After literally thousands upon thousands of Gulf seafood such as oysters, shrimp and fish having been tested, not one has failed a test searching for Corexit or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), the latter of which could cause cancer, according to BP's (NYSE:BP) COO for the Gulf Coast Restoration Organization, Mike Utsler.
That said, Utsler added they're working with state agencies in the Gulf to improve testing, as well as creating standardized testing to be used going forward.
"The important thing is to define a standard baseline since that’s not something that’s been tested before — what’s the baseline is for the potential presence of this product, Corexit, a surfactant used in many differing types of substances such as toothpaste, baby shampoo, and the same base product found in discharges of the Mississippi and other rivers," Utsler said.
To generate confidence in Gulf seafood, chief enforcement officer for the Marine Resources Division, Major Chris Blankenship, said chemical and sensory analysis will continue.
Showing posts with label Corexit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corexit. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
FDA Now Saying BP's (NYSE:BP) Corexit Use Safe
The FDA has raised such a public outcry to BP's (NYSE:BP) use of the chemical Corexit. Now they've changed their tune saying there's very little contamination from the massive use of the dispersant. Something seems a little "fishy" here.
The FDA says that they have determined that Corexit has a low potential for bioconcentration in seafood species. "Although seafood is exposed to the dispersant, the inherent properties of the dispersants minimize the possibility of their being present in food. There is no information at this time to indicate that they pose a public health threat from exposure through the consumption of seafood," said Ed Markey who sits on the House Energy and Environment subcommittee.
The United States Food and Drug administration is also jumping on board saying the dispersants should not show up in seafood and effect humans. It seems hard to believe that with close to 2 million gallons of the toxic dispersant Corexit deposited into our oceans, that everybody is now taking a passive stance on the issue.
The FDA says that they have determined that Corexit has a low potential for bioconcentration in seafood species. "Although seafood is exposed to the dispersant, the inherent properties of the dispersants minimize the possibility of their being present in food. There is no information at this time to indicate that they pose a public health threat from exposure through the consumption of seafood," said Ed Markey who sits on the House Energy and Environment subcommittee.
The United States Food and Drug administration is also jumping on board saying the dispersants should not show up in seafood and effect humans. It seems hard to believe that with close to 2 million gallons of the toxic dispersant Corexit deposited into our oceans, that everybody is now taking a passive stance on the issue.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Whistle Blower: BP (NYSE:BP) Deliberately Sinks Oil With Corexit
While talk has died down on BP's (NYSE:BP) massive use of Corexit, and the company deliberately ignoring the EPA's orders to find a different dispersant. A whistle blower will be testifying in front of a Senate investigative panel this week. He is expected to reveal the full extent of BP's cover up and prove what many have suspected all along.
Fred McCallister will be testifying on Thursday of this week. He will be telling of BP's deliberate sinking of oil through the extensive use of the toxic dispersant Corexit. The purpose, to hide the amount of the oil spilled before it can be collected to prevent the fines that BP would incur.
McCallister's statements will include answers to why BP has continually refused help from foreign skimmers. He said that the company feared that the skimmers would have the capability to give the actual count of gallons collected. That information turned over to the U.S. Government, having the information on spill rate financial penalties, would cause BP to receive the accurate fines according to the oil spilled.
"BP is in control of this situation and they are doing what's in the best interests of BP and their shareholders," said McCallister.
Fred McCallister will be testifying on Thursday of this week. He will be telling of BP's deliberate sinking of oil through the extensive use of the toxic dispersant Corexit. The purpose, to hide the amount of the oil spilled before it can be collected to prevent the fines that BP would incur.
McCallister's statements will include answers to why BP has continually refused help from foreign skimmers. He said that the company feared that the skimmers would have the capability to give the actual count of gallons collected. That information turned over to the U.S. Government, having the information on spill rate financial penalties, would cause BP to receive the accurate fines according to the oil spilled.
"BP is in control of this situation and they are doing what's in the best interests of BP and their shareholders," said McCallister.
Labels:
BP,
BP Coverup,
chemical dispersants,
Corexit,
oil spilled,
shareholders,
sinking oil,
skimmers,
Whistle Blower
BP's (NYSE:BP) Allen Approved Over 74 Exemptions For Chemical Use
While we are all aware of BP's (NYSE:BP) use of the toxic chemical Corexit, documents have brought to light the excessive use of the chemical despite the Environmental Protection Agency's order to not use it. The order was given by the EPA on May 26th.
The documents, released by a congressional subcommittee states that BP was ordered to use the chemical sparingly and rarely. Coast Guard officials ignored this order, and allowed the company to use hundreds of thousands of dispersants in the Gulf.
There are over 74 documented cases that show the Coast Guard giving exemptions for the use of the chemical, despite the order against it. The time frame was only 48 days that these massive amounts of dispersants were used. One of the documents show that BP was actually given the "OK" to use more chemicals then what was even requested.
Thad Allen, the retired Coast Guard admiral who is in charge of leading the oil spill cleanup efforts defended his decision. He said that the overall use of the chemical dispersants dropped significantly after the EPA's order. Although, on some days the amount of surface oil warranted a "tactical" decision to use them.
The documents, released by a congressional subcommittee states that BP was ordered to use the chemical sparingly and rarely. Coast Guard officials ignored this order, and allowed the company to use hundreds of thousands of dispersants in the Gulf.
There are over 74 documented cases that show the Coast Guard giving exemptions for the use of the chemical, despite the order against it. The time frame was only 48 days that these massive amounts of dispersants were used. One of the documents show that BP was actually given the "OK" to use more chemicals then what was even requested.
Thad Allen, the retired Coast Guard admiral who is in charge of leading the oil spill cleanup efforts defended his decision. He said that the overall use of the chemical dispersants dropped significantly after the EPA's order. Although, on some days the amount of surface oil warranted a "tactical" decision to use them.
Labels:
BP,
chemical dispersants,
Coast guard,
Corexit,
EPA,
Gulf,
oil spill cleanup,
Thad Allen
Monday, July 19, 2010
BP (NYSE:BP) Kills Whale Skimmer With Dispersants
There has been much controversy surrounding BP's (NYSE:BP) use of the toxic dispersant Corexit, it's proving to kill off more than just marine life. The U.S. coastguard has deemed the Taiwanese skimmer called "A Whale" ineffective.
Due to the massive amounts of dispersants distributed into the Gulf, it broke up the oil resulting in "A Whale" not being able to properly skim the water for oil. There was a lot of optimistic hope that it would greatly assist in the removal of the toxic crude. During its testing it only removed minuscule amounts of oil.
Bob Grantham, TMT offshore spokesman said, "This ship demonstrated that it can bring substantial volumes of capacity to bear in addressing oil spills quickly and with great maneuverability. That said, the particular conditions present in the Macondo spill did not afford the vessel to recover a significant amount of oil. Due to the highly dispersed nature of oil in the Gulf."
Due to the massive amounts of dispersants distributed into the Gulf, it broke up the oil resulting in "A Whale" not being able to properly skim the water for oil. There was a lot of optimistic hope that it would greatly assist in the removal of the toxic crude. During its testing it only removed minuscule amounts of oil.
Bob Grantham, TMT offshore spokesman said, "This ship demonstrated that it can bring substantial volumes of capacity to bear in addressing oil spills quickly and with great maneuverability. That said, the particular conditions present in the Macondo spill did not afford the vessel to recover a significant amount of oil. Due to the highly dispersed nature of oil in the Gulf."
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
BP: (NYSE:BP) We'll Reduce Use By 50-80 % Of Corexit
BP (NYSE:BP) continues its use of the dispersant Corexit, ignoring the EPA and federal government. BP says it will reduce the amount of Corexit it is currently using in the Gulf. Serious questions are being raised on the effects this chemical will have long term on wildlife and humans.
Due to BP's continued excuses and lack of action, the EPA is setting up its own research and testing in their lab in Gulf Breeze, FL. The purpose of this testing will be to find a less toxic dispersant that can aid in the safe breakup of the oil. Among these is included, a biodegradable tests and well as toxicity testing.
Lisa Jackson, the EPA Administrator said she meet with BP officials Sunday night to get the company to cut back on it use of the chemical dispersant. She feels confident that there will be a 50 - 80 percent reduction over the next few days as they proceed with their testing.
This reduction will mainly be on the surface. Jackson said, putting the dispersant directly into the stream of oil underwater has proven to be far less toxic and more effective than it's effects on the top of the water.
Due to BP's continued excuses and lack of action, the EPA is setting up its own research and testing in their lab in Gulf Breeze, FL. The purpose of this testing will be to find a less toxic dispersant that can aid in the safe breakup of the oil. Among these is included, a biodegradable tests and well as toxicity testing.
Lisa Jackson, the EPA Administrator said she meet with BP officials Sunday night to get the company to cut back on it use of the chemical dispersant. She feels confident that there will be a 50 - 80 percent reduction over the next few days as they proceed with their testing.
This reduction will mainly be on the surface. Jackson said, putting the dispersant directly into the stream of oil underwater has proven to be far less toxic and more effective than it's effects on the top of the water.
Labels:
BP,
chemicals,
Corexit,
dispersants,
EPA,
testing,
toxic dispersants,
wildlife
Saturday, May 22, 2010
EPA May Allow BP's (NYSE:BP) Corexit Use
On Thursday, the EPA had given BP (NYSE:BP) 24 hours to pick a less toxic dispersant, and 72 hours to start using it. Now today, they told ABC News that they may allow BP to continue the use of Corexit, the dispersant that they deemed far to toxic.
Apparently, the EPA has done some testing and said that Corexit has killed up to 25 percent of organisms living 500 feet down where the dispersant was used.
As we are coming upon the 72 hour deadline, the EPA says there will be consequences for failing to meet it. The EPA will then demand to see the records of BP's research, including proof that it
sufficiently investigated other dispersant options, as well as the explanation of why each one was not chosen. That was the extent EPA would comment on the full consequences of failing to meet the deadline.
Adora Andy, EPA spokeswoman told ABC News, "it's not that Corexit is banned, it's not that they have to stop using it because they're using it right now. But it's just that they need to switch over."
Apparently, the EPA has done some testing and said that Corexit has killed up to 25 percent of organisms living 500 feet down where the dispersant was used.
As we are coming upon the 72 hour deadline, the EPA says there will be consequences for failing to meet it. The EPA will then demand to see the records of BP's research, including proof that it
sufficiently investigated other dispersant options, as well as the explanation of why each one was not chosen. That was the extent EPA would comment on the full consequences of failing to meet the deadline.
Adora Andy, EPA spokeswoman told ABC News, "it's not that Corexit is banned, it's not that they have to stop using it because they're using it right now. But it's just that they need to switch over."
Labels:
ABC,
BP Oil,
consequences,
Corexit,
EPA,
toxic dispersants
Friday, May 21, 2010
BP (NYSE:BP) Says There's No Better Dispersant Alternative
A BP (NYSE:BP) executive adamantly insists that there's no better dispersant for the pollution cleanup. Not to mention the dispersant that the EPA is now demanding be replaced, was approved by the Unified Command, the national guard, as well as the EPA.
It is an approved product and is effective in the pollution cleanup. Doug Suttles, BP's chief operating officer stated on Good Morning America, "it's making a difference in this fight to try and keep this stuff from coming to shore."
Suttles also stated, BP intents to continue looking for a better alternative but, "right now we cannot identify another product that is available that's better than Corexit." This statement leaves many wondering if BP will comply with the deadline the EPA has given it.
BP said in a statement to ABC News, the chemical is "one of the most well studied dispersants." It's choice of the use of Corexit was based partially on being able to "get a sufficient supply to meet our needs on a short notice."
It is an approved product and is effective in the pollution cleanup. Doug Suttles, BP's chief operating officer stated on Good Morning America, "it's making a difference in this fight to try and keep this stuff from coming to shore."
Suttles also stated, BP intents to continue looking for a better alternative but, "right now we cannot identify another product that is available that's better than Corexit." This statement leaves many wondering if BP will comply with the deadline the EPA has given it.
BP said in a statement to ABC News, the chemical is "one of the most well studied dispersants." It's choice of the use of Corexit was based partially on being able to "get a sufficient supply to meet our needs on a short notice."
Labels:
BP Oil,
Corexit,
dispersants,
enviromental disaster,
EPA,
pollution cleanup
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Nalco (NYSE:NLC) Gets Knocked by EPA
Nalco (NYSE:NLC) had a good thing going while it lasted, as its highly effective chemical dispersant Corexit, which was used to battle the oil spill by BP (NYSE:BP), has now been ordered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to stop being used, as they caved in to pressure from radical environmentalist and "scientists" because of unproven, theoretical ideas it could cause more harm to the ecosystem at some future time.
I guess they'd rather allow harm to the ocean and marine animals and life today, which is provable harm, than to take a chance that some theoretical thing will happen in some distant future.
As far as it affects Nalco, it's unclear whether or not they'll provide some less effective oil dispersant or not. BP did order huge amounts of the original dispersant, which was a great boon to Nalco, greatly increasing that particular segment of the company; although it did only account for about 1 percent of their revenue until the oil accident.
With that in mind, the 5.26 percent drop in the share price of the company, or $1.26 drop today was unwarranted, and shouldn't cause much damage to their bottom line, and it could improve if they have what is being called a less-toxic chemical dispersant to offer.
This was a cowardly and ridiculous response by the EPA, and they should have ignored it, as there were tests done before the dispersant was used, and they, the Coast Guard and BP all concluded Corexit was safe.
I guess they'd rather allow harm to the ocean and marine animals and life today, which is provable harm, than to take a chance that some theoretical thing will happen in some distant future.
As far as it affects Nalco, it's unclear whether or not they'll provide some less effective oil dispersant or not. BP did order huge amounts of the original dispersant, which was a great boon to Nalco, greatly increasing that particular segment of the company; although it did only account for about 1 percent of their revenue until the oil accident.
With that in mind, the 5.26 percent drop in the share price of the company, or $1.26 drop today was unwarranted, and shouldn't cause much damage to their bottom line, and it could improve if they have what is being called a less-toxic chemical dispersant to offer.
This was a cowardly and ridiculous response by the EPA, and they should have ignored it, as there were tests done before the dispersant was used, and they, the Coast Guard and BP all concluded Corexit was safe.
BP (NYSE:BP) Has Used 655,000 Gallons Of Now Banned Chemicals
BP (NYSE:BP) has dispersed a minimum of 655,000 chemicals in the Gulf that are now banned. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, this is the largest application of dispersant's every used in the history of oil spills.
The two dispersant's being used are from a line called Corexit, both these dispersant's were banned from use on oil spills in the U.K. over 10 years ago due to the failure of their toxicity tests. What's actually used is kept secret by manufactures, the EPA said they are required by law to protect this information.
Corexit had been on the approved list of dispersant's put out by the EPA despite them being more toxic and less effective. A version of Corexit was used on the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989, it was linked later to human health problems. Nervous system, kidney, liver, blood, and respiratory problems are just some of the related health problems due to Corexit.
BP has been asked to switch to less toxic dispersant's within 72 hours.
The two dispersant's being used are from a line called Corexit, both these dispersant's were banned from use on oil spills in the U.K. over 10 years ago due to the failure of their toxicity tests. What's actually used is kept secret by manufactures, the EPA said they are required by law to protect this information.
Corexit had been on the approved list of dispersant's put out by the EPA despite them being more toxic and less effective. A version of Corexit was used on the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989, it was linked later to human health problems. Nervous system, kidney, liver, blood, and respiratory problems are just some of the related health problems due to Corexit.
BP has been asked to switch to less toxic dispersant's within 72 hours.
Labels:
BP,
chemicals,
Corexit,
dispersant's,
EPA,
Exxon Valdez,
health problems,
toxic chemicals
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)