Posts

Summerland Oil…Again

Image: Harry Rabin, 2016

Summerland, CA Beach just below Lookout Park.  Image: Harry Rabin, 2016

For the past several days we have been seeing unusually heavy oil deposition along the beaches in Summerland, centered just below Lookout Park.  While we have been in a period of higher than normal seep activity for the past year or so, this tarring event seems beyond a mere seep event.  This smacks of some type of oiling event from an (as of yet) unknown source, discrete or well bore.

Montecito Tar 03-04-16a

ESRM Tech Lab as Studio
Sean skype interview Tech Lab for KEYT Interview 03-04-16a

In the midst of teaching my “Intro to Drones” class (ESRM 370) this past Friday, we got a ring from our local ABC affiliate, KEYT3 TV.  They were looking for comment on this beach deposition, but my packed schedule was too full to arrange a regular interview on camera.  Cue our new ESRM web camera and Skype.  While Skype’s low-res connection didn’t do justice to that new HD camera, this was another example of the power of CSUCI and ESRM.  Our interdisciplinary perspectives, community service orientation, and desire to communicate more widely motivated the purchase of that new camera a mere week before.  On top of that, our brand-new, well-lit Tech Lab in Sierra Hall proved a convenient backdrop for an interview after our class wrapped up and before I had to run off to another meeting.  Much thanks to Kim Gregory, CSUCI’s great Press Office, and AARR’s Tim Holcombe’s Skyping skills to get the whole hook-up in place while I was running between students and engagements.

Sean & Tim skype interview Tech Lab for KEYT Interview 03-04-16

Tim on tech detail as we did a sound check before the questions flowed.

KEYT pulled together a brief, but nice piece in time for their 5 O-Clock news (below).

KEYT Summerland Oil Story March 2016

Becker Well

Many locals have been quite concerned for several years about potential releases from the Becker Well or similar such long-abandoned, but not necessarily properly capped, wells.  The Becker Well was drilled sometime in the late 1800s, predating our modern suite of resource management agencies, modern environmental regulations, and even effective drilling records.  Becker is in the surf zone.  This appears to in part explain why it was never properly abandoned.  It has a history of small but persistent oil leaks, apparently often being behind deposition onto the beach or into the nearshore ocean off Summerland’s coast.  These ongoing drip-drip-drip of oil releases motivated the State Lands Commission to begin a re-excavation and attempt to reseal the well starting in late fall of 2015.

Images: State Lands Commission Press Release on November 2, 2015.

Images: State Lands Commission Press Release on November 2, 2015.

The Great Oil Miscalculation

It is hard to underestimate the influence our Federal Energy Information Agency (EIA) has on energy markets.  Their annual and quarterly reports, littered with predictions, drive investments, public policy, and global understanding of energy production and consumption.

So the recent coming to terms with the fact that the EIA has of late been hugely overestimating American petroleum consumption is cause to sit up and take notice.  A very readable overview of this overestimate was pulled together this past summer by Lydia Cox for the World Economic Forum:

US oil production has transformed itself fundamentally in the past decade.  Between 1970 and 2008, US crude oil production fell by nearly half as conventional wells were depleted.  Since 2008, however, production has rebounded from 5 million barrels per day to an average of 8.7 million barrels per day in 2014.  The almost entirely unexpected increase – largely attributable to technological innovations such as advances in horizontal drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and seismic imaging – has helped the US become the world leader in oil production.

Whereas the developments in oil production have been widely reported and appreciated, far less attention has been paid to US petroleum consumption’s remarkable decline relative to both recent levels and past projections — one of the biggest surprises to have occurred in global oil markets in recent years.  Petroleum consumption in the US was lower in 2014 than it was in 1997, despite the fact that the economy grew almost 50% over this period.  As illustrated in Figure 1, consumption rose steadily from 1984 through the early 2000s, peaking in 2004 before decreasing in conjunction with rising oil prices.

US petroleum consumption from 1949-2014 in millions of barrels per day, 1949-2014. Figure: Energy Information Administration (cited in Cox 2015).

US petroleum consumption between 1949 and 2014 (in millions of barrels of crude oil per day). Figure: Energy Information Administration (as cited in Cox 2015).

The deviation from the EIA’s estimation from more than a decade ago for our American consumption is sizable:

Deviation between historic (2003) and current (2015) EIA predictions of U.S. petroleum consumption to 2025. Figure: Energy Information Administration (cited in Cox 2015).

Deviation between historic (2003) and current (2015) EIA predictions of U.S. petroleum consumption to 2025. Figure: Energy Information Administration (cited in Cox 2015).

Unfortunately this massive deviation from the expected growth in oil consumption is a uniquely American phenomenon and primarily a transportation sector phenomenon.  Simply put, we are burning less gas a diesel in our cars and trucks due to two main factors:

  • reduced miles driven on average (formally referred to as Vehicle Miles Traveled, VMT)
  • improved fuel efficiency
Reduced oil consumption owes almost entirely to improved fuel consumption rate and reduced vehicle miles traveled in the transportation sector. Figure: Energy Information Administration (cited in Cox 2015).

Reduced oil consumption owes almost entirely to improved fuel consumption rate and reduced vehicle miles traveled in the transportation sector. Figure: Energy Information Administration (cited in Cox 2015).

To date the reduced miles driven accounted for the majority of fuel savings,   As Cox explained:

Between 2003 and 2014, gasoline prices explain a large share of the fuel economy increase of the light-duty fleet.  However, over time we expect fuel economy standards to have a growing influence on fuel economy — both for the light- and heavy-duty fleets.  Fuel consumption from the heavy-duty fleet accounts for one-fifth of total transportation sector consumption, and is the fastest growing component in the transportation sector.  New heavy-duty fuel economy standards that the Administration has announced will reduce actual transportation sector consumption relative to even the 2015 projections, which do not reflect these new standards.

Given the importance of miles travelled in explaining the surprises, we use household survey data to present new evidence on the factors underlying the changes.  Demographics appear to explain a very large portion of the vehicle miles travelled developments, but we also find evidence that the effects of demographics and economic variables on vehicle miles travelled have changed over the past 20 years.  Such changes present a major challenge to projecting future petroleum consumption.

On into the future, improved fuel efficiency via improving Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standards will become to greater driver of lowered consumption:

In 2014, rising fuel economy explains roughly 25% of the consumption surprise, and vehicle miles travelled explain the remaining three quarters.  In the 2025 projections, however, the factors are more comparable, with fuel economy accounting for 45% of the surprise and vehicle miles travelled accounting for 55%, demonstrating the growing rule of public policies like fuel economy standards in shaping fuel use.

In sum, the high gas prices we have been seeing over the past decade have helped curb our driving habits and ultimately lead to our burning less fuel.  Over the coming decade, our current Clean Energy Strategy Policy will likely be at the root of this reduce oil consumption.  In and of itself it is not strong enough to get us to a sustainable future.  But this dramatic reduction in estimated oil consumption shows effective policy and clear drivers can indeed push our US economy into a low carbon future.  This can work.

References

Cox, Lydia.  2015.  The surprising decline in US petroleum consumption.  World Economic Forum Blog.  Posted July 10, 2015.  Accessed February 21, 2015.

Refugio Spill Seminars

Santa Barbara Channelkeeper is hosting a series of Refugio Oil Spill-related talks through the end of March 2016.  It looks like there will be some great presentations!

BrianHall_OilSpill

From their website:

The Plains All American Pipeline Spill provided a harsh reminder that oil exploration, production, and transport along our coast can have significant impacts on the environment, the economy, and our community. While federal, state, and local agencies, non-profits, and scientists are working to ensure we are better prepared for future spills, it is important for our community to be informed, engaged, and empowered to participate in this process.

Santa Barbara Channelkeeper and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History are co-hosting a six-part speaker series that will address how Santa Barbara is moving forward after the oil spill.  Experts will present on each topic (themes listed below), followed by a brief question and answer period moderated by Karl Hutterer. Each session will take place at Farrand Hall at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History from 6pm-8pm. Admission is free.

For questions about the series, please contact Jenna Driscoll at Santa Barbara Channelkeeper at jennad@sbck.org or 805-563-3377 x 5.

 

Details of upcoming presentations:

January 13th: Introduction to Oil Operations in Santa Barbara County

  • Errin Briggs, Energy Specialist, Santa Barbara County – Current and proposed oil operations in Santa Barbara County and measures the County has taken to increase oversight and safety.

February 10th: Oil Spill Preparedness: Santa Barbara’s Oil Spill Response Plan and new legislation to improve spill prevention and response

  • Robert Troy, Deputy Director, Santa Barbara County Office of Emergency Management – County perspective
  • Jennifer Gold, Environmental Scientist, California Department of Fish & Wildlife, Office of Spill Prevention and Response – Area Contingency Plans and Sensitive Site Updates for Santa Barbara, Ventura, and the Channel Islands.
  • Commander Rom Matthews, US Coast Guard – Coast Guard role in spill prevention and response.
  • Das Williams, California Assemblymember, District 37 – Recent legislation to improve spill prevention and response.
  • Wendy Motta, Office of Congresswoman Lois Capps – Federal pipeline regulations.

February 17th: Research and Monitoring Impacts from the Refugio Oil Spill

  • Mike Connell, Senior Environmental Scientist, California Department of Fish & Wildlife, Office of Spill Prevention and Response – OSPR monitoring
  • Dr. David Valentine, Earth Science Professor, UC Santa Barbara –TBD
  • Linda Krop, Chief Counsel, Environmental Defense Center – The Natural Resource Damage Assessment and how the public can participate.

 March 2nd: Do Your Part: Volunteering During an Oil Spill

  • Cindy Murphy, Local Government Outreach & Grants Coordinator, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Office of Spill Prevention and Response – How to volunteer during an oil spill.
  • Elaine Ibarra, Animal Care Coordinator and Administrative Assistant, Santa Barbara Wildlife Care Network – SBWCN volunteer opportunities.
  • Yoli McGlinchey, Emergency Services Manager, Santa Barbara Fire Department – The Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program.

March 16th: Truth about Seeps: Natural and Anthropogenic Sources of Oil in the Santa Barbara Channel 

  • Dr. Ira Leifer, Marine Science Institute and Chemical Engineering Researcher, UC Santa Barbara – Seeps in the Santa Barbara Channel
  • Steve Curran, Drilling Engineer, California State Lands Commission – Seeps from legacy wells and efforts to properly re-abandon them.

March 30th: Moving Beyond Oil: Sustainable Energy and Transportation in Santa Barbara County

  • Jefferson Litten, Energy Program Manager, Community Environmental Council – Community Choice Aggregation
  • Ed France, Executive Director, Santa Barbara Bicycle Coalition – Santa Barbara’s Bicycle Master Plan
  • Andy Heller, Summerland Resident, SBCK Board Member – How you can move away from fossil fuels in your life.

More Plastics…

Reporters are continuing to cover our work on documenting the magnitude of plastic pollution across our world ocean and the potential impacts from all this unintended petroleum waste, both macro and micro.  This week our CSUCI team headed over to downtown Ventura for a presentation to the general public on what we have found to date.

The VCReporter‘s Chris O’Neal covered this in a story that ran today:

Clare Steele is an associate professor of environmental science and resource management at California State University, Channel Islands, in Camarillo. Steele conducted research, along with seniors Dorothy Horn and Michaela Miller, that shows that plastic pollution, in particular so-called microplastics, has been found within the food chain through sand crabs, which in turn are eaten by shorebirds, who themselves are eaten by fish that could be consumed by humans.
“This is a considerable global problem that we’re really just getting a handle on,” said Steele. “We’ve known about plastic pollution on a large scale for quite some time, but people are really starting to focus on the microplastics.”
Steele and her undergraduate students began researching the topic of microplastic pollution by collecting sand samples from around the world, and in particular from Northern California and all the way to the Mexico coast.
“We’re getting samples of sand from Grand Cayman in the Caribbean, from South Africa and from Hawaii, and we’re finding this microplastic pollution in every place that we look,” said Steele.
Microplastic are, simply put, the remnants of the plastic bottles, bags, fishing lines, etc., that have broken down into smaller and smaller pieces rather than biodegrading into the environment, thereby creating pieces of plastic from half a millimeter in size to microscopic, unable to be seen by the human eye…

Dorothy Horn is a CSUCI senior studying environmental science and resource management and is one of Steele’s students. Since September 2015, Horn has dissected 125 sand crabs found on beaches from Alaska to San Diego and has discovered, thus far, that roughly 35 percent of them have “ambient fibers” within them.
Aside from being a danger to the animals that ingest them, Horn says these pollutants have a hidden danger to humans as well.
“In other species, invertebrates, mammals, they’ve shown to cause endocrine disruption, as in changes in hormone production,” said Horn, adding that increased hormones can disrupt reproduction. “If a little fish eats a little crab and so on up the food chain and then we eat the fish, well, there’s something called bio-accumulation of toxins that could have an effect on us.”
Toxins, says Steele, cling to plastics in the ocean like Velcro, creating a concentrated area of chemicals that leech out of the plastic.

Read the whole story here.

Anyone wanting a slightly shorter (than the hour long public lecture) and more technical overview of our microplastics work can check out this presentation (sorry for the lame camera work on my part) from a conference in Sacramento in November 2015:

Also, don’t forget our recent story in the Ventura County Star on microplastics.

Offshore Fracking Halted Temporarily

Oil Platform Santa Barbara Channel 10-22-05

The Santa Barbara Environmental Defense Center’s 2014 challenge to Interior’s policy of offshore fracking with limited public notice has met with success by the courts.  The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and Bureau on Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) have agreed to re-analyze the environmental dangers of offshore fracking, with their environmental impact assessment of the process/policy to be completed by May 28, 2016.

 

Oil fracking off the Ventura and Santa Barbara coast has been halted for at least a few months.

Source: Government Agrees to Halt Offshore Oil Fracking Off Coast

After the Spill: Oil & Coastal Wetland Loss

Recovery in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon has been something of a slow recovery when it comes to the most impacted communities (mid- and deepwater).  More readily-viewable areas have seen mixed recovery.

Much of the discussion in Louisiana has centered around the payments or “getting back to work.”  A new documentary, After The Spill, by Jon Bowermaster, places the aftermath of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill into the context of Louisiana’s perpetual lovefest with the oil and gas industry that has been a key driver of wetland loss and coastal erosion for more than seven decades.

Last Friday, the documentary screened at the Joy Theater in New Orleans.  Check out this provocative documentary on a screen near you and join the debate and discussion about the appropriate role of oil and gas extraction along the Gulf Coast.

See Mark Schleifstein’s summary here (from NOLA.com).

 

Mapping Spill Impacts

We saw some really neat efforts to map oil spills and explore impacts associated with spills in spatially-explicit ways at last summer’s ESRI Users Conference in San Diego.  This very brief rundown of what was on display shows how the science of documenting oil spill impacts has embraced geospatial science.  GIS is no longer a secondary concern.  Rather, it is at the center of our modern investigations.

Presenters showcased everything from a first-principals approach from Simon Suo at Penn who is trying to create a GIS to quickly predict possible impacts from a future spill…

Oil Spill geospatial impacts ESRI 2015

…to simple maps pulling together geospatial data such as this visualization of tracking impacts from fracking chemicals upon water tables…

Penn Fracking Map ESRI 2015

…and documentation of expenditures from the Deepwater Horizon spill for post-spill academic studies and ecological restoration projects such as the Deepwater Horizon Project Tracker by the Trust for Public Lands.

DWH Funding Tracker Screenshot

Fire threatening oil infrastructure

Freeway sign for the Pacific Coast Highway near Solimar Beach burns near Ventura on Saturday, Dec. 26, 2015. (image: KABC)

Freeway sign for the Pacific Coast Highway near Solimar Beach burns near Ventura on Saturday, Dec. 26, 2015. (image: KABC)

The current Solimar Beach Fire raging north of the City of Ventura is threatening numerous oil drilling and storage areas adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway along the Rincon coast of northwestern Ventura/southeastern Santa Barbara County.

12-28-15 23:00 Update:

As of 17:00, Ventura County Fire is reporting 100% containment with only about 70 personnel on the ground engaged in mopping up efforts.  Officials revised the burn area to 562 hectares (1,388 acres). At last report, all oil and gas facilities were reported undamaged.  The same goes for homes and buildings: no significant damage.

12-27-15 22:00 Update:

We have seen some awesome sunsets across Ventura County these last two nights.  The particulates in the air over the western reaches of the county are not posing a health threat (they are primarily blowing right offshore), but are treating us to some wonderful colors.

 

Sunset from W Potrero Road above our CSU Channel Islands campus. Boxing Day, 2015.

 

Fire officials were reporting 75% containment as of 17:30 Sunday night with fire personnel on scene down to 335 people.  Officials also disclosed the oil operation at the ignition site was part of the holdings of California Resources Corporation.

The active front has moved well inland from PCH.  Comparatively little scorching happened in the immediate coastal zone, with flames apparently jumping PCH over less than a linear mile of freeway.  All told I saw burned hillsides over no more than a five mile stretch of PCH as I drove the area earlier today.

 

Coastal hillsides along the Rincon section of PCH. This gives you a good idea of what the vegetation looked like as of two days ago (pre-burn).

  

Coastal hills along the Rincon section of PCH midday on December 27, 2015.

 

12-27-15 9:00 Update:

See the latest from the VC Star.

Ventura County Fire Officials are now reporting 70% containment.  Staffing is a bit down from yesterday at a reported 426 firefighters on scene as of this morning.

The cause of the blaze has now been confirmed to be private power lines that were blown down by high winds.  These were on an oil production company’s property.  There were near active wells, but those wells were apparently not damaged.  Usually these areas are devoid of vegetation.

12-26-15 23:00 Update:

See the latest from the VC Star and LA Times.

All lanes of PCH and all rail service had reopened at of mid afternoon as winds have continued to slacked throughout the day.  The immediate coastal zone and associated oil infrastructure is mostly out of danger at the moment.  Ventura County Fire Department is reporting 60% containment as of this evening thanks to the huge support in both manpower and air support.

 

The Solimar Beach Fire

A Ventura County Fire Department engine on PCH as flames from the Solimar Beach fire burning along PCH just north of Ventura on December 26, 2015. (Image: Ryan Cullom)

A Ventura County Fire Department engine on PCH as flames range from the Solimar Beach Fire burning just north of Ventura on December 26, 2015 (Image: Ryan Cullom).

The fire viewed from the city of Ventura. Image: Ventura County Fire.

The fire viewed from the city of Ventura (Image: Ventura County Fire).

Solimar Fire from the cockpit of a Ventura County Air Unit Copter 7 making a pass on the morning of December 26, 2105 (image: tweet from Ventura County Air Unit).

Solimar Fire from the cockpit of a Ventura County Air Unit Copter 7 making a pass on the morning of December 26, 2105 (image: tweet from Ventura County Air Unit).

A train passes a burned segment of hillside e along PCH just North of Ventura, Boxing Day, 2015 (Image: Chuck Kirman/Ventura County Star).

A train passes a burned segment of hillside e along PCH just North of Ventura, Boxing Day, 2015 (Image: Chuck Kirman/Ventura County Star).

A fast-spreading, offshore wind-whipped wildfire has burned as estimated 480 ha (1200 acres) of coastline (as of the 11:00am press briefing on December 26, 2015) near Solimar Beach north of Ventura, California.  The fire has prompted mandatory evacuations along the nearby beach enclaves and a complete closures the 101 Freeway (aka Pacific Coast Highway aka PCH) in both directions as of early Saturday morning.  Rail lines which parallel the freeway along this section of our coast are also shut down until further notice.

Ventura County Fire personnel are working the fire with more than 600 fire fighters on scene or en route to the fight the fire.  The flames are being pushed by a strong northwest wind and currently poses a potential threat to oil, gas, power and rail infrastructure.

Ventura County Fire estimating it will take them about three days to get full containment.

Fire incident map as of midmorning on Boxing Day, 2015. Map: Ventura County Fire

Fire incident map as of midmorning on Boxing Day, 2015. Map: Ventura County Fire

While the actual ignition has yet to be determined, the fire appears to have begun around 10:30 p.m.  Christmas night near the 3000 block of West Pacific Coast Highway.  Overnight flames were within 50 m (150 feet) of the sand and various of our long-term sandy beach monitoring sites.

Solamar Beach Fire freeway closures as of Boxing Day, 2015.

Solamar Beach Fire freeway closures as of Boxing Day, 2015.

Oil & Gas Infrastructure in Harms Way

Fire officials claim to be on cautiously worried about oil and gas facilities in the vicinity, citing the fact that oil companies have cleared ample brush around the perimeters of their operations and are now working closely with emergency personnel to avoid any problems.

Detail of the San Miguelito oil field partly threatened by Solamar Beach Fire. Red dots are locations of active oil wells as of 2008 (after Wikicommons)

Detail of the San Miguelito oil field partly threatened by Solamar Beach Fire. Red dots are locations of active oil wells as of 2008 (image: Wikicommons).

Altered Freeway Traffic…

Union Pacific Rail, PCH, and the 101 Freeway from State Route 33 to State Route 150 were closed as of early morning on December 26 given both the proximity of the fire to the roadbed and the fact flames were sporadically jumping PCH itself and igniting vegetation on the seaward side of the roadbed.

Given the complete closure of the Rincon, the alternative route for this major north-south corridor was via the 150 and 33 highways.  As someone who regularly drives this twisting, curvy route, I was relieved to see that the California Highway Patrol recommended big rigs NOT take State Route 150.

…will Kill More Animals

Our lab is uniquely positioned to quantify the potential unintentional consequences of this necessary, altered traffic flow.  More on this later, but in brief we have been monitoring wildlife road kill across southern California roads for the past decade and have robust estimates of how many critters are killed on more than 50 roadways in and around Ventura County.

Before this closure we had documented the following kill rates along these three roads (the Rincon section of the 101, the 33, and the 150):

road Segment milage speed limit (mph) mean kills per mile max vehicles per hour mean vehicles per hour
33 (Ojai) 11.2 55 0.20 3,120 1,352
150 (Casitas) 16.5 45 0.20 600 227
101 (Rincon) 12.6 65 0.06 7,772 4,315

As the 33 is one of our most intense concentrations of road kill in the county, I estimate that as we boost the traffic flow along the 33 and 150 highways, we will see perhaps an additional 58 animal kills that we would not have seen had the bulk of the traffic remained on PCH/had we not had this fire.

Leadbetter Classic: Surf & Pollution Ed

Dorothy Horn (ESRM), Lakey Peterson, Michaela Miller (ESRM), and Patrick Costa (ESRM) on Leadbetter Beach. December 19, 2015.

Dorothy Horn (ESRM), Lakey Peterson (Pro Surfer & Activist), Michaela Miller (ESRM), and Patrick Costa (ESRM) on Leadbetter Beach. In front of our Sandy Beach Pollution Education Booth.  December 19, 2015.

Lakey Peterson Bowl

 

IMG_5513.JPG

Today part our our sandy beach team trekked up to Santa Barbara’s Leadbetter Beach for the second annual Lakey Peterson Keiki Bowl/Leadbetter Classic.  This mix between surf competition and camp is a collaboration between pro surfer Lakey Peterson, Santa Barbara surf school Surf Happens, and the Teddy Bear Cancer Foundation.  In addition to a surf competition for kids and teenagers, this beach festival offered free surf clinics to children battling cancer.

High Five

We contacted organizers about a month ago to see if they might be interested in having us lend some technical and education help, motivated to reach out after hearing about Surf Happens’ High Five program.  In the vein of 50 Simple Things You Can Do To Save The Planet by John Javna, the High Five Program urges beach-goers to simply pick up five pieces of trash every time they go to the beach.  Participants are also encouraged to brainstorm five simple steps they might take in their daily lives to reduce pollution more generally and, in so doing, minimize their individual carbon footprint.

Steps like “pick up five pieces of trash” are simple.  But not simplistic.  To be sure they are not enough to stop climate change or beach degradation in and of themselves.  But like our sustainable seafood, road kill, and numerous other hybrid research-education efforts, we find that getting folks to see the world in a different way can be extremely powerful.  The strength lies in the ability of such efforts to get the public to see what is so mundane as to appear invisible or non-noteworthy as visible and noteworthy.

ESRM: Educating Surfers & Beach Goers

IMG_5511.JPG IMG_5512.JPG IMG_5515.JPG IMG_5516.JPG

Our ESRM Sandy Beach Research team was well represented by Dorothy Horn, Michaela Miller, and Patrick Costa who set-up a pubic education station to explain the work we have been doing measuring the health of California’s sandy beaches.  In particular they brought up our tools and outreach materials to explain the level of plastic pollution impacting our beaches across the state.  Our microplastic displays are always a hit (albeit a potentially scary one).

Called Due To Rain

Aggregate rainfall in Santa Barbara and Ventura County on December 19, 2015. Total rainfall (in inches) for the previous 12 hours (as of 16:00). Data courtesy Ventura County Watershed Protection District.

Aggregate rainfall in Santa Barbara and Ventura County on December 19, 2015. Total rainfall (in inches) for the previous 12 hours (as of 16:00). Data courtesy Ventura County Watershed Protection District.

The public began showing up in large numbers at 11am.  Unfortunately, by noon the rains had hit and folks rapidly melted away to warmer and drier indoor settings.  As our booth was set-up in the main event area, we closed down early along with the rest of the event.  We love the rain, but were a bit bummed the weather kept us from clocking in a full day of education and outreach.  On the upside, we were to very happy to get and invite to present another educational booth at the upcoming Rincon Classic International Surf Competition in January 2016.

Thanks to all our Santa Barbara friends and the Leadbetter organizers!  We lookforward to helping out with future events!

 

 

IMG_5514.JPG

ExxonMobil Investigated for Possible Climate Change Deception

Exxonmobil-truthiness

Lipstick on a Pig?

It appears to be no coincidence that ExxonMobil has recently released a new series of beautiful and very slick TV and online ads implying that they are all about innovation and very interested in alternative energies.  (Their most recent releases are below:)

Reality is far from the images portrayed in this campaign where internal combustion engines emit rainbows and industry scientists spend time researching algal-based biofuels.  Indeed, this current lobbying effort seem to be mostly about serving as something of a counter point to two major media stories capturing wider media attention here in December of 2015: the Paris Climate Change Summit and the unfolding investigation into alleged illegal statements and deception from Exxon leadership.  While the role of ExxonMobil in funding anti-science campaigns and backing political candidates who loathe facts or reasoned discussion on energy policy and the most detrimental aspects of our oil-based economy is well known.

What we say to our family vs. what we tell the neighbors

Recent investigations into Exxon’s internal documents show they were indeed at the cutting of climate change research back in the day and knew of the potential threats of fossil fuel-related emissions since I was a little kid in the 1970’s. As Harvard climate historian Naomi Orestes noted in the New York Times in October:

But Exxon was sending a different message, even though its own evidence contradicted its public claim that the science was highly uncertain and no one really knew whether the climate was changing or, if it was changing, what was causing it … Journalists and scientists have identified more than 30 different organizations funded by the company that have worked to undermine the scientific message and prevent policy action to control greenhouse gas emissions.

Exxon responded to these revelations by pointing out that over the last 4o years their scientists (apparently the lady in the above TV spot???) have continued to publish peer-reviewed climate research:

Our scientists have contributed climate research and related policy analysis to more than 50 papers in peer-reviewed publications – all out in the open. They’ve participated in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since its inception – in 1988 – and were involved in the National Academy of Sciences review of the third U.S. National Climate Assessment Report.

Finally, I’ll note that we have long – and publicly – supported a revenue-neutral carbon tax as the most effective, transparent, and efficient way for governments to send a signal to consumers and the economy to reduce the use of carbon-based fuels.

Exxon has know the reality about climate change as long as there has been a galaxy far, far away.

Exxon has know the reality about climate change as long as there has been a galaxy far, far away.

The interesting issue here is the apparently marked divergence between the now-released revelations from these previously hidden internal reports and Exxon’s public face (their spokesman pointed to Exxon’s peer-reviewed publications from their scientists between 1983 and 2014 – 53 papers in all), including their comments to shareholders.

While the then-Exxon (now ExxonMobil) was understanding and apparently attempting to deal with climate change as early as 1977 (note to my younger students: this was when the first Star Wars was released and 11 years before the launch of the IPCC), their outward arguments have been something different. Distinct from this internal behavior/reality, Exxon has had a different public persona since at least the mid 1980’s.  To the wider world, Exxon has spent the past 40 years wholeheartedly refusing to publicly acknowledge climate change and gone so far as to promote misinformation (a more cynical person might even use the term “propaganda”) ala the tobacco industry regarding the health risks of smoking.  Both were industries producing products and byproducts with significant and increasingly well understood toxicity who were concerned that acknowledging this toxicity could subsequently drive away consumers and ultimately harm their profitability.

Criminal behavior?

The recent revelations of internal documents apparently show that ExxonMobil recognized the potential dangers of climate change and began factoring likely predictions from rising seas, more intense hurricanes, etc. into their own internal business planning and decisions as early as 1981.  The ensuing raft of news coverage drove the New York State Attorney General to launch an investigation last month to determine whether ExxonMobil indeed broke the law by misleading investors and the public about the risks posed by climate change.

As The New York Times reported last month:

According to people with knowledge of the investigation, Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman issued a subpoena Wednesday evening to ExxonMobil, demanding extensive financial records, emails and other documents.

The investigation focuses on whether statements the company made to investors about climate risks as recently as this year were consistent with the company’s own long-running scientific research.

The people said the inquiry would include a period of at least a decade during which Exxon Mobil funded outside groups that sought to undermine climate science, even as its in-house scientists were outlining the potential consequences — and uncertainties — to company executives.

Kenneth P. Cohen, vice president for public affairs at ExxonMobil, said on Thursday that the company had received the subpoena and was still deciding how to respond.

A detailed July 2015 press release from the Union of Concerned Scientists links to various original documents that sparked the recent concern and investigations.  Anyone wishing to see the original documents should check that out.

Public double think speak

It is perhaps not surprising that a company that exists to make money might set a course that is designed to maximize their revenues, ecotoxicological facts and planet be damned.  Leaving those issues aside, I think it is perhaps most illuminating to see what was actually said over the years.  Forget all the rhetoric on both sides of the issue for a moment and focus on what was actually said.  The New York Times did a great job in excerpting relevant passages from these internal documents (see the publicly available ones here) in a story last month.  I have excerpted and formatted the following statements after that piece.  I have added in my own commentary by denoting statements which I believe to be accurate (in green) and statements which are perhaps disingenuous (in red).  You can be the judge as to whether these red statements cross the line…or just wait for the New York Attorney General’s formal findings to be released in the coming months.

    • 1980
      Internal Exxon Document

      From a paper titled, “Exxon Research and Engineering Company’s Technological Forecast CO2 Effect,” by H. Shaw and P.P. McCall:

      “Projections of scientists active in the area indicate that the contribution of deforestation, which may have been substantial in the past, will diminish in comparison to the expected rate of fossil fuel combustion in the future. A number of scientists have postulated that a doubling of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could occur as early as 2035. Calculations recently completed at Exxon Research indicate that using the energy projections from the CONAES (Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems) study and the World Energy Conference, a doubling of atmospheric CO2 can occur at about 2060.

    • 1989
      Duane G. Levine, Exxon’s Manager of Science and Strategy Development

      A year after the NASA climate scientist James Hansen warned Congress that global warming was already occurring, an Exxon scientist made a presentation on the topic to the company’s board of directors. His notes included the following language:

      “In spite of the rush by some participants in the greenhouse debate to declare that the science has demonstrated the existence of [global warming] today, I do not believe such is the case. Enhanced greenhouse is still deeply imbedded in scientific uncertainty, and we will require substantial additional investigation to determine the degree to which its effects might be experienced in the future.”

    • 1995
      Lenny Bernstein, Exxon Mobil Chemical Engineer and Expert on Climate Change

      An email by Mr. Bernstein to Ohio University’s Institute for Applied and Professional Ethics shows that Exxon (before its merger with Mobil) was aware of climate change science years before it became a political issue.

      In his note, Mr. Bernstein refers to a giant natural gas field in Indonesia that Exxon did not ultimately develop:

      “Exxon first got interested in climate change in 1981 because it was seeking to develop the Natuna gas field off Indonesia. ”

      “When I first learned about the project in 1989, the projections were that if Natuna were developed and its CO2 vented to the atmosphere, it would be the largest point source of CO2 in the world and account for 1 percent of projected global CO2 emissions.”

    • 1997
      Lee Raymond, Exxon Chief Executive

      Mr. Raymond, in a speech to the 15th World Petroleum Congress in Beijing, addressed the issue:

      “It is highly unlikely that the temperature in the middle of the next century will be affected whether policies are enacted now or 20 years from now.”

    • 2000
      Exxon Mobil Newspaper Ad

      In response to the Clinton Administration’s report on the potential effects of climate change on different regions and industries in the United States, the company took out a lengthy ad. Excerpts include:

      “The report’s language and logic appear designed to emphasize selective results to convince people that climate change will adversely impact their lives.”

      “The report is written as a political document, not an objective summary of the underlying science. Climate change is an important public issue. That is why we support emphasis on further climate research, the development and encouragement of promising technology, the promotion of more efficient use of energy, the removal of barriers to innovation, and cost-benefit assessments of proposed policies.”

    • 2002
      Bob B. Peterson, Chief Executive of Imperial Oil, Exxon Mobil’s Subsidiary in Canada

      Mr. Peterson told the Canadian Press news service that “Kyoto is an economic entity,” referring to the Kyoto Protocol initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions:

      “It has nothing to do with the environment. It has to do with world trade. This is a wealth-transfer scheme between developed and developing nations.”

    • 2004
      Exxon Mobil Newspaper Ad

      “Scientific uncertainties continue to limit our ability to make objective, quantitative determinations regarding the human role in recent climate change or the degree and consequences of future change.”

    • 2007
      Rex Tillerson, Exxon Mobil’s Chief Executive

      Mr. Tillerson changed course in a speech before a conference in Houston organized by the energy consulting firm Cambridge Energy Research Associates:

      “The risks to society and ecosystems from climate change could prove to be significant. So, despite the uncertainties, it is prudent to develop and implement sensible strategies that address these risks.”

      “A range implies a certain degree of uncertainty. Policy decisions need to accommodate that uncertainty.”

    • 2008
      J. Stephen Simon, an Exxon Mobil Senior Vice President

      Testifying before a Senate Judiciary Committee on May 21, 2008, Mr. Simon was pressed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, who suggested that fringe views on climate change were being endorsed and espoused by oil companies. Mr. Simon responded:

      “In other words, that we are supporting junk science and trying to make people think that this is not an issue. I think all of us recognize it is an issue. It is how we deal with it – and I think we are dealing with it, and we are doing so in a responsible fashion.”

    • 2010
      Exxon Mobil Annual Report

      “Because we want to ensure that today’s progress does not come at the expense of future generations we need to manage the risks to our environment. This includes taking meaningful steps to curb global greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions, while also utilizing local resources to help maintain secure supplies. Energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions represent close to 60 percent of global GHG emissions attributed to human activities, and are expected to increase about 25 percent from 2005 to 2030. This increase is substantially lower than the projected growth in energy demand over the period, reflecting improved energy efficiency, as well as a shift to a significantly less carbon-intensive energy mix – mainly natural gas, nuclear and wind gaining share as fuels for power generation.”

    • 2014
      Exxon Mobil Annual Report

      The company commented on various countries’ consideration of rules for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to control climate change:

      “These requirements could make our products more expensive, lengthen project implementation times, and reduce demand for hydrocarbons, as well as shift hydrocarbon demand toward relatively lower-carbon sources such as natural gas.”

    • 2015
      Ken Cohen, Exxon Mobil Vice President for Public and Government Affairs

      Mr. Cohen, in a blog post entitled “Exxon Mobil’s commitment to climate science,” wrote:

      “What we have understood from the outset – and something which over-the-top activists fail to acknowledge — is that climate change is an enormously complicated subject.

      “The climate and mankind’s connection to it are among the most complex topics scientists have ever studied, with a seemingly endless number of variables to consider over an incredibly long timespan.”