This blog posting by Alister Doyle, argues that the Bp’s massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is not one of the most harmful and deadly spills the world has seen. Although the BP oil spill is the largest off the United States it’s impact on nature specifically seabirds is not as great as other previous international spills.
Doyle claims that a 5 tonne oil spill in 1976 in the Baltic Sea is far worse then the current BP oil spill. His reasoning comes from Arne Jernelov of the institute of Furtures Studies in Stockholm, who acknowledges that 60,000 long-tailed ducks were killed by this oil spill. Doyle compares this to the BP, 250,000 to 400,000 tonne, oil spill where fewer than 1,200 birds have been recorded killed.
The evidence that Doyle has on his argument is well established and thoroughly backed. He uses Jernelov’s information on the Baltic Sea oil spill to prove that it was much worse then the current BP spill. He then states that Jernelov receives support from the Global Marine Oil Pollution Information Gateway. In the blog there is a section coming form the Gateway confirming Doyle’s claim. They use an example that is similar to the comparison between the Baltic Sea oil spill and the BP oil spill.
The Gateway website explains in the blog that there is no clear relationship between the oil amount that has been released and the effect that it has on the environment/ wildlife. It also states “a smaller spill at the wrong time/wrong season and in a sensitive environment may prove much more harmful than a larger spill at another time of the year”. This reference from Global Marine Oil Pollution Information Gateway helps Doyle support his argument that it is feasible and possible that a much smaller oil spill is far more harmful then a larger one. Therefore proving that his claim of the Baltic Sea spill being much more harmful then the BP oil spill.
Doyle also does some math in his blog argument. He knows the amount of birds killed in both the Baltic Sea spill and the BP spill and the amount of oil that was released into the environment. He finds that for every 80 grams of oil spilled in the Baltic Sea one bird was killed. This is a very small ratio compared to the BP spill in which one bird was killed per 200-330 tonnes of oil spilled (so far). Doyle calculates these ratios to prove that even though the Baltic Sea spill was much smaller then the BP spill it was much deadlier to the birds, and most likely the environment as well.
The strength of Doyle’s argument is a strong one. He has two valid references that support his claim. Both the claims by Jernelov (writing for the journal Nature) and the backing from the Global Marine Oil Pollution Information Gateway give Doyle evidence to prove his argument. He uses the evidence that he has very well, providing examples and proves that the outcome of the Baltic Sea spill was much worse then the BP oil spill.
Doyle gives a great example to those who may disagree with his claim or argument in general. Some may think that the BP oil spill is a far worse, due to the amount of oil released into the environment. Although the BP oil spill is the largest surrounding the U.S, and one of the largest in the world, Doyle shows that smaller spills are deadlier due to a number of factors. Doyle states that “even tiny amounts of oil can mean that the birds’ feathers stick together and let chill water, like in the Baltic Sea, get to their bodies through what is normally a layer of insulation.” With this example he provides proof that factors such as climate and temperature affect the results of an oil spill, not necessarily just the size of it.
What Doyle could have improved on is the flow of his blog. He goes back and forth between what occurred in the Baltic Sea oil spill and the BP oil spill. He does this to compare and contrast the two spills, but his argument seems to wander after he talks about the facts from the BP oil spill. Doyle mentions that the previous biggest oil spill before BP’s was in 1989 off the coast of Alaska known as the Exxon Valdez spill. He may have been using this as another example to how the magnitude of the effects of the BP oil spill is not as large as others that are much smaller then it. He doesn’t state if this is an example or what his intentions were to talk about the Exxon Valdez spill, but I feel that it is out of place and could be compared to in a separate paragraph.
This blog was well structured and Doyle was thorough and precise with the information he brought to support his argument. The claim Doyle was making was clarified from the beginning of the blog. He then structured the support he had from Jernelov and the Global Marine Oil Pollution Information Gateway so that his argument would have some solid evidence to validate his claim.
Blake Turner
References:
Doyle, Alister. “BP, oil and seabirds-Baltic Sea ducks had worse luck” Environmental Forum, July 8, 2010,
http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2010/07/08/bp-oil-and-seabirds-baltic-sea-ducks-had-worse-luck/
“Effects of oil pollution on marine wildlife”. Global Marine Oil Pollution Information Gateway,
http://oils.gpa.unep.org/facts/wildlife.htm
Jernelov, Arne. “How to defend against future oil spills” Nature, July 8, 2010,
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7303/full/466182a.html
No comments:
Post a Comment