| Dear
EarthTalk: Given the huge oil spill in the
Gulf of Mexico last month, isn‘t it high time the
government put a stop to offshore oil drilling once and
for all? Short of banning it altogether, what can be done
to prevent explosions, leaks and spills moving forward?
-- P. Greanville, Brewster, NY
| |
The
BP oil disaster is casting a long shadow over the
public comment process now going on in Virginia and
other coastal states that are considering putting
exploratory oil wells in their offshore waters
© Sky Truth, courtesy Flickr |
The
explosion of BP’s Deepwater Horizon drill rig on April
20 and the resultant oil spill now consuming coastal regions
of the Gulf of Mexico could not have come at a worse time
for President Obama, who only recently renewed a push to
expand drilling off the coast of Virginia and other regions
of the U.S.
The
debate over whether or not to tap offshore oil reserves
with dangerous drilling equipment has been raging since
extraction methods became feasible in the 1950s. It heated
up in 2008 when George W. Bush convinced Congress to lift
a 27-year-old moratorium on offshore drilling outside of
the already developed western Gulf of Mexico and some areas
off Alaska. Despite public protests, cash-strapped governments
of several coastal states wanted the moratorium lifted given
the potential for earning windfall revenues.
Barack
Obama had historically toed the Democratic party line on
offshore drilling—don‘t allow it—but changed
his tune during his 2008 campaign to compromise with pro-drilling
Republicans if they would play ball with him on his carbon
emissions reduction and energy efficiency initiatives. Then
on March 31, three weeks prior to the Deepwater Horizon
explosion, which killed 11 workers and has caused untold
environmental damage, Obama called for new offshore drilling
in the Atlantic from Delaware to central Florida and in
Alaska’s untapped northern waters. He also asked Congress
to lift the ban on offshore drilling in the oil-rich eastern
Gulf of Mexico, just 125 miles from Florida’s beaches.
A
key aspect of Obama‘s new plan is to assess the potential
risks and benefits of each specific offshore site before
drilling there can commence. While Obama’‘s
plan wouldn‘t grant any new leases until 2012, the
Deepwater Horizon problem is casting a long shadow over
the public comment process now going on in Virginia and
other coastal states otherwise ready to sign on the dotted
line for exploratory wells to go into their offshore waters.
Whether or not Congress and the American people are willing
to let their government expand on what appears already to
be some risky business is anybody‘s guess at this
point.
Oil
industry representatives maintain their equipment and processes
are safer than ever. The U.S. Minerals and Management Service
(MMS) blames the vast majority of the 1,400 offshore drilling
accidents in U.S. waters between 2001 and 2007 on “human
error,” not malfunctioning equipment, though some
might argue that the distinction is irrelevant because there
will always be human error. A small fire on the Deepwater
Horizon in 2005 was found to be caused by human error, and
most analysts agree some kind of bad judgment call also
likely caused the rig‘s ultimate demise. The MMS says
it was already in the process of drafting new regulations
that would require rig operators to develop programs focused
on preventing human error, including operations audits once
every three years for each rig.
Some
Congress members don‘t think the new regulations are
enough, especially in the wake of the BP tragedy. U.S. Senator
Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat who has led opposition to
offshore drilling, has now called for a congressional investigation
of safety practices at offshore oil rigs, and has asked
the U.S. Interior Department to undertake a full review
of all U.S. drilling accidents over at least the last decade.
CONTACTS:
BP; U.S.
Minerals and Management Service.
Dear
EarthTalk: I am very interested in purchasing household
cleaners whose ingredients and final product are not tested
on animals. Where do I look?
-- Debbie Reek, via e-mail
| |
The
Leaping Bunny logo is now displayed on the packaging
of more than 300 cosmetics and household products
for sale across the U.S.
© Leaping Bunny |
According to
most animal advocates, the fact that manufacturers of household
cleaners still use animals to test the toxicity of their
products is not only inhumane—why should innocent
animals have to suffer and die so we can get our floors
a little cleaner?—but also illogical, as modern lab
tests not involving living creatures can discern more practical
information faster and for less money. Another problem with
animal testing is that its findings don’t always successfully
predict real-world human outcomes.
According to
the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), for instance,
animal tests on rats and rabbits over several decades “failed
to predict the birth defect-causing properties of PCBs,
industrial solvents and many drugs, while cancer tests in
rats and mice failed to detect the hazards of asbestos,
benzene, cigarette smoke, and many other substances.”
The group blames these shortcomings of animal testing for
“delaying consumer and worker protection measures
by decades in some cases.”
While animal
product testing is still allowed in the U.S. (researchers
here are continuing to improve alternative testing methods
that can potentially replace the use of live animals in
the lab), Europe is leading the charge toward a future where
highly trained lab technicians with computers and robots
will replace sacrificial animals in assessing the toxicity
of various substances. A ban on animal testing in cosmetics
and household products will go into effect across the European
Union in 2013.
American animal
advocates would like to see similar legislation on the books
in the U.S., but at this juncture it appears unlikely to
happen for some time. Nonetheless, many are hopeful that
Europe’s action on the issue will help move the cosmetics
and household products industries in the U.S. and elsewhere
away from harming animals for consumers’ sake.
In the meantime,
if you’re looking to avoid household cleaners that
subject critters to poisons, you’ve never had so many
choices. Back in 1996 eight national animal protection groups
banded together to form the Coalition for Consumer Information
on Cosmetics (CCIC) in order to unify behind one standard
for so-called “cruelty-free” cosmetics and household
products. The resulting Leaping Bunny certification logo
is now proudly displayed on the packaging of more than 300
cosmetics and household products for sale across the U.S.
The shopping guide on the coalition’s LeapingBunny.org
website points consumers to various household cleaning and
other types of products that don’t contain any ingredients
subject to new animal testing.
Some of the top
household cleaning products that meet Leaping Bunny criteria
and are practical for a wide range of domestic tasks come
from companies such as Seventh Generation, Earth Friendly
Products, Earth Alive, Citra Solv, Nature Clean and Vermont
Soapworks, among many others. You can order these products
online via websites like Planet Natural and Green Feet,
and many are sold in natural food stores.
CONTACTS:
HSUS;
LeapingBunny.org;
Planet Natural;
Green Feet. |
