Ralph Schwartz is to be commended for his excellent reporting of the Coast Guard’s ongoing intimidation of climate activists Chiara D’Angelo and Matt Fuller, who shared the occupation of the Arctic Challenger’s anchor chain in May of 2015.  Ralph wrote a nice article, but then, he’s a journalist.  As a lowly editorialist, I am unrestrained by niceties and often write to rage against the outrageous and ridicule the ridiculous.  And there is much to ridicule in this episode of the Coast Guards burgeoning egomania.

Once upon a time, when oil prices were up, summer was immanent and Shell was confident, Superior Energy prominently featured an incredible video simulation of the Arctic Challenger protecting against the potential impacts of arctic drilling. 

It took some digging, but you can see this must-watch video here.  It is impossible to watch and believe anyone would consider this a practical or adequate solution to the inherent dangers of arctic drilling. Meanwhile, over at Shell, their Alaska page now returns, “The page you are looking for is unavailable. Our apologies for the inconvenience.” 

The Arctic Challenger is the most improbable affair imaginable. Billed as Shell’s critical worst-case mitigation measure, it seems at best a marginal scheme perhaps abstractly believable only to a handful of the most entrenched bureaucrats handing out the necessary permits.  It is inconceivable that anyone in the Coast Guard with any salt on their vest would ever consider this vessel anything but a liability.

In the event of a wellhead blowout this retrofitted Rube Goldberg barge is intended to unfold a miracle of engineered attachments to contain, collect, separate and process a turbulent mix of oil-gas-water.  Processing involves spraying petroleum products through combustion nozzles on a “flare boom” to assure that any dirty doody is burned and deposited in the atmosphere, not on the water or in unsightly spills on snow or ice.

Oh thanks, we get to breathe that?  Well, only if it works, which is doubtful.

The feasibility of the Arctic Challenger has long been subject to skepticism.  Screenshots from the enlightening video were grabbed and included in an earlier article in the Vancouver Observer.   The article paints a rather discouraging picture of their plan, and for good reason. The thing failed a number of crucial tests, some catastrophically.  Most other functionalities were merely simulated or theorized.  The most important features have never been tested in the field. No one wants to test wellhead blowouts after the Deepwater Horizon disaster - especially in the arctic.  It would be far too graphic. These are the kinds of things you do out of plain view and apologize for after the fact.  Brilliant!

The prospect of the “flare boom” doing anything other than spewing the oil slick around is difficult to feature.  Even Shell said,“”Extensive engineering studies have been conducted on the use of the flare boom to confirm its functionality and safety”, out of one side of their mouth, and from the other, “One function of the flare boom is its ability to create a water curtain to absorb radiant heat and protect the crew from burning surface oil".  So it isn’t really separating the oil and water?  It’s going to spray everything around, with some going into the air and the rest in the water? Will they add volumes of Corexit to conceal the inadequacy?  I’d personally like to see whether this contraption can actually deliver as promised. I have zero faith in its ability. 

The fact this floating farce was ever somehow approved is sufficient reason to honor any brave citizen courageous enough to object and intercede.  Before anyone is fined for attempting to prevent this fiction from accompanying a drilling fleet into the most vulnerable waters of the world, wouldn’t it be fair to check and see if it really works? Perhaps the defendents' actions should reasonably have been prolonged to prevent the tragedy this rust bucket could never have averted.

At the least, the Coast Guard - or whoever approved the silly notion - ought to put up an amount equal to the fines they seem eager to levy, and let’s call it a straight-up bet.  Put it to the test.  If it works like a charm, fine the citizens. If it makes a mess, let the Coast Guard pay the fine for having protected a crazed figment of some overly-optimistic engineer’s imagination, and for their heavy-handed treatment of rational citizens exercising their last resort to prevent irreparable harm.