Posted on 07/01/2010 5:58:54 PM PDT by Qbert
It’s already in the food chain. Is this an extinction level event?
I live near Pass Christian. The county supervisor says he can’t stop the EPA from using the local dump for this hazardous waste which could leach into people well water. Just yesterday, MS has closed the Sound to all fishing. Why? because the fish are contaminated. It’s been raining everyday. Today it’s forming right over us raining microparticulates rising from the surface of the contaminated gulf.
How far will this go? The guy next door has 25 head of cattle. I’m imagining corexit raindrops falling on the grass that his cattle will eat causing bioaccumulated contamination of beef in the food chain. Yea, seems very real.
You should see Lake Ponchartrain from the TwinSpan Bridge it’s covered in steams of corexit slicks, while local radio programs are promoting purchase of Lake crabs and fish.
Their past record is hardly 'spotless', is it?
U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study (Obama let it happen)"
Gulf oil spill: BP has a long record of legal, ethical violations "
Federal Regulator Repeatedly Failed to Inspect Deepwater Horizon "
"U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study"
"Obama admin exempted BP's Gulf drilling from environmental impact study "
"Obama sheltered BP's Deepwater Horizon rig from regulatory requirement"
"Red Flags Were Ignored Aboard Doomed Rig "
Because multiple federal agencies have said it was, not just BP.
And yes, BP's record is far from spotless, but pushing illegitimate scare stories doesn't help things at all. I just the other day saw a "human interest" story about a poor charter fisherman who committed suicide because he thought that "the Gulf of Mexico will never recover in my lifetime", when, in actual fact, the scientific studies of ALL spills show a quite rapid recovery (five years for Exxon-Valdez, three years for Ixtoc). So the alarmist lies KILLED this poor man. He might be alive now if he had had the truth instead of the bullshit.
Your local landfill already contains all the same ingredients found in Corexit 9500. It also very likely contains quite a lot of used motor oil. So there is precisely nothing wrong with the EPA using the local dump for this material.
Your neighbors cows are quite safe. Nothing in Corexit is toxic by ingestion. If it were, husbands would long since be dead from the Corexit ingredients in their wives makeup.
If you were to breath in a VERY large quantity of aerosolized Corexit 9500 and oil, you might have something to worry about. But the large amount required cannot be gotten from a thunderstorm....even a Louisiana thunderstorm (I'm from Pointe Coupee, so I know about those).
And Corexit doesn't form "slicks". It dissolves in water. And it causes oil to also dissolve. So if you're seeing a "slick".....it's oil, and not CoRexit.
Despite your claims it is you who are inaccurate.
The cause of the spill is BP and the failure of
regulation by the Obama administration.
Stop blaming posters for the problems and the deaths.
You deliberately left out the worst toxins from your list,
and you ignored the fact that the breakdown products
may be more toxic than the precursors.
I doubt there has ever been adequate testing and certainly
there has never been tests of this material
on human infants — as will occur now without their choice.
Wrong.
"The cause of the spill is BP and the failure of regulation by the Obama administration. Stop blaming posters for the problems and the deaths."
The direct cause of this poor fisherman's death was scare stories. If not for those, he would be alive today.
"You deliberately left out the worst toxins from your list, and you ignored the fact that the breakdown products may be more toxic than the precursors.
I left nothing out. CoRexit 9500 DOES NOT CONTAIN the 2-butoxy compound. And there is no data that the Corexit 9500 byproducts are more toxic than the precursors.
I doubt there has ever been adequate testing and certainly there has never been tests of this material on human infants — as will occur now without their choice.
Oh, please. Human infants have been exposed to these ingredients for decades through both inhalation and ingestion. The ingredients are found throughout your house, assuming your wife wears makeup, washes clothes, cleans house, etc., etc.
Obama and BP caused the man's suicide. Period.
You left out the toxic materials and have no clue
as to what actually is being distributed.
There has been no testing of toxicity. Q.E.D.
But you couldn't care less.
Adding to your excellent points:
Corexit 9500 biodegrades within 20 days.
People want to be frightened. It is a great distraction from all the real problems we all face. No matter what you tell them, how many links are posted on FR by however many FReepers, the folks with an anxiety disorder that must be fed will simply shout back “Wrong!”, as though that makes the truth inaccurate.
Just go to YouTube for the list of videos up on the horror of Corexit 9500. 99% of them contain no substance, just expletives and fearmongering. The one video by an LSU environmental biologist shows their studies stating that the fish and shrimp recover within months from the crude+Corexit 9500 mixture. The stuff biodegrades, new animals migrate into the area, they feed and thrive on the degraded components of crude+Corexit 9500 and the ecosystem is recovered.
But it is a good outlet for angst to rail about being poisoned.
And people, being the idiots they are, fall for it.
In other words, a surfactant?
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/toxic_avenger_movie_poster.jpg
This is what everyone in the South will look like soon.
Corexit has a warning to consumers: “do not inhale”. Make- up doesn’t have such labels.
A few weeks ago we had a water spout type storm. I found several tiny dead crabs scattered in my yard front and back I live several miles from the coast. I believe I do have something to worry about.
Corexit is in the dispersed oil..
Neither do liquid soaps and detergents. But I can guarantee you that if you put a solution of Dawn dishwashing liquid in an ultrasonic humdifier and breath the output for a long enough time, you'll have the same effect as you would with the Corexit (and for the same reason).
"A few weeks ago we had a water spout type storm. I found several tiny dead crabs scattered in my yard front and back I live several miles from the coast. I believe I do have something to worry about."
No, you really do not. You simply cannot get a sufficient dose in the time involved to cause any type of health effect. The CoRexit would have to be as toxic as cyanide or botulin toxin for that to happen.....which it is not.
"Corexit is in the dispersed oil.."
Yes, it is. But the oil/Corexit dispersed oil wants to STAY in the liquid, not evaporate.
I'm a PhD chemist, and, as I said, I'm "from" Louisiana. Born there, grew up there, went to LSU, and worked in the petrochem industry (NOT for an oil company) there for twenty years. I have relatives both by blood and by marriage all over south Louisiana, including New Orleans and Baton Rouge. And I am NOT worried for any of them, because I know about this stuff, in depth.
I can't agree that it is a "good outlet". People have committed suicide because of this mis-informtion. I'm sure that the added levels of un-necessary stress will trigger some heart attacks and strokes that wouldn't have happened otherwise.
But your extra points are good. Some I knew about (the degradation), but the one about the LSU research on the crude-CoRexit mistures is new to me. Not unexpected, but nice to know the research has already been done.
Point taken. I meant *good outlet* as in *it works for them*. It is tragic that someone committed suicide because they believed the GOM was irreparably damaged.
The lab experiment described in the video is, as the scientist admitted, not a real world situation. It also was a worst case scenario. The one really negative finding was that a worm on which the shrimp feed was killed by crude, crude+Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9500 even 6 months out. I gathered they put fresh worms into the aged mixtures to get that finding. However, he points out it was done in a flask and that “we just have to see how it turns out”, since adding dispersant in a contained environment without wave action, rain, wind, current, microbes or depth of the water column is not an accurate reflection of the Gulf, per se. The experiment was meant to roughly mimic a floating fresh water marsh. He points out that scale, temperature and real life conditions could make a difference.
They were also using tiny animals. Fish were evidently more robust, but, it seems to me that the tiny crustaceans and worms used could be more sensitive than larger varieties. Still, in areas with less than the 75% coverage they used, survival even of the miniature animals could possibly be improved.
There is one other video titled Corexit Safer Than Dish Soap, but a sampling of the other videos listed on the right of the You Tube screen showed nothing but allegations, innuendo and fearmongering.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BEm6NM2r2c&feature=related
charts at about 2:21
“CoRexit 9527 is not used and has not been used to treat the spill.”
WW.... that’s not what the NALCO website says:
“COREXIT 9500 is the sole product we have been making for Gulf responders since the spill began. Limited quantities of COREXIT 9527 may have been drawn from existing dispersant stockpiles from around the world. COREXIT 9500 does not include the ingredient 2-butoxy ethanol, an ingredient in COREXIT 9527.
Both COREXIT dispersants have been approved by the EPA as part of the National Contingency Plan for treating oil spills.”....
http://www.nalco.com/news-and-events/4297.htm
According to NALCO Corexit 9527 HAS been used in the spill and we have no way of knowing how much was used. NALCO has been slick in their wording...they refer to Corexit dispersant(S(plural)) being used.... claiming that 9500 is the only product they’ve been ‘making’/’manufacturing’ for use... while failing to mention use of existing 9527!....maybe they should have scrubbed this from their website:
“COREXIT 9500 is the sole product we have been making for Gulf responders since the spill began. Limited quantities of COREXIT 9527 may have been drawn from existing dispersant stockpiles from around the world. COREXIT 9500 does not include the ingredient 2-butoxy ethanol, an ingredient in COREXIT 9527.
Both COREXIT dispersants have been approved by the EPA as part of the National Contingency Plan for treating oil spills.”
According to NALCO Corexit 9527 HAS been used in the spill and we have no way of knowing how much was used. NALCO has been slick in their wording...they refer to Corexit dispersant(S(plural)) being used.... claiming that 9500 is the only product they’ve been ‘making’/’manufacturing’ for use... while failing to mention use of existing 9527!....maybe they should have scrubbed this from their website:
“COREXIT 9500 is the sole product we have been making for Gulf responders since the spill began. Limited quantities of COREXIT 9527 may have been drawn from existing dispersant stockpiles from around the world. COREXIT 9500 does not include the ingredient 2-butoxy ethanol, an ingredient in COREXIT 9527.
Both COREXIT dispersants have been approved by the EPA as part of the National Contingency Plan for treating oil spills.”
http://www.nalco.com/news-and-events/4297.htm
2-Butoxy Ethanol Risk Evaluation
Glycol alkyl ethers are commonly used as solvents. 2-Butoxy Ethanol is one of the most toxic of the glycol ethers.
You should use products containing butoxyethanol with extreme care. It is a poison that can easily absorb through your skin to harm you. When working with it, always wear gloves and goggles and be sure the you have enough ventilation.
HAZARD SUMMARY [1]
# 2-Butoxy Ethanol can affect you when breathed in and by passing through your skin.
# Exposure can irritate the eyes, nose, and throat. Higher exposures may cause you to become dizzy, lightheaded, and to pass out.
# Contact can burn the eyes.
# High or repeated exposure can break down red blood cells, and cause anemia. It can also damage the liver and kidneys.
# Breathing the vapor can irritate the lungs and cause a build-up of fluid (pulmonary edema). This can cause death.
Acute Health Effects
The following acute (short-term) health effects may occur immediately or shortly after exposure to 2-Butoxy Ethanol:
# High exposures may cause you to become dizzy, lightheaded, and to pass out.
# 2-Butoxy Ethanol can break down red blood cells. This can cause a low blood count (anemia). It may also damage the liver and kidneys.
# Breathing Ethanol can break down red blood cells. This can cause a low blood count (anemia). It may also damage the liver and kidneys.
# The liquid can cause eye burns and may cause temporary blurred vision. It may also irritate the skin, causing a rash or burning feeling on contact.
# Exposure to the vapor can irritate the eyes, nose, mouth, and throat.
Chronic Health Effects
The following chronic (long-term) health effects can occur at some time after exposure to 2-Butoxy Ethanol and can last for months or years:
Cancer Hazard - According to the information presently available to the New Jersey Department of Health, 2-Butoxy Ethanol has not been tested for its ability to cause cancer in animals.
Reproductive Hazard - According to the information presently available to the New Jersey Department of Health, 2-Butoxy Ethanol has not been tested for its ability to adversely affect reproduction.
Other Long-Term Effects - Long-term exposure can cause the breakdown of red blood cells, resulting in anemia. 2-Butoxy Ethanol may damage the liver and kidneys. Very irritating substances may affect the lungs. It is not known whether 2-Butoxy Ethanol causes lung damage.
http://www.westp2net.org/janitorial/tools/butoxy.htm
The more important point is that BOTH products have been APPROVED by the EPA for use in this situation, which would NOT have been done if either product were as toxic as they are being made out to be. You can quote MSDS's for all you're worth, and scare a lot of people, some even to the point that they commit suicide, but you cannot change the truth, which is that nobody is going to die from being exposed to EITHER Corexit.
Thank you for posting your bona fides and your reassurances. :~) It’s much appreciated by this FReeper.
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.
