Under the Black Tide

2002/12/10 Roa Zubia, Guillermo - Elhuyar Zientzia

• Ozeanografia
• Etika

If it has really been so, I am very happy. On the one hand, because of its political and sociological consequences, and on the other, because it can also sacrifice from within certain shortcomings of science.

One such lack is marine research. It is believed that much is known about the sea, but when there are problems a great debate is generated among experts. This is what happens when we study putting limits on fishing and some states continue to hunt whales.

And that's what happened in the case of the Prestige. Immediately after the accident the first decision was made. What was better? Bring open sea or dock? We know what the decision was and what the consequence was. And some experts have shown themselves in favor of this decision and others against it. But not only that.

Despite the conclusion, some experts do not believe it was a serious ecological disaster, such as the Scottish Paul Kingston. He believes that the ecosystem will be healthy when all the beings that live there recover their activity.

However, American Ron Heintz disagrees that he has shown that many components
of the fuel cause deformations in fish eggs.

According to the most widespread theory so far, oil does not affect fish much, but research has been done only with benzene and toluene, and oil has many other components. For example, no one knows what the real influence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons is.

Therefore, perhaps the authorities should rethink the distribution of money for science. Investigating the sea seems essential. And if it's not asking too much, I want to make another reflection here: with the money needed to maintain a military plane you can
investigate many fish stocks.

Opinion piece for Herri Irratia