Question

On March 24, 1989, an oil tanker owned by Exxon Shipping Company struck a reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The ship spilled 10.8 million gallons of crude oil over the next few days. The oil covered 1,300 miles of coastline, which then affected the local environment. Which of the following would not be one way the oil spill affected the local community?

1) A decrease in local tourism
2) An increase in local temperatures
3) Oil getting in the feathers of birds
4) Blocking light from getting to plant life

Answer 1

An increase in local temperatures would not be an effect of an oil spill, unlike a decrease in tourism, oil affecting birds, and blocking sunlight from reaching plants, which are all common impacts of such environmental disasters.

Step-by-step explanation:

When considering the effects of an oil spill on a local community, we can look at several environmental disasters for context. For example, the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 had a significant impact on the local community of Prince William Sound, Alaska. These impacts included a decrease in local tourism, oil contaminating the feathers of birds, and blocking sunlight necessary for plant life. However, an oil spill would not lead to an increase in local temperatures as the oil does not affect atmospheric temperatures directly.

Environmental disasters such as oil spills can have profound and lasting effects on local economies, ecosystems, and the health of both wildlife and human populations. The cost of cleaning up such disasters can escalate very quickly, and the ecological impacts can last for decades. This has been observed across numerous incidents, including the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and spills in other regions such as the Gulf of Oman and the Nigerian Delta.