Not This Again: Shell Prepares to Drill in the Chukchi Sea

It’s Groundhog Day for drilling in the Arctic. But this isn’t a funny, feel-good story. It’s a big mistake.

It was only a couple of years ago that Shell made its first attempt at drilling in the Chukchi Sea and failed miserably. Shell’s crew lost control of the drill ship Kulluk, which ran aground off Sitkalidak Island on New Year’s Eve in 2012. It was carrying thousands of gallons of fuel. Shell, a multi-billion dollar oil giant, moved the Kulluk in part to avoid paying State of Alaska taxes on the vessel. And yet, the federal government has given Shell a second shot at oil exploration in the Chukchi Sea.

The Coast Guard tows the damaged Kulluk after it ran aground.

Shell claims that it has established new safety standards, and Department of the Interior Secretary Sally Jewell has said that this time, things will be different. Shell even told the New York Times that they’ve “put together the most environmentally sensitive, technically sound Arctic program ever assembled.”

But that doesn’t change the basic facts of drilling in Arctic waters: that it would be a dangerous undertaking in unpredictable waters with virtually no nearby infrastructure or support. The nearest coast guard station is more than 1,000 miles away. The nearest airports that can handle the cargo planes needed to transport oil cleanup equipment are 100 miles away or more. Compare that to the BP oil spill, which was immediately accessible by boat and plane, took place in the relatively warm, calm waters of the Gulf of Mexico and still took nearly three months to get under control.

Walruses are just one of the many Arctic species that could be impacted by an oil spill.

In summer, freezing water temperatures, 20-foot swells, gale force winds and thick fog are common in Arctic waters. In winter, the Chukchi Sea is almost completely covered in ice. If a well were to be breached late in the season and couldn’t be contained before the ice set in, it could leak oil in to the Arctic Ocean beneath the ice all winter.

Even other oil companies are questioning Shell’s dogged pursuit of Chukchi Sea oil. Chief executives from Total in France and Eni in Italy have publicly expressed their doubts. Other companies have suspended or let their leases in the Arctic expire because they’re too risky–and costly, during this time of low gas prices–to justify pursuing. And still the Department of the Interior continues to give Shell a pass in the Arctic and invite disaster as a consequence.

An oil spill in the Arctic Ocean would be far more difficult to control and clean up than one in warmer, quieter waters with better access to emergency assistance. This has the potential to make it many times more catastrophic than the BP spill, which was disastrous enough. Thousands of species depend on Arctic waters for food and habitat, including walruses, eider ducks, seals, and roughly half of the America’s polar bears, a species already profoundly threatened by climate change. And every species, from zooplankton to bowhead whales, would be affected by oil spill damage.

It’s just as clear now as it was back in 2012 that the Chukchi Sea is simply no place for oil exploration. Shell doesn’t deserve any more chances. But Arctic wildlife do deserve the chance to live and thrive without the threat of an oil spill disaster.