Drilling and Nuclear Power in the Arctic

Shell is preparing to join Russia in the Arctic, as the energy giant prepares to drill in the far northern regions. This comes as Russia is doubling down on its energy play, with plans to power Arctic drill rigs with floating nuclear reactors. This ambitious plan could see the Arctic Sea filled with reactors, a sight that could shock and awe many. 

The increased interest in the Arctic is due to the melting of the ice, which has seen a drop from 20,000 km³ to 7,000 km³ in the last four decades. This has opened up the possibility of drilling in the world’s second-to-last fossil fuel frontier, a development that has been made possible by excessive levels of carbon dioxide emissions, which have seen 2014 become the hottest year on record.

What if there is a mistake?

The potential for a catastrophic oil spill in the Arctic has been highlighted by the ongoing saga of a “ghost barge” that has been adrift in the region for the past eight months. The 950-gallon barge broke free from a tugboat in the Beaufort Sea last October, and despite attempts to retrieve it, turbulent seas have made it too dangerous for the tug captain to do so. 

Satellite reconnaissance shows the barge is currently located around 40 miles off Russia’s Chukchi Peninsula, and Russian efforts to locate it have been hampered by bad weather. This incident serves as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of an oil spill in the Arctic, and the difficulties of mitigating such an event. 

David Barber, a scientist with a Canadian research group at the University of Manitoba, warned that a blowout before the winter freeze-up could spew oil uncontrollably for seven or eight months. The oil would bind with the newly formed ice, be carried far and wide by ocean currents, and released into new environments the following spring. 

The Deepwater Horizon disaster of 2010 serves as a cautionary tale. It took 47,000 people and 7,000 vessels, as well as 125 aircraft, to stem the blowout and seal the well – and even then, unofficial reports suggest it continued to leak. In the Arctic, the lack of roads, ports, and icebreakers would make a similar incident almost impossible to contain. 

The search for oil in the Arctic may prove to be a dangerous and costly mistake, one that could have far-reaching and long-lasting environmental consequences.

There is no easy access to the Arctic… period!

The Arctic is facing a potentially nightmarish consequence in the form of a “ghost barge” that has been at large for eight months. This is a stark reminder of the risks associated with oil drilling and production, as evidenced by the Santa Barbara oil spill in 1969, which was the largest oil spill in U.S. waters at the time. Despite the implementation of state-of-the-art measures to prevent a repeat spill, the Santa Barbara pipeline burst in 2015, polluting miles of beaches and killing an unmeasurable number of sea animals. 

The Arctic is a volatile and unpredictable environment, and the risks of drilling and producing oil are even greater. Shell had to abandon its 2012 drilling campaign due to two damaged drill rigs, and its spill containment system was crushed like an aluminum beer can during a test in Puget Sound. In December 2012, the Kulluk drill rig broke loose from towlines five times in a heavy storm and ran aground. 

Despite these risks, the Obama administration granted conditional approval in May 2015 for Shell to start drilling in the Arctic Ocean. The development of cold-adapted bioremediation technologies is still in its infancy, and a report by the U.S. National Research Council in 2014 highlighted serious shortcomings to Shell’s response capabilities and those of U.S. agencies. The U.S. appears to be rushing headlong to make oil discoveries in the Arctic, despite the potential for massive, incomprehensible physical destruction.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *