Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 20 March 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.176
News
Lasting legacy of the Exxon Valdez
Twenty years on, the iconic oil spill remains an expensive ecological disaster.
When people think of big oil spills, they think of the Exxon Valdez. Twenty years ago, the oil tanker spilled its load off the coast of Alaska, and images of oil-slicked birds hit the news at a time when environmental awareness was quickly rising in the United States.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
Extraordinary quantities of detergents added to the Exxon Valdez oil spill were catastrophic. The spill itself was only messy. Saddam Hussein pumped 400 million gallons of Kuwaiti oil into the Persian Gulf to thwart a (sham) Marine landing - 600 mi^2 of sea slick, 300 miles of coastline drenched in oil. ZERO abatement thereafter within a stagnant wetland environment. Net adverse chronic sequelae? None. Add remediation to obtain all the disaster an Enviro-whine could purhase with your donated funds.