Exxon Valdez: Still a shock
"... our society continues to act as if oil were a stepping stone rather than a stumbling block to future U.S. prosperity, security and quality of life. As a result, the environmental threat from global warming remains largely unchecked."
Opinion
Seattle Post Intelligencer
Sunday, March 26, 2006
In scale, there's been nothing similar since the Exxon Valdez disaster devastated Alaskan waters, shorelines and fish populations. As Puget Sound's experience shows, though, the threat of oil spills remains.
In many ways, oil-pollution prevention has come a long way in the Sound, the Pacific Northwest and nationally since the tanker poured 11 million gallons of crude oil into Alaska's Prince William Sound on March 24, 1989. New laws mandate better construction of tankers. Tugs accompany tankers in many situations. Companies and individuals face greater liability for negligence or other mistakes. But the attempts to learn from the Exxon Valdez that were just beginning on this weekend 17 years ago remain unfinished.
Closure is still missing for those most hurt by the spill. In spite of earning profits of $36 billion last year alone, ExxonMobil continues to fight a $5 billion damage award from federal court to fishermen and affected communities. [note below]
Less shameful but more damaging, our society continues to act as if oil were a stepping stone rather than a stumbling block to future U.S. prosperity, security and quality of life. As a result, the environmental threat from global warming remains largely unchecked.
Some political leaders can talk a good game while they feed the national oil addiction. President Bush and Republican congressional leaders are using every imaginable legislative maneuver to try to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Energy companies' political friends pushed dangerous ideas, including a U.S. Senate attempt to introduce larger oil tankers into Puget Sound that was blocked by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.
On the plus side, as an incident this month suggested, the U.S. Coast Guard now takes even a 15-gallon spill in Puget Sound seriously.
But the general lack of environmental commitment by the Bush administration has forced local and state governments to pay more attention to oil spills, reducing oil dependency and controlling global warming. Washington state last year approved creation of an oil spill advisory council largely modeled on one that has helped tighten operations in Alaska's Prince William Sound.
The Exxon Valdez spill shocked the nation into stronger environmental protections. But oil addiction and climate change are chronic problems. And their damaging effects on the environment, human health and U.S. security continue to grow.
Note
Lois N. Epstein is an engineer with Cook Inlet Keeper. On the matter of Exxon fighting the court-ordered $5 billion punitive damages, she offers these comments:
The $4.5-$5 billion dollars is for punitive damages. The jury award was partly arrived at (I think most experts agree) by determining a figure that would have some meaningful, punitive impact on the company. Since it's such a large, lucrative company, the figure needed to be high.
Exxon has since funded research on punitive damages by Harvard Law School's W. Kip Viscusi, which advocates for punitive damages having some relationship to actual damages. And there's been a relevant Supreme Court case during the period of non-settlement.
So, the reason this case has bounced back between the appeals court and the lower court so many times is that Exxon does not want it to set a precedent for high punitive damages - they'd rather wait until the courts and possibly their funded research change to favor them.
Thus, this settlement is caught up in a broader discussion of tort reform and punitive damages.
Final thoughts, note that 1) Viscusi's conclusions are controversial (see
http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticleIHC.jsp?id=1138269913844) and, 2) "actual" damages wrt environmental losses (i.e., non-economic losses of wildlife) are difficult to quantify, so it's tough to have a binding rule determining the ratio of punitive damages to actual damages.
Lois N. Epstein, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Oil and Gas Industry Specialist
Cook Inlet Keeper (Anchorage Office)
308 G St., Suite 219
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
ph: 907 929-9371
fx: 907 929-1562
lois@inletkeeper.org