Conflicts – Oil Exploration and Water

Abstract

Water resources and water quality are closely related to oil exploration, refining and distribution. Since oil products provide over 90% of transport energy in almost all countries it is apparent that any oil operation is an inherent risk for water resources. Since water supplies will be increasingly stressed as a consequence of climate change and population increase the environmental risks associated with oil exploration may intensify. Thus, there are more reasons than CO 2 emissions and climate change to cut down on oil production and consumption. In this paper water related risks are discussed from two aspects: (1) water use and water pollution as a result of normal exploration, refining and distribution, (2) water and marine life contamination caused by accidents. It will be exemplified by some major oil accidents, too often caused by human errors or negligence. Ecological effects of oil contamination for seawaters and freshwaters are discussed. Some aspects of social and economic consequences are examined. Some possibilities for mitigating oil leakage risks are highlighted.

Data-Quality Assessment Signals Toxic-Site Safety Threats and Environmental Injustices

“…First, CBRE/TCC's 2018 low-toxicity claim is false because TCFM is an ozone-depleting and global-warming chemical, which has been banned internationally since the 1986 Montreal Protocol. It is also a cardio-/neuro-/pulmonary toxin that causes reduced human-lung capacity, bradycardia, and heart arrhythmias after only 15-second, 16,000 µg/m 3 airborne exposures; at higher doses, TCFM causes cognitive malfunction, pneumonia, lung inflammation, hemorrhage, pleuritis, and pericarditis [52]. Yet this dangerous, 15-second, 16,000 µg/m 3 TCFM dose is lower than 86% of Canoga Parks' soil-gas levels that could enter indoor air [41].…”

“…Despite the UN’s New Urban Agenda and the World Bank’s and EU’s apparent promotion of semi-privatized cleanup, information about the public-health consequences of semi-privatized toxic-site cleanups is largely anecdotal. On one hand, semi-privatized assessments/cleanups are cheaper and faster but, on the other hand, critics charge that semi-private testing/remediation often fails government scientific-data audits, is “typically driven by purely [private] financial motives” [ 15 ], and frequently has inadequate government oversight, e.g., [ 16 ]. In 2019, two economists tried to sort out these competing stances; they claimed to provide the first analysis of the public costs and benefits of privatized toxic-site assessment/cleanup but assessed only remediation-related, property-value increases and ignored all public-health risks/costs/benefits [ 13 ] (p. 369).…”

Dynamic Characteristics of Bubble Collapse Near the Liquid-Liquid Interface

“…The appearance of bubble cavitation has brought many serious hazards, such as the generation of noise [1], the destruction of materials [2,3], and the decline of hydraulic mechanical performance [4]. Still, it has provided various benefits as well, for example, medicine [5], petrochemical [6], and emulsion preparation [7]. Bubble collapse near the liquid-liquid interface can also be seen near a seabed covered by crude oil or the interface between soft tissue and body fluid [8]; thus, it is very critical for deep-sea oil production and bioengineering.…”

Solar Photovoltaic and Wind Energy Providing Water

“…SDG14 (Life below water): Solar and wind energy will replace or reduce the consumption of fossil fuels. This will reduce the risks for fuel spills in water bodies …”

“…This will reduce the risks for fuel spills in water bodies. [8] In the rest of the paper we review solar PV and wind power expansion and their cost development. Renewable energy is also becoming more economically attractive since the costs of conventional systems increase, commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions are implemented and targets for exploiting renewable energy are set.…”