Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jun 12;8(6):e65087.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065087. Print 2013.

Extent and degree of shoreline oiling: Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Gulf of Mexico, USA

Jacqueline Michel  1 , Edward H Owens, Scott Zengel, Andrew Graham, Zachary Nixon, Teresa Allard, William Holton, P Doug Reimer, Alain Lamarche, Mark White, Nicolle Rutherford, Carl Childs, Gary Mauseth, Greg Challenger, Elliott Taylor
Affiliations

Extent and degree of shoreline oiling: Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Gulf of Mexico, USA

Jacqueline Michel et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

The oil from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico was documented by shoreline assessment teams as stranding on 1,773 km of shoreline. Beaches comprised 50.8%, marshes 44.9%, and other shoreline types 4.3% of the oiled shoreline. Shoreline cleanup activities were authorized on 660 km, or 73.3% of oiled beaches and up to 71 km, or 8.9% of oiled marshes and associated habitats. One year after the spill began, oil remained on 847 km; two years later, oil remained on 687 km, though at much lesser degrees of oiling. For example, shorelines characterized as heavily oiled went from a maximum of 360 km, to 22.4 km one year later, and to 6.4 km two years later. Shoreline cleanup has been conducted to meet habitat-specific cleanup endpoints and will continue until all oiled shoreline segments meet endpoints. The entire shoreline cleanup program has been managed under the Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Technique (SCAT) Program, which is a systematic, objective, and inclusive process to collect data on shoreline oiling conditions and support decision making on appropriate cleanup methods and endpoints. It was a particularly valuable and effective process during such a complex spill.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Authors JM, ZN, MW and WH are employed by Research Planning, Inc. Author SZ is employed by Atkins. Author EHO is employed by Owens Coastal Consultants, Ltd., and was contracted to Polaris Applied Sciences, Inc. Author PDR is employed by EML Environmental Mapping Limited and is contracted to Polaris Applied Sciences, Inc. Author AL is employed by Triox and is contracted to Polaris Applied Sciences, Inc. Authors AG, TA, GC, ET and GM are employed by Polaris Applied Sciences, Inc. Polaris Applied Sciences, Inc., has a contract with BP to provide technical support to the SCAT Program. This work was conducted under the Deepwater Horizon oil spill Unified Command. Funding was provided by BP, as the Responsible Party. However, the NOAA, RPI, and Atkins authors were funded through NOAA, who is the Scientific Support Coordinator to the US Coast Guard. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter the authors’ adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, as detailed online in the guide for authors.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Representative photographs of shoreline oiling conditions.
Sand beaches: A. Small surface residue balls in the supratidal zone (scale is 15 cm); B. Buried oil patties; C. Surface residue balls in the intertidal zone that are angular, indicating that they were eroded from adjacent oil residue mats; D. Intertidal oil residue mats at the toe of the beach. Marshes: E. Heavily oiled wrack at the high-water line and oiled mat of laid-over vegetation; F. Thick (>1 cm) emulsified oil under the laid-over vegetation mats; G. Oil/shell incipient asphalt pavement on the marsh platform; H. Oiled Phragmites along the Mississippi River delta.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Oiled shoreline lengths (km) by oiling category and State.
A. At maximum oiling conditions, one year (May 2011), and two years (May 2012) post spill. B. Oiled shoreline lengths (km) by oiling category, State, and habitat at maximum oiling conditions.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Maps by shoreline oiling category at maximum oiling conditions, one year (May 2011), and two years (May 2012) post spill.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Time-series plots of the km of shoreline oiled by oiling category and habitat type.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. McNutt M, Camilli R, Guthrie G, Hsieh P, Labson V, et al.. (2011) Assessment of flow rate estimates for the Deepwater Horizon/Macondo well oil spill. Flow rate technical group report to the national incident command, interagency solutions group, March 10, 2011. Available: http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile.... Accessed 21 March 2013.
    1. McNutt MR, Camilli R, Crone TJ, Guthrie G, Hsieh P, et al.. (2011) Review of flow rate estimates of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 10.1073/pnas.1112139108. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Owens EH, Teal AR (1990) Shoreline cleanup following the Exxon Valdez oil spill: Field data collection within the S.C.A.T. program. Proceedings of the 13th Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program Tech. Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON, June 6–8, 1990, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 411–421.
    1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2000) Shoreline Assessment Manual. Seattle: NOAA Emergency Response Division. 122 pp. Available: http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/manual_shore_as.... Accessed 21 March 2013.
    1. Michel J, Benggio B (1999) Guidelines for selecting appropriate cleanup endpoints. Proceedings of the 1999 Intl. Oil Spill Conference, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC. Available: http://ioscproceedings.org/.

Publication types

MeSH terms