Sustainability Challenges in the Gas and Oil Industry †Free Samples

Question: Discuss about the Sustainability Challenges in the Gas and Oil Industry. Answer: Introduction The oil and gas industry owns a significant place among all the primary industries of the world. USA and Middle East countries are blessed with the natural resources of petroleum oil and gas industry. Oil and gas industry provides support to many industries such as pharmaceutical industry, chemical industry, fertilizers and plastics. Therefore, it can be said that the oil and gas industry is the backbone of innumerable industries. However, there are some problems related to the sustenance of environmental sustainability (Aeppli et al 2014). This is because due to the exploration process, production and consumption process sometimes threatens the ecosystem. The main reason behind this is when the particular oil and organization is not conscious about the environmental sustainable factor and always concerned about the profit of its own organization (Teich and Pemberton 2015). Now several unwelcomed incidents take place, which is harmful for the biodiversity. Thus, for this cause organi zation like The World Petroleum Council has been formed to look after the sustainable extraction, production and consumption of oil and natural gas and other sources of energy for the interests of human being only. Another important fact arises that sometimes some companies tries to grasp the resources as much as it can which leads to unequal distribution of natural resources. In that case corporate social responsibility and business ethics must be positively included in the planning and policies of a company which is necessary for the environmental sustenance and economic sustenance in the society. This report mainly contains an in detail analysis about the sustainability challenges in the oil and gas industry (Horn 2013). Various examples of Environment Disaster The oil and gas industry is highly significant among all the industries of the world and it has worldwide demand, but there are certain risks and hazards with the industry. The problem occurs with the drilling operation because this enables water pollution and responsible for production of air filth. The most ill effect due to this is the global warming, which causes flood, altering the temperature of a country and other environmental consequences. This can be prevented if the companies of the oil and gas industry take the necessary steps to reduce the risks such as oil spill (Fingas 2016). One oil spill incident occurred and the company responsible for it was Exxon Valdez. This shows that the company does not have any have any business ethics and social responsibility, which allowed such a disaster to occur (Post, Kwon and Tuteja 2016). Exxon Oil Spilling It can be said that Third Mate Gregory Cousins piloted the vessels of Exxon Valdez on March 24, 1989, but the Gregory Cousins do not have the permission to pilot it. The third mate could not pilot the vessel due to excessive workload. Hence, the third mate failed to maintain the Raytheon Collision Avoidance system and they collided with the Bligh reef for spilling the oil of its cargo by rupturing the hull. The Captain Hazelwood tried to make the tanker free from the reef but failed to do it (Wang et al. 2014). Moreover, he was not attentive during the whole process. The coastal guard said that he warned Hazelwood not to rock the ship because it would led further oil spill, which would make the situation worst (Ahmad et al. 2015). Later it was found that Captain Hazelwood had consumed alcohol for which he could not remain attentive during the critical situation. The consequence of the oil spill was immensely negative. The spill killed thousands of sea birds, sea otters and other wildlife covering the coastline with oil. The Prince William Sound was a nest of 200 species of birds, inclusive of trumpeters swan. It can be said that during the time of natural disaster there stayed the sea otter and killer whales in the Prince William Sound. Hence, it can be said that the incident mainly occurred due to the irresponsibility of the company. The company did not take seriously about the drilling process of oil, which took various marine lives and destroyed the ecosystem ultimately affecting the human-being. After the incident, Alaska pipeline reached at the spot to prevent or safeguard oil contamination (Brown and Bhushan 2016). They used emergency pump in order to suction oil in other vessels. However, the tragedy part that both Alaska and Exon did not have sufficient contamination boom and chemical dispersants, which would solve the process of oil spill. The skimmer boats dug out the oil out of the sea but it also needed nearby barges to empty it out which is also a lengthy process. The cleaning up of the oil from the sea sometimes leads to miscommunication between the person standing in the shore and in the crew mainly because of technical issues. Finally, private fish boats also tried to support the company by cleaning but because of bad weather and the other problems, the oil sick had spread to cover 2,600 miles of coastline and sea. Both Alaska and Exxon failed to deal with the crisis. The chairperson of Exon apologized for the oil spill and its failure in tackling the crisis but he did it after six days of the incident. Thus, it signified that he was not genuinely repented for the situation (Fingas and Brown 2014). Moreover, Exxon did not want to involve in the cleaning process but after several protests, the president of Exon said that they would start the process in the spring of 1990. Exon could not escape from the s ituation at all. The company had to bear the clean up expenses and also compensate by paying money to the federal ,state, and the local government (Vander et al.2016). The company had to pay $2.2 billion for all these issues. Various lawsuits were imposed on the company. The state of Alaska filed a lawsuit against the Exxon Company because of its failure to manage the oil spill. The state of Alaska and the federal government compromised with the Exxon company to make 10 payments in a year as a penalty for harms to natural resources, and the restoration and the substitution of the natural resources . The amount was $ 900 million and another $5 billion was given to commercial anglers, natives, business owners and native corporations who suffered due to this. Exxon also had to compensate of $50 million to the United States and $50 million to the state of Alaska. Exxon was a huge organization and it was sound in its financial matters. Its revenue generation was much sound for which the company could pay such penalties. However, the main loss was the lives of the marine lives that distorted the biodiversity (D'andrea and Reddy 2014). Finally, the main solution of this problem is that the Exxon organization did not follow any business ethics. It was not well acquainted with the aspects of corporate social responsibility. If they had followed such ethics then the chairperson of this Exxon organization did not have apologized after 6 days of the disaster and that too from New York and they would have been very much cautious about the capability and condition of the pilots of the drilling team (Osofsky et al. 2016). The supervisor of the company has not properly looked after the exploration process of the natural resources (Schulenberg et al. 2015) . After few years of the incident when the name of the Exxon shifted to ExxonMobil, it claimed that the area has totally recovered itself from the situation. But in reality it was not the truth because a study conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Services found that the toxins leaked from the Exxon Valdez oil abided at the beaches which severely hampered the sea life for more than two decades after the disaster (Dabbiru et al. 2015). Most of the oil has indurated into semi-solid beneath the underwater and still continued harm the lives of marine flora and fauna. Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill BP is considered as s one of the leading company among the oil and gas industries. However, the companys reputation failed to its irresponsibility in properly implementing the business ethics. There were various discredits afflicted to this company. For example, there was a explosion occurred in the Texas Refinery explosion that killed 15 employees . At time the BP Company promised that it will strengthen the sustainable and safety approach of the company. After that the company changed its title to Beyond Petroleum (Cheong 2014). This change witnessed that that company is thinking about the sustainability of the environment along with the sustainability among the employees in the office environment. After this, the company concentrated on adopting certain strategies, changed certain norms, and spend huge amount of money for alternative energy resources. The company also accomplished certain steps needed for prevention of global warming. Unfortunately, the company was unable to retain its promises when BP rocked the oil rig from the oil reservoir in the Gulf of Mexico (Dubansky et al. 2014). The company contracted with the Transocean Ltd Company. The consequence was the explosion, which killed 11 employees. The burning rig sank after two days and the leaching of the damaged oil well permitted to flow huge quantity of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. The company tried to manage the situation by drilling other holes to relieve pressure from the damaged well, but this method also proved to be futile. It further deteriorated the condition and huge quantity of oil poured into the Gulf of Mexico daily wise (Dholakia et al.2015). This oil cleansed up the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. Thus, it destroyed the livelihood of the anglers who relied on the Gulf for their earnings. It can be considered that there are various causes of explosions. One of the reason is BP did not follow the whole procedure o f examining the pipes to detect gas in the well. Other expert suggests that the last step in installing the pipe accelerated the scope of the explosion. This was because the installation meant cementing the steel pipe in the proper place but unfortunately the cement was unable to grasp the spill oil and finally the explosion occurred. Another factor was that the design of drilling the oil was very poor which was hugely responsible for the consequence (Hansel et al.2015) After the disaster the first thing, which happened, was that the CEO Tony Hayward resigned from its post. After this, the company gave a penalty of $ 36.5 billion for cleaning the gulf. The company was also charged against its environmental consequences and under the Clean Water Act and the amount of money were $18.7 billion and $5.5 billion respectively. It took almost three months to control the leaking of oil into the gulf. Thousands of marine lives died in the oily waters. Another ill consequence was that the water turned into black it was contaminated. People who earned livelihood surrounding this Gulf of Mexico lost their jobs. It can be said that by the period the leaching of the oil was stopped it can be said that more than 640 miles of shoreline several states were enveloped with oil. Scientists have said that this disaster had threatened to the coral reefs and other marine lives. BP also gave huge amount of money $20 billion to the stakeholders who relied on the marine live s for their livelihood. The other factor is that the safety of the health of the public (Gadhamshetty et al.2015). This is because many people consumed seafood and, as the sea is poisonous due to the leaking of the oil (Clancy et al. 2017). It can be considered that the oil and the chemicals have a huge bad effect on the quality of the seafood. Hence, it can be said that every company must be very strict with its responsibility towards its society and towards its employees (Sontag 2014). The planning and policies of the company must include the essential aspects of examining the pipes, taking extra precautionary methods to restrain any dangers and the most important thing is the ethical behaviour which always compels the manager or chairperson of the company to be very strict about the business ethics of the company (Grabowski and Roberts 2016). Fracking harmful or beneficial Fracking Technology is used to obtain natural gas located below the earths surface. It is a complex process and is done by pumping in sand, water and chemicals in shale rocks (Schirrmeister 2014). The technology garnered the attention of the world only recently after the authorities in US discovered a large scale gas reserve. The discovery has created ripples in the nation as the amount of gas in the reserve will surely provide the nation freedom to energy and huge employment opportunities for the people. There has been debate over whether Fracking is useful for the environment or is harmful to it. Research works undertaken by researchers claims that the mentioned technology is much more advanced and has a longer sustainability. Tests on the technology have shown significant gap in carbon emissions than traditional forms energy sources. Experts says that natural gas has much more health benefits than coal while the production of electricity (Mazur 2016). Natural gas releases much les s amount of harmful substances in the atmosphere in comparison to coal which is a big advantage. Another advantage of natural gas has been the emission of much less greenhouse gas which is a much needed way to tackle the depletion of the ozone layer. Fracking also does not affect the change in the quality of the water resources of a specific area. The levels of water bodies and those of the natural gas are located at different strata of the earth. The traditional technologies to drill natural gas were not reliable enough on the particular issue but the innovative technology ensures that no such disaster occurs. The above mentioned uses of Fracking shows only one side of the coin, the other side of the coin has some different answers altogether. The distribution of Natural Gas is uneven which makes it impossible for plants to discontinue coal as the source of energy. The opposers of Fracking challenge the theory of clean air quality by the supporters of the technology. They argue that no such research or survey has been undertaken to prove the air quality of the surrounding areas and the theory is just based on mere assumptions. One of the most important concerns surrounding Fracking technology is the fear of leakages that are quite common in areas where the technology is used to derive natural gas. The leakage releases methane which is one of the most dangerous greenhouse gases (Norris et al. 2014). Some studies on the technology has shown shocking results involving Fracking as extensive use of Hydraulics while digging the earth results in contamination of the surrounding water bodies (Sova cool 2014). This may lead to dangerous results as arsenic and other harmful chemicals may get mixed up with the tap water that the people use for different needs. In worst cases the water turns flammable and in turn lead to explosions. The organizations that are involved in using the technology use unethical methods to garner profit and never disclose the chemicals that are used in the process. The contamination results in long term health problems like low vision, kidney ailments and many more health complications. A report by one of the leading newspapers of Ohio claims that the mentioned technology has been the main cause behind the rapid decline of water levels in the state as a bulk amount of water is needed to operate the total process. Last but not the least some experts claim that the frequent occurrence of earthquakes is only due to the terrible drilling activities which is gradually damaging the seismic structure of the ground below. The report clearly highlights the positive as well as the negative effects of the latest technology. It can be suggested that before the implementation of Fracking a thorough round up must be done to ensure the safety and sustainability of the whole process. Conclusion Finally, in the end it can be said that different environmental problems occur mainly due to the irresponsible steps taken by humankind only. It can be said that if the human being exploits the natural resources for its own benefit then the human being also have to face the consequences. However, the most important factor is that the persons who are in the elite class exploit the natural resources degrade the environmental situation and the consequences have to be faced by the common mass. The elite class mainly comprises of the business heads like the managers and the chairperson of the Exxon organization and BP. They have repeatedly proved that that their own motives and profits have ruined the lives of many people.These companies have implemented strategies only according to its own will and interests and the consequence was huge. The lack of responsibility and the inferiormanagement has taken the lives of huge number of marine lives. They are not only important for the maintainin g the ecological balance of the marine diversity but they are also significant for sustaining the ecosystem of the whole world. The companies spent a huge amount of money for compensations but they were not literally concern about the severe impact of their misconduct. Oil spilling into the sea has huge negative effects on the health of the human kind.The contamination of the water has severely harmed the marine lives for a long period. This also has a bad implication on the fishing industry, this is because the government and many other people earned huge amount of money based on the fishing industry.Many subsidiary businesses are also built based on this industry.Therefore, the oil spill incident and the fracking highly hamper the society in various ways.The companies also suffered largely because they lost their reputation due to their own work. Thus, the companies and the organization must leave the traditional strategic implementations and implement the strategies of Corporate Social Responsibility and business ethics. In order to save their own company from bad recognition and deterioration. References Aeppli, C., Nelson, R.K., Carmichael, C.A., Valentine, D.L. and Reddy, C.M., 2014, May. Biotic and abiotic oil degradation after the Deepwater Horizon disaster leads to formation of recalcitrant oxygenated hydrocarbons: new insights using GC GC. InInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings(Vol. 2014, No. 1, pp. 1087-1098). American Petroleum Institute. Ahmad, W.N.K.W., De Brito, M.P. and Tavasszy, L.A., 2015.The implications of energy transition on sustainable supply chainmanagement practices in the oil and gas industry.Journal of TechnologyManagement and Business,2(1). Brown, P.S. and Bhushan, B., 2016. Bioinspired materials for water supply and management: water collection, water purification and separation of water from oil.Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A,374(2073), p.20160135. Cheong, S.M., 2014. From hurricanes to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in coastal Louisiana: The impact of regulatory change. Clancy, S., Worrall, F., Davies, R. and Gluyas, J., 2017, April. The potential for spills and leaks of hydraulic fracturing related fluids on well sites and from road incidents. InEGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts(Vol. 19, p. 418). Dabbiru, L., Samiappan, S., Nobrega, R.A., Aanstoos, J.A., Younan, N.H. and Moorhead, R.J., 2015, July. Fusion of synthetic aperture radar and hyperspectral imagery to detect impacts of oil spill in Gulf of Mexico. InGeoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2015 IEEE International(pp. 1901-1904). IEEE. D'andrea, M.A. and Reddy, G.K., 2014. Crude oil spill exposure and human health risks.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine,56(10), pp.1029-1041. Dholakia, U.M., Mittal, V., Han, K. and Dayal, A., 2015. Results from the Integrated Oil Gas Sector: The 2015 Strategy and Corporate Performance in the Energy Industry (SCOPE) Study. Dubansky, B., Whitehead, A., Rice, C.D. and Galvez, F., 2014. Response to Comment on Multi-Tissue Molecular, Genomic, and Developmental Effects of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill on Resident Gulf Killifish (Fundulus grandis).Environmental science technology,48(13), pp.7679-7680. Fingas, M. and Brown, C., 2014. Review of oil spill remote sensing.Marine pollution bulletin,83(1), pp.9-23. Fingas, M., 2016.Oil spill science and technology. Gulf professional publishing. Gadhamshetty, V., Shrestha, N., Chilkoor, G. and Bathi, J.R., 2015. Emerging Environmental Impacts of Unconventional Oil Development in the Bakken Formation in the Williston Basin of Western North Dakota. InHydraulic Fracturing: Environmental Issues(pp. 151-180). American Chemical Society. Grabowski, M. and Roberts, K.H., 2016. Reliability seeking virtual organizations: Challenges for high reliability organizations and resilience engineering.Safety Science. Hansel, T.C., Osofsky, H.J., Osofsky, J.D. and Speier, A., 2015. Longer-term mental and behavioral health effects of the Deepwater Horizon Gulf oil spill.Journal of Marine Science and Engineering,3(4), pp.1260-1271. Mazur, A., (2016). How did the fracking controversy emerge in the period 2010-2012?.Public Understanding of Science,25(2), pp.207-222. Norris, J.Q., Turcotte, D.L. and Rundle, J.B., (2014), December. A Percolation Model for Fracking. InAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts(Vol. 1, p. 03). Osofsky, J.D., Osofsky, H.J., Weems, C.F., Hansel, T.C. and King, L.S., 2016. Effects of stress related to the gulf oil spill on child and adolescent mental health.Journal of pediatric psychology,41(1), pp.65-72. Post, E., Kwon, G. and Tuteja, A., 2016. OilWater Separation with Selective Wettability Membranes. InNon-wettable Surfaces(pp. 347-367). Schirrmeister, M., (2014). Controversial futuresdiscourse analysis on utilizing the fracking technology in Germany.European Journal of Futures Research,2(1), pp.1-9. Schulenberg, S.E., Smith, C.V., Drescher, C.F. and Buchanan, E.M., 2015. Assessment of Meaning in Adolescents Receiving Clinical Services in Mississippi Following the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: An Application of the Purpose in Life Test?Short Form (PIL?SF).Journal of clinical psychology. Sontag, D.E.B.O.R.A.H., 2014. Where oil and politics mix.The New York Times. Sovacool, B.K., (2014). Cornucopia or curse? Reviewing the costs and benefits of shale gas hydraulic fracturing (fracking).Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,37, pp.249-264 Teich, J.L. and Pemberton, M.R., 2015. Epidemiologic studies of behavioral health following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill: limited impact or limited ability to measure?.The journal of behavioral health services research,42(1), pp.77-85. Vander Zanden, H.B., Bolten, A.B., Tucker, A.D., Hart, K.M., Lamont, M.M., Fujisaki, I., Reich, K.J., Addison, D.S., Mansfield, K.L., Phillips, K.F. and Pajuelo, M., 2016. Biomarkers reveal sea turtles remained in oiled areas following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.Ecological Applications,26(7), pp.2145-2155. Wang, Q., Chen, X., Jha, A.N. and Rogers, H., 2014. Natural gas from shale formationthe evolution, evidences and challenges of shale gas revolution in United States.Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,30, pp.1-28. Wiseman, H., 2014. Evaluating and Enhancing the Capacity of the States to Govern Unconventional Oil and Gas Development Risks. Risks and Risk Governance in Shale Gas Development: Summary of Two Workshops. National Academy Press, Washington DC.