The congressional Office of Technology Assessment reports that U.S. capability to effectively respond to marine oil spills has not improved in the year since the Exxon Valdez accident off Alaska.
OTA reported that improvements in cleanup technology although they are not likely to be dramatic-and better organization of response efforts could reduce the risk of significant damage from a major oil spill.
Sen. Ted Stephens (R-Alaska) said, "This report will be used to urge further investment in research and technology. Much more must be done to develop that technology if we are to avert disasters like the one in Prince William Sound." He said Congress also should consider changing tax laws to give the oil industry more incentive to develop oil spill technology.
OTA recommended that environmental regulations be waived or streamlined to allow a more rapid, efficient response to oil spills.
The agency also recommended development of dual purpose vessels for work on large spills. It said Army Corps of Engineers' dredges, for example, could be designed or retrofitted with oil spill recovery equipment and be on call to fight spills as needed.
NO PERFECT SOLUTION
OTA's report said short of eliminating tankers, there is no perfect solution to the problem of offshore oil spills. OTA said they will occur again, and the catastrophic ones will never be cleaned up satisfactorily. So prevention of major spills must be a high priority.
OTA cited mechanical containment and recovery as the main U.S. oil spill response method. But the effectiveness is limited, and only small percentages of oil have been recovered from major spills.
"Current mechanical containment and recovery technology is not usually effective in waves greater than 6 ft, winds greater than 20 knots, and currents greater than 1 knot," OTA said.
"Improvements in mechanical recovery technologies that can be expected from stepped up research and development efforts are unlikely to result in dramatic increases in total oil recovered from a catastrophic spill.
"In general, improvements that are likely to offer greater effectiveness for large offshore spills involve larger, more costly equipment, strategically located for a quick response."
DISPERSANTS, BURNING
OTA noted concerns about the toxicity and effectiveness of dispersants but said available dispersants are less toxic than the oil they disperse.
"But dispersed oil can be toxic until it breaks down or is diluted sufficiently, and it will impact a greater fraction of the water column."
OTA said there is no reliable method to test the effectiveness of dispersants in field operations.
In situ burning of spilled oil appears to have merit in certain situations, especially if the oil can be contained and thickened with the use of fireproof booms.
This technique is not currently an important oil spill countermeasure but is being investigated further in the U.S. Some experiments have resulted in high burn percentages and thus high removal rates.
"Nevertheless," OTA said, "burning probably is limited in its applications. Igniting and keeping a slick burning may be a problem in some circumstances. In others, burning may jeopardize the stricken vessel and any oil remaining on board."
Copyright 1990 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.