Oil in the Arctic

Catherine Auten 

Photo by: winkyintheuk

In April 2010, the British Petroleum oil rig exploded sending one hundred and seventy million gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The full extent of the damage caused by the spill is still unknown. Recently, the Arctic Circle countries have become concerned that this type of devastation could appear on the coast of Antarctica very soon. Countries like China, Japan and the United States are extremely interested in drilling for oil in the Arctic. The only effective way to police these countries efficiently is to allow the Arctic Circle countries to provide their own standards for drilling activity off their shore line.

In a recent article published in Nature, the author proposed a way to prevent a disastrous oil spill from occurring in the Arctic (Nature, 5-6). The author claimed that the Arctic Council should create a binding agreement for all countries interested in drilling for oil in the Arctic (Nature, 5-6). However, the Arctic Council’s history shows its reluctance to create binding documents. Since its creation in 1996, the Council has only produced the Antarctic Treaty, declaring Antarctica a peaceful continent, and the Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue Agreement which binds the countries within the Arctic Circle to participate in efficient search and rescue procedures. Besides these two documents, the Arctic Council on serves as a forum for Arctic countries to discuss issues and possible solutions.

The Center for American Progress’s website posted an article expressing the Arctic Council’s inability to handle the pressing issue of drilling for oil because it lacks “unified, strategic management structures.” The author cited that, in the Council’s fifteen year history, it has only produced two binding documents; this lack of legislation proves that the Council lacks the ability to move quickly enough for the current drilling issue.

The most effective way to prevent an oil spill in the Arctic is for each country to set its own standards for drilling, making them responsible for the effects of a spill. If a spill occurred, the clean up and recovery would be the responsibility of the particular country where the spill occurred. This encourages each country to take the most extreme precautions when allowing oil companies to start drilling.

Canada has already developed a similar strategy to what I have outlined above. Canada requires that all ships weighing over three hundred tons, or any ship carrying potential pollutants, register before entering the Canadian territory. This plan is a non discriminatory way for Canada to police its territory. If countries wanted to begin drilling in Canadian territory, a similar plan of action could be devised.

By allowing individual nations to set their own standards for off-shore drilling, the countries within the Arctic can expect better protection against the dangers of a spill. While the Arctic Council could serve as a place for these countries to agree on a similar course of action, it should not be left up to the Arctic Council to create a binding agreement regarding oil interests in the Arctic; the issue is too pressing to rely on an organization which has consistently proved to be resistant to action.

Works Cited

"Poles Apart." Nature. 482. (2012): 5-6. Web. 27 Feb. 2012.