Posted on 08/03/2010 5:41:04 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
WASHINGTON -- A new federal study of chemical dispersants used to break up oil in the Gulf of Mexico shows that when mixed with oil, the dispersant is less toxic to aquatic life than oil alone.
The study 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 other chemical dispersants approved for use in oil spills.
(Excerpt) Read more at wwltv.com ...
And you trust the EPA? The same people that want to regulate CO2 and farmers dust.
Gotchya.
Great timing.
I suspect that sometime next year they will also approve all of those European oil skimming ships to help clean up the gulf.
I'm not saying that the dispersants shouldn't have been used.
Just warning that nobody's been able to repeal the Law of Unintended Consequences :)
Is this dispersant like adding Dawn to the oil??
Some one paid them off. I see the price of oil is going up now the leak has been stopped. Oh, goody!
No, she can’t swim, so she sinks.
Without the dispersants what would have happened to the beaches?
Yes but more effective at breaking down the oil quicker.
But hasn’t Miami been destroyed by the oil slick yet? Big Media cries wolf again.
Pray for America
Oh, yes ... the petroleum will definitely find its way into the food chain, and the dispersants definitely speed the process.
Bacteria eat the petroleum. Plankton eat the bacteria. Shrimp and small fish eat the plankton. Big fish and people eat the shrimp. Big fish eat the small fish. People eat the big fish.
Yep ... happens all the time.
During WW II many, many of miles of east coast beaches were
were covered by oil blasted from oil tankers sunk by German U-Boats. Have any of those beaches become usable yet?
Oil slicks covered the Atlantic from the USA to England, but I sort of believe there were NO permanent environmental disasters.
Don’t worry, though, next Thursday the MEDIA will find something else to get hysterical about.
There are so many things wrong with this. If the dispersants aren't bad, why did BP need to use them?? And, if the oil, by itself, isn't bad what was the panic about??
I listened to another EPA dipwad on the radio this morning saying basically that the earth has already dealt with the oil; that's why no one can find it anymore. So, again, the question must be asked, what was the panic all about??
(It's a rhetorical question. After 18 months of 0bama, I KNOW the answer!)
Correct. Next Thursday the media will warn people who live on unpaved roads or have unpaved driveways that the dust is going to kill them. The government will hand out millions in grant money to study the problem.
Alarming isn’t it? The Feds are overbearing and inept.
The EPA is a lackey for BP, which has bought the Presidency. Corexit used during the Exxon Valdez oil spill disaster caused people respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders. Corexit 9500 can cause hemolysis (rupture of blood cells) and may also cause internal bleeding. It bioaccumulates, like many other carcinogens. It’s manufacturer Nalco is a multinational interest with close ties to the administration and deep connections in China.
Phew! Enough for my little propaganda writing exercise for this morning.
Yeah, but paved roads use oil!
I guess the answer (that they truly would prefer) would be no roads and no cars...
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.