Preserve documented evidence
Used the archived historical NOSDRA/UNEP incident-record material without representing the dataset as complete or current to 2026.
Independent historical environmental study · Bayelsa State
Bayelsa Oil-Spill Evidence Atlas
Where were oil spills reported repeatedly in Bayelsa? Explore documented incident history and how earlier reports relate to the separate 2018 evaluation.
Project objective
Understand where reported spills recurred in the historical record.
Oil spills can affect land and waterways, but incident reports do not directly measure the extent of contamination. I used an archived, quality-checked collection of documented incidents from 2006 to 2018 to examine which areas had repeat reports. Reports from 2018 were held apart to evaluate patterns established using the earlier years; this is a historical atlas, not live monitoring or a prediction of future spills.
3,109Documented incidents in the 2006–2018 study
777Study cells with records before 2018
11First-recorded 2018 evaluation-only cells
14 of 312018 events in areas with reports in 2015–2017
My contribution
Separating recorded recurrence from predictions or contamination claims.
I reconciled historical incident evidence, mapped comparable study cells, tested time-separated interpretations and published a visual account of what the records do and do not show.
Organize spatial histories
Assigned accepted records to consistent study cells to explore recurrence patterns at a comparable scale.
Hold out a later year
Kept first-recorded 2018 study cells separate from earlier-history classifications when evaluating historical recurrence.
Analyse recurrence
Compared recorded events across time while distinguishing more frequent documentation from proven future spill probability.
Explain what is unknown
Clarified that map symbols do not show contamination areas, unreported incidents or operator responsibility.
Publish the historical atlas
Developed the interactive map and supporting methods, scientific context and accessible site explanations.
Spatial workflow
From archived incident reports to readable historical evidence.
- 01Check
Reconcile incident records and establish the validated 2006–2018 study scope.
- 02Map
Place documented histories into comparable geographical study cells.
- 03Compare
Describe older histories and reports during 2015–2017.
- 04Evaluate
Keep 2018 evidence separate and examine overlap with earlier reporting patterns.
- 05Communicate
Publish interactive layers, clear legends and limitations for both technical and nontechnical readers.
Outputs and value
Historical recurrence evidence for further investigation.
These results help visitors see where documented incidents have appeared repeatedly and where record reviews or field investigations might be useful. The atlas does not establish live incident activity, confirmed environmental damage or future spill probabilities.
- Interactive map of 788 historical and evaluation study cells
- Clear distinction between 777 pre-2018 historical cells and 11 first-recorded 2018 evaluation-only cells
- Counts and categories describing recorded recurrence in the 2006–2018 archive
- Explanation of why the validated historical study ends in 2018
- Accessible methods and explicit limitations for interpreting the data
Project attribution: Independent historical GIS research and interactive atlas development by Samuel Bahago Gabriel, based on archived documented incident material. The linked atlas explains source coverage and the limits of historical reporting.
Continue exploring