Science and Society
The Latest Developments in Science and Technology
Ned Potter is the science correspondent for ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson." He has reported on such topics as space exploration, the human genome and climate change.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« A Nuclear Reactor that Fits on a Truck | Main | U.S. Greenhouse Gases Dropping? No, But.... »
Fuel Spill in the Antarctic?
November 28, 2007 3:08 PM
Passengers from the M/S Explorer, the cruise ship that sank last week off the Antarctic coast, are safely in warmer climates. But depending in which report you see, there may be other victims.
Helen Hughes, who reports for us from Santiago, says Chile's environment minister, Ana Lya Uriarte, has expressed concern about diesel fuel spilling from the wreck. On Sunday, says the ministry, a flyover spotted a fuel slick of approximately 1 to 1.5 square kilometers (about half a square mile) near the wreck site. "They also noted the presence of an estimated 2,500 penguins and sea fowl on ice floes in the area," she writes.
The waters where the Explorer sank are disputed territory. Argentina also claims jurisdiction--and authorities there tell Joe Goldman, who works for us from Buenos Aires, that they do not believe the fuel tanks on the ship broke open. They say it's quite likely that other liquids from the ship--from bilge tanks, the plumbing system, etc.--got into the water, and if there's a slick, that's what showing up.
There are a few news stories on all this--one from the Russian news agency RIA Novosti can be found HERE. Earth Times has run a piece, which you can find HERE.
Depending on what may actually have spilled, petroleum breaks up but does not readily evaporate in the cold, choppy water near the Antarctic. So, Helen reports, the Chilean navy is containing spillage through "mechanical" means--most likely surrounding it with floating booms.
Oil from the ship would be capable of forming a slick. but if it were leaking from a wreck three miles deep, it might not rise to the surface, says the environmental group Oceana.
The Explorer went down 40 miles from any shoreline, we're told. The water there is nearly three miles deep. But the location is remote, and information is slow to come back. More when we get it.
November 28, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (5)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/23751878
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fuel Spill in the Antarctic?:
this can be yip if i need to ok???????????????????????????????????????
Posted by: jack | Nov 28, 2007 6:31:58 PM
Mankind is like a cancer upon this planet.
We should just learn to live within our means and leave well enough alone. Gas and oil have been nothing but bad news since day one.
Posted by: RW | Nov 28, 2007 6:54:36 PM
The more ice melts and oceans open up to more traffic, the more ways we have to destroy our planet. The near-sightedness of recent generations sickens me. Don't they care about a healthy world for even their own children and grand-children? It's hard to imagine that they genuinely do. Change will be difficult but is absolutely necessary - and the more time goes by, the more traumatic the changes will be.
Please, Earthlings, do something now. We aren't ready to abandon Earth for another location. This is all we have; let's try a little harder to not to screw it up permanently.
Posted by: Pablo | Nov 28, 2007 7:21:06 PM
This alleged oil spill while potentially not good is infinitessimal compared to what washed up on shores around the world during WWII. Stop the whining. Stop the stupidity. Don't you see the insanity at work on the recent REAL spill in San Francisco Bay? Upwards of $10K US was spent on cleaning a few hundred seagulls and other extremely prolific birds....
Posted by: TH1567 | Nov 28, 2007 8:46:47 PM
That was EACH Bird...that is not a wise use of monetary resources
Posted by: TH1567 | Nov 28, 2007 8:47:45 PM
Post a comment
