Quote:
Originally Posted by aka123
Some reading:
http://scholar.google.fi/scholar?hl=...ironment&btnG=
http://www.forskningsraadet.no/CSSto...2004Bodkin.pdf
http://www.oil-spill-info.com/Public...bility_ESI.pdf
"The ecosystem response to the 1989 spill of oil from the Exxon Valdez into Prince William Sound, Alaska, shows that current practices for assessing ecological risks of oil in the oceans and, by extension, other toxic sources should be changed. Previously, it was assumed that impacts to populations derive almost exclusively from acute mortality. However, in the Alaskan coastal ecosystem, unexpected persistence of toxic subsurface oil and chronic exposures, even at sublethal levels, have continued to affect wildlife. Delayed population reductions and cascades of indirect effects postponed recovery. Development of ecosystem-based toxicology is required to understand and ultimately predict chronic, delayed, and indirect long-term risks and impacts"
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/302/5653/2082.short |
what does the valdez spill into the pristine prince william sound have to do with the gulf of mexico bp oil spill? you should prolly do some research on the damage done there from the clean-up. have you been to either location? I have been to both. apples and oranges.
I grew up spending summers in Galveston, my mom lives there now. tar balls on the beach have been a part of the landscape there for decades and decades. In contrast, prince william sound is not a naturally occuring seepage zone.