Huge Australian Oil Spill Raises Questions

(CBS)  An oil spill disaster that could rival the impact of the Exxon Valdez is playing out tonight off the coast of Australia. For 10 weeks, a crippled deep-water oil rig has been leaking millions of gallons into the ocean between Australia's northwest coast and the islands of Indonesia.

It is bringing to light the possible environmental impact when offshore drilling goes wrong, as CBS News correspondent John Blackstone reports.

With explosive gas spewing into the air and thousands of gallons of oil pouring into the water each day the spill began claiming sea snakes, birds and dolphins.

The blowout is thought to have been caused by a fracture in a pipe 8,000 feet beneath the sea floor. Again and again over two months the Thailand-based company that owns the rig tried and failed to plug the well.

"We remain committed and resolved to achieve our goal," said Jose Martins, chief financial officer of the company, Pttep Oil. "That may require a few more attempts."

Just how much has spilled is uncertain. Environmental groups say satellite photos show its spread across more than 9,000 square miles and estimate some 9 million gallons have poured into the ocean - nearly as much as the 11 million gallons that escaped from the Exxon Valdez in Alaska.

"There's no cleanup technology available on earth to clean up a spill that big," said Richard Charter of Defenders of Wildlife.

The oil company insists the spill is much smaller but refuses to give a number. Environmentalists monitoring the damage say flocks of sea birds, groups of whales, porpoises and sea turtles have been seen feeding near the oil. But the region is so large and so remote there is no count of wildlife killed or injured.

While the spill is far from American waters, it's come at an awkward time for those pushing more offshore drilling here under the slogan, "Drill, baby, drill."

Well, this is 'Drill, baby, oops,'" Charter said. "What we're seeing now and it's very tragic - when a blowout happens, we can't shut 'em off. These are forces of nature."

The rig off Australia was state of the art, just two years old. This week, just after the well was finally capped, the platform exploded and burned - bringing a spectacular end to the flow of oil but adding fuel to the worldwide debate over offshore drilling.

[a88toto]

The oil platform company should be given 3 days to stop the leak, and then the platform should have a BOMB dropped on it! That's the only way to stop a leak like that. A billion dollars damage to clean up the enviroment,or a billion dollar platform to rebuild, that should be the sentence handed to that company.

[louiville35]

You are a COMPLETE MORON. The waste material from nuclear energy production is FATAL FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS! It CAN'T be safely stored, CAN'T be safely moved, and IT CAN NEVER be cleaned up. And no sane person wants any of it anywhere near them, because (as you did point out) ACCIDENTS HAPPEN!

Nuclear is NOT clean enery. It is the most vile, most dangerous, most "dirty" form of energy available.-by bill0bob November 4, 2009 9:48 PM EST
===========================================================================
"Nuclear is NOT clean enery" sure it is bob, just look at it this way we take elements with a half life of 700 million-2 billion years then convert them to energy with a byproduct that has a half life of 200K years AND we remove forever the elements that can be used to MAKE bombs.

You know one of those swords into plow shears things. A Big "WIN WIN". Your problems is you think in months not years.

Just because man touched it along the way doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Not only that but fusion reactors are just around the corner.

[louiville35]

by Ms_enza November 5, 2009 8:28 AM EST
No, nuclear is not clean energy.

Solar, hydro-electric, and wind are the cleanest forms and they are not "totally" clean. Environmental impacts of the chemicals used and the river flows lost take tolls too -- albeit infinitesimal compared to nuclear and fossil, and nuclear is infinitesimal when compared to fossil fuels.

It would be (has been) folly to view nuclear waste and its long half-life and storage difficulties in the absence of CO, CO2, SO5, and an entire string of Cs, Ns, Ss, Os 2s, 3,s and 5s, in all the gas, liquid, and solid forms erasing YEARS off the lives of people and the planet.

The next magical trick of physicists is to wring the last bits of energy out of the stuff.
=============================================================================
Hmmmm

Let me expain you do know we stand in front of a massive nuclear/fusion reactor? That except for distance and some gasses has no shielding at all from us. Couple that with the known nuclear reaction that has gone on for billions of years day and night right under our feet.

That kind of contridicts your

That naturally occurring nuclear reactors have been found on the surface of the planet and that the waste from these reactors have only moved a few meters from where the reactions took place 2 billion years later.

That nuclear research/power have (and continue everyday) saved millions of lives more then any destructive use of nuclear power.

That "erasing YEARS off the lives of people and the planet" is at best a stretch since most people get their big dose while flying in planes of from naturally occurring elements like radon in the ground or granite counter tops.

[rickwar]

Someone expected anything different than this? The result here is what you can expect at some point regardless of prcautions.

Hmm, solar and wind are not 24/7/365? Actually that assessment is wrong. The wind blows ALL the time, just at slower speeds, technology would allow for varying the shape of the airfoil (blades) to adjust and create power with wind speeds as low as 2 mph, just not quite there yet.

Solar, stop thinking earth based solar and start thinking space based solar sent in the form of microwave energy beamed back to earth and don't forget that solar can be "stored" as energy, think both active and passive. Also the sun shines everyday, just hidden in places by clouds and the infra red still passes through them. Ever heard of the grid? It transmits energy from one place to another all across this country. So, not sunny in Oregon today? It's sunny in California, electricity flows through the grid to where needed. So solar is 24/7/365.

Don't forget tidal energy, the tides are active 24/7/365 and some areas use it now.

As to nuclear, well, first, it's not that clean. It's clean only from the carbon side of the equation. The radioactive waste is a huge problem never answered. Check out the problems at Hanford, Los Alamos, and several indian reservations that have accepted the waste and 60 years on are finding radioactivity in their water supplies and rock strata. Yes, from a carbon standpoint it's "green" but that's as far as it goes.

There is no "Clean Coal" there are cleanner coal burning plants, while some coal burns hotter and cleaner, it's not a clean or carbonless fuel. And, it is a finite resource.

Oil? A finite resource, in fact we may have already tapped all the easy sources and even the oil producers admit there will be less in the near future. The Alaskan reserve that the Drill baby Drill group would love to get to (read oil companies)would supply the US for about 13 months if used outright, that is from both government and oil company estimates.

The time to begin our changes is right now while we have a variety of sources to use and time instead of clinging to all the old ideas and protecting old companies that in a sense are raping us and the earth each day

[rickwar]

Someone expected anything different than this? The result here is what you can expect at some point regardless of prcautions.

Hmm, solar and wind are not 24/7/365? Actually that assessment is wrong. The wind blows ALL the time, just at slower speeds, technology would allow for varying the shape of the airfoil (blades) to adjust and create power with wind speeds as low as 2 mph, just not quite there yet.

Solar, stop thinking earth based solar and start thinking space based solar sent in the form of microwave energy beamed back to earth and don't forget that solar can be "stored" as energy, think both active and passive. Also the sun shines everyday, just hidden in places by clouds and the infra red still passes through them. Ever heard of the grid? It transmits energy from one place to another all across this country. So, not sunny in Oregon today? It's sunny in California, electricity flows through the grid to where needed. So solar is 24/7/365.

Don't forget tidal energy, the tides are active 24/7/365 and some areas use it now.

As to nuclear, well, first, it's not that clean. It's clean only from the carbon side of the equation. The radioactive waste is a huge problem never answered. Check out the problems at Hanford, Los Alamos, and several indian reservations that have accepted the waste and 60 years on are finding radioactivity in their water supplies and rock strata. Yes, from a carbon standpoint it's "green" but that's as far as it goes.

There is no "Clean Coal" there are cleanner coal burning plants, while some coal burns hotter and cleaner, it's not a clean or carbonless fuel. And, it is a finite resource.

Oil? A finite resource, in fact we may have already tapped all the easy sources and even the oil producers admit there will be less in the near future. The Alaskan reserve that the Drill baby Drill group would love to get to (read oil companies)would supply the US for about 13 months if used outright, that is from both government and oil company estimates.

The time to begin our changes is right now while we have a variety of sources to use and time instead of clinging to all the old ideas and protecting old companies that in a sense are raping us and the earth each day

[Senor_Lazlo]

one thing this report neglects to say is that he oil platform and rig were built and installed in 2008 -- then failed in 13 months -- so much for 'newer, safer technology'. some other thoughts: the jobs and revenue numbers the drilling lobbies are pushing in coastal states pale to the numbers tourism already provides (at least along the mid-atlantic and southeast) in some cases by a factor of 4:1. jobs and revenue that will be around as long as we don't senselessly risk them for a paltry supply of oil and natural gas. learn more at nottheanswer.org

[lileoj]

This is all the more reason why we need to get rid of these dangerous fuel sources. And Im not even talking just oil. Nuclear also is dangerous. It needs to be solar, wind, and sea power (wave power technology). Australia has some of the most beautiful oceans and we just messed up a HUGE area of it =(

[SAMTORRES66]

There is tons of enviromental risks by drilling offshore. Republicans know that, do they care? NO.. all they care about is the might green dollar.

[bubbadubba]

"let them drill! let them drill! let them drill! No restrictions! No restrictions!"
Stupid oil company brainwashed right wing parrots and bribed politicians.
Yes I mean Palin too.