Santa Barbara Oil Spill

[Sea Save Foundation]

We need to examine two top news stories. "Safe Drilling" has been given the U.S. green light in the Arctic. Yet, in Santa Barbara we are seeing pictures like this. Did Santa Barbara based Exxon executives elect to use the "unsafe drilling manual" or are policy makers completely oblivious to the reality and dangers of offshore drilling? If the gentle conditions in Santa Barbara can still yield mistakes, what will happen in the harsh conditions in the Arctic?

 

[Wookie]

Was this a result of a drilling accident, or are you using emotion to make your point. I was told a pipeline burst and contaminated a storm drain that lead to the ocean. In fact, on CNN.com there is a picture of the oil coming out a storm drain.

What in the world does this have to do with offshore drilling in the arctic?

 

[oldschoolto]

Boy oh Boy ... Wookie, you can't expect facts get in the way... Jim...

 

[broadreach]

There are several off shore oil and gas rigs in the Santa Barbara Channel. Was the oil in the pipeline produced off shore?
You've got to transport it somehow, no?

 

[Drin]

According to USA Today,

"Built in 1987 and installed in 1991, the pipeline transfers oil from ExxonMobil's Las Flores Canyon Processing Facility to a pumping station in Gaviota owned by Plains. The oil then flows east to refineries in Kern County."

So no, it doesn't appear to have been produced locally.

I'm not a fan of fearmongering. Pushing an agenda by misrepresenting a horrific incident for one's own ends lowers your credibility dramatically in my eyes, Sea Save Foundation.


-Adrian

 

[Wookie]

And nothing is to say that this isn't a horrific accident in one of the nicest most pristine bits of the California coast. It's bad enough to merit it's own horror without bringing offshore drilling into it.

 

[broadreach]

Actually, Las Flores Canyon Processing Center is exactly where all the off shore oil is piped to for processing before being piped to refineries...
County of SB : Energy Division

 

[cool_hardware52]

View attachment 208794
We need to examine two top news stories. "Safe Drilling" has been given the U.S. green light in the Arctic. Yet, in Santa Barbara we are seeing pictures like this. Did Santa Barbara based Exxon executives elect to use the "unsafe drilling manual" or are policy makers completely oblivious to the reality and dangers of offshore drilling? If the gentle conditions in Santa Barbara can still yield mistakes, what will happen in the harsh conditions in the Arctic?

It's a shame, but let's keep things in perspective.

1) On shore Pipeline, not a drilling accident

2) The estimates of the oil released is a maximum of 105K gallon with ~20K gallons reaching the ocean

3) The 1969 spill was *3 million* gallons. This spill is ~7% of the size of the spill in 1969.

Tobin

 

[Drin]

Actually, Las Flores Canyon Processing Center is exactly where all the off shore oil is piped to for processing before being piped to refineries...
County of SB : Energy Division

Ok. That's fine. The point remains - how does the rupture of a landlocked buried piping have ANYTHING to do with offshore drilling?


-Adrian

 

[broadreach]

I'm not opposed to all offshore drilling, but the point is that introducing oil producing infrastructure (including rigs, pipelines and processing facilities) to a new area increases the likelihood of environmental degradation.
Does that mean we shouldn't drill in the arctics, I'm not sure. But you can't dismiss the danger and you can't deny the lesson of this (relatively minor) spill.
That pipe is there as part of the offshore oil production infrastructure. When you drill for oil in sensitive areas the risk to the environment is real.