Authorities in the South American nation of Ecuador have confirmed that an oil spill released about 1,200 barrels into the Pacific, contaminating kilometres of oceanfront.

Rafael Armendariz, transportation manager for the state-owned oil firm Petroecuador, confirmed on Thursday that the incident took place a day earlier when a tank in the marine terminal in the port of Esmeraldas surpassed its capacity.

“It is estimated that around 1,200 barrels were spilled,” Armendariz said at a press conference. “Not all of them fell onto the beach. A part was contained by the pool inside of Petroecuador’s facilities.”

About half of the crude spilled out of Petroecuador’s facilities, spreading across about 4km (2.5 miles) of Las Palmas Beach, a popular destination for recreation and tourists.

An investigation into the cause of the spill is taking place. General Manager Ramon Correa said problems like negligence, mechanical damage or sabotage could not yet be ruled out.

Esmeraldas is about 150km (93 miles) south of Ecuador’s northern border with Colombia. The company says it has controlled 90 percent of the spill’s impact on land and 60 percent at sea through initial cleanup efforts.

Environmental Minister Jose Davalos told the TV station Ecuavisa the spill could affect wildlife such as birds and crustaceans. He expected the cleanup to take about a week.

Davalos noted that he is awaiting an assessment from Petroecuador before deciding on appropriate penalties.

  • player2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I used to work in the oilfield and my reaction was also, oh, only 1200 bbls? That amount is pretty small in terms of the spills we saw or heard about locally regularly, however that was in the middle of North Dakota and this is on a beach and ocean marine life which makes this so much worse.

    • A_A@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      no, not in North Dakota … :
      “Authorities in the South American nation of Ecuador have confirmed …”

      Edit : Oups ! Sorry for that. Thanks to @Alto@kbin.social for calling this.

      Ok @player2@lemmy.world i think I get it this time :

      Name enviro. Nb. barrels bad ?
      D.W.Horizon at sea 4.9e6 1k x😬
      Ecuador beach 1.2e3 😑
      N.Dakota on land 1.2e3 🙄
      • Alto@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe they were referring to the spills they had personally seen/heard about.

      • player2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Aside from actually hurting animals, a beach spill is really bad optics / PR. I know it won’t really impact the earth as a whole, natural oil seeps let lots of oil into the ocean every day, but beach spills make headlines.

    • BobKerman3999@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t worry: someone will show up to tell us that mining lithium is much worse for the environment

      • A_A@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes ! exactly ! /s
        So … let’s burn all the oil until 99% of us are in climatic catastrophes ! /s
        ( Obviously your comment is also sarcasm )