38 In a decision issued June 25, 2008, written by justice david souter, the court vacated the.5 billion award and remanded the case back to the lower court, finding that the damages were excessive with respect to maritime common law. Exxon's actions were deemed "worse than negligent but less than malicious." The punitive damages were further reduced to an amount of 507.5 million. 40 The court's ruling was that maritime punitive damages should not exceed the compensatory damages, 40 supported by a precedent dating from 1818. 41 Senate judiciary committee chairman Patrick. Leahy has decried the ruling as "another in a line of cases where this Supreme court has misconstrued congressional intent to benefit large corporations." 42 Exxon's official position was that punitive damages greater than 25 million were not justified because the spill resulted from an accident. Attorneys for the plaintiffs contended that Exxon bore responsibility for the accident because the company "put a drunk in charge of a tanker in Prince william sound." 43 Exxon recovered a significant portion of clean-up and legal expenses through insurance claims associated with the grounding.
The new Abolitionism The nation
On December 6, 2002, holland announced that he had reduced the damages to 4 billion, which he concluded was justified by night the facts of writing the case and was not grossly excessive. Exxon appealed again and the case returned to holland to be reconsidered in light of a recent Supreme court ruling in a similar case. Holland increased the punitive damages.5 billion, plus interest. Citation needed After more appeals, in December 2006 the damages award was cut.5 billion. The court of appeals cited recent Supreme court rulings relative to limits on punitive damages. 36 Exxon appealed again. On may 23, 2007, the 9th Circuit court of Appeals denied ExxonMobil's request for a third hearing and let stand its ruling that Exxon owed.5 billion in punitive damages. Exxon then appealed to the supreme court, which agreed to hear the case. 37 On February 27, 2008, the supreme court heard oral arguments. Justice samuel Alito, who at the time, owned between 100,000 and 250,000 in Exxon stock, recused himself from the case.
The major part of the money would be spent to finish cleaning up oiled beaches and attempting to restore the crippled herring population. 34 Litigation and cleanup costs edit eagles rescued from the oil spill In the case of Exxon. Baker, an Anchorage jury awarded 287 million for actual damages and 5 billion for punitive damages. To protect itself in case the judgment was affirmed, Exxon obtained.8 billion credit line from. Morgan., who created the first modern credit default swap so that write they would not have to hold as much money in reserve against the risk of Exxon's default. 35 meanwhile, exxon appealed the ruling, and the 9th. Circuit court of Appeals ordered the trial judge, russel Holland, to reduce the punitive damages.
32 On March 24, 2014, the twenty-fifth anniversary of the spill, noaa scientists reported that some species seem to have recovered, with the sea otter the latest creature to return front to pre-spill numbers. Scientists who have monitored the spill area for the last 25 years report that concern remains for one of two pods of local orca whales, with fears that one pod may eventually die out. 33 Federal scientists estimate that between 16,000 and 21,000 us gallons (61 to 79 m3) of oil remains on beaches in Prince william sound and up to 450 miles (725 km) away. Some of the oil does not appear to have biodegraded at all. A usgs scientist who analyses the remaining oil along the coastline states that it remains among rocks and between tide marks. "The oil mixes with seawater and forms an emulsion. Left out, the surface crusts over but the inside still has the consistency of mayonnaise or mousse." 34 Alaska state senator Berta gardner is urging Alaskan politicians to demand that the us government force ExxonMobil to pay the final 92 million (57 million) still owed.
26 27 Wildlife was severely affected by the oil spill. Both the long-term and short-term effects of the oil spill have been studied. 28 Immediate effects included the deaths of 100,000 to as many as 250,000 seabirds, at least 2,800 sea otters, approximately 12 river otters, 300 harbor seals, 247 bald eagles, and 22 orcas, and an unknown number of salmon and herring. 8 29 In 2003, fourteen years after the spill, a team from the University of North Carolina found that the remaining oil was lasting far longer than anticipated, which in turn had resulted in more long-term loss of many species than had been expected. The researchers found that at only a few parts per billion, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons caused a long-term increase in mortality rates. They reported that "species as diverse as sea otters, harlequin ducks and killer whales suffered large, long-term losses and that oiled mussel beds and other tidal shoreline habitats will take an estimated 30 years to recover." 30 In 2006, a study done by the national. Exxon Mobil denied any concerns over any remaining oil, stating that they anticipated a remaining fraction that they assert will not cause any long-term ecological impacts, according to the conclusions of the studies they had done: "we've done 350 peer-reviewed studies of Prince william sound. 27 The effects of the spill continued to be felt for many years afterwards. As of 2010 there were an estimated 23,000 us gallons (87 m3) of Valdez crude oil still in Alaska's sand and soil, breaking down at a rate estimated at less than 4 per year.
A voice for Animals - hennet
Landowners, fishing groups, and conservation organizations questioned the use of chemicals on hundreds of miles of shoreline when other alternatives may have been available." According to a report by david Kirby for takepart, the main component of the corexit formulation used during cleanup, 2-butoxyethanol, was. 24 Mechanical cleanup was started shortly afterwards using booms and skimmers, but the skimmers remote were not readily available during the first 24 hours following the spill, and thick oil and kelp tended to clog the equipment. Despite civilian insistence for a complete clean, only 10 of total oil was actually completely cleaned. 1 Exxon was widely criticized for its slow response essay to cleaning up the disaster and John devens, the mayor of Valdez, has said his community felt betrayed by Exxon's inadequate response to the crisis. 25 More than 11,000 Alaska residents, along with some Exxon employees, worked throughout the region to try to restore the environment. Clean-up efforts after the Exxon Valdez oil spill Because Prince william sound contained many rocky coves where the oil collected, the decision was made to displace it with high-pressure hot water. However, this also displaced and destroyed the microbial populations on the shoreline; many of these organisms (e.g.
Plankton ) are the basis of the coastal marine food chain, and others (e.g. Certain bacteria and fungi) are capable of facilitating the biodegradation of oil. At the time, both scientific advice and public pressure was to clean everything, but since then, a much greater understanding of natural and facilitated remediation processes has developed, due somewhat in part to the opportunity presented for study by the Exxon Valdez spill. Despite the extensive cleanup attempts, less than ten percent of the oil was recovered and a study conducted by noaa determined that as of early 2007 more than 26 thousand. Gallons (98 m3) of oil remain in the sandy soil of the contaminated shoreline, declining at a rate of less than 4 per year.
16 The oil industry promised, but never installed, state-of-the-art iceberg monitoring equipment. 17 Exxon Valdez was sailing outside the normal sea lane to avoid small icebergs thought to be in the area. tanker crew was half the size of the 1977 crew, worked 12- to 14-hour shifts, plus overtime. The crew was rushing to leave valdez with a load of oil. 18 coast guard vessel inspections in Valdez were not performed, and the number of staff was reduced. 18 Lack of available equipment and personnel hampered the spill cleanup.
16 This disaster resulted in International Maritime Organization introducing comprehensive marine pollution prevention rules ( marpol ) through various conventions. The rules were ratified by member countries and, under International Ship Management rules, the ships are being operated with a common objective of "safer ships and cleaner oceans". 19 In 2009, Exxon Valdez captain Joseph hazelwood offered a "heartfelt apology" to the people of Alaska, suggesting he had been wrongly blamed for the disaster: "The true story is out there for anybody who wants to look at the facts, but that's not the. Hazelwood said he felt Alaskans always gave him a fair shake. 20 Contents Clean-up and environmental impact edit workers using high-pressure, hot-water washing to clean an oiled shoreline Chemical dispersant, a surfactant and solvent mixture, was applied to the slick by a private company on March 24 with a helicopter. But the helicopter missed the target area. Scientific data on its toxicity were either thin or incomplete. In addition, public acceptance of a new, widespread chemical treatment was lacking.
The complete guide to cbd extractions (CO2 Cannabis
As to captain joe hazelwood, he was below decks, sleeping off his bender. At the helm, the third mate never would have collided with Bligh reef report had he looked at his raycas radar. But the radar was not turned. In fact, the tanker's radar was left broken and disabled for more than a year before the disaster, and Exxon management knew. It was just too expensive to fix and operate." 14 Exxon blamed Captain hazelwood for the grounding of the tanker. 13 Other factors, according to an mit course entitled "Software system Safety" by Professor Nancy. Leveson, 15 included: Ships were not informed that the previous report practice of the coast guard tracking ships out to Bligh reef had ceased.
11 In this photograph, pooled black oil is shown stranded in the rocks Exxon Shipping Company failed to supervise the master and provide a rested and sufficient crew for Exxon Valdez. The ntsb found this was widespread throughout the industry, prompting a safety recommendation to Exxon and to the industry. 12 The third mate failed to properly maneuver the vessel, possibly due to fatigue or excessive workload. 12 Exxon Shipping Company failed to properly maintain the raytheon Collision avoidance system (raycas) radar, which, if functional, would have indicated to the third mate an impending collision with the Bligh reef by detecting the "radar reflector placed on the next rock inland from Bligh. This cause has only been identified by Greg Palast (without evidentiary support) and is not present in the official accident report. 13 Captain Joseph hazelwood, who was widely reported to have been drinking heavily that night, was not at the controls when the ship struck the reef. However, as does the senior officer, he was in command of the ship even though he was asleep in his bunk. In light of the other findings, investigative reporter Greg Palast stated in 2008, "Forget the drunken skipper fable.
response efforts difficult and severely taxed existing response plans. The region is a habitat for salmon, sea otters, seals and seabirds. The oil, originally extracted at the Prudhoe bay oil field, eventually covered 1,300 miles (2,100 km) of coastline, 3 and 11,000 square miles (28,000 km2) of ocean. 6 7 According to official reports, the ship was carrying.09451 million us gallons (1,264,155 bbl; 200,984.6 m3) of oil, of which about.8 million us gallons (260,000 bbl; 41,000 m3) were spilled into the Prince william sound. 1 8 An approximate figure of 11 million us gallons (260,000 bbl; 42,000 m3) was a commonly accepted estimate of the spill's volume and has been used by the State of Alaska's Exxon Valdez oil Spill Trustee council, 3 the national Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and environmental groups. 5 9 10 During the first few days of the spill, heavy sheens of oil covered large areas of the surface of Prince william sound. Multiple factors have been identified as contributing to the incident: Beginning three days after the vessel grounded, a storm pushed large quantities of fresh oil on to the rocky shores of many of the beaches in the Knight Island chain.
If needed, the tide class tankers can deliver 800 cubic metres of fuel per hour. Of the four Tide class tankers, rfa tidespring is fully operational while rfa tiderace is on the verge of entering service. Rfa tidesurge is being fitted out in Falmouth and raf tideforce will soon be delivered from her builders in south Korea. In, quick posts 13 comments. The, exxon Valdez oil spill occurred in, prince william sound, alaska, like march 24, 1989, when, exxon Valdez, an oil tanker owned. Exxon Shipping Company, bound for, long beach, california, struck, prince william sound 's. Bligh reef at 12:04 am 1 2 local time and spilled.8 million us gallons (260,000 bbl; 41,000 m3) of crude oil over the next few days. 3, it is considered to be one of the most devastating human-caused environmental disasters.
Full text - benjamin Franklin - the journal of Paris, 1784
Hms queen Elizabeth conducted her first Replenishment at sea (RAS) with rfa tidespring this week. While the main purpose of her current deployment is to conduct helicopter flight trials in the eastern Atlantic, the opportunity was taken to prove her ras capability. A first replenishment at sea for qe with rfa tidespring was planned to take place in February. The two ships came together but no lines were passed because in the rough weather it was not worth taking risks for a trial that could be postponed until a better opportunity was available. Hms queen Elizabeth sailed from Portsmouth on 10th June so had only been at sea for 11 days, assuming she sailed with full fuel tanks, she did not actually need to conduct ras. For the purposes of the trial, just 200 tonnes of F76 marine diesel oil was transferred from rfa tidespring. Both port and starboard fuelling stations on the carrier were tested. Rfa tidespring was designed from the outset to provide fuel to the qec aircraft carriers. To conduct the ras, the two ships steam at 12 knots, around 42 metres apart.