US Coast Guard rescues crew of Shell oil rig Kulluk off Alaska, December 29, 2012 (USCG photo/Sara Francis)

An enormous Shell Oil offshore drilling rig ran aground on an island in the Gulf of Alaska on Monday night after it broke free from tow ships in rough seas, officials said.

The rig, the Kulluk, which was used for test drilling in the Arctic last summer, is carrying about 139,000 gallons of diesel fuel and 12,000 gallons of lubricating oil and hydraulic fluid, the officials said.

Thanks to the heroic efforts of the U.S. Coast Guard, 17 crew members on board the Kulluk rig were rescued and brought to safety. But the fate of the area’s wildlife isn’t so clear. While no oil sheen had been spotted as of New Year’s Day, as the Washington Post reports, any spill wouldn’t have to go far to find a range of species:

The Kodiak archipelago, where the rig ran aground, is home to nearly 250 bird species, including horned puffins, red-faced cormorants and Harlequin ducks. It boasts among the highest winter bird counts in Alaska. It is also home to Kodiak brown bears, who feed on local salmon streams.

Watch the grounded rig being battered by waves in this clip from The UpTake:

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Times adds that the grounding is only the latest problem for Shell’s Arctic drilling effort:

Last summer, the Kulluk drilled a shallow test well in the Beaufort Sea while another rig drilled a similar hole in the Chukchi Sea to the west.

But Shell announced in September that it would be forced to delay further drilling until this year after a specialized piece of equipment designed to contain oil from a spill was damaged in a testing accident.

The episode was one of a number of setbacks for the Arctic drilling program last year. Shell now says it hopes to drill five exploratory wells in the region during the 2013 drilling season, which begins in mid-July.

Last August, the National Wildlife Federation’s Jeremy Symons warned of the dangers of Shell’s Arctic drilling plans, even calling out the Kulluk by name. Today, his warning seems eerily prescient:

This week a Shell Oil Co. drilling rig, the Kulluk, headed towards the Beaufort Sea off Alaska’s northern coast to begin drilling operations.  This flagship effort to open up Arctic waters to drilling has already received the thumbs up from the Obama Administration. I can’t help but recall all those “what if” moments following the BP Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico.  What if we hadn’t turned a blind eye to insufficient spill planning?  What if we had proper oversight of oil companies and held them accountable for lying about the risks before approving their permits?  What if we truly weighed the risks and the rewards of moving into new drilling frontiers before disaster strikes?

Shell’s rig is not simply another rig.  It is the pioneer, intended to open a new frontier and convert an unspoiled aquatic wilderness into the next big oil rush. These waters are vital habitat for an abundance of wildlife such as ringed seals, as well as whales that travel the world’s oceans and birds that migrate across North America every year.

Shell’s troubles are far from the only trouble the oil industry has seen in Alaska recently. There was a BP oil spill in July 2011 and a Spanish drilling company’s well blowout in February 2012. As a 2010 National Wildlife Federation report detailed, oil disasters are tragically common.

The National Wildlife Federation will continue monitoring efforts to free the Kulluk and any impacts on wildlife. Keep checking back to Wildlife Promise for updates.

This is a guest post by Sara Gosman, a water resources attorney for National Wildlife Federation.

In the past few years, the Great Lakes region has seen a surge of interest in natural gas development using hydraulic fracturing. This controversial technique—commonly known as “fracking”—injects a mix of water, chemicals, and sand at high pressures to break open shale. Natural gas and liquids then move into the well and up to the surface.

Fracking of shallow wells has occurred in Michigan for over 30 years. But the recent interest is in fracking of deep wells, which can extend more than a mile below the surface and up to two miles horizontally. Fracking of deep wells requires more water, more chemicals, and greater pressure on the well itself. Thus, these wells pose more risks for water resources.

Because of these risks, the National Wildlife Federation is particularly concerned about the impact of fracking on the watershed that feeds the Great Lakes—the Great Lakes Basin. So far, only a few deep shale wells have been drilled within the Basin: most are in Michigan while one is in Ohio. But deep shale underlies much of the Basin, and energy companies are looking to “liquids-rich” shale plays that provide both natural gas and liquids. For example, Encana Corporation, which holds 43,000 acres of mineral rights in the Utica/Collingwood play in Michigan, announced to investors in May 2012 that it intends to focus on the Utica/Collingwood, where it contends it has “first mover advantage.”

Today, NWF is releasing a report, Hydraulic Fracturing in the Great Lakes Basin: The State of Play in Michigan and Ohio, on the legal framework governing fracking in these two states. Before any boom in fracking within the Great Lakes Basin, the report aims to assess current laws to determine whether they protect the Basin’s water resources.

In the report, we consider not just the practice of fracking itself, but the entire life cycle of fracking as it relates to water:  from the freshwater needed for fracking; to activities on the well site, including fracking of the well; to the ways in which the wastewater is disposed of.

For each of these three areas, we review the laws in Michigan and Ohio. Because there are very few federal requirements, the report primarily focuses on state law. Indeed, both Michigan and Ohio have recently taken steps to address the risks of fracking. We conclude that the laws in each of the areas address some of the risks of fracking, but that more needs to be done to fully protect the Great Lakes Basin.

Based on our findings, the report offers recommendations to improve the regulatory framework in both states. For example, we suggest that:

• Both states should regulate water withdrawals for fracking under their water use laws and protect all water resources from significant impacts.
• Both states should improve regulation of fracking itself. The states should require fracturing fluid to be tested for contaminants of concern prior to fracking. The states should also require a well operator to submit a list of potential chemicals in the fluid prior to fracking. After fracking, the operator should submit a list of the chemicals actually used.
• Both states should require disposal wells that accept flowback to meet some of the critical requirements imposed on wells that accept other forms of industrial wastewater. In addition, the federal government or the states should require that flowback be treated as hazardous waste if it has hazardous characteristics.

I want to thank the law students who worked with me on the report and the Environmental Law and Policy Program at the University of Michigan Law School for its academic support of the grant project. The views in the report are the National Wildlife Federation’s.

The issue of fracking generates a lot of heated debate, but not always a lot of light. In writing this report, our goal was to shine a light on the issue by thoroughly analyzing the legal framework. My hope is that this assessment will help the states better protect the Great Lakes Basin from the risks of fracking.

Help protect our nation’s wildlife and waterways from fracking.>>>

Tundra Swan in flight (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

Tens of thousands of ducks and geese prized by sportsman, including Northern Pintails, Snow Geese, Greater White-fronted geese, Tundra Swans, Long-Tailed Ducks and more depend on the Reserve for nesting, feeding and molting each summer before heading south once again.  And the Reserve’s two major caribou herds, including the largest in Alaska, provide a vital subsistence resource for Native Alaskans as well as recreational hunting opportunities for sportsmen.

BLM’s draft management plan identifies an “Alternative B” that does the best job of protecting critical wildlife habitat in the Reserve – let BLM know you support that alternative.

Tell the Bureau of Land Management to Preserve the Best Places in the Reserve!

Lend your voice to the thousands of sportsmen, birders, subsistence users and others weighing in to ensure that the spectacular wildlife of the Reserve is protected for generations to come.

In the northwest corner of the northwestern-most state in the union lies the misnamed National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska (“Reserve”).  Well, the Alaska part is right, but the rest of it, not so much.

Contrary to the image conjured by its name, the Reserve is actually a place of unparalleled wildlife habitat supporting a wildly diverse and spectacular array of creatures.  Caribou, grizzly bears, wolves, wolverines, musk ox, walrus, seals, polar bears . . . the iconic wildlife of the Arctic are all well-represented in the Reserve.  But the wildlife that occurs in the most staggering numbers  – and probably the most familiar to folks in the 48 states – are the millions of migratory birds that summer in the Reserve and then fly south to almost every state in the nation.

A pair of Northern Pintails takes flight. Photo by Larry Hitchens.

Surprisingly, there’s not much oil in the Reserve – enough for about a month at the current U.S. consumption rate according to the U.S. Geological Survey.  The Obama Administration is currently deciding how much of the Reserve’s wildlife habitat to protect, and how much to lease to the oil companies.  Given the abundance and diversity of wildlife at stake, and the relatively minimal oil resource, National Wildlife Federation supports a balanced approach that protects the most important habitat while allowing careful oil development where appropriate. 

Tell the Bureau of Land Management to protect crucial wildlife habitat in the Reserve.

According to the Alaska Dispatch, a well being drilled by Spanish company Repsol hit a methane gas pocket, which triggered the blowout.  A crew of specialists all the way from Texas is traveling to the site, but meanwhile the well is spewing drilling mud–42,000 gallons and counting.  An expert from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation explained that the drilling mud “is hazardous to the tundra.”

Should Big Oil Be Allowed to Drill (And Spill) in Places Like the Arctic Refuge?

credit, Susanne Miller/USFWS

Some misguided members of Congress are using the excuse that extracting dirty fuels from a beautiful and untouched national treasure will pay for highway projects.  But, thanks to people voicing their outrage across the country, some elected officials are standing up against the transportation and energy bill (H.R. 3408) that would bring ruin to wildlife and wild places.

The “terrible” transportation package in Congress opens up new drilling areas on the East and West Coast, off the coast of Alaska, and in the pristine coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, which is home to iconic wildlife like polar bears, caribou, Arctic fox, wolves, and more. House Republican leadership are using rare procedural tricks to split the bill up because many Members take serious issue with drilling impacts, so they may lack the votes to pass it all at once.

Representatives object to drilling off the coast of places like California and along the Atlantic coast, where oil spills and well blowouts, like in the Gulf spill and right now in Alaska, threaten communities that depend on tourism. Other lawmakers worry that a provision to grant industry 2 million acres of public land for oil shale speculation would generate zero energy, zero revenue, and zero jobs. A group of House Republicans even sent Speaker Boehner a letter requesting that Arctic Refuge drilling be taken out of the bill, continuing a legacy of moderate support for this pristine wilderness.

All of this new drilling revenue is supposed to pay for a chunk of the $260 billion transportation bill.  But there’s one minor detail:  much of this revenue is speculative and wouldn’t even pay for 1% of the total cost.  Groups like Club for Growth, Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Taxpayers for Common Sense agree that it is a fiscally irresponsible approach to paying for highways, bridges, and mass transit with imaginary money.

But Pipelines Transport Oil, Not People

The transportation package also requires approval of the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline permit within 30 days,  which irresponsibly overturns a recent decision by the President to deny the permit.  This pipeline would move dirty Canadian tar sludge through the heartland of the U.S. to export to foreign countries, making the America complicit in the destruction of wilderness habitat in Alberta’s boreal forests and the senseless  poisoning of wildlife to make room for the pipeline. The transportation legislation, if passed in its current state, would also fuel  climate change that is already causing severe drought and economic damage in the United States.   Building the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would threaten America’s clean water supplies, raise gas prices in the U.S. and result in a net loss to American jobs.

The legislation also waives environmental review for many projects, takes away dedicated dollars for public transportation and even defunds a program to establish safe routes for kids to get to school.

Big Oil is already double-dipping into our wallets.  It is making record profit through taxpayer-funded subsidies and every time we pay at the pump–the industry doesn’t need another expensive gift from us.

Help Protect Wildlife from Arctic Drilling

Arctic wildlife are already suffering from loss of sea ice from global warming.  The lives of species like the ringed seal and the polar bear would be at even greater risk from an oil spill in the Arctic Ocean, which would be virtually impossible to clean up in the remote and rough, frigid waters.  The blowout on Alaska’s North Slope is a perfect example: a crew of specialists had to be called up from Texas to try and control the well.

Wildlife need you to speak up for them and tell their member of Congress that the entire transportation package is a bad deal for wildlife, our clean air and water, and the future of public transportation.

Urge your decision-makers to make the right choice to protect wildlife from drilling >>

Background: TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, has applied for a Presidential permit to build a 1,700-mile crude oil tar sands pipeline from Alberta, Canada, through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma to Texas refineries on the Gulf of Mexico. The pipeline is designed to carry more than 800,000 barrels of thick, tar-like oil every day. To produce one barrel of this heavy crude, extractors level the forest, dig up four tons of earth, consume two to four barrels of fresh water, burn large amounts of natural gas and create toxic sludge holding ponds. Tar sands oil is one of the most polluting, highest-carbon fuels, a fuel that contributes to the warming of the planet.

Fact vs. Fiction

TransCanada officials have claimed that Keystone would create “20,000 high paying jobs for American families” and “118,000 person years of employment in spinoff jobs in communities along the pipeline.” Citing methodological flaws in several studies, Cornell’s analysts reached a different conclusion. The project “has minimal job creation potential,” they found.

Here’s what the industry-sponsored studies left out:

• Fuel prices will rise in 15 Midwest states. TransCanada’s own consultant told the Canadian National Energy Board that part of the purpose of the pipeline is to raise the price of heavy crude oil in the Midwest.
• Oil spills will threaten jobs and the farming industry. Phase 1 of the Keystone has spilled 14 times in its first year of operation. Oil spills will despoil rivers, drinking water sources and the Ogallala Aquifer, which will put at risk the livelihoods of farmers and ranchers and the tourism industry.
• Keystone will kill jobs in Canada. The pipeline will end plans to build “upgraders” in Alberta that were expected to generate 22,000 construction and refinery jobs and arrest tar sands development. “Refining capacity in Texas has recently been expanded to accommodate tar sands oil – most of those jobs are now gone from the U.S. economy,” say Cornell researchers.
• Pollution has health care costs. Keystone XL will increase air pollution emissions and reduce air quality in both Canada and the U.S. Treating respiratory and other illnesses has economic costs and those costs destroy jobs.

Don’t believe the polluter hype and check out Cornell University’s full report. In short, Keystone will kill jobs, not create them.

Remember the days when Big Tobacco insisted their product was safe? For a long time, people bought in: doctors lit up, mothers smoked around their kids … just watch an episode of “Mad Men” for a visual. We eventually wised up, but Phillip Morris, R.J. Reynolds and co. spent decades denying that cigarettes cause cancer, in the face of overwhelming evidence. To put it bluntly, they lied for a living.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss—Big Oil.

Responders could only restore a small part of the ecosystem after the Exxon Valdez spill, 800 miles south of Shell's proposed sites. Cleanup would be next to impossible that far north. (photo: ARLIS Reference)

Since the BP oil spill, the press and groups like NWF have turned the spotlight on these companies and discovered the not-so-shocking truth: Big Oil has a casual relationship with honesty. We put out a report last year that detailed how major accidents have become the norm for the petroleum industry, whose CEO’s have taken a page from the tobacco textbook and apparently think that if they lie often enough—and boldly enough—that people will believe them. The lie? “Trust us. We know what we’re doing.”

Case in point: Shell Oil Company was recently approved to drill in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas off Alaska’s northern coast. Shell has been drooling over this area for years but has been delayed by its own corner-cutting and challenges from environmental groups. We’ve already detailed some of the problems with Arctic drilling including nightmarish weather and the potential impacts on wildlife, and last month’s major spill in the North Sea put another black mark on Shell’s record. But now, barring an unexpected reversal from the White House, the company is ready to start even though they clearly pulled their “facts” out of thin air.

Well here’s the REAL fact: Shell can’t clean up a spill in the Arctic, any more than Big Tobacco could make a “safe” cigarette. They know this. We know this. Somebody should probably tell the regulators before everything goes up in smoke.

Here’s your chance. We have until September 26 to tell the government what we think of Shell’s bogus claims, and you can submit your own comment online in less time than it takes to brush your teeth.

A polar bear keeps close to her young along the Beaufort Sea coast in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (photo: Susanne Miller/USFWS)

TAKE ACTION and add your voice to the thousands of other Americans who are speaking up to protect Arctic wildlife and ensure the health of our oceans.

—————————–

Click here to learn more about National Wildlife Federation’s work in the Arctic.

www.fueleconomy.gov

As temperatures soar into the 90’s, beach outings, bbq’s, and pool parties are in full swing, but not without a significant cost. Families once again are experiencing pain at the pump caused by high and unpredictable gas prices. Drivers have to devote more and more of their incomes to filling up their cars, putting a strain on already tight budgets.

Our transportation sector is 95 percent dependent on oil which leaves us at the mercy of unpredictable spikes in gas prices and unfriendly or unstable countries who control many of the vast reserves of oil we rely on. As more and more consumers from countries like China and India enter the global marketplace and demand the very same luxuries we as Americans are privileged to, reserves will only be strained further. How will we cope with increasing demand but dwindling reserves? More drilling is NOT the answer.

The people of Montana are learning all too well the consequences of our rush to drill without giving safety considerations a second thought. Hauntingly similar to the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the middle of the United States is now subject to another massive oil spill. On June 30^th, an Exxon Mobil pipeline ruptured and spewed thousands of gallons of oil into the Yellowstone River. The situation is still far from contained and the extent of the damage is still not known.

Cheap oil is tapped out and what is left is in ever more dangerous sites and requires more destructive methods to extract. It is time we take control of our energy future and demand from our leaders REAL solutions to the energy crisis. We have the tools to cut our dependence on oil TODAY. Increased fuel efficiency, electric vehicles and investment in mass transit, not only sever our reliance on oil, but save Americans money and create jobs at home.

Check out NWF’s new resource, “Taking Control: Real Solutions to Rising Gas Prices,” which highlights that:

• Today we spend two-thirds of a trillion dollars a year on oil, half of it sent overseas.
• An electric or plug-in electric hybrid car frees American families from the gas pump altogether and enables them to fuel up at an outlet at home at a cost equivalent to less than $1/gallon.
• Americans overwhelmingly support a 60 mpg fuel economy standard – by a margin of nearly 2 to 1
• Federal investment of $40 billion on public transit and intercity rail would create 3.7 million direct and indirect jobs – 600,000 of those in the manufacturing sector alone.
• Oil companies receive approximately $4 billion a year in federal subsidies – money that could be invested to spur innovation and create American jobs.

The House Appropriations Committee passed its fiscal year 2012 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill this week which includes a provision that prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from moving forward on the next round of vehicle fuel efficiency standards.

Speak up against this and other attacks on our clean air, clean water and wildlife.

Murkowski's Arctic Refuge drilling bill bring adverse impacts to polar bears and other Arctic wildlife

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski has introduced another Arctic Refuge directional drill bill that she claims “should silence any potential controversy over ANWR development.”  Here’s how the controversy would be silenced:

Allow intrusive seismic testing and surface exploration activities with no mandatory seasonal restrictions to protect wildlife or wilderness in the coastal plain, the “biological heart” of the Arctic Refuge;

Waive fundamental legal requirements to consider new studies and information and instead deem a 1987 environmental analysis adequate to support drilling the Refuge today.  Mandate a lease sale of at least 200,000 acres within 18 months and another within two years;

 Authorize the Bureau of Land Management to hold further lease sales in regardless of the opinion of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency charged with managing the Arctic Refuge;

Ensure a rubberstamp for BLM decisions by instructing courts that they ”shall be presumed to be correct unless proven otherwise by clear and convincing evidence.”

So let’s see: disruptive activities in the Arctic Refuge like seismic testing and exploratory drilling; mandatory lease sales, with mandatory dates and sizes, to be run by the BLM regardless of what the Refuge managing agency, the Fish and Wildlife Service, thinks? 

And regardless of what the socio-economic, environmental and other studies say?  Oh wait, there won’t be any studies.  A 1987 study will be deemed all we ever needed to know, despite the fact that it’s 24 years old and incapable of assessing the wildlife, habitat, climate change and other relevant issues of today.  And if all this might lead to some underinformed decisions?  Not to worry, the bill tells the courts to presume everything is OK.  

Silence the controversy?  I don’t think so.  Reminds me of her attempt to silence the climate change controversy by gutting the EPA’s ability to do anything about carbon pollution . . . but that’s another story.

Post was written by Tracy Sabetta, pictured here with her daughter. Tracy leads the outreach to NWF supporters in Ohio. You can reach her at tsabetta@initiativeohio.com.

You know what they say about the best laid plans, right?

Conservation leaders and outdoor enthusiasts decided to bring our case proposals to drill for oil and natural gas in Ohio state parks to the people’s house yesterday.

We were well-prepared to stage a “camp in” on the lawn of the Ohio Statehouse to send a clear message to lawmakers:  If drilling is going to keep us from camping in our state parks, then we will have to camp right here in your front yard.

Ohio citizens gather at the State Capitol to oppose drilling in state parks

Then the skies opened up, and the rain poured down…and poured down…and poured down.
Concerns about muddy conditions on the lawn forced our campers inside, but did not dampen our spirits.

The, “We Love Our Parks, We Love Clean Water,” event was still a  great success.  Volunteers from across Ohio crowded into the basement of the Ohio Statehouse with their fishing poles, picnic baskets and lawn chairs, and proceeded to camp in one of the busiest areas of state government.

Staff and volunteers circulated petitions and distributed information to everyone who walked through the area, including nearly every member of the committee currently hearing the bill in the House of Representatives.  Campers spread blankets on the floor of the Statehouse and opened their sack lunches—inviting the legislators to join them!

The event was capped off with a rousing press conference where legislators were offered a second opportunity to publicly declare which state parks, state nature preserves, and state scenic rivers in their local legislative district they would vote to keep closed from oil and gas drilling or would vote to “convert from natural parks to industrial parks” and open up to extraction.

“As a state legislator, I understand that it is my duty to protect the health and welfare of the people of Ohio,” said State Representative Teresa Fedor (D-Toledo).  “With so many uncertainties facing us with these drilling proposals, we’re going to have to have answers before we open up and really put the future of our state parks at risk.  Eleven million Ohioans expect their parks to remain pristine, gorgeous, protected.”

Speakers at the press conference included the Ohio Environmental Council, Ohio League of Women Voters, Ohio Interfaith Power and Light, and seven legislators opposed to drilling.  Media coverage has been great with three TV stations, two radio stations, and six newspapers reporting on the event.  Even the lobbying from the Ohio Oil and Gas Association watched from the background!

Now, it is crunch time.  The bill is slated to be voted out of committee on Tuesday of next week, and the full House will cast their votes on Wednesday.  Drilling opponents are ready—we are hitting the telephones and working hard to keep this issue in the media.

So while we did not get to pitch our tents on the Statehouse lawn as expected, we did make the best of a soggy day to tell our legislators that their drilling proposals are all wet!

To see press coverage of the event, click here!