just ahead at 6:00, forget about the exxon valdez. never mind hurricane "katrina."rnia waterway that one local expert says is poised for disaster bigger than hurricane "katrina" or the exxon valdez. >> i'm terry mcsweeney live in patterson. in a few hours divers will resume their search for the bodies of the man and the four-year-old boy he kidnapped. mary! hey! wow, you look great! thanks! it's this new wish yourself thin program. i just wish it and it happens. it's probably those fiber one bars you're eating. i know they help me stick to my diet. the bars are 90 calories and the fiber helps you feel full. 90 calories and high fiber. so that's why this diet thing is working. but it's weird because my wish for lorenzo came true. [ male announcer ] fiber one 90 calorie bars. hungry no. results yes.

after the exxon valdez oil spill regional citizens' advisory committees were created in alaska. our commission recommends doing something very similar in the gulf of mexico to empower the people to be active participants in the planning of l and gas development, in reacting to proposals, reviewing a oil spill response pla, in training so that if there is this bill they are able to be part of the work force and a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources of the arctic, but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both the research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> yes, sir. >> randy showstack. i would appreciate if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant lead at the table and way made -- what may be the relationship between that and the initial difficulties determini

i know a few, obviously, there was an oil well exxon valdez -- the exxon valdez in the 1990's and the gulf of mexico. but in terms of switching the internal combustion engine to other sources, everybody is on the same page that it will not happen overnight. obviously, the obama administration has endorsed strong fuel economy standards that will reduce the amount of fuel that we need to power those engines. but again, there are issues going to ethanol-based fuel, issues in terms of battery- powered and electric cars, and where you plug these things in. that was a whole nother can of worms, if we go to electric cars and we're putting those in to stop it in your garage, that is causing a whole coal-fired power plant emissions problem. a slew of experts say that we will need oil for a very long time to come. host: what have we learned in the time since the exxon valdez for the long term -- what is the long-term effect on the shores of alaska or the bay in alaska? guest: what we have learned from the exxon valdez is that early on, we cannot predict all of the effects. we can do our best, b

i know a few, obviously, there was an oil well exxon valdez -- the exxon valdez in the 1990's and the gulf of mexico. but in terms of switching the internal combustion engine to other sources, everybody is on the same page that it will not happen overnight. obviously, the obama administration has endorsed strong fuel economy standards that will reduce the amount of fuel that we need to power those engines. but again, there are issues going to ethanol-based fuel, issues in terms of battery- powered and electric cars, and where you plug these things in. that was a whole nother can of worms, if we go to electric cars and we're putting those in to stop it in your garage, that is causing a whole coal-fired power plant emissions problem. a slew of experts say that we will need oil for a very long time to come. host: what have we learned in the time since the exxon valdez for the long term -- what is the long-term effect on the shores of alaska or the bay in alaska? guest: what we have learned from the exxon valdez is that early on, we cannot predict all of the effects. we can do our best, b

five million barrels, that's 18 exxon valdez oil spills and it just kept coming and coming and coming. early on, there was no way to know how long it would take to cap the well and to stop the flow. and so this very aggressive response, in fact, i believe was as much as we could have done and in fact, did accomplish a phenomenal amount. the sheer magnitude of the spill was one that has resulted in a lot of the damage that has been done and we will it be to discover as time goes on. >> suarez: dr. lubchenco, thanks for joining us. >> thank you, ray. >> brown: as we heard, scientists are still assessing the long-term damage to the gulf. "newshour" correspondent tom bearden recently caught up with researchers doing just that off the coast of alabama. >> reporter: on a bitingly cold december day, biology assistant professor anthony overton braved the wind and the waves miles off the coast of alabama, collecting microscopic baby fish. again and again, overton and his crew heaved a finely-meshed double net array over the side of a 27-foot aluminum boat. this is one of eight excursions to ca

after the exxon valdez oil spill regional citizens' advisory committees were created in alaska. our commission recommends doing something very similar in the gulf of mexico to empower the people to be active participants in the planning of oil and gas development, in reacting to proposals, reviewing a oil spill response plans, in training so that if there is this bill they are able to be part of the work force and a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources of the arctic, but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both the research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> yes, sir. >> randy showstack. i would appreciate if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant lead at the table and way made -- what may be the relationship between that and the initial difficulties in de

after the exxon valdez oil spill regional citizens' advisory committees were created in alaska. our commission recommends doing something very similar in the gulf of mexico to empower the people to be active participants in the planning of oil and gas development, in reacting to proposals, reviewing a oil spill response plans, in training so that if there is this bill they are able to be part of the work force and a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources of the arctic, but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both the research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> yes, sir. >> randy showstack. i would appreciate if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant lead at the table and way made -- what may be the relationship between that and the initial difficulties in de

is to say there was almost no technological wide stance taken as a result of the experience of exxon valdez. we have made a number of recommendations on the response and containment including at the department of interior in consultation with other agencies should develop a more rigorous set of requirements for industry response plans. .. the second area is restoration. the data for this event is april night, 2010. if we define our goal has been to restore the goal of the condition it was not april 19, we have missed an enormous opportunity. frankly, the g-golf on april 19 with a degraded area. it had suffered for decades of misuse and most romantically shown by the marshes of louisiana, which has been receiving at a rate of over one football field every 30 minutes. we felt that this was a chance to begin a major process of restoring this very important part of our nation. we have recommended that 80% of the fines and penalties that we anticipate will be assessed under the clean water act the direct did at gulf restoration. that will require your approval. only congress can make that commit

after the exxon valdez oil were commissioned in alaska. we are recommending during something similar in the gulf of mexico to allow the people in the gulf to be active produce bins in the planning of oil and gas development, in training so that, if there is an oil spill, the they can be a part of the work force in a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources in the arctic. but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both of the research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> i would appreciate it if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant seat at the table as senator gramm indicated. and what may not be the relationship between that and, for instance, the initial difficulties in determining oil flow rates and other problems where s

is to say there was almost no technological wide stance taken as a result of the experience of exxon valdez. we have made a number of recommendations on the response and containment including at the department of interior in consultation with other agencies should develop a more rigorous set of requirements for industry response plans. .. the second area is restoration. the data for this event is april night, 2010. if we define our goal has been to restore the goal of the condition it was not april 19, we have missed an enormous opportunity. frankly, the g-golf on april 19 with a degraded area. it had suffered for decades of misuse and most romantically shown by the marshes of louisiana, which has been receiving at a rate of over one football field every 30 minutes. we felt that this was a chance to begin a major process of restoring this very important part of our nation. we have recommended that 80% of the fines and penalties that we anticipate will be assessed under the clean water act the direct did at gulf restoration. that will require your approval. only congress can make that commit

is to say there was almost no technological wide stance taken as a result of the experience of exxon valdez. we have made a number of recommendations on the response and containment including at the department of interior in consultation with other agencies should develop a more rigorous set of requirements for industry response plans. ..

after the exxon valdez oil spill regional citizens' advisory committees were created in alaska. our commission recommends doing something very similar in the gulf of mexico to empower the people to be active participants in the planning of oil and gas development, in reacting to proposals, reviewing a oil spill response plans, in training so that if there is this bill they are able to be part of the work force and a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources of the arctic, but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both the research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> yes, sir. >> randy showstack. i would appreciate if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant lead at the table and way made -- what may be the relationship between that and the initial difficulties in de

after the exxon valdez oil spill regional citizens' advisory committees were created in alaska. our commission recommends doing something very similar in the gulf of mexico to empower the people to be active participants in the planning of oil and gas development, in reacting to proposals, reviewing a oil spill response plans, in training so that if there is this bill they are able to be part of the work force and a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources of the arctic, but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both the research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> yes, sir. >> randy showstack. i would appreciate if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant lead at the table and way made -- what may be the relationship between that and the initial difficulties in de

one of the real surprises here, to me, is having overseen much of the response to exxon valdez in 1989, the status of the dispersant question was still unresolved. i did not permit the dispersant to be in many of the sensitive areas because of fear that getting into the water column will contaminate the fish. remarkable to me that we finally have a spill, and they are predictable, that we then have the argument about whether it is toxic? does it persist in the environment? does it depend how deep it is injected or how much is? we make strong recommendations that epa seriously begin to test toxics, the toxicity of dispersants and their effectiveness, and to do so in real time situations. i can perfectly well understand why you when an application may go in through epa to deposit oil on the water and see whether something works to contain it or dissolve it, that is probably ot left at the top of in bobox, nevertheless we think it needs to be done. particularly recommended be done in the arctic to find out how it would work in the icy waters. >> it has a major role to play in restoration