ia coverage of the event showed that both sealife and shorelines are subject to severe danger during a major spill. Although the Prince William Sound disaster was caused by a tanker, most people also see offshore drilling as a possible source for future spills. The oil industry has responded to this concern by claiming that the danger is not as great as most people think it is. Thus, the industry argues that its overall safety record is very good and that accidental spills are actually very rare despite the sensationalized media coverage of the Valdez spill (Rosendahl, 1990, p. 3).
In addition to oil spills, however, there are also other possible ecological dangers caused by the existence of offshore drilling. For example, substances known as "heavy muds" are used to lubricate the machinery contained on drilling platforms. These muds often contain toxic additives (Parker, 1990, p. 18). All offshore drilling sites create vast amounts of these potentially toxic muds. In this regard, it has been noted that up to 2,000 tons of heavy muds are created every day by each drilling site, and that "over the 20-year average lifetime of a platform, anywhere from 75,000 to 150,000 tons of drilling waste may be discarded into the ocean" (p. 18). As in the case of oil spills, these drilling muds pose a serious threat to sealife in the area. Yet another potential ecological danger caused by offshore drilling is "produced water." This term refers to water which has been mixed with oil. It has been noted that "produced water is usually highly saline, rich in organics, and may hold naturally occurring radium" (p. 18). Thus, produced water adds the threat of radioactive damage to the already-existing threat of oil pollution. Some critics of offshore drilling have also pointed out that drilling sites have a high danger of explosion.
...