Film4

1. 1.Title, director and release year? “Black Wave: the Legacy of the Exxon Valdez,” the director of this document is Robert Cornellier and it was released in 2010.

2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film? It is a documentary about the oil tanker Exxon Valdez and what happened when it ran aground in Alaska. The director wants the viewers to feel the plight of the victims of the accident.

3. Who are they key social actors and stakeholders in the film? The key actors are the fishermen and women who lost their jobs due to the oil spill. The people of Cordova, Alaska as a whole are stakeholders in this film. These people have been through a life changing events. One of the fishermen interviewed in the movie lost his fishing vessel because he could no longer fish in the polluted seas.

4. What does the film convey about the matrix of factors that contribute to our dependence on oil? The movie shows that we rely heavily on oil because we are willing to go to great lengths to build an oil pipeline that crosses the state of Alaska. They spent billions of dollars to have a pipeline go from one part of Alaska to another. This contributes to our dependence because we are more fascinated with fueling our cars and boats instead of thinking about potential problems that may arise from another oil spill. Also, Alaska is one of the most beautiful places in America and we are willing to ruin its beauty for oil.

5. What does the film convey about the matrix of problems caused by our dependence on oil? Oil spills hurt our food supply by contaminating our seas. It has a dramatic impact on the local economy. The economy of Cordova plummeted because of this oil spill. There used to be a big port and a lot of parades. Now there are very little fishing vessels and parades in the town. Also Exxon Mobile is holding out on paying some of the fines which is crippling economic recovery.

6. Should the captain have been punished? Joseph Hazelwood, the Captain of the Exxon Valdez, was a drunk for many years. Yet, Exxon did not see this as a potential threat to the safety of the ship and the environment. He did not have a driver’s license but he was allowed to drive a massive oil tanker. He hurt many people’s livelihood. Hazelwood should have been incarcerated but Exxon should be punished more. The oil company was completely unprepared. Exxon did not respond for 72 hours and did not have a plan of action if a spill was to occur. They were more focused on the photo opportunity by putting random stuff in the sea so it looked as if they were cleaning up the mess.

7. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? I found the phone call transcripts most persuasive because it was from a primary source and it was obvious that there was no aggressive plan to clean up the oil spill. If there was a more aggressive response by Exxon the spill may have been contained. This could have kept millions of salmon eggs from being destroyed and 300,000 sea birds from being killed. Having a viable salmon industry could have provided economic stability to Cordova. Another piece of information I find compelling is that the Trans Alaskan Pipeline, when built, was the most expensive privately constructed and financed construction project in the United States. The problem with the whole idea of drilling oil in Alaska is that the ships were not getting the adequate maintenance necessary to safely transport the oil. The Exxon Valdez’s hull was an inch thick. Now we have double hull ships but that still may not be enough to prevent another oil spill disaster.

8. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why I believe the Trans Alaskan Pipeline is a better method to transport oil, than driving ships around Alaska and other waterways. The pipeline is less likely to fail. I have not heard of any big oil spill that was caused by the oil pipeline. So I see a pipeline as a better means of transportation than a ship.

9. What kinds of corrective action are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. The film suggests not drilling and transporting oil from Alaska. The film also highlights educating the youth so that this event does not happen again. They want young people to see the beaches that are still infested with oil and the damage that it is causing to the eco-system.

10. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references, explaining what your learned from each reference.) The film made me look up the permits for the Trans Alaskan Pipeline (43 USC CHAPTER 34 - TRANS-ALASKA PIPELINE) I learned that if there is a spill that the holder of the oil is responsible for any clean-up of pollutants and is subject to penalties of Civil penalties. (a) Penalty. (b) Persons liable. (c) Amount. (d) Procedures. (e) State law.

Another thing I looked up is the amount of oil actually spilled in the bay. I wanted to know if there was an accurate number. It seems that people just make up a number and don’t really explain how they derive it. What I found was between 257,000 to 750,000 //barrels // of oil. Also, Exxon at the peak of the clean-up hired 11,000 workers. 45% of the oil that that spilled from the Exxon Valdez ended up on shore. []