I NO LONGER blame BP (Vanity)

LOL ... I can see you've got your "head in the sand" ... is it fun down there? ... :-)

At least, the U.S. EPA ordered BP to discontinue the use of Corexit already (May 19th, but no telling how much BP dumped on us before then... yeeooow!), because they know about the toxicity of it. In addition, its use in the U.K. has been banned for quite a while now. Apparently they took action on its toxicity before we did ... hoo-boy!

Here is a synopsis of a paper from the International Oil Spill Conference ...

The IOSC is ... the preeminent gathering of oil spill response experts from around the world!
The International Oil Spill Conference contributes to and enables a culture of preparedness within the oil spill response community, the broader field of incident management, and society as a whole.
It provides a forum for professionals from the international community, the private sector, government, and non-governmental organizations to highlight and discuss innovations and best practices across the spectrum of prevention, preparedness, response and restoration.

Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark
Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc.
Mettlers Rd., CN 2350
East Millstone, New Jersey 08875-2350

A greater danger involving Corexit 9500, and as outlined by Russian scientists in this report, is that with its 2.61ppm toxicity level, and when combined with the heating Gulf of Mexico waters, its molecules will be able to “phase transition” from their present liquid to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and allowing their release as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.
Even worse, should a Katrina like tropical hurricane form in the Gulf of Mexico while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit 9500 are sitting on, or near, its surface the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all life forms from the “bottom of the evolutionary chart to the top”.
Note: For molecules of a liquid to evaporate, they must be located near the surface, be moving in the proper direction, and have sufficient kinetic energy to overcome liquid-phase intermolecular forces. Only a small proportion of the molecules meet these criteria, so the rate of evaporation is limited. Since the kinetic energy of a molecule is proportional to its temperature, evaporation proceeds more quickly at higher temperatures.

The PDF of Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview can be found here: www.iosc.org ...

It's people like you who likes to gamble with people's lives and get them ill and pollute the environment and destroy animals and habitat... we should put you in a vat of Corexit for some "skin treatment" for you ... LOL ...

What is Corexit?

Corexit is a line of oil dispersants or solvents, originally developed by Exxon and now manufactured by Nalco Holding Company (NHC) of Naperville, IL. Interestingly, NHC is associated with Exxon and British Petroleum (BP) — the latter is the same company that insists on using Corexit.

An oil dispersant is basically a detergent, like your diswashing detergent. It disperses or breaks up the oil film into small droplets that intermix with seawater.

There are at least four different formulations of Corexit:

Corexit EC 7664A
Corexit EC 9500A (aka Corexit 9500)
Corexit 9527A
Corexit EC 9580A

Corexit EC9500A is mainly comprised of hydrotreated light petroleum distillates, propylene glycol and a proprietary organic sulfonic acid salt. Propylene glycol is a chemical commonly used as a solvent or moisturizer in pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. An organic sulfonic acid salt is a synthetic chemical detergent, such as that used in laundry detergents, which acts as a surfactant to emulsify oil and allow its dispersion into water.

A variant of Corexit was used in the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska. In the present Deepwater Horizon oil spill, BP is using unprecedentedly large quantities of Corexit EC9500A and Corexit EC9527A, applying 800,000 gallons total, but more accurate estimates run as high as 1,000,000 gallons underwater.

Is Corexit Effective?

Corexit 9500 was 54.7% effective and Corexit EC9527A was 63.4% effective in handling Louisiana crude oil. Corexit is not a very efficient oil dispersant; there are others that are better. (More below)

Is Corexit Safe to Use?

The short answer is “No!” Corexit is highly toxic to humans as well as marine life.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified the 2-butoxyethanol in Corexit to be a causal agent in the health problems experienced by cleanup workers after the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill of respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders.

According to the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), Corexit 9500‘s “potential human bazard is: High.” It can cause central nervous system depression; nausea; unconsciousness; liver, kidney damage; and red blood cell hemolysis with repeated or prolonged exposure through inhalation or ingestion.

Here is what the MSDS for Corexit EC9500A says about Accidental Release Measures:

PERSONAL PRECAUTIONS :
Restrict access to area as appropriate until clean-up operations are complete. Ensure clean-up is conducted by trained personnel only. Ventilate spill area if possible. Do not touch spilled material. Remove sources of ignition.
Stop or reduce any leaks if it is safe to do so. Have emergency equipment (for fires, spills, leaks, etc.) readily available. Use personal protective equipment recommended in Section 8 (Exposure Controls/Personal Protection). Notify appropriate government, occupational health and safety and environmental authorities.
RESPIRATORY PROTECTION :
If significant mists, vapors or aerosols are generated an approved respirator is recommended. An organic vapor cartridge with dust/mist prefilter or supplied air may be used. In event of emergency or planned entry into unknown concentrations a positive pressure, full-facepiece SCBA should be used. If respiratory protection is required, institute a complete respiratory protection program including selection, fit testing, training, maintenance and inspection.
HAND PROTECTION :
Nitrile gloves, Viton# gloves, Polyvinyl alcohol gloves
SKIN PROTECTION :
Wear impervious apron and boots.
EYE PROTECTION :
Wear chemical splash goggles.
HYGIENE RECOMMENDATIONS :
Keep an eye wash fountain available. Keep a safety shower available. If clothing is contaminated, remove clothing and thoroughly wash the affected area. Launder contaminated clothing before reuse.

On May 19, 2010 the EPA gave BP 24 hours to choose less toxic alternatives to Corexit, selected from the list of EPA-approved dispersants on the National Contingency Plan Product Schedule. BP was to begin applying the less toxic dispersants within 72 hours of EPA approval of their choices, but BP refused to change from Corexit, citing safety and availability concerns with alternatives.

According to the EPA, Corexit is more toxic than dispersants made by several competitors and less effective in handling southern Louisiana crude. Not only is Corexit toxic to human and marine life, it helps keep spilled oil submerged. The quantities used in the Gulf will create unprecedented underwater damage to organisms.

There are claims that Corexit is one of the most poisonous dispersants ever developed, that it is 4 times more toxic than crude oil, and 20 times more toxic than other dispersants, but only half as effective.

Is there a better alternative than Corexit?

There is an oil dispersant called Dispersit, manufactured by Polychem, a division of U.S. Polychemical Corporation. Dispersit is a much less harmful water-based product, with about one third of the toxicity that Corexit 9500 presents. Corexit 9500 is a harsh petroleum-based solvent which is dangerous to people and sea life. Dispersit’s human health effect is “slight to none.” Dispersit is also on the EPA’s approved list of dispersants.

Dispersit is also more effective than Corexit. Dispersit has a demonstrated effectiveness of 100% on the lighter South Louisiana crude, and 40% on Pruhoe Bay’s heavier crude. Exxon’s Corexit 9500 is just 55% effective on SL and 55% effective on PB. On an average, Dispersit is 70% effective, and may prove 100% effective, while Corexit 9500 is an average of 50% effective, with a maximum effective use of just 55%.

Bruce Gebhardt at Polychem Marine Products was asked if Dispersit was being used in the Gulf Oil Spill situation. “Very little,” he replied. When asked why, the impression was that the government had used Corexit 9500 in the past, and was going with what they know — no matter how dangerous that might prove to be.

Why does BP insist on using the highly toxic, less effective Corexit?

Why is Corexit 9500 is being used at all, when the water-based Dispersit is available, markedly more effective and less toxic? Follow the money.

Recall that earlier I had said that Corexit is manufactured by Nalco Holding Company (NHC), which is associated with BP. Rodney F. Chase, who sits on the board of Nalco, was also a BP board member. The likelihood that he still holds shares in both companies is very high. In fact, it was reported on May 3, 2010, that BP has acquired Nalco Holding’s entire inventory of its Corexit oil dispersant! Not surprisingly, NHC’s stock took a sharp jump, up more than 18% at its highest point of the day when it was announced that their product is the one BP will use in the Gulf.

But wait! It gets even better! Peter Sutherland, the Chairman of Goldman Sachs International, was also, until last year, the Chairman of BP! The same Goldman Sachs that sold $250 million of its BP stock right before the oil rig explosion/spill. Conclusion

There are experts who think that oil dispersants of whatever variety shouldn’t even be used in the Gulf.

Dispersing the oil neither eliminates it nor decreases its toxicity. All dispersants do is to break the oil into small particles, where it becomes less visible. But the oil’s still there, spewing toxicity at an even greater rate (due to higher surface area), except now it’s pretty much impossible to skim or trap or vacuum or even soak up the oil particles at the shoreline because most of it will never make it to the shoreline. Instead, the toxic crude oil AND the dispersant will be spread all over the ocean’s waters.

In effect, to “disperse” the oil means it will NEVER be cleaned up. It will just stay out there, polluting and poisoning the ocean and marine life, including the fish, shrimp, mollusk that we humans consume as food.

And if using oil dispersants is unwise, it is approaching madness to use a dispersant as toxic as Corexit. Add to the insane formula the fact the Corexit isn’t even a very effective dispersant, and we’re looking at avarice and mendacity on the part of BP at the level of true EVIL. As for the Obama administration, any government that tolerates such evil is minimally incompetent and maximally complicit in evil.

More alarming still is the opinion in some quarters that when the toxic Corexit 9500 is combined with the warm waters of the Gulf, much of it will transition into a gaseous state that will be absorbed into clouds, to be released as toxic rain upon all of the Eastern United States.

May God help us!

less of the fraud that is FEMA’s trademark, such as when the agency distributed $31 million to 13,000 Miami-Dade residents in Florida following Hurricane Frances, even though Dade County experienced no hurricane conditions
http://mises.org/daily/1908 Could FEMA oversee BP claims process? As BP says it’s working to send out a second round of claims checks to impacted families, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano tells Eyewitness News she plans on dispatching a top FEMA official to Louisiana to make sure BP improves the process.

But in the wake of FEMA’s highly criticized performance in paying out claims post Katrina, some wonder what will be different.

“FEMA is a classic government bureaucracy it moves very, very slowly,” said Clancy DuBos, Eyewitness News Political Analyst and Gambit political columnist. “Bringing in FEMA to speed things up with oil spill claims process just seems counter intuitive.”

“The first time for the claims process….I had to wait in line for over 4 hours to try to get our money,” said Creppel.

“We don’t need time, we need relief right away,” said Terrebonne.

She’s worried about yet another layer of bureaucracy. FEMA’s help would be a hindrance, she says, to her and her children.

“Only now people from [Hurricane] Katrina are getting their money and this is ever since 2005,” said Terrebonne. “I just think it’s ridiculous.”

Area leaders call FEMA’s involvement unbelievable.

“There’s only one word that makes my blood pressure go up more than FEMA, and that’s BP,” said Plaquemines Parish president Billy Nungesser.
http://www.wwltv.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/BP-Claims-Process-96194449.html House panel: FEMA unready to help the disabled in a disaster
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/06/15/1682490/house-panel-fema-unready-to-help.html

10 ways MMS makes FEMA look good http://www.grist.org/article/2010-05-18-10-ways-mms-makes-fema-look-good

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.