The event that many Americans described as the United States’ worst environmental catastrophe might not be as detrimental. Of course the sheer amount of gallons that have been spilled are the highest in history but measuring the environmental impacts as well as social ramifications not much has changed from before the oil spill to now. Oysters and clams that are collected along the coast and served to the tourists near the Gulf Coast were given a clean bill by the FDA. Few animals have seen a drastic decrease in numbers other than dolphins and sea turtles but that can be explained by them moving their breeding grounds due to residual oil not being about to facilitate a healthy life for their offspring. Why was this not as devastating? Luckily since the spill happened 5000 ft under the ocean and 40 miles offshore it was contained to an area not as rich when compared to the marshland and coast like of the Gulf of Mexico. The amount of oil that actually washed up on shore, which upset many Americans, was only 1/50th of the amount that spilled. Not enough credit was given to the 20 million dollar clean-up that BP initiated directly after the explosion. Why do we care now? This article just explains that BP did a great job with handling their situation, however this is a learning exercise not a gratitude party. Many other corporations can implement processes which minimize the risk of oil spills as well as other man-made disasters that negatively effect the ecology of the area. BP now has several (16)┬áprecautions they’ve installed since the spill. With new fail-safes, counter-measures, and new plan of action BP should be able to contain anymore mishaps. Companies, much like BP, are already under governmental pressure for energy efficient production as well as quotas and tariffs for their goods. Should they have required the increase of security to these potentially dangerous facilities or continue as they have done and leave it up to the company to decide?

Noah Bey