While not natural structures, their platforms have been embedded into the muddy seabed long enough to become part of the ocean environment, providing a home for creatures like mussels and barnacles, which in turn attract larger fish and sea lions that find safety and food there.

After two and a half decades of studying the rigs, Bull says it’s clear to her: “These places are extremely productive, both for commercial and recreational fisheries and for invertebrates.”

Now, as California and the US shift away from offshore drilling and toward greener energy, a debate is mounting over their future. On one side are those who argue disused rigs are an environmental blight and should be removed entirely. On the other side are people, many of them scientists, who say we should embrace these accidental oases and that removing the structures is morally wrong. In other parts of the world, oil rigs have successfully become artificial reefs, in a policy known as rigs to reefs.

  • fartsparkles
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Removing the top part would mean ships have no visual cue there’s a bunch of metal underneath the surface that could wreck their ship. Better to just leave it intact.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Thats a good point. Hide it just below the surface so ships wreck themselves on it. Those sink and become more reefs that then go on to scuttle more ships. Circle of life!

    • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ships use charts to dodge such things. All of those rigs should already be on the charts so as long as the “reef” is deep enough for small boats to pass over it should be all good.