Ecological Risk Assessment Consensus Workshop Environmental Tradeoffs Associated With Oil Spill Response Technologies Mexico - United States Pacific Coastal Border Region: A report to the US Coast Guard, District 11.
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Date
2006
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
In June/July 2006, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) District 11 sponsored a workshop to evaluate the relative risk to natural resources from various oil spill response options (on-water mechanical recovery, dispersant application, and on-shore mechanical recovery) compared to natural recovery, which in the context of the workshops refers to oil removal by natural processes only. The spill scenario involved a release of approximately 70,000 gallons of Intermediate Fuel Oil (IFO) due to an accident five nautical miles west of Point Loma, CA. The hypothetical date for the release was late June. The workshop involved participants from both the United States (US) and Mexico, and was designed to emphasize cooperative decision-making when a spill in US waters threatened shoreline resources in both countries and when consideration of dispersants would lead to increased risk to valuable offshore resources in Mexican waters. The workshop consisted of two three-day workshops separated by approximately one month. At the initial meeting three focus groups analyzed natural recovery and on-water mechanical recovery. At the second workshop the groups evaluated dispersant use at two levels of effectiveness (75% and 25%) and on-shore mechanical recovery. The participants concluded that on-water mechanical recovery, in this scenario, was unlikely to be effective in reducing shoreline impacts. While dispersants offered some benefits to the shoreline, the groups did not agree as to the magnitude. All groups concluded that protection of the Tijuana Slough was a high priority, and that the current strategy of placing a berm across the entrance to prevent contamination was a critical element of the response plan. If this was not successful cleanup would be very difficult, if not impossible. Environmental concerns were largely driven by the risk to sea birds, and secondarily to intertidal invertebrates. When dispersants were used there was an increased risk to sensitive offshore habitats and water column resources, especially around the Coronado Islands, but the concerns were not ranked above a moderate level by any group. Participants felt that additional cooperative efforts of this type were important, and helped build the international interactions necessary for successful planning and response. They also emphasized that, if dispersants are to be considered as an option, there must be extensive planning and exercises to familiarize stakeholders with the issues, so that decisions can be made in a timely fashion.Pages
50ppPublisher or University
Ecosystem Management & Associates, Inc.Series : Nr
Technical Report;06-02Collections