The Daily Collegian
Published Independently by students at Penn State
Unsure of date; likely first half 1993


Exxon: Valdez oil spill damage overestimated

By LAURAN NEERGAARD
Associated Press Writer

ATLANTA - Exxon claimed yesterday that lab errors and a failure to recognize
other sources of oil in Alaska's Prince William Sound have led to grossly
exaggerated predictions of long-term damage from its Valdez oil spill.

The government said the oil giant's claims are viable and that it will recheck
the data.

"Some of what they say may very well be true," said Dave Kennedy of the Seattle
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which handled the
government's studies of the spill.

"But I'm not sure that in the long run it really changes all that much. The fact
remains they still spilled 11 million gallons of oil that had a tremendous
impact at the time."

The 1989 tanker accident killed unknown numbers of wildlife, including possibly
a third of the Sound's sea otter population. Some scientists say the Sound needs
decades to recover and that some wildlife may still be poisoned there.

Exxon Corp. didn't dispute the spill's immediate impact. But the company
yesterday released data backing its claims that long-term predictions are
exaggerated.

"We don't want to belittle it," said Exxon scientist Dr. Hans 0. Jahns. "But
we're all going to be living with oil production, and it doesn't serve anybody
well to have an exaggerated perception what an oil spill can do."

Exxon will present 25 studies at a science conference in two weeks in Atlantam
where other scientists will debate the findings.

An overview of the tests shows Exxon used chemical fingerprinting to distinguish
the Valdez crude from other hydrocarbons in the Sound.

Exxon contends scientists who didn't use that technique labeled even naturally
occurring hydrocarbons as Valdez oil. Exxon found oil from natural seeps
upstream and from diesel fuel used by boats in the Sound that it contended was
misidentified.