Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T14:40:49.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Removal of oil from shorelines: biodegradation and bioremediation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2013

John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
PRBO Conservation Science, California and University of Western Australia, Perth
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Many microorganisms have evolved the ability to feed on naturally occurring petroleum hydrocarbons, which they use as sources of carbon and energy to make new microbial cells. Most of the tens of thousands of chemical compounds that make up crude oil can be attacked by bacterial populations indigenous to marine ecosystems. A consortium of different bacterial species rather than any single species acts together to break hydrocarbons down into carbon dioxide, water, and inactive residues. Even toxic oil residues, including highly toxic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), can be detoxified. Microorganisms do not accumulate hydrocarbons as they consume and degrade them, so they are not a conduit for transferring hydrocarbons into the food web. In fact, microorganisms grown on hydrocarbons can be a potential source of protein for animal and human food (Shennan, 1984).

For many years before the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and other governmental agencies had supported research on microbial degradation of oil in marine environments – biodegradation – and on ways to enhance and accelerate it – bioremediation. These studies showed that, while in many cases biodegradation can mitigate toxic impacts of spilled oil without causing ecological harm, environmental conditions for it to happen rapidly are not always ideal (Atlas, 1995). If water carrying sufficient amounts of oxygen and nutrients cannot reach the oil, rates of biodegradation will be severely limited: oil incorporated into, or on, sediment above the tidal zone, oil buried in low-permeability sediments (Chapter 7), and thick oil layers and tarballs that are not intimately in contact with flowing water are especially resistant to biodegradation.

Type
Chapter
Information
Oil in the Environment
Legacies and Lessons of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
, pp. 176 - 197
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Academy of Microbiology (2011). Microbes & Oil Spills. Washington DC, USA: American Society for Microbiology.Google Scholar
Atlas, R.M. (1975). Microbial degradation of petroleum in marine environments. In Proceedings of the First Intersectional Congress of the International Association of Microbiological Societies, September 1–7, 1974, Tokyo, Japan. Hasegawa, T., ed. Tokyo, Japan: Science Council of Japan; Volume 2; pp. 527–531.Google Scholar
Atlas, R.M. (1995). Petroleum biodegradation and oil spill bioremediation. Marine Pollution Bulletin 31(4–12): 178–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atlas, R.M. and Bragg, J.R. (2007). Assessing the long-term weathering of petroleum on shorelines: Uses of conserved components for calibrating loss and bioremediation potential. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program (AMOP) Technical Seminar, June 5–7, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Environment Canada; pp. 263–290.Google Scholar
Atlas, R.M. and Bragg, J.R. (2009a). Bioremediation of marine oil spills: when and when not – the Exxon Valdez experience. Microbial Biotechnology 2(2): 213–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atlas, R.M. and Bragg, J.R. (2009b). Evaluation of PAH depletion of subsurface Exxon Valdez oil residues remaining in Prince William Sound in 2007–2008 and their likely bioremediation potential. In Proceedings of the 29th Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program (AMOP) Technical Seminar, June 5–7, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Environment Canada; pp. 723–748.Google Scholar
Boehm, P.D., Page, D.S., Brown, J.S., Neff, J.M., Bragg, J.R., and Atlas, R.M. (2008). Distribution and weathering of crude oil residues on shorelines 18 years after the Exxon Valdez spill. Environmental Science & Technology 42(24): 9210–9216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boufadel, M.C., Harifi, Y., Van Aken, B., Wrenn, B., and Lee, K. (2010). Nutrient and oxygen concentrations within the sediments of an Alaskan beach polluted with the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental Science & Technology 44(19): 7418–7424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boufadel, M.C. and Bobo, A.M. (2011). Feasibility of high pressure injection of chemicals into the subsurface for the bioremediation of the Exxon Valdez oil. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation 31(1): 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boufadel, M. and Michel, J. (2011). Pilot Studies of Bioremediation of the Exxon Valdez Oil in Prince William Sound Beaches. Anchorage, Alaska, USA: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council Restoration Project 11100836.
Bragg, J.R., Prince, R.C., and Atlas, R.M. (1994). Effectiveness of bioremediation for oiled intertidal shorelines. Nature 368(6470): 413–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bragg, J.R., Prince, R.C., Wilkinson, J.B., and Atlas, R.M. (1992). Bioremediation for Shoreline Cleanup following the 1989 Alaskan Oil Spill. Houston, Texas, USA: Exxon Company, USA.Google Scholar
Button, D.K., Robertson, B.R., and Craig, K.S. (1981). Dissolved hydrocarbons and related microflora in a fjordal seaport: Sources, sinks, concentrations, and kinetics. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 42(4): 708–719.Google Scholar
Chianelli, R.R., Aczel, T., Bare, R.E., George, G.N., Genowitz, M.W., Grossman, M.J., Haith, C.E., Kaiser, F.J., Lessard, R.R., Liotta, R., Mastracchio, R.L., Minak-Bernero, V., Prince, R.C., Robbins, W.K., Stiefel, E.I., Wilkinson, J.B., Hington, S.M., Bragg, J.R., McMillen, S.J., and Atlas, R.M. (1991). Bioremediation technology development and application to the Alaskan spill. In Proceedings of the 1991 International Oil Spill Conference (Prevention, Behavior, Control, Cleanup), March 4–7, 1991, San Diego, California. Washington DC, USA: American Petroleum Institute Technical Publication 4529; pp. 549–558.Google Scholar
Koons, C.B. and Jahns, H.O. (1993). The fate of oil from the Exxon Valdez: A perspective. Marine Technology Society Journal 26(3): 61–69.Google Scholar
Leschine, T.M., McGee, J., Gaunt, R., van Emmerik, A., McGuire, D.M., Travis, R., and McCready, R. (1993). T/V Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Federal On Scene Coordinator’s Report. Washington DC, USA: United States Department of Transportation, United States Coast Guard; Report DOT-SRP-94–1; National Technical Information Service Order Number PB94–121845; Volume 1; pp. 198–200.
Li, H. and Boufadel, M.C. (2010). Long-term persistence of oil from the Exxon Valdez spill in two-layer beaches. Nature Geoscience 3(2): 96–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michel, J., Nixon, Z., and Cotsapas, L. (2006). Evaluation of Oil Remediation Technologies for Lingering Oil from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in Prince William Sound. Juneau, AK, USA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Project 050778 Final Report.
National Research Council (2003). Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. Washington DC, USA: National Academy Press; ISBN-10: 0309084385.Google Scholar
Neff, J.M., Bence, A.E., Parker, K.R., Page, D.S., Brown, J.S., and Boehm, P.D. (2006) Bioavailability of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from buried shoreline oil residues thirteen years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill: a multispecies assessment. Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry 25(4): 947–961.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neff, J.M., Owens, E.H., Stoker, S.W., and McCormick, D. (1995). Shoreline oiling conditions in Prince William Sound following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan Waters. Wells, P.G., Butler, J.N., and Hughes, J.S., eds; Philadelphia, PA, USA: American Society for Testing and Materials; ASTM Special Technical Publication 1219; ISBN-10: 0803118961; pp. 312–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, E.H. (1991). Shoreline conditions following the Exxon Valdez oil spill as of fall 1990. In Proceedings of the 14th Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program (AMOP) Technical Seminar, June 12–14, 1991, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Environment Canada; pp. 579–606.Google Scholar
Page, D.S., Boehm, P.D., and Neff, J.M. (2008). Shoreline type and subsurface oil persistence in the Exxon Valdez spill zone of Prince William Sound, Alaska. In Proceedings of the 31st Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program (AMOP) Technical Seminar, June 3–5, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Environment Canada; pp. 545–563.Google Scholar
Pope, G.A., Gordon, K.D., and Bragg, J.R. (2011a). Fundamental reservoir engineering principles explain lenses of shoreline oil residue twenty years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In Proceedings of the Society of Petroleum Engineers’ Americas E&P Health, Safety, Security, and Environmental Conference, March 21–23, 2011, Houston, Texas. Houston, TX, USA: Society for Petroleum Engineers; SPE Paper 141809.Google Scholar
Pope, G.A., Gordon, K.D., and Bragg, J.R. (2011b). Using fundamental practices to explain field observations twenty-one years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Oil Spill Conference (Promoting the Science of Spill Response), May 24–26, 2011, Portland, Oregon, USA. Washington DC, USA: American Petroleum Institute.Google Scholar
Prince, R.C., Bare, R.E., Garrett, R.M., Grossman, M.J., Haith, C.E., Keim, L.G., Lee, K., Holtom, G.J., Lambert, P., Sergy, G.A., Owens, E.H., and Guénette, C.C. (2003). Bioremediation of stranded oil on an Arctic shoreline. Spill Science & Technology Bulletin 8(3): 303–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, R.C., Clark, J.R., Lindstrom, J.E., Butler, E.L., Brown, E.J., Winter, G., Steinhauer, W.G., Douglas, G.S., Bragg, J.R., Harner, J.E., and Atlas, R.M. (1993). Bioremediation of the Exxon Valdez oil spill: Monitoring safety and efficacy. In Bioremediation of Chlorinated and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Compounds. Hinchee, R.E., Alleman, B.C., Hoeppel, R.E., and Miller, R.N., eds. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Lewis Publishers. ISBN-10: 0873719832; ISBN-13: 9780873719834; pp. 107–124.Google Scholar
Pritchard, P.H. and Costa, C.F. (1991). EPA’s Alaska oil spill bioremediation project. Part 5. Environmental Science & Technology 25(3): 372–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, P.H., Costa, C.F., and Suit, L. (1991). Alaska Oil Spill Bioremediation Project, Science Advisory Board Draft Report. Gulf Breeze, FL, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory; EPA Report EPA/600/9–91/046a. [ and ]
Shennan, J.L. (1984). Hydrocarbons as substrates in industrial fermentations. In Petroleum Microbiology. Atlas, R., ed. New York, NY, USA: Macmillan Publishing Company; ISBN-10: 0029490006; pp. 643–683.Google Scholar
Short, J.W., Irvine, G.V., Mann, D.H., Maselko, J.M., Pella, J.J., Lindeberg, M.R., Payne, J.M., Driskell, W.B., and Rice, S.D. (2007). Slightly weathered Exxon Valdez oil persists in Gulf of Alaska beach sediments after 16 years. Environmental Science & Technology 41(4): 1245–1250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Short, J.W., Lindeberg, M.R., Harris, P.M., Maselko, J.M., Pella, J.J., and Rice, S.D. (2004). Estimate of oil persisting on beaches of Prince William Sound, 12 years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental Science & Technology 38(1): 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Short, J.W., Maselko, J.M., Lindeberg, M.R., Harris, P.M., and Rice, S.D. (2006). Vertical distribution and probability of encountering intertidal Exxon Valdez oil on shorelines of three embayments within Prince William Sound. Environmental Science & Technology 40(12): 3723–3729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, E. and Reimer, D. (2008). Oil persistence on beaches in Prince William Sound: a review of SCAT surveys conducted from 1989 to 2002. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56(3): 458–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (1989a). Bioremediation of Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Washington DC, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development; Press Release, July 31, 1989; Letter to K.T. Koonce, Exxon Corporation, July 26, 1989.
US Environmental Protection Agency (1989b). Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia (Salt Water): 1989. Narragansett, RI, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory; EPA 440/5–88–004.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (1990). Alaskan Oil Spill Bioremediation Project. Washington DC, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. National Service Center for Environmental Publications; EPA/600/8–89/073.Google Scholar
Venosa, A.D., Haines, J.R., and Allen, D.M. (1992). Efficacy of commercial inocula in enhancing biodegradation of weathered crude oil contaminating a Prince William Sound beach. Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology 10(1): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venosa, A.D., Campo, P., and Wrenn, B.A. (2010). Biodegradability of lingering crude oil 19 years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental Science & Technology 44(19): 7613–7621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, D.A., Hameedi, M.J., Galt, J.A., Watabayashi, D., Short, J., O’Clair, C., Rice, S., Michel, J., Payne, J.R., Braddock, J., Hanna, S., and Sale, D. (1994). Fate of the oil spilled from the T/V Exxon Valdez in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Environmental Science & Technology 28(13): 561A–568A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, X., Venosa, A.D., and Suidan, T. (2004). Literature Review of the Use of Commercial Bioremediation Agents for Cleanup of Oil-Contaminated Estuarine Environments. Cincinnati, OH, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research Laboratory. National Service Center for Environmental Publications; EPA/600/R-04/075.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×