Gulf Oil Spill

Oil covered everything: beaches, animals, plants, bottoms of boats. Approximately 205.8 million gallons of oil leaked into the ocean and toward the Louisiana shoreline. To put the amount in perspective, that oil could be used to drive a Toyota Prius around the earth 184,181 times (Repanich). All of this pollution and destruction because of one singular company: British Petroleum. Needless to say, the image of BP was tarnished because of this. What can a company do to come back from such a serious setback? This was the question that was faced by the company in 2010 (when the spill occurred), and is still being wrestled with today. By analyzing BP’s “Commitment to the Gulf” ad campaign, the brand’s desired identity is made very apparent. When it comes to oil, nearly all consumers are involved. However, BP does take specific steps in order to narrow down a target audience when it comes to advertising its product. Despite the hardships faced by BP stemming from the spill, consumers still have an addiction to oil. BP, the fourth largest oil company in the world (“Biggest Oil”), has such a firm hold on consumer society that it is a necessity in today’s consumer landscape. By pushing the brand’s identity to its target audience, BP used branding to overcome a severe controversy and rebuild the image it hoped to convey to consumers.

Every day individuals take the true beauty of our nation by visiting recreational areas along with beaches. Oil spills create nothing, but negative effects on the areas that it happens in. Many plants and animals are affected by this negative disaster which sickness the animals or some even die from it. Maybe if more time and money was spent working on having more efficient renewable energy sources than digging up a source of fuel that will eventually run out we would not have as much of a problem.

The National Institutes of Health started to address the issue in a study that is tracking around 33,000 cleanup workers and volunteers. This research will apprise whether the exposure to foul oil has an effect on physical or mental health. Since this is happening, people are now more calm and safer since they know there are many people trying to help and locate whether or not the oil spill may have an impact on human

Regardless of their attempt, the spread of the oil to the surface and shore of the ocean was inevitable. Therefore, all marine animals were affected by the oil contamination in the Gulf of Mexico. Oil filled the blowholes and entered the lungs of dolphins and whales. This made breathing almost impossible.

How did the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 affect our economy and environment, and what does the future hold, with regard to the environment, oil drilling, and sustainability?

Offshore drilling could lead to an oil spill which shown from the Gulf of Mexico incident. It can ruin the sea’s wildlife. With the wildlife at stake it can be really hard to fix the problem and most companies result in using corexit which makes the issue worst. This makes the oil sink deep in the ocean, and results in even more of the underwater marine life suffer. With us being fishermen it could kill our businesses because we will not have food to provide with fish being killed from a potential oil spill. Plus the oil drill wouldn’t really do anything for the state of South Carolina, and if it isn’t needed I wouldn’t want something that we don’t want it to have bad odds of affecting our business.

The oil spill created long term problems for the living organisms that inhabit the Gulf of Mexico. The oil covered the feathers of birds, making them unable to float at the surface. The oil killed some of the deep sea coral as far as seven miles away from the site. Mammals ingested the oil, which resulted in some of the mammals having internal bleeding and ulcers. This has also lead to an increase in sea turtles stranding, sick dolphins, and a decrease in population of many marine animals. This disaster stuck during the breeding season for many species of wildlife. “The oil’s toxicity may have hit egg and larval organisms immediately”, which could have wiping out those age classes. Population dips and cascading food web has occurred due to

On April 20, 2010 the Macondo Blowout, the largest accidental oil spill in the GoM and the second largest in the world, released an estimated 4.9 million barrels of crude oil (Atlas and Hazen 2011). This significant ecological perturbation of the sea and coastal region has led to negative impacts in local fishing, aquaculture and tourism (National Health Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (US) Gulf Ecology Division 1999; Yanez-Arancibia and Day 2004; Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 2004; Ritchie and Keller 2008). Since the occurrence of the oil spill, most studies used molecular approaches including NextGen sequencing technology to assess the diversity and metabolism of complex microbial communities in oil-contaminated environments, particularly samples collected from off-shore locations surrounding the Macondo Blowout (Evans et al. 2004; Bordenave et al. 2007; Cappello et al. 2007; Liang et al. 2007; dos Santos et al. 2011;

Back in the spring of 2010, the Gulf of Mexico experienced the worst oil spill in U.S history as a result of an explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon Oil rig. On April 10th the hazardous accident had already killed 11 people, deformed and killed countless numbers of marine wildlife, and leaked 3.19 million barrels of oil that spread about 42 miles off the coast of Louisiana. Even though the well was located within the deep sea (the lowest part of the ocean that accounts for most of the water on Earth) the ecosystem suffered heavily from it. For instance, it has been reported that over 335 dolphins died, hundreds of sea turtles washed up on the shore soaked in oil, and hundreds of seabirds drowned or starved from not being able to fly,

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill occurred on April 20, 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico. This oil spill was the largest spill in history in front of the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989. This oil spill released about 4.9 million barrels of oil into the ocean. This spill not only wreck havoc on the marine life but also the economic players that depended on ocean such as fisherman, tourism, and offshore drilling located along the gulf coast. Along will the spill the oil rig which was named Deepwater Horizon also went up in flames. This proved that the issue went far beyond just an oil rig that blew a line. Since this oil spill had drastic impacts all along the coast, BP which was the most liable for this incident faced criminal charges based on what happened. BP which knew the risks of deep ocean drilling failed to take the necessary safety procedures to reduce the risks of such incident occurring, thus was the reasoning behind placing most of the fault on them and not the other companies. The lack of regulatory oversight led to the issues and cost-cutting procedures opened the rig up to possible malfunctions like the one that occurred. During the spill into the gulf, BP sealed the well with cement which seemed to stop a majority of the oil from escaping the well. BP also recognized that the well was “dead” which was proven wrong when scientists still could conclude was leaking minor amounts of oil into the ocean. This spill not only proved to be harmful to the environment but also

Colwell, R. R. 2014. "Understanding The Effects Of The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill". Bioscience 64 (9): 755-755. doi:10.1093/biosci/biu145.

A corporation has a moral duty to ensure that their products and operations do not cause harm to society and the environment. There are significant factors that must be taken into consideration to ensure the proper response is put forth if disaster rears its ugly head. Many times, when disaster strikes, companies do not always make the appropriate response, or they do not remediate the problem efficiently enough to maximize their efforts. The Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 is a prime example of this. The Exxon Valdez oil spill pales in comparison only to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. (NOAA)

The Exxon-Valdez oil spill occurred on March 24, 1989, when the tanker Exxon Valdez, transporting oil from Valdez, Alaska to Los Angeles, California, ran aground on the Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The root cause of the accident was the captain. After passing through Valdez Narrows, pilot Murphy left the vessel and Captain Hazelwood took over the wheelhouse. It was Captain Hazelwood who made the decision to steer the ship off its normal path in order to avoid a run in with ice. For reasons that remain unclear, as Captain Hazelwood retired in his quarters, his copilots Cousins and Kagan failed to make the turn back into the shipping lanes and the ship ran aground on Bligh Reef at 12:04 a.m., March 24, 1989. There have been several speculations on what occurred, however, The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the accident and determined five probable causes of the grounding: (1) The third mate failed to properly maneuver the vessel, possibly due to fatigue and excessive workload; (2) the master failed to provide a proper navigation watch, possibly due to impairment from alcohol; (3) Exxon Shipping Company failed to supervise the master and provide a rested and sufficient crew for the Exxon Valdez; (4) the U.S. Coast Guard failed to provide an effective vessel traffic system; and (5) effective pilot and escort services were lacking.

The Exxon Valdez oil spill that took place on March 24, 1989, was responsible for an enormous amount of damage to the natural environment of Alaska. Animal life and plant life alike, were severely harmed from this disastrous spill. Being such a high-risk company, one would assume that the legal requirements surrounding the company policy were prioritized. Due to the scope of the disaster though, one may wonder just how strict the requirements were that governed the operations of Exxon. Even if there were rules in place, how well were they being followed by Exxon employees? What were the legal requirements that governed the operations of Exxon? Did the people responsible for this disaster consider these? In the following discussion, these are examined from a moral analysis point of view.

Peter has been working with the Bigness Oil Company’s local affiliate for several years, and he has established a strong, trusting relationship with Jesse, manager of the local facility. The facility, on Peter’s recommendations, has followed all of the environmental regulations to the letter, and it has a solid reputation with the state regulatory agency. The local facility receives various petrochemical products via pipelines and