Good news. EPA just announced chemical dispersants no more toxic than oil.

[dixiegrrrrl]

So, is that saying they are AS toxic as the oil?

Well, anyhow, now that the EPA has done an extra special study, don't we feel better now?:evilgrin:


WASHINGTON -- The Environmental Protection Agency says a new study shows that dispersants used to break up oil in the Gulf of Mexico are no more toxic to aquatic life than oil alone.

The EPA says the tests also show that when mixed with oil, the dispersant used in the Gulf, Corexit 9500A, is no more or less toxic than oil mixtures with available alternative chemicals.

The test results were released Monday as the Obama administration defends itself against assertions that officials allowed oil giant BP to use excessive amounts of chemical dispersants whose threat to sea life remains unknown. Congressional investigators say the Coast Guard routinely approved BP requests to use thousands of gallons of Corexit despite a federal directive to use the chemical sparingly.

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/08/epa_says_chemical_dispersants.html

[flyarm]

1. They also said the air was safe at Ground Zero..wow I feel so reassured ..not! eom

[BrklynLiberal]

11. Ahhh yes..I remember that very well.

[DCBob]

18. So what exactly is the story there? Was EPA paid off or just incompetent or both or what?

I dont keep up with these conspiracy things very well.

[flyarm]

23. Just watch the many Video's that are avail..here is one..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FxfYqnlQ50&feature=player_embedded

Oh and at Ground Zero Christine Whitman was the head of the EPA she told everyone of the first responders and those cleaning up ground zero the air was totally safe she even provided fake numbers of the ..even toxicities though those buildings were filled with asbestos..and all kinds of Toxins..people who cleaned up the site have died or have totally compromised health in many many ways and very seriously, many can not work and are very very ill!

Oh and guess who was one of the people paid by BP? Christine Whitman along with Tom Daschle and our new CIA chief Leon Panetta !

Oh and it is not a conspiracy theory..it is fact!


Spill, Baby, Spill
By Michael Isikoff, Ian Yarett and Matthew Philips | NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated May 10, 2010

BP has been trying hard to burnish its public image in recent years after being hit with a pair of environmental disasters, including a fatal refinery explosion in Texas and a pipeline leak in Alaska. One major step was to announce, in 2007, that it had hired a high-powered advisory board that included former EPA director Christine Todd Whitman, former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, and Leon Panetta, who were each paid $120,000 a year. (Panetta left when he became President Obama's CIA director.) Two years ago the oil giant's chief executive, Robert Malone, flew board members out to the Gulf of Mexico on a helicopter to demonstrate the safeguards surrounding BP's advanced drilling technology. "We got a sense they were really committed to ensuring they got it right," Whitman told NEWSWEEK.

Now BP, formerly known as British Petroleum, finds itself blamed for what could prove to be the worst oil spill in U.S. history. And only weeks after Obama announced an ambitious plan to open up more U.S. offshore waters to oil drilling, shunting aside environmental concerns from his own Democratic Party, his administration is facing a comeuppance from hell. "There was a lot of wishful thinking, I guess," says Villy Kourafalou, a scientist at the University of Miami's Rosensteil School of Marine and Atmospheric Science. "The new technologies were said to be so wonderful that we'd never have an oil spill again." Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who had sought to block the expanded drilling, says the oil and gas industry was pushing this idea hard. "They said, 'We'll never have a repeat of Santa Barbara,'?" referring to the 1969 rig explosion off the California coast. Both the Bush and Obama administrations "were buying the line that the technology was fine," Pallone adds.

BP pressed hard to make that point in D.C. Its PR efforts included payments of $16 million last year to a battery of Washington lobbyists, among them the firm of Tony Podesta, the brother of former Obama transition chief John Podesta. Last fall, after the U.S. Interior Department proposed tighter federal regulation of oil companies' environmental programs, David Rainey, BP's vice president for Gulf of Mexico exploration, told Congress that the proposal was unnecessary. "I think we need to remember," he said, that offshore drilling "has been going on for the last 50 years, and it has been going on in a way that is both safe and protective of the environment."

Read the full article at:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/237298

[DCBob]

24. Thanks.. I will take a look..

Of course, keep in mind that was the Bush/Cheney era.

[flyarm]

25. It was and is also in the Obama era!

[DCBob]

29. You have any hard evidence of that?

[flyarm]

33. you should have looked at the Newsweek article I already posted

"The new technologies were said to be so wonderful that we'd never have an oil spill again." Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who had sought to block the expanded drilling, says the oil and gas industry was pushing this idea hard. "They said, 'We'll never have a repeat of Santa Barbara,'?" referring to the 1969 rig explosion off the California coast. Both the Bush and Obama administrations "were buying the line that the technology was fine," Pallone adds.


ah and Daschle was on Obama's election Team when he was rolling in cash from BP!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

yes indeed I have kept everything since day one..as I sad the Gulf is my back yard, I know what I saw and I know what i breahred and I know how BP took over our beaches..

We have all been lied to since day one!

Leaked report: Government fears Deepwater Horizon well could become unchecked gusher
By Ben Raines
April 30, 2010, 2:18PM

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/deepwater_horizon_secret_memo.html


'The following is not public' document states

View full size(AP Photo/U.S. Coast Guard)This image provided by the U.S. Coast Guard Saturday April 24, 2010, shows oil leaking from the drill pipe of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig after it sank. A confidential government report on the unfolding spill disaster makes clear the Coast Guard now fears the well could be on the verge of becoming an unchecked gusher shooting millions of gallons of oil per day into the Gulf. A confidential government report on the unfolding spill disaster in the Gulf makes clear the Coast Guard now fears the well could become an unchecked gusher shooting millions of gallons of oil per day into the Gulf.

"The following is not public," reads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Emergency Response document dated April 28. "Two additional release points were found today in the tangled riser. If the riser pipe deteriorates further, the flow could become unchecked resulting in a release volume an order of magnitude higher than previously thought."

Asked Friday to comment on the document, NOAA spokesman Scott Smullen said that the additional leaks described were reported to the public late Wednesday night. Regarding the possibility of the spill becoming an order of magnitude larger, Smullen said, "I'm letting the document you have speak for itself."

In scientific circles, an order of magnitude means something is 10 times larger. In this case, an order of magnitude higher would mean the volume of oil coming from the well could be 10 times higher than the 5,000 barrels a day coming out now. That would mean 50,000 barrels a day, or 2.1 million gallons a day. It appears the new leaks mentioned in the Wednesday release are the leaks reported to the public late Wednesday night.

"There is no official change in the volume released but the USCG is no longer stating that the release rate is 1,000 barrels a day," continues the document, referred to as report No. 12. "Instead they are saying that they are preparing for a worst-case release and bringing all assets to bear."

The emergency document also states that the spill has grown in size so quickly that only 1 to 2 percent of it has been sprayed with dispersants.

The Press-Register obtained the emergency report from a government official. The White House, NOAA, the Coast Guard and BP Plc did not immediately return calls for comment made early this morning.

The worst-case scenario for the broken and leaking well pouring oil into the Gulf of Mexico would be the loss of the wellhead and kinked piping currently restricting the flow to 5,000 barrels -- or 210,000 gallons -- per day.




xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


http://blog.al.com/live/2010/05/video_shows_federal_officials.html

A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration video, shot as officials coordinated response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster, shows that federal officials almost immediately worried that the oil well could leak up to 110,000 barrels per day, or 4.6 million gallons.

The video appears on a federal Web site.

It was filmed in Seattle, at NOAA's Western Regional Center, as scientists and federal officials in Seattle, Houston and New Orleans engaged in telephone conferences, according to a companion document on the Web site.

snip:

A confidential NOAA report, dated April 28 and circulated among federal agencies, makes similar projections regarding spill size in a worst-case situation.

View full size(NOAA video still)A hand-drawn map of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill dated April 22, 2010, is seen in this image from a video downloaded from the NOAA Web site. The video shows federal officials discussing the oil spill soon after the Deepwater Horizon exploded.

It describes newly discovered leaks in the tangle of riser pipe, attributing them to ongoing erosion of the pipe. The riser pipe, in this case about 5,000 feet long, connects the wellhead on the sea floor to the drilling rig on the surface.

"If the riser pipe deteriorates further, the flow could become unchecked," reads the report.

On Thursday, the day after the NOAA report was circulated, BP officials said they were worried about "erosion" of the piping.

Sand is an integral part of the formations that hold oil under the Gulf. The raw crude rising from the bottom of a well carries sand and other abrasive materials. In effect, the oil is sandblasting the piping as it rushes through with tremendous force, according to petroleum engineers.

"I think we need to be prepared for it to be the spill of the decade," Debbie Payton of NOAA, the meeting's coordinator, says during the NOAA video.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Obama: “Oil Rigs Today Generally Don’t Cause Spills”

Obama Repeats Katrina Oil Spill Myth To Defend Offshore Drilling

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm8gLmuTvJ4&feature=play ...


By: David Dayen Thursday April 29, 2010 1:42 pm

snip:

What a difference 18 days makes. Here was Barack Obama, on April 2, before the BP oil rig disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, claiming that oil rigs are safe to justify his position on offshore drilling:

I don’t agree with the notion that we shouldn’t do anything. It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced. Even during Katrina, the spills didn’t come from the oil rigs, they came from the refineries onshore.

Not only does this quote look ridiculous in hindsight, it wasn’t true at the time, as Brad Johnson points out:

Obama’s claim that oil rigs did not cause any spills during Hurricane Katrina is simply false, as the Wonk Room reported in June, 2008, when Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and other conservatives made the same false claim:

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused 124 Offshore Spills For A Total Of 743,700 Gallons. 554,400 gallons were crude oil and condensate from platforms, rigs and pipelines, and 189,000 gallons were refined products from platforms and rigs.

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused Six Offshore Spills Of 42,000 Gallons Or Greater. The largest of these was 152,250 gallons, well over the 100,000 gallon threshhold considered a “major spill.”

http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/04/29/obama-oil-rigs-t ... ’t-cause-spills/


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


YouTube - Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling ( to Florida voters while asking for their votes)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8fkbEuCQss&NR=1

[DCBob]

35. Well, they were wrong about that, werent they.. but not exactly incriminating..

I guess I am looking for payoffs, bribes, obvious inexcusable incompetence.

[flyarm]

36. go look up the shit Salazar did..I just added more to the above post.

[flyarm]

37. BP Enjoys Lobbying Strength, Close Ties to Lawmakers as Federal Investigation Looms

BP Enjoys Lobbying Strength, Close Ties to Lawmakers as Federal Investigation Looms
By Cassandra LaRussa on April 30, 2010 3:14 PM


On Thursday, oil giant BP asked for U.S. government assistance in cleaning up massive amounts of crude oil ominously approaching the coast of Louisiana -- the messy results of a recent oil rig explosion 40 miles off-shore.

In response, the Obama administration promised support in both clean up and containment of the environmental crisis. The president also sent clear signals indicating a potential federal investigation to determine cause and responsibility for the accident.

If BP faces heavy federal scrutiny, it's well-positioned to fight back: The London-based company has consistently spent top dollar to influence legislative and regulatory activity in Washington, D.C., the Center for Responsive Politics finds.

During the 2008 election cycle, individuals and political action committees associated with BP -- a Center for Responsive Politics' "heavy hitter" -- contributed half a million dollars to federal candidates. About 40 percent of these donations went to Democrats. The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself, who collected $71,000.

BP regularly lobbies on Capitol Hill, as well. In 2009, the company spent a massive $16 million to influence legislation. During the first quarter of 2010, it spent $3.53 million on federal lobbying efforts, ranking it second (behind ConocoPhillips) among all oil and gas industry interests.

Its registered lobbyists include a number of former federal government and high-ranking political campaign officials, including longtime political operative Tony Podesta, former congressional chief of staff Bob Brooks, former congressional legislative director David Pore and vice presidential aide Michael S. Berman, the Center's research shows.

The oil and gas industry, of which BP is a member, reported $169 million in 2009 lobbying expenditures.

Comparatively, the entire environmental movement spent $22 million on lobbying in 2009 - not much more than BP alone spent for the year. The most active member of the environmental industry, the Nature Conservancy, reported $2.2 million in 2009 expenditures. Last year, BP was active lobbying on the American Clean Energy Leadership Act of 2009, which allows increased oil and gas leasing in the Gulf of Mexico, in areas closer to shore than current law allows.

The bill also calls for additional research and inventory of oil and gas reserves in the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), who has received $14,000 in campaign donations during the past two decades from those associated with BP, the Center finds.

In 2009, BP also lobbied on the Oil Spill Prevention Act of 2009 and the Clean Water Restoration Act.



these are snips read in entirety.



http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil...

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 /

[Wilms]

2. I guess they'll CHANGE the "federal directive to use the chemical sparingly".

I sure HOPE they will.

All this needless worry about Corexit.

Can we call the Obama admin CorexNot?

[hedgehog]

3. Maybe the heavy use of Corexit is a red herring that distracts us

from noticing how toxic the oil is! Anyone check the status of plants and animals near oil wells on land, lately?

[jberryhill]

21. MMMmmmmm... red herring

Must be all that internal bleeding.

[flyarm]

27. no red herring , BP and our government are lying up their asses!

I live 300 miles from the gusher and in early May we had air so bad one could hardly breathe from the smell of the rottenest smell of oinions for 5 days and then it smelled like chemicals..it burned your eyes , your throat, and was giving everyone headaches..it felt like someone ut a ton of bricks on your chest..The Gulf is my back yard..it took 4 days for the local media to report about it, and they said the stink was from Clearwater Fla to Ft Meyers 4 hour drive south!

Red Herring my ass..they are lying up their asses..it was Corexit Being sprayed and we were getting it in our air as thick as shit!

so now they are contradicting themselves??????

yeah right..

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

NOAA: BP spill has toxic effect on air quality in US cities; effects shellfish many miles from site
The toxic effects are making themselves known on people living in cities on the mainland U.S. and on Gulf shellfish miles from the site of the BP oil spill. The evaporating oil slick, which is itself the major source of deadly aromatic hydrocarbon emissions, will continue spreading for months after the gusher is plugged, according to scientists.


While BP is expected to finally plug the Deep Horizon well as soon as next week to great fanfare, the toxic effects will continue for months and years to come.

http://www.envirotech-online.com/news/air-monitoring/6/... / - BP spill 'having effect on US air quality'
The BP oil spill has had a negative effect on the air quality of US cities, a report has shown.

Scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released details of their research into the air quality of states close to the Gulf of Mexico explosion that occurred on April 20th.

They revealed that 15 to 17 kilometres downwind from the location of the spill, there were concentrations of chemicals in the air that were much higher than should be expected in urban areas.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

remember this as well..............

BP acknowledges another altered photo, posts originals
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/07/22/bp.altered.photos/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

[Skink]

4. It's OK to eat the Corexit special.

[xchrom]

5. Recommend --

[qb]

6. It's nice they're thinking about the wildlife, but what about the bleeding workers?

[walldude]

7. K&R... lunacy abounds...

[G_j]

8. where is the study?

no links in the article.

I'm skeptical.

[blindpig]

9. k&r

The way this has gone down who could believe anything those people say?

[BrklynLiberal]

10. If THAT is the good news, Please spare me the bad news....

[Catherina]

12. That's simply terrific

I'll go gather up some fish right now

[dipsydoodle]

13. Despite the rumours

which circulated about Corexit being banned in the UK, which it isn't, you'll find that the restriction on its use applies to rocky shore use only and that out at sea it had been found to have no adverse effect on sea/marine life.

Doubtless all will become clear when as may be inevitable the makers are forced to declare its complete formula. As far as I'm aware the main components declared to date are 2-butoxyethanol which is used in houshold cleaners, propylene glycol which amongst other applications is used in baby wipes and a component the name of which escapes me which is used to help clear constipation.

The above is not a defence of its use. Its an unfortunate choice - droplets or slicks.

[DCBob]

19. Alot of rumours.. hard to keep up with them all.

thanks for the info.

[rucky]

28. Now we have Corexit AND oil in the gulf.

I'm not seeing how this can be framed as an either/or decision.

[dipsydoodle]

41. Only in as much

in the absense of dispersants you'd have slicks which may be the less desirable of the two compared with droplets whatever. I've never heard of any country having a preference for slicks. As I said : its what you consider to be the lesser of two evils. Back in the seventies when the Torrey Canyon tanker broke up here in the UK's waters, before commercial dispersants were available, the slicks were napalmed by the RAF in an effort to stop then reaching the coast.

[flyarm]

48. the slicks can be caught up in booms and taken out of the water , the dispersants

sink the oil and make it unseeable..but it is still all there over 200 million barrels of it ..over 500 million million gallons of oil is now sunk in the Gulf..which is now broken up and disspersed throughout the Gulf..one expert called it like a FEd EX into the food chain..speeds it up to be ingested by fish and the food chain for fish!
The oil will sit under the surface instead of being removed from the gulf..now there is no way to capture the oil and remove it!
And BP and our government allowed this and did this to be able to lie to the American people and the world.

BP did it so they would not be held accountable for all the oil that did enter the Gulf..remember they knew from day one they were lying about the amounts of oil gushing into the gulf..remember the 1000 barrels they lied about for almost 1 month..it was all a fucking damn lie and our government allowed them to lie!

And do not say it is from one party,..it was from both parties of our government!

[femrap]

14. Right.....and I'm

the Queen of England.

Now I KNOW that shit is bad.

[Hubert Flottz]

15. Well the oil is about as toxic to sea life as an atom bomb.

The A bomb would be an easier way to did probably. Quicker anyway.

[joeybee12]

16. The EPA under Obama is just as trustworthy as the EPA under Bush...

...two can play that game.

[glitch]

30. Sad, isn't it? We don't have Trust back yet.

Maybe it's packaged with Hope and Change.

[spanone]

17. epa = oil companies

[AlabamaLibrul]

20. BULLSHIT. EPA is the worst "flip-flopper" in recent history.

"The EPA says the tests also show that when mixed with oil, the dispersant used in the Gulf, Corexit 9500A, is no more or less toxic than oil mixtures with available alternative chemicals."

That's funny, 'cause it used to be only a couple months ago EPA said the opposite.

In handling Louisiana crude Corexit EC9500A (formerly called Corexit 9500) was 54.7% effective, while Corexit EC9527A was 63.4% effective.<29><30> The EPA lists 12 other types of dispersants as being more effective in dealing with oil in a way that is safe for wildlife. <7> One of those tested was Dispersit, which was 100% effective in dispersing Gulf oil and is less toxic to silverfish and shrimp than Corexit.<31>

[Gold Metal Flake]

22. Oil is poison.

And, too, Corexit + oil is poison.

[G_j]

42. so you have the combined effects of two deadly toxins nt

[Gold Metal Flake]

43. Seems simple enough to me.

[spanone]

26. is that like saying a hydrogen bomb is no worse than an atomic bomb?

[flyarm]

31. BP buys up Gulf scientists for legal defense, roiling academic community

BP buys up Gulf scientists for legal defense, roiling academic community
Source: Alabama Press Register

BP buys up Gulf scientists for legal defense, roiling academic community
Published: Friday, July 16, 2010, 5:00 AM Updated: Friday, July 16, 2010, 4:14 PM

For the last few weeks, BP has been offering signing bonuses and lucrative pay to prominent scientists from public universities around the Gulf Coast to aid its defense against spill litigation.

BP PLC attempted to hire the entire marine sciences department at one Alabama university, according to scientists involved in discussions with the company's lawyers. The university declined because of confidentiality restrictions that the company sought on any research.

The Press-Register obtained a copy of a contract offered to scientists by BP. It prohibits the scientists from publishing their research, sharing it with other scientists or speaking about the data that they collect for at least the next three years.

"We told them there was no way we would agree to any kind of restrictions on the data we collect. It was pretty clear we wouldn't be hearing from them again after that," said Bob Shipp, head of marine sciences at the University of South Alabama. "We didn't like the perception of the university representing BP in any fashion."

Read more: http://blog.al.com/live/2010/07/bp_buys_up_gulf_scienti...


we who live on the gulf have kept most articles and Jurno reports..we can not be fooled..if you want to be fooled so be it , but we on the Gulf will not tolerate the lies and the deciet by BP or /and our government!

[flyarm]

32. BP is lying. The federal government is lying.

https://secure2.convio.net/pep/site/SPageServer?pagename=SeizeBP

BP is lying. The federal government is lying.

July 20, 2010

BP is lying. The federal government is lying. Kenneth Feinberg is ... well, let's call it flip-flopping.

Out-of-work fishers and others from the Gulf Coast are enraged about the double dealing of BP and the Feinberg-led escrow fund. They have just learned that if they earned any income or wages from BP as part of the clean-up effort, the money would be subtracted from any claim they make against the so-called $20 billion escrow fund. That is a direct contradiction from what they had been told earlier.

But the latest lie turns out be the tip of the iceberg.


Please go sign the petition!!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



YouTube - local people asking BP questions. You wont see this on TV!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuxOKjHzqqQ&feature=player_embedded

[The Flaming Red Head]

47. This makes me so furious

That for once in my life I can't find the words to express the level of my anger and I am never at a loss for words.

Thanks so much for that U-Tube of the angry fisherman.

All I can think of is taking the heads of the execs of BP and Trans Ocean and Halliburton and putting them on pikes in the GOM for all to see as a warning.

"Don't F*** with US!"

I know it sounds barbaric but what they have done is so horrible it needs an equal reaction.

And now they want to scale back on the clean up and pretend like the oil and corexit is not still there.

Like the man said "We ain't stupid."

Maybe we do need another revolution.


The Flaming Red Head AKA The Swampbitch

[flyarm]

34. Ahhh but BP has already gotten rid of the Dead Dolphin and Whale carcasses!

YouTube - BP Slick Covers Dolphins and Whales

BP Slick Covers Dolphins and Whales

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxDf-KkMCKQ

[Baclava]

38. I think I've heard this before

[JoeyT]

39. That seems like an awfully low bar to set.

We've gotten good at setting low bars the last few years, though.

[annabanana]

40. the "loyal bushies" destroyed the credibility of that dept at ground zero. . n/t

[flyarm]

44. Our Goverment is lying!

Must see!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lSdIkZX-qs&feature=player_embedded

[flyarm]

45. Our Goverment is lying!

Must see!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lSdIkZX-qs&feature=player_embedded

[Avalux]

46. So what if oil was colorless and no one could see it?

Would that make it any less toxic? The magic trick to make the oil 'disappear' to save BP's ass (aided by our government) doesn't mean, well, you get the picture....