Support Grist
Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.
InterActivist

Rikipedia

Author and oil-spill expert Riki Ott answers readers' questions


18 Mar 2005
Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
Riki Ott.
Riki Ott, author of Sound Truth and Corporate Myth$.
question We know that using oil is wasting our planet, ruining the atmosphere and oceans, and poisoning our water and children, but we still find using it a reasonable thing to do. Who is really at fault, Exxon or us? Are we destined to pollute earth to a point that destroys us all?    -- Bruce Wright, Executive Director, Conservation Science Institute, Wasilla, Alaska

answer Old habits are just hard to break -- it's just part of human nature. It's also part of human nature, I think, to focus on the positive and not admit to the negative until it affects us personally and drastically. In 100 years or so, oil has rapidly advanced the basic quality of life for many Americans well beyond that of most other people on the planet. We equated the positive benefits of oil use with "progress" and simply left it at that without looking for other ways to support our lifestyles. There was no need: oil was cheap and plentiful and ours for the taking.

Of course, there was a downside to our growing oil dependency. The extraordinary costs of development, production, and transportation dictated huge capital investments, which led, rapidly, to creation of mega-companies. The centralization of power upstream eventually led to centralization of economic activity downstream in every other industry. And voila -- globalization in the name of progress. (I think ultimately globalization carries the seeds of its own destruction in the form of social, economic, and environmental injustice and inequity, but that is another story. And one which we hopefully will survive!)

The giant companies influence (control?) more of our individual lives and decisions than we like to admit. Let's face it: if we saw as many ads on TV talking about the health problems now linked with petrochemical exposures (at levels our federal government still thinks are "safe") -- or telling us that the source of 92 percent of these harmful low levels of oil in our air and water is from burning fossil fuels in our vehicles and power plants (according to the National Research Council), or pointing out that we are melting our planet with our energy choice -- as we do see ads selling us on oil, we might start to agitate for another, more benign energy source.

As it stands now, the negative effects of our oil use have been noticed by others with whom we share the planet and by a growing number of disillusioned Americans. Further, oil is no longer plentiful or cheap and a growing number of countries are competing with us for a dwindling resource across a politically unstable planet.

So it is time to start examining old habits. It's time to admit that oil is really not the friendly energy source we once thought. It's time to start taking individual steps to reduce our own fossil-fuel use. It's time to hold these giant corporations that we created, in the name of efficiency and cheap power, accountable to the negative impacts of fossil-fuel use.

One way to start is to remember that we vote with our pocketbooks every day. As long as we must fuel our cars with gas (which will hopefully not be more than another 20 to 30 years), choose companies that are truly active in moving us beyond oil (and not just doing good marketing to that effect) and ones that are double-hulling their tankers. Hint: Exxon has done neither.

question What do you think it will take for the public to implicate themselves (at least to some extent) in disasters like the Exxon Valdez spill, and do you believe that the media has a responsibility in helping to establish these linkages during post-spill reporting?    -- Kelly Harrell, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

answer I think the media bears a huge responsibility to investigate and report the root causes of these human-made disasters such as oil spills to give people the basic knowledge to make informed choices. I think the media is woefully flunking this task. By reporting these disasters simply as disasters and treating them with little more weight than one gives car accidents, people are not able to draw the important connections needed to reduce risks to minimize these disasters in the first place.

The Exxon Valdez is a case in point. The media reflected the public outrage long enough that Congress managed to pass the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which contained some key provisions to reduce risk of future giant spills. These provisions include double-hull tankers by 2015, improved vessel traffic controls (and things like alcohol screening of tanker captains), citizen oversight councils, and the right of states to set stricter standards than the federal government.

But where was the media coverage on the root cause of this spill -- our oil dependency? Or on the fact that, according to the National Research Council, about 30 million gallons of oil, the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez spill, contaminate our rivers and coastal seas every year due to the burning of fossil fuels in our cars and power plants? Or that this chronic leakage is likely occurring at levels that affect people and wildlife?

I think that people need to be provided with accurate information on a consistent basis in order to connect the dots between these oil disasters and our oil usage. Blasting people with disaster coverage is too episodic and depressing. We're all just glad to get to the end of the disaster and the bad news.

What we need are more educational articles that help people see up front the bigger picture of our oil usage -- the "externalities" such as childhood asthma, cancers and other health problems, military installations, declining reserves, likely price increases, global destabilization, global climate threats, etc., and at the same time what energy alternatives are possible to allow a similar (or more likely a vastly improved) quality of life. This way people can better assess the risks of our oil dependency and make informed choices that will chart a course to a new energy future.

question Do you think it's realistic to think that the U.S. will be able to rid itself of all petroleum dependency? Is that the only way to protect our waters and wildlife from oil spills? What else can we do to ensure that history does not repeat itself?    -- Name not provided

answer I not only think it is possible to transition off our petroleum dependency, I think it is inevitable. My only concern is that we will be lulled into the status quo of relying heavily on fossil fuels for another 20 or 30 years before we get serious about switching our energy base. The sooner we get started, the more graceful -- and less costly in terms of human health and life -- will be the transition.

We can start with the most wasteful sector and the one using the most oil and causing the most damage to our health and the health of our wildlife and planet -- our transportation sector, which uses the bulk of our oil supplies. I do believe there are far better uses of oil than getting us from one point to another. Once we address our transportation needs, then we might have more time to work out alternatives for agricultural fertilizers, plastics, pharmaceuticals, and the myriad of other uses we have for oil.

Certainly oil pollution is not the only threat to our waters and wildlife. Incremental habitat loss and chemical toxins that damage reproduction and development take enormous tolls. Oil is just another hazard in the mix -- and one we might have the most immediate chance to do something about. Until we transition off oil, we will run the risk of more big spills. I just hope they are fewer and farther in between!

question Do you think your book is having an effect on those who read it? What sort of action do you hope to inspire?    -- Name not provided

answer Well I certainly hope so! I wrote this book in a way that would be readable for a broad audience specifically with the intent and hope that readers would take its message to heart -- oil is more toxic than we thought -- and then act on this new understanding. I hope to inspire individuals to get involved in the biggest threat facing civilization today -- our choice of energy.

Einstein said, "Problems cannot be solved from the same consciousness that created them." I'd like to see individuals become energy literate; that is, educate ourselves about what energy we use in our homes, schools, offices, and cars; where it comes from; how much it really costs in terms of health care, military installations, waste disposal, and other costs; and then make conscious freewill choices to wean our own fossil-fuel appetite. If enough of us did this, consistently, and we demanded the same of our political leaders, we could initiate the transition away from fossil fuels without having to wait for the oil companies and automobile makers to tell us what step to take next.

Simply put, there is enough evidence now that oil is more harmful to life than we thought, and we should get off oil (fossil fuels) sooner rather than later. I hope my book inspires people to this end.

question So, what is the most important thing you've learned about yourself and life in these years you've devoted to writing this book?    -- Ilarion Merculieff, Anchorage, Alaska

answer This spill and the cathartic experience of writing about it for six years taught me the most, I think, about anger. I'm a passionate person and the negative side of passion is anger. It was easy to be angry after the spill -- at Exxon, at the federal government, at the state government, at all the destruction of innocent life. It was easy to stay angry at Exxon after the spill for dividing our fishing community (and other oiled communities) with the money spill (aka the cleanup), for the giant pretense that its spill had no long-term harm to workers or wildlife, for lack of initiative (still) to double-hull its tankers, and for many other reasons.

Sometime later, three or four years, it dawned on me one day how destructive that anger was to myself and how much energy I had wrapped up in just being mad. I could use that energy for other, much more constructive things! And so I poked and prodded about in my own interior landscape and learned to release and transform anger into constructive energy. I still have my moments, of course, but now they are teachable moments, and I am able to move more quickly through the anger to take advantage of this powerful emotion.

I learned I have the capacity for great good and the energy to make positive changes -- and I now feel I have the emotional and spiritual framework to tackle the tasks before me rather than be overwhelmed. In fact, I learned so much -- and the journey was a large part of the learning -- that I would like to share this journey someday as another story in hopes that it will similarly inspire others to take positive actions for change.

Thank you for being part of my journey.

question Would you do it over again, or was it all too painful?    -- Darren Marting, Las Vegas, Nev.

answer I am in love with where I live. Love is both joyous and painful; love probes our emotional depths and challenges us to expand our capacity to care, to struggle to improve, to fix things that are wrong. I am here for the duration, because where I live is Earth.

question If the Republicans win the votes to start drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, what do you suggest we do?    -- JoAnne Russ, Buffalo, N.Y.

answer Sadly, on March 16, the U.S. Senate voted 51-49 to open the Arctic Refuge to oil and gas drilling. It's too bad the pro-drilling forces don't have to get as many "yeses" over the years as the pro-sanctuary forces have had to get "nos." The incredible efforts by the environmental community, the Native peoples like the Gwich'in and their Inupiat neighbors to the east in Canada, and thousands of Americans have won many "no" votes, but it only takes one "yes" vote to change everything.

I suggest you now bombard the U.S. House leaders, your own delegates, and the president with your opinion on what you want to happen. Check out the websites of the nonprofit organizations who have been leading this charge to protect the Arctic Refuge for more suggestions of what to do: Alaska Wilderness League and the Gwich'in Steering Committee.

Don't lose hope. It's not over yet.

question Do you accept the annual Permanent Fund Dividend? If so, how do you rationalize it since it derives from oil monies?    -- Elizabeth Burk, Vashon, Wash.

answer Yes, I accept the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend -- and I give it all away to my favorite environmental organizations. Money is not a bad thing. It's a form of energy that can be put to good use. So that is what I do. It's a gift from the Earth and that's where I return it.

question My 16-year-old came home from school and told me that it's a proven fact that the worst cause of global warming is from the methane that cows produce, and this is printed in her school science books. Is this true?    -- Soo Chalk, Cleethorpes, U.K.

answer Oh dear. This is perhaps why I've been asked by K-12 science teachers for better information for students! While cows and sheep do contribute to global climate change, they are not the main cause of it. Certainly not, if one is to believe 2,000 scientists with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Program. These scientists report that the ever-accelerating rate of fossil-fuel consumption over the last 150 years, combined with extensive burning of wood, are the main culprits contributing to carbon emissions and global warming. Methane, produced by cows, sheep, rice growing, and forest burning (in slash and burn agriculture), is more effective in promoting warming than carbon dioxide, but there is less of it. About 20 percent of the global methane emissions are due to farm animals. I'm afraid we have no one to blame but ourselves here and our fossil-fuel habits.

question As I understand it, the Alaskan salmon fishery is really the only one being responsibly managed right now and with low mercury levels in the fish (according to the Seafood Watch program run by the Monterey Bay Aquarium). How can we change our other salmon fisheries to be similarly successful in that regard?    -- Name not provided

answer Alaska still has the advantage of a largely intact ecosystem. As we teach our children in Alaska, salmon are the most valuable product grown in forests! They take a lot less time to grow than trees, and they need healthy forests and healthy watersheds to survive.

One of the big lessons from the oil-spill science was that our western-based style of management, based on focusing on a single species at a time, actually contributes to managing the species right out of existence! We need a multidisciplinary approach with consistent baseline monitoring over decades to properly understand salmon and hope to manage a sustainable fishery. Yes, this is expensive, but so is loss of these wonderful and inspiring wild fish.

But the bottom line is: you can't manage the fisheries unless you have allowed the salmon to have the habitat they need.

question What can I, personally, do to help humanity?    -- Eric Wadsworth, Tucson, Ariz.

answer I've asked this question myself of many people with a wide diversity of knowing. At first I was surprised by the consistent answer, stated in different ways: work on yourself. Be the change you want to see.

Examine your internal landscape. Honestly. Don't hide anything from yourself. Address the tangled emotions. Work them out. If something upsets you in the outside world, ask yourself why. Figure out what inside you gets upset and why. Untangle it. How can we get to world peace with angry individuals? How can we help others until we have helped our own selves? The experience of helping our own selves be the person we want to be gives us the wisdom to help others.

Then look at your unique gifts and see what you have to offer. Do you have time to commit to something that inspires you? Money? Education, knowledge, or wisdom? Look at other people as having unique gifts also. What is it they are teaching or offering?

The four things I learned from the Alaska Natives still guide my work in the outside world as I seek to make a difference. Show up. Listen. Share your truth. Don't be attached to outcome.

But I found that I couldn't listen with compassion or share my truth with vision until I had cleared a bit of my own internal landscape ...

question I am so overwhelmed by all of this, always have been. Where do I start trying to help?    -- Alane Celli, Charlottesville, Va.

answer Yes, it certainly can be overwhelming. So you have to start with baby steps. Small accomplishments inspire larger steps and successful larger steps are empowering. Pretty soon, you'll find you are running to keep up with yourself.

I can only share what I did and hope that my example will give you just enough light to find your own path. I started by volunteering to help at a local nonprofit organization, Cordova District Fishermen United. I offered what I had, which in my case was my academic training on oil pollution. I did my homework to learn what those before me had done. I learned as much as I could about the players and the problem, which at first was chronic air and water pollution at the marine-tanker terminal in Port Valdez (covered briefly in Sound Truth and more extensively in my next book). I tried to identify both the causes of the problems and the potential fixes. I researched the facts and the fiction and could explain the differences. I was persistent and consistent. I always looked to recruit others.

Somehow the years slipped by, and now I'm sitting on top of a mountain of knowledge and encouraging others to climb up -- the view is great. Hope is on the horizon. I believe we can survive the fossil-fuel age and some of the renewable-energy choices promise to even vastly improve our quality of life.

So, pick a mountain and start climbing!

question Any advice for a wannabe writer on how to get started and keep the momentum going on such a big writing project?    -- Name not provided

answer Well, first you have to have something to write about that inflames your passion! Then, on days when you wonder just why the heck you've assigned yourself this ridiculous task, you remember you care and why you care.

In my case, on down days, I remember the grief of my friends and neighbors and the anguish of my community during the early days of the spill; I remember the lingering sadness over the sound's slow recovery and the lingering anger over Exxon's refusal to pay what people think is due; I remember the people who have been sick since the spill cleanup and the ones who died; I remember the resolve and commitment by so many good people -- friends, fishers, scientists, doctors, lawyers -- to make a difference by learning from this spill so that we could work together to prevent another, or at least to help alleviate the human suffering the next time; I remember how beautiful Prince William Sound is; I remember that I can make a difference.

And always, every day, I remember to take time to renew my own spirits and emotions so that I can give the next day my very best effort. For me, as for others I'm sure, renewal means different things -- a long hike outdoors, a visit with friends, some quiet time in my own home. But the end result is the same: an eagerness to tackle the next day at full throttle!

question Besides Silent Spring, what other environmental writing has inspired you over the years? What writers have most influenced you or your style of writing?    -- Name not provided

answer Ho ho!! I laugh because when I walk into bookstores I realize there are so many choices, and what may help or inspire one person can be completely off the chart for another. And I do love to read books to learn about the world around and within me. My tastes have changed a bit with time too. At first I hungered for knowledge about the physical world and now I find myself steering into the metaphysical world (although some cultures do not even recognize this word because it is all a continuum).

In The Same Vein
Tempest in a Tight Spot
Terry Tempest Williams sends dispatches from a tour to promote The Open Space of Democracy
Well. Milestone readings include Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac, Hermann Hesse's Siddhartha, Winnie the Pooh, Wind in the Willows (if you think these latter two are just for children, maybe you should check them out!), Terry Tempest Williams' books, especially Refuge, Red, and The Open Space of Democracy, Starhawk's The Fifth Sacred Thing, Barbara Kingsolver's Prodigal Summer and Small Wonder. I really like Yes! magazine and devour every issue -- check out the back issue "The Power of One." And I like Shift, the magazine of the Institute of Noetic Sciences, as an exploration of the connection between the conscious and subconscious.

Just reading is the important thing and teaching children to read. It opens up whole worlds and helps make sense of things. As for my writing style, it is self-styled: an unconscious accumulation of what I've read, what I've learned, who I am, and where I live. I read Bird by Bird and went for it.

question Do you feel like the environmental movement is dead, as has been discussed so much lately? How can we change the movement for the better, or should we let it die?    -- Name not provided

answer Goodness no. The environmental movement is far from dead. It lives in the hearts of commercial fishers who realize the connection between strong salmon returns and good habitat protection; Native people who teach their children that their culture depends on the land; sports fishers who cast their lures into our rivers and lakes; mothers who are furious that their own breast milk is poisoning their babies and that their young children struggle to breathe or die from chemical exposures thought to be safe; people who walk their dogs or themselves in parks and wild places; families who recreate outdoors; farmers who work the land; economists who calculate that healthy economies depend upon healthy environments ... My! The list goes on and on.

It's not always called environmentalism, but an understanding of nature and nurture, whether it's our bodies, our families, our souls, or our communities, and even our great nation, is what environmentalism is all about.

The planet is our home. If we trash it, where will we live?

Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
< Previous | Next >

Also in Grist

The Week's Most Popular



From the Archives
Not Just Lippman Service. Steve Lippman, green investment expert, answers questions.
Nobody Puts Brenda in a Corner! Brenda Way, artistic dance director, answers questions.
It All Comes Out in the Walsh. Bill Walsh, founder of the Healthy Building Network, answers questions.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Jobs Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcasts
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks