Salmon farm. Not going to say much because there are clearly two commentaries coming out.What do think Hawgwash, oyster or salmon farm related? What ever is in those pens may be gone for health reasons.
Fish in the pens should be unaffected. That amount of diesel will evaporate and leave little impact on environment. Seems like this small spill is really just fodder for the enviros and anti-fish farm proponents.
The bigger issue in my view to me are the effects on clams and other intertidal organisms. While 1,000-1,500 litres may not seem a lot it's too easy to just hand wave off these as one offs and that they don't matter. Smoking guns are difficult to find and all too easy these areas suffer deaths by a thousand cuts.
Jim
I agree that the cumulative effect of spills like this can be rough on the ecosystem. However, as much as I dislike spills like these, this amount of diesel fuel should break down relatively quickly as long as the water is reasonably clear. The fuel will evaporate and much will be consumed by the microbes that can plague our fuel tanks. The diesel is light enough that it will predominantly reside on the surface of water until it is dispersed, consumed, and absorbed. This should reduce any harmful effects on shell fish.
I think spills are bad and shouldn't be taken lightly. However, from what little I can tell about this particular spill, it shouldn't have much long tern negative affect on the water column.
I imagine that the operator will be paying a hefty fine, and rightly so.
Nightsky;JDCAVE; said:Returning to my previous point of "death by a thousand cuts", there are thousands of environmental issues where single events are considered low risk, but event after event eventually causes collapse of populations. After a 40 year career in fisheries, I have witnessed case after case of population collapse and still scientists really only have theories as to why those occurred. I think we need to rethink what is and is not acceptable.
Ok. So let's take that 1,000 litres of diesel and move it around a bit. Let's say I have a fuel truck and spilled that 1,000 litres on your front lawn. Will you still say it's ok, the microbes will break it down soon enough? Or if you were buying my house with a below ground fuel tank that leaked 1,000 litres into the soil, would you still say it's ok it happens all the time to all kinds of properties and the bacteria will break it down. On land there are all kinds of environmental standards in place for removal of contaminated soils and who is responsible. What is different here? Some of the locals are frosted by this spill and I don't think we should just be blowing them off. How much is acceptable? I'm telling you not sure. And I am certainly not an expert on habitat issues such as this.
Returning to my previous point of "death by a thousand cuts", there are thousands of environmental issues where single events are considered low risk, but event after event eventually causes collapse of populations. After a 40 year career in fisheries, I have witnessed case after case of population collapse and still scientists really only have theories as to why those occurred. I think we need to rethink what is and is not acceptable.
Just a wee wild guess...Mitsubishi probably has fine money in their "operating" budget. You can bet the 10 buck an hour kid had a can tied to his arse though.dhays; said:As I mentioned in my post, the operator should be paying a fine. Why? Because punitive actions like a fine can be effective is ensuring that other operators are more careful in the future.
And your professional background on this matter is...what?
Goo Gal, gotta love it.Nightsky; said:To back up my belief, I decided to do a little google search...
Goo Gal, gotta love it.
The following just shows to go ya, for every individual who can back up this, another can back up that. No winners.
Peter Ross, an ocean pollution expert with the Vancouver Aquarium, said parts of it will evaporate and other parts will remain as droplets in suspension or on the shore.
"The diesel is not going to disappear magically. It's going to continue to weather, get older as a product and end up in different parts of the environment in different forms.''
He said a sheen is a mixture of some diesel components that remain behind after the evaporation of toxic components. Therefore, a sheen is less harmful than other fuel components, but it still shouldn't be taken up by shellfish that are eaten by humans, he said.
Ross, who previously worked for the federal government, said the spill was modest and in sheltered waters. "If we can't clean that up, then how does that speak to our capacity to deal with large ocean-going tankers with heavy fuel products?'' he asked.
Some of the comments here say, if I could paraphrase, that most of the fuel will evaporate so all is good. I've often wondered where this fuel evaporates to that is good.
Could someone fill me in on just what happens to the fuel after it evaporates.