| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "EXXON VALDEZ DISASTER": |
|
|
Exxon Valdez Disaster, 2004.
An exploration of two issues arising from the Exxon Valdez disaster.
690 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 16.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at two issues arising from the Exxon Valdez disaster in 1989, the extent of Exxon's liability and the effect on hydrographic survey technology. It also explains why Exxon was responsible for the environmental disaster.
From the Paper
"When the foot Exxon Valdez ran aground at Blight Reef during the first minutes of March,its cargo tanks ruptured, as a consequence, nearly million gallons of crude oil spilled into Prince William Sound contaminating more than miles of seashore and defiling a ..."
| |
|
The Exxon Valdez Disaster, 2002.
An assessment of the Exxon Valdez oil spill disaster.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 3 sources, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the Exxon Valdez oil spill and criticizes Exxon for criminal negligence and irresponsibility.
| |
|
The Exxon-Valdez Disaster, 2006.
Examines the environmental effects of this 1989 oil-spill which took place in Alaskan waters.
1,454 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In March 24, 1989, Captain Joe Hazelwood and his crew impaled the oil tanker Exxon-Valdez on Bligh Reef, spilling more than 42 million liters of oil into the waters of Alaska's Prince William Sound. This paper shows that it was the worst environmental disaster ever to happen in American waters. The spill area was about the size of three football fields and covered nearly 1,400 shoreline miles of the Sound. The paper examines the immediate and long-term effects on the environment as a result of this spill. It also discusses the role of the media in the disaster.
From the Paper
"Immediately after the spill, nearly 800 birds were captured and laundered by scientists, but after their re-release into the environment, most birds only survived an average of one week before dying. Sea birds often gather at the places of land-water and air-water interface - the areas most disrupted by the spill itself. In the long term, however, the lowering of sea bird populations was related to their reproduction cycles, which were inhibited by the presence of oil in their nesting areas."
| |
|
Exxon Valdez, 2006.
The paper describes the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska and the full impact of this disaster.
2,794 words (approx. 11.2 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the oil spill accident that infused several million gallons of oil into a pristine wilderness area in Prince William Sound, Alaska, in 1989. The details of the spill are recorded and the writer also includes the conclusions of the Oil Spill Commission that investigated the accident. The paper explains the impact of the oil spill and how the subsequent efforts of ExxonMobil to repair the damage are still considered to be inadequate. The paper also quotes a recent study which concluded that far from having recovered, the Sound area persists to experience problems as a result of the oil spill but concludes that valuable lessons have been learnt from the Exxon Valdez disaster and great strides have been made since the disaster in setting up an oil-spill prevention system in the Sound.
From the Paper
"The oil tanker Exxon Valdez was a 987-foot ship, which was the second newest out of the 20 tanker fleets of the Exxon Shipping Company. The ship left the Alyska Pipeline Terminal at 9.12 pm, Alaska Standard Time on March 23, 1989 and was then loaded with 53,094, 540 gallons of North Slope crude oil to be transported to Long Beach in California. (The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Disaster) Exxon Valdez had hit at a reef in the Prince William Sound of Alaska on March 24, 1989 and it was considered as a nightmare. Within three hours if the incident, the Exxon Valdez was being grounded at Bligh Reef, with eight of its 11 cargo tanks being damaged and about several million gallons of crude oil were being spread into Prince William Sound. Before the occurrence of this accident Exxon Valdez had already transported oil through the Prince William Sound for more than 8700 times. Further before the occurrence of the Exxon Valdez disaster, the system of transiting of about 2 million barrels daily from the North Slope oil to the West coast and Gulf Coast markets had worked really well. Such complacency and efficacy were being affected when the Exxon Valdez had faced with the disaster on March 24. (Details about the Accident) This incident not only brought about revolutionary changes in Prince William Sound but also made the world to think seriously regarding the assurances, which were received from the corporations about their operations being safe."
| |
|
The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 2006.
An examination of the public relations aspect of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
1,563 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper analyses the Exxon Valdez oil spill, which occurred on March 24, 1989. The paper examines the environmental concerns of the oil spill, Exxon Valdez being the largest ship ever built for the world's largest oil company. The writer explains that it was not only an industrial accident, but a "technological and organizational disaster" as well. The paper further analyzes the public relations disaster that followed, and concludes that had the crisis been handled differently, Exxon's reputation might well have been enhanced, rather than damaged.
From the Paper
"The industry's insistence on having its own way regarding the regulation of the Valdez tanker trade, and the government's incremental accession to industry pressure, culminated into a disastrous system failure (Details pp). The general public reacted with anger over the environmental damage and the mar upon the Alaskan wilderness (Details pp). The Exxon spill remains on the list of the world's largest oil spills during the past twenty-five years, and has come to be seen as the nation's largest environmental disaster, since Three Mile Island (Details pp)."
| |
|
Exxon Valdez, 2002.
A study of the historic Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 off the coast of Alaska.
2,550 words (approx. 10.2 pages), 4 sources, £ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the enormous environmental disaster of the Exxon Valdez oil spill into the Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The paper provides the history of the Exxon Company, a detailed description of the accident and the following environmental cleanup. It describes the criminal negligence of the company and complete public relations failure.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Situation Analysis
Burning Mechanical Cleanup Chemical Dispersants
Effects on the Environment
Government Action
Exxon?s Reaction
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The Exxon Valdez, a tanker loaded with oil from the shipping terminal in Valdez, Alaska, ran aground on Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound (in the Gulf of Alaska) at 12:04am, on March 24, 1989. At the helm was of Gregory Cousins, Third Mate, who was not licensed to pilot the ship through Prince William Sound, whose waters were considered treacherous. Joseph Hazelwood, the captain of the ship, was apparently asleep below deck. Third Mate Cousins had tried to dodge floating ice, performing a series of strange right turns. When the ship hit Bligh Reef, its hull ruptured and much of the cargo spilled. In the next few days, the oil spread rapidly, causing the deaths of thousands of sea birds, sea otters, and other wildlife. It covered the coastline with oil from the ship resulting of the wreck and eventually contamination of marine life; the fishing season in the sound was halted for several years.
| |
|
Exxon Valdez Incident, 2002.
A look at the oil tanker Exxon Valdez spill.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 3 sources, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This undergraduate paper discusses the biggest oil spill incident in US history when the oil tanker Exxon Valdez struck Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska, spilling more than 11 million gallons of crude oil. This incident tool place in 1989, which later resulted in the implementation of the Pollution Act of 1990.
| |
|
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 2002.
This paper discusses how Exxon's public relations people effectively dealt with the Exxon Valdez oil spill into Alaska's Prince William Sound.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 5 sources, £ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper focuses on what happened, what the PR strategy was and how successful Exxon's efforts were to limit the public relations damage.
| |
|
The Exxon Valdez and Environmental Damage, 1995.
Reviews the current information regarding environmental engineering techniques being used in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Examines the creation and implementation of some techniques inspired by the Exxon Valdez incident.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 12 sources, £ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Exxon Valdez and Environmental Damage
Abstract
This article will review current information regarding environmental engineering techniques being used in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The creation and implementation of some of these techniques was inspired by the Exxon Valdez incident. There were no absolute positive correlations between bioremediation techniques used, new tanker technology, and the lessening of ecological impact. Environmental engineering appears best at studying the variables and then learning through trial and error what are the most positive steps to take."
| |
|
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 1991.
This paper discusses the Exxon Valdez oil spill: Events surrounding the 1989 Alaska catastrophe, environmental damage, clean-up, costs, causes, ethics and public relations.
3,375 words (approx. 13.5 pages), 6 sources, £ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"On a calm, clear spring night in 1989, in Alaska's Prince William Sound, the bridge crew of the supertanker Exxon Valdez felt a strong thump, followed by a prolonged shuddering and loss of steerage way. Their ship had gone aground--not violently, not in a way that immediately endangered the ship itself, but enough to rip open the underside of the tanker's single hull, spilling hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil into the sea.
Within hours, emergency response measures were underway to recover the spilled oil and (above all) to prevent it from spreading out to befoul adjacent shorelines. These measures, however, were too little and too late. By the next day, the Exxon Valdez would be in the world's headlines, the lead story in network newscasts.
By the next week, the circumstances of the accident would be ... "
| |
|
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 1990.
This paper discusses the Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 24, 1989, a tanker accident in Alaskan waters.: Economic, political and environmental ramifications.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 13 sources, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
" On Good Friday, March 24, 1989, Valdez, Alaska was thrust into the world spotlight as the tanker Exxon Valdez struck Bligh Reef, spilling 10 million gallons of oil into the marine-life-rich waters of Prince William Sound.
The oil spill resulting when the Exxon Valdez struck Bligh Reef was the worst in American maritime history. As the story unfolded, the public learned that the captain of the ship had apparently been drinking, that the third mate was in charge of the vessel at the time it struck the reef, and that safeguards which should have prevented such an accident existed, but were not operating the night of the accident ."
| |
|
The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 2008.
A investigation into the Exxon Mobil claim that the fishing industry has recovered from the oil spill at Prince William Sound.
1,154 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 5 sources, APA, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper is an endeavor to disseminate the truth from the differing opinions relating to an oil spill and environmental disaster. The paper examines the claims made that the fisheries that were destroyed when the ship Exxon Valdez spilled its oil into the Prince William Sound, have completely recovered.
Outline:
Introduction
Exxon's Shame
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report
Alaska Fisheries Science Center Report
Conclusions Drawn from the Review of Literature
From the Paper
"A report published by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center entitled: "The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: How Much Oil Remains" states that the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound "released a minimum of 1.1 million gallons of Alaska crude oil into one of the largest and most productive estuaries in North America." (Short, Rice and Lindeberg, 2001) Studies conducted since that time, specifically a study in 1993 returned estimates stating that "7m of shore line were still contaminated with subsurface oil." (Short, Rice and Lindeberg, 2001) Monitoring that has been ongoing in nature has determined that by 1999 "oil was surprisingly persistent and often in relatively unweathered state, containing high concentrations of toxic and biologically available polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)." (Short, Rice and Lindeberg, 2001) Moreover, "fauna from higher tropic levels such as sea otters and sea ducks still have not recovered." (Short, Rice and Lindeberg, 2001) Public concern led the 2001 assessment of the shorelines of Prince William Sound. The following table relates the summary of the sampling effort in this assessment."
| |
|
Response to Technological Disasters, 2002.
A look at the centers on 2 incidents: the Exxon Valdez wreck and oil spill and the Chernobyl nuclear reactor meltdown.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 5 sources, £ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Centers on 2 incidents. Exxon Valdez wreck & oil spill & Chernobyl nuclear reactor meltdown. Examines how individual communities, governements & other social institutions responded to the accidents. Political, social, economic & historical context. Envioronmental effect. Public health.
From the Paper
"One might think that there is a standardized response to disaster, something imprinted on our brains through evolutionary processes. We should be programmed to respond to the eruption of terrible events just as we are programmed to fight or flight by millennia of natural selection.
But there are dramatically different responses depending both on an individual's personality and ? perhaps even more importantly ? by the nature of the disaster. People rush into burning buildings to save children with seemingly no thought to save themselves. But when they see a person dying from AIDS ? or Ebola ? they turn and flee, even when the risk to themselves is far less. This has to do partly with poor risk assessment skills, and partly it seems to do with culturally ingrained values. We may well be taught from childhood onward that we have a moral..."
| |
|
The Space Shuttle Columbia Disaster, 2008.
An analysis of the events that led up to the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the changes that NASA has implemented to prevent a similar disaster from occurring.
1,431 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 4 sources, APA, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper introduces and analyzes the topic of the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. Specifically, it analyzes the accident that occurred on the morning of February 1, 2003 and discusses the events that led up to its occurrence. The paper then discusses what NASA learned from the Columbia disaster and the changes that it has implemented as a result.
From the Paper
"In conclusion, NASA learned much from the Columbia disaster, and they have implemented new flight techniques and safety checks that help ensure this type of accident does not happen again. However, the Columbia disaster indicates that communication and decision-making at NASA is sometime suspect, and that continues, even today, even though NASA has developed these new safety checks to help make sure disasters like Columbia do not happen again. While the communication techniques NASA officials use may come into question, ultimately, it is recognized that space travel, although we often take it for granted, is inherently dangerous. Astronauts know that, and so do their families. Every time we send another space shuttle into orbit, we face the possibility of disaster, it is that simple. Still, space travel has largely been safe, and it seems that NASA will continue to promote safe space travel into the future."
|
|
|
