-
A catastrophe is afoot in the Gulf of Mexico, for the birds and other marine life. The oil rig which exploded, and is now leaking greater amounts of oil every day, blackens the sea in an age wherein the technology is still nonexistent to clean it up.
Hurricane season is just around the corner to boot - it seems a fair prediction that the shore birds are going to be inundated with oil.
The Gulf Coast is nothing if not teeming with bird life.
-
Gulf oil spill could reach shore Thursday night
NEW ORLEANS – The edge of a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was expected to reach the Mississippi River delta by Thursday night and a new technique to break up the oil a mile underwater could be tried, officials said.
As of this morning, part of the slick was about 3 miles from the Louisiana shore, said National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration spokesman Charles Henry said. It's too late to stop some of the spill from reaching the coast, but BP PLC said it might attempt to break up some of the oil spewing from a blown-out a mile under water.
The company also has asked the Department of Defense if it can help with better underwater equipment than is available commercially, said BP PLC chief operating officer Doug Suttles.
In addition, he said the company has been reviewing research on using chemical to break up the oil, which has been done before, but never at these depths. The well is almost a mile underwater off the Louisiana shore.
U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry called it "a novel, absolutely novel idea."
Meanwhile, Louisiana Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal declared a state of emergency and announced that BP had agreed to allow local fishermen to assist in the expected cleanup. Under the agreement, shrimpers and fishermen could be contracted by BP to help. Jindal said the state was also training prison inmates to help clean up wildlife harmed by oil slicks moving toward shore.
The federal government sent in skimmers and booms Thursday. BP operated the rig that exploded and sank 50 miles offshore last week, which led to the spill, and is directing the cleanup and trying to stop the leak.
If the chemical technique is approved, work could start tonight, Suttles said.
"We want to pursue every technique we can find," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100429/ap_on_bi_ge/us_louisiana_oil_rig_explosion
-
Yep - been hearing about this. Some saying it's in control, or not too serious, and others saying it will be the worst oil spill disaster for a century.
-
I'm all for these reports being exaggerations.
Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez
Burdeau And Holbrook Mohr, Associated Press Writers – 2 mins ago
MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER – Faint fingers of oily sheen have reached the mouth of Mississippi River, the vanguard of a massive spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
The slick is making its way toward a delicate environment of birds, marine life and some of the nation's richest seafood grounds.
By sunset Thursday, the oil had creeped into South Pass of the river and was lapping at the shoreline in long, thin lines.
Booms in place to protect grasslands and sandy beaches are being over topped by 5-foot waves of oily water in choppy seas.
In the distance, the lights of the fleet of boats working to keep more of the crude oil away from the coast were outlined in the dying twilight.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
VENICE, La. (AP) — An oil spill that threatened to eclipse even the Exxon Valdez disaster spread out of control and drifted inexorably toward the Gulf Coast on Thursday as fishermen rushed to scoop up shrimp and crews spread floating barriers around marshes.
The spill was both bigger and closer than imagined — five times larger than first estimated, with the leading edge just three miles from the Louisiana shore. Authorities said it could reach the Mississippi River delta by Thursday night.
"It is of grave concern," David Kennedy of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told The Associated Press. "I am frightened. This is a very, very big thing. And the efforts that are going to be required to do anything about it, especially if it continues on, are just mind-boggling."
The oil slick could become the nation's worst environmental disaster in decades, threatening hundreds of species of fish, birds and other wildlife along the Gulf Coast, one of the world's richest seafood grounds, teeming with shrimp, oysters and other marine life.
The leak from the ocean floor proved to be far bigger than initially reported, contributing to a growing sense among many in Louisiana that the government failed them again, just as it did during Hurricane Katrina. President Barack Obama dispatched Cabinet officials to deal with the crisis.
Cade Thomas, a fishing guide in Venice, worried that his livelihood will be destroyed. He said he did not know whether to blame the Coast Guard, the federal government or oil company BP PLC.
"They lied to us. They came out and said it was leaking 1,000 barrels when I think they knew it was more. And they weren't proactive," he said. "As soon as it blew up, they should have started wrapping it with booms."
The Coast Guard worked with BP, which operated the oil rig that exploded and sank last week, to deploy floating booms, skimmers and chemical dispersants, and set controlled fires to burn the oil off the water's surface.
The Coast Guard urged the company to formally request more resources from the Defense Department. A BP executive said the corporation would "take help from anyone."
Government officials said the blown-out well 40 miles offshore is spewing five times as much oil into the water as originally estimated — about 5,000 barrels, or 200,000 gallons, a day.
At that rate, the spill could easily eclipse the worst oil spill in U.S. history — the 11 million gallons that leaked from the grounded tanker Exxon Valdez in Alaska's Prince William Sound in 1989 — in the three months it could take to drill a relief well and plug the gushing well 5,000 feet underwater on the sea floor.
Ultimately, the spill could grow much larger than the Valdez because Gulf of Mexico wells typically hold many times more oil than a single tanker.
Doug Suttles, chief operating officer for BP Exploration and Production, had initially disputed the government's larger estimate. But he later acknowledged on NBC's "Today" show that the leak may be as bad as federal officials say. He said there was no way to measure the flow at the seabed, so estimates have to come from how much oil rises to the surface.
Mike Brewer, 40, who lost his oil spill response company in the devastation of Hurricane Katrina nearly five years ago, said the area was accustomed to the occasional minor spill. But he feared the scale of the escaping oil was beyond the capacity of existing resources.
"You're pumping out a massive amount of oil. There is no way to stop it," he said.
An emergency shrimping season was opened to allow shrimpers to scoop up their catch before it is fouled by oil. Cannons were to be used to scare off birds. And shrimpers were being lined up to use their boats as makeshift skimmers in the shallows.
This murky water and the oysters in it have provided a livelihood for three generations of Frank and Mitch Jurisich's family in Empire, La.
Now, on the open water just beyond the marshes, they can smell the oil that threatens everything they know and love.
"Just smelling it, it puts more of a sense of urgency, a sense of fear," Frank Jurisich said.
The brothers hope to get all the oysters they can sell before the oil washes ashore. They filled more than 100 burlap sacks Thursday and stopped to eat some oysters. "This might be our last day," Mitch Jurisich said.
Without the fishing industry, Frank Jurisich said the family "would be lost. This is who we are and what we do."
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal declared a state of emergency Thursday so officials could begin preparing for the oil's impact. He said at least 10 wildlife management areas and refuges in his state and neighboring Mississippi are in the oil plume's path.
The declaration also noted that billions of dollars have been invested in coastal restoration projects that may be at risk.
As dawn broke Thursday in the oil industry hub of Venice, about 75 miles from New Orleans and not far from the mouth of the Mississippi River, crews loaded an orange oil boom aboard a supply boat at Bud's Boat Launch. There, local officials expressed frustration with the pace of the government's response and the communication they were getting from the Coast Guard and BP officials.
"We're not doing everything we can do," said Billy Nungesser, president of Plaquemines Parish, which straddles the Mississippi River at the tip of Louisiana.
Tension was growing in towns like Port Sulphur and Empire along Louisiana Highway 23, which runs south of New Orleans along the Mississippi River into prime oyster and shrimping waters.
Companies like Chevron and ConocoPhillips have facilities nearby, and some residents are hesitant to criticize BP or the federal government, knowing the oil industry is as much a staple here as fishing.
"I don't think there's a lot of blame going around here. People are just concerned about their livelihoods," said Sullivan Vullo, who owns La Casa Cafe in Port Sulphur.
A federal class-action lawsuit was filed late Wednesday on behalf of two commercial shrimpers from Louisiana, Acy J. Cooper Jr. and Ronnie Louis Anderson.
The suit seeks at least $5 million in compensatory damages plus an unspecified amount of punitive damages against Transocean, BP, Halliburton Energy Services Inc. and Cameron International Corp.
In Buras, La., where Hurricane Katrina made landfall in 2005, the owner of the Black Velvet Oyster Bar & Grill couldn't keep his eyes off the television. News and weather shows were making projections that oil would soon inundate the coastal wetlands where his family has worked since the 1860s.
It was as though a hurricane was approaching, maybe worse.
"A hurricane is like closing your bank account for a few days, but this here has the capacity to destroy our bank accounts," said Byron Marinovitch, 47.
"We're really disgusted," he added. "We don't believe anything coming out of BP's mouth."
Signs of the 2005 hurricane are still apparent here: There are schools, homes, churches and restaurants operating out of trailers, and across from Marinovitch's bar is a wood frame house abandoned since the storm.
A fleet of boats working under an oil industry consortium has been using booms to corral and then skim oil from the surface.
The Coast Guard abandoned a plan Wednesday to set fire to the leaking oil after sea conditions deteriorated. The attempt to burn some of the oil came after crews operating submersible robots failed to activate a shut-off device that would halt the flow of oil.
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was briefed Thursday on the issue, said his spokesman, Capt. John Kirby. But Kirby said the Defense Department has received no request for help, nor is it doing any detailed planning for any mission on the oil spill.
Obama dispatched Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson to help with the spill. The president said the White House would use "every single available resource" to respond.
Obama has directed officials to aggressively confront the spill, but the cost of the cleanup will fall on BP, White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100430/ap_on_bi_ge/us_louisiana_oil_rig_explosion
-
This sucks guys.
-
Definitely.
-
New York Times Oil Slick Map (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/04/28/us/20100428-spill-map.html)
Gulf coast oil spill potential disaster for birds
Organizations such as the Audubon Society are gearing up to help in a possible epic crisis in the gulf coast as the almost 100 mile long oil spill edges near important bird sensitive areas. The oil spill is so large that it can be seem from space from a NASA satellite. If the spill reaches the coast it will be disastrous for birds and other wildlife.
At risk are the: Chandeleur Islands IBA; Gulf Islands National Seashore IBA in Louisiana and Mississippi; and the Active Delta IBA in Louisiana, which includes Delta National Wildlife Refuge and Pass-a-Loutre Wildlife Management Area. The brown pelican, many species of terns, shorebirds, herons, egrets, marsh birds, ocean dwelling birds, songbirds, and migratory birds are in peril. Unfortunately this time of years is also nesting and spawning season as well.
There are possible long term consequences to the eco system if the oil gets into marshes and wetlands causing disastrous impact on birds and other wildlife. The International Bird Rescue Research Center has been put on alert to help organize volunteers and help oiled birds in need.
Audubon Map of Important Bird Areas (http://louisianacoast.audubon.org/birds-science-education/important-bird-areas/important-bird-areas-map)
Oil Slick from Rig Collapse Seen from Space
By LiveScience Staff
26 April 2010 04:40 pm ET
The oil slick that is expanding from the site of an oil rig collapse last week has been spotted from space by a NASA satellite.
An estimated 42,000 gallons of oil per day are leaking from an oil well in the Gulf of Mexico after an oil rig caught fire and then sank into the ocean waters last week.
The only oil evident in the water at first was that which had been on the rig itself at the time it exploded on April 20. Over the weekend, officials working on the oil spill discovered that water was also leaking from the pipe that led up to the rig from the well some 5,000 feet (1,524 meters) below on the seafloor.
NASA's Aqua satellite took a photograph of the affected area on Sunday, April 25, in which the oil slick — which currently covers an area 48 miles long (77 kilometers) and 39 miles wide (63 km), according to news reports — can be seen.
The Mississippi Delta is the center of the image, and the oil slick is a silvery swirl in the lower right. The oil slick may be particularly obvious because it is occurring in the sunlit area, where the mirror-like reflection of the sun off the water gives the Gulf of Mexico a washed-out look.
The slick may contain dispersants or other chemicals that emergency responders are using to control the spread of the oil, and it is unknown how much of the 700,000 gallons of fuel that were on the oil rig burned in the fire and how much may have spilled into the water when the platform sank.
An emergency response effort is underway to stop the flow of oil and contain the existing slick before it reaches wildlife refuges and beaches in Louisiana and Mississippi.
The oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico that resulted from the explosion and collapse of an oil rig can be seen in this image from NASA's Aqua satellite. At left is the Mississippi Delta. The slick is the lighter colored area in the lower right. Credit: MODIS Rapid Response Team
IMAGE ATTACHED
-
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2564/4142645558_e4c0169d2d.jpg)
-
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2515/3988587245_efc65b0d22_b.jpg)
2008
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3498/4021995869_2be87ec4d8_b.jpg)
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3117/2676083440_2414729330.jpg)
Reddish Egret Dancing
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3595/3687862951_cb1d335f0f.jpg)
Roseate Spoonbills
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4039/4330837277_32ea49e5b9.jpg)
Royal Tern
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2603/3666374707_6577370f8b.jpg)
Snowy Egrets
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2426/3650164547_066484d268.jpg)
Little Blue Heron
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2478/3639533041_877c6efd4a.jpg)
Cattle Egrets
-
Pelicans, otters along La. shore in path of spill
Cain Burdeau, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 17 mins ago
MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER – Migrating birds and those along the shoreline, nesting pelicans and even river otters and mink along Louisiana's fragile islands and barrier marshes are the first in the path of a massive Gulf of Mexico oil spill that was starting to ooze ashore.
The leak from a blown-out well a mile underwater is five times bigger than first believed. Faint fingers of oily sheen were reaching the Mississippi River delta late Thursday, lapping the Louisiana shoreline in long, thin lines. Thicker oil was about five miles offshore. Officials have said they would do everything to keep the Mississippi River open to traffic.
The oil slick could become the nation's worst environmental disaster in decades, threatening to eclipse even the Exxon Valdez in scope. It imperils hundreds of species of fish, birds and other wildlife along the Gulf Coast, one of the world's richest seafood grounds, teeming with shrimp, oysters and other marine life.
"It is of grave concern," David Kennedy of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told The Associated Press about the spill. "I am frightened. This is a very, very big thing. And the efforts that are going to be required to do anything about it, especially if it continues on, are just mind-boggling."
Oil clumps seabirds' feathers, leaving them without insulation — and when they preen, they swallow it. Prolonged contact with the skin can cause burns, said Nils Warnock, a spill recovery supervisor with the California Oiled Wildlife Care Network at the University of California. Oil swallowed by animals can cause anemia, hemorrhaging and other problems, said Jay Holcomb, executive director of the International Bird Rescue Research Center in California.
The spewing oil — about 210,000 gallons a day — comes from a well drilled by the rig Deepwater Horizon, which exploded in flames April 20 and sank two days later. BP PLC was operating the rig that was owned by Transocean Ltd. The Coast Guard is working with BP to deploy floating booms, skimmers and chemical dispersants, and set controlled fires to burn the oil off the water's surface.
Protective boom has been set out on Breton Island, where colonial species such as pelicans, gulls and skimmers nest, and at the sandy tips of the passes from the Mississippi River's birdfoot delta, said Robert Love, a state wildlife official.
The leak from the ocean floor proved to be far bigger than initially reported, contributing to a growing sense among some in Louisiana that the government failed them again, just as it did during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. President Barack Obama dispatched Cabinet officials to deal with the crisis.
Cade Thomas, a fishing guide in Venice, worried that his livelihood will be destroyed. He said he did not know whether to blame the Coast Guard, the government or BP.
"They lied to us. They came out and said it was leaking 1,000 barrels when I think they knew it was more. And they weren't proactive," he said. "As soon as it blew up, they should have started wrapping it with booms."
Government officials said the well 40 miles offshore is spewing about 5,000 barrels, or 200,000 gallons, a day into the gulf.
At that rate, the spill could eclipse the worst oil spill in U.S. history — the 11 million gallons that leaked from the grounded tanker Exxon Valdez in Alaska's Prince William Sound in 1989 — in the three months it could take to drill a relief well and plug the gushing well 5,000 feet underwater on the sea floor. Ultimately, the spill could grow much larger than the Valdez because Gulf of Mexico wells tap deposits that hold many times more oil than a single tanker.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was focusing on national wildlife refuges on a chain of barrier islands.
"We're trying to go for the ones where the pelicans are nesting right now," said Tom McKenzie, the agency's regional spokesman, adding that about 900 were on North Breton.
About 34,000 birds have been counted in the national refuges most at risk, McKenzie said. Gulls, pelicans, roseate spoonbills, egrets, shore birds, terns and blue herons are in the path of the spill.
Mink and river otter also live in the delta and might eat oiled carcasses, said Robert Love, head of the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries' coastal and nongame division.
Bird rescuer Holcomb worked the Valdez disaster and was headed to Louisiana. He said some birds may avoid the oil spill, but others won't.
"These are experiences that the birds haven't encountered before," he said. "They might think it's seaweed. It's never harmed them before."
BP has requested more resources from the Defense Department, especially underwater equipment that might be better than what is commercially available. A BP executive said the corporation would "take help from anyone." That includes fishermen who could be hired to help deploy containment boom.
An emergency shrimping season was opened to allow shrimpers to scoop up their catch before it is fouled by oil.
This murky water and the oysters in it have provided a livelihood for three generations of Frank and Mitch Jurisich's family in Empire, La.
Now, on the open water just beyond the marshes, they can smell the oil that threatens everything they know and love.
"Just smelling it, it puts more of a sense of urgency, a sense of fear," Frank Jurisich said.
The brothers hope to get all the oysters they can sell before the oil washes ashore. They filled more than 100 burlap sacks Thursday and stopped to eat some oysters. "This might be our last day," Mitch Jurisich said.
Without the fishing industry, Frank Jurisich said the family "would be lost. This is who we are and what we do."
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal declared a state of emergency so officials could begin preparing for the oil's impact. He also asked the federal government if he could call up 6,000 National Guard troops to help.
In Buras, La., where Hurricane Katrina made landfall in 2005, the owner of the Black Velvet Oyster Bar & Grill couldn't keep his eyes off the television. News and weather shows were making projections that oil would soon inundate the coastal wetlands where his family has worked since the 1860s.
"A hurricane is like closing your bank account for a few days, but this here has the capacity to destroy our bank accounts," said Byron Marinovitch, 47.
"We're really disgusted," he added. "We don't believe anything coming out of BP's mouth."
Mike Brewer, 40, who lost his oil spill response company in the devastation of Hurricane Katrina nearly five years ago, said the area was accustomed to the occasional minor spill. But he feared the scale of the escaping oil was beyond the capacity of existing resources.
"You're pumping out a massive amount of oil. There is no way to stop it," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100430/ap_on_bi_ge/us_louisiana_oil_rig_explosion
-
Already the spill has encompassed "three times" the area which was initially predicted, and the rescue effort for oil-laden shorebirds has begun. The news here is going to get progressively worse, while some politicians are engaging in deliberate minimization. BP Oil thus far is just scratchng their head.
The good news about a hurricane or an earthquake is that they both stop: an oil spill will keep going on and on, especially when the authorities determine "it can't be stopped". So if you're of a mind to do so, say a prayer for the birds and animals, and for the humans who will be rescuing them - or cleaning their remains. It's a heart-wrenching event.
Gulf Coast birds in danger
By Frank Gill, Special to CNN
April 30, 2010 5:46 p.m. EDT
Editor's note: Frank Gill, PhD., is interim president of Audubon. Frank was Audubon's chief scientist until his retirement in 2005, and has been a member of Audubon's national board of directors. He is the author of a textbook, "Ornithology," and more than 150 scientific and popular articles.
(CNN) -- Humans have always looked to birds for joy, inspiration and comfort, but if we look toward the birds of the Gulf Coast today, we feel no comfort, only a deep and growing unease.
What began on April 20 with the horrific loss of 11 human lives in the explosion of the offshore oil rig Deepwater Horizon now threatens to become a devastating and far-reaching environmental disaster -- one that should shake the American people to our very core.
Hour by hour, a massive oil slick is spreading to the fragile coastal wetlands and barrier islands of the Mississippi River Delta in Louisiana. Coastal areas of Mississippi, Alabama and Florida are also at risk.
Birds are key indicators of the environment in which they -- and we -- live and eat and breathe. Their health or decline eventually mirrors our own, and the diagnosis this week isn't looking very good.
The spreading oil threatens "Important Bird Areas," sites identified by Audubon and other conservation experts as vital to the health or even the survival of entire species.
Coastal bird species -- graceful terns, gangly pelicans, peaceful plovers -- have everything to lose if the oil reaches them. It is breeding season for these year-round coastal denizens, and it is also peak migration season for millions of other birds headed north, right through the areas that may be hardest hit.
A host of well-known species are at risk, among them:
• Brown pelicans, the state bird of Louisiana, are incubating eggs on barrier islands. The species was removed from the endangered species list late last year -- a victory to be sure -- but nevertheless faces an uncertain future.
• Reddish egret, a tall, colorful bird that "dances" wildly in the surf as it hunts for prey, is a scarce denizen of warm, salty coasts.
• Royal terns, and several of their relatives, nest on beaches and dunes and catch small fish by executing spectacular plunge-dives into the waters of the Gulf. But a dive into oily water could prove deadly for these beautiful creatures.
• Mottled ducks, locally called "summer ducks" because they are the only ducks that breed along the Gulf Coast, living, feeding and nesting in coastal salt marshes where oil would have devastating consequences.
• Seaside sparrows, tiny and secretive marsh birds, will have nowhere to go if the salt marsh edges they frequent are destroyed by oil. They would simply fade away.
Why does it matter if birds are in trouble? Like most Americans, I believe that living things have intrinsic worth and should be celebrated and allowed to thrive. They add beauty and wonder to our world. But if that doesn't convince you, consider this: If birds are in trouble, so are we.
The problem is simply too big to contain. Birds and marine life will die. Sensitive habitats will be damaged. Industries and families will suffer. Cleanup will cost billions and take months or even years. Long-term recovery is uncertain.
We commend the federal, state and industry personnel who are working long hours in difficult and dangerous conditions attempting to stop and contain the spill. However, everyone shares the sickening realization that even heroic efforts probably will not be enough to avert significant environmental damage.
This disaster confronts us squarely with the risks to which we expose ourselves and our environment any time we drill for oil. As a nation, we must stop and consider what we've done, and what we will do tomorrow.
We must pause and reflect on what places can truly be considered "safe" for oil extraction, having the courage to recognize that in some, the risks are simply too great and the resources too precious to spoil. Elected representatives must keep the picture of this spreading catastrophe in mind as they consider the path to our energy future.
America's energy needs are great. But so is our concern for the people and nature imperiled by our addiction to fossil fuel. It's time to redouble our efforts to move toward a future powered by cleaner, renewable sources of energy that make the planet a safer place for us and all the life with which we share it. The images from the Gulf are tragic reminders that we cannot afford to wait.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Frank Gill.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/30/gill.audubon.oil/index.html
(He was too gentle, heh.)
-
Gulf oil spill swiftly balloons, could move east with the Jet Stream (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100502/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill)
-
Obama might have to dive in himself to satisfy Fox News.
It certainly is a grim event.
-
It's incredible that they can't switch that thing off.
I this age, that they have to manually move some gadget that won't budge.
I can only assume they have manipulated Congress to ensure they don't have to install electronic valves for exactly such emergencies.
Now they are talking about a month or three. Unbelievable.
Then I hear once the oil gets into the marshes, they will never be able to clean it up.
This is a perfect example, that the time for cowboys is over. Only responsibility and cooperation will serve us from this point forward.
-
I'm not going to post too many updates from here on : the news is horrendous, and gets worse, and takes on all nightmare proportions - not only for the Gulf, but for the East Coast USA. The pictures of the dead will begin to get posted all over the web.... I'm going to leave that to everyone's imagination. Only the living will get posted here, for visualization's sake.
But I'm very interested in 2 things, personally:
1.) What caused this accident - that is, the initial explosion, and is that cause related to the rumblings of the ocean floor - the same rumblings which caused the volcano to erupt in Iceland?
2.) What are the psychological effects of the whole thing on humans, especially in terms of suicidality?
-
The best hope is that the weather changes and blows it away from the coast.
In the ocean it causes little problem and breaks down without any interference. It's real damage is when it hits the shore, which it has done already I gather, although it could get much worse.
-
The jet stream will perform this task, already. My speculation is that what gets directed into the ocean will get blown back to shore during hurricane season.
-
I heard an expert in this area say that the oil degrades quite quickly in the open ocean.
Here is an interesting site:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/oil-spill-map.htm?loc=interstitialskip
I didn't realise how many oil rigs they had operating there - how this hasn't happened there before is amazing.
-
There's a congressman claiming that this is all merely like "chocolate milk", that the ocean will break it all up, that this is nothing to be concerned about. I would be cautious about believing this.
-
It is bad stuff - there is no getting away from that. The expert said that they have found when it is in the open ocean, the best thing to do is leave it alone. It bio-degrades of it's own course. It doesn't take too long, but while it is oil it pollutes and obviously affects any birds and surface breathing fish.
The real damage is when it hits the shore - basically kills everything. I notice they are already seeing dead tortoises washed up on the beaches. Once the feathers of birds is oiled it can't protect against the cold, aside from stopping them from flying. I suppose we will hear more of how it affects everything.
-
My father's business for 20 years, where I worked each summer as a teenager.
The firm name was:
OILKILLERS
I shall give you details.
Oilkillers, heh heh. We worked with soot damages after fires too.
-
Culled from Huffington Post's "Most Outrageous Reactions to the Gulf Spill".
*Texas Governor Rick Perry (R) speculated that the spill may have just been God's doing: “From time to time there are going to be things that occur that are acts of God that cannot be prevented."
*Rush Limbaugh: On Limbaugh's April 29 program, he raised the possibility that the oil spill is all an environmentalist conspiracy: "Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they're sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they're sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I'm just noting the timing here."
*Michael Brown, director of FEMA during the Bush years, told FOX News' Neil Cavuto: "This is exactly what they want, because now he can pander to the environmentalists and say, 'I'm gonna shut it down because it's too dangerous. This president has never supported big oil, he's never supported offshore drilling, and now he has an excuse to shut it back down."
*House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) saw the disaster as an opportunity to call for expanded offshore drilling: “This tragedy should remind us that America needs a real, comprehensive energy plan, like Republicans’ ‘all-of-the-above’ strategy."
*Tony Hayward, CEO of BP, the company that owns the oil rig that caused this whole mess, told the BBC that it wasn't their mess, but they'll go ahead and clean it up anyways: “This was not our accident … This was not our drilling rig. This was not our equipment. It was not our people, our systems or our processes. This was Transocean’s rig. Their systems. Their people. Their equipment.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/06/gulf-oil-spill-photos-the_n_565016.html#s88301
-
Seems this disaster is getting much worse.
-
Halliburton! - improper capping. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/gulf-spill-halliburton-co_n_570484.html?fbwall)
They won't pay. This will now get all cloak-and-dagger.
-
This is looking increasingly nasty.
I have just read today about the change that happened at BP when the CEO changed in 2007. Out the door went the whole 'Energy Company' image of BP, and its internal funding for alternative power sources.
When Bush left office, BP massively ramped up its lobbying funding to the new Obama administration. Successfully fought for the off-shore drilling bill, and the avoidance of regulations for its drilling practices, which appear to be the current problem.
The question is, will any amount of damage affect the power of oil companies to minimise their costs and drill where they want? I am tempted to hope for maximum damage in the hope this will change things, but alas I sense it will only cause damage and change nothing. So I still hope for minimum damage, but that's not looking likely.
-
Giant Plumes of Oil Forming Under the Gulf
www.nytimes.com
Scientists are finding enormous oil plumes in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, including one as large as 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick in spots. The discovery is fresh evidence that the leak from the broken undersea well could be substantially worse than estimates that the government and BP have given.
The plumes are depleting the oxygen dissolved in the gulf, worrying scientists, who fear that the oxygen level could eventually fall so low as to kill off much of the sea life near the plumes.
Dr. Joye said the oxygen had already dropped 30 percent near some of the plumes in the month that the broken oil well had been flowing. “If you keep those kinds of rates up, you could draw the oxygen down to very low levels that are dangerous to animals in a couple of months,” she said Saturday. “That is alarming.”
The plumes were discovered by scientists from several universities working aboard the research vessel Pelican, which sailed from Cocodrie, La., on May 3 and has gathered extensive samples and information about the disaster in the gulf.
Scientists studying video of the gushing oil well have tentatively calculated that it could be flowing at a rate of 25,000 to 80,000 barrels of oil a day. The latter figure would be 3.4 million gallons a day. But the government, working from satellite images of the ocean surface, has calculated a flow rate of only 5,000 barrels a day.
BP has resisted entreaties from scientists that they be allowed to use sophisticated instruments at the ocean floor that would give a far more accurate picture of how much oil is really gushing from the well.
“The answer is no to that,” a BP spokesman, Tom Mueller, said on Saturday. “We’re not going to take any extra efforts now to calculate flow there at this point. It’s not relevant to the response effort, and it might even detract from the response effort.”
The undersea plumes may go a long way toward explaining the discrepancy between the flow estimates, suggesting that much of the oil emerging from the well could be lingering far below the sea surface.
The scientists on the Pelican mission, which is backed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the federal agency that monitors the health of the oceans, are not certain why that would be. They say they suspect the heavy use of chemical dispersants, which BP has injected into the stream of oil emerging from the well, may have broken the oil up into droplets too small to rise rapidly.
BP said Saturday at a briefing in Robert, La., that it had resumed undersea application of dispersants, after winning Environmental Protection Agency approval the day before.
“It appears that the application of the subsea dispersant is actually working,” Doug Suttles, BP’s chief operating officer for exploration and production, said Saturday. “The oil in the immediate vicinity of the well and the ships and rigs working in the area is diminished from previous observations.”
Many scientists had hoped the dispersants would cause oil droplets to spread so widely that they would be less of a problem in any one place. If it turns out that is not happening, the strategy could come under greater scrutiny. Dispersants have never been used in an oil leak of this size a mile under the ocean, and their effects at such depth are largely unknown.
Much about the situation below the water is unclear, and the scientists stressed that their results were preliminary. After the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon, they altered a previously scheduled research mission to focus on the effects of the leak.
Interviewed on Saturday by satellite phone, one researcher aboard the Pelican, Vernon Asper of the University of Southern Mississippi, said the shallowest oil plume the group had detected was at about 2,300 feet, while the deepest was near the seafloor at about 4,200 feet.
“We’re trying to map them, but it’s a tedious process,” Dr. Asper said. “Right now it looks like the oil is moving southwest, not all that rapidly.”
He said they had taken water samples from areas that oil had not yet reached, and would compare those with later samples to judge the impact on the chemistry and biology of the ocean.
While they have detected the plumes and their effects with several types of instruments, the researchers are still not sure about their density, nor do they have a very good fix on the dimensions.
Given their size, the plumes cannot possibly be made of pure oil, but more likely consist of fine droplets of oil suspended in a far greater quantity of water, Dr. Joye said. She added that in places, at least, the plumes might be the consistency of a thin salad dressing.
Dr. Joye is serving as a coordinator of the mission from her laboratory in Athens, Ga. Researchers from the University of Mississippi and the University of Southern Mississippi are aboard the boat taking samples and running instruments.
Dr. Joye said the findings about declining oxygen levels were especially worrisome, since oxygen is so slow to move from the surface of the ocean to the bottom. She suspects that oil-eating bacteria are consuming the oxygen at a feverish clip as they work to break down the plumes.
While the oxygen depletion so far is not enough to kill off sea life, the possibility looms that oxygen levels could fall so low as to create large dead zones, especially at the seafloor. “That’s the big worry,” said Ray Highsmith, head of the Mississippi center that sponsored the mission, known as the National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology.
The Pelican mission is due to end Sunday, but the scientists are seeking federal support to resume it soon.
“This is a new type of event, and it’s critically important that we really understand it, because of the incredible number of oil platforms not only in the Gulf of Mexico but all over the world now,” Dr. Highsmith said. “We need to know what these events are like, and what their outcomes can be, and what can be done to deal with the next one.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/us/16oil.html?hp
-
Oil's arrival in loop current has Fla. on edge
By AP writers Michael Kunzelman And Greg Bluestein – 2 hrs 25 mins ago
NEW ORLEANS – An outer edge of the massive Gulf of Mexico oil spill has reached a powerful current that could take it to Florida and beyond, according to government scientists.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Wednesday that a small portion of the slick from the blown-out undersea well had entered the so-called loop current, a stream of faster moving water that circulates around the Gulf before bending around Florida and up the Atlantic coast. Its arrival may portend a wider environmental catastrophe affecting the Florida Keys and tourist-dotted beaches along that state's east coast.
Even farther south, U.S. officials were talking to Cuba about how to respond to the spill should it reach the island's northern coast, a U.S. State Department spokesman said.
Florida's state meteorologist said it will be at least another seven days before the oil reaches waters west of the Keys, and state officials sought to reassure visitors that its beaches are still clean and safe. During a news conference, David Halstead, the director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, showed off a picture of a Coppertone bottle on a beach.
"What's the only oil on the beaches? Suntan oil," Halstead said.
Tar balls found earlier in the Florida Keys were not from the spill, the Coast Guard said Wednesday. Still, at least 6 million gallons have already poured into the Gulf off Louisiana since the April 20 explosion of an offshore oil rig that killed 11 workers and led to the spill, the worst U.S. environmental disaster in decades. The Exxon Valdez tanker spilled 11 million gallons in Alaska in 1989.
Tar balls have washed ashore as far east as Alabama, and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal declared Wednesday that heavier oil was now soiling his state's coastal marshes. Earlier waves of the slick had begun as a thin sheen before the thicker stuff starting washing ashore this week.
The governor, inspecting the Mississippi Delta by boat, swept a fishnet through water, holding up a chocolate-thick ooze. The delta region is home to rare birds, mammals and a wide variety of marine life in marshy wildlife refuges and offshore islands.
Billy Nugasser, president of coastal Plaquemines Parish, La., said the oil "has laid down a blanket in the marsh that will destroy every living thing there."
In Washington, environmental groups criticized how BP PLC, the oil giant that operated the Deepwater Horizon rig, has handled the response, and urged the government to take to take greater control of the situation.
"Too much information is now in the hands of BP's many lawyers and too little is being disclosed to the public," Larry Schweiger, president of the National Wildlife Federation, told the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. "The Gulf of Mexico is a crime scene and the perpetrator cannot be left in charge of assessing the damage."
BP has received thousands of ideas from the public on how to stop the oil gusher, but some inventors are complaining that their efforts are being ignored.
Oil-eating bacteria, bombs and a device that resembles a giant shower curtain are among the 10,000 fixes people have proposed to counter the growing environmental threat. BP is taking a closer look at 700 of the ideas, but the oil company has yet to use any of them.
"They're clearly out of ideas, and there's a whole world of people willing to do this free of charge," said Dwayne Spradlin, CEO of InnoCentive Inc., which has created an online network of experts to solve problems.
BP spokesman Mark Salt said the company wants the public's help, but that considering proposed fixes takes time.
"They're taking bits of ideas from lots of places," Salt said. "This is not just a PR stunt."
BP succeeded in partially siphoning away the leak over the weekend, when it hooked up a mile-long tube to the broken pipe, sending some of the oil to a ship on the surface. And the company said Wednesday it hopes to begin shooting a mixture known as drilling mud into the blown-out well by Sunday.
The "top kill" method involves directing heavy mud into crippled equipment on top of the well, then aiming cement at it to permanently keep down the oil. Even if it works, it could take several weeks to complete.
If it fails, BP is considering a "junk shot," which involves shooting knotted rope, pieces of tires and golf balls into the blowout preventer. Crews hope they will lodge into the nooks and crannies of the device to plug it.
About 70 BP workers are taking more suggestions at a tip line center in Houston. The company plans to test one idea from Kevin Costner, the "Waterworld" and "Field of Dreams" actor who has invested more than $24 million on developing a centrifuge that can be dropped into the slick and separate the water from oil, storing the petroleum in tanks.
"It's like a big vacuum cleaner," said Costner's business partner, John Houghtaling II of New Orleans, "These machines are ready to be employed. The technology is familiar to the industry."
Tracking the unpredictable spill and the complex loop current is a challenge for scientists, said Charlie Henry, a NOAA environmental scientist.
The loop moves based on the shifting winds and other environmental factors, so even though the oil is leaking continuously it may be in the current one day, and out the next. And the slick itself has defied scientists' efforts to track it and predict its path. Instead, it has repeatedly advanced and retreated, an ominous, shape-shifting mass in the Gulf, with vast underwater lobes extending outward.
"The key point is that we watch and study and monitor oil adjacent to the loop current and we model it to try to get ahead of it," Henry said. "Nothing is changing quickly and nothing is changing drastically over the next few days."
___
-
Scientists Fault Lack of Studies Over Gulf Oil Spill
By JUSTIN GILLIS, New York Times
Published: May 19, 2010
Tensions between the Obama administration and the scientific community over the gulf oil spill are escalating, with prominent oceanographers accusing the government of failing to conduct an adequate scientific analysis of the damage and of allowing BP to obscure the spill’s true scope.
The scientists assert that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other agencies have been slow to investigate the magnitude of the spill and the damage it is causing in the deep ocean. They are especially concerned about getting a better handle on problems that may be occurring from large plumes of oil droplets that appear to be spreading beneath the ocean surface.
The scientists point out that in the month since the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, the government has failed to make public a single test result on water from the deep ocean. And the scientists say the administration has been too reluctant to demand an accurate analysis of how many gallons of oil are flowing into the sea from the gushing oil well.
“It seems baffling that we don’t know how much oil is being spilled,” Sylvia Earle, a famed oceanographer, said Wednesday on Capitol Hill. “It seems baffling that we don’t know where the oil is in the water column.”
The administration acknowledges that its scientific resources are stretched by the disaster, but contends that it is moving to get better information, including a more complete picture of the underwater plumes.
“We’re in the early stages of doing that, and we do not have a comprehensive understanding as of yet of where that oil is,” Jane Lubchenco, the NOAA administrator, told Congress on Wednesday. “But we are devoting all possible resources to understanding where the oil is and what its impact might be.”
The administration has mounted a huge response to the spill, deploying 1,105 vessels to try to skim oil, burn it and block it from shorelines. As part of the effort, the federal government and the Gulf Coast states have begun an extensive effort to catalog any environmental damage to the coast. The Environmental Protection Agency is releasing results from water sampling near shore. In most places, save for parts of Louisiana, the contamination appears modest so far.
The big scientific question now is what is happening in deeper water. While it is clear that water samples have been taken, the results have not been made public.
Lisa P. Jackson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, told Congress on Wednesday that she was pressing for the release of additional test results, including some samples taken by boats under contract to BP.
While the total number of boats involved in the response is high, relatively few are involved in scientific assessment of the deep ocean.
Of the 19 research vessels owned by NOAA, 5 are in the Gulf of Mexico and available for work on the spill, Dr. Lubchenco said, counting a newly commissioned boat. The flagship of the NOAA fleet, the research vessel Ronald H. Brown, was off the coast of Africa when the spill occurred on April 20, and according to NOAA tracking logs, it was not redirected until about May 11, three weeks after the disaster began. It is sailing toward the gulf.
At least one vessel under contract to BP has collected samples from deep water, and so have a handful of university ships. NOAA is dropping instruments into the sea that should help give a better picture of conditions.
On May 6, NOAA called attention to its role in financing the work of a small research ship called the Pelican, owned by a university consortium in Louisiana. But when scientists aboard that vessel reported over the weekend that they had discovered large plumes undersea that appeared to be made of oil droplets, NOAA criticized the results as premature and requiring further analysis.
Rick Steiner, a marine biologist and a veteran of the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster, assailed NOAA in an interview, declaring that it had been derelict in analyzing conditions beneath the sea.
Mr. Steiner said the likelihood of extensive undersea plumes of oil droplets should have been anticipated from the moment the spill began, given that such an effect from deepwater blowouts had been predicted in the scientific literature for more than a decade, and confirmed in a test off the coast of Norway. An extensive sampling program to map and characterize those plumes should have been put in place from the first days of the spill, he said.
“A vast ecosystem is being exposed to contaminants right now, and nobody’s watching it,” Mr. Steiner said. “That seems to me like a catastrophic failure on the part of NOAA.”
Mr. Steiner, long critical of offshore drilling, has fought past battles involving NOAA, including one in which he was stripped of a small university grant financed by the agency. He later resigned from the University of Alaska at Anchorage and now consults worldwide on oil-spill prevention and response.
Oceanographers have also criticized the Obama administration over its reluctance to force BP, the oil company responsible for the spill, to permit an accurate calculation of the flow rate from the undersea well. The company has refused to permit scientists to send equipment to the ocean floor that would establish the rate with high accuracy.
Ian MacDonald of Florida State University, an oceanographer who was among the first to question the official estimate of 210,000 gallons a day, said he had come to the conclusion that the oil company was bent on obstructing any accurate calculation. “They want to hide the body,” he said.
Andrew Gowers, a spokesman for BP, said this was not correct. Given the complex operations going on at the sea floor to try to stop the flow, “introducing more equipment into the immediate vicinity would represent an unacceptable risk,” he said.
Thad W. Allen, the Coast Guard admiral in charge of the response to the spill, said Wednesday evening that the government had decided to try to put equipment on the ocean floor to take accurate measurements. A technical team is at work devising a method, he said. “We are shoving pizzas under the door, and they are not coming out until they give us the answer,” he said.
Scientists have long theorized that a shallow spill and a spill in the deep ocean — this one is a mile down — would behave quite differently. A 2003 report by the National Research Council predicted that the oil in a deepwater blowout could break into fine droplets, forming plumes of oil mixed with water that would not quickly rise to the surface.
That prediction appeared to be confirmed Saturday when the researchers aboard the Pelican reported that they had detected immense plumes that they believed were made of oil particles. The results were not final, and came as a surprise to the government. They raise a major concern, that sea life in concentrated areas could be exposed to a heavy load of toxic materials as the plumes drift through the sea.
Under scrutiny from NOAA, the researchers have retreated to their laboratories to finish their analysis.
In an interview, Dr. Lubchenco said she was mobilizing every possible NOAA asset to get a more accurate picture of the environmental damage, and was even in the process of hiring fishing vessels to do some scientific work.
“Our intention is to deploy every single thing we’ve got,” Dr. Lubchenco said. “If it’s not in the region, we’re bringing it there.”
Government TOO SLOW (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/20/science/earth/20noaa.html?WT.mc_id=SC-SM-E-FB-SM-LIN-TBT-052010-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click)
-
This is building into a very nasty scene. I expect the consequences will be wide spread.
-
Frustration mounts as oil seeps into Gulf wetlands
Greg Bluestein, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 56 mins ago
ROBERT, La. – Anger grew along the Gulf Coast as an ooze of oil washed into delicate coastal wetlands in Lousiana, with residents questioning the federal government and others wondering how to clean up the monthlong mess that worsens with each day.
"It's difficult to clean up when you haven't stopped the source," said Chris Roberts, a councilman for Jefferson Parish, which stretches from the New Orleans metropolitan area to the coast. "You can scrape it off the beach but it's coming right back."
Roberts surveyed the oil that forced officials to close a public beach on Grand Isle, south of New Orleans, as globs of crude that resembled melted chocolate washed up. Others questioned why BP PLC was still in charge of the response.
"The government should have stepped in and not just taken BP's word," declared Wayne Stone of Marathon, Fla., an avid diver who worries about the spill's effect on the ecosystem.
The government is overseeing the cleanup and response, but the official responsible for the oversight said he understands the discontent.
"If anybody is frustrated with this response, I would tell them their symptoms are normal, because I'm frustrated, too," said Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen. "Nobody likes to have a feeling that you can't do something about a very big problem."
As simple as it may seem, the law prevents the government from just taking over, Allen said. After the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, Congress dictated that oil companies be responsible for dealing with major accidents — including paying for all cleanup — with oversight by federal agencies.
BP, which is in charge of the cleanup, said it will be at least Tuesday before engineers can shoot mud into the blown-out well at the bottom of the Gulf, yet another delay in the effort to stop the oil.
A so-called "top kill" has been tried on land but never 5,000 feet underwater, so scientists and engineers have spent the past week preparing and taking measurements to make sure it will stop the oil that has been spewing into the sea for a month. They originally hoped to try it as early as this weekend.
BP spokesman Tom Mueller said there was no snag in the preparations, but that the company must get equipment in place and finish tests before the procedure can begin.
Click image to see photos of oil impact
AP
"It's taking time to get everything set up," he said. "They're taking their time. It's never been done before. We've got to make sure everything is right."
Crews will shoot heavy mud into a crippled piece of equipment atop the well, which started spewing after the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon exploded April 20 off the coast of Louisiana, killing 11 workers. Then engineers will direct cement at the well to permanently stop the oil.
BP, which was leasing the rig and is responsible for the cleanup, has tried and failed several times to halt the oil.
Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles said Friday that a mile-long tube inserted into the leaking pipe is sucking about 92,400 gallons of oil a day to the surface, a figure much lower than the 210,000 gallons a day the company said the tube was sucking up Thursday. Suttles said the higher number is the most the tube has been sucking up at any one time, while the lower number is the average.
The company has conceded that more oil is leaking than its initial estimate of 210,000 gallons a day total, and a government team is working to get a handle on exactly how much is flowing. Even under the most conservative estimate, about 6 million gallons have leaked so far, more than half the amount spilled by the Exxon Valdez.
Frustrated local and state officials were also waiting for the Army Corps of Engineers to issue permits so they can build sand berms in front of islands and wetlands to act as buffers between the advancing oil and the wetlands.
In a statement Friday, corps spokesman Ken Holder said officials understand the urgency, but possible environmental effects must be evaluated before even an emergency permit can be issued.
Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry also took BP to task for not responding aggressively enough to oil coming ashore in Terrebonne Parish, La., to the west of the mouth of the Mississippi River.
Public interest in the spill is high — after lawmakers pressed BP for a live video feed of the leak this week, so many people tried to view it that they crashed the government Web site where it was posted.
BP executives say the only guaranteed solution to stop the leak is a pair of relief wells crews have already started drilling, but the work will not be complete for at least two months.
That makes the stakes even higher for the top kill.
Scientists say there is a chance a misfire could lead to new problems. Ed Overton, a Louisiana State University professor of environmental studies, said the crippled piece of equipment called a blowout preventer could spring a new leak that could spew untold gallons of oil if there's a weak spot that is vulnerable to pressure from the heavy mud.
BP is also developing several other plans in case the top kill doesn't work, including an effort to shoot knotted rope, pieces of tire and other material — known as a junk shot — to plug the blowout preventer, which was meant to shut off the oil in case of an accident but did not work.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100522/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill
Two months of continued pumping --- why, I do believe the whole world will see firsthand the effects of that, eventually.
-
http://carlsafina.org/2010/04/30/apocalypse-again/
-
As much damage is being wrought by the "clean-up" as the spill itself, and, while I haven't wanted to 'demonize' BP, it apparently is a blight on the whole fiasco.
http://blog.al.com/live/2010/05/mobile_scientists_warnings_abo.html
Death and pending death, all around.
-
Once again we confront the recurring consequence of awareness.
Awareness means being aware of. Unfortunately we are not always able to filter awareness. Sometimes we can - I don't need to study the techniques and cases of torture, although I did hear a radio interview with a an author who did just this. And I am glad someone has brought this out of the shadows. But I don't have to go way out of my track to involve my sensitivities in it.
But mostly the growth of awareness opens us to both pleasant and unpleasant - the tumbling and the spinning forces.
Part of the obligation of awareness is to withstand its impact. Withstanding means to find some point of refuge that provides security against the tsunamis of painful and pleasurable sensations. Both can cause us to become lost.
Awareness itself is one such refuge. By standing outside of ourself, and being not just aware of what is 'out there', but aware of ourself, as perceiver. We call this self-awareness.
The other refuge is to reach the Assemblage Point where we see that nothing matters.
This AP is of little use for action. To act we need to make a judgement, to choose which is the correct and which the incorrect action, thus to feel the difference. We call this discernment.
To know discernment is to know suffering. It is also to know priority. Priority means seeing what is of ultimate importance in any situation, which is not necessarily what is pleasant. There are ample examples of how something of enduring benefit comes out of something horrific.
Thus to develop discernment, we have to expose ourselves to both pleasure and pain.
But if we allow these tsunamis to overwhelm us, to destroy our centre, then we will go mad or senile.
How to hold fast to the centre against these winds and waves?
There are many times when we cannot cling to a solution - we just have to watch and feel, with no immediate answer.
Maturity comes from reflective experience. In practice we have to expose ourselves - we can't hide - and we have to keep our balance. That means not over-reacting, but not hiding.
Ultimately nothing matters. Short of that, there is everything to gain.
Each person has to achieve their own balance - this can mean opening and closing our gap under control. Not being at the mercy of the world or our reactions. We are responsible for choosing when to expose ourselves, and when to hide. There are times when we have to close the shutters, and times to open them.
Just don't leave them open or shut out of fear or lack of will.
-
The point of no mercy and many tears brought me to where I am today. I shall not forget that.
While living in these times of great change and turmoil it is as Michael says. Do not let the events in the world destroy our centre and well-being. We are travelers, and have chosen to live a lifetime in this madness. There will take another 25 000 years until things get as crazy as it is now.
We might see us as divine elves dancing on this Mother Earth celebrating creation and her rich life.
-
We might see us as divine elves dancing on this Mother Earth celebrating creation and her rich life.
I like that.
-
I heard an expert in this area say that the oil degrades quite quickly in the open ocean.
http://www.youtube.com/v/7lBQkNgY3bY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US
Have you seen this Vicki?
-
One of the things that bothers me is this dichotomy of attitudes and allegiance.
I gather that the entire community directly affected by this are also the same community directly gaining from the oil drilling industry.
But more, if you asked Americans would they prefer to have pristine coastlines by paying more for petrol, what do you think they would say?
-
Have you seen this Vicki?
It's a nightmare indeed.
But more, if you asked Americans would they prefer to have pristine coastlines by paying more for petrol, what do you think they would say?
God knows, Michael - there is insanity at large.
Per the oil spill and subsequent controversy, Obama cancelled the plans for offshore drilling in the waters of Virginia today. ("Virginia Beach", to be specific - very close to my home). Thank the heavens for any bullets dodged.
But, part and parcel to the "mad world" it has become, I'm sharing someone's comment on the whole affair on the newspaper's page today:
I KNEW IT!! I EFFING KNEW IT!! Obama blew up the oil rig in the gulf coast! Why!? Because Obama made many promises and threats to pass the health care bill. The problem is, many of his supporters are greenie weenies. In order to get the healthcare bill passed, he agreed to allow drilling off the east coast. But to make his greenie weenie leftist supporters happy, he could not allow drilling off the east coast, even though he agreed to it. The only way to make both parties happy was to support drilling, then condemn it due to a massive disaster. VOILA! Gulf coast disaster equals reason to stop drilling equals happiness from the greenie weenies. Therefore, moratorium on oil drilling off the east coast. This disaster is way too convenient to be only a coincidence. Is Obama directly responsible? Of course not, but a friend of a friend of a friend of BO may be. Does this sound like a conspiracy theory? Of course it does, because it is. Don't take what I say seriously, mostly because if you do, I could be targeted by the guvment. Should I assume room temperature without the ability to breath, or should I go missing without a trace, take my word for it, the guvment had nothing to do with it.
Insane.
-
The proponents of drilling say, "But how else do we decrease the dependence on foreign oil?"
And I wonder why we aren't putting full energies into all of the alternate forms of energy instead. Guess that makes me a "greenie weenie".
-
There is sure to be madness afoot Nichi.
I have been trying to keep abreast of this incident myself. I noticed the clip posted by Piper specified a mix of oil and chemical dispersant - not just oil itself. I'm not sure that makes any difference, but oil is a natural product, and the chemical dispersant most likely isn't. In other words an already serious situation may have been made worse.
But that assumes those managing the pollution issue are idiots - I would have to assume in the first instance they have more information on the consequences of this than I do. But they may not. We have seen idiocy before. It is good that people from outside are poking their noses into this, as the whole thing has a strong odour of cover-up from the companies involved. I think they call it 'risk management'. Risk to shareholder's funds that is.
I was interested to see that shareholders are actually suing the board of BP. That will put the wind up that guy who took over CEO of BP back in 2007 - hopefully he will get the sack.
My understanding is that Obama was hand-tied until BP killed the leak. He put his own scientists in there, but BP really had all the expertise, so they had to be given a free hand to stop this. And it was definitely in their interest to pull out all stops to do that.
But BP has little interest in the damage, except to limit their financial risk.
So the most important thing was stopping the leak - I hope this latest measure succeeds. Then Obama has, with the merest whiff of success, come out and slapped a moratorium on the drilling industry.
I gather that what is upsetting people is that Obama hasn't 'demonstrated' his response in sufficient 'blockbuster' emotion. So he had to say he wakes and goes to sleep with it on his mind. So much politics is about entertainment.
The main problem for Obama, is that he can't do what he wants. The system is firmly entrenched, and his team is a minor player, unless he can get a second term. Even then the cards are against the evil of socialism.
Last night's TV doco on America's Future made a good point (Julie was in town so I got to surf the channels after watching the cycling). Although the go-for-it, everything-is-great and America-can-do-anything approach which was sponsored initially by President Jackson and then more recently by Reagan, is so typically American, so also is the voice of those who speak against this. Who speak for caution and responsibility.
That other voice is behind Obama, but it is still weak since the Republican movement went rabid. Sanity is no longer necessary.
The oil spill they are saying is two or three times greater than the Exxon Valdez disaster.
Basically this catastrophe is now depressingly real. BP is looking at a billion dollar price tag, but that is cold comfort to the devastation in the oceans.
The big question is, will any lessons be learnt? Will anything change?
What I find extraordinary is that so little changes - we lurch from crisis to crisis, disaster to disaster.
Look around you at old people. What are you doing that is different to what they did in life? Ask yourself is that where you want to be at that age?
We so often claim that we are different, that we have made changes to our life, that we will never fall for the stupidities of our forebears. The truth is we usually know what to do different, but we are just like our nations - we carry on the same. It's all just talk.
-
There's a lot we don't know here yet - a lot of misinformation was distrubuted by BP, and the one good thing which comes from other agencies putting their heads in is the possibility of getting some facts straight. (For example, every estimate I've seen of how much oil escaped from the leak was/is different than the one before.)
There's talk of dead zones, permanent ones. At the moment, it would seem that the Gulf (and who knows how much of the ocean, eventually) is permanently damaged. But we don't know yet. There is no precedent for the whole experience.
A few posts above I posted an article wherein BP was taking heat for using the dispersants (and Lori's video sure drives home how awful that process is), but the heat doesn't stop them. They have the appearance of not needing to answer to anyone. They surely feel no obligation to all the wildlife, underwater and on land, they are killing. (Another fact we won't know the answer regarding for quite a while - what is the deathcount?)
Another issue is the seabed ... is it permanently cracked, in a time when quakes are on the rise, especially in the MidAtlantic Ridge? Will the scientists and agencies be able to present and sell the interconnectedness of forces and events in time to avert more major disasters? What will the effect of hurricane season be on the whole business? These are the questions which are on my mind, additional to yours.
-
Speaking of learning our lessons.
http://www.youtube.com/v/GHmhxpQEGPo&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6
-
Right... there you go.
-
The proponents of drilling say, "But how else do we decrease the dependence on foreign oil?"
And I wonder why we aren't putting full energies into all of the alternate forms of energy instead.
The oil tycoons are like a Mafia.
-
'Top kill' BP operation to halt US oil leak fails (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10191622.stm)
The next option after the failure of "top kill" is called the lower-marine-riser-package (LMRP) cap containment system. It involves an underwater robot using a saw to hack off the leaking pipe and place a cap over it.
The LMRP cap is already on site and the operation is expected to last four days.
BP says it cannot guarantee that the new method - which has not been carried out at depths of 5,000 feet before - will be successful.
-
???
-
I read this on the effect of hurricanes on the spill:
~If the oil is out to sea (the ocean?), a hurricane will help speed up the biodegradation process; however, I don't know if they are referring to the dispersant as well as the oil.
~If a hurricane comes into the Gulf, moving counter-clockwise as it does, the direction of the churned-up oil will depend on which side of the slick the storm tracks. If it tracks to the east of the spill, it will move the oil away from the Gulf Coast. If to the west of the spill, it will move oil onto the coast, for the same distance inland as is the surge.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/hurricanes_oil_factsheet.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As Rudy noted, BP could not plug up the leak. There are new measures in store over the next 4 days, and it sure is looking as if the cap which was projected to be ready 2 months from now is going to be the answer ... if that will even work.
Meanwhile, more agencies and the administration and the public are tearing their hair out. For the first time, one is seeing discussion of International implications, like with Cuba's coral reef.
I suspect that in the end, this will be taken out of BP's hands.
-
Unfortunately I can't see how they can take it out of BP's hands - no else has the expertise.
They may make a big fuss of taking it out of their hands, but from what I hear, that would be a nightmare for the government.
-
A brief sojourn into the dramatics and emotional values of presidential performances, this editorial was interesting to me because Obama's recent "trip to the Gulf" left me with an odd taste in my mouth as well.
Once More, With Feeling
By MAUREEN DOWD
May 29, 2010
New York Times
President Spock’s behavior is illogical.
Once more, he has willfully and inexplicably resisted fulfilling a signal part of his job: being a prism in moments of fear and pride, reflecting what Americans feel so they know he gets it.
“This president needs to tell BP, ’I’m your daddy,’ “ scolded James Carville, a New Orleans resident, as he called Barack Obama’s response to Louisiana’s new watery heartbreak “lackadaisical.”
At a press conference, Obama said Malia had asked him, as he shaved, “Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?” (That hole should be plugged with a junk-shot of Glenn Beck, who crudely mocked the adorable Malia.) Oddly, the good father who wrote so poignantly about growing up without a daddy scorns the paternal aspect of the presidency.
In the campaign, Obama’s fight flagged to the point that his donors openly upbraided him. In the Oval, he waited too long to express outrage and offer leadership on A.I.G., the banks, the bonuses, the job loss and mortgage fears, the Christmas underwear bomber, the death panel scare tactics, the ugly name-calling of Tea Party protesters.
Too often it feels as though Barry is watching from a balcony, reluctant to enter the fray until the clamor of the crowd forces him to come down. The pattern is perverse. The man whose presidency is rooted in his ability to inspire withholds that inspiration when it is most needed.
Oblivious to warnings about Osama hitting the U.S. and Katrina hitting New Orleans, W. often seemed more absorbed in workouts than work. Obama, by contrast, does his homework; he conveys a rare and impressive grasp of difficult subjects when he at last deigns to talk to the news media and reassure those whose lives are overturned by disaster.
The wound-tight, travel-light Obama has a distaste for the adversarial and the random. But if you stick too rigidly to a No Drama rule in the White House, you risk keeping reality at bay. Presidencies are always about crisis management.
Obama invented himself against all odds and repeated parental abandonment, and he worked hard to regiment his emotions. But now that can come across as imperviousness and inflexibility. He wants to run the agenda; he doesn’t want the agenda to run him. Once you become president, though, there’s no way to predict what your crises will be.
F.D.R. achieved greatness not by means of imposing his temperament and intellect on the world but by reacting to what the world threw at him.
For five weeks, it looked as though Obama considered the gushing that became the worst oil spill in U.S. history a distraction, like a fire alarm going off in the middle of a law seminar he was teaching. He’ll deal with it, but he’s annoyed because it’s not on his syllabus.
Even if Obama doesn’t watch “Treme” on HBO, it’s strange that he would not have a more spontaneous emotional response to another horrendous hit for Louisiana, with residents and lawmakers crying on the news and dead pelicans washing up on shore. But then, he didn’t make his first-ever visit to New Orleans until nearly a year after Katrina hit. “I never had occasion to be here,” he told The Times’s Jeff Zeleny, then at The Chicago Tribune.
Just as President Clinton once protested to reporters that he was still “relevant,” President Obama had to protest to reporters last week that he has feelings.
He seemed to tune out a bit after the exhausting battle over health care, with the air of someone who says to himself: “Oh, man, that was a heavy lift. I’m taking a break.”
He’s spending the holiday weekend in Chicago when he should be commemorating Memorial Day here with the families of troops killed in battle and with veterans at Arlington Cemetery.
Republican senators who had a contentious lunch with the president last week described him as whiny, thin-skinned and in over his head, and there was extreme Democratic angst at the White House’s dilatory and deferential attitude on the spill.
Even more than with the greedy financiers and arrogant carmakers, it was important to offend and slap back the deceptive malefactors at BP.
Obama and top aides who believe in his divinity make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.
“The media may get tired of the story, but we will not,” he told Gulf Coast residents when he visited on Friday. Actually, if it weren’t for the media, the president would probably never have woken up from his torpor and flown down there.
Instead of getting Bill Clinton to offer Joe Sestak a job, Obama should be offering Clinton one. Bill would certainly know how to gush at a gusher gone haywire. Let him resume a cameo role as Feeler in Chief. The post is open.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html?WT.mc_id=OP-SM-E-FB-SM-LIN-DOW-053010-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click
"Torpor" is a good word ... that's how the progression of events has felt to me - like a befuddled, directionless non-response to events. I'm speaking intuitively. Though it's probably in fact more like the seemingly-passive quality of PTSD.
-
A Hole in the Earth - Failure - No Platitudes Will Do - Here Comes Hurricane Season - Apoplexy and Apocalypse (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100530/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill)
-
I find myself in contrary views about this. On the one hand I do like to see a leader reflect back the emotional state of the people they lead, and on the other hand I am sceptical of this as I often see politicians play the reflection card cynically.
Do we want a national political system that runs like an evening soap-opera? Because that's what we have.
I feel in myself, I look for a leader to reflect my anxiety when I sense nothing is happening to fix it. When I have confidence in the leadership, that I sense they know the problems and are dealing with them in the best possible way, then I don't care if they don't reflect my anxiety. But I would kinda like it - always nice to see someone articulate my turmoil.
However politics these days is about appearances, so if Obama isn't giving the masses their parental dose, he'd better get cracking or he'll lose them.
-
Ocean currents likely to carry oil along Atlantic coast (http://www2.ucar.edu/news/ocean-currents-likely-to-carry-oil-spill-along-atlantic-coast)
-
The last healing attempt has failed, and the oil has now come ashore in Pensacola, Florida. It's going to engorge the eastern part of the Gulf, where there are many coral reefs and other rare and precious life.
My last hope, since Pensacola has a huge Naval Base, is that the military will become proactive in this, somehow, someway - even if by putting more pressure on the administration. I will bet as we speak, someone in the Navy knows what needs to be done....
Just dreaming, perhaps.
-
I've seen this on TV, about interviews and comments from people in the US.
It's like the US citizens have this indelible sense of belief in the power of their armed forces. It has always been the way that the military can just blast their way through any problem. Something about the American psych that brute force in the end is the answer to all obstacles.
I've seen people saying they should send in the military to fix this leak. That Obama hasn't done enough, and he should have kicked BP off the case and brought in the 'real' fix-it men from wherever.
It doesn't matter how many top people have answered to the question of why don't they push BP out of the task as they have been so incompetent: "With what?"
There simply isn't anyone more experienced in this than BP. Obama can only jump up and down to show everyone he cares, but he can't do a damn thing to make this work any faster. America is stuck with BP to fix this problem - there isn't anyone else.
The idea that BP is in league with Obama or his associates in perpetuating this catastrophe is insane. BP is about to be wiped out. It has lost a third of its market valuation already, and is likely to lose much more - soon its stocks will be near worthless. This is an unmitigated catastrophe for BP as much as it is for the coastline.
And it is a catastrophe for Obama, because all he can do is watch, and in the people's frustration they want him to save the situation. He is as powerless as anyone to stop the flow of oil. And it appears all attempts to contain the spread is also futile. He should have acted sooner, I hear some say - how? He is as powerless in this as everyone else.
In a land that prides itself on can-do, no one can do anything except BP. Americans should get used to the idea that some things can't be fixed with a gun. They also have to get used to paying higher prices for their gasoline.
It's funny how we hear so much about this spill, but how much have we heard about the leakage of oil in Niger? Only yesterday I heard for the first time that Niger suffers a much greater spillage of oil than what is occurring in the Gulf, every year!
It's one catastrophe after another, and all because we like cheap goods. We let them get away with it, because we, the citizens, are too stupid to stop them. They destroy the planet, then spin a whole load of bullshit about the evilness of those who want to change things for the benefit of the common wealth ... and we believe them. Then we vote them back in to keep ripping off the people and planet. Humanity is paying for its laziness and lack of intelligence ... and unfortunately so are those who had no choice - our companion species on this planet.
But it's not all doom. There is also a powerful force for life and sanity. Join up today!
-
Actually, I wasn't thinking of the Navy using brute force --- I was thinking they had some knowledge up their sleeve about the ocean, currents, seabeds, and such - and the means to get around therein.
But now that you mention their influence - they do have an influence on things. That was made manifest just last week as they objected to offshore drilling in Virginia Beach: Obama obliged them and called it off.
I don't know what you're talking about with the guns.
-
Making money on an oil disaster (http://climateprogress.org/2010/05/27/exxon-valdez-bp-oil-disaste/)
I wonder how much a catastrophe it will be for BP.
At the end of the article there are some ideas on what Obama should do.
-
Yes Rudi, they will squirm out it.
The danger for BP however, is not that they will go broke. It is that their market valuation will drop so low due to this event, that they become a prime take-over target. Business as usual, but the shareholders will lose buckets.
I have read that after the last big spill in the Gulf, the environment movement really started in the US, along with an increase in legislation and other such things. So if enough people get outraged about this, some significant changes could result.
Unfortunately, I sense that the power of this kind of multinational business will be un-dimmed by such events.
But you are absolutely right, Obama now has a clear obligation to ensure all the talk is followed by action right through to the end. That is one thing he can do, and as we are witnessing in Australia, big moral rhetoric by heart-thumping politicians has a tendency to evaporate after awhile, and after numerous visits to their office by those with the funds to bankroll the next election. It's all about politics, and not oil spills or coastlines. Thus the activists have to maintain the pressure.
-
In 1979, we seemed to be more able and willing to mobilize our own resources. The Ixtoc Disaster of 1979: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ixtoc_I_oil_spill)
In Texas, an emphasis was placed on coastal countermeasures protecting the bays and lagoons formed by the barrier islands. Impacts of oil to the barrier island beaches were ranked as second in importance to protecting inlets to the bays and lagoons. This was done with the placement of skimmers and booms. Efforts were concentrated on the Brazos-Santiago Pass, Port Mansfield Channel, Aransas Pass, and Cedar Bayou which during the course of the spill was sealed with sand. Economically and environmentally sensitive barrier island beaches were cleaned daily. Laborers used rakes and shovels to clean beaches rather than heavier equipment which removed too much sand. Ultimately, 71,500 barrels of oil impacted 162 miles of U.S. beaches, and over 10,000 cubic yards of oiled material were removed.
Containment
In the next nine months, experts and divers including Red Adair were brought in to contain and cap the oil well.[7] An average of approximately ten thousand to thirty thousand barrels per day were discharged into the Gulf until it was finally capped on 23 March 1980, nearly 10 months later.
Aftermath
Prevailing currents carried the oil towards the Texas coastline. The US government had two months to prepare booms to protect major inlets. Pemex spent $100 million to clean up the spill and avoided paying compensation by asserting sovereign immunity.
The oil slick surrounded Rancho Nuevo, in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas, which is one of the few nesting sites for Kemp's Ridley sea turtles. Thousands of baby sea turtles were airlifted to a clean portion of the Gulf of Mexico to help save the rare species.
I suppose in all fairness, Texas had 2 months to prepare, unlike Louisianna, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida now. Nonetheless, we took it into our own hands... While currently, we're still standing here wondering will BP step in? Who's coming to save us? No one - best make Plan B fast!
(I also like this part in '79 whereby "thousands of turtles were airlifted to safety." That's what I call action.)
-
Here are other ways the military is involved -
The US Army Corps of Engineers (http://www.usace.army.mil/Pages/default.aspx)
and
US Coast Guard (http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/index.php/2010/06/papp-provides-forces-logistics-for-gulf-spill-response/)
-
Yes, I don't understand why there hasn't been a mass volunteer response like back then. Everyone seems to be waiting for BP or the government to act.
Maybe there is and I just haven't heard about it.
-
Yes, I don't understand why there hasn't been a mass volunteer response like back then. Everyone seems to be waiting for BP or the government to act.
I think it's a combination of denial, bewilderment and shock, the waiting.
I was thinking about the wiki article cited above: it said that 162 miles of US coastline was impacted, and we had 2 months before the oil "landed".
In the current scenario, there will be well over 558 miles of US coastline impacted, and the oil has come ashore in less than/more than one month. And that's not including the current which will take it around to the Atlantic side of the coastline. So, perhaps I was hasty in making a comparison.
Maybe there is and I just haven't heard about it.
On the Army Corps of Engineers site, there is a blurb about "the unemployed" getting hired for the clean-up. There's also talk of the Obama office developing a youth corps.
Meanwhile, there are many animal activist organizations (like Audubon, for just one) who are setting up shop to assist ... not to mention various Institutes and Universities. Perhaps we don't "know" about all of this yet because the work has only begun. There is conspiracy-talk about BP attempting to keep the photos of the dead and dying birds, fish, and other critters out of the public's view, but I don't think they can succeed at that.
-
Birds frozen in oil: image of a desperate summer
By Seth Borenstein, Ap Science Writer – Sat Jun 5, 3:46 am ET
They are the ghastly images of a summer fouled before it started. Squawking seagulls and majestic brown pelicans coated in oil. Click. Gunk dripping from their beaks. Click. Big eyes wide open. Click. Even the professionals want to turn away. They can't.
"They get me. It's just inherently sad," said Nils Warnock, a wildlife recovery specialist. "You see this bird totally covered in oil and all you can see are those eyes looking at you blinking. You'd have to be pretty tough not to be affected by that image."
Warnock didn't see the birds in person. He's in California, but the pictures still hit him in the gut. Warnock has been rescuing birds in oil slicks since 1985 and he still chokes up when talking about photos of birds he hasn't seen in person.
Now put yourself in Melanie Driscoll's shoes. She doesn't just see the pictures. She sees the birds close-up through her bird conservation work for the National Audubon Society across Louisiana. The pleading eyes get her, too.
Driscoll has to shut down her emotions while helping coordinate the rescue of the birds. But the feelings sneak back at night, keeping her awake, making her see oily blackness creeping across her cats and even across the moon when she looks up.
When environmental groups try to tug at the public's heart and wallet, they focus on what biologists call "charismatic megafauna." It's the feathered or furry helpless critter that you can relate to. It's not the oiled hermit crab — an image joked about as not very touching by Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show" Thursday night.
It's got to have eyes that melt your heart. And that's what's all over the nation's front pages now.
"The pelican has really become the poster child for this that people are really focusing on," Driscoll said. "The bird is the symbol. They are visible. They are charismatic."
Up in Alaska, where it has been 21 years since the Exxon Valdez spill, residents watching the images of oiled birds are turning off their TV sets because it is just too hard to see, said Nancy Bird. She is director of the Prince William Sound Science Center, which still monitors the effects of the 1989 spill.
"I just wish that somebody would put them out of their misery very quickly," she said. "Watching an animal like that die a slow death is pretty disturbing."
The birds seem frozen in oil. The image is apt.
Birds that get oiled can die from being too cold, or too hot, because the crude oil interferes with the natural oils that make them waterproof. That means their sensitive skin is exposed to extremes in temperature. Even in the relatively mild Gulf waters, they can "die from hypothermia," said Ken Rosenberg, director of conservation science at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. They can also drown.
The brown pelican, the state symbol of Louisiana, is now also the symbol of death — not just for the birds in the pictures, but for the likely thousands unseen.
"If you're seeing oiled birds, we can assume that there's a lot of death going on," Rosenberg said. "They literally are an indicator of what's going on in the entire ecosystem."
Some species of birds, especially those that lurk hidden in marshes — such as the clapper rail, seaside sparrow and mottled duck — will not be photographed coated with oil. They'll just disappear sight unseen, Driscoll said.
"Those birds won't get their eulogy," Driscoll said. "They'll just disappear. It's an unseen tragedy."
-
My last hope, since Pensacola has a huge Naval Base, is that the military will become proactive in this, somehow, someway - even if by putting more pressure on the administration. I will bet as we speak, someone in the Navy knows what needs to be done....
I've read about 20 articles more on the whole business since posting the above, and I'm chagrined to report that the Navy has been involved from the beginning, opening the Pensacola base to all the agencies, and supplying booms and skimmers to the effort. So I need not have 'hoped' - it already was in motion. My bad.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704302304575214102112725116.html
It is an interesting sensation, though, this lingering sense that nothing is being done. Since we've been speaking of the "fi", I wonder what program of hopelessness and helplessness is operative here.
-
You'd think the Navy and the Coast Guard could do something to contain the spread, or redirect it, or whatever.
This is turning out worse and worse every day. I heard they were successful with the last measure, but haven't heard yet how successful.
-
Since we've been speaking of the "fi", I wonder what program of hopelessness and helplessness is operative here.
It's the one where people get into an emotion state over something they can do nothing about.
-
I heard they were successful with the last measure, but haven't heard yet how successful.
Just read, it's a third they are capturing.
-
Just read, it's a third they are capturing.
I had a dream that they had found an oily substance that the spillage would stick to and in dumping that it all stuck together and was easier to suck up!
-
What is the meaning of the oil spill that is occurring (in May 2010) in the Gulf of Mexico?
You may be hoping for information that will bring new hope for resolving this issue. Because this is a third-dimensional experience, created by third-dimensional choices, the hope for resolution lies in what you choose to do in the material world. There is no way to escape this fact – ultimately, you are working with the consequences of the long-standing choices made by humanity.
Like everything, this event is resonating at every level of existence -- in the physical, social, energetic, higher dimensions, at every level -- this event is resonating for all of humanity. The primary energy of this is the energy of birth, which may not seem to make sense at first. Just like in birth, this is the painful new beginning of a fresh perspective.
At a more third dimensional level, this is a wakeup call for humanity. It has always been written that as you did damage to your environment, which is Planet Earth, eventually you would need to wake up and notice that damage. Then you have a whole series of choices to make as a human race. You can strive to mitigate the damage and heal the earth or you can ignore it until things get bad enough that you choose to mitigate and heal the earth.
Either way at some point, in order to survive, humanity is going to change their primary drives toward wholeness and healing for all forms of life on the planet. That is the inevitable end result. It may that there are very few humans left alive when you finally make that decision. Until then, you will see progressively bigger and more startling wakeup calls. Most of them will present themselves as what you are calling ecological disasters, manmade disasters, and increasingly they will affect human beings rather than just animals. It will affect human beings in more immediate and irrevocable ways. This is yet another wakeup call in regard to the process of humanity in having swung out of balance with nature and now being called to swing back into balance with nature.
As most of you know, you have a very long road ahead of you. Even if you choose to totally change the whole human race's perspective on the value of ecology, you would still have generations of work ahead of you to physically resolve the damage you have done. Actually, most of the work still lies in simply helping more of humanity recognize the need to bring yourselves back into balance with ecology. It is a wakeup call in a third dimensional level.
There is this deeper spiritual meaning of birth. The energy of the Gulf of Mexico at this time looks like a birth canal and if you imagine birth occurring for a mammal, for a human being or any other mammal, the birth canal expands, it extends, it sometimes tears. There is a lot of blood and a lot of other fluid. It is a messy event and energetically you are birthing a new potential for humanity. That wakeup call has so much potential. It has to come through a messy and painful event.
What you are likely to find is that that wakeup call is going to evolve over the course of the next several years. The first major shift occurring is people who never thought that they would worry about ecology or being in balance with Planet Earth are finding themselves now necessarily concerned with it because their lives are being directly impacted. That number of people, that number of people being directly impacted will continue to expand because right now the strongest potential is that the oil will spread to many other coastlines before it is resolved. It will be present for right now, potentially for decades. That is one of the immediate effects. In the hearts and minds of many, many individuals, they're waking up to the truth about your current relationship about Planet Earth and the fact that it is out of alignment.
There is a secondary impact for most of the world, and certainly for the western world, in regard to your oil or petroleum resources and the impact will occur in money. A lot of people will lose a lot of money. Some very wealthy people will lose a lot of money because of their misguided efforts to become wealth through oil production, but even more people will lose money by paying higher prices for oil and by paying higher taxes to help clean up the mess that has been made. That larger impact will also serve as a wakeup call for many, many more people. If humanity and particularly we will be more specific about the United States, if people in the United States had collectively shifted more toward coming into balance with nature, you may not have had such a large and far reaching and impactful disaster.
You are not being punished -- you are simply being woken up. Just like a teenager who is reluctant to get out of bed in the morning, if a parent pushes them and nudges them lovingly, they may not wakeup so eventually the parent has to shout or push the teenager off the bed or throw cold water on their face or something that feels like a punishment but really is an effort to get you to wakeup.
We know that for many of you who have long been aware of the ecological imbalance and long been invested in helping to resolve it, it is very frustrating to see such a large disaster happen despite your efforts. In order for this to be resolved for humanity, humanity as a whole needs to make the shift. It is always lonely and it is always difficult to be a pioneer to be ahead of the curve. For those of you in that position, there is some value in it as well. That is the meaning of the Gulf oil spill. It is actually pretty straightforward. It is a direct consequence of your actions.
How can we help?
The question of how you can help is that if the primary purpose of this in the larger scale of things is to encourage people to wake up and change their core values or realign how their behavior matches their core values. One of the most important things you can do to help here is to actually talk about this with your friends and neighbors and to avoid blaming or avoid saying, "I told you so." It is difficult to come out of denial. It is very painful to come out of denial. It will serve you to be gentle and soft but totally willing to talk about this.
Talk about the events with your friends and neighbors, not in the form of debate, but simply bring up the topic, watch the conversation evolve and just gently take note of who is waking up. There will be people who are resisting or denying the truth of this impact and there is not much you can do to change their minds. The people who are suddenly realizing that their actions, that somehow they're connected to the ecological disaster, turn your attention to those people. Without blame and without any sense of self-righteousness, be willing to talk about and brainstorm together how you can make changes in your lives that help bring you and therefore to some extent, bring humanity back into alignment with the balances of nature.
This is a long slow process. Many of you hope that this will be the final awakening. Like this will be bad enough that everyone will suddenly wake up but this is really the kind of thing that's going to change over the course of years and even generations. It is vitally important that you do your part.
There are also some things you can do physically. Ultimately, you must change your relationship to energy – we mean this on the physical level of electricity and oil, and we mean it in regard to metaphysical energy. The process of realizing that everything is energy and that you are made of love goes hand-in-hand with the process of releasing your consumptive behaviors and ceasing your destruction of Planet Earth. You MUST address this at both a physical and an energetic level.
Organizations are going to emerge to help support the cleanup of this mess and also the prevention of future such disasters. Those organizations are the seeds for organizations that eventually help you be better stewards of wetlands and coastal areas across the world. It will serve you to support those organizations. Some of you will be called to support them by volunteering and some of you will send money. It will be important to wait and pay attention to make sure you are sending money to the organizations that actually have staying power and integrity. Essentially there are seeds being planted for what will become long-standing organizations that help everyone steward these natural areas. They will arise out of crisis and some of them will last as long-term stewards that will essentially be channels through which people can connect with nature.
There is something you can do on an energetic level as well. This is one of those physical events that is particularly susceptible to your intentions; to the energy that you send through prayer, through meditation, through visualization. Because it is occurring in water and because it is liquid, it can be easily moved and the oceans particularly respond to energy because they are reservoirs of energy. It actually will make a difference for you to visualize, pray or do some of those spiritual practices to send light to the area. We suggest that you not get too caught up in trying to decide where the oil should or should not go because you will all have different ideas about that and none of you has a complete enough perspective to really know.
Instead, send light with the intention that the oceans manage the oil in the way that best serves them because the oceans, their currents, the life in the oceans, all of them are connected to this and you can funnel energy to them and they will know what to do. They will know where to send the oil, they will know how best to mitigate its effects as long as it is there. Simply send light in the most loving and empowering energy you can to the area. This is the kind of thing that will help you feel better because you are doing something. You will not see direct results right away, but over time you can know that by doing that things will turn out better than they would have had you not done this. As long as your vision is limited, you will not see directly how that effect occurs, but trust us and know that it truly does have an effect. Prayer works, meditation works, your loving intentions, they really do work to make the world function better than it would without you here. (May 2010)
Copyright © Akashic Transformations 2005 - 2008 All rights reserved.
-
That has some good stuff in it Piper. A constructive long term approach.
-
There is this deeper spiritual meaning of birth. The energy of the Gulf of Mexico at this time looks like a birth canal and if you imagine birth occurring for a mammal, for a human being or any other mammal, the birth canal expands, it extends, it sometimes tears. There is a lot of blood and a lot of other fluid. It is a messy event and energetically you are birthing a new potential for humanity. That wakeup call has so much potential. It has to come through a messy and painful event.
What you are likely to find is that that wakeup call is going to evolve over the course of the next several years. The first major shift occurring is people who never thought that they would worry about ecology or being in balance with Planet Earth are finding themselves now necessarily concerned with it because their lives are being directly impacted. That number of people, that number of people being directly impacted will continue to expand because right now the strongest potential is that the oil will spread to many other coastlines before it is resolved. It will be present for right now, potentially for decades. That is one of the immediate effects. In the hearts and minds of many, many individuals, they're waking up to the truth about your current relationship about Planet Earth and the fact that it is out of alignment.
I'm seeing this, little by little. In some situations, it's hard to identify the left from the right.
-
We are finally realizing that we are going to have to leave (http://labucketbrigade.wordpress.com/2010/06/07/“we-are-finally-realizing-that-we-are-going-to-have-to-leave-”/)
Amazing this insidious gag order BP has on the folks it allegedly "reimburses" or hires. This enforced silence is probably why there has been the sensation of a lull.
-
Another of those cases where we make a promise that is not ours. You want to help? Pay the price of not opening the small door.
I can well understand BP's point of view - it has enough bad publicity. But that makes it very hard on those seeking to do something about the creatures caught in this.
-
At a more third dimensional level, this is a wakeup call for humanity. It has always been written that as you did damage to your environment, which is Planet Earth, eventually you would need to wake up and notice that damage. Then you have a whole series of choices to make as a human race. You can strive to mitigate the damage and heal the earth or you can ignore it until things get bad enough that you choose to mitigate and heal the earth.
Either way at some point, in order to survive, humanity is going to change their primary drives toward wholeness and healing for all forms of life on the planet. That is the inevitable end result. It may that there are very few humans left alive when you finally make that decision. Until then, you will see progressively bigger and more startling wakeup calls. Most of them will present themselves as what you are calling ecological disasters, manmade disasters, and increasingly they will affect human beings rather than just animals. It will affect human beings in more immediate and irrevocable ways. This is yet another wakeup call in regard to the process of humanity in having swung out of balance with nature and now being called to swing back into balance with nature.
-
As most of you know, you have a very long road ahead of you. Even if you choose to totally change the whole human race's perspective on the value of ecology, you would still have generations of work ahead of you to physically resolve the damage you have done. Actually, most of the work still lies in simply helping more of humanity recognize the need to bring yourselves back into balance with ecology. It is a wakeup call in a third dimensional level.
There is this deeper spiritual meaning of birth. The energy of the Gulf of Mexico at this time looks like a birth canal and if you imagine birth occurring for a mammal, for a human being or any other mammal, the birth canal expands, it extends, it sometimes tears. There is a lot of blood and a lot of other fluid. It is a messy event and energetically you are birthing a new potential for humanity. That wakeup call has so much potential. It has to come through a messy and painful event.
-
"When I was on Grand Isle's beach behind the Marina, I was walking in flip flops, the chemical line that looked like slime (dispersant) flipped up into my shoe and where I had a small blister, burned it to the point it felt like it was on fire. This is a serious physical threat and danger to anyone doing clean up that may have a small cut. Or even smelling it because the smell was toxic." - Oil Spill Crisis Map
Louisianna Bucket Brigade (http://www.labucketbrigade.org/)
-
No one will be surprised, but there is a black-out zone. I'm confused, though, about how it is that BP could control airspace.
(Warning - disturbing pictures)
From the Ground: BP Censoring Media, Destroying Evidence (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/riki-ott/from-the-ground-bp-censor_b_608724.html)
-
This is only my take - you won't find this in any news article, because intuition is the primary conduit here.
As observed in various comments Obama has made in front of the camera, including various speeches and formal statements he has made, I conclude that he is seriously out of balance. This is an energetic read, based not at all on his content.
His affect is inappropriate - he's smiling when he should be grave, he's shaky when he should be a rock. He feels dizzy and completely out of control, and he probably is. He has lost his thread - some bottom has fallen out.
</.02>
God help us.
-
Gulf oil full of methane, adding new concerns
Matthew Brown And Ramit Plushnick-masti, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 27 mins ago
NEW ORLEANS – It is an overlooked danger in the oil spill crisis: The crude gushing from the well contains vast amounts of natural gas that could pose a serious threat to the Gulf of Mexico's fragile ecosystem.
The oil emanating from the seafloor contains about 40 percent methane, compared with about 5 percent found in typical oil deposits, said John Kessler, a Texas A&M University oceanographer who is studying the impact of methane from the spill.
That means huge quantities of methane have entered the Gulf, scientists say, potentially suffocating marine life and creating "dead zones" where oxygen is so depleted that nothing lives.
"This is the most vigorous methane eruption in modern human history," Kessler said.
Methane is a colorless, odorless and flammable substance that is a major component in the natural gas used to heat people's homes. Petroleum engineers typically burn off excess gas attached to crude before the oil is shipped off to the refinery. That's exactly what BP has done as it has captured more than 7.5 million gallons of crude from the breached well.
A BP spokesman said the company was burning about 30 million cubic feet of natural gas daily from the source of the leak, adding up to about 450 million cubic feet since the containment effort started 15 days ago. That's enough gas to heat about 450,000 homes for four days.
But that figure does not account for gas that eluded containment efforts and wound up in the water, leaving behind huge amounts of methane. Scientists are still trying to measure how much has escaped into the water and how it may damage the Gulf and it creatures.
The dangerous gas has played an important role throughout the disaster and response. A bubble of methane is believed to have burst up from the seafloor and ignited the rig explosion. Methane crystals also clogged a four-story containment box that engineers earlier tried to place on top of the breached well.
Now it is being looked at as an environmental concern.
The small microbes that live in the sea have been feeding on the oil and natural gas in the water and are consuming larger quantities of oxygen, which they need to digest food. As they draw more oxygen from the water, it creates two problems. When oxygen levels drop low enough, the breakdown of oil grinds to a halt; and as it is depleted in the water, most life can't be sustained.
The National Science Foundation funded research on methane in the Gulf amid concerns about the depths of the oil plume and questions what role natural gas was playing in keeping the oil below the surface, said David Garrison, a program director in the federal agency who specializes in biological oceanography.
"This has the potential to harm the ecosystem in ways that we don't know," Garrison said. "It's a complex problem."
BP CEO Tony Hayward on Thursday told Congress members that he was "so devastated with this accident," "deeply sorry" and "so distraught."
But he also testified that he was out of the loop on decisions at the well and disclaimed knowledge of any of the myriad problems on and under the Deepwater Horizon rig before the deadly explosion. BP was leasing the rig the Deepwater Horizon that exploded April 20, killing 11 workers and triggering the environmental disaster.
"BP blew it," said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the House investigations panel that held the hearing. "You cut corners to save money and time."
In early June, a research team led by Samantha Joye of the Institute of Undersea Research and Technology at the University of Georgia investigated a 15-mile-long plume drifting southwest from the leak site. They said they found methane concentrations up to 10,000 times higher than normal, and oxygen levels depleted by 40 percent or more.
The scientists found that some parts of the plume had oxygen concentrations just shy of the level that tips ocean waters into the category of "dead zone" — a region uninhabitable to fish, crabs, shrimp and other marine creatures.
Kessler has encountered similar findings. Since he began his on-site research on Saturday, he said he has already found oxygen depletions of between 2 percent and 30 percent in waters 1,000 feet deep.
Shallow waters are normally more susceptible to oxygen depletion. Because it is being found in such deep waters, both Kessler and Joye do not know what is causing the depletion and what the impact could be in the long- or short-term.
In an e-mail, Joye called her findings "the most bizarre looking oxygen profiles I have ever seen anywhere."
Representatives of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration acknowledged that so much methane in the water could draw down oxygen levels and slow the breakdown of oil in the Gulf, but cautioned that research was still under way to understand the ramifications.
"We haven't seen any long-term changes or trends at this point," said Robert Haddad, chief of the agency's assessment and restoration division.
Haddad said early efforts to monitor the spill had focused largely on the more toxic components of oil. However, as new data comes in, he said NOAA and other federal agencies will get a more accurate read on methane concentrations and the effects.
"The question is what's going on in the deeper, colder parts of the ocean," he said. "Are the (methane) concentrations going to overcome the amount of available oxygen? We want to make sure we're not overloading the system."
BP spokesman Mark Proegler disputed Joye's suggestion that the Gulf's deep waters contain large amounts of methane, noting that water samples taken by BP and federal agencies have shown minimal underwater oil outside the spill's vicinity.
"The gas that escapes, what we don't flare, goes up to the surface and is gone," he said.
Steven DiMarco, an oceanographer at Texas A&M University who has studied a long-known "dead zone" in the Gulf, said one example of marine life that could be affected by low oxygen levels in deeper waters would be giant squid — the food of choice for the endangered sperm whale population. Squid live primarily in deep water, and would be disrupted by lower oxygen levels, DiMarco said.
Meanwhile, the Coast Guard signaled a shift in strategy Friday to fight the oil, saying it was ramping up efforts to capture the crude closer to shore.
Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said an estimated 2,000 private boats in the so-called "vessels of opportunity" program will be more closely linked through a tighter command and control structure to direct them to locations less than 50 miles offshore to skim the oil. Allen, the point man for the federal response to the spill, previously had said surface containment efforts would be concentrated much farther offshore.
____
-
This is only my take - you won't find this in any news article, because intuition is the primary conduit here.
As observed in various comments Obama has made in front of the camera, including various speeches and formal statements he has made, I conclude that he is seriously out of balance. This is an energetic read, based not at all on his content.
His affect is inappropriate - he's smiling when he should be grave, he's shaky when he should be a rock. He feels dizzy and completely out of control, and he probably is. He has lost his thread - some bottom has fallen out.
</.02>
God help us.
You have been seeing him more than I, so you could have a better intuition than I. But that's not how I have reading this.
I heard some of his speech and I also heard the gruelling interrogation of BP's chief executive, Tony Hayward. And I see the same issue.
My take is that the underlying problem is that 'America' is facing a conflict of interest on a deep level. They can't handle that emotionally because to face it directly is still too traumatic. So they shoot the frustration to whatever scapegoat they can find.
What I am seeing is that popular US is traumatised by this - they don't want to give up their cars, esp their big cars, they don't want to pay more for petrol and they know they have been complicit in this disaster because of their avarice for cheap petrol - cheaper than any other nation on the globe I think.
But more than that, it is a confrontation between and awakening reality that the world they live in will not always do what they want. There is a very deep strain in American psychology of the 'can do', that 'we can overcome any obstacle', that 'where there's a will there's a way'. And this has in the minds of popular culture deteriorated into an astounding belief of the might of the military, and more importantly the gun. A simplistic belief in the gun over the mind.
It permeates US culture - you see it in the movies where intelligent heroes and especially intelligent female actors have always had a huge hurdle to clear for popular acceptance. You see in the love of Ronald Reagan and George W Bush - how they resorted to single line clichés to rousing popular acclaim.
This is not uncommon - you will see it in all empires in their hey days, as you now see it in China. A nation pride-belief that 'we can do anything'.
A series of blows to this conviction has hit the US in recent years. Vietnam was a very big blow, but they patched themselves back in the 90s, but then 9/11 which really confounded the public with it audacity, its efficiency and its horror. Iraq turned into a horrific embarrassment and the revulsion of the world towards the GWBush image of America. Then Afghanistan, but mostly the GFC which has left the US in an international pauper state along with the embarrassment of having initiated the whole thing.
Then the cyclone that wiped out one of the largest cities in the US and to which the incompetence of response was a huge shock to the 'can do' self-image. Blow after blow - you are seeing the decline of an empire, and it was as traumatic to the US as it was to Britain and every other empire. Not that the US empire will be going away any time soon, but every empire culture moves into a very new psychological self-image as it declines. A far more nuanced and complex self-image, plus I might say artistically creative.
But right now, Obama has the qualities of a careful thinker - one who wants to reflect before acting, and isn't afraid to weigh the complexities. These are characteristics of the phase that the US is moving into, but the resistance is mammoth.
There is no quick solution to this problem, and even Hayward doesn't have a magic wand, nor could he possibly have known anything about the drilling site before it exploded - he is the head of a vast multi-national company, and one little drill is as significant as an ant to an elephant. Until it blows up that is.
What is happening is that Americans are stewing in their confrontation with reality - that it is complex and that it needs competent handling, not soap-opera. Reality is calling, and it is bigger than anyone thought.
Hayward at least bears some culpability for a general un-preparedness, to which he admitted. But what the public want is emotionality. My take on the Obama 'mis-match' as you put it Niche, is that we are seeing a new paradigm of leadership that doesn't dance to the old tune. Americans are facing a shift in what it is to be 'American', and they have a man who is presenting the cues for that, but they don't like it. The dissonance runs too deep for familiar comfort.
However, what is important is not how he dances emotionally, but how competent he is. If he is successful, he will win through, and America will change. If he is unsuccessful, America will reel back to an old-time leader, which will serve to bring forward the demise of US empire faster than ever, as was seen with GWB.
The US is very lucky to have a leader who is neither Left nor Right. He does many things which outrages both sides. But will he succeed in getting sufficient runs on the board to gain respect before the next election? Grudging respect is in many ways the best kind of respect. We shall see, but he will need both luck and intelligence, and luck is a fickle partner.
-
Now things look even worse for BP. Their partner has finally come out and slammed BP, after which their shares were down-classified to junk status. I hope they hold together long enough to pay up.
And the head of the fund reckons $20 billion won't be enough.
Meanwhile it's still leaking.
-
It would appear that Louisianna has sold its soul to the corporate devil. Not only has a judge approved an injunction against the current Federal moratorium on offshore-drilling, but it seems its own law enforcement agency is working for BP.
http://motherjones.com/rights-stuff/2010/06/BP-louisiana-police-stop-activist
-
Judge who overturned drilling moratorium reported owning stock in drilling companies (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100622/ts_ynews/ynews_ts2771)
-
Judge who overturned drilling moratorium reported owning stock in drilling companies (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100622/ts_ynews/ynews_ts2771)
I saw an article a couple of weeks ago about the Louisianna jurists -- that there are very FEW of them who aren't oil-stockholders. Per all the suits on board to come to them, a change of venue was suggested, but I don't hold out hope.
-
The odds here are
40% 60%:
-
If it isn't covered up, we'll see more of this:
Coroner: Charter captain working oil spill killed himself (http://blog.al.com/live/2010/06/charter_captain_kills_self_on.html)
No one will say so, but it's more than money. It's being surrounded by blackness.
-
Curious what's going on.
First Julie has gone Facebook, to talk with a few friends. You 'over-wherever' may not be aware that in Australia we have just had a huge battle between a Government that wants the country to have a greater share of the huge profits that mining companies are making off the Chinese. The mining company owners, who are all billionaires, have cried bloody murder and set up advertising campaigns that no one else could match, not even the government itself.
Julie saw one of these pro-mining ads on her Facebook page!
Now, with the anti-BP think gaining pace, this YouTube clip has become a mega hit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AAa0gd7ClM
As soon as it starts, watch how a big add appears on the right, with a picture of Obama looking arrogant and "BP Spill - Blame Obama?" written next to it, with "vote here now" in small letters. The effect is that on watching first you tend to not notice this add appear.
The oil spill is bad enough, but now everyone is being manipulated into a political game by people who have become extremely smart, and they have plenty of money to manipulate.
-
Curious what's going on.
First Julie has gone Facebook, to talk with a few friends. You 'over-wherever' may not be aware that in Australia we have just had a huge battle between a Government that wants the country to have a greater share of the huge profits that mining companies are making off the Chinese. The mining company owners, who are all billionaires, have cried bloody murder and set up advertising campaigns that no one else could match, not even the government itself.
Julie saw one of these pro-mining ads on her Facebook page!
Now, with the anti-BP think gaining pace, this YouTube clip has become a mega hit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AAa0gd7ClM
As soon as it starts, watch how a big add appears on the right, with a picture of Obama looking arrogant and "BP Spill - Blame Obama?" written next to it, with "vote here now" in small letters. The effect is that on watching first you tend to not notice this add appear.
The oil spill is bad enough, but now everyone is being manipulated into a political game by people who have become extremely smart, and they have plenty of money to manipulate.
True ... and disheartening. The BP and other big oil corps will need a lot of oil themselves ... to lubricate the pitchfork tips.
-
NOAA described a few weeks ago that if a hurricane moves west of the spill, oil could be expected to wash on land. The first Atlantic cyclone will be moving to the west of the spill, though it has enough distance from the spill that it might not impact. Who knows::
-
Hurricane Alex graced the Gulf in the best possible distance from the spill, and yet, its effects are being noted along the coast, where efforts towards clean-up have to wait, and tar balls and crude are coming ashore. It's fair to conclude that any cyclone entering the Gulf is going to have its own disastrous effect: it doesn't matter if its path seems to be directly or indirectly engaged with the spill.
Furthermore, each storm which comes in delays BP's plugging of the leak, the completion of which is set to mid-August.
Meanwhile, a Taiwanese tanker has been converted to an "oil skimmer". The vessel (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100701/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill) is 10 stories high and heading toward the Gulf now.
Among the workers in Louisianna, there is talk of 'secret' night crews who remove the dead carcasses of dolphins, birds, fish, turtles, and whales who have washed ashore. The air quality is being investigated for toxicity. In short, hell it is there.
-
Driving home the hell ... The oil spill workers are being housed in the rejected trailers FEMA offered post-Katrina (rejected per amounts of formaldehyde):
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/07/banned_fema_trailers_get_secon.html
-
I couldn't pass up posting this: after all, as Michael often states, its main instruction is to "hold the light steady." The passage is passed on from the Walking the Red Road page...
"This is from the beautiful, amazing International Council of 13 Indigenous Grandmothers--they each represent a continent and a native tradition. /..../ Here is something they have written about the oil spill--they advise us to "stay awake" and... then to reach into our hearts and help cast a "Net of Light." Please read and pass it along.....
Walking the Red Road (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?react=1246908445%3Ade05d9f4f39f5a3d1634ca9191777e6c#!/pages/Walking-the-Red-Road/116756885014151)
"We ask you to cast, anchor, and hold the Net of Light steady for the Gulf of Mexico," the Grandmothers said. "This crisis is affecting the entire world, and humanity is asleep. Wake up!" they cried. "Animals are dying, plants are dying, and your Mother is writhing in agony. If you hold the Net of Light steady at this time you will help stave off further catastrophe.
"You have been lulled into a false sleep," they said, "told that others (B.P.) would take care of this problem. This is not so," they said. "And this is not the time for you to fall into oblivion. Determine now to stay awake, and once you have made that commitment, think of, cast, and hold the Net of Light. Hold it deep and hold it wide. Amplify its reach to penetrate the waters of the Gulf and dive deep beneath the crust of Mother Earth. Anchor it at the earth's core and as you hold it there, ask it to unify with the mineral kingdom of this planet. It will do this and will harmonize with all the solid and liquid mineral states on earth-including oil and gas. The Net of Light will call these minerals back into harmony.
"Whatever human beings have damaged, human beings must correct," the Grandmothers said. "This is the law. We repeat: This is the law. You cannot sit back and ask God to fix the mess humanity has created. Each of you must throw your shoulders to the wheel and work. We are asking for your help. Several years ago we gave you the Net of Light so you would be able to help the earth at times like this. Step forward now. This is the Net of Light that will hold the earth during the times of change that are upon you," they said.
"First move into your heart and call on us. We will meet you there. The Net of Light is lit by the jewel of your heart," they said, "so move into this lighted place within you and open to the Net of which you are a part. Bask in its calming presence. It holds you at the same time that you hold it.
"Now think of magnifying your union with us. We, the Great Council of the Grandmothers, are with you now, and all those who work with the Net of Light are also with you. There are thousands, even millions now connected in light," they said. "Along with this union, call forth the power of the sacred places on earth. These will amplify the potency of our joint effort. Then call on the sacred beings that have come to prevent the catastrophe that threatens to overwhelm your planet. We will work together," they said, nodding slowly.
"Think of, cast and magnify the presence of the Net of Light in the Gulf of Mexico. See, imagine or think of it holding the waters, holding the land, the plants, the sea life, and the people. Holding them all!" they said. "The Net of Light is holding them steady; it is returning them to balance. Let the love within your lighted heart keep pouring into the Net of Light and hold, hold, hold. Calmly and reverently watch as the light from your heart flows along the strands of the Net. It will follow your command and continuously move forth. As soon as you think of it, it will happen. We ask you to practice this for only a few minutes at a time, but to repeat it throughout the day and night.
"We promise that this work with the Net of Light will do untold good," the Grandmothers said. "We are calling you to service now. You are needed. Do not miss this opportunity. We thank you and bless you."
-International Council of 13 Indigenous Grandmothers
http://www.grandmotherscouncil.com/about.html#agnes
-
Consolidated Fish and Wildlife Collection Report PDF (http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/WildLifeConsolidated17JUL2010.789615.pdf)
Oiled bird numbers from International Bird Rescue -
1191 captured alive
2129 collected dead
511 treated and released
This has to be an underestimate, and of course does not include all the other wildlife.
Animal species treated:
Brown Pelicans
White Pelicans
Laughing Gulls
Northern Gannets
Night Herons
Cattle Egret
Snowy Egrets
Reddish Egret
Least Bitterns
Common Terns
Sandwich Terns
Least Terns
White Ibis
Herring Gulls
Dunlins
Roseate Spoonbills
Sanderlings
Terrapins
King Snake
http://www.ibrrc.org/gulf-oil-spill-birds-treated-numbers-2010.html
-
Experts fear long oil effect on marine life, food chain
18 July 2010, WASHINGTON — Scientists studying the massive BP oil spill fear a decades-long, “cascading” effect on marine life that could lead to a shift in the overall biological network in the Gulf of Mexico.
With some 400 species estimated to be at risk — from the tiniest oil-eating bacteria to shrimp and crabs, endangered sea turtles, brown pelicans and sperm whales — experts say the impact of oil and chemical dispersants on the food chain has already begun, and could grow exponentially.
“A major environmental experiment is underway,” Ron Kendall, director of the Institute of Environmental and Human Health at Texas Tech University, told AFP.
“We are already impacting the base of the food chain,” he said, including plankton, which provide crucial food for fish, and juvenile shrimp in intertidal marshes along the Gulf Coast.
Kendall, whose institute is studying tissue samples from live and dead Gulf fish to analyze the spill’s impact, helped study effects of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil disaster on wildlife in Alaska’s Prince William Sound.
With the Exxon Valdez, a finite amount of oil poured into the sea — about one 17th of the low estimate of the oil that has gushed from a ruptured well into the Gulf — and rose to the surface to coat the shoreline.
“This is so much more complex, what we’re dealing with now,” he said, noting that the 1.84 million gallons (7.0 million liters) of chemical dispersants used to fight the spill has kept some of the oil from fouling shores, but created potentially drastic problems by breaking up the oil has into droplets that may never be recovered.
Dispersants, says Kendall, release aromatic hydrocarbons and allow small oil droplets to be consumed by marine life, potentially threatening the food supply for humans.
No contaminated Gulf fish or seafood has reached the market, according to experts, but authorities have closed some 35 percent of all fishing waters, threatening the livelihoods of thousands and putting the region’s multibillion-dollar seafood industry in peril.
Researchers have reportedly observed major die-offs of organisms such as pyrosomes, cucumber-shaped creatures that are favorite meals of endangered sea turtles, which have been dying by the hundreds.
Kendall acknowledged that species shifts are possible but added that “we’re at the early stages of documenting the scientific effects of what’s occurring.”
BP and the US government say they have found more than 2,600 dead birds, mammals and turtles, but Doug Inkley, a senior scientist at the National Wildlife Federation, warns that could be the tip of the iceberg.
Many dead fish and sharks sink, so their numbers may never be known.
Inkley pointed to ongoing studies which show oil is expected to have a large effect on plankton — and the animals that eat them.
“This could be an effect that will ripple all the way up the food chain,” he said.
He fears a delayed disaster, similar to when Prince William Sound’s Pacific herring population collapsed four years after the Exxon Valdez spill, likely because few of the herring that spawned in 1989 reached maturity.
Dozens of marine and bird species were beginning their breeding season in April when the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and sank, setting off the huge spill.
“You could have a (population) crash later because of the failure of many of the young to survive this year,” said Inkley. “The impacts on wildlife I expect will last for years, if not decades.”
Congressman Ed Markey, chairman of a House subcommittee on energy and the environment, echoed the concerns in a letter to the Food and Drug Administration.
He said evidence showed “the marine food chain in the Gulf of Mexico has already been contaminated,” and pointed to researchers who recently uncovered oil droplets found inside crab larvae harvested from the Gulf.
“This finding is particularly disconcerting because these larvae are a source of food for numerous aquatic species and this is therefore the first sign that hydrocarbons have entered into the food web.”
Complicating the scenario, the Gulf will soon host millions of fowl on autumn and winter migrations.
“We’ll have a whole new wave of ducks and waterbirds that will be coming here and getting affected,” Kendall said. “Who knows what impact that will bring?”
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle08.asp?xfile=data/environment/2010/July/environment_July40.xml§ion=environment
-
...
-
With the risk of appearing ignorant... what does this mean?
-
With the risk of appearing ignorant... what does this mean?
It's a cyclone (Bonnie) moving into the area (see more current graphic, which wasn't available earlier, sorry). The good news is that another storm to its west is apparently going to offset its reaching hurricane status. The bad news is, there's another storm to its west, which will surely abet the pushing of oil onto all the wetlands.
-
Experts fear long oil effect on marine life, food chain
18 July 2010, WASHINGTON — Scientists studying the massive BP oil spill fear a decades-long, “cascading” effect on marine life that could lead to a shift in the overall biological network in the Gulf of Mexico.
With some 400 species estimated to be at risk — from the tiniest oil-eating bacteria to shrimp and crabs, endangered sea turtles, brown pelicans and sperm whales — experts say the impact of oil and chemical dispersants on the food chain has already begun, and could grow exponentially.
“A major environmental experiment is underway,” Ron Kendall, director of the Institute of Environmental and Human Health at Texas Tech University, told AFP.
/...../
(See above post)
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle08.asp?xfile=data/environment/2010/July/environment_July40.xml§ion=environment
How curious that NOAA gave the go-ahead for a large portion of the Gulf to be re-opened for commercial fishing today. But also how curious that Florida's citizens "voted in" offshore drilling. One sector's "facts" are another sector's blindman's buff. Someone with a lot of greed is at the helm.
-
This is a good example of the situation which faces humanity.
On one side, so many situations call for cooperation, change and restraint.
On the other it's not just greed, although that mind set is there, but they wouldn't call it greed, they would call it business and resource security. The majority however would simply see an issue of having or not-having a job - feeding and providing security for their family.
This causes a dilemma where many people hold opposing views at the same time. They want the beauty of their environment and especially the health that comes from that, but they also want good paying work and fear the consequences of losing their job.
I see this increasing across the globe. The big answers to the big problems stalking life on Earth, have cogent resistance based on short-term realities.
-
I'm into something a little more radical than the armchair/intellectual/academic appreciation of beauty. There are living things all around us, which is the purview of far more than idle eyes or hands. It isn't a "luxury" - personally, wherever I've worked in the past 30 years, I've found tons of wild critters lurking beyond the sidewalk's edge. They're there - to be seen, or not. They have lives they've eked out, and humor. They never interfered with my clocking in or out.
In order to advocate for them, one is called a "bleeding heart" or a "greenie weenie". I don't accept that dichotomy, though I'm surely familiar with it.
We've known for decades we needed to be working on other forms of energy, and had we followed through, I have no doubt that the economy would not be in danger of perilous decline if we chose something other than oil. So we only have ourselves to blame if it really does come down to having a job or not. This system only stands to go on and on, as the burl of oiled men, and their inconceivably rich employers, stand defiantly against the value of life en masse. Never willing to use their imagination to come up with something wholly different than blackening the earth.
-
A dreamer I once worked together said that oil is a spinal fluid of a being we call Earth.
-
I'm into something a little more radical than the armchair/intellectual/academic appreciation of beauty. There are living things all around us, which is the purview of far more than idle eyes or hands. It isn't a "luxury" - personally, wherever I've worked in the past 30 years, I've found tons of wild critters lurking beyond the sidewalk's edge. They're there - to be seen, or not. They have lives they've eked out, and humor. They never interfered with my clocking in or out.
In order to advocate for them, one is called a "bleeding heart" or a "greenie weenie". I don't accept that dichotomy, though I'm surely familiar with it.
That is a different matter - that is a personal awareness of yours and many others, however as a group within humanity, it is extremely small. Those of us who actually 'feel' the environment, have always had a difficult road unless we can find untouched wilderness.
For the rest it is a cultural identity and a growing awareness that our air, food and water etc are becoming very unhealthy.
That is the struggle I am speaking of above, which is manifesting in the world like rarely before.
We've known for decades we needed to be working on other forms of energy, and had we followed through, I have no doubt that the economy would not be in danger of perilous decline if we chose something other than oil. So we only have ourselves to blame if it really does come down to having a job or not. This system only stands to go on and on, as the burl of oiled men, and their inconceivably rich employers, stand defiantly against the value of life en masse. Never willing to use their imagination to come up with something wholly different than blackening the earth.
It is true indeed, but it goes way beyond oil. There is a terminal illness in our whole attitude to life - how long before it becomes finally unsustainable and crumbles, is the question. I think we have at least five years, or twenty at the outside.
There are many talking about this currently. One prominent view is that all our problems from oil to obesity to Global Climate Change to species extinctions is all about having passed the threshold of Consumption Economics. We are now into Over-Consumption and can't stop.
I had a realisation in the Art Gallery in Sydney last week. When I look at Indian art, I feel they use the Gods as a symbolic rallying-point, culturally, artistically and metaphysically. It keep them off the streets of the mind - provides a purpose.
When I see Western secular art, I have this powerful sense that they have no purpose, no direction - they are simply revelling in their own personal freedom to explore whatever takes their fancy. That can be beautiful or ugly. Otherwise they utilise factual reality as a rallying-point, where they seek to replicate the outer world - that has no metaphysical purpose but at least it keeps them of the mental streets.
I also felt that Western secular art is only a reflection of the social world. Walking the city streets I sense the same - there is no purpose to life aside from consumption - work to consume stuff, be it things or experiences, but all with no purpose.
I do think that most of humanity like it exactly that way - they like the 'freedom' from obligation, as much as the artists.
Curiously, I also felt that Japanese art has always been abstract, 'modern' and secular. But for some reason I feel they know what they are doing - they don't appear lost. I have a sense of comfortableness with their eccentricity, probably because of the exquisite sensitivity of their art.
-
In chaos theory in math there is a term called bifurcation point. It is a point beyond which a mathematical function obtains a radically different value - a steep change occurs.
Given that we are witnessing another 'hottest period of history of measurements' (and changes in giant systems like Earth take a long time to come forth), it is reasonable to assume that we have passed the bifurcation point. In other words, we (i.e. present humanity in general) and our way of life and our way of thinking have been sentenced.
Now what?
-
Now what?
Good question!
-
What's the difference between living your last day, your last year or your last five years?
-
What's the difference between living your last day, your last year or your last five years?
Do tell!
-
If one is to believe this, there is some good news:
http://ht.ly/2iYTm
The aggressive oil-skimming they've done seems to have paid off. The initial concern and prediction was that the oil would get into the "loop current", hit S. Florida and part of the US East Coast. Very recently this estimate was published by NOAA.
Now, they are saying that if the well-cap succeeds, that the oil will travel no more than it has. I'm all for this outcome, though I read it very cautiously.
Also, they've tested seafood in the eastern part of the Gulf, and it has been given the non-toxic nod. This seems the hardest to believe, given the material that was published about Corexit, the dispersant used. Time will tell.
-
Coast Guard allows toxic chemical use on Gulf oil
H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 34 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Coast Guard has routinely approved BP requests to use thousands of gallons of toxic chemical a day to break up oil slicks in the Gulf of Mexico despite a federal directive that the chemicals be used only rarely on surface waters, congressional investigators said Saturday after examining BP and government documents.
The documents show the Coast Guard approved 74 waivers over a 48-day period after the restrictions were imposed, resulting in hundreds of thousands of gallons of the chemicals to be spread on Gulf waters. Only in a small number of cases did the government scale back BP's request.
The extensive use of dispersants to break up oil gushing from BP's Deepwater Horizon raised concerns early on as to what long-term damage the toxic chemicals might be doing to the Gulf's aquatic life. That prompted the Environmental Protection Agency on May 26 to direct BP to stop using the chemicals on the water surface except in "rare cases."
But Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., said Saturday that the chemicals continued to be used extensively with Coast Guard approval, often at a rate of 6,000 to 10,000 gallons a day. A request was made and approved on June 13 to spread as much as 36,000 gallons of dispersant, according to data obtained by Markey's Energy and Environment subcommittee.
The EPA directive "has become more of a meaningless paperwork exercise than an attempt ... to eliminate surface application of chemical dispersants," Markey wrote in a letter sent Friday to retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the government's point man on the spill.
Markey's office released the letter Saturday as well as the documents his panel had analyzed. Markey said that instead of complying with the EPA directive, "BP often carpet bombed the ocean with these chemicals and the Coast Guard allowed them to do it."
The House investigators found that the Coast Guard routinely approved the chemical use, in some cases a week in advance. On five occasions the Coast Guard approved a BP request to use 6,000 gallons a day over a weeklong period and "in many of these days BP still used more than double" the limit that was approved, Markey said in his letter.
A call to the BP press office in Houston was not immediately returned.
A spokesman on duty for the Unified Command Center in New Orleans did not have an immediate comment.
The chemicals break down masses of oil into small droplets that allow the oil to be more easily consumed by bacteria. But the chemicals also are toxic and it's not known what impact the large volume of chemicals being used against the BP spill might be having on marine life.
The EPA has acknowledged that there are tradeoffs and that some use of the chemicals are essential to combat the oil spill. The EPA directive issued in May concerned only surface dispersal of the chemicals. BP also has been using large amounts of chemicals near the ocean floor at the site of the damaged wellhead.
In recent weeks, little oil has been noticed on the Gulf surface, and scientists believe one reason for that might be the extensive use of the chemical dispersants.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100801/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_dispersants
I've read about this non-approved use on so many sites - how is it that "Washington" is just now learning about it?
-
What's the difference between living your last day, your last year or your last five years?
I guess it's a bit like the alarm waking you up at 6am, and realising it's Saturday and you can sleep in till 9am.
-
I don't know what to make of it - here's an article which reports that as of 28 July, the Loop Current has been stalled.
http://yowusa.com/earth/2010/earth-0810-01a/1.shtml
If it's true, the questions it arouses will drive one mad.
-
Much Gulf Oil Remains, Deeply Hidden and Under Beaches
New U.S. Gulf oil spill report called "ludicrous."
Christine Dell'Amore
National Geographic News
Published August 5, 2010
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/08/100805-gulf-oil-spill-cement-static-kill-bp-science-environment/?source=link_fb08052010oilreportarticle
Part of an ongoing series on the environmental impacts of the Gulf oil spill.
As BP finishes pumping cement into the damaged Deepwater Horizon wellhead Thursday, some scientists are taking issue with a new U.S. government report that says the "vast majority" of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill has been taken care of by nature and "robust" cleanup efforts.
In addition, experts warn, much of the toxic oil from the worst spill in U.S. history may be trapped under Gulf beaches—where it could linger for years—or still migrating into the ocean depths, where it's a "3-D catastrophe," one scientist said.
The U.S. government estimated Monday that the Deepwater Horizon spill had yielded about 4.9 million barrels' worth of crude.
On Wednesday a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) report said that about 33 percent of the spilled oil in the water has been burned, skimmed, dispersed, or directly recovered by cleanup operations. (See "Gulf Oil Cleanup Crews Trample Nesting Birds.")
Another 25 percent has evaporated into the atmosphere or dissolved in the ocean, and 16 percent has been dispersed via natural breakup of the oil into microscopic droplets, the study says. (Read more about how nature is fighting the oil spill.)
The remaining 26 percent, the report says, is still either on or just below the surface, has washed ashore or been collected from shores, or is buried along the coasts.
Oil Spill Report "Almost Comical"?
For all their specificity, such figures are "notorious" for being uncertain, said Robert Carney, a biological oceanographer at Louisiana State University (LSU) in Baton Rouge.
That's in part because the fluid nature of the ocean means that it's "exceedingly hard" to track oil.
"Water is always moving—if I go out to the spill site tomorrow and look for hydrocarbons, I might not find much, because the oiled water is already gone."
But to accurately figure out how much oil is left, you need to know how much went into the Gulf to begin with, he said.
"Once you start off with that fundamental measure"—the total amount of oil spilled—"being an educated guess, then things aren't that great."
To University of South Florida chemical oceanographer David Hollander, the NOAA estimates are "ludicrous."
"It's almost comical."
According to Hollander, the government can account for only about 25 percent of the spilled Gulf oil—the portion that's been skimmed, burned off, directly collected, and so on.
The remaining 75 percent is still unaccounted for, he said.
For instance, the report considers all submerged oil to be dispersed and therefore not harmful, Hollander said. But, given the unknown effects of oil and dispersants at great depths, that's not necessarily the case, he added.
"There are enormous blanket assumptions."
Oil Trapped Deep in Gulf Beaches
The new report comes after days of speculation about where the Gulf oil has gone. After the damaged well had been capped July 19, U.S. Coast Guard flyovers didn't spot any big patches of crude on the water.
But oil cleanup is mostly getting rid of what's on the surface, Carney said. There's a common perception that "as long as you keep it off the beach, everything's hunky dory," he added.
In fact, scientists are still finding plenty of spilled Gulf oil—whether it's bubbling up from under Louisiana's islands, trapped underneath Florida's sugar-white beaches, or in the ocean's unseen reaches. (See pictures of spilled Gulf oil found just under Florida beaches.)
This week, biological oceanographer Markus Huettel and colleague Joel Kostka dug trenches on a cleaned Pensacola beach and discovered large swaths of oil up to two feet (nearly a meter) deep.
Oil gets trapped underground when tiny oil droplets penetrate porous sand or when waves deposit tarballs and then cover them with sand, said Huettel, of Florida State University in Tallahassee.
(Read more about oil found under "clean" Florida beaches earlier this month.)
Whether microbes munch the oil—the most common way oil breaks down—depends on how much oxygen is available for the tiny organisms to do their work. (See marine-microbe pictures.)
"So far, we haven't seen any rapid degradation in these deep layers," Huettel said, though he noted oil at the top of the sand has been disappearing within days.
With little oxygen, the buried oil may stay for years, until a storm or hurricane wipes away the upper sand layers.
Previous oil spills suggest that the buried beach oil may continuously migrate not only out to sea but also into groundwater, where it can harm wildlife, Huettel said.
Oil-laden groundwater in Alaska following the Exxon Valdez spill, for instance, led to "significantly elevated" death in pink salmon embryos between 1989 and 1993, he said. (Related: "Exxon Valdez Pictures: 20 Years on, Spilled Oil Remains.")
Gulf Oil Microbe Cleanup "Total Bull"
Microbes are not an oil-cleanup panacea either, LSU's Carney cautioned.
For instance, oil-eating bacteria can't stomach asphalt, the heaviest part of an oil molecule and the same material used to pave roads, he said.
The leftover asphalt falls to the seafloor, where another kind of microbe may chew on it—making the molecule shorter and thus more toxic, according to Carney.
"The sentimentality that bacteria turn everything into fish food and CO2 is total bull," he said.
What's more, microbes cherry-pick whatever piece of oil is easiest to process—and on their own time, said Christopher Reddy, a marine chemist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts.
Counting on microbes to quickly clean up an oil spill is "like asking a teenager to do a chore. You tell them to do it on a Friday, to do it when it's most advantageous, and they do it on a Saturday," Reddy said.
"It can be frustrating that you can't constrain the role of microbes and overall natural cleanup."
Deep-Sea Oil Spills are "Unchartered Territory"
Another "open question" remains, FSU's Huettel noted: What is happening to the oil deep in the Gulf?
For the first time during an oil-spill response, officials used chemical dispersants to break up oil at ocean depths between 4,000 and 5,000 feet (1,200 and 1,500 meters). The dispersant-treated oil bits may have sunk to the seafloor, Huettel said.
In the cold, dark ocean, this mixture of oil and chemical dispersants may be suspended and preserved, causing long-term problems for deep-sea animals, Texas Tech University ecotoxicologist Ron Kendall said during August 4 testimony before the U.S. Congress.
"We have very limited information on the environmental fate and transport of the mixture of dispersant and oil, particularly in the deep ocean," Kendall said.
Some oil fragments are so tiny they can't be seen with the human eye, said the University of South Florida's Hollander. Others are big enough to be gobbled up by baby fish that mistake the oil for food. (See pictures of ten animals at risk from the Gulf oil spill.)
Predicting what will happen to the deep-sea ecosystem is "uncharted territory," said Hollander, who's studying what the oil is doing to deep-sea creatures during a series of research cruises this summer and fall.
"Could be a bottom-up collapse, could be nothing happens," he said. But he suspects a "real large chunk of food chain is being disrupted."
"We're getting into something different than the 2-D petroleum spill" on the Gulf's surface, he added. "All of the sudden you've taken this 2-D disaster and turned it into a 3-D catastrophe."
-
http://www.grist.org/article/2010-08-05-so-what-happens-when-you-dump-2-million-gallons-of-toxic-chemica/
Quotes fisherman Mark Stewart:
All the sea life is trying to get out of the water. The turtles are all out there with their heads sticking out of the water trying to get air. It's not normal.
And fisherman Danny Ross:
...
Sea creatures that are normally bottom species are on top of the water due to the water column is so full of dispersants. The oxygen level is so low. A horseshoe crab, it's on top of the water trying to swim. We've never seen that in our life. We might not be biologists, but we know our waters. This is not normal.
-
The story has devolved now into a fascinating display of minimization and near-denial, under pressure now from the Tourism boards all around the gulf.
First it was a wildlife apocalypse - now it was "just a little oil." Intelligent people call the agencies which have endeavored honest reporting "chicken little".
Supposedly, the "loop current" has been stalled, a first in known history, with possible consequences along the line of the film Day After Tomorrow, but no one is talking about it.
-
Oil turned up in a Mississippi marsh over the weekend, contrary to expectations voiced by BP. BP has accelerated a television ad campaign to boot over the weekend, and they've presented themselves as the average working-joe-who-cares.
Concerns are being voiced by the animal people regarding the annual winter migration of birds who arrive in Texas and Louisianna. It will be a real test of how "okay" things really are (not).
International Bird Rescue has published updated figures on the death count: now it cites that there have been
1837 captured alive
3839 collected dead
716 treated and released
More sea turtles have been collected in the last 10 days than in all the previous 3 months.
http://www.ibrrc.org/gulf-oil-spill-birds-treated-numbers-2010.html
-
Louisiana Fishermen Slam Claims that Oil Almost Gone, Seafood Safe
Fishing grounds are full of oil-soaked marsh grass and tarballs, with shrimp season set to open next week, locals say
by Jacoba Charles
Aug 11th, 2010
HOPEDALE, LA.— In the small towns of coastal Louisiana, the widespread consensus is that the oil is far from gone.
Fishermen return from working on cleanup crews or from recreational angling trips with stories of crabs whose lungs are black with oil, or of oysters with shells covered in sludge. They take photos and carry tarballs home like talismans to show what they have seen. They talk about their fears with anyone who will listen, and often their voices are tinged with panic.
Yet a government report released last week by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said that 75 percent of the oil has been cleaned up, dispersed or otherwise contained. And the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports that of all the samples of seafood that have been tested since the oil spill, none have shown evidence of contamination.
While some in the coastal seafood industry agree with these assessments, a majority seem to view the news with a sense of betrayal.
"The cleanup isn't even close to being done," said Karen Hopkins of Dean Blanchard Seafood, which accounts for about 11 percent of the U.S. shrimp supply, on the barrier island of Grand Isle.
"The last thing I want to do is scare anyone away from the seafood down here," said Dawn Nunez, standing at the counter of the shrimp wholesale business and deli she owns in the tiny fishing town of Hopedale. "But if I’m not eating it or feeding it to my children, I can’t advise anyone else to eat it either."
On their dock across the street, Dawn's husband Marty Nunez pulls a clump of oil-ridden marsh grass out of a plastic bag.
"There's people fishing where this is at – or worse than this," he said. "I can't understand how they say things are getting back to normal."
Nunez surreptitiously picked the grass while working as part of BP's Vessels of Opportunity cleanup operation on Monday. For him the oil-soaked grass is a symbol of a lurking threat. Like many other people living along the coast, Nunez is confident that vast quantities of oil remain in the environment, despite highly publicized announcements to the contrary.
"Our fishermen bring home grass and tarballs and then we watch the news and they say there is no sign of oil," said Dawn Nunez. "Where did it go? Where did millions of gallons of oil go if it's not in the Gulf?"
A widely held theory is that the 1.8 million gallons of dispersants that were sprayed during the cleanup operation caused the oil to sink to the bottom.
"I've been working with oil all my life," said Brian Zito, a commercial fisherman on Grand Isle. "Dispersant is like a soap, and if you wash your hands in a bucket your water will be all white and soapy and fine. But let that bucket sit there for a few hours and see what happens – all that oil is going to come back together."
When they start trawling for shrimp or dredging for oysters, fishermen fear that the oil will get stirred up again.
For now that fear is largely untested. Although 5,144 square miles of federal waters affected by the oil spill had been deemed safe as of Tuesday, little of that good news applies to Louisiana. The state's three main fisheries are crab, oysters and shrimp – but the shrimp season doesn't open until next week. And crab and oyster fishing is almost entirely shut down because of the spill, as are most of the nearshore fishing grounds relied on by Louisiana's shrimpers.
But perhaps the biggest problem faced by the state's commercial fishermen is that they don't trust their own product. Even when the government decides they are allowed to fish in the marshes again, many say they are going to wait.
"I know what's out there and I'm not going to mess up my equipment with oil," Zito said in an often-repeated sentiment. "You can't even ride back there in a boat without stirring up tarballs, let alone put a net in the water."
Trawling for shrimp involves dragging a heavy chain, called a tickling chain, across the bottom of the marsh, lake or ocean. Shrimp that live in the muck swim up, and get scooped into the waiting net. And if oil is on the sea floor like the fishermen fear, that will get stirred up as well.
And if there is any contamination of the seafood, there is a very real chance that the individual fishermen could ultimately be held responsible. Past lawsuits filed by restaurant customers have made this possibility seem very real.
"We are going to have to buy product liability insurance on a product that we've never had to worry about before," Hopkins said.
Perhaps because of this, demand for Gulf Coast seafood is down. Marty Nunez said that the processor he has sold to for years called to warn him they wouldn’t be buying his product, should he get any in.
"They can't buy it because they can't sell it," he said. "They can’t even sell Gulf Coast shrimp that they have from last year."
But the fishermen facing this uncertain future stand to lose much more than a job. Many come from families that have hunted, fished and lived in Louisiana's swampy waterways for generations.
"This is a way of life," Nunez said. "It's what we eat, drink and breathe."
http://solveclimate.com/blog/20100811/louisiana-fishermen-slam-claims-oil-almost-gone-seafood-safe
-
Gulf Outsiders Little Understand What is Happening to People Inside
Louisianan frames the local story of the disaster, and of persisting fears the tragedy may only be just beginning
Jul 31st, 2010
by Tim Gautreaux, Guardian
Those who live in Louisiana all their lives develop an understanding of disaster. We know a hurricane can turn over hundreds of offshore oil rigs in one pass and then come to land and do the same to our homes. Refineries explode, rigs blow up, pipelines burst, well pressures cause accidents that take fingers, feet, arms, legs and life itself.
There's hardly a family in the Gulf region that does not have a member involved in the oil industry. My father was a tugboat captain who handled barges of crude oil for the sprawling refineries, my brother sells oilfield equipment and technology, my nephew captains offshore supply vessels, my great-nephew operates a giant crane currently picking Katrina-smashed equipment from the Gulf floor. Cousins manage oil leases.
So, even though I am not an oil worker, the industry is part of my environment, my history, and when I saw images of the April Deepwater Horizon explosion and fire, I thought at once, "Wait a minute. Something's wrong. That rig is state-of-the-art, the size of a small factory, loaded with technology that rivals the space program in complexity. Why is the fire so enormous?"
And later, when the labyrinth of pipes and valves keeled over in a rumbling, hissing nimbus of flame, I was astounded, thinking, "Why didn't the blowout preventer shut down the well?" And days later, when it was revealed that the device was not functioning, a dark spill began to spread in my soul, a burgeoning realization that nothing could stop a runaway well 5,000 feet below the Gulf's surface. Nothing.
Fear of Well Rupture
A wide open fire hydrant blasting a plume of water out of a four-inch opening operates on a pressure of 50 pounds per square inch. The oil and gas venting from the rig's seven-inch pipe is propelled by at least 3,000 psi. Or more. And if the pipe beneath the blowout preventer fails? The reservoir pressures, I understand, are 11,000 psi. Unchecked, the subterranean caverns of oil would roar to the surface for years.
BP has made a number of attempts to stop the fountain of oil and all have failed, except for the latest cap. But even this success poses many dangers, including a well rupture far below the ocean floor, initiated by the high pressure caused by the cap. No one knows what the result of such a failure would be, and this highlights the most frightening facet of the catastrophe: its unpredictability. The final solution is supposed to be the relief wells BP is drilling, and on the day I realized even these might not arrest the blowout, I decided to stop thinking about it all.
I drove into my south-east Louisiana town of Hammond to get something good to eat. At a seafood cafe I ordered Oysters Scampi. The TV was on above the bar, showing miles-long strands of red oil streaming across the face of the Gulf. I thought of the men killed in the explosion, how they spent their lives trying to avoid something like this. My oysters were large and plump; I ate the first fellow, then looked up at the oil.
Shrimp, Grass, Birds
Locally, it's well known that 60% of the US's oysters come from Louisiana's coastal regions. The oyster beds would be killed by the oil and take years to regenerate. Longer, if the oil kept coming next year. And the next. The spill inside me widened as I realized that the shrimp fisheries would soon be closed, the commercial taking of red snapper, grouper and all their delectable cousins banned. I remembered that Louisiana supplies 73% of the nation's shrimp. My God, what about the charter boat industry and sport fishermen from Texas to Florida?
The nightly news told of oil coming ashore. Unlike its neighboring states, Louisiana has no shore, no sand beach except for a small spit called Grand Isle, no dunes, hills, cliffs. The entire Gulf border and its wide attendant marshes are exactly at sea level. The shore is mostly gritty mud held in place by tall, dense marsh grass. What is not water is grass, thousands of square miles of it. When the oil kills the grass, the shore will begin to melt away.
This coastal marsh is home to millions of birds – pelicans, terns, egrets, great herons – and a rich variety of mammals and reptiles. It is threaded through by countless miles of narrow bayous, inlets and lagoons, all spawning areas for shrimp and succulent blue-claw crabs, nesting grounds for vast flocks of migratory geese and ducks – a hot and humid greenhouse teeming with life.
Louisiana is a relatively small state, but it contains 40-45% of the nation's coastal wetlands. The neighboring states of Texas, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida have similar fertile and productive marshes, though such areas are much smaller.
Greatest Fear Comes True
The oil that began to show up, the so-called tar balls, were really reddish pancakes of axle grease; they began to appear on Grand Isle, then east, on the Alabama beaches, followed by a nasty invasion of the lovely green water and white sand shores of Pensacola and Santa Rosa Island. Heavy dark oil began to pool against the Louisiana marshes, coating wildlife with a greasy, glue-like batter – no one can ever know how many thousands of animals have died, how many carcasses are at the bottom of the quarter million square miles of the Gulf.
Next, every fisherman's greatest fear happened.
The government had to close over 80,000 square miles of the Gulf to all fishing, and suddenly tens of thousands of fishermen were out of work, losing their identity and a way of life they and their ancestors have pursued for generations. The Cajuns have fished since they arrived in the 1700s; the Vietnamese, Croatians, African Americans, Native Americans, Islenos and plain American country boys who trawl and fish and process are all on the bank watching their livelihoods drown in oil.
How much oil? Who will ever know? As of now, a safe final estimate, if the cap holds and the relief wells work, is 200 million gallons. The oil washing up in July might have leaked in April. Locals are losing sleep about how much oil is looming underwater to bedevil us next year or for 10 years.
Calls to counseling and crisis lines are through the roof. Fourteen million people depend on fishing and oilfield work for a living in the Gulf region. The fishermen can't pay rents and mortgages, utility bills, insurance, buy fuel for their boats, save for any kind of future; they stand in charity food lines on 100-degree days.
The oilfield people are facing cutbacks because of the new ban on deepwater drilling; this is affecting shipbuilding, crewboat, supply and helicopter fleets, machine shops, pipe yards, supply houses, foundries and a hundred other businesses. The fishermen are hurting acutely at the moment, but the oil workers are worried for their futures as well, as the industry is facing a wind-down that could last for years.
Outsiders Don't Understand
The news keeps getting more uncertain and, yes, things can get worse because hurricane season is now upon us and no one knows what havoc a big storm in the Gulf could cause. It could do anything from pushing a bow wave of killing oil over the estuaries to painting New Orleans with black rain.
I don't think people living outside the region understand what is happening.
One so-called environmentalist suggested Gulf fishermen and oil workers should just get educated in green technology and work in solar panel factories. What are they supposed to do for 20 years until the technology is perfected and the factories built? Fishermen want to work as fishermen; the Gulf is 1,000 miles wide and they are independent members of a huge culture, not employees.
By the end of June I tried to limit my news intake. It was now clear the enormous Gulf tourism industry was on shaky ground because all the beaches from Panama City, Florida to Grand Isle, Louisiana were fouled or soon to be fouled, and the result was a freefall in hotel, condo and restaurant bookings, and trade in the thousands of gift shops, filling stations, convenience stores, bait-and-tackle shops. Each type of business was firing workers, cutting orders, falling into debt.
After a charter boat captain shot himself in the head, I turned off the television. But everywhere I went, neighbors, bank tellers, waitresses, university professors all fretted about the spill. Last year, one billion pounds of fish was harvested from the Gulf; now only a tiny fraction of that is being caught in the small areas still open, and chances are even that clean catch will be distrusted by buyers outside the region. How many years will it take for Gulf seafood's reputation for quality to return?
This disaster rides like a tumor on the back of the monster Katrina, a storm that in 2005 killed more than 1,800 people in the New Orleans area. Many residents of the region were finally getting their homes rebuilt, their boats and docks restored.
Not a man in a thousand miles glad about any of it
It is true a few hundred men have been hired by BP at low wages to shovel muck off the shores. Several motels have been rented to house workers and BP has been leaking out checks to fishing families and charter boat operators (though there are tales of checks never arriving). Hundreds of boats have been hired to go after the oil, but not a man in a thousand miles is glad about any of it.
Everyone has a sense of why the accident happened. Weeks before the explosion, it seems BP knew the blowout preventer was leaking and missing a crucial seal. About 10 hours before 11 men were burned up, employees report an argument broke out between the rig's BP manager, who wanted a speedy and cheap sealing of the well, and the driller and cementer, who demanded traditional, safe plugging methods. The company man overruled the experts. He wanted to save money, ignoring the first rule of industry economics: safety is never more expensive than an accident.
The clean-up bill is complex and will extend for years. In Florida, workers clean a beach at dusk; at sunrise it's covered again. The spill is slathering four states now. It could be blown over to Texas. It could show up in the marinas of Key West, or even Wilmington, North Carolina on the Atlantic, wherever the Gulf Stream carries it. The coming expense is not to be imagined. Lawsuits are spilling out with no judicial blowout preventer to slow them down. Injury and loss of livelihood suits, suits from hotels for loss of bookings, suits from restaurants, bars, stores, suits for mental anguish, even claims from municipalities for loss of taxes.
The future?
There is a large, years-old black spot in my driveway where my old Jeep once leaked a quart of transmission oil. It's not fading away. The BP spill is likewise staining the coast's soil, and sinking into the psychological fabric of the Gulf. Beneath the sorrow lies suspicion and anger based on the notion that if this spill had occurred near a place like Boston harbor where a lot of wealthy, well-connected people live, every oil-skimmer in the hemisphere would have been brought in and every offer of foreign help accepted immediately, instead of 71 days after the spill began.
The locals have watched with disbelief some of BP's lunatic and expensive clean-up methods, such as wiping down each blade of marsh grass with paper towels. They have watched their own, more effective, home-grown efforts ridiculed and crushed by irrelevant Coast Guard regulations and "experts" who have never seen Louisiana's coast except perhaps through the windows of a plane.
In three to 10 years, maybe the lawsuits will be settled, maybe the sea grasses will grow back to hold the marshlands together, maybe the fish now trying to breathe clouds of undersea oil will somehow propagate, maybe trust in the world's best seafood will return.
But a person's life is composed of minutes and is most fulfilled by working and bringing one's earnings to the family table. And who can give back even one ruined minute?
http://solveclimate.com/blog/20100731/gulf-outsiders-little-understand-what-happening-people-inside
-
BP Oil Spill: Endangered Species Still at Risk
Deepwater Horizon spill leads to rise in dolphins and endangered brown pelicans injured or killed this week
By Suzanne Goldenberg, Guardian
Aug 9, 2010
U.S. officials recorded a big jump in the numbers of dolphins and endangered brown pelican and sea turtle injured or killed by the BP spill over the past week, even as officials were proclaiming that the oil was rapidly disappearing from the Gulf.
Some 1,020 sea turtles were caught up in the spill, according to figures today – an ominous number for an endangered species. Wildlife officials collected 177 sea turtles last week – more than in the first two months of the spill and a sizeable share of the 1,020 captured since the spill began more than three months ago. Some 517 of that total number were dead and 440 were covered in oil, according to figures maintained the Deepwater Horizon response team.
"It is a high number for any endangered species," said Elizabeth Wilson, a scientist for the Oceana conservation group.
The number of dolphins, whales and other marine mammals captured or found dead also rose last week, from 69 to 76. An analysis by the National Wildlife Federation said the numbers of oiled birds collected had nearly doubled since the well was capped, from 37 to 71 a day.
It is unclear why the numbers of injured and dead wildlife have jumped. One official at the Deepwater Horizon response command claimed that the rescue effort had intensified over recent days, but did not provide numbers for increased crew.
Others suggested that oil was moving into wildlife habitats, or that animals initally exposes to smaller quantities of oil were sickening over time.
Conservation groups also accused wildlife officials of misjudging their earlier rescue efforts and putting some at risk species – such as the brown pelican – in greater danger.
Wildlife officials had earlier held back from visiting islands in Barataria Bay that are sanctuaries for brown pelican for fear of disrupting their nesting season.
But that concern to avoid disturbing habitat may have put pelican eggs and hatchlings at greater risk once able-bodied pelican fled the oil.
"There has been a lot of criticism of fish and wildlife for the fact that they never actually went on the islands, and because they did not, abandoned nests were left so that any chicks that were already hatched died, and any eggs that were left were also left to die," said Cynthia Sarthou executive director of the Gulf Restoration Network
-
Birds
1917 captured alive
846 rehabilitated and released
4187 collected dead
Mammals (?)
78 dead
Turtles
Over 500 dead
Over 400 captured for rehabilitation
http://www.ibrrc.org/gulf-oil-spill-birds-treated-numbers-2010.html
These numbers are underestimates, perhaps gross underestimates. There are stories circulating about the "night-time" secret collection of carcasses, under tight security. The speculation is that BP doesn't wish to pay the 50k per each "endangered species" carcass, per a wildlife protection act, but I think it's more about publicity and the complicity in the new push to present everything as "ok". Everything's ok - the president had a swim off Pensacola Beach. Which, frankly, makes him complicit too.
-
I'm still digesting this intellectually... can't say yet that I fully comprehend it. But it is of interest that BP has put much of the scientific community residing on the Gulf on their payroll: this report comes out of Georgia, whose coast is not on the Gulf.
Report concludes that nearly 80 percent of oil from Gulf spill remains
Media briefing featuring Samantha Joye, Charles Hopkinson scheduled for 11 a.m., Aug. 17
Writer: Sam Fahmy, 706/542-5361, sfahmy@uga.edu
Contact: Jill Gambill, 305/542-8975, jgambill@uga.edu
Aug 16, 2010, 16:56
Athens, Ga. – A report released today by the Georgia Sea Grant and the University of Georgia concludes that up to 79 percent of the oil released into the Gulf of Mexico from the Deepwater Horizon well has not been recovered and remains a threat to the ecosystem.
The report, authored by five prominent marine scientists, strongly contradicts media reports that suggest that only 25 percent of the oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill remains.
“One major misconception is that oil that has dissolved into water is gone and, therefore, harmless,” said Charles Hopkinson, director of Georgia Sea Grant and professor of marine sciences in the University of Georgia Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. “The oil is still out there, and it will likely take years to completely degrade. We are still far from a complete understanding of what its impacts are.”
Co-authors on the paper include Jay Brandes, associate professor, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography; Samantha Joye, professor of marine sciences, UGA; Richard Lee, professor emeritus, Skidaway; and Ming-yi Sun, professor of marine sciences UGA.
Hopkinson and Joye will discuss the report and the fate of gas released into the Gulf of Mexico at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 17. The briefing will be held in Room 261 of the Marine Sciences building on the UGA campus. Reporters can join the briefing via teleconference by dialing toll-free 888-204-5987 and entering access code 2560397.
The group analyzed data from the Aug. 2 National Incident Command Report, which calculated an “oil budget” that was widely interpreted to suggest that only 25 percent of the oil from the spill remained.
Hopkinson notes that the reports arrive at different conclusions largely because the Sea Grant and UGA scientists estimate that the vast majority of the oil classified as dispersed, dissolved or residual is still present, whereas the NIC report has been interpreted to suggest that only the “residual” form of oil is still present.
Hopkinson said that his group also estimated how much of the oil could have evaporated, degraded or weathered as of the date of the report. Using a range of reasonable evaporation and degradation estimates, the group calculated that 70-79 percent of oil spilled into the Gulf still remains. The group showed that it was impossible for all the dissolved oil to have evaporated because only oil at the surface of the ocean can evaporate into the atmosphere and large plumes of oil are trapped in deep water.
Another difference is that the NIC report estimates that 4.9 million barrels of oil were released from the wellhead, while the Sea Grant report uses a figure of 4.1 million barrels since .8 million barrels were piped directly from the well to surface ships and, therefore, never entered Gulf waters.
On a positive note, the group noted that natural processes continue to transform, dilute, degrade and evaporate the oil. They add that circular current known as the Franklin Eddy is preventing the Loop Current from bringing oil-contaminated water from the Gulf to the Atlantic, which bodes well for the East Coast.
Joye said that both the NIC report and the Sea Grant report are best estimates and emphasizes the need for a sustained and coordinated research effort to better understand the impacts of what has become the world’s worst maritime oil spill. She warned that neither report accounted for hydrocarbon gasses such as methane in their oil budgets.
“That’s a gaping hole,” Joye said, “because hydrocarbon gasses are a huge portion of what was ejected from the well.”
The complete Georgia Sea Grant/University of Georgia Oil Spill report is available online at http://uga.edu/aboutUGA/joye_pkit/GeorgiaSeaGrant_OilSpillReport8-16.pdf.
Figures from the report are available at http://uga.edu/aboutUGA/joye_pkit/GeorgiaSeaGrant_OilChart.pdf.
http://www.uga.edu/news/artman/publish/100816_Sea_Grant.shtml
-
Health Effects of the Gulf Oil Spill
Gina M. Solomon, MD, MPH; Sarah Janssen, MD, PhD, MPH
JAMA. Published online August 16, 2010. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1254
The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico poses direct threats to human health from inhalation or dermal contact with the oil and dispersant chemicals, and indirect threats to seafood safety and mental health. Physicians should be familiar with health effects from oil spills to appropriately advise, diagnose, and treat patients who live and work along the Gulf Coast or wherever a major oil spill occurs.
The main components of crude oil are aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons.1 Lower-molecular-weight aromatics—such as benzene, toluene, and xylene—are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and evaporate within hours after the oil reaches the surface. Volatile organic compounds can cause respiratory irritation and central nervous system (CNS) depression. Benzene is known to cause leukemia in humans, and toluene is a recognized teratogen at high doses.1 Higher-molecular-weight chemicals such as naphthalene evaporate more slowly. Naphthalene is listed by the National Toxicology Program as "reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans" based on olfactory neuroblastomas, nasal tumors, and lung cancers in animals.2 Oil can also release hydrogen sulfide gas and contains traces of heavy metals, as well as nonvolatile polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that can contaminate the food chain. Hydrogen sulfide gas is neurotoxic and has been linked to both acute and chronic CNS effects; PAHs include mutagens and probable carcinogens.1 Burning oil generates particulate matter, which is associated with cardiac and respiratory symptoms and premature mortality. The Gulf oil spill is unique because of the large-scale use of dispersants to break up the oil slick. By late July, more than 1.8 million gallons of dispersant had been applied in the Gulf. Dispersants contain detergents, surfactants, and petroleum distillates, including respiratory irritants such as 2-butoxyethanol, propylene glycol, and sulfonic acid salts.
Acute Health Effects From Oil and Dispersants
In Louisiana in the early months of the oil spill, more than 300 individuals, three-fourths of whom were cleanup workers, sought medical care for constitutional symptoms such as headaches, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, cough, respiratory distress, and chest pain. These symptoms are typical of acute exposure to hydrocarbons or hydrogen sulfide, but it is difficult to clinically distinguish toxic symptoms from other common illnesses.1
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set up an air monitoring network to test for VOCs, particulate matter, hydrogen sulfide, and naphthalene. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention analysis of the EPA data concluded: "The levels of some of the pollutants that have been reported to date may cause temporary eye, nose, or throat irritation, nausea, or headaches, but are not thought to be high enough to cause long-term harm."3 Data posted on BP's Web site suggest that air quality for workers offshore is worse than on land. Local temperatures pose a risk of heat-related illness, which is exacerbated by wearing coveralls and respirators, implying a trade-off between protection from chemical hazards and heat.
Skin contact with oil and dispersants causes defatting, resulting in dermatitis and secondary skin infections. Some individuals may develop a dermal hypersensitivity reaction, erythema, edema, burning sensations, or a follicular rash. Some hydrocarbons are phototoxic.
Potential Long-term Health Risks
In the near term, various hydrocarbons from the oil will contaminate fish and shellfish. Although vertebrate marine life can clear PAHs from their system, these chemicals accumulate for years in invertebrates.4 The Gulf provides about two-thirds of the oysters in the United States and is a major fishery for shrimp and crab. Trace amounts of cadmium, mercury, and lead occur in crude oil and can accumulate over time in fish tissues, potentially increasing future health hazards from consumption of large fin fish such as tuna and mackerel.
Health Effects From Historic Oil Spills
After the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, a total of 1811 workers' compensation claims were filed by cleanup workers; most were for acute injuries but 15% were for respiratory problems and 2% for dermatitis.5 No information is available in the peer-reviewed literature about longer-term health effects of this spill. A survey of the health status of workers 14 years after the cleanup found a greater prevalence of symptoms of chronic airway disease among workers with high oil exposures, as well as self-reports of neurological impairment and multiple chemical sensitivity.6
Symptom surveys performed in the weeks or months following oil spills have reported a higher prevalence of headache, throat irritation, and sore or itchy eyes in exposed individuals compared with controls. Some studies have also reported modestly increased rates of diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, rash, wheezing, cough, and chest pain.7 One study of 6780 fishermen, which included 4271 oil spill cleanup workers, found a higher prevalence of lower respiratory tract symptoms 2 years after oil spill cleanup activities. The risk of lower respiratory tract symptoms increased with the intensity of exposure.8
A study of 858 individuals involved in the cleanup of the Prestige oil spill in Spain in 2002 investigated acute genetic toxicity in volunteers and workers. Increased DNA damage, as assessed by the Comet assay, was found in volunteers, especially in those working on the beaches.7 In the same study, workers had lower levels of CD4 cells, IL-2, IL-4, IL-10, and interferon compared with their own preexposure levels.
Studies following major oil spills in Alaska, Spain, Korea, and Wales have documented elevated rates of anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and psychological stress.9 A mental health survey of 599 local residents 1 year after the Exxon Valdez spill found that exposed individuals were 3.6 times more likely to have anxiety disorder, 2.9 times more likely to have posttraumatic stress disorder, and 2.1 times more likely to score high on a depression index.10 Adverse mental health effects were observed up to 6 years after the oil spill.
Approach to Patients
Clinicians should be aware of toxicity from exposures to oil and related chemicals. Patients presenting with constitutional symptoms should be asked about occupational exposures and location of residence. The physical examination should focus on the skin, respiratory tract, and neurological system, documenting any signs that could be associated with oil-related chemicals. Care consists primarily of documentation of signs and symptoms, evaluation to rule out or treat other potential causes of the symptoms, removal from exposure, and supportive care.
Prevention of illness from oil and related chemicals on the Gulf Coast during the cleanup period includes proper protective equipment for workers and common-sense precautions for community residents. Workers require proper training and equipment that includes boots, gloves, coveralls, and safety glasses, as well as respirators when potentially hazardous levels of airborne vapors, aerosols, or particulate matter exist. Workers should also take precautions to avoid heat-related illness (rest breaks and drinking sufficient fluids). All worker injuries and illnesses should be reported to ensure proper tracking.
Community residents should not fish in off-limit areas or where there is evidence of oil. Fish or shellfish with an oily odor should be discarded. Direct skin contact with contaminated water, oil, or tar balls should be avoided. If community residents notice a strong odor of oil or chemicals and are concerned about health effects, they should seek refuge in an air-conditioned environment. Interventions to address mental health in the local population should be incorporated into clinical and public health response efforts. Over the longer term, cohort studies of Gulf cleanup workers and local residents will greatly enhance the scientific data on the health sequelae of oil spills.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author: Gina M. Solomon, MD, MPH, Department of Medicine, UCSF, and Natural Resources Defense Council, 111 Sutter St, 20th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104 (gsolomon@nrdc.org).
Published Online: August 16, 2010. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1254
Author Affiliations: Department of Medicine, University of California-San Francisco, and Natural Resources Defense Council, San Francisco, California.
REFERENCES
1. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Toxicological Profile for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH). Atlanta, GA: US Dept of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service; 1999.
2. National Toxicology Program. Naphthalene. Report on Carcinogens. 11th ed. Research Triangle Park, NC: US Dept of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service; 2005. http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s116znph.pdf. Accessed August 9, 2010.
3. US Environmental Protection Agency. Odors from the BP Oil Spill. http://epa.gov/bpspill/odor.html. Accessed June 7, 2010.
4. Law RJ, Hellou J. Contamination of fish and shellfish following oil spill incidents. Environ Geosci. 1999;6(2):90-98. FREE FULL TEXT
5. Gorma RW, Berardinelli SP, Bender TR. HETA 89-200 and 89-273-2111, Exxon/Valdez Alaska Oil Spill. Health Hazard Evaluation Report. Cincinnati, OH: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 1991.
6. O’Neill AK. Self-Reported Exposures and Health Status Among Workers From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Cleanup [master's thesis]. New Haven, CT: Yale University; 2003.
7. Rodríguez-Trigo G, Zock JP, Isidro Montes I. Health effects of exposure to oil spills [in Spanish]. Arch Bronconeumol. 2007;43(11):628-635. PUBMED
8. Zock JP, Rodríguez-Trigo G, Pozo-Rodríguez F; et al, SEPAR-Prestige Study Group. Prolonged respiratory symptoms in clean-up workers of the Prestige oil spill. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;176(6):610-616. FREE FULL TEXT
9. Sabucedo JM, Arce C, Senra C, Seoane G, Vázquez I. Symptomatic profile and health-related quality of life of persons affected by the Prestige catastrophe. Disasters. 2010;34(3):809-820. PUBMED
10. Palinkas LA, Petterson JS, Russell J, Downs MA. Community patterns of psychiatric disorders after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Am J Psychiatry. 1993;150(10):1517-1523. FREE FULL TEXT
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/jama.2010.1254v1
-
Birds
1968 captured alive
1000 rehabilitated and released
4642 collected dead
Mammals (?)
78 dead
Turtles
Over 500 dead
Over 400 captured for rehabilitation
http://www.ibrrc.org/gulf-oil-spill-birds-treated-numbers-2010.html
-
Read an article about a wildlife refuge in Arkansas who, expecting their usual visits by the fall migration, will be flooding the refuge, so as to discourage their visitors from continuing their journey to the Gulf. In other words, they're increasing their wetland environment so as to encourage more birds to stay there, rather than to fly further south, into harm's way.
(Was really impressed with the creativity there.)
-
That's a bit of good news - news of some goodness in the world.
-
That's a bit of good news - news of some goodness in the world.
Yes! And truth be told, there are many stories out right now about the rescue work going on around the Gulf. Many groups are involved...
-
I'm going to post this, despite its semi-inflammatory nature. It fits with all the other numerous articles I've been reading. It's always possible that the article is wrong - in fact, I hope it's wrong in its ultimate conclusions. But there has indeed been a cover-up, so one has to ask, why?
Walking dead: Ongoing BP Gulf disaster may be killing millions
by Terrence Aym
“I think the media now has to...tell the American people who’s getting money for poisoning the millions of people in the Gulf." - Hugh Kaufman, senior EPA analyst, admits millions have been poisoned in the Gulf states.
A biochemical bomb went off in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010—a bomb that was as dangerous and destructive as a nuclear blast.
An atom bomb’s death and destruction can be measured immediately after detonation while BP’s unintentional biochemical bomb is a slow-motion explosion that is driving a disaster that continues even now.
Lingering death, however, occurs with both types of explosions.
Millions exposed to uncontrolled hemorrhaging, lesions, cancers
Recently, enraged scientists have presented strong evidence that millions of Gulf area residents have been poisoned by the BP Gulf disaster. Worse, millions more could be exposed to long term poisoning from benzene contamination. Benzene exposure leads to cancers.
Yet other than those furious scientists few seemed to care.
Now, however, more frightening evidence has emerged that areas of the Gulf Coast may have been not only saturated with high levels of benzene, but hydrogen sulfide and radioactive hydrocarbon effluents too-three deadly substances that can cause disease and death years after the initial exposures.
The EPA and the ongoing news blackout
The curtain of silence that swiftly descended just days after the Deepwater Horizon blowout at the Macondo well has never been fully lifted. At the time, a no-man's land was created prohibiting fishermen, reporters, news helicopters and civilian sea and air craft from approaching the immediate disaster zone. The US Coast Guard and BP conducted joint operations feverishly attempting to quell the spreading disaster.
Reporters were threatened with arrest. News stories were yanked. Scientific reports buried. And data from the NOAA research vessel—initially sent to the region to take readings of the seafloor—was suppressed.
Yet, like the oil and gas, information leaked.
Beyond the oil gushing into the Gulf at a rate never before seen, deadly methane gas also flooded the region. The methane reached such high levels of density in the Gulf that brilliant scientists like Dr. John Kessler of Texas A&M recorded stunning readings of methane amounts one million times higher than normal. His reports reached the media.
Although access to the forbidden zone has since been restored, a partial news blackout regarding the chemical readings and data that were measured in the Gulf waters and the Gulf states from April into August continues.
A conveyor belt of death: deep sea oil plume 22-miles long
Despite the "all-clear" pronouncements of talk radio commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, the Gulf has not "magically cleaned itself up."
Poisons flooded into the Gulf for three months. Unabated, these poisons have affected the ecology of the region. Now more evidence is mounting that the delicate infrastructure of life inhabiting the Gulf continues to absorb much of the poison and is passing it on to unsuspecting humans. Reports that sea life in the Gulf have remained uncontaminated are being vigorously challenged.
And new reports are circulating the globe that the missing oil’s been found. A plume 22-miles long is suspended deep in the cold, dark waters of the Gulf. It’s not breaking up and it’s not being eaten by microbes.
It is, however, acting as a conveyor belt of death.
Cocktail of poisons
Some environmental experts are calling what’s pouring into the land, sea and air from the seabed breach ‘a chemical cocktail of poisons.’
Areas of methane dead zones devoid of oxygen are continuing to drive species of fish into foreign waters, are killing plankton and other tiny sea life that are the foundation for the entire food chain, and are polluting the air with cancer-causing chemicals and poisonous rainfalls.
And before the news blackout fully descended, the EPA released data that benzene levels in New Orleans had rocketed to as high as 3,000 parts per billion (ppb).
Benzene is extremely toxic, even short term exposure at low levels can cause agonizing illness and slow death from cancerous lesions and leukemia years later. But 3,000ppb is far from a low reading.
Hydrogen sulfide was also detected by the EPA monitoring stations around the New Orleans area. The EPA reported hydrogen sulfide levels as high as 1200ppb. A normal, safe level falls between 5 to 10ppb.
Recently, Ron Kendall, an ecotoxicologist from Texas Tech University, was interviewed by National Geographic concerning the affect of the poisons released by the blown out well on bacteria and plankton in the Gulf.
The results were not looking good. Indications of a major, ongoing poisoning occurring in the Gulf were widespread. "This is what we've been worried about, because this is the base of the food chain," he told National Geographic.
"Any effects on that level can work their way right on up."
Meaning right up the food chain to humans—many of whom have already been exposed to poisons from the air and water.
The bio-chemical time bomb
A hamstrung oil giant unable to stop a gigantic disaster; the federal government's inaction and misdirection; angry governors unable to get federal agencies to lend a hand; a Nobel Prize winning physicist appointed as the head of the task force dealing with the Gulf—a man who couldn't tell a drill bit from a drill press…This is either a script for a bad Hollywood movie or a reality that could lead to the eventual premature death of millions.
Unfortunately, it's a reality. And the BP Gulf ticking time bomb continues to tick.
According to a report issued by Michael Harbart, Professor of internal medicine at Wayne State University and Kathleen Burns, Ph.D., Director of Sciencecorps, long-term exposure of the chemicals released by the ongoing BP Gulf disaster—at relatively low levels—should be avoided at all costs because "the potential for serious health damage is substantial. Chronic health effects are typically evaluated for specific crude oil components and vary from cancer to permanent neurological damage. They cover a range of diseases affecting all the organ systems..."
[Sciencecorps.org: "Gulf Oil Spill Health Hazards"]
In their JAMA paper, the “Health Effects of the Gulf Oil Spill,” Gina M. Solomon and Sarah Janssen categorically state that “The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico poses direct threats to human health…”
They further point to that infamous “cocktail of poisons” again naming benzene, hydrogen sulfide, toluene, and xylene among other toxic airborne contaminants that have been released over the residents of the Gulf coast community.
Senior EPA analyst admits millions poisoned in Gulf
Recently—in an eye-opening interview with 'Democracy Now!'—Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst at the EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, made this shocking admission:
"And I think the media now has to follow the money, just as they did in Watergate, and tell the American people who’s getting money for poisoning the millions of people in the Gulf."
As Alexander Higgins at 'Democracy Now!' points out: “Hugh Kaufman has been at the EPA since the Agency was created in the early 1970s, as an engineer, investigator and policy analyst. Prior to joining the EPA in the beginning of 1971, he was a captain in the US Air Force. He helped write all the Federal laws regulating the treatment, storage, disposal, and remediation of solid and hazardous waste. He has been the Chief Investigator on numerous contamination cases, including Love Canal and Times Beach.”
For more of the transcript and the EPA analyst’s video testimony go here.
The walking dead
Like those exposed to the Russian Chernobyl disaster, or the many thousands now sick and dying after exposure to the 9-11 Twin Towers toxic cloud, the people of the Gulf coast may have joined the ranks of the walking dead.
Experts cannot predict with any certainty that the poisons will be contained exclusively to the Gulf states. Weather patterns and the variable density of the substances could conceivably expand the Death Zone into parts of the Midwest and East coast of the United States.
What happened leading up to the Deepwater Horizon disaster can be debated as an accident or a folly, but what has happened to millions of people in the aftermath can be called nothing but criminal.
Now BP and the federal government have been attempting to assuage public concerns and claim that the Gulf disaster has been much ado about nothing.
Their claims are being met by skepticism. The response from Washington has been excuses. Although that will be of little consolation to the children and adults that may contract leukemia or other debilitating diseases a mere handful of years from now.
Excuses are of little value to the dead.
http://www.helium.com/items/1929422-bp-gulf-disaster-may-be-killing-millions?page=1
Benzene Toxicity (http://www.leukemiainfocenter.com/Benzene_Toxicity.html)
New Orleans' '4WWL TV News' report on EPA benzene levels [May 2010 before news blackout.]
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGxGVGiD3yk)
Hydrogen Sulfide Gas Toxicity (http://www.alken-murray.com/H2SREM9.HTM)
Toxicological Profile of Hydrogen Sulfide PDF (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp114-c2.pdf)
Radioactivity exposure: air, water, food supply
“Radioactive Hydrocarbon Effluent ...from oil and which possesses higher levels of radium isotopes. The deeper the petroleum reserves, the more likely the reservoirs of oil and methane in those geological formations will contain uranium, thorium or radium. Given the elevated levels of radioactivity at the source, the level of radioactivity associated with the hydrocarbon effluent coming out of the well will inevitably be impacted. Radium isotopes have inherent health risks that ought to be identified and properly disseminated. The concerned resident of the Gulf Coast may want to initiate him/herself in the area of health impacts due to long-term exposure to low grade radioactivity. Of course, the seafood, the waters and the beaches all provide different vehicles for such contamination to take place, each with varying consequences.'
Environmental and Health Impacts of the BP Gulf Oil Spill
(http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article21717.html)
Scientists plead dispersants not be used
Dispersants consensus statement [PDF] (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/TODAY/Sections/aNEWS/2010/07-July%2010/ScientistsConsensusStatement.pdf)
Continued Abundance of corroborative links at:
http://www.helium.com/items/1929422-bp-gulf-disaster-may-be-killing-millions?page=3
-
How Has It Come to This? (http://www.truth-out.org/how-has-it-come-this62558)
Scenes from Grand Isle, Louisianna
-
National Wildlife Federation Urges Attorney General to Consider Gulf Gas as Well As Oil
Including Gas in Gusher Tally Raises Potential Penalties by 50 percent
08-25-2010 // Miles Grant
Oil burning in Gulf of Mexico
The National Wildlife Federation and the Natural Resources Defense Council sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder today urging him to hold BP and other parties accountable for both the oil and hydrocarbon gas spilled in the Gulf of Mexico gusher.
While attention has focused almost exclusively on the millions of barrels of crude oil spilled, the discharge and effect of large quantities of hydrocarbon gases like methane and propane have been virtually ignored.
“To hold BP fully accountable for the impacts of the Gulf disaster, the Department of Justice needs to calculate civil penalties by combining both the oil and gas discharges – a total that’s 50 percent higher than the oil alone,” said John Kostyack , executive director for wildlife conservation and global warming with the National Wildlife Federation. “While the public’s attention has been focused mainly on oil, both the Oil Pollution Act and Clean Water Act make it clear that penalties should consider both oil and gas.”
When calculated in equivalent units of weight, the magnitude of discharged oil plus gas is equal to one and a half times the oil alone. In other words, if 172 million gallons (4.1 million barrels) of oil were discharged into U.S. waters, the total discharge in barrel of oil equivalents (oil plus gas) was actually more than 252 million gallons (6 million barrels).
“While it will take time to fully understand the effects of the Gulf disaster, we’re deeply concerned about hydrocarbon gas discharge because so much of it will dissolve into the water before reaching the surface,” said Dr. Ian MacDonald, professor of oceanography at Florida State University. “These effects may include neurological damage and death for fish and other marine life.”
Examples of a cause and effect relationship between large natural gas releases and mass fish mortality were found in the early 1980s in what is now Ukraine. Accidental gas blowouts in the Sea of Azov in 1982 and then again in 1985 significantly impacted flounder and sturgeon populations, resulting in impaired movement, weakened muscle tone, and cell membrane damage.
“Even if microbes work to degrade the hydrocarbon gases, they’ll be competing for oxygen and other nutrients with microbes attacking oil,” said Dr. Lisa Suatoni, senior scientist with NRDC’s Oceans Program. “That could significantly affect the overall degradation process.”
http://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/Media-Center/News-by-Topic/Wildlife/2010/08-25-10-Including-Gas-In-Gusher-Tally.aspx
-
NOAA Claims Scientists Reviewed Controversial Report; The Scientists Say Otherwise
By Dan Froomkin
Huffington Post
In responding to the growing furor over the public release of a scientifically dubious and overly rosy federal report about the fate of the oil that BP spilled in the Gulf of Mexico, NOAA director Jane Lubchenco has repeatedly fallen back on one particular line of defense -- that independent scientists had given it their stamp of approval.
Back at the report's unveiling on August 4, Lubchenco spoke of a "peer review of the calculations that went into this by both other federal and non-federal scientists." On Thursday afternoon, she told reporters on a conference call: "The report and the calculations that went into it were reviewed by independent scientists." The scientists, she said, were listed at the end of the report.
But all the scientists on that list contacted by the Huffington Post for comment this week said the exact same thing: That although they provided some input to NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), they in no way reviewed the report, and could not vouch for it.
The skimpy, four-page report dominated an entire news cycle earlier this month, with contented administration officials claiming it meant that three fourths of the oil released from BP's well was essentially gone -- evaporated, dispersed, burned, etc. But independent scientists are increasingly challenging the report's findings and its interpretation -- and they are expressing outrage that the administration released no actual data or algorithms to support its claims.
HuffPost reached seven of the 11 scientists listed on the report. One declined to comment at all, six others had things to say.
In addition to disputing Lubchenco's characterization of their role, several of them actually took issue with the report itself.
In particular, they refuted the notion, as put forth by Lubchenco and other Obama administration officials, that the report was either scientifically precise or an authoritative account of where the oil went.
Story continues below
"What we were trying to do was give the Incident Command something that they could at least start with," said Ed Overton, an emeritus professor of environmental science at Louisiana State University. "But these are estimates. There's a difference between data and estimates."
Overton said NOAA asked him: "How much did I think would evaporate?" He responded with some ideas, but noted: "There's a jillion parameters which are not very amenable to modeling."
He said he didn't know what NOAA did with his input. "I pretty much did my estimates and let that go," he said.
And Overton bridled at the way the report was presented -- with very precise percentages attributed to different categories. For instance, the report declared that 24 percent of the oil had been dispersed.
"I didn't like the way they say 24 percent. We don't know that," Overton said. "They could have said a little bit more than a quarter, a little bit less than a quarter. But not 24 percent; that's impossible."
Michel Boufadel is on the list, but told HuffPost he did not review the report or its calculations. And the Temple University environmental engineer also said its specificity was inappropriate.
"When you look at that dispersed amount, and it says 8 percent chemically dispersed and 16 percent naturally dispersed, there's a high degree of uncertainty here," he said. "Naturally dispersed could be 6 or it could be 26."
Ron Goodman, a 30-year veteran of Exxon's Canadian affiliate who now runs his own consulting company, was incorrectly listed on the report with an academic affiliation: "U. of Calgary." He is only an adjunct there. He said he responded to a series of questions from NOAA -- "and that was it."
And once the report came out, he said, "I was concerned that the amount dispersed was very low. I think it was higher by maybe a factor of two or three."
In another example of how people are reading too much into the report, there has been some discussion suggesting that its estimate that 8 percent of the oil was chemically dispersed provides a new data point regarding how well those controversial chemicals worked. Goodman, however, said he believes the government scientists didn't base their conclusion on evidence, but on faith.
"They took the amount of dispersant that was applied, and multiplied it by 20 which is the manufacturer's suggested amount," he said.
Merv Fingas, a former chief researcher for Canada's environmental protection agency, said he thought the report was purely operational in nature. "The purpose of this was for the responders, and to tell them what to do -- as opposed to saying 'golly, the oil's all gone.' That was never the impression. That was very badly misinterpreted."
Fingas said the scientists stressed how broad the ranges should be for the estimates. "On the pie chart, if you say 15 percent, it could maybe be 30, it could maybe be 5."
Told how much certainty administration officials expressed in the estimates -- "we have high degree of confidence in them," is how Lubchenco put it -- Fingas was blunt.
"That's what happens when stuff goes from scientists to politicians," he said. "It was exactly the opposite with the scientists. We had a lot of uncertainty."
Juan Lasheras, an engineering professor at University of California, San Diego, on the list explained: "My involvement with the estimation of the oil spill budget has been minimal. I simply assisted Bill Lehr (NOAA) in a minor way with the estimation of the size of the oil droplets generated by the rising plume. I have not been involved in any of the other calculations or in the discussion and the writing of the report."
Jim Payne, a private environmental consultant on the list, declined to comment beyond saying: "I really don't know that much about how that was calculated."
Also worth noting: Four of the "independent scientists" listed on the report work for the oil industry, have until recently, and/or work for consulting companies that do business with the oil industry.
What happened here? Why did ballpark estimates clearly created to guide emergency responders suddenly get cast as a conclusive scientific facts? (See my story from a few hours ago, Questions Mount About White House's Overly Rosy Report On Oil Spill.)
Why did administration officials mislead the public about those findings -- and then claim that independent scientists had reviewed them, when the evidence suggests that they did not?
NOAA public affairs officials did not respond to requests for comment before my deadline.
Ian R. MacDonald, an oceanographer at Florida State University who was not one of the scientists on NOAA's list, sees this latest incident as part of an ongoing problem.
Lubchenco had previously been a key figure in the patently low-ball estimates for the oil flow, and fervently resisted acknowledging the existence of underwater oil plumes, he said.
"I've worked with NOAA essentially all my career and I have many good friends there, and people I respect in the agency, scientists who are really solid," MacDonald said.
"Throughout this process, it's been troubling to me to see the efforts of people like that passed through a filter where the objective seems to be much more political and public relations than making comments to inform the public.
"The consistent theme," MacDonald said, "seems to be to minimize the impact of the oil -- and to act as a bottleneck for information."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/20/noaa-claims-scientists-re_n_689428.html
-
So it goes on. Unfortunately it is not just BP that wants this subject off the radar. I would say both political parties are keen to forget it - Democrats because they are in Government, and Republicans because they are on the side of de-regulated industry. It is politically too fraught with pitfalls for any politician.
-
There has been another oil rig explosion in the Gulf, to the west of Deepwater Horizon. It's not one of BP's rigs, and there is a leak associated with it.
-
Shades of extortion ...
BP Says Limits on Drilling Imperil Spill Payouts
By CLIFFORD KRAUSS and JOHN M. BRODER
Published: September 2, 2010
New York Times
BP is warning Congress that if lawmakers pass legislation that bars the company from getting new offshore drilling permits, it may not have the money to pay for all the damages caused by its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
The company says a ban would also imperil the ambitious Gulf Coast restoration efforts that officials want the company to voluntarily support.
BP executives insist that they have not backed away from their commitment to the White House to set aside $20 billion in an escrow fund over the next four years to pay damage claims and government penalties stemming from the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. The explosion killed 11 workers and spewed millions of barrels of oil into the gulf.
The company has also agreed to contribute $100 million to a foundation to support rig workers who have lost their jobs because of the administration’s deepwater drilling moratorium. And it pledged $500 million for a 10-year research program to study the impact of the spill.
But as state and federal officials, individuals and businesses continue to seek additional funds beyond the minimum fines and compensation that BP must pay under the law, the company has signaled its reluctance to cooperate unless it can continue to operate in the Gulf of Mexico. The gulf accounts for 11 percent of its global production.
“If we are unable to keep those fields going, that is going to have a substantial impact on our cash flow,” said David Nagel, BP’s executive vice president for BP America, in an interview. That, he added, “makes it harder for us to fund things, fund these programs.”
The requests keep coming for BP to provide additional money to the Gulf Coast to help mitigate the effects of the spill. This week, Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, reiterated his request that BP finance a five-year, $173 million program to test, certify and promote gulf seafood.
BP has already agreed to pay for some measures that exceed its legal obligations. For instance, to help promote tourism in affected regions, it donated $32 million to Florida’s marketing efforts and $15 million each to Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama.
But the company, which is based in London, now appears to be using such voluntary payments as a bargaining chip with American lawmakers.
BP is particularly concerned about a drilling overhaul bill passed by the House on July 30. The bill includes an amendment that would bar any company from receiving permits to drill on the Outer Continental Shelf if more than 10 fatalities had occurred at its offshore or onshore facilities. It would also bar permits if the company had been penalized with fines of $10 million or more under the Clean Air or Clean Water Acts within a seven-year period.
While BP is not mentioned by name in the legislation, it is the only company that currently meets that description.
The provision was written by Representative George Miller, Democrat of California, who is a strong environmental advocate and a close ally of Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker.
It was specifically designed to punish BP for its past transgressions, including the Deepwater Horizon explosion, and deny the company access to American offshore oil and natural gas.
“The risk of having a dangerous company like BP develop new resources in the gulf is too great,” said Daniel Weiss, Mr. Miller’s chief of staff. “Year after year after year, no matter how many incidents they’re involved in, no matter how many fines they’ve had to pay, they never changed their behavior. BP has no one to blame but themselves.”
BP’s concerns are becoming public as the company begins final preparations for permanently sealing its stricken well. On Thursday, it removed the temporary cap on top of the well, which had earlier been blocked with cement, so that it could replace the blowout preventer. The blowout preventer, a massive piece of equipment whose valves failed to shut down the oil flow after the explosion, is a crucial piece of evidence in the investigation.
Andrew Gowers, a BP spokesman, said that BP had shown good will by going beyond its legal obligations to clean up the spill and compensate those affected.
“We have committed to do a number of things that are not part of the formal agreement with the White House,” he said. “We are not making a direct statement about anything we are committed to do. We are just expressing frustration that our commitments of good will have at least in some quarters been met with this kind of response.”
Mr. Gowers suggested that the proposed legislation contradicted President Obama’s stated desire to keep BP a strong and viable company after the agreement to set up the escrow fund. He added, “I am not going to make a direct linkage to the $20 billion, but our ability to fund these assets and the cash coming from these assets that are securing these funds would be lost” if the House bill were enacted by Congress.
BP executives have said that regulators in other countries have not circumscribed their deepwater operations since the gulf accident. The only exception came in Greenland, where officials quietly told BP that it was not welcome to join in an auction for offshore leases in a new Arctic drilling zone.
BP is the largest producer of oil and gas in the gulf, pumping 400,000 barrels a day and accounting for about 20 percent of total production from deepwater reservoirs in the region. The company operates 89 production wells and shares a stake in 60 other wells operated by partner companies.
As BP has tried to raise cash to pay for damages caused by the spill, it has suspended its dividend and intends to sell off as much as $30 billion of assets around the world.
But the Gulf of Mexico remains crucial to the company’s finances.
“The gulf is the most profitable barrel in BP’s portfolio,” said Fadel Gheit, a managing director at Oppenheimer & Company. He estimated that the gulf generated $5 billion to $7 billion in profits annually for BP, or about a quarter of the company’s total.
Mr. Weiss dismissed BP’s warning that it might not be able to meet its financial obligations. “BP has substantial assets, whether they develop them or sell them,” he said. “If BP needs to sell assets to meet its financial obligations, that’s a decision they have to make.”
BP said that the House bill would stymie new drilling and cripple the company’s existing gulf operations.
Mr. Nagel said BP had discussed the matter with House leaders, and that company executives intended to discuss the matter with Senate leaders after the summer recess. The Senate version of the drilling reform bill does not specifically ban BP from future leases, but it grants regulators explicit authority to deny leases to companies with safety or environmental problems.
The Obama administration endorsed the overall House bill, but has been silent on the Miller amendment. An Interior Department official said that the agency already had the authority to deny a company guilty of safety or environmental regulations the right to bid on offshore leases.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/03/business/03bp.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
-
Birds
1968 captured alive
1000 rehabilitated and released
4642 collected dead
Mammals (?)
78 dead
Turtles
Over 500 dead
Over 400 captured for rehabilitation
http://www.ibrrc.org/gulf-oil-spill-birds-treated-numbers-2010.html
As of Sept 6:
2055 captured alive
1177 rehabilitated and released
5701 collected dead
Can't locate update on turtles and "mammals", but I did read talk of a "superpod" of dolphins found dead... can't confirm that, though.
-
Millions of Migrating Birds Heading to Oil
Birds from Canada are ready to head south, and are in for a deadly shock when they reach still fouled Gulf Coast.
By Larry O'Hanlon
Wed Sep 8, 2010 09:38 AM ET
Discovery News
THE GIST
Migratory birds are heading south into the troubled shores of Louisiana.
Many areas are too contaminated to support the invertebrates migrating birds require.
Nearly five million Migratory birds from Canada are now winging their way south across North America, and many of them could be in for a nasty shock when they reach the oily marshes and beaches along the Gulf Coast.
"There’s a lurking time bomb for many waterfowl and shorebirds that breed in Canada's boreal forest and winter or stop in the Gulf," said Jeff Wells, senior scientist at the Boreal Songbird Initiative.
There are several concerns ornithologists have about the birds. First of all, they could come into direct contact with oil that's present in many salt marshes, as well as just under the surface of shores and islands off Louisiana.
Then there is the problem of food. Many shorebirds eat small invertebrates that live in the sand along the shore. Now a lot of that sand is saturated with oil just below the surface, which has wiped out the invertebrates.
"The birds are actually dipping their bills down into the oil," said Wells.
The marshes, shores and islands of the Gulf Coast are a bottleneck for birds heading south, as they provide the last chance for many of these birds to fatten up before flying 500 miles across the Gulf to their wintering grounds in the Caribbean or South America. It's arguably one of the word's the worst places to have a major environmental disaster, said Melanie Driscoll, director of bird conservation for the National Audubon Society's Louisiana Coastal Initiative.
In order to see whether migrating birds get mired directly in oil, or if there are any other surprises in bird behavior or health due to the oil spill, the Audubon Society is planning on expanding teams of volunteer and professional bird watchers to monitor what happens in the coming months, and even years.
Among the first things that might be observed, said Driscoll, is a desperate search for food. If shorebirds can't find food, they will start moving around, looking for it in other areas.
"Migrant birds have very plastic behavior," said Driscoll. "We should be able to see changes in the use of habitat."
Driscoll said she recently visited one of the barrier islands off Louisiana and confirmed Wells' concern about the oil. She found oil-saturated sand just a half inch from the surface of the sand. The oil-soaked sand went down as far as she dug, which was about 15 inches, she said. That's very bad news for shorebirds.
"We're not really sure what will happen," Driscoll told Discovery News. Birds might fail to find enough food and then not complete their migration, search much further and find food, or try to fly without eating enough, and not make it.
"To get answers, we're really looking at these long-term monitoring efforts."
It could take years to sort out the effects to migrating birds, because they are difficult to count and, by their nature, move around a lot.
In the case of the Exxon Valdez disaster, the effects to birds are still being seen because oil is still surfacing on the beaches -- 21 years later. But because the Gulf Coast is so much warmer, Driscoll and others hope that the bacterial degradation of the oil will happen faster than in Alaska's colder Prince William Sound.
"What's really going to matter is the long term impacts to this ecosystem," said Driscoll. "It's a bad place to have a really bad natural disaster."
-
Health Effects on Gulf Residents - More and More Come To Light (http://www.oilspill.labucketbrigade.org/reports/?c=24).
-
Some significant Breaking News for us who are watching the birds...
The National Wildlife Federation invoked the Freedom of Information Act to the US Fish and Wildlife Agency, per the impact on the Gulf Birds. Curiously, Fish and Wildlife's data-total only includes half of what the International Bird Rescue has been posting (cited here) number-wise, but their listing of species is more thorough. (Perhaps the totals are older than what IBR has been citing...)
http://www.fws.gov/home/dhoilspill/pdfs/Bird%20Data%20Species%20Spreadsheet%2009142010.pdf
The hardest hit have been the Brown Pelicans, Laughing Gulls, and Northern Gannets. There are many unmentioned-by-IBR species, and many surprises. For example:
~Loons and Mallards are already involved, whereas one might not have expected to see that until well into the Fall migration.
~There are Owls and a few songbirds on the list (Mourning Dove, Mockingbird, American Redstart, Pigeons, Swallows, Purple Martins, some types of Sparrow, Kingbird, and Common Nighthawk).
I'm waiting to see an explanation regarding the discrepancy between the 2 sources: IBR and US Fish and Wildlife. With the latter, being a government agency, one becomes accustomed to the "cover-up factor". Then again, IBR bases its data on BP's own reports, and who better to conceal the facts than them?
IBR's current count:
2070 captured alive
1208 rehabilitated and released
5939 collected dead
Of sporting interest, Canadian Geese are also involved. I'm curious to see if Canada comes forth regarding those numbers (which are low, at present). Technically, the US has an International Treaty with Canada to protect the Canadian Geese...
But hell, the US has hardly protected its own, so I'm absolutely fantasizing that any legal action will make any difference here. As a matter of fact, BP has announced it will not cover Alabama's oil spill claims. Why? Because, they said, Alabama sued them.
If you are interested in any of the truth regarding the chain of events in the whole saga, read the local websites - not the government- or BP-sponsored sites. For example, in the past couple of weeks, a couple of fish-kills occured, and except for the local sites and blogs, I can't find anything on them. The whole thing is swept under the rug.
-
http://www.youtube.com/user/jamescfox#p/u/1/g0o-68fW5pY
-
Third Fish Kill in Plaquemines Parrish, Louisiana in Recent Days (http://www.wwltv.com/news/local/Third-fish-kill-reported-in-Plaquemines-103204929.html?gallery=y&img=3#gallery-image)
No oxygen in the water.
-
Fighting a cover-up as it's evolving, and what goes into it:
This (http://oilspillaction.com/category/important-articles) site, owned by a Louisiana lawyer (not on BP's payroll), has been keeping up with current events.
-
Fighting a cover-up as it's evolving:
Federal agencies intimidate a Channel 3 News Reporter here. (http://www.weartv.com/newsroom/top_stories/videos/wear_vid_10939.shtml).
-
Plenty of scope here for daring independent reporters.
Amazing tho - I expect this is all BP, and as it pays so much to the state, and it's people, you won't get far.
-
Travel writers visiting beaches on BP dime
Louis Cooper
September 26, 2010
What does it take to get a half dozen travel writers to Navarre Beach?
This weekend, it took a check from BP and a white stretch limousine.
Six travel writers — chauffeured around in a limo — are on Navarre Beach this weekend to get the word out that this summer's BP oil spill is over, and the beach, along with the rest of Santa Rosa County, is open for tourism.
Using money from BP, the Santa Rosa County Tourist Development Council hosted a familiarization — or "fam" — tour for select out-of-town reporters, showing them the pristine beaches and other assets of the county.
"We've had travel writers come often, but this is an actual 'fam' trip, a planned package of events to show them the whole county," said Kate Wilkes, executive director of the council. "Having the money from BP enabled us to do this."
The tour was covered with part of $551,000 from BP, some of which also funded a voucher program which gave gift cards to tourists who stayed in local accommodations and this weekend's sand sculpture event on Navarre Beach.
The writers — who are staying at the Summerwinds condominium — come from media outlets like Baton Rouge Parents, the Houston Tribune, Southern Hospitality Magazine, www.Planet EyeTraveler.com, www.UPTake.com and www.JustSayGo.com, among others.
Ron Stern, editor of www.JustSayGo.com based in Colorado, said he will tell his readers that the oil hype has been overblown.
"What the national media has been saying is totally untrue, for the most part, and blown totally out of proportion," Stern said. "What they're going to get from me is the truth. You can come down here, and you're not going to get oil on your feet or tar balls on your shoes. ... I haven't seen anything in the sand other than sand, and I've been swimming in the water."
Apryl Thomas, a freelance writer from Athens, Ga., has written about the oil spill on the coast for several websites and publications, including Southern Hospitality.
"I knew the spill was kind of blown up. I had done many articles when this happened. The way it was first covered in the national media, you honestly thought, 'It's gone,' but once I did a little research and calling, I felt like it is important to let people know everything is good to go."
All of the reporters who are visiting have agreed to write something about the area. Although the trip is paid for by BP and is intended to combat the misconceptions created by the spill, Wilkes said she doesn't think oil will be a big part of the tour.
"From now on in, we're not going to mention oil, unless it comes back," Wilkes said. "In our advertisements, the message is that the beaches are beautiful, but, also, it's that there is more to do."
The writers arrived Friday and are scheduled to leave today. They visited the new Navarre Fishing Pier, the Gulf Breeze Zoo, Hidden Creek Golf Club in Navarre, Adventures Unlimited north of Milton and the Rufus Hayes Training Stables ranch in Milton.
http://www.pnj.com/article/20100926/NEWS01/9260329/1056/NEWS10/Travel-writers-visiting-beaches-on-BP-dime
There it is.
-
Bird rescue experts kept on sideline after gulf oil spill
By Craig Pittman, St Petersburg, Florida Times staff writer
In Print: Sunday, September 5, 2010
The Deepwater Horizon disaster may have killed thousands of birds in the Gulf of Mexico and no one knows about it, say experienced wildlife rescuers. The reason: The experts were not allowed to go look for live oiled birds in the areas where they were most likely to be found.
Instead they were assigned to less urgent duties, or never called in at all.
Meanwhile the job of searching for birds in need of rescue went to inexperienced federal and state employees — fisheries biologists, firefighters, people who had never touched a bird before, much less one coated in oil.
One pair of federal employees spent two hours pursuing a single oiled-up pelican that eluded them every time. They gave up when night fell.
"This is the worst screwed-up response I've ever been on," said Rebecca Dmytryk, the founder of a group called WildRescue, who has worked on saving birds from oil spills in Louisiana, Ecuador and California.
"I'm just at a loss for why this was allowed to happen," said Lee Fox of Save Our Seabirds in Sarasota. "I thought these people were on the side of the wildlife."
To the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the assignment is called "wildlife reconnaissance and capture activity,'' said Jeff Fleming of the federal agency. Rescuing oiled birds is "one of the tasks our biologists typically perform in a response such as this. It's a common role our trained biologists fill."
He said the agency must handle the bird rescue duties itself, with an assist from other federal and state officials, because of "our migratory bird responsibilities under the law." Federal law has given special protection to migratory birds since 1918.
That leaves people like Jay Holcomb on the sidelines — even though Holcomb, president of the International Bird Rescue Research Center, has been saving birds from oil spills since 1971. During the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, Holcomb oversaw the entire bird search and rescue program in Prince William Sound, the largest of its kind ever attempted, involving about 50 boats. He has also worked on spills in Africa, Spain and the Galapagos Islands.
Yet on this spill, instead of searching for birds in need of rescue, "we've been assigned to respond to hotline calls," Holcomb said. "We've been completely kept out of it."
BP hired a 4-year-old Texas company called Wildlife Response Services to oversee the rescue and rehabilitation of birds, turtles and any other animals hurt by the spill. The owner, Rhonda Murgatroyd, starred in a television ad for BP touting the oil company's response to the spill.
Murgatroyd said she has worked on spills across the gulf coast for the past decade. She said federal agency employees were assigned bird rescue duties because Holcomb and the other wildlife rehabilitation experts "didn't have the personnel to go out and rescue all the birds."
It was more important for those experts to oversee cleaning the oiled birds and helping them recover, she said, a position that Fleming echoed.
Murgatroyd is convinced the system she set up has worked well.
"I don't know why anyone would question that," she said.
As of Friday, the joint BP-Coast Guard task force reported they had collected 7,568 birds, 4,212 of them visibly oiled. More than 5,500 were dead. Not one was collected from offshore.
Dmytryk said she and her co-workers begged for permission to go out to the other offshore rigs in the gulf to look for sick and injured birds that were too weak to make it to shore. But they were turned down. Not even Holcomb could get permission.
"They said for safety reasons we couldn't do it," Holcomb said. "There was not a lot of interest in using our expertise."
Instead, Dmytryk was assigned to scour beaches and marshes to collect birds that were dead already, which she regarded as a waste of her experience and knowledge. Holcomb gave up and instead oversaw the cleaning and rehabilitation of birds brought in by the federal employees.
The same thing happened to Heidi Stout, a veterinarian who is director of Tri-State Bird Rescue.
"I'm part of the rehab effort," she said. "I'm not involved in rescue work. That's being overseen by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service."
Some wildlife rescue experts didn't even get to do that much.
In April, when BP first began hiring people to deal with the spill, Murgatroyd called Fox, a Wimauma resident who oversaw the rescue of seabirds during the 1993 tanker spill in Tampa Bay and then wrote a manual for how to handle oiled-up birds.
Fox said she was told to get her gear ready to roll to the Florida Panhandle at a moment's notice. She packed up a van with everything she would need: medical equipment, towels and tubs, plus 75 cages and lots of Dawn dish washing liquid. She also trained volunteers from different Florida wildlife groups so they too would be ready to step in and help.
Four months have passed and "I've never heard another word," Fox said.
The same thing happened to Sharon Schmaltz of Wildlife Rehab and Education in Texas, who has spent 26 years working spills around the gulf.
"We never did get mobilized anywhere," she said. "We were told to stay put."
Instead the Fish and Wildlife Service sent its own employees into the field to capture oiled birds. One of those assigned to the job: Kayla DiBenedetto, a fisheries biologist who had been studying sturgeon.
Although she took some training classes on how to deal with oiled birds, it didn't really prepare her for the challenge.
"With the oiled birds that could walk and swim, I'd make a quick run at them to take them by surprise," DiBenedetto wrote in a first-person account posted on the Defenders of Wildlife website. "If they saw me coming, they'd run into the water and start swimming away. I found myself imagining it from the bird's perspective: If some large creature in a white suit was chasing me, of course I'd run, even if that large creature was saying, 'I'm here to help, I promise!' "
But wildlife rescue experts say chasing the birds with a net is the wrong way to catch an oiled bird. It adds to the stress the birds are already feeling.
The right way, the way that causes the bird far less stress, is to lure it in close enough to grab. An experienced rescue expert can lure a pelican close with just about anything. Fox once caught one by fluttering a $20 bill at it.
After seeing photos of how the Fish and Wildlife Service employees are chasing down the birds, Fox said, "I'm up to my nostrils drowning in frustration." Because of the way the rescue was mishandled, she said, "there are probably hundreds of thousands of birds dead already out there."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/wildlife/article1119315.ece
-
There's a story afoot about seabirds and swans turning up dead, sick, and paralyzed at Tampa Bay and Longboat Key, Florida ... The scientist examining them "wonders" if it's connected to the corexit and other toxins connected to the oil spill...
I got to read the article once, and since then cannot pull it up on any of the many sites the item is coming up on, per Google search. Likewise, the article did not make it to a conventionally-recognized news site (and those are easy to download, I may add.) So until I can find a conventional site, can't offer the direct quotes.
-
IBR's current count:
2070 captured alive
1208 rehabilitated and released
5939 collected dead
5 days later:
2075 captured alive
1225 rehabilitated and released
6050 collected dead
I don't believe these numbers - the dead are probably into 6 or 7 figures.
But it's all cloaked, and per the post included, it's apparent that US Fish and Wildlife is indeed dealing with International Treaties. Frankly, it seems like perfect karma for Canada to sue the US. Geaux Canada, and any other country that invested in their wildlife!
Bird rescue experts kept on sideline after gulf oil spill
By Craig Pittman, St Petersburg, Florida Times staff writer
In Print: Sunday, September 5, 2010
The Deepwater Horizon disaster may have killed thousands of birds in the Gulf of Mexico and no one knows about it, say experienced wildlife rescuers. The reason: The experts were not allowed to go look for live oiled birds in the areas where they were most likely to be found.
Instead they were assigned to less urgent duties, or never called in at all.
Meanwhile the job of searching for birds in need of rescue went to inexperienced federal and state employees — fisheries biologists, firefighters, people who had never touched a bird before, much less one coated in oil.
One pair of federal employees spent two hours pursuing a single oiled-up pelican that eluded them every time. They gave up when night fell.
"This is the worst screwed-up response I've ever been on," said Rebecca Dmytryk, the founder of a group called WildRescue, who has worked on saving birds from oil spills in Louisiana, Ecuador and California.
"I'm just at a loss for why this was allowed to happen," said Lee Fox of Save Our Seabirds in Sarasota. "I thought these people were on the side of the wildlife."
To the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the assignment is called "wildlife reconnaissance and capture activity,'' said Jeff Fleming of the federal agency. Rescuing oiled birds is "one of the tasks our biologists typically perform in a response such as this. It's a common role our trained biologists fill."
He said the agency must handle the bird rescue duties itself, with an assist from other federal and state officials, because of "our migratory bird responsibilities under the law." Federal law has given special protection to migratory birds since 1918.
That leaves people like Jay Holcomb on the sidelines — even though Holcomb, president of the International Bird Rescue Research Center, has been saving birds from oil spills since 1971. During the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, Holcomb oversaw the entire bird search and rescue program in Prince William Sound, the largest of its kind ever attempted, involving about 50 boats. He has also worked on spills in Africa, Spain and the Galapagos Islands.
Yet on this spill, instead of searching for birds in need of rescue, "we've been assigned to respond to hotline calls," Holcomb said. "We've been completely kept out of it."
BP hired a 4-year-old Texas company called Wildlife Response Services to oversee the rescue and rehabilitation of birds, turtles and any other animals hurt by the spill. The owner, Rhonda Murgatroyd, starred in a television ad for BP touting the oil company's response to the spill.
Murgatroyd said she has worked on spills across the gulf coast for the past decade. She said federal agency employees were assigned bird rescue duties because Holcomb and the other wildlife rehabilitation experts "didn't have the personnel to go out and rescue all the birds."
It was more important for those experts to oversee cleaning the oiled birds and helping them recover, she said, a position that Fleming echoed.
Murgatroyd is convinced the system she set up has worked well.
"I don't know why anyone would question that," she said.
As of Friday, the joint BP-Coast Guard task force reported they had collected 7,568 birds, 4,212 of them visibly oiled. More than 5,500 were dead. Not one was collected from offshore.
Dmytryk said she and her co-workers begged for permission to go out to the other offshore rigs in the gulf to look for sick and injured birds that were too weak to make it to shore. But they were turned down. Not even Holcomb could get permission.
"They said for safety reasons we couldn't do it," Holcomb said. "There was not a lot of interest in using our expertise."
Instead, Dmytryk was assigned to scour beaches and marshes to collect birds that were dead already, which she regarded as a waste of her experience and knowledge. Holcomb gave up and instead oversaw the cleaning and rehabilitation of birds brought in by the federal employees.
The same thing happened to Heidi Stout, a veterinarian who is director of Tri-State Bird Rescue.
"I'm part of the rehab effort," she said. "I'm not involved in rescue work. That's being overseen by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service."
Some wildlife rescue experts didn't even get to do that much.
In April, when BP first began hiring people to deal with the spill, Murgatroyd called Fox, a Wimauma resident who oversaw the rescue of seabirds during the 1993 tanker spill in Tampa Bay and then wrote a manual for how to handle oiled-up birds.
Fox said she was told to get her gear ready to roll to the Florida Panhandle at a moment's notice. She packed up a van with everything she would need: medical equipment, towels and tubs, plus 75 cages and lots of Dawn dish washing liquid. She also trained volunteers from different Florida wildlife groups so they too would be ready to step in and help.
Four months have passed and "I've never heard another word," Fox said.
The same thing happened to Sharon Schmaltz of Wildlife Rehab and Education in Texas, who has spent 26 years working spills around the gulf.
"We never did get mobilized anywhere," she said. "We were told to stay put."
Instead the Fish and Wildlife Service sent its own employees into the field to capture oiled birds. One of those assigned to the job: Kayla DiBenedetto, a fisheries biologist who had been studying sturgeon.
Although she took some training classes on how to deal with oiled birds, it didn't really prepare her for the challenge.
"With the oiled birds that could walk and swim, I'd make a quick run at them to take them by surprise," DiBenedetto wrote in a first-person account posted on the Defenders of Wildlife website. "If they saw me coming, they'd run into the water and start swimming away. I found myself imagining it from the bird's perspective: If some large creature in a white suit was chasing me, of course I'd run, even if that large creature was saying, 'I'm here to help, I promise!' "
But wildlife rescue experts say chasing the birds with a net is the wrong way to catch an oiled bird. It adds to the stress the birds are already feeling.
The right way, the way that causes the bird far less stress, is to lure it in close enough to grab. An experienced rescue expert can lure a pelican close with just about anything. Fox once caught one by fluttering a $20 bill at it.
After seeing photos of how the Fish and Wildlife Service employees are chasing down the birds, Fox said, "I'm up to my nostrils drowning in frustration." Because of the way the rescue was mishandled, she said, "there are probably hundreds of thousands of birds dead already out there."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/wildlife/article1119315.ece
-
This is from one of the local-focused Facebook pages regarding the spill. This page (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?react=1246908445%3Ade05d9f4f39f5a3d1634ca9191777e6c#!/SaveTheGulfOfMexico) is one of the more moderate ones. I just thought it interesting to observe what the locals are saying.
Save the Gulf of Mexico "What’s been happening in our community is what happened in Valdez." - Press-Register
Stress of oil spill still lingering in Orange Beach (http://blog.al.com/live/2010/09/stress_of_oil_spill_still_ling.html#modg_smoref_face)
blog.al.com
Councilman Jeff Silvers receives phone calls in the middle of the night. The citizens on the line tell him that BP is spraying oil dispersant over Perdido Pass “from an airplane with no lights,” he said, or that workers on boats are covertly dumping it into the water.
3 hours ago ·
Valerie Sargent Martin What I don't get is how helpless the leadership is. It's like they're afraid to test their own soil, water, and air to confirm their suspicions. If there's any good use of taxpayer money, making sure you're not living in toxic conditions would be one.
Cathy Jones They are all afraid of the truth.
3 hours ago ·
Elaine Silva and what about the news blackout about all of this? I see NOTHING on Canuck news at all, WTF is wrong? They've probably been told NOT to REPORT on it as people from other states and countries might see and get upset!
3 hours ago ·
Johnny Robinson An emergency survey conducted door-to-door in coastal Alabama confirmed elevated levels of depression and stress following the oil spill and also detected possible effects, such as respiratory ailments, according to a preliminary report. ~ ...In the same write up, Councilwoman Pattisue Carranza, a pharmacist, said that she had seen more and more people seeking prescriptions and medications this summer for “thick throats.”...You want to be honest with people and tell them this is what’s going on, but you don’t want to alarm them.” Does anyone else see something VERY wrong with this??!!
Shannon Riley this DOES not surprise me at all.... and the fact that they are doing it from an airplane with no lights. omg!!... WHAT'S DONE IN THE DARK SHALL COME TO THE LIGHT!!!!! this company is ridiculous. ACCOUNTABILITY ..where is it??!! why isn't any one enforcing it?
Wayne Cameron Many of the cleanup workers from the Exxon Valdez spill are dead now from cancer. Exposure to the benzene in crude dramatically increases your risk of cancer. The mix of Corexit and crude is way worse because the Corexit acts as a transport to allow the crude to penetrate deep into tissue. The folks down there who took the bait "big money" to join the cleanup crews have traded 20 to 30 years of their lives for a few thousand dollars. I'm sure they had to sign waivers, too. Very sad, indeed.
Susan Cox We need our leaders to be diligent and NEVER WAIVER from finding out the answers, the truth, and listening to ideas and demand action for the sake of our people and our precious environment.
Judy Thompson Who now is doing the beach clean ups?
Ronni Taylor Remember this is all because of Corporate-Dominated Capitalism. We are being poisoned because we won't stand up and demand an end to the Corporations controlling our society! Wake up Sheeple, Corporate Capitalism must end!
Pete Leoni Oh Big yeah, then we get government communism, no thanks
Dana Barnum This will have lasting repercussions who will be responsible for that? Who will monitor that? It is far from over.
Sue Smith I can't stress enough, especially before the elections, that you research how YOUR state representatives have voted over the years for gas and oil legislation and who's leading in lobbying monies. The TV ads tell one story, but how they voted is FACT. Unfortunately, I think many of you will be very amazed who is working for YOU and who is working for the corporations.
Laura Cooke Lies, deceit and more cover up....ALL BS!!!!
Marsha Pivert Dale Wayne, I'm not sure that's true. One report says they are all dead. This one says their health was studied but not published http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/29/96782/health-of-exxon-valdez-cleanup.html
The question is why haven't these ...problems been addressed?
April Triplett My question is, my family went swimming in the gulf in Destin. are they going to get sick?
Mary Anne Ruppert Good observations and comments. In SW FL we have been fortunate not to have any visual dirty oil in our water. I guess time will be the Big factor in wildlife sustainability. in the meantime Whole Foods has an intensive program to assure fresh seafood.
Michael Reese I can't believe people are swimming in the Gulf at all. It's like they haven't even heard of the spill. For example, who are the idiots walking barefoot on the beach through all the crap in the photo? It blows my mind!
René O'Deay Bad News from Bayou Barataria.
http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/06/bad-news-from-bayou-barataraia.html
Reports from people living along the bayou, of helicopters flying over at night spraying, with no lights. black copters. more reports on... this can't find right now from last June. One day there's oil in the bayou and the next, after the copters sprayed, none on surface.... but.....The big copters flew over our house on Westbank at night, running very low and with no lights. not long after that my big healthy tomato plants just up and died, shriveled up. tomatoes that were on it spoiled. still tried to grow, but no more tomatoes.
Here's about a lawsuit, with a little more info on this.
http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/lawsuit-targets-bps-use-of-corexit.html
Nikki Oldaker Hello - where is the EPA?
Colleen A Shea heard that is happening @ Perdido too, could'nt get a date on it.
Julie Peters-Haymes In bed with BP along with the President.
Margaret Collier THE PEOPLE OF THE GULF COAST DO NOT MATTER ,WE ARE JUST LIKE OUR FISH IN THE GULF KILL US WE ARE NOTHING
Steve Drinkard http://www.stevedrinkard.com/archives/150 Authorities should implement precautions in new Gulf of Mexico developments due to increasing earthquake risks.
-
BP educates Terrebonne students on oil spill
By JENNA FARMER
Over the last five months, BP has had a prominent presence along the Gulf Coast at various local government meetings and outreach centers - but this time, BP has made its way into the Terrebonne Parish school system.
Eighth grade students of Oaklawn Junior High School were able to sit in on one of four scheduled science demonstrations last Wednesday prepared by BP and Gary Ott of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The demonstrations were designed to better educate the students about the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and give them the most current information available.
"The primary purpose [of the demonstration] is to inform and educate students on the methods used to clean up the oil in the Gulf and the wetlands and marshes," Janella Newsome, BP media liaison said in a press release. "It's also to dispel myths about dispersants, subsurface oil and seafood safety."
According to BP representatives, it won't be the last demonstration.
"This is the first session of many going on," Charles Gaiennie, a BP representative said at Oaklawn's library last week. "We are starting here in Terrebonne Parish with eighth grade because they are the first of school age kids that have a defined science class. We wanted to reach out to schools that are near communities that have been directly impacted by the oil spill, so Terrebonne was a good choice. There's a lot of information that's out there isn't current or accurate."
The students who attended the first demonstration, held at 8:30 a.m., filed into the library and were greeted by BP Community Support Lead Peter Clifford, who asked if they had heard about the oil spill. Students who answered Clifford's questions correctly received a prize - a BP hat or pen.
"There was a lot of oil that went into the Gulf, so that's the reason we're here, and there were a lot of scientific things that had to happen with clean up," Clifford told students.
Ott began opened his presentation by giving the students a quick overview on oil, then began his visual presentation with a fish tank full of water.
"We're going to have a pretend spill with some vegetable oil," Ott said. "I'm going to put the oil in the water from the bottom, and we're going to pretend this is the Gulf of Mexico. The bottom to the top is one mile, and as the oil floats, it comes up to the surface and spreads on the top of the water."
Using a mixture of vegetable oil and cocoa powder, Ott let the students watch the makeshift crude oil float to the top of the fish tank, then had volunteer Jaycie Jones, 13, help him clean up the oil.
"The biggest thing I learned [today] is oil is not that easy to gather when it's spread out," Jaycie said as she used an eyedropper as a skimmer, paper towels as absorbent boom and dish detergent as dispersant to try to get rid of the oil on the top of the fish tank.
"There's inefficiency with skimmers," Ott said. "They also pick up water with oil. It's as if I told you I want to clean this whole building with eyedroppers, how well am I going to do it? Not too well. So there's a certain amount of helplessness when you're dealing with big oil spills."
Ott also passed around oil-coated feathers to demonstrate the effects of oil on the wildlife in the Gulf, comparing the feathers to zippers.
"The zippers wont gather up again if oil is on the feathers," Ott said.
After assisting Ott with the demonstration, Jaycie asked why people had blamed BP for the spill.
"When you have a spill and it's going on day after day and you think it's going to affect your life and your ability to fish and have a job, you feel helpless and you get angry," Ott responded. "That's what people do when they feel helpless, and who are they going to blame? They're going to blame someone. So, one company that stood up was BP because they had interest in that well, and they took the heat."
Following the presentation, students were given homework assignments in both their science class and English class based on what they learned from the demonstration.
"The plan is to conduct these science projects in affected parishes including Terrebonne, Iberia, Vermillion, Jefferson, Lafourche, Plaquemines, Orleans, St. Bernard, St. Mary and St. Tammany," Newsome said. "The science project was very successful very well received by students [at Oaklawn]."
Newsome added there's no timeline as to when the science demonstration will reach other junior high schools within these coastal parishes as BP is still in the process of scheduling.
Latest update: Sep 29, 2010 - 07:17:06 am PDT
http://www.tri-parishtimes.com/articles/2010/09/29/business_news/093_50_bpeducatesterrebonnestudents.txt
Pretty insidious.
-
Panel: Gov't thwarted worst-case scenario on spill
Dina Cappiello, Associated Press Writer – 41 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The Obama administration blocked efforts by government scientists to tell the public just how bad the Gulf oil spill could become and made other missteps that raised questions about its competence and candor during the crisis, according to a commission appointed by the president to investigate the disaster.
In documents released Wednesday, the national oil spill commission's staff describes "not an incidental public relations problem" by the White House in the wake of the April 20 accident.
Among other things, the report says, the administration made erroneous early estimates of the spill's size, and President Barack Obama's senior energy adviser went on national TV and mischaracterized a government analysis by saying it showed most of the oil was "gone." The analysis actually said it could still be there.
"By initially underestimating the amount of oil flow and then, at the end of the summer, appearing to underestimate the amount of oil remaining in the Gulf, the federal government created the impression that it was either not fully competent to handle the spill or not fully candid with the American people about the scope of the problem," the report says.
The administration disputed the commission findings, saying senior government officials "were clear with the public what the worst-case flow rate could be."
In a statement Wednesday, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chief Jane Lubchenco and White House budget director Jeffrey Zients pointed out that in early May, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen told the public that the worst-case scenario could be more than 100,000 barrels a day, or 4.2 million gallons.
For the first time, the documents — which are preliminary findings by the panel's staff — show that the White House was directly involved in controlling the message as it struggled to convey that it, not BP, was in charge of responding to what eventually became the biggest offshore oil spill in U.S. history.
Citing interviews with government officials, the report reveals that in late April or early May, the White House budget office denied a request from NOAA to make public its worst-case estimate of how much oil could spew from the blown-out well. The Unified Command — the government team in charge of the spill response — also was discussing the possibility of making the numbers public, the report says.
The White House budget office has traditionally been a clearinghouse for administration domestic policy.
The report shows "the political process was in charge and science really does not have the role that was touted," said Christopher D'Elia, dean of environmental studies at Louisiana State University.
But Jerry Miller, head of the White House science office's ocean subcommittee, told The Associated Press in an interview at a St. Petersburg, Fla., scientific conference on the oil spill that he didn't think the budget office censored NOAA.
"I would very much doubt that anyone would put restrictions on NOAA's ability to articulate factual information," Miller said.
The explosion in the Gulf of Mexico killed 11 workers, spewed 206 million gallons of oil from the damaged oil well, and sank the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig.
BP's drilling permit for the well originally estimated the worst-case scenario to be a leak of 6.8 million gallons per day. In late April, just after the spill began, the Coast Guard and NOAA received an updated worst-case estimate of 2.7 million to 4.6 million gallons per day.
While those figures were used as the basis for the government's response to the spill — they appeared on an internal Coast Guard situation report and on a dry-erase board in NOAA's Seattle war room — they were never announced to the public, according to the report.
However, they were, in fact, announced, as news stories from May 2 to May 5 show, though the figures received little attention at the time.
For more than a month after the explosion, government officials were telling the public that the well was releasing 210,000 gallons per day. In early August, in its final estimate of the spill's flow, the government said it was gushing 2.6 million gallons per day — close to the worst-case predictions.
The documents also criticize Carol Browner, director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy, saying that during a series of morning-show appearances on Aug. 4, she misrepresented the findings of a federal analysis of where the oil went and incorrectly portrayed it as a scientific assessment that was peer-reviewed by inside and outside experts.
"I think it's also important to note that our scientists have done an initial assessment, and more than three-quarters of the oil is gone," Browner said on NBC's "Today" show.
But the analysis never said it was gone, according to the commission. It said it was dispersed, dissolved or evaporated — meaning it could still be there. And while NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco was more cautious in her remarks at a news conference at the White House later that day, the commission staff accuses the two senior officials of contributing to the perception that the government's findings were more exact than they actually were.
Florida State University professor Ian MacDonald, who has repeatedly clashed with NOAA and the Coast Guard over the size of the spill, the existence of underwater plumes and oil in the sea floor, said he felt gratified by the report.
From the beginning, there was "a contradiction between discoveries and concerns by academic scientists and statements by NOAA," MacDonald said in an interview with the AP at the oil spill conference.
And he said it is still going on. MacDonald and Georgia Tech scientist Joseph Montoya said NOAA is at it again with statements saying there is no oil in ocean floor sediments. A University of Georgia science cruise, which Montoya was on, found ample evidence of oil on the Gulf floor.
___
Online: National Oil Spill Commission: http://www.oilspillcommission.gov
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101006/ap_on_sc/us_gulf_oil_spill
-
(http://buriedshiva.com.au/vicky/misc5/leuniglies.jpg)
-
America moves on from spill; Gulf Coast feels abandoned
The Associated Press
By Jay Reeves, AP Writer
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — About 800 miles from the Gulf of Mexico, Dave Edmonds is struggling to remind people about the BP oil spill.
There aren't many magazine covers with photos of oil-drenched birds now that BP has capped its massive gusher at the bottom of the sea. People aren't looking online for information about the historic spill like they were a few weeks ago.
So Edmonds, who lives on the Delaware coast, has started a nonprofit organization to keep the disaster on people's minds with a website and social networking campaign.
"Awareness has dropped. People don't really care about the people who were affected. They don't care about the fish life," said Edmonds, founder of Taking Back the Gulf.
For Gulf residents fighting for economic survival, a nation's short attention span is deeply unsettling, especially with oil still washing ashore. Yet it's unclear whether Americans are turning their attention elsewhere, or whether it's just the media that have.
Either way, people like Chef Chris Sherrill feel abandoned.
"It's amazing how quickly the American public forgot that this was one of the worst manmade disasters in U.S. history," he said. His wedding catering and event business in Gulf Shores, Ala., is teetering because few brides are still coming to the beach for weddings.
The slight isn't necessarily intentional. Walking with his girlfriend in a park in Des Moines, Iowa, Michael Gauthier said he wonders about the oil's lingering impact on the environment, and he fears for Gulf residents.
"It's not in your face every day so you forget about it. Who doesn't have bills to pay and work to go to? Who has time to think about what's going on in Louisiana?" said Gauthier, 26.
What's going on is the continued arrival of oil washing ashore, although in lesser amounts than during the summer. Dire predictions of environmental Armageddon have yet to materialize, but there's also no consensus on how badly the ecosystem has suffered.
At first, no one could agree on how much oil was spilling into the Gulf; now there's disagreement over how much remains. A commission this week faulted Barack Obama's administration for multiple missteps, including an effort to block scientists from telling the public how bad the spill could be early on.
"If someone could say it will affect this, our shrimp are going to be poisoned for 10 years, people would think this is a bigger deal maybe," said Scott Peterson, 37, also of Des Moines.
Peterson's sentiment was echoed by Kathy Yoder, whose family works a farm in Washington, Maine. She said people may be dismissing the spill because the impacts don't seem as devastating as first predicted.
"What irritates me is people act like it's all gone because it's not floating on top of the water," she said. "I'm like, 'Hello, there's plenty of oil under the surface.'"
Recent research also raises the question of whether the spill is being overlooked outside the Gulf region, or if information on recent developments is just harder to come by. A Pew Research Center study found that only 1 percent of news coverage was dedicated to the spill last month, down from 22 percent during the height of the crisis.
However, a separate Pew survey found that 34 percent of the people responding to a poll in mid-September said they were still very interested in the spill — making it the top news item that week in terms of public interest. Participants were presented with news topics and asked how much they were following them.
But even if people say they're interested when asked directly, information from Google suggests that they're not searching as much for information about the spill online.
The term "Gulf oil spill" was a hot search on Google for weeks, peaking in mid-May as a sense of doom built around the fate of coastal towns, marshes and beaches. Soon, photos were all over the media of oiled marshlands and crude washing in with the surf on beaches.
Conditions on some parts of the coast improved in July, and Google searches had decreased dramatically by late that month, when BP finally capped the well and oil stopped flowing into the deep-blue waters off the coast of Louisiana.
Even more Web users lost interest through August despite the occasional blip, and people now enter in the Gulf oil spill search terms about as often as they did in April before the horrendous rig explosion and unstopped gusher grabbed the coast by the throat. Far more common today are searches for information about the economy, actress Lindsay Lohan or the University of Alabama's top-ranked football team.
One place where interest remains high is Cordova, Alaska. The northern fishing community of 2,200 was devastated after the tanker Exxon Valdez ran aground in Prince William Sound in 1989, and Gulf residents have visited to learn from survivors of the Alaska spill.
"I think like all things media-related, when you see it often enough, it's pushed to the back of your mind," said Rochelle van den Broek, executive director of Cordova District Fishermen United. "But here, it's in our minds a little bit more than other places because it's a subject so close to people."
In Louisiana, Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser became the face of the oil spill during the summer, meeting with Obama and conducting countless media interviews. The parish still sends out regular news releases with photos of fresh oil, almost begging someone to notice.
Nungesser said it's no accident that America has spill amnesia. He faults BP commercials for portraying the region as being healthier than it really is, for focusing more on successful aspects of the cleanup than the havoc the gusher created.
"What's frustrating to me is that they're obviously setting the stage for pulling out," Nungesser said.
BP has said it's in for the long haul, and Chef Sherrill said the company needs to be. He has creditors all over the country, and he regularly must explain to them that he can't pay his bills because the spill dried up business and there's simply no money.
"It should be a crime what is happening down here," Sherrill said.
http://blog.al.com/wire/2010/10/america_moves_on_from_spill_gu.html
-
Florida Oil Spill Law (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Florida-Oil-Spill-Law/153108198054994)
-
Florida Oil Spill Law (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Florida-Oil-Spill-Law/153108198054994)
Every day, she has new articles and video-interviews with people (from local citizens to fishermen to BP workers to scientists) who have been bullied to "shut up", by US Fish and Wildlife, BP, Homeland Security, etc. So if you are interested in the anatomy of a cover-up, this site is a good one.
The facts are coming out more and more about the impact on Florida - the one area they proclaimed was not affected.
Among today's entries is a video with an A & M University scientist, who was on the Gulf doing a couple of studies per the dispersant - Their boat was boarded by Homeland Security and all their data and notes were confiscated.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A disturbing phenomenon is that many of the videos to which I've posted links here have been taken down. One wonders if the removals were coerced or voluntary. Especially fascinating was that the video of the newsman in Florida who was confronted by US Fish & Wildlife, who told the newsman a couple of shameless lies right in front of the camera, was taken down. That video was damning for sure.
Long story short, the oil keeps appearing, the critters keep showing up paralyzed, ill, or dead, human body parts have been reported washing up, they keep spraying the dispersant, and folks are sick -- and given the possibly-carcinogenic nature of the chemicals, possibly sick in the long-term.
But "everything's okay."
-
A beautifully-written article which is too long to c and p here:
The Gulf Between Us (http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/5931)
There is an image or two therein which chilled me to the bone, but I promised to not get too gruesome here.
-
http://www.youtube.com/v/b3H9V_kCrMY?fs=1
".....embarassed to be an american....."
-
This event is oddly enough not making the waves it should. I do think it has caused Obama to lose the support of a small group of knowledgeable and progressive people. They are not a vote-sensitive demographic, but I feel their influence is indirectly quite potent.
I can only assume it is an example of the power of oil in the US - it is a national security issue, as well as belonging to the top of big business. I am unaware of any politician of influence who has spoken out about this outrageous cover-up.
Shows who is really running things, and why conspiracies are so rampant.
-
This event is oddly enough not making the waves it should. I do think it has caused Obama to lose the support of a small group of knowledgeable and progressive people. They are not a vote-sensitive demographic, but I feel their influence is indirectly quite potent.
I can only assume it is an example of the power of oil in the US - it is a national security issue, as well as belonging to the top of big business. I am unaware of any politician of influence who has spoken out about this outrageous cover-up.
Shows who is really running things, and why conspiracies are so rampant.
BP has quite the bullying and intimidation-campaign going - I speculate that that is what's behind the immensity of the matter not reaching the public.
The moment Obama took that dip in Pensacola, he lost all credibility with me forever.
The only place one can get the truth is in the works of the grassroots, citizen-journalists. The format is not as polished, but the substance is clear.
Enough are coming forward now, including the scientists, that the force of them will be undeniable. And yes, Obama won't get re-elected --- as he very well shouldn't.
-
I'm still waiting to hear more about the alleged "stall" of the Loop Current ... the ramifications of that reaches far more than the Gulf (the sacrificial lamb).
We have one last hurricane on tap, Richard, and I'm fascinated to see if it goes into the Loop Current at all. The others have just weirdly veered around it. I read just yesterday a boat captain's observation that when he's on the water, it's palpable: the Gulf isn't moving - it's dead.
-
And yes, Obama won't get re-elected --- as he very well shouldn't.
This was the same problem we had here in Aust. Kevin Rudd came in to power with a landslide of hopes and expectations for change, which almost all failed to materialise.
The Right reclaimed much of their party support base through the usual bullshitting and lunatic ravings. The intelligent voters were left with a real problem: they were completely disillusioned with Rudd, yet the last thing they wanted was a return to the Right parties.
The problem was that although Rudd had failed to deliver on expectations of change, he had at least brought in sensible and responsible management of a host of small government matters. You did feel that the lunatics were no longer in charge. What was disappointing was that on the major issues, he had been indecisive and lacking courage.
This left them with a choice - vote for those who promised to do a lot and delivered little, or the those who were promising to do nothing and hand control of the prison back to the criminals.
What we also knew was that Rudd himself knew this - that although he lost support of the progressives, they would never vote for the opposition. What they did was to shift to the Greens.
But this was a strategic mistake. He thought he had to win across the 'middle' ground of voters who could swing either way, but instead he lost integrity, and even the middle ground admire courage and integrity, even if they don't quite agree.
Strength of conviction and willingness to fight for it, are qualities all people admire - it is a winning posture. Dissembling and fumbling, despite words of principle, are soon sniffed out and rejected by the voters.
The problem, however, remains: George Bush came across as a strong conviction leader who knew how to upset people and go for what he believed in. The intelligent voter has a choice - disappointment or total catastrophe.
-
Obama went beyond "dissembling and fumbling", though. He moved into outright lies - destructive ones. Perhaps he had poor counsel, but what kind of counsel he has is ultimately his choice too.
As to what happens next, heaven knows. Hopefully, his party will come up with another candidate, and the country won't be at the mercy of "the right".
-
Though I'm inclined to believe that the whole mess is a wash. The die is cast.
-
They may, but he is probably better than his party. It is quite likely he has not pushed for honesty precisely because of pressure from within his party.
I feel these days, we have to acknowledge that those of us who seek for qualities like honesty, compassion, wellbeing for all creatures on this planet, such that we can all achieve our greatest potential ... and so on ... we are in a very small minority.
The majority either are out for their own interest, or they simply don't give a shit.
And unfortunately that is how the universe is set up.
The big question, is are we personally going to give up seeking such qualities, and join the majority?
-
The big question, is are we personally going to give up seeking such qualities, and join the majority?
Can't imagine joining the majority .. it would be like stepping off the path. Mostly impossible. Can only speak for me, though.
-
Before reading this, it should be driven home that the standards of safety were recently relaxed - some say in an effort to relieve BP of its possible culpability.
NOAA Official Asks EINNEWS to Withdraw Story Questioning Safety of Gulf Seafood
Nov. 5, 2010 /EIN Presswire/ - A U.S. government spokesperson reacted sharply today to an EIN news story questioning the safety of gulf seafood, saying "the veracity of the federal government seafood safety protocol or results are not in question by any qualified scientist." EINNEWS said it stands by its story.
The official, Christine Patrick, the lead public affairs officer for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, demanded that EINNEWS withdraw its story.
NOAA and the Federal Food and Drug Administration earlier this week issued a joint statement giving the "all clear" to the consumption of Gulf of Mexico seafood.
The agencies based their approval on what they said were tests on 1,735 tissue samples including more than half of those collected to reopen Gulf of Mexico federal waters.
The agencies said only a few showed trace amounts of dispersants residue (13 of the 1,735) and they were well below the safety threshold of 100 parts per million for finfish and 500 parts per million for shrimp, crabs and oysters. The test detects dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, known as DOSS, a major component of the dispersants used in the Gulf.
But contrary to Ms Patrick's claim that "the results are not in question by any qualified scientist," the scientific community has expressed concerns that the federal government has been too quick to help the Gulf fishery get back on its feet after the massive BP oil spill.
The DOSS safety "threshold" itself is controversial among scientists and represents a compromise with many authorities who believe it should be higher.
The Environmental Protection Agency asked BP to stop using the dispersant Corexit 9527's because of short and long term concerns about its toxicity. Following the Exxon Valdez disaster, Corexit 9527 was associated with severe health problems suffered by thousands of clean up workers.
The dispersants are known to kill incubating sea life.In humans, long-term exposure can cause central nervous system problems or damage blood, kidneys or livers, according to the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention. Following the Exxon Valdez disaster, Corexit 9527 was associated with severe health problems suffered by thousands of clean up workers.
Despite the EPA's concerns, Corexit 9527 was used until supplies ran out, and then was replaced with Corexit 9500. Both are products of Nalco Energy Services LP, whose board of directors is made up of former and current BP, Exxon, Monsanto and Lockheed executives. Nalco is a corporate affiliate of BP.
The FDA-NOAA statement made no mention of tests for PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons). These are cancer-causing chemicals in crude oil and can be taken in through fish and shellfish.
A recent assessment of long term effects of the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska's Prince William Sound concluded that that chemically dispersed oil was far more toxic than physically dispersed oil and that PAH in the water column was the primary cause.
The FDA-NOAA statement also failed to discuss the heavy metals found in oil itself. Heavy metals are trace contaminants in the crude oil, but they bioaccumulate up the food chain. Larger, predator fish could potentially pick up a significant amount of heavy metals from the oil contaminants, and mercury and lead are toxic to the brain and nervous system.
Many scientists are concerned that levels of some of these chemicals will increase through the food chain over time, resulting in worse problems with food safety several years from now.
Based on available literature EINNEWS supports its original story, will not withdraw it, and invites members of the scientific community to offer their opinions.
http://www.einnews.com/pr-news/215998-noaa-official-asks-einnews-to-withdraw-story-questioning-safety-of-gulf-seafood
-
I had a hope that the Gulf stories would come more to the fore and the center following the elections, but it seems not to be the case. Even the "liberals" don't seem to be that interested. Obama has pushed forward with other plans and issues, one of which seems to be the robbing of Social Security - more bad news for me. And now, everything he says is coated in oily toxicity, to me. I am gravely disappointed, to say the least - in him and in the media who cow-towed to the pressure.
Meanwhile, the disaster is compounded daily. There are still tarballs, plumes, human sickness, animal deaths, cover-ups, and grim forecasts for the future of the Gulf - the economy AND the life.
Add vultures to the list -
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/vultures-being-found-floating-biscayne-bay-man-picked-10-birds
-
I feel like a small, naive child: "don't they care?"
But I assume the deadpan in short enough shrift.
-
(Jahn, the problem is not the crude oil - the problem is the corexit, and the synergistic effects of the oil + corexit. Also, definitive answers have not been obtainable per the natural gas and hydrocarbons released. The Valdez, furthermore, was a finite amount of oil... the Gulf spill was much greater, and keeps showing up. The Loop Current stalled ... for how long no one is saying. The toll on the birds and other animals is astronomical - and that's just the stats that we know about. BP and the US Gov't cut into rescue operations anywhere but onshore. The FDA lowered its acceptability standards for the seafood-toxins which continue to be found .. some say that some of the shrimp- and oyster-species there have been wiped out. Vultures are dropping dead in the waters near Florida - swans are showing up paralyzed. The people are sick, and time will tell if the same carcinogenic results show up as did around the Valdez. BP kept such tight controls on the whole business that their clean-up workers weren't allowed to know what was going on 100 feet away - They actively courted the media away from true reporting, and attempted to indoctrinate school children in Louisianna to 'not blame BP'. The seafloor of the Gulf is a graveyard... and much much more... I don't see at all how the whole thing, which continues daily, is not deemed a catastrophe.)
Fortunately, in the some what longer run a crude oil catastrophe is not much of a catastrophe. I could hold a lecture on this but the main message is that crude oil is natural and that it has quite little impact on the ecosystem. Especially in the South hemisphere. Exxon Valdez in Alaska was in that sense a greater ecological problem, and required more clean up efforts.
I do not marginalize the ecologic effects of the Mexican Gulf event but in the long run it will have no especially devastating effect. The warming of the water and that the water release carbonoxide is a greater problem right now. Species die for good because of the heating, but species die only temporarily beacuse of crude oill.
-
(Jahn, the problem is not the crude oil - the problem is the corexit, and the synergistic effects of the oil + corexit. Also, definitive answers have not been obtainable per the natural gas and hydrocarbons released. The Valdez, furthermore, was a finite amount of oil... the Gulf spill was much greater, and keeps showing up. The Loop Current stalled ... for how long no one is saying. The toll on the birds and other animals is astronomical - and that's just the stats that we know about. BP and the US Gov't cut into rescue operations anywhere but onshore. The FDA lowered its acceptability standards for the seafood-toxins which continue to be found .. some say that some of the shrimp- and oyster-species there have been wiped out. Vultures are dropping dead in the waters near Florida - swans are showing up paralyzed. The people are sick, and time will tell if the same carcinogenic results show up as did around the Valdez. BP kept such tight controls on the whole business that their clean-up workers weren't allowed to know what was going on 100 feet away - They actively courted the media away from true reporting, and attempted to indoctrinate school children in Louisianna to 'not blame BP'. The seafloor of the Gulf is a graveyard... and much much more... I don't see at all how the whole thing, which continues daily, is not deemed a catastrophe.)
Ok Ok Dear, I hear you!
I will have my lecture later. Not trying to simplify your worries or concern, these concernss of youra are of course must appropriate.
But as for a releif to you today. Crude oil is a natural ingredient in the ecological system and there are many micro organisms that eat this kind of oil. By time crude oil turn into asphalt and that state do not affect the system, it is like stones.
-
It always happens, that when I think I've become too jaded or too dark, that I find I'm not quite jaded enough. It should have been a no-brainer, that besides the massive lawsuits and bad press BP is trying to redirect (with the help of the US Gov't), that also at the heart of all the false polish is their pressure on the residents to accept the settlements offered. "Everything is ok now - take this small pittance."
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/editorial-board-ignore-feds-latest-report-florida-listen-outsiders
-
Finally it comes out about the manatees. 767 found dead in 2010 - they're attributing "279" of those deaths to cold temperatures.
-
BP angers America again – this time over deal with Russians
By Stephen Foley in New York
Monday, 17 January 2011
BP still has to pay for the environmental disaster from the Gulf oil spill
BP's frantic efforts to repair its devastated reputation in the US have been set back by a major new alliance with the Russian government, prompting outraged comments from all sides of the political spectrum.
Amid continuing anger from the American public over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, politicians are calling for an investigation into BP's deal to sell a 5 per cent stake in the company to the Russian state-controlled oil giant Rosneft.
That deal, which gives BP access to vast untapped oil reserves in the Arctic, was signed with fanfare in London on Friday night, but across the Atlantic, one Congressman renamed BP "Bolshoi Petroleum". US critics also suggested BP has now become a national security threat, as well as environmental one.
"The national security implications of BP America being involved with the Russian company – that does require scrutiny by the Committee of Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS)," Michael Burgess, a Republican from Texas, said in a television interview hours after the deal was signed.
Mr Burgess is a member of the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee, making him a potential thorn in the side of BP, which has major operations across the US. "BP unfortunately has not been a great player either in the oil pipeline in Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico," Mr Burgess said. "We have had serious problems there."
Earlier, Ed Markey, a prominent Democrat, had highlighted that BP was in 2009 the top supplier of petroleum to the US military. And he promised to push for intense scrutiny of the deal. He said: "Even following the largest oil spill in US history, and potentially billions of dollars in fines still outstanding, the Russian Bear is apparently bullish about BP. This acquisition will almost certainly complicate the politics of levying and collecting damages from BP following their Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
"BP once stood for British Petroleum. With this deal, it now stands for Bolshoi Petroleum. The details of this deal and its impacts on the operations of BP America need to be thoroughly examined," Mr Markey added.
CFIUS is the US Treasury body with the power to block mergers and takeover deals if they are found to hurt US national security. Natural resources deals have always been among the most politically sensitive, and appear to be even more so since the emergence of China and other emerging nations on the world stage. US political pressure thwarted a Chinese takeover of an American oil company, Unocal, in 2005.
A BP spokesman said yesterday that the company was "very happy and pleased with the deal we have done, and we will deal with groups that have things to say as and when necessary".
Privately, the company believes there are no grounds for the US to intervene in the deal. Wall Street analysts say BP's business prospects are more heavily dependent on other issues, including the long-term costs of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and BP's reputation with US safety regulators. It remains unclear if, or how soon, BP might once again become a contender for future drilling licences in the Gulf.
BP's chief executive, Bob Dudley, and Vladimir Putin, the Russian Prime Minister, called it "an alliance based on mutual advantage". Rosneft will take a 5 per cent stake in the British company, worth £4.9bn, in return for 9.5 per cent of Rosneft. It is the first time that one of the international oil giants has entered into this kind of cross-shareholding arrangement with a state-controlled oil company.
Under the deal, BP will help exploit new oil and gas exploration licences awarded to Rosneft last year, which cover approximately 125,000 square kilometres in the shallow waters of the South Kara Sea. The deal was immediately attacked by environmental campaigners, including Greenpeace, for extending drilling to the fragile Arctic.
And yesterday, Ed Miliband, the Labour party leader, told the BBC's Andrew Marr: "I'd be pretty worried about this... I think that the lesson of the Gulf oil spill should be that the task for all of us – private companies, government and so on – is not to just keep digging and digging deeper and deeper for oil. It is actually to find those alternative forms of energy that can help us move forward in a clean way."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bp-angers-america-again-ndash-this-time-over-deal-with-russians-2186244.html
-
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/
-
Corexit Letter from Louisiana Senator to Obama
State of Louisiana Senate
District I
Senator A.G. Crowe
1/16/2011
The Honorable Barack Obama
The President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500
Re: The environmental impact of dispersing Corexit during and after the oil spill
Dear Mr. President;
The BP incident in the Gulf of Mexico has now been acknowledged as the greatest manmade disaster in history but there is yet another manmade disaster that must not be overlooked and has not been adequately addressed in the recently released report of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon oil disaster.
That second major disaster has been caused by the unnecessary use of the toxin Corexit dispersant. In early May of 2010 just after the crisis began, I requested that our Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell use whatever legal means were necessary to stop the use of this toxin. Shortly thereafter, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal requested that the use of this toxic dispersant be discontinued because of the long-term environmental damage. And still later, it was reported in the media that you also ordered BP to stop using Corexit. Surprisingly, I also read in the media that they even refused your request.
Mr. President, my concern is that this toxic and damaging chemical is still being used and it will compound the long-term damage to our state, our citizens, our eco-system, our economy, our seafood industry, our wildlife and our culture.
I am well aware that our emphasis, resources and energy is currently engaged working through the administrative and legal proceedings of the oil disaster but we must also recognize and begin the same process to address the damage Corexit has done and will continue to do as we go forward.
As the State Senator for District 1 in the southeastern corner of the State of Louisiana representing the parishes of St. Tammany, St. Bernard, Orleans and Plaquemines, I respectfully request that you have your administrative officials provide the information requested in this letter. I need to make that information available to my constituents who are seeing their lives and lands threatened and their way of life hanging in the balance. Due to the threats to public safety and ecological realities, I am compelled to write this letter requesting answers to my questions regarding the role of the United States Government in administering the response to the crises in the Gulf. It is apparent that the response directed by our government was inadequate because it allowed the use of Corexit dispersants which increased the toxicity level of the spilled oil and delivered no substantial benefit.
Corexit dispersants increased the toxicity of the oil itself when the two were mixed together. Its use caused the cross contamination of the Gulf water column by forcing the transfer of the surface oil downward through the water column, causing the oil to sink to the Gulf floor. The result was an unnecessary elevated negative impact as this same oil moved ashore later to the tidal zones delivering toxic weathered oil to coastal residents, tourists and businesses and workers in the Gulf region.
Government officials stated over and over that the use of the dispersants was designed to break up the oil into smaller digestible parts to be consumed by the sub-sea living micro-organisms. This strategy is unsubstantiated. In fact, the Corexit dispersant created the opposite results since Corexit contains toxic ingredients which act as biocides to prevent microbial digestion of the oil. Physical evidence supports that the entire response administered by government agencies have been inadequate.
Independent scientists have reported the waters and our shores of the Gulf are toxic. It has been reported that the toxins in the Gulf waters are directly linked to the distribution of dispersants (Corexit 9500 and 9527A) introduced this summer (and since then) during the BP disaster. It has not all evaporated (gassed off) or digested by the microbes and the remaining contamination needs to be cleaned up and not hidden so that the toxins can be removed quickly from our Gulf for the safety of our citizens and to allow what remaining species of sea and wild life to recover; if at all possible.
Immediately following the accident, I spent a great deal of time researching this issue and met with numerous eminently qualified scientists and professionals with the hope of being able to save our coastal zone with the use of “bio-friendly” oil dispersants which I learned was available, safer, non-toxic and proven to be effective.
Today, 9 months after the accident, there is still no plan by the United States Government to clean up the toxin Corexit. Many are concerned that the oil laced with this toxic dispersant is still in the Gulf being moved constantly by currents throughout the ecosystem spreading contamination.
It is well known by many reputable scientists and environmental watchdog groups that non-toxic bio-remediation products, such as “OSE-II” was and is available. It has been used all over the world by many countries, contractors, private industry and the United States military and has been proven to be a safe solution in the past. Moreover, these types of products possess unique properties such as hydraulic lift (causes oil to float) so that the sunken oil can be raised from the sediments and detoxified.
I believe that the officials at the BP science labs have been disingenuous about their supposed desire to protect the aquiculture of the Gulf and the livelihood of the families who harvest the fisheries of the Gulf, in that they have intentionally excluded safe, non-toxic and proven bio-remediation technology to clean up the oil and toxins. BP’s refusal to use bio-remediation products to restore Gulf waters to pre-spill conditions is very disturbing to me since the EPA and USCG has approved bio-remediation for the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska years ago. BP has also used non-toxic bio-remediation technology in the Caribbean and in Africa. RPT 6 of the EPA has used OSE-II in U.S. waters as well.
Was the toxin Corexit used because it dropped the oil from the surface so it would appear that the problem was solved? Was it ever discussed that the dropping of the oil would render the huge undertaking of placing booms useless? The earthen berms called for by Plaquemines Parish President Nungesser and Governor Jindal was our only defense after the use of Corexit was employed as we witnessed in disbelief oil coming to our shores under the booms.
Please have your administration provide answers to the following questions.
1. Have acutely toxic chemical compounds been formed by the mixing of Gulf crude with toxic dispersants (Corexit 9500 and 9527A) applied individually or in a mixed ratio? If such chemicals have been mixed, please provide the ratios and provide the names of the other chemicals with which Corexit was mixed.
2. Other acutely toxic compounds have been found in the air, water, and sediments in the Gulf. Have they evaporated off with the aid of dispersants? Have your scientist reported that these compounds have come ashore, contaminating our coastal communities?
3. Is the oil spilled truly cleaned up, or has it been transformed through the evaporation and loss of lighter-chain hydrocarbons, leaving the heavier, longer-chain hydrocarbons in the water and sediments to continue delivering toxins to those exposed to them through time, which includes all the aquatic life within the Gulf waters?
4. What levels of toxins can humans safely tolerate if these toxins are taken in either by ingestion or by direct exposure from the air or water?
5. Are the Gulf waters safe? If so, define “safe.” Please define the test methods used to determine water quality and safety to assist independent scientists to verify these results.
6. Is Gulf seafood safe? If so, define “safe.” Please define the test methods used to determine safety to assist independent scientists to verify these results. The independent smell test by the USDA has on occasion proven to be inaccurate. What test equipment is being employed? USDA Director Steve Wilson will not declare verbally.
7. Were our Gulf waters safe prior to the recent 4,200 square mile ban by NOAA? If so, when? Please describe the testing methods and proof that it was safe. Where are the test data and a description of test methods that proved it was safe? What tests or methods were used to prove it was unsafe?
8. Have our Gulf onshore breezes been safe, specifically from May/June and from 2010 to present? Environmental monitoring by the federal government has surely occurred since the accident and test results as well as a description of test methods and findings should be available by now. Much is still missing in this area of data on numerous agency web sites. Please provide them. Independent scientists have reported the presence of PAH’s, 2-butoxy-ethanol and other toxic compounds in the air and in onshore rainfall. Please provide any data available on this issue, including their effects on humans, and confirm if the public should be concerned about bio-accumulation in commercial seafood or not. If indeed there is any risk of bio-accumulation, then know that it is possible to detoxify the soil and ground water, if necessary. Both NOAA and the EPA data together with some of BP’s data are contradictory within their own summations. We just need transparency regarding these issues.
9. What is the impact of prolonged exposure to these chemicals on humans in terms of toxicity and illness? What are the symptoms associated with various exposures? I ask this because in the Exxon-Valdez accident, it has been reported that all who participated in the clean up activity died within 20+ years of the accident. Understanding the chemical characteristics of the toxins used and mixed with the oil is important.
10. With respect to water samples taken by EPA and NOAA, please provide the test data and a description of test methods regarding poly-propanol, 2-butoxy ethanol, ethylene glycol, total hydrocarbons and PAH’s in the water column, not just the surface waters. Reports of chemicals in the water melting the plastics or rubber products such as diving suits and gasket seals have been reported and documented. Also, fishermen have discovered the bottoms of their crab traps dissolved or were heavily coated with rubbery tar-type oil.
11. Does the toxic effects of the dispersant Corexit 9500/9527A mixed with light sweet crude confirm that the toxicity level is increased for living organisms?
Understanding that bacteria are living organisms, I have yet to discover any definitive proof that natural bio-remediation of the weathered oil is possible by using Corexit. The claims by EPA officials and Coast Guard personnel have been confirmed to be false since 1992 (EPA/NETAC Test 1992). This is critical because it is apparent that the toxin Corexit administered did nothing but drop and hide the oil allowing for vast amounts of oil and toxins to be released well below the surface in to the water columns and the food chain. Further, it has been suggested that the toxicity level may increase with time after a spill. There is definitive proof that natural bio-remediation was a viable alternative for use at the time of the disaster and that it can still be used after the natural crude has been dispersed. It is still possible to clean up the water, the coastal lands, the marsh grass areas, the sandy beaches, the water column and the oil on the Gulf floor. EPA has approved bio-remediation products on the NCP list such as OSE-II that can raise the sunken oil to the surface for a safe natural conversion to CO2 and water which will detoxify the water column and restore the Gulf waters to pre-spill conditions. It was recommended for use in the clean up effort by the USCG Testing lab on July 10, 2010 to the FOSC (Federal on Scene Coordinator), however no action was taken. For unknown reasons, the EPA has blocked its use and continues to deny requests for use by both BP and the Louisiana DEQ.
Today in Louisiana and the other affected Gulf states, the health and welfare of our citizens, public safety, economic pain and environmental unknowns exist and the time to address this critical issue is now.
We will not be fooled in to believing that the oil and the toxins are gone. Because the toxic dispersants have been, and are still being used today, the oil is being forced downward in to the water columns and then carried endlessly around and about by the Gulf currents adversely affecting our environment.
On behalf of the citizens of all of the states on the Gulf coast, I strongly urge you to employ all of the resources you have available to guarantee a safe and healthy future for those of us in the Gulf coast states by joining with us to make sure safe non-toxic bio-remediation technology is put in to use immediately.
It is my sincere hope that this request is answered in a timely fashion so that I can advise my constituents.
I appreciate your understanding and cooperation in this matter.
Respectfully,
A.G. Crowe
State Senator
District 1
State of Louisiana
cc: Vice President Biden: Vice President of the United States of America
Dept of Environmental Protection Agency: (Secretary Lisa. P. Jackson, Dana Tullis, Sam Coleman, Craig Carroll, Gregory J Wilson
Dept. of Defense: (Robert Gates)
Members of the Joint Chiefs: Secretary of the Navy / Secretary of the Army
(US Coast Guard) Incident Commander Ret. Admiral Thad Allen,
Adm. James A Watson, Adm. Mary E Landry, Adm. Paul Zunkunft)
Dept of Justice: (Attorney General-Eric H. Holder, Jr.)
Dept of Interior: (Kenneth Salazar)
Dept. of Agriculture: (Thomas J. Villach)
Dept. of Commerce: (Gary F. Locke)
Dept of Health and Human Services: (Kathleen Sebelius)
Dept of Energy: (Steven Chu)
Dept of Homeland Security: (Janet Napolitano, Thad Allen)
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal
New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu
Alabama Governor Robert Bentley
Florida Governor Rick Scott
Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour
Texas Governor Rick Perry
Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell
Alabama Attorney General Troy King
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi
Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott
Louisiana Secretary of Wildlife & Fisheries Robert Barham
Louisiana Secretary of Dept. of Environmental Quality Peggy Hatch
Garret Graves, Louisiana Governor’s Office of Coastal Protection
Louisiana Secretary of Department of Health & Hospitals Bruce Greenstien
Senator Mary L. Landrieu
Senator David Vitter
Congressman Steve Scalise
Congressman Cedric L. Richmond
Congressman Jeff Landry
Congressman John Fleming
Congressman Rodney Alexander
Congressman Bill Cassidy
Congressman Charles Boustany
Louisiana Senate President Joel T. Chaisson, III
Louisiana Speaker of the House Tucker
Alabama Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard
Florida Speaker of the House Dean Cannon
Mississippi Speaker of the House William J. McCoy
Texas Speaker of the House Joe Straus
Alabama Senate President, Lt. Governor, Jim Folsom, Jr.
Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolos
Mississippi Senate President, Lt. Governor, Phil Bryant
Texas Senate President, Lt. Governor, David Dewhurst
Mr. Sean Hannity
USA Today
Wall Street Journal
Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser
St. Bernard Parish President Craig P. Taffaro, Jr.
Acadia Parish President A. J. Credeur
Ascension Parish President Tommy Martinez
Assumption Parish President Martin S. Triche
Calcasieu Parish President Guy Brame
Cameron Parish President Charles Precht, III
Iberia Parish President Ernest Freyou
Iberville Parish President J. Mitchell Ourso, Jr.
Jefferson Parish President John F. Young, Jr.
Jefferson Davis Parish President Donald Woods
Lafayette Parish President Joey Durel
Lafourche Parish President Charlotte Randolph
St. Charles Parish President V. J. St. Pierre, Jr.
St. James Parish President Dale Hymel, Jr.
St. John the Baptist Parish President Natalie Robottom
St. Martin Parish President Guy Cormier
St. Mary Parish President Paul P. Naquin, Jr.
St. Tammany Parish President Kevin Davis
Terrebonne Parish President Michel Claudet
Vermilion Parish President Wayne Touchet
Finally, and probably too late, someone lays it on the line.
http://www.protecttheocean.com/corexit-letter/
-
Another senator (a Democrat) from Arizona came out in criticism of the Obama Administration's handling of the BP spill, the day after Senator Crowe's piece, quoted above. But all for naught, apparently.
I couldn't stomach listening to the State of the Union address last night, but from scanning the "reviews" and responses, I surmise the Gulf was not mentioned at all. So, whether one believes or not the painstaking reporting of this site (http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/), and others like it, in which new discoveries of the consequences surface every day, it becomes easier and easier to understand why Louisiana and some other Gulf states feel like the unwanted step-children of the country. The condition is a long-standing ailment, for which Katrina was the refresher-course, and there is talk now of diaspora from the region. By an underground-ish few.
Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich gave an interview to the AP this week, in which he proposed that the Environmental Protection Agency be done away with, in favor of a similar agency who would consider the "needs of the economy", or something like that. Who knows the extent of Gingrich's influence at this point, but the message is still clear. While I despair a bit that the whole business be turned so blatantly and unabashedly around - that is, now we should not even pretend we are caring for the environment - I say that the EPA had little to no power in putting a stop to Corexit being used, so what good are they? Really. Believe it now or not, but the consequences of the poisoning of the Gulf will become more and more known over time. The EPA was useless.
Obama gave an excellent eulogy for the assassinated in Arizona, but my take on him - healthplan and all - is that he is a paper president. And indeed, perhaps a paper puppet, per his swim in Pensacola this summer to "show" that "everything is ok". Having said this, however, I don't have a suggestion for a good successor.
So, in the words of Michael Maher, we ARE stuffed.
Thanks for allowing me to process these events.
-
Jan. 30, 2011, 1:56 p.m. EST
U.S. likely to cut estimate of BP oil spill size
By James Herron
Wall Street Journal
LONDON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. Government is likely to bow to pressure from BP PLC /quotes/comstock/13*!bp/quotes/nls/bp (BP 46.74, +0.53, +1.14%) and cut its estimate of the size of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last summer, U.K. newspaper The Observer reports Sunday.
The official U.S. Government estimate says currently that 4.9 million barrels of oil leaked from the Macondo well, 800,000 barrels of which was captured from the well head. BP has been arguing behind the scenes that this figure is too high and a source at the Environmental Protection Agency told the Observer the government has agreed to reduce the estimate.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-likely-to-cut-estimate-of-bp-oil-spill-size-2011-01-30
-
It won't work - the US IS oil. The link is too deep for any Administration to buck.
The problem is that the US has fallen in economic power internationally. The situation is extremely serious for the US, with the rise of China like a vicious dog at it's heels. The US will sacrifice much more than sea creatures and a few million of its citizens to claw back its economic power.
This is realpolitik. Forget about the environment and democracy - it all about power. And without power the US is powerless to do anything. That is why the Admin is sitting on the fence with Egypt, when it should be in there pumping for the new era of Arab reality.
-
NPR reporter says he tried to ask right questions about Gulf spill
By JUSTIN L. MACK • jmack@jconline.com • February 4, 2011
There was standing room only Thursday as more than 100 people packed a lecture room in Purdue (University)'s Pfendler Hall to hear award-winning NPR correspondent Richard Harris discuss last year's Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Harris, who won a Kavli Science Journal Award from the American Association for the Advancement of Science in November for his coverage of the BP oil spill, became the go-to news source for updates on the spill.
Harris' talk was part of Purdue University's Discovery Lecture series.
His body of work included a story in which Purdue mechanical engineering professor Steven Wereley and other experts said BP was vastly underestimating the size of the spill.
The veteran journalist said he never set out to earn national praise when he began digging for the truth.
"I didn't go out and say 'I'm going to get the best oil spill story in the world.' I was just trying to do my job and be a good science reporter and ask the right question.
"It just turned out that the answer was spectacular."
Harris, an NPR reporter since 1986, used his speech, "How Big Was the BP Spill? Getting to the Truth?" to recount how he first got involved with the coverage of the spill as well as what inspired him to challenge early spill estimates.
According to a Purdue release, more than 4 million barrels of oil spewed into the gulf off the coast of Louisiana following the April 20 explosion at the Macondo well, which killed 11 workers.
The BP oil spill, leaking an estimated 50,000 to 66,000 barrels per day, was roughly 20 times greater than the Exxon Valdez accident in 1989.
On May 12, Harris was the first to report that figures released by the U.S. government and BP underestimated the size of the spill.
Harris had contacted Wereley to see if the professor could use a research tool he'd developed to analyze the initial 30-second video clip of oil gushing from the 21.5-inch pipe.
He said he reached out to Wereley after getting a call from Florida State oceanographer Ian MacDonald, who said the early video released by BP showed the leak easily exceeded the 1,000 to 5,000 barrels per day originally estimated.
Wereley then spent the afternoon of May 11 creating freeze-frame shots from the video and analyzing data to compute how fast oil was flowing from the pipe.
"The response was curious at first. Someone from the White House Press Office called and said, 'You can't say that. People will get scared,' " Harris said.
After nearly a year of tracking the spill, Harris said he is still thinking about what new stories and topics will emerge from the incident.
Purdue sophomore Megan Kendall said Harris' speech allowed her to see the spill from a new perspective.
"I don't listen to NPR every day or anything like that, but I remember his story from last year," she said.
"I thought (the speech) was very interesting and I liked hearing it again firsthand.
"It was interesting to learn about all of the different players involved, from the scientists to the reporters to those in academia."
http://www.jconline.com/article/20110204/NEWS0501/102040339
-
It's only people like him who keep the thing alive - he and some noteworthy others are still pressing for the truth. If there is no pressure for the truth, then the Oil companies will win this one.
-
There's an embarrassing spelling error in this piece which could conceivably undermine it ... can you see it? (I don't mean something nit-picking and typo-esque: it's a biggie.)
Monday, February 14, 2011
LA STATE SENATOR DEMANDS STOPPAGE OF TOXIC CHEMICALS IN THE GULF OIL CLEAN UP
February 10, 2011
TO: SENATOR HARRY REID, Senate Majority Leader
CONGRESSMAN JOHN BOEHNER, Speaker of the House of Representatives
CONGRESSMAN FRED UPTON, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee
CONGRESSMAN DARRELL ISSA, Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform
SENATOR JAMES INHOFE, Ranking Member, Committee on Environment and Public Works
CONGRESSMAN PAUL RYAN, Chairman of the Committee on the Budget
CONGRESSMAN JOHN MICA, Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
CONGRESSMAN BOB GIBBS, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
CC: GOVERNOR BOBBY JINDAL
SENATOR DAVID VITTER, SENATOR MARY LANDRIEU, REPRESENTATIVE STEVE SCALISE, REPRESENTATIVE CEDRIC RICHMOND, REPRESENTATIVE JEFFREY LANDRY, REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FLEMING, REPRESENTATIVE RODNEY ALEXANDER, REPRESENTATIVE BILL CASSIDY, REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES BOUSTANY
Dear Honorable Congressmen:
As of February 1st, 2011, it is estimated that between 800,000 and 4 million gallons of toxic chemical dispersants have been sprayed or poured into the Gulf of Mexico in an on-going operation. The broad-scale distribution of these poisonous substances has been justified by statements such as “trade-offs have to be made”.
The “tradeoffs” have been made and, because toxic dispersants were used, we now have millions of gallons of oil laced with toxic dispersants still suspended throughout the water column and on the sea floor, shifting constantly with the currents. This is causing severe, long-term harm to the public’s health, marine life, the environment, the economy and the Gulf’s way of life.
The EPA authorized the use of toxic chemical dispersants to sink the oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil accident violating the Clean Water Act, and the EPA (specifically Lisa Jackson, Dana Tulis, and Sam Coleman) with the help of NOAA, (specifically Jane Lubchenco, Ed Levine, and Charlie Henry) have blocked the efforts of the Coast Guard and the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida and Alabama to protect their natural resources and the health, safety and welfare of their citizens as guaranteed by the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
On January 16, 2011, I wrote a letter to President Obama (copy attached) requesting answers to a number of specific questions and serious concerns brought to my attention by my constituents. It’s been over three weeks since that letter arrived at the White House and, at this point, it appears that I will not get a response from the President or his administration.
Consequently, my constituents and I have decided to start a petition (viewable at www.agcrowe.com) which will be directed to you and launched within the next few days. Our goal is simple. We need your help to stop this destructive activity immediately and begin implementing proven, safe, non-toxic solutions which are already available and ready to be deployed.
Sincerely,
A.G. CROWE
District 1
State Senator
State of Louisiana
Attachments: Letter to President Barack Obama
Preview of Petition
Senator A.G. Crowe “Clean the Gulf” Petition
Please join Louisiana State Senator A.G. Crowe in demanding that proven, non-toxic solutions are immediately implemented to restore the Gulf of Mexico to its condition prior to BP’s oil rig blow out disaster.
TO:
SENATOR HARRY REID, Senate Majority Leader
CONGRESSMAN JOHN BOEHNER, Speaker of the House of Representatives
CONGRESSMAN FRED UPTON, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee CONGRESSMAN DARRELL ISSA, Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform SENATOR JAMES INHOFE, Ranking Member, Committee on Environment and Public Works CONGRESSMAN PAUL RYAN, Chairman of the Committee on the Budget CONGRESSMAN JOHN MICA, Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure CONGRESSMAN BOB GIBBS, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
FROM:
CONCERNED U.S. CITIZENS
PETITION
PREAMBLE
As of February 1st, 2011, it is estimated that between 800,000 and 4 million gallons of toxic chemical dispersants have been sprayed or poured into the Gulf of Mexico in an on-going operation. The broad-scale distribution of these poisonous substances has been justified by statements such as “trade-offs have to be made.”
The “tradeoffs” have been made and, because toxic dispersants were used, we now have millions of gallons of oil laced with toxic dispersants still suspended throughout the water column and on the sea floor, shifting constantly with the currents. This is causing severe, long-term harm to the public’s health, marine life, the environment, the economy and the Gulf’s way of life.
Therefore, we respectfully submit the following petition:
Whereas, the U.S. Presidential oath of office calls for the preservation of the nation’s natural resources, and that responsibility is delegated to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);
Whereas, the EPA (specifically Lisa Jackson, Dana Tulis, and Sam Coleman) with the help of NOAA, (specifically Jane Lubchenco, Ed Levine, and Charlie Henry) have blocked the efforts of the Coast Guard and the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama to protect their natural resources and the health, safety and welfare of their citizens as guaranteed by the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution;
Whereas, the EPA authorized the use of toxic chemical dispersants to sink the oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil accident violating the Clean Water Act;
Whereas, those chemical dispersants, and particularly all versions of the product called Coexist, have been proven, by scientific studies, to have made the BP Horizon accidental discharge worse than if the oil had been allowed to float to the surface, where it could have been collected;
Whereas, per scientific studies, the toxic chemical dispersants have polluted large and indefinable areas of the Gulf waters, making them unpredictable and unsafe for all living organisms;
Whereas, per scientific studies, the toxic chemical dispersants have contaminated much of our Gulf’s seafood, endangered the public’s health, shaken the public’s confidence in the quality of our seafood, and prolonged the recovery of the seafood and tourism industries;
Whereas, the public’s health has been put at great risk, as can be seen by the alarming rise in health problems which can be directly linked to exposure to the toxic chemical dispersants and dispersed oil;
Whereas, per scientific studies, Coexist is a biocide which kills the natural microorganisms that break down oil, retarding the degradation of the oil itself, and is, thus, a continuing threat to all life in the Gulf;
Whereas, there are on-going reports of the illegal continued spraying of Coexist on the Gulf’s waters and its shorelines;
Whereas, toxic chemical dispersants are destroying the Gulf’s economy and its way of life;
Whereas, there are EPA-known, non-toxic, bioremediation solutions which could have been used in the first few weeks of the BP Horizon accidental discharge which would have prevented the majority of the damage to the marine life, the environment, and the public’s health which resulted from the oil well blow out;
Whereas, these same non-toxic bioremediation solutions can still be used to thoroughly and quickly clean up the oil and the toxic chemical dispersant, and reverse the damage to the Gulf;
Whereas, the implementation of bioremediation technology is a fraction of the cost of other cleanup methods currently being used and would save the U.S. government untold wasted funds;
Whereas, there are non-toxic, first-response, bioremediation products that are already on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Contingency Plan (NCP) list of approved products for use in cleaning up oil spills;
Whereas, the EPA has provided no valid scientific reason for withholding permits for the full and immediate implementation of thoroughly vetted and demonstrably workable, non-toxic, bioremediation remedies designed to fully detoxify and remediate both the oil and the toxic dispersant within two to four weeks;
Whereas, non-toxic bioremediation methods create clean, healthy waters which would allow the restoration of jobs in the fishing, tourism and oil/gas industries, as well as all other related commerce,
We, the people, do hereby formally request that:
Our federal oversight trustees acknowledge and adhere to the formal demands of the Gulf Coast States (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas and Florida) requesting that proven, first-response, EPA-certified, NCP-classified, non-toxic, bioremediation products be immediately implemented to clean up the contamination from the oil and toxic dispersants present in our gulf waters, tidal zones and marshes, so that our natural resources can be returned to pre blow-out conditions, and
That the use of toxic chemical dispersants, such as Coexist or any other scientifically-identified, toxic dispersant, be banned immediately in U.S. navigable waters.
-
The sequel of DH is in the making (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/business/global/16arctic.html?_r=1&hp)
-
The sequel of DH is in the making (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/business/global/16arctic.html?_r=1&hp)
I just wonder ... if they have a disaster, how will that oil commingle with the water from the melting of the caps? Furthermore, won't that activity accelerate the melting of the caps? ~We'll all be underwater soon enough: black, sludgy water.
-
I read that since the Gulf disaster, 10 new rigs have been built in the Gulf. They aren't open for business yet, but they're waiting.
The Gulf is a poisoned wasteland ... the country has turned its back on it.
-
There was a 3.5 earthquake in the Gulf a couple of days ago, off the coast of W. Florida (see attached.) A highly unusual event. There are whispers of a connection to events vis a vis the oilrigs, but my question is, if the Gulf is growing more seismically active, is it a good idea to have all those rigs there?
Likewise in Arkansas, there have been 30 or more earthquakes recently - baby ones, but one has to ask, what in the world is going on?
-
29 infant dolphin deaths in the past 2 weeks in Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida; a pygmy sperm whale washing up in Galveston, TX and another in Destin, Florida; a spike in manatee deaths; bloodwork on many Gulf residents -especially the clean-up workers - showing levels of chemical toxicity; increased illness all around the Gulf - some of it manifesting as hemorrhaging; dramatic illness and lesions manifesting after some have taken a swim; oil newly surfacing and coming ashore regardless of the dispersants; the disappearance of baby oysters; the exposure of highly flawed governmental testing on seafood (like cleaning and deveining shrimp PRIOR to testing); continued fish-kills and oiled birds still washing ashore; massive pile-up of dead portugese man-of-war's in Florida; oil and corexit are in the rain in the region; yet the tourism boards launch their seasonal invitations to come down and eat the seafood and take a swim.
The only story emerging in mainstream media is a study showing that the microbes are not eating the oil as desired.
Recently, a 54yo LSU professor died (cause was not stated...). He had spoken against BP's 3-year confidentiality clause in their recruitment of academics. It was his death which brought that story back to light.
There's the short version.
-
Thanks for keeping us informed Nichi. The issue has completely gone off the news here.
-
It seems that NOAA outsources its labwork to Poland ...
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/hustling-noaa-charge-investigating-baby-dolphin-deaths-will-months-remember-poland
-
Scientists investigating dolphin deaths in gulf say BP oil spill is possible cause
By Craig Pittman, Times Staff Writer
In Print: Friday, February 25, 2011
Usually, a few dead dolphins wash ashore along gulf beaches in the first few months of the year. Some are killed by Red Tide or other toxic algae blooms, some by diseases, some by cold.
But this year something different is happening. Since Jan. 1, there have been 48 bottlenose dolphins washed up on the beaches of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida's Panhandle.
Most of them — 29, including two of the three found in Florida — were newborn, miscarried or stillborn calves. There were reports of five more washing ashore Thursday, but scientists had not yet verified them or added them to the official count.
The suspicion is that somehow the oil or chemical dispersants from summer's Deepwater Horizon disaster killed them. Activists from the National Wildlife Federation and other groups blogging about the deaths and posting items on Twitter have linked the spike in deaths to the oil spill. ABC and CNN have jumped on the story.
However, the culprit could turn out to be something else, scientists say.
"We shouldn't jump to conclusions," cautioned Randy Wells, a Mote Marine Laboratory scientist who has spent nearly 40 years studying dolphins.
Tests of the carcasses to pinpoint the cause will likely take months, said Blair Mase of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is overseeing the investigation.
Still, everyone acknowledges that the wave of dead dolphins signals something out of the ordinary.
"What's unusual is that there are so many, and so many of them are so young," said Mase, who is in charge of the NOAA's marine mammal stranding network for the southeastern states.
The gestation period for dolphins is between 11 and 12 months. That means dolphins dying now were likely conceived before the April 20 rig explosion off the Louisiana coast.
They were in the early stages of development as about 4.9 million barrels of oil gushed into the gulf, and BP was spraying 771,000 gallons of chemical dispersant on the flow.
Although federal officials and BP have scaled back the cleanup, Louisiana officials say they're still seeing oil washing ashore.
A recent study of the area around the spill by University of Georgia scientist Samantha Joye found dead corals, crabs and sea stars scattered on the sea floor, along with strings of bacterial slime that created what she called an "invertebrate graveyard."
Still, Mase said that many things can lead to animal deaths. "Since 1990, we have had 13 unusual mortality events in the Gulf of Mexico. … So the oil spill is one of the things we're looking into."
There are arguments to be made, though, against some of those other possible causes.
If the dolphins were killed by the winter cold, other species would likely be affected, too, said Moby Solangi, director of the Institute for Marine Mammal Studies, which has collected a majority of the dolphin carcasses, all of them from a 130-mile stretch of beach in Alabama and Mississippi.
So far, all Solangi's staff has been finding have been very young dolphins.
"The usual thing with strandings is that we see a mix of old and young dolphins," Solangi said. "But these all appear to be stillborn or they survived just a day or two before dying."
A Red Tide bloom hasn't been reported in the northern gulf, so that seems unlikely as a cause. That still leaves bacterial or viral infections among possibilities.
Steve Shippe of the Emerald Coast Wildlife Refuge in Fort Walton Beach led the group that picked up the two young dolphins found in the Florida Panhandle — one Jan. 5 in Gulf Breeze, one Jan. 25 on Pensacola Beach.
Although Shippe is studying the oil spill's impact on dolphins, he's reluctant to blame those two on BP. "This is kind of a historical average for our part of the gulf coast," he said.
But the large numbers washing ashore on the Alabama and Mississippi beaches could be a sign of something strange at work, he said.
Shippe, Mase and Solangi all pointed out one thing: The dolphin birthing season hasn't hit its peak yet. That begins at the end of February/beginning of March — so the tide of dead dolphins may not be over.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/wildlife/scientists-investigating-dolphin-deaths-in-gulf-say-bp-oil-spill-is/1153647
-
Marriage of oil and fisheries in Louisiana is not so happy: Bob Marshall
Editorial
Published: Friday, February 25, 2011, 8:07 AM
By Bob Marshall, The Times-Picayune
Imagine this. A reporter is invited on a state-funded fishing trip by the Louisiana Charter Boat Association. One caveat: His story must inform readers the oil industry lives in harmony with recreational fishing and, in fact, is beneficial to that sector.
Shocked?
So was Eric Sharp of the Detroit Free-Press.
"Of course, I told him I couldn't do that -- I couldn't accept any trip with pre-conditions," he said. "When he told me the money and the conditions had come from your Department of Natural Resources, I was really surprised." I wasn't. Not even after the story was confirmed by DNR Undersecretary Robert Harper. His agency is spending $10,000 on that campaign, he said.
There are several things wrong with this program, starting with the most obvious: It's not true. In fact, the opposite is true.
Government studies show energy development caused at least 38 percent of the 2,100 square miles of coastal wetlands Louisiana has lost over the past 70 years -- and the erosion continues at the rate of 25 square miles a year. Most of that loss has been in estuaries scientists say are responsible for 80 percent of all the fish in the Gulf.
Sure, some rigs act as artificial reefs that attract fish, but when the habitat that produces those fish is destroyed the rigs will become pretty lonely places.
Those losses would have been far less if the industry hadn't spent millions controlling the political system to prevent tighter protections for wetlands. They didn't like the extra cost.
So the truth is that the so-called marriage between oil and fisheries in Louisiana resulted in a battered spouse. Guess which one it is.
The second problem with this campaign is that it uses public funds to benefit one of the most profitable industries on the planet. It can afford to pay for its own media bribes.
Finally, there's the fact most of these companies make their profits from publicly-owned resources. Our government agencies are supposed to represent us in those business relationships, not them. It's like having your Realtor working for the prospective buyer.
Of course when Harper says the DNR was just doing its job, he's not far off.
The DNR's stated mission is "to preserve and enhance the nonrenewable natural resources ... through conservation, regulation, management and development" and to ensure that the state of Louisiana realizes "appropriate economic benefit." It is also charged with enforcing the regulations governing those activities. But it says (admits?) "The department strives to facilitate an excellent working relationship with industry, with a strong emphasis on reaching mutual goals." Well it's certainly been successful there. While Louisiana leads the nation in annual oil spills (4,000 a year according to the U.S. Coast Guard), the DNR seldom collects fines. According to a recent report from Bloomberg News, since 2006 the DNR took part in only 46 spill enforcements and collected penalties in just 28. The average fine these wealthy companies paid for polluting our environment was $10,496.
Meanwhile, federal regulators involved in the same cases collected $148,496 on each issue.
In fact, our DNR doesn't restrict its oil industry cheerleading to the state. Over the past year it has issued statements echoing the American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying arm of the oil and gas business, urging Congress to: preserve $36 billion in incentives taxpayers will give oil companies over the next decade; prevent the EPA from regulating carbon pollution, a key factor in sea level rise that is swamping more of our coast; stop stricter safety regulations and higher royalty payments. Naturally, it also thought halting deep-water drilling until the industry proved it could stop another BP disaster was outrageous.
The standard reason given by DNR is that that industry is vital to the state economy, producing 50,000 jobs.
Well, what about the other 1.9 million jobs in the economy? Or the reality that oil and gas interests often conflict with the reforms and programs we need to survive on these dying deltas? Or the lessons learned when the old Minerals Management Service became a support arm for the oil industry?
That's the accurate story, and the one our tax dollars should be used to spread.
Now, I would be shocked if that happened.
http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2011/02/marriage_of_oil_and_fisheries.html
-
Angela expressed it well in the 6/11 thread, so I'm going to quote it here:
The truth is always 'simple' ... when boiled down, just follow the money. It's all in plain sight. Those who control our nation, and probably have a strong hold on other countries as well, are greedy, power hungry bastards. They promote their 'causes' under the guise of religious and personal freedoms, when in fact, they want just the opposite. They want Total Control. This is our Patriarchal reign ... this is the 'good 'ol boys ... it's a modern day legal mafia, just as our Wall Street is legalized gambling.
Do you know that there is a hedge fund for snow precipitation? I heard it about two months ago on NPR (National Public Radio), and of course now, I can't find it on the internet. It's insane ... again, legalized gambling.
I swear I live in the land of the zombies ... everyone sleepily following their orders that have been implanted, programmed ... brainwashed ... And when a truth is revealed, it's quickly washed away, removed from public view, until a 'Jesse Ventura', or a 'Julian Assange' force it into the forefront. Then the 'witch hunt' begins to persecute the messengers ... or, are they really messengers ;) ...
I feel the same reactions to the oil spill and climate change. In speaking to my brother the other day, who said he was going to be at Mardi Gras in New Orleans this year, I was cautioning him about the seafood. He said, "Oh, I thought that the whole thing about the spill wasn't as bad as they first thought... [that everything was ok]..." I shared a little of the content of this thread, and you would've thought I was telling him about little green men from Mars.
Back in the 70's, we had all those lies, a 'wrong' war, assassinations, Watergate, and the killings at Kent State. It drove me from reading much further. I would only occasionally follow a story thereafter. I'm back there now, and I know it's all wrong - the timing of withdrawal is wrong, especially per M's recent post:
We, who value spiritual aspirations, should be watching these movements intensely. Why? Because we need two things:
1. Time. The most precious thing - this path requires sufficient time to mature, and thus to throw it over for some emotional allegiance or sense of injustice, or out of head-in-the-sand ignorance, is insanity.
2. Goad-task. Without a powerful task relevant to our current life-world situation, we stagnate in our own juices. The current upheavals in all areas of our world are exactly what we need to push us over the final line.
Be in the world but not of it.
The trouble is, I don't think I have the energy any more to weed through all the bullshit. We have a controlled, not a free, press... God knows what the truth is, anymore, anywhere. Or is this the desired conclusion, by the powers-that-be? Perhaps I simply need a break from pouring into every detail.
I definitely need to decorate the walls of my own time-capsule.
Edited to add: I'm sure this weariness will pass. Meanwhile, thanks for letting me share my frustration.
-
;)
-
Another Oil Spill, in the South Atlantic (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=134760219)
-
...
-
The Gulf of Mexico is not as clean as they say
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/geoffrey-lean/8454859/The-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-not-as-clean-as-they-say.html
The task of assessing the true toll of the Deepwater Horizon blow-out is only now starting, says Geoffrey Lean.
So is it now safe to go back into the Gulf of Mexico? A year after the Deepwater Horizon blow-out – which killed 11 workers and spilled 4.9 million barrels of oil – it might seem so.
Beaches along the coast look like they're back to their breathtaking normal, the ecologically sensitive Louisiana wetlands seem full of life again, and resorts are hoping that tourists will start flocking back. Only 0.4 per cent of American waters there are still closed to fishing – down from more than a third last summer – and prawn catches were actually nearly 10 per cent higher in January and February than at the same time last year.
Two weeks ago, the Obama administration gave the first go-ahead for a new deep water well since the disaster (it had already issued permits for six previously approved ones). The clean-up force has been cut from 52,000 to 6,000, and, two months ago, the head of the government's special claims fund said research he had commissioned showed that the area would have almost fully recovered by next year.
And yet we are still only near the beginning of the story – for oil spills, like other environmental emergencies, have a short acute phase, followed by a long chronic one. As so far at Fukushima, the acute phase has gone better than once seemed possible – but the long-term consequences remain unknown.
Mercifully, even miraculously, the Gulf has been spared the devastation that looked all too probable in the early weeks of the crisis, when the gushing oil seemed unstoppable, and the winds were blowing an ever-growing slick straight towards the wildlife-rich marshes of the Mississippi Delta. The winds changed just in time and – together with favourable currents and the flow of the great river itself – held the oil offshore long enough for it to dissipate: BP's spraying of 1.84 million gallons of dispersants also helped.
But while catastrophe was averted, the task of assessing the true toll is only now starting. It is highly charged, both commercially – since the result may decide how much may have to be paid in compensation – and politically, since Barack Obama, damaged by his hesitant handling of the crisis, has been over-eager in declaring it over.
It is worth bearing in mind that the effects of the acute stage are more serious than they might appear. One hundred dead cetaceans, for example, washed ashore – but, as a rule of thumb, 50 times as many such whales and dolphins sink at sea, making the likely toll around 5,000. Similarly the 8,065 oiled birds recovered are bound to be only a small fraction of those affected; in a ghoulish exercise, researchers will dump avian carcasses overboard this summer to see what proportion make it to land through the shark-infested sea.
Nor are all the beaches as idyllic as they appear to be. Many have an oil layer beneath the sand, while others are strewn with tiny fragments of tar balls. Huge mats of weathered oil are plaguing surf zones where the waves crash in. Parts of the wetlands are seriously contaminated, too.
There may be other surprises in store. For several years after the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska's Prince William Sound, the herring population seemed to have survived – but then crashed, never to recover. Birds that fed on affected shellfish in the area have had trouble breeding. And follow-up studies after a 1969 spill off Massachusetts found crabs still badly affected four decades later.
The biggest – and most hotly contested – issue is particular to this accident, which uniquely took place nearly a mile beneath the sea. Scientists increasingly expect that the greatest effects will take place in the deep ocean, but determining them, in the words of one US government expert will be "probably one of the most challenging things ever".
The official American position is that "most of the oil is gone" and, indeed, Department of Energy research suggested that naturally-occuring microbes did a good job of gobbling it up. But Prof Samantha Joye, of the University of Georgia – who has actually been to the sea floor in a submarine many times before and after the accident – tells a different story after finding an enormous "graveyard" covered in a thick coat of pollution. She reckons that the microbes managed to munch up only a tenth of the oil.
Perhaps most ominously is anecdotal evidence of illnesses among clean-up workers and other Gulf Coast residents, with blood containing elevated levels of the chemicals found in oil. A $19 million official study of 55,000 people has been launched to determine any health effects.
True, it could all have been so much worse. But, a year on, the story of Deepwater Horizon is still far from coming to a close.
-
It is far from over... And frankly, I hope it gets driven home and placed right in Obama's path, to the point that he can't get re-elected, that he was actively complicit in covering up and dismissing the real troubles there. Personally, I can't even look at him without feeling a twinge of outrage.
-
Oil spill response hindered by infighting between public officials, says Thad Allen
Published: Sunday, April 17, 2011, 6:00 AM
By George Altman, Washington Bureau
(http://media.al.com/live/photo/8733119-large.jpg)
Gulf Oil SpillVessels gather at the Deepwater Horizon oil spill site over the Gulf of Mexico, in July 2010. Retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the incident commander for the spill, said fights for authority between government officials hampered the effort. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
ARLINGTON, Va. — Efforts to combat the Gulf oil spill were plagued by wrangling for authority among government officials, withering public criticism and sometimes-haphazard operations in the air and on the water, according to the man who led the fight during the height of the disaster.
But one of the biggest obstacles, said retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, was the impulse that many people had to abandon the response plan entirely in the face of such an extraordinary crisis.
While some changes are necessary, the overall plan dictated by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 served the Gulf Coast well during the spill, according to Allen.
"The magnitude of the problem started driving doubts in everybody’s minds, and there were these political urges to act beyond the doctrine," Allen said.
It’s an issue, he said, that’s likely to arise in future such events: Whether to "wing it," or "have the courage to believe in ourselves and the decisions we’ve made."
Gulf leaders suffered from 'cognitive dissonance'
With the anniversary of the spill approaching, Allen spoke with the Press-Register about the successes and failures of the response effort and what lessons it holds.
The most important lesson, Allen said during an hour-long interview at his RAND Corp. office near Washington, D.C., is that getting extra help through a federal response also means local leaders must give up some of their power.
"You have to subordinate, sometimes, your organization and your political position in favor of becoming part of that larger response that is integrated and best serves the people," Allen said. "The question is, do we have the personal, civil and political will to do that when we’re being pressured?"
During the oil spill, the answer was sometimes no, according to Allen, who said leaders across the Gulf Coast suffered from "cognitive dissonance," wanting the aid of federal resources but then expecting to control them.
Despite the federal Oil Pollution Act, or OPA, being more than two decades old, it’s still a very useful tool, according to Allen. Enacted in August 1990 following the Exxon Valdez disaster, the law mandates many aspects of the handling of oil spills.
Last year’s spill, spawned by an April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig that killed 11 workers, sent 206 million gallons of crude into the Gulf, according to government estimates. The Valdez spill was paltry by comparison, at 11 million gallons.
The massive scale of the Gulf crisis led some to panic and want to discard the OPA plans unnecessarily, Allen said.
As an example, he mentioned the provision making the spill’s "responsible party" liable for the cleanup. In the case of the Gulf gusher, many didn’t trust BP PLC to fix the mess.
Still, he said, the size of the Gulf spill highlighted various defects in the law, whose authors anticipated a small and centralized leadership group guiding the response.
Last year’s effort was more akin to warfare, "a major theater operation, or a siege," requiring a larger-scale command structure, according to Allen. He said that the law should be changed to address this possibility.
He also expressed support for removing OPA’s liability limit of $75 million per spill. BP agreed to exceed this amount without a change in the law.
Additionally, Allen said, the president should have the power to declare a "spill of national significance," which, like an emergency declaration, would automatically grant important powers to responders, such as control of airspace and ability to relocate essential equipment.
Allen said the Gulf response demonstrated the efficiency of situational burning to remove spilled oil floating on the water.
But rather than relying on an ad-hoc amateur fleet to corral oil, as happened with a BP program that paid private boat owners to aid in the spill response, Allen said that oil companies should have certified response boaters in place before the next spill occurs.
Despite some controversy and questions, the Unified Command structure, in which Coast Guard, federal government and BP officials jointly coordinated response efforts, proved effective, he said.
And if a similar gusher breaks open a mile underwater tomorrow, Allen said, those in charge should be better prepared to handle it, having acquired more knowledge, better equipment and a greater ability to coordinate operations.
"I don’t think there’s any doubt about that," Allen said. "I think, in general, we’d be much better positioned."
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/485386_10151550192128987_1804094795_n.jpg)
-
That's what our species does to the world. I wonder how long our planet will consider it worthwhile to keep the situation as is. It is hard to believe that planet's mind is going to look stoically at such reckless behaviour for much longer.
-
Take the analogy of us being like a cancer to the planet. Some people who get sick of cancer manage to fight back and eradicate it (with help), but most succumb to it and die.
Maybe there's nothing the planet can do or it's not strong enough.
-
Earth is responding to human dream by creating disasters at the spots where human concentration is highest and collective dreams most dark, hopeless and pessimistic.
I'm going to play the devil's advocate and ask, are disasters really more common where human concentration is highest? Maybe we are more aware of those that happen close to crowded places because it affects more people therefore it's a bigger news. You wouldn't hear about an earthquake destroying a 2000 people village somewhere in Mongolia. Just a few weeks ago there was a magnitude 8 earthquake in Iran, in a desert region. The death toll was barely inexistent - I don't remember it because it was only a small side news on the day it happened without any follow-up. The media didn't care to sensationalize it.
We do not manifest these disasters, we might cause them to increase in number and intensity. We also have many more settlements and many are "large" - the laws of statistics say that disasters affecting humans will be more (and better covered). There's no need for a vague, spiritual law "of manifestation" to explain it.
The planet will be fine. We have evidence of global catastrophic events in the Earth's past that destroyed almost everything, yet here we are with millions of species of lifeforms. Maybe we'll lead all of them to extinction, making us the next catastrophic event, but the planet will regenerate. Once human activity ceases, the forests we burnt and cut will regenerate, land that we destroyed with intensive agriculture will be reclaimed by weed and general plant and animal life. Save for a global nuclear contamination, life will most definitely flourish, and they even found bacteria flourish in highly radioactive environments.
Maybe we should stop explaining everything through our egotistic, self-important and self-righteous views we have as a species.
-
Good point. This article (http://www.economist.com/node/21542755) claims that natural disasters have not become more common since 1980s and they do not take more lives. Their economic toll keeps soaring, though, which questions the viability of our economic structures.
Someone pursuing the train of thought of Ruiz would argue that it only proves how benevolent being our Earth is despite the depressing thoughts and deeds (nightmare dream) of humanity. It does not seem to want to wipe out humans, it just sabotages economy which, in turn, seems to be the softest spot for many individuals (e.g. suicides in the US topic). In other words, it administers a bit of therapy to its malfunctioning organ.
Whether it is so or not - everyone has to see nature and qualities of human-Earth connection for themselves - you are absolutely right to say that Earth will survive. It has survived previous civilisations and it will survive this one as well. Humanity is not important enough to talk about the end of the 'world'. Humanity's dream of the world influences most of all the fate of humanity.
The challenge of survival for mankind is, however, not to switch into a fluffy New Age view of the world (it does not change the basic social structures created by mankind) or wallow in wealth and say that if acquired 'spiritually', there are no resource constraints (it is merely putting a new label on a greed-based economy). It is about finding truth (to the extent we can penetrate unknown) about ourselves and our existence here, and applying it in what we do.
-
Earth is responding to human dream by creating disasters at the spots where human concentration is highest and collective dreams most dark, hopeless and pessimistic.
Maybe we should stop explaining everything through our egotistic, self-important and self-righteous views we have as a species.
I have also pondered the same idea that the earth explodes in some way where humans have 'pulled' earth's violence to them through there own behaviour. I also accept Rudi's comment as basic, and not to be thrown aside on a vague anthropomorphism.
But I have seen how odd it appears when the earth erupts in places that were in some way 'asking for it'. I accept the structures of the earth would cause the target point to be diverted, so it's not a really accurate process. After years of weighing this up, I'd have to say the evidence is hard to match with the concept. That doesn't mean there isn't some truth in it, but certainly not what you'd place money on.
The anthropomorphic self-importance is very real, but that doesn't mean the earth will be fine without humans. Sure it will survive any species' passing, but all species are there for a reason. Some potential will be lost for the earth - I don't believe it is completely indifferent to all its organic experiments. Nonetheless, the size difference just has to come down on the humans being replaceable.
This article (http://www.economist.com/node/21542755) claims that natural disasters have not become more common since 1980s
I've been aware of this, as we have discussed in another thread, but I find it hard to validate from my own perceptions. I think I'll wait for more assessments to emerge than just go with this one. I think this report came from an advisory body to the Insurance industry, and was more concerned to point to the increase of population and property values within that context.
a recent study by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which represents the consensus among thousands of scientists, expressed little confidence in any link between climate change and the frequency of tropical cyclones.
The IPCC has to play safe, but there are plenty of other scientists who have definitely connected the two, including Australia's own Bureau of Meteorology. Generally it's been publicly acknowledged by many climate specialists that we can expect more extreme weather events. What has been hard to match up are the earthquakes, although the issue there is more focused on the effects of fracking.
-
It's stunning how little press this event is getting:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/shell-oil-spill-dumps-nearly-90000-gallons-of-crude-into-gulf-of-mexico/5525316
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/e0/c3/bb/e0c3bba2d30360429aec26832999380e.jpg)
-
BP did finally get fined some huge amount of money, but I'm unsure if it's been paid.
Such oil spills are the big risk down there.