Anything goes, when it comes to money

Greenpeace finds corals at Shell’s proposed Arctic drilling site

The soft coral species known as the Sea Raspberry (Gersemia sp.) © Jiri Rezac / Greenpeace

 

Greetings from the Chukchi Sea, way up in the Arctic north of Alaska, where the team aboard the Greenpeace ship Esperanza is using a small submarine to study the seafloor in the area Shell hopes to begin drilling for oil this summer. During what we believe to be the first research submarine dives ever in the Chukchi Sea, we were surprised to discover large numbers of corals in the midst of Shell’s proposed drill site.

Shell says it knew the corals are there, telling the Washington Post that corals make up nearly 4% of the marine life at the bottom of the Chukchi. To put that in perspective, the South Florida reefs I studied for my masters thesis– and which attract divers from thousands of miles away – often have about 4% coral cover. Personally, I was definitely not expecting corals to be one of the three most commonly seen species on our dives, along with brittle stars and baskets stars.

Corals are slow growing, long lived, and highly vulnerable to disturbance. They provide habitat for fish and other marine life, often serving as nursery areas for larvae or juveniles. Both the United Nations and the US Government have recognized the importance of protecting corals.

All of this raises questions why there is no mention of Chukchi corals in the environmental impact statement for Shell’s drilling plans. Coral experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration do not appear to have been consulted. The public was not informed. You would think the Department of Interior, which oversees the permitting of offshore drilling, would have learned from the BP Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Instead of moving beyond fiascos like the Gulf assessment which talked about walrus and other Arctic species, it appears little has changed and that environmental impact statements are still treated as little more than bureaucratic requirements to rush through on the way to rubber stamping the next item on Big Oil’s wish list. (my red emphasis)

Source: GreenpeaceBlogs Read more

Opinion:

These corporations will stoop to anything in their greed for profits.

This omission should be prosecuted, and the fine should be BILLIONS!

To show that this bullshit will not be accepted.

 

Advertisements

2 responses to this post.

  1. Any environmental assessments should the independent. An impact assessment by an oil company can never be said to be independent and objective where profit is concerned.

    Like

    Reply

    • >Alex, not only environment assessments, but any assessment by anyone with a vested interest in the outcome is hogwash. Take Coca Cola’s evaluation of aspartame as an example… And they continue to poison the world with Coca Zero.

      AV

      Like

      Reply

Be green, say something

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: