Seismic testing in the Atlantic: Why should you care?

In December, when President Obama announced that he would cancel lease plans for offshore oil drilling in the Atlantic Ocean from 2012 – 2017, we all breathed a collective sigh of relief. This was a major victory for both ocean protection and our efforts to put an end to offshore oil drilling, was it not?

Not exactly. CCAN remains troubled that the Department of the Interior (DOI) plans to proceed with plans to conduct seismic testing in the mid and south Atlantic, which is unnecessary and can be dangerous for marine life. That’s why last week, several members of our staff attended a public hearing about this proposal, delivering 5,000 comments submitted by supporters like you who DO NOT support any oil exploration in the Atlantic Ocean whatsoever. We made it clear that our members don’t support oil drilling, now or in the future. But what does seismic testing have to do with all of this, and why is the DOI taking comments? Find some answers below.

Seismic testing area
Seismic testing area

What is seismic testing?

Seismic testing is an exploration technique used by oil and gas companies to explore the ocean for oil and gas sediments. In order to measure these sediments, large ships fire high-intensity air guns deep into the ocean. These “air cannons” produce a high intensity, low frequency noise and are dragged behind boats for thousands of miles in a systematic procedure to map an entire area.

Why should I care?

Air cannons are designed to be extremely loud – reaching up to 270 decibels (for reference, a nuclear explosion can be about 300-310 decibels underwater) and have been recorded by scientists from locations over 1,800 miles away. While there are many natural ocean noises, the excessive noise generated by air cannons masks those natural sounds, which are used by marine animals to hunt, navigate, feed and find mates. Continue reading

Against a torrent of oil, a trickle of responsibility

Of the many things lacking in the response to the BP spill, responsibility ranks pretty high on the list. From President Obama’s reluctance to reverse his decision to expand offshore drilling, to BP’s shameless attempts to play the innocent victim card, and the far right’s attempts to pin the blame on environmentalists, responsible words and actions have been in short supply. So it’s been refreshing to see at least some public figures attempting to reverse that trend.

In what could be the first inklings of a mounting wave of political push back against the reckless drill-baby-drill mentality, several political leaders from coastal states including Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and six US Senators, have spoken out in defense of their states coastlines and common sense by calling on President Obama to reverse his offshore drilling decision.

Among the Senators were Maryland Senators Mikulski and Cardin, who as I noted in an earlier post, wrote a letter to Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman in March calling on the three to keep offshore drilling out of the climate bill they were working on.

That letter was unfortunately ignored, but now that the Senators have a more visible platform from which to trumpet their concerns it’s good to see that they are using it.

Even still, more is needed. Despite recognizing the unacceptable risks posed by a cavalier policy towards offshore drilling, the Senators stopped short of recognizing the unacceptable risks posed by our oil dependence as a whole. Instead they reiterated Obama’s claim “that domestic oil production is an important part of our overall strategy for energy security,” adding that “it must be done responsibly, for the safety of our workers and our environment.”

Responsibility, safety, and energy security are not terms that should be used in the same sentence as the phrase oil production, unless juxtaposed against it. Given the threats of climate change, peak oil, and the thousands of oil-related air pollution deaths that occur every year, it’s hard to see how any policy except a policy to aggressively shift us away from the use of oil, could possibly be considered responsible with respect to the safety of our workers, the general public, our environment or our energy security.

As Grist’s Jonathan Hiskes pointed out last week, there may never be a better opportunity for our political leaders to make this case to the public. We have to demand that they do so. It’s the only responsible thing to do.