Oil cleanup not ending anytime soon
Article History
There are updates to this article.
Crews work on Treasure Island to remove oil from the shoreline.
(Jason Steinberg/Special to The Examiner)
Crews work on Treasure Island to remove oil from the shoreline.

SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Most of the workers who have cleaned Cosco Busan fuel from Bay Area shorelines are expected to be sent home by the end of this week, but officials have warned that toxic oil will remain on some coastal rocks.

Volunteers helped thousands of contractors clean oil from shorelines after the container ship spilled 58,000 gallons of fuel into the Bay on Nov. 7, but just 350 workers and no volunteers remained on the job Sunday, according to Department of Fish and Game official Rob Roberts, who has coordinated state cleanup efforts.

Cleanup efforts are expected to be finished by Friday, he said, but shoreline monitoring is expected to continue for months. The entire coastline will be surveyed for oil in January, Roberts said.

Locally, the remaining workers are painstakingly collecting oil on Treasure, Angel and Alcatraz islands, east of China Beach, and west of Aquatic Park, according to Roberts. He said workers are also spraying oiled rocks with hot water, then collecting the dislodged oil. “Sometimes we can get most of it,” Roberts said. “But it’s not 100 percent.”

Rocks that are too slippery to be safely walked on, or that are home to crabs, plants, barnacles and other organisms, such as some of the rocks on Alcatraz Island, are not pressure-washed. Instead, Roberts said, “We just let nature handle it.”

Hot water, according to UC Berkeley marine ecologist Tim Herrlinger, can be lethal to shoreline critters. “They’re more likely to die when the temperature goes up a little than if it went down a little,” he said.

Ecosystems on Alaskan rocks that were left in oil after the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill sometimes recovered better than ecosystems on rocks that were pressure-washed with hot water, according to Herrlinger.

Dennis Deaver fished Alaska’s Prince William Sound until the Exxon Valdez spill destroyed the inlet’s herring population. The commercial Bay fisherman said oil that was pressure-cleaned off Alaskan rocks was not always removed. “All it did was run down in the rocks and sand,” he said.

About 2 percent of Exxon’s oil remained on Alaskan shorelines three and a half years after the accident, researchers found.

The U.S. Coast Guard abandoned plans to use oil-lifting chemicals on rocks, according to U.S. Coast Guard spokesman Jonathan Cilley, because the chemicals left slippery residues after tests at UC Berkeley.

High-pressure, hot-water rock cleaning

Advantages

» Removes oil from rocks

» Organisms can repopulate cleaned rocks

» Removed oil is prevented from washing back into the Bay

Disadvantages

» Traces of oil are left behind

» Can kill animals, plants and other organisms

» Workers can slip as they clean oiled rocks

Source: Rob Roberts, California Department of Fish and Game

jupton@examiner.com


Name
Comments

characters left


Comments from Examiner Readers

6:17 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 29, 2007 re: "Cosco Busan owners pay $80M to leave"

Examiner Reader said:
Examiner Reader said: The ship's destination was QINQDAO (Tsingtao), China, not Korea as reported above. 7 agree | 6 disagree Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree How does one disagree with a statement of provable fact?

148 agree | 139 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

6:12 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 29, 2007 re: "Tests show Bay water is clean"

Examiner Reader said:
"Additionally, state officials said that tests conducted by a California Department of Fish and Game biologist last week that found what seemed to be oil found in local herring fisheries were “inclusive,” according to Lt. Rob Roberts of the Department of Fish and Game’s Office of Spill Prevention and Response." Perhaps "inconclusive" was intended

122 agree | 101 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:56 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "Cosco Busan owners pay $80M to leave"

Examiner Reader said:
The ship's destination was QINQDAO (Tsingtao), China, not Korea as reported above.

158 agree | 163 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:23 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "Group turns oil into food for ’shrooms"

Examiner Reader said:
The Coast Guard did not turn away the Fire Department boat that came to investigate. That is false. The Coast Guard did, inform them of the 100 yard safey zoen around the Cosco Busan after the incident occurred. The statement implies that the Coast Guard is covering up this incident, which is ridiculous.

193 agree | 147 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:30 AM MST on Tue., Dec. 11, 2007 re: "Bay spill lawsuits pour in"

Examiner Reader said:
Hey, SFoff, I live in SF and yes my county did fail miserably in their response. I just wonder if Dennis Herrera is really going to believe that he will get 25K for each day of the spill from Captain Cota.

137 agree | 141 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:50 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007 re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"

SFoff said:
Dear Examiner reader (first grade level, apparently)12:40pm. There was no mention of S.F. being the only county affected by the spill. The article was from a San Francisco Newspaper, regarding San Francisco's response to the oil spill. Not very obscure. It's all clear in context. Nobody was wondering why SF. "was not kept in the loop". He is questioning why S.F. did not enter the loop of it's own accord, considering how much "training and partnership" had been established. Are we supposed to be happy with our particular cities response because your county also failed miserably to do anything in time to prevent this problem? And BTW, S.F. is not the center of the Universe, just the Solar System, but thanks for the exaggeration!

157 agree | 167 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:40 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007 re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"

Examiner Reader said:
... and San Francisco was the only city, the only county affected by this spill. It seems that SF is to self-centered in this incident, wondering why it was not kept in teh loop. It seems that many other cities and counties were affected by this incident. way to go SF. Show you true colors. If ross Mirkirami wants to be mayor in 2012 then he should just come out and proclaim that San Francisco is in fact, the center of the universe. Then he will get my vote

160 agree | 146 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:00 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007 re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"

Examiner Reader said:
Seems strange that we would be knocking ourselves up for something we had little control over and had misleading info about. One would think you can rely on the Coast Guard to provide accurate info, since this IS their jurisdiction, but to get the info wrong hours later and even when others are pointing out that it's a LARGE spill (and to ignore this emergency) seems unconscionable. This, to me, should be about the ship crashing into the bridge tower and the bungled response of the Coast Guard, their effect on the greater Bay Area and effective preventive measures.

159 agree | 143 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:34 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Waters now safe, fishing to resume"

Examiner Reader said:
Its my understanding two-thirds of the 58,000 gallons of oil is unaccounted for and will remain so. The water quality of San Francisco Bay was questionable before this event. Some sort of blanket statement regarding the "safeness" of the bay water seems a bit dubious to me.

318 agree | 168 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:32 AM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Bay Bridge bumper bits lost"

Examiner Reader said:
Having said that black made it harder to find the missing pieces of plastic lumber, they're going to use black again for the replacement?!! Foolish.

391 agree | 137 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:34 AM MST on Mon., Nov. 26, 2007 re: "Birds death toll continues climb following oil spill"

Examiner Reader said:
Very self indulgent of you to equate an oil spill dead birds and your situation. Get over it already.

245 agree | 185 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
 
 

(page generated in 0.11 seconds)