship. The effects of the oil spill are far worse than a brief
quote can describe. The Exxon-Mobil oil spill had many physical ecological affects, as well as
multiple severe economical effects. This disaster was the largest of its kind up to date and since
nothing like this had ever happened before, clean-up teams were not prepared or ready for a
disaster of this magnitude to occur. This disaster had many immediate effects and some delayed
that went unseen until they reared their heads years down the line.
Millions of animals, including birds, land mammals and fish were affected by this spill
along with plant and human life as well. The oil spill would end up having large effects upon
many aspects of the Alaskan lifestyle, largest to be felt was in the fishing industry. The two main
fishing industries in Alaska that were affected by this disaster were the salmon and herring
fishing industries. The numbers of fish were somewhat immediately depleted due to the oil
killing off some of the populations of these groups of fish, but the biggest hit to the fishing
industry was four years after the spill occurred because the oil spill had adverse affects on the
eggs of the fish the year of the spill. Some of the populations of fish were able to recover to their
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
3
former numbers, but others still have not recovered from the devastating effects of the oil spill.
Because fishing is such a huge part of the Alaskan economy, this disaster would have huge
adverse effects on the economy. Even larger physical problems would be created when a storm
would hit the Alaskan coast where the spill had occurred only a few days after the spill. This
would send a mixture of oil and water hurling onto land to cover whatever it landed on in a thick
coat of oil and water. The spill had both immediate effects and some that were delayed, but just
as devastating. The effects of the spill on the environment would last for years and take millions
of dollars to clean up. Many regulations have been implemented since this spill to ready clean up
teams for another disaster like this if it were to occur. There is a lot that has been learned from
this disaster and some of this can be applied to the disasters that have recently occurred. Keep in
mind that disasters are bound to happen, but we must be ready to act to reduce the effects as
much as possible.
Effects on the Environment
An oil spill can be very detrimental to an environment and its animals and can have short
and long term impacts. The Exxon Valdez spill impacted three national parks, four national
wildlife refuges, and a national forest. 1300 miles of shoreline were also affected (Graham S,
2003). Oil has the potential to persist in the environment long after an oil spill has occurred and
may cause shifts in population structure, species abundance, diversity, and distribution. Habitat
loss and the loss of prey have the potential to affect many fish and wildlife populations.
If the plants in the environment become saturated oil, they are unable to photosynthesize
and ultimately will die. If toxins seep into the roots, they will almost certainly die and possibly
never regrow, impacting many ecosystems. If oil kills algae, seaweed and other marine plants,
this affects marine life’s food sources. Oil causes harm to wildlife through physical contact,
ingestion, inhalation, and absorption. When oil covers marine animals, it alters their feather or
fur structure and inhibits the ability to warm themselves; as a result they most likely will die of
hypothermia. The oil covering their bodies also may cause them to drown. When the wildlife is
covered in oil, they try to clean themselves and as a result, they ingest the toxic oil. The oil can
contaminate plankton, algae, fish eggs and larvae of animals, which will kill them. Fish that feed
on this can then become contaminated which are hazardous to animals that feed on the fish.
Bigger fish, birds, mammals, and even humans can then be contaminated after eating the fish.
Millions of fish died as a result of the Exxon Valdez spill. Fish can be impacted directly
through uptake by the gills, ingestion of oil or oiled prey, effects on egg and larval survival, or
changes in the ecosystem that support the fish. Adult fish may experience reduced growth,
enlarged livers, changes in heart and respiration rates, fin erosion, and reproductive impairment
when exposed to oil. Birds also were greatly affected as a result of the spill. There were as many
as 250,000 seabirds deaths due to the oil spill. Birds were affected by the oil-contaminated fish
they fed on and were killed by the affects the oil had on their feathers. As mentioned before, this
caused them to lose their ability to warm themselves and would die of hypothermia. Many birds
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
4
mammals and other animals, in efforts to clean themselves, ingested and inhaled oil. When oil is
inhaled or ingested it may kill immediately, but more often results in lung, liver and kidney
damage that would then lead to death. Suppression to the immune system, organ damage, skin
irritation and ulceration, damage to the adrenal system and behavioral changes were also affects
of the oil (Msnbc, 2009). When the immune system is damaged this can lead to secondary
infections that could lead to death. Many of these animals’ food sources were affected, making it
very hard to find food.
Prince William Sound contained many rocky coves where the oil collected; the decision
was made to displace it with high-pressure hot water. This displaces and destroyed the microbial
populations on the shoreline; many of these organisms, such as plankton, are the basis of the
coastal marine food chain, and others are capable of facilitating the bio-degradation of oil
(Graham S, 2003).
There are many long-term impacts the oil spill has had on this area. Today, oil still
persists in the environment. It is nearly as toxic as it was the first few weeks after the spill
(Biello, 2011). The persistent nature of oil in sediments produces chronic long-term exposure
risks from some species. These chronic exposures enhanced mortality for years. The ecosystem
is still very slow to recover because of how the oil still persists. The long-term effects of the
wreck of the Exxon Valdez will be difficult to determine and studies are still ongoing. It has, and
will, impact the environment for years to come.
Methods
In order to understand the economic impact the Exxon Valdez oil spill had on the
economy, specifically fishing and tourism in the Alaska area, two reports were consulted. The
first by the McDowell Group in 1990, which addressed the impact of the spill on the Alaskan
tourism industry. The first phase of the assessment was designed to identify the extent of harm
and/or benefit the spill had on the tourism industry. Two research techniques were used, the first
of which reviewed all existing, accessible data that could indicate the impacts the spill had on the
1989 visitor season. The second technique involved interviews with tourist-affected businesses
and relevant government organizations and agencies. The second report was presented by R. T.
Carson and W. M. Hanemann in 1992 to the Attorney General of the State of Alaska and
analyzed the recreational fishing losses that was related to the Exxon Valdez spill. The
researchers estimated the impacts of the spill on sport fishing activities by considering the
number of anglers, sport fishing trips, areas fished, species fished for, and the length of the trips.
They then placed a dollar value on the changes that took place by using the travel cost or
contingent valuation methodologies. In order to do this, data was collected by the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game for the years leading up to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. This data
exhibited three primary characteristics-an upward trend in recreational fishing activities, some
year-to-year variations regarding the trend, and variations in the fishing patterns associated with
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
5
the fishing quality. Other assumptions were used, the key ones involving the “treatment of the
baseline year, the trend in sport fishing activities, the geographic scope of the particular area
examined, trips taken by the oil spill clean-up workers, trip substitution versus trip loss, possible
losses in 1990, and the dollar values placed on different types of changes in recreational fishing
patterns” (Carson & Hanemann, 1992).
Summary and Analysis
In regards to the effect on tourism, the McDowell Group (1990) found that the Exxon Valdez oil
spill caused several negative and positive effects. Some examples being that there was a
decrease in the resident and non-resident vacation visitor traffic to the spill affected areas
(Valdez, Homer, Kodiak and Cordova) because there was a lack of visitor services available,
such as accommodations and charter boats. Forty-three percent of businesses that were surveyed
in the affected areas felt they had been significantly or completely affected by the spill in the
summer of 1989. There was a higher cost of doing business for the visitor industry because of a
severe labor shortage throughout the state due to “traditional service industry workers seeking
high-paying spill clean-up jobs.” Within the most spill-affected areas, 59% of businesses
reported cancellations related to the spills and 16% reported less than expected business due to
the spill. Spending by visitors decreased by 35% in Southwest Alaska from the previous summer
along with an 8% decrease in Southcentral Alaska, resulting in a net loss of $19 million in visitor
spending. In contrast, there was a major positive effect in that strong, spill-related business in
cleanup areas like Steward, Homer, Kodiak, Anchorage and Valdez in sectors like hotels/motels,
air taxi, boat charters and car/RV rentals. This helped offset the lack of vacation business these
areas usually experienced. Another effect that could be considered both positive and negative
was the increase in media exposure. Some businesses felt that such exposure would tarnish
Alaska’s “pristine” image whereas others felt that it had made Alaska a household word and
would help attract visitors. It is important to note that this study found effects for the spill
became less severe with 12% of surveyed businesses indicating significant or complete effects
by the summer of 1990.
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
6
Figure 1. Overall Effect of Exxon Valdez oil spill on business. This graph illustrates the perceived effect the oil spill had
on regional business during the summer of 1989.
In regards to the economics of the recreational fishing losses due to the oil spill, the study by
Carson and Hanemann (1992), found that the preliminary range of recreational fishing loss was
vast. At the low end, there were no recreation fishing loses whereas the high end of the range
was $580 million. The assumptions for both sets of numbers are cited as being inconsistent with
the data. By creating a baseline and collecting data for 1984-1989 for the number of anglers,
trips and days to the spill area, the report states that the different sub-areas affected by the oil
spill reacted independently, however the pattern of fishing for residents in the spill area is for the
most part constant over time, with a modest dip between 1988 and 1989 in the number of anglers
and trips. The only dramatic drop is present in the number of trips to the area by residents that
live outside the spill area. As for non-resident anglers that fish the spill area, the number
remained unchanged, with even a 15% increase in the number of days fished in 1989 over 1988.
In Southcentral Alaska’s non-oil spill area, there was an increase in the number of anglers from
’88 to ‘89, though a large decrease in the number of trips and number of days. This may have
four possible causes: the quality of sport fishing opportunities was reduced because of the spill,
the boats that would have normally been used were diverted for use in the clean-up effort, there
was an increase in the congestion at some sites outside the spill area because of less opportunities
in the spill area, and residents may have been too busy in the summer of 1989 helping with the
cleanup so they had no time to fish.
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
7
After taking all of their data, the researchers postulated that a plausible lower bound
estimate was $3.6 million and a plausible upper bound calculation is about $50.5 million. It is
acknowledged that the bounds could be tightened if more work were to be done in a few areas.
For one, more analyses could be done on the raw data that was relied upon in this report.
Secondly, supplementary data could be collected on “recreational fishing trip cancellations, boat
availability in different locations, the composition of clean-up worker households, and the size of
salmon runs and the commercial catch in various locations.” Finally the construction of formal
behavior models could be made to explain and link the data sets provided.
Figure 2. Map of the Exxon Valdez oil spill area. This figure illustrates the physical boundaries of the spill on the
southern region of Alaska’s coast.
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
8
Figure 3. Sport fishing effort for the Exxon Valdez oil spill area, 1984-1989. This graph illustrates the number of
anglers, trips and days fished before and after the spill.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Exxon Valdez oil spill was an ecological disaster, spilling 11 million
gallons of oil into the ocean, destroying over 1300 miles of Alaskan shoreline. The spill polluted
Alaskan fishing grounds and disrupted fishing and tourism industries. The spill also created great
economic damage when destroying these industries as well. In fact, it has taken almost 20 years
to sort out the legal liabilities for this disaster. Exxon has had to pay over 1 billion dollars in
damages for the spill, which was only a fraction of what the Alaskan people thought they should
be paid. They didn’t receive the money until years later. However, twice that much has been
spent on restoration and cleanup by the Alaskan government and other private sources (Frank,
2009). After the spill occurred, it was clear that nobody knew what to do. The responsibility of
various levels of government was not taken on and there was a grave lack of communication
between these levels. The nation was very ill-informed of the events taking place during and
after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and even the natives of Alaska knew very little about what was
going on. There were many law suits and arguments over who should take the blame and
responsibility which led to great turmoil and confusion.
Although the Exxon Valdez oil spill was devastating to the environment and the Alaskan
economy, some good has actually come as a result of this spill. It pushed the government into
action and provided the necessary measures to expand and reexamine oil spill preventions,
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
9
responses, and cleanup for future incidents. It also sparked scientists to look for different
techniques and recovery efforts (Frank, 2009). The spill in 1989 brought about the Oil Pollution
Act (OPA) in August of 1990 because of public reaction. This act aimed to prevent future oil
spills, create penalties, and create a better cleanup process if oil spills take place in the future. To
do this, the act brought about funding for the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, designating that up
to one billion dollars can be used on each incident. It also required all major companies to create
spill scenario or contingency plans before they drill oil in case an oil spill occurs. These plans
must be approved by both the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard.
They must also be very detailed and location-specific. The OPA also required new tankers to be
built with double hulls which would create an extra protective layer in case the tanker crashes, as
well as more responsibility taken for costs by the federal, state, and local governments
("Environmental laws and," 2010). According to Stan Stephens (1994), 5 out of 6 oil spills
could have been prevented with double hulls. Thus, the complete transition to double hulls must
take place by 2015. With this act, states can also create and maintain their own laws regarding
oil spills and clean ups. It has also increased penalties greatly for noncompliance
("Environmental laws and," 2010). Among other things, these changes in the OPA will help
change the response to oil spills throughout the nation.
Even though these new laws and regulations have been put into place and preventative
and recovery efforts have greatly improved in the past two decades, oil spills still occur. Not only
could better preventative systems have taken place, but better response planning could have
lessened the impacts of the Alaskan economy and industry as well. Many new rules have been
implemented in Alaska and in the national plans as well. For example, tanker crews must now be
tested for alcohol within an hour of sailing. There are also more strict licensing procedures as
well to prevent tanker pilot error. Overall, the entire industry must plan for oil spills that are
larger than what they really might be. Thus, the equipment, personnel, and resources will be
ready to take on such a large spill. Equipment was on scene but was not ready for use until days
after the spill took place. And by that time, the weather had worsened so that the equipment
could not be used properly. Aleyska’s Ship Escort and Response Vessel System have been
greatly improved since the spill in 1989 (Stephens, 1994).
Thus, even though great strides have been taken since the Exxon Valdez oil spill, it still
remains a fact that transporting crude oil by sea is still very risky and dangerous to the
environment and economy. Oil spills preceding this spill have made the same mistakes as the
Exxon Valdez spill, even with the improvements made to resources, equipment, and preventative
measures. There is hope for the future, however, with Obama’s rejection to the “drill, Baby,
drill” mentality of the Bush Administration. Obama’s administration seems to favor the slow
removal of oil reliance and purchasing of renewable sources of energy that will be less polluting
and harmful to our environment. According to Richard Frank (2009), oil spills do not seem to be
the most threatening force to the environment anymore. That title belongs to the climate change
and the consequences that come along with that. Unfortunately, once this devastating
phenomenon occurs, it will not be able to be cleaned up with money, resources, or equipment
like the oil spills have been able to. Thus, it is important that the world prepares for more oil
spills as well as severe climate changes that will affect the ocean environment. It is also a
necessity for the world to develop national energy actions for increased energy efficiency and
renewable sources that also decrease reliance on oil.
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
10
References
David Biello (2011, April 20). How the Oil spill affect Coastal Wildlife. Retrieved from
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article
Dorset, Melanie (2010) “Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Continued Effects On The Alaskan Economy,”
Colonial Academic Alliance Undergraduate Research Journal: Vol 1, Article 7.
(2010). Environmental laws and oil spills. LawInfo: Legal simplified-lawyers verified.
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council. (1992). A preliminary economic analysis of recreational
fishing losses related to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. No location: Carson, R. T. & Hanemann,
W. M.
Frank, R. (2009, March 24). Exxon valdez: 20 years later- lessons learned.
Graham, S. (2003, December 19). Environmental Effects of Exxon Valdez Spill Still Being Felt.
Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=environmental-effects-of
McDowell Group. (1990). An assessment of the impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on the
Alaska tourism industry. Juneau: no author.
EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL
11
Msnbc. (2009, March 24). Oil plagues sound 20 years after Exxon Valdez. Retrieved from
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29838444/ns/us_news-environment/t/oil-plagues-soundyears-after-exxon-valdez/
Stephens, S. (1994). Prince william sound regional citizens’ advisory council. Oil spill
conference.
Walsh, B. (2009, June). Still Digging Up Exxon Valdez Oil, 20 Years Later . Time Science.
Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1902333,00.html