|
|
|
|
|
OIL EXTRACTION OIL EXTRACTION
The extraction of oil is responsible for the deforestation, degradation, and destruction of lands across the globe. The oil extraction process results in the release of toxic drilling by-products into local rivers, poisoning peoples and animals, while broken pipelines and leakage result in persistent oil spillage. In addition, the burning of oil adds many tons of carbon to our atmosphere each year. Unfortunately -- from a conservation point of view -- rainforests often lie on rich oil deposits, a tempting source of revenue for a government, especially in developing countries. With careful management and planning, the extraction of oil from the rainforests in a more environmentally-friendly way is possible, but requires time and money; two things the governments of some developing governments lack. Instead governments may opt to sell concessions to foreign companies who, in the past, extracted their oil with little consideration for the environment or the native peoples. When the companies pull out after oil reserves decline or political problems arise, they often leave a devastated landscape. One of the best known case studies of oil exploitation in the rainforest is in Ecuador, where US oil giant, Texaco (now Chevron-Texaco), has seriously degraded an ecosystem along with affecting the lives of thousands of indigenous peoples. Before Texaco entered the region in 1967, the Ecuadorean Oriente was considered one of the most biodiverse regions on the planet and was home to several indigenous groups including the Huaroni people. Some of these Huaroni were among the few remaining indigenous peoples on Earth living fully in their traditional ways. Over the past three decades, the Oriente has suffered serious degradation and deforestation. Oil spills [green groups allege Texaco dumped more than 20 billion gallons of toxic drilling by-products into local waterways and spilled more than 17 million gallons of crude] and clearing for access roads, exploration, and production activities have damaged the surrounding rainforest and adversely affected the lives of local people. As of the mid 1990s, lands once used for farming lay bare and hundreds of waste pits remain. In August 1992, Kane reported a rupture in a pipeline that caused a 275,000 gallon (1.04 million L) spill which made the broad Rio Napo run black for days and forced downstream Peru and Ecuador to declare national states of emergency for the affected regions (Kane 1995). Originally it appeared that Texaco might pull out of the Oriente without reparations to the people whose environment it degraded, but widespread protests by indigenous peoples, environmentalists, and human rights organizations forced Texaco into negotiations. Texaco projected its clean up costs at a moderate US$5-10 million. In response to the insufficient clean-up gesture, along with widespread environmental degradation and serious health problems among local peoples, lead attorney Crist˜bal Bonifaz filed a US$1.5 billion class action lawsuit (Maria Aguinda, et al., v. Texaco Inc.) against Texaco in White Plains, NY on behalf of 30,000 indigenous peoples affected by the oil company's operations. Other suits against Texaco in Ecuador had failed because of Texaco's political influence with the Ecuadorean judiciary. This suit was dismissed in 1996, though in 1998 the suit was reinstated. The exploitation of oil in the Ecuadorean Amazon serves as a particularly negative example of oil development projects in the rainforest. Typically, the oil company cuts roads through the forest in order to carry out operations. These roads are followed by transient peasant settlers who colonize and damage the surrounding forest through slash-and-burn agriculture, introduction of domestic animals, hunting, the collection of fuelwood, and often the introduction of foreign disease to local forest dwellers. Besides the opening of oil roads, oil companies like Texaco, burn off by-product natural gas in the open air, a process known as flaring. The flames, besides adding pollutants to the atmosphere, cause fires that can destroy more forest and threaten the lives of locals. In the late 1990s, such gas burning at an Occidental well in Bangladesh was cited as the cause behind a large fire in the rainforest. The oil extraction process can be messy and destructive. Spills result from burst pipelines and toxic drilling by-products may be dumped directly into local creeks and rivers. Some of the more toxic chemicals are stored in open waste pits and may pollute the surrounding lands and water ways. For security reason, oil operations may have military involvement. Oil spills are of tremendous concern in the rainforest. A severe oil spill could have a devastating impact given the variety of river systems - from floating meadows to swamp forest to oxbow lakes, to sand bars - that would be affected. The Exxon Valdez oil spill was difficult enough to clean up even though it was limited to rocky beaches, imagine the mess of a similar size spill in the Amazon. Indigenous and local peoples often gain the least from oil extraction, but stand to lose the most. For the impact on their homes, culture, environment, and health, these people generally see little in the form of compensation from the government or oil companies. For example the Ogoni tribesmen in Nigeria have seen little revenue from Shell's activities in the Niger River delta and today rely mostly on sabotage of oil installations to collect oil spill compensation from Shell. It is meretricious to say oil companies are solely responsible for fleecing locals out of their deserved oil revenues. In many cases, oil companies pay their agreed upon fees and royalties, which end up in the hands of corrupt government bureaucrats before they are ever distributed the the communities. As for the government of the developing country, oil production does not necessarily take the burden of debt off its shoulders. During the 1970s when oil prices were extraordinarily high and real interest rates low, many oil-exporting countries looked much wealthier than they actually were and took out large loans from foreign banks. The loans were used to sponsor costly, often economically inefficient development projects. In the 1980s the creditworthiness of these developing countries collapsed with oil prices, and the debt of many oil-exporters skyrocketed. For example, the national debt of Ecuador has rapidly accelerated since the beginning of the oil boom in the early 1970s. In 1970, the national debt stood at US$256.2 million), but by 1992 the debt had swollen to US$12,600 million ($12.6 billion). Low oil prices in the late nineties again devastated the treasuries of oil-dependent countries like Venezuela and Gabon before recovering again. Granted, oil conglomerates are easy targets for environmentalists. Their operations are highly conspicuous and create a dramatic impact on the local economy and the local social conditions. Since local communities reap few benefits from oil development, while shouldering the bulk of the social and environmental costs it is easy to see why the contribution of oil development to environmental devastation is often overstated. |
|
A World Imperilled |
Natural Forces Subsistence Activities Oil Extraction Mining War Cattle Pasture Fuelwood, Roads, Climate Population & Poverty |
| what's new | tropical fish | help support the site | madagascar | search | about | contact |
Copyright Rhett Butler 1994-2005 |
