In response to the explosion of one of BP’s offshore oil rigs, the Nicholas School of the Environment launched a website that is solely dedicated to keeping track of the spill and its impact on the Gulf Coast. In addition to the major news headlines, webcam images and links on the page, Bill Chameides, dean of the Nicholas School, has started his own blog about the spill called “The Green Grok.” The Chronicle’s Sonia Havele spoke with Chameides about his blog and the significance of the oil rig disaster.
The Chronicle: Since the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion on April 20, you have made several posts on your blog, “The Green Grok,” about the BP oil spill. Now that it has been over two months since the initial explosion, what do you feel are the greatest short-term as well as long-term concerns?
Bill Chameides: Well the short-term concern clearly is the impact of the oil on the wetlands of the Gulf Coast and the potential for issues with regard to, for example, dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico.... Another short-term concern is to shut the oil off. That’s the number one concern. Long-term, I think it’s the long-term impact of the oil spill itself—to what extent will turtles in the area [and] other types of species that have long lifetimes be impacted by the spill, and to what extent will those [effects] be irreversible? There is also a really serious issue that I think we as a nation need to come to grips with, and that is our dependence on oil and the price that we’re paying in so many different ways because of that dependence.
TC: What is a realistic approach to changing the public’s attitude towards the consumption of oil?
BC: [That question] is hard to answer because when you think about it, we’ve been trying to deal with our dependence on oil since about 1973, and I just don’t think people get it. I think the answer is ultimately to provide consumers with more fuel-efficient cars, provide them with better mass transit. I think probably a lot of people feel like they would like to use less gasoline, but there really is no choice. I know, for example, in Durham, it’s very hard to get around without a car. So, I think that part of the answer is providing the appropriate infrastructure. It’s just not a choice to do without a car. I think that’s part of the problem. I think the other solution is to adjust the price of gasoline to properly reflect its cost.
TC: Are there any misconceptions you believe are out there right now, and what has media coverage not completely covered in all of this?
BC: Interestingly enough, I got a comment from someone who said, “why [are] you calling this an oil spill?” And perhaps we’re all making a mistake by calling this an oil spill or somehow limiting in our minds what’s really happening. It’s obviously not an oil spill—it’s a leak. The bottom of the ocean is pouring oil out continuously into the waters, and I think that maybe in terms of our whole conception, we need to find a better term than oil spill. I think that some of the things that Jane Lubchenco, who’s the head of [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration], said at [a] meeting... that there are some things that are not being properly reported. For example, if the oil is transported over large distances, which it probably ultimately will [be], then it will be highly weathered, and therefore it will show up as... long strings of tar, which is not great, but it’s not the same thing as having a big wave of gooey oil coming in and covering everything.... [Another thing] is that I think the oceanographic community is surprised at how little the oil has spread so far. A lot of it has been caught up in something called the Franklin Eddy, which is actually not good news for the folks in the Gulf because it is not being dispersed.
TC: You described Jane Lubchenco as a “scientist extraordinare” and noted that she addressed “the human side” of the oil spill. She said the oil spill was a “human tragedy as well as an environmental disaster” and that the response must be threefold, aiming for “healthy oceans, healthy coasts and healthy communities.” Could you elaborate on what this thought means a bit more?
BC: So first of all, it’s a human tragedy because eleven people were killed. The other part of the tragedy is that these communities along the coast depend for their economic well-being and their way of life on the services and ecosystems that make up the Gulf in terms of fisheries, in terms of wetlands, and even in terms of people employed on these oil rigs.... And the cascading fallout of those kinds of things in their lives will have significant impacts for them, for the community, and actually probably for the whole nation. So there is an incredibly important human element of what’s going on. I think when Jane talks about healthy oceans, healthy coasts and healthy communities, they’re all interrelated, and in looking at the environmental impacts and trying to do restoration and protect the environment and the wetlands, we also need to be thinking about these communities and how to protect and help them be restored to a healthy community.
TC: Aside from Duke researchers, in what ways has the Duke community responded to the crisis?
BC: I’m hopeful that within the next six months or so Duke will develop its own response to the catastrophe... and that we will have something where we’re looking at the fallout from this accident that will not only look at the environmental impacts and the impacts on wildlife, but also be looking at impacts on communities and how we can help those communities address those problems. We have dozens of alumni who are working in various capacities on the oil spill. They’re working for the United States Geological Survey, they’re working for NOAA, they’re working for state environmental agencies, they’re working with private companies... I’m hoping that [Duke] can develop a program that lasts for years. The impact and the recovery from this oil accident is going to take years to occur, and I think that Duke needs to make a long-term commitment to use this accident as an opportunity to use our knowledge in the service of society. Also, [we need] to use this incident as a laboratory and a... hands-on classroom for our students to learn about community outreach and about working in the environment. I think there’s a wide spectrum of things that Duke can do.
TC: You also mentioned that you left the meeting with Jane feeling “more informed” and “reassured” that the “government folks really were on top of things and could get this mess fixed up.” What, in particular, left you with this new sense of reassurance?
BC: Part of the government’s frustration, I think, comes from a sense of helplessness—and there is helplessness. There’s not a whole lot that we can do.... I was encouraged because I learned that there was careful data being taken to monitor how far the spill had spread [and] that there had been some assessments of how the impacts might occur.... But, which is not to say, that the federal government has a plan of action to solve this problem. I don’t know that there is a solution. I think all we can do to a large extent is respond to it and try to deal with the aftermath as best as we can.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.