Much, indeed, VERY much press has been focused on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the potential damage to the environment it may cause. Congressional hearings, self described expert witnesses, eco-lobbyists, and regional politicians are jumping all over this bandwagon. Lawsuits are flying. Coast Guard is flying, too, at the orders and “best guess” of the government agencies that want to appear viable. But the “coasties” are running out of both matches and emulsifiers. British Petroleum is turning away volunteers and donated supplies so as not appear as if they can’t control the situation themselves. Shame on all of them except the would-be volunteers. And even the volunteers are misguided through no failing of their own.
My attention and sympathy is focused more on the families of those who died or were injured in the explosions and fire. The greatest risk of this cleanup is that more human lives will be lost or ruined before it’s over. Yes, there is a risk to wildlife, particularly the marsh birds, but the more we try to prevent damage to the environment from the spilled oil, the more we would ourselves damage it by the effort to clean it up. Vehicles and booted feet pressing the crude into the sediments of the marshes will make that crude a permanent and long-term damaging feature of those marshes. The marshes of the Gulf Coast are not the same as the permafrost of Alaska’s north coast.
Nature keeps a pretty clean house for itself all by itself. In a matter of months, if we leave it alone, all the volatile components of the crude will evaporate and, within a couple years, no trace of the spill will be visible or dangerous. That’s only true if BP caps the leak and we leave the spilled crude alone. Failing to accomplish either of those will leave permanent scars along the Gulf Coast.
Nothing that we or BP can do will erase the emotional scars of the survivors or ease the pain of the families who lost loved ones in the beginning of this. But “nothing” is exactly what we should do about the spilled crude.
