Results from cooperative ecological risk assessments for oil spill response planning in Galveston Bay, Texas and the San Francisco Bay area, California

Simple item page
dc.acquisition-srcen_US
dc.call-noen_US
dc.contract-noen_US
dc.contributor.authorAurand, DVen_US
dc.contributor.authorCoelho, GMen_US
dc.contributor.authorPond, RGen_US
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorCaplis, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorKraly, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorSowby, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorWalker, AHen_US
dc.contributor.other2005 International Oil Spill Conference, IOSC 2005en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-02-15T16:45:53Z
dc.date.available2010-02-15T16:45:53Z
dc.date.issued2005en_US
dc.degreeen_US
dc.descriptionpgs. 7205-7213en_US
dc.description-otheren_US
dc.description.abstractThis paper summarizes the results of two cooperative ecological risk assessments (ERAs) that examined the potential environmental consequences of oil spill scenarios, two in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay, California and one in Galveston Bay, Texas. The goal of the evaluation was to identify the optimum mix of response options for reducing injury to the environment. For these specific scenarios, the participants concluded that only dispersant use, assuming high effectiveness, had the potential to significantly reduce environmental impact when compared to natural recovery. While water-column effects increased with dispersant use, they were not long term and judged to be of less ecological significance than shoreline or water-surface impacts. Aside from dispersant use, only shoreline cleanup was effective in clearly mitigating impacts, and obviously would not prevent the immediate consequences of the spills. The optimum response was viewed as involving some combination of the various response options. There were some issues with data adequacy in both locations, but both groups felt the information was adequate for the analysis. In both ERAs, participants emphasized that the conclusions were scenario specific, and that additional analyses would be necessary before any significant generalizations could be made.en_US
dc.description.urihttp://gbic.tamug.edu/request.htmen_US
dc.geo-codeGalveston Bayen_US
dc.geo-codeSan Francisco Bayen_US
dc.history1-15-09 kswen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1969.3/18493
dc.latitudeen_US
dc.locationNot available in house - Please contact GBIC for assistanceen_US
dc.longitudeen_US
dc.notesen_US
dc.placeen_US
dc.publisheren_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries10018.00en_US
dc.relation.urien_US
dc.scaleen_US
dc.seriesen_US
dc.subjectoil spillsen_US
dc.subjectplanningen_US
dc.subjectresponseen_US
dc.subjectrisk assessmenten_US
dc.titleResults from cooperative ecological risk assessments for oil spill response planning in Galveston Bay, Texas and the San Francisco Bay area, Californiaen_US
dc.typeCONFen_US
dc.universityen_US
dc.vol-issueen_US

Files

Collections

Galveston Bay Bibliography
GBIC Abstracts (full text not available through Jack K. Williams Library)