It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MARTIAL LAW ALERT: Gulf Coast Evacuation Scenario Summer/Fall 2010

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I think the other major concern is the corexit they are spraying to disperse the oil.




posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by darkelf
 





Thanks for participating in this thread.


Daaaamn Dark elf. Was that like a "would you please see your own way out'? Or maybe a "Thank you, that will be all"?
I take it her info has been deemed not credible?



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by darkelf
 


That is kind of missing the point. PAH's are different than Benzene, because they are polycyclic and MORE dangerous. Benzene is fairly benign, and it is the basic structure from which all the more dangerous components in Creosote are formed. There are no PAH's without Benzene, and Benzene by itself is pretty harmless. So, while your source is correct, it also serves to support my claim that the Creosote fumes and Asphalt fumes are much more worrisome than just Benzene or Benzine.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkelf
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I think the other major concern is the corexit they are spraying to disperse the oil.


Again, the Corexit is a concern, but it is basically "super-soap." While I don't like the unprecedented volumes of its use, I do think it has protected the beaches so far, and I think the oil damage would be worse had they not used it.

Here is a quote from a Corexit thread, and a link to 2 other discussions about Corexit, as well as a link to a discussion about Methane.

Corexit:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Methane:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Extralien
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Your answers are all in this thread. It biodegrades in about 45 days. It is safe in pretty high concentrations, and it doesn't require any special protective gear or transport placards for handling or moving. Even if it were spilled on a road side it would not require special clean up. It is very non-toxic. See also www.nalco.com...



Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


More from their site. Of course they want to push their product, but they also want to protect their image and be remembered as some of the Good Guys in this horrible incident. They don't want to be lumped in with BP or the GOvernment. Therefore, I tend to believe what is on their site and press releases.

Also, the oil has not spread as far or as quickly as anybody predicted. Maybe this stuff is the reason. If it is breaking it down and sinking it to the sea floor, then it may be protecting those sensitive marshes? The whole situation stinks, but I can't demonize the Corexit just yet. It sounds like pretty good stuff.


Biodegradation
• A March, 1994, report created by France’s Institut National de L’Enviroenment Industriel et des Risques indicated that COREXIT 9500 largely biodegraded in 28 days. COREXIT oil dispersant was first applied to the Gulf oil slick on April 23.
Bioaccumulation

“Over the past few days, there has been substantial misunderstanding about the nature and composition of our product,” said Erik Fyrwald, President and CEO of Nalco. “COREXIT has played a significant role in mitigating the disastrous consequences of the Gulf oil spill and has done so effectively and safely.

Concentration
• At 840,000 gallons, the amount of dispersant in the region of the 3,850 square-mile slick represents an average concentration of about 30 parts per billion to the 10 meters of depth the dispersant will go – even without factoring in that a substantial portion of the product has already biodegraded.

• By comparison, the EPA allows drinking water to contain non-biodegradable contaminants -- including carcinogens and reproductive toxins -- that exceed the level of biodegradable chemicals present in COREXIT in the Gulf.





Originally posted by getreadyalready
Actually becoming more and more of a fan of Corexit the more I read. Here are some quotes from the MSDS showing that it isn't considered harmful.

From the MSDS:


PRODUCT IS NOT REGULATED DURING TRANSPORTATION For Packages Greater Than 119 Gallons: Proper Shipping Name : COMBUSTIBLE LIQUID, N.O.S. Technical Name(s) : PETROLEUM DISTILLATES UN/ID No : NA 1993 Hazard Class - Primary : COMBUSTIBLE
Safe to transport. No special warnings.



None of the substances are specifically listed in the regulation. CLEAN AIR ACT, Sec. 111 (40 CFR 60, Volatile Organic Compounds), Sec. 112 (40 CFR 61, Hazardous Air Pollutants), Sec. 602 (40 CFR 82, Class I and II Ozone Depleting Substances) : None of the substances are specifically listed in the regulation.
No specifically harmful ingredients listed. Just typical classes of compounds.



OTHER INFORMATION Due to our commitment to Product Stewardship, we have evaluated the human and environmental hazards and exposures of this product. Based on our recommended use of this product, we have characterized the product's general risk. This information should provide assistance for your own risk management practices. We have evaluated our product's risk as follows: * The human risk is: Low * The environmental risk is: Low Any use inconsistent with our recommendations may affect the risk characterization.
Low Human Risk, Low environmental risk.




INHALATION : Repeated or prolonged exposure may irritate the respiratory tract. SYMPTOMS OF EXPOSURE : Acute : A review of available data does not identify any symptoms from exposure not previously mentioned. Chronic : Frequent or prolonged contact with product may defat and dry the skin, leading to discomfort and dermatitis. AGGRAVATION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS : Skin contact may aggravate an existing dermatitis condition
Takes repeated or prolonged exposure to get acute symptoms. Even then the main symptoms are only aggravation of existing dermatitis or breathing problems. There was no dangers listed for ingestion other than the danger of aspirating it back into the lungs.




4. FIRST AID MEASURES EYE CONTACT : Immediately flush with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. If symptoms develop, seek medical advice. SKIN CONTACT : Immediately wash with plenty of soap and water. If symptoms develop, seek medical advice. INGESTION : Do not induce vomiting: contains petroleum distillates and/or aromatic solvents. If conscious, washout mouth and give water to drink. Get medical attention. INHALATION : Remove to fresh air, treat symptomatically. Get medical attention. NOTE TO PHYSICIAN : Based on the individual reactions of the patient, the physician's judgement should be used to control symptoms and clinical condition.


Treat by flushing with water, drinking water, and treating symptoms. No vomiting, no stomach pumping, not too many warnings. It even says for the physician to use their own judgement as to how much treatment of the symptoms should be given. Sounds less harmful than just about anything in my kitchen/bath/or garage.



[edit on 15-6-2010 by getreadyalready]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 



Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by darkelf
 





Thanks for participating in this thread.


Daaaamn Dark elf. Was that like a "would you please see your own way out'? Or maybe a "Thank you, that will be all"?
I take it her info has been deemed not credible?


Not at all. Her points caused me to check out what she was saying. I actually agreed with her. The only time I will ask someone to leave a thread is if it gets really far off topic or if it violates T&C. Then I just ask the parties involved to take it to u2u. I appreciate her participation.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I understand what you are saying, but my concern is over reports that they haven't stopped spraying.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by darkelf
 


That's cool then I thought with her leaving the thread right after you posted that . Maybe she took it wrong I hope not. She did seem knowledgable.
Getready with some fine truthseeking must of sent her back tracking a bit.
I'm sure she will return as she seems worth her salt. So to speak.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:36 PM
link   
These huge underwater plumes theyre not talking about,
could these be giant bubbles off methane gas, and if so what kind of devastation would it cause if one were to explode, ive heard theyre miles across stretching thousands of feet down



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:37 PM
link   
gulfcoast.airnowtech.org...

As of 1:00 p.m. EDT, today. The Gulf Coast Air Quality is "Moderate" to "Good."




Because of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the EPA is monitoring air quality in the region. The maps and charts below show current ozone and fine particulate Air Quality Index values at air quality monitors located along the Gulf coast. These maps and charts will be updated hourly to show the most recent conditions.


This is a pretty good site. BTW, I am in Tallahassee and we have one of the "yellow" dots for "moderate."


@ DarkElf,

I am concerned that they may be spraying it too close to the beaches, but I am happy that they are still spraying it out on the water. It works by breaking the surface tension of the oil, breaking it into smaller and smaller particles that bond with the solvents and sink it to the bottom. It is still dangerous on the bottom of the ocean, but it buys the beaches and marshlands some time instead of having them inundated immediately.

On the bottom of the ocean, the filter fish and natural biodegradation can happen. It will still poison the food chain eventually, but it will be a slower process.

All of this is moot if they don't stop the leak by the end of summer. If they stop the leak, then everything they have done has been helpful, but if they don't stop the leak and begin the cleanup, then everything they have done has only delayed the inevitbable and complicated the situation. If they don't stop the leak, the oceans are doomed anyway, and I will be going back to Missouri to ride out the economic apocalypse!



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by jessemole
reply to post by CAELENIUM
 


Wow, I like your approch... Spot on there Lady!
You just affected allot of people with short insight! Nuff said!
Hard to smile right now, but I got a grin!

Later I trust..
Jessemole


Please do not listen to this person? They are not SPot ON? If you don't believe me fine, but go read up on this stuff. This poster knows just enough to be dangerous. They don't understand what they are saying, they are just regurgitating information out of context.

The 3300 ppb claim has been disproven in other threads. It never happened. The "experts" on the scenes with degrees like mine in Chemistry and Engineering are not wearing breathing apparatus. The contracted fishermen all along the Gulf Coast (friends of mine) are not being told to wear breathing apparatus even in the middle of huge pools of this stuff. Another ATSer (WWJFKD) is onsite contracted with BP, and he is not wearing breathing apparatus.

There is danger, but the danger is not breathing non-existent fumes.


Once again I emphasis that you are free to expose yourself to BENZENE C6H6 fumes if that is your choice. You are free to disbelieve the Environmental Protection Agency if you please to. It is a free country. Personally I prefer to trust in the EPA and their now openly published report for all to read. The EPA are far more trusted than are Oil Industry workers and the University theoreticians. Even if as you say the recommended maximum exposure is six parts per billion then how does that compare to the 3300 parts per billion the EPA measured in Louisiana last week ? That is 550 times greater than your recommended exposure level. Compounds in the "benzene series" are a different category. "Benzine" is a compound of many hydrocarbons and not containing any benzene C6H6. According to the EPA it is the levels of BENZENE C6H6 that is by far the most worrying problem. Methane might explode, but it is not going to be that huge a problem even if it did explode. BENZENE C6H6 is the killer. The reason why wearing masks is not advised is because the masks do not offer protection against such basic molecules. The masks are useless. Full oxygen breathing equipment would be your only safe option. So now we all need to invest in NASA or JPL mass produced "space suits" ? What is this world turning into ?


NB: Those who are suggesting that my figures are not from the EPA should read the following source and obviously go direct to the EPA.
> EPA Report <
> ATS thread <
> ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY <


I am not a great fan of ALEX JONES and his friend LINSEY WILLIAMS, but they are trying to get the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY information across to the general public. We need to make our own evaluation based on what we think individually. If I lived in the Gulf of Mexico coastal strip I certainly would have evacuated long before now. Do not wait for government marching orders. They are bent on murder. They spend a trillion dollars per year on means by which to mass murder everyone. Can we trust them ? They will just leave you all to die. Use your resources to evacuate if you choose it to be that way. Others will stay and might [for me it is certain] live [or rather die] to regret their choice. Better safe than sorry is my motto. May OUR LADY be with you all. She will always be with you no matter where you go.
> EPA Report <
> ATS thread <
> ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY <


[edit on 15/6/2010 by CAELENIUM]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by CAELENIUM
 


This is not a personal attack, but my posts had the EPA sources not yours. My posts linked to the official pages, warnings, measurements, etc. Yours has just been conjecture. Why do you now say that I am free to ignore the EPA?

Please post a source for the supposed 3300 ppb that you claim. Other posters have tried on other threads and there is no source for that info. There has never been such a measurement.

Your supposed Georgia University in Atlanta (I suppose you actually mean University of Georgia 50 miles away in Athens) has not published what you claim.

Please post your sources, and then I will be happy to discuss those specific events, but I do not believe they ever happened, and I do not believe they ever will.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
LOTS AND LOTS OF LINKS AND DATA. LOTS AND LOTS OF EPA SOURCES FOR YOU.

www.epa.gov...

The EPA has even INCREASED their limits of detection of the Hydrogen Sulfide that you mention, and has not seen a marked increase.


For all hydrogen sulfide (H2S) date posted before May 17, the detection limit is 1 ppm. For all H2S date posted May 17 or after the detection limit is 0.1 ppm.





Air Data >>
EPA's air monitoring conducted through June 13, 2010, has found that air quality levels for ozone and particulates are normal on the Gulf coastline for this time of year.

EPA has observed odor-causing pollutants associated with petroleum products along the coastline at low levels. Some of these chemicals may cause short-lived effects like headache, eye, nose and throat irritation, or nausea. People may be able to smell some of these chemicals at levels well below those that would cause short-term health problems.






Water Data >>
EPA's analysis of surface water along the Gulf coast found elevated levels of nickel above benchmark levels for aquatic life in samples collected on June 4, 2010 and June 7, 2010. This might affect fish and shellfish exposed for an extended period. It is unlikely that the contamination resulted from the BP Spill.

Surface water results collected on May 21, 2010 at 11 stations along the coast of Louisiana were measured for two of the chemicals associated with dispersants (2-Butoxyethanol and 2-Ethylhexyl Alcohol) but did not detect either one.




posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   


Once again I emphasis that you are free to expose yourself to BENZENE C6H6 fumes if that is your choice. You are free to disbelieve the Environmental Protection Agency if you please to. It is a free country. Personally I prefer to trust in the EPA and their now openly published report for all to read. The EPA are far more trusted than are Oil Industry workers and the University theoreticians. Even if as you say the recommended maximum exposure is six parts per billion then how does that compare to the 3300 parts per billion the EPA measured in Louisiana last week ? That is 550 times greater than your recommended exposure level. Compounds in the "benzene series" are a different category. "Benzine" is a compound of many hydrocarbons and not containing any benzene. According to the EPA it is the levels of BENZENE C6H6 that is by far the most worrying problem. Methane might explode, but it is not going to be that huge a problem even if it did explode. BENZENE C6H6 is the killer. The reason why wearing masks is not advised is because the masks do not offer protection against such basic molecules. The masks are useless. Full oxygen breathing equipment would be your only safe option. So now we all need to invest in NASA or JPL mass produced "space suits" ? What is this world turning into ?


This is great good stuff on bothsides of this debate.
Getready she certainly isn't fearmongering. That's just by her tone.
I want to see if you two are going to meet in the middle.
Please stay with it both of you I am eating this up.
This is an easy way to learn.

ZERO



These huge underwater plumes theyre not talking about,

Someone should get zero an answer though.

[edit on 15-6-2010 by randyvs]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Highest Concentration of Benzene appears to be about 0.63 ppb. Well below the 6 ppb mark.

Ethyl Benzene, Xylene, Mapthalene, Toluene, Benzopyrene, benzoflouronthene, benzoanthracene, chrysene and their derivatives are all below 5 ppb. for every daily measurement at every location measured since May 16th. I didn't go back before that, because well, why should I?

Links to lenghty excel file with EPA data:
www.epa.gov...



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I appreciate the opportunity to flex a little mental muscle, but I really wish she would post some sources to debate. Otherwise she will just keep going back to data that never existed and I will be fighting a strawman.

I assume that the 3300 ppb that she mentions was on some blog or website or godlikeproductions or some webcast, but it was never on epa, noaa, or bp site. There is live data at all monitoring stations and there are historical files available to anyone that looks.

I will say this. If the levels get that high, then I will recommend evacuation. No worries though, because even in an Organic Chemistry lab setting with pints of Benzene sitting all around a closed room environment, the levels never reached even 1 ppb.

Again, if you can smell the Benzene or other solvent (WD-40 type) smells, then you should concern yourself a little and see how long is sticks around. A couple of weeks ago in Pensacola Beach, I noticed the smell, and I wasn't very happy about it, but it went away the next day.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
...Benzene is fairly benign...Benzene by itself is pretty harmless...


Benzene is harmless? Somebody better tell these guys that then. I hate using Wikipedia for anything, but it's a quick reply to your post that hopefully will enlighten you as to the absolutely toxic nature of Benzene... it's deadly and telling people it's harmless isn't really a wise idea at all.


en.wikipedia.org...
Benzene exposure has serious health effects. Outdoor air may contain low levels of benzene from tobacco smoke, wood smoke, automobile service stations, the transfer of gasoline, exhaust from motor vehicles, and industrial emissions.[21] Vapors from products that contain benzene, such as glues, paints, furniture wax, and detergents, can also be a source of exposure, although many of these have been modified or reformulated since the late 1970s to eliminate or reduce the benzene content. Air around hazardous waste sites or gas stations may contain higher levels of benzene.

The short term breathing of high levels of benzene can result in death, while low levels can cause drowsiness, dizziness, rapid heart rate, headaches, tremors, confusion, and unconsciousness. Eating or drinking foods containing high levels of benzene can cause vomiting, irritation of the stomach, dizziness, sleepiness, convulsions, and death.

The major effects of benzene are manifested via chronic (long-term) exposure through the blood. Benzene damages the bone marrow and can cause a decrease in red blood cells, leading to anemia. It can also cause excessive bleeding and depress the immune system, increasing the chance of infection. Benzene causes leukemia and is associated with other blood cancers and pre-cancers of the blood.

Human exposure to benzene is a global health problem. Benzene targets liver, kidney, lung, heart and the brain and can cause DNA strand breaks, chromosomal damage etc. Benzene causes cancer in both animals and humans. Benzene was first reported to induce cancer in humans in the 1920s. The chemical industry claims it wasn't until 1979 that the cancer-inducing properties were determined "conclusively" in humans, despite many references to this fact in the medical literature. Industry exploited this "discrepancy" and tried to discredit animal studies which showed benzene caused cancer, saying that they weren't relevant to humans. Benzene has been shown to cause cancer in both sexes of multiple species of laboratory animals exposed via various routes.[22][23]

Some women who breathed high levels of benzene for many months had irregular menstrual periods and a decrease in the size of their ovaries. It is not known whether benzene exposure affects the developing fetus in pregnant women or fertility in men.

Animal studies have shown low birth weights, delayed bone formation, and bone marrow damage when pregnant animals breathed benzene.

Benzene has been connected to a rare form of kidney cancer in two separate studies, one involving tank truck drivers, and the other involving seamen on tanker vessels, both carrying benzene-laden chemicals.

The US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) classifies benzene as a human carcinogen. Long-term exposure to excessive levels of benzene in the air causes leukemia, a potentially fatal cancer of the blood-forming organs, in susceptible individuals. In particular, Acute myeloid leukemia or acute non-lymphocytic leukaemia (AML & ANLL) is not disputed to be caused by benzene.

Several tests can determine exposure to benzene. There is a test for measuring benzene in the breath; this test must be done shortly after exposure. Benzene can also be measured in the blood; however, because benzene disappears rapidly from the blood, measurements are accurate only for extremely recent exposures. Benzene exposure should always be minimized.

In the body, benzene is metabolized. Certain metabolites, such as trans,trans-muconic acid can be measured in the urine. However, this test must be done shortly after exposure and is not a reliable indicator of benzene exposure, since the same metabolites may be present in urine from other sources.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency has set the maximum permissible level of benzene in drinking water at 0.005 milligrams per liter (0.005 mg/L). The EPA requires that spills or accidental releases into the environment of 10 pounds (4.5 kg) or more of benzene be reported to the EPA.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set a permissible exposure limit of 1 part of benzene per million parts of air (1 ppm) in the workplace during an 8-hour workday, 40-hour workweek. The short term exposure limit for airborne benzene is 5 ppm for 15 minutes.

In recent history there have been many examples of the harmful health effects of benzene and its derivatives. Toxic Oil Syndrome caused localised immune-suppression in Madrid in 1981 from people ingesting anilide-contaminated rapeseed oil. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome has also been correlated with people who eat "denatured" food that use solvents to remove fat or contain benzoic acid but causality is unproven.[citation needed]

Workers in various industries that make or use benzene may be at risk for being exposed to high levels of this carcinogenic chemical. Industries that involve the use of benzene include the rubber industry, oil refineries, chemical plants, shoe manufacturers, and gasoline-related industries. In 1987, OSHA estimated that about 237,000 workers in the United States were potentially exposed to benzene, but it is not known if this number has substantially changed since then.

Water and soil contamination are important pathways of concern for transmission of benzene contact. In the U.S. alone there are approximately 100,000 different sites which have benzene soil or groundwater contamination. In 2005, the water supply to the city of Harbin in China with a population of almost nine million people, was cut off because of a major benzene exposure. Benzene leaked into the Songhua River, which supplies drinking water to the city, after an explosion at a China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) factory in the city of Jilin on 13 November.

In March 2006, the official Food Standards Agency in Britain conducted a survey of 150 brands of soft drinks. It found that four contained benzene levels above World Health Organization limits. The affected batches were removed from sale.[24] (See also benzene in soft drinks).

[edit] Molecular toxicology
The paradigm of toxicological assessment of benzene is slowly shifting towards the domain of molecular toxicology as it allows understanding of fundamental biological mechanisms in a better way. Glutathione seems to play an important role by protecting against benzene induced DNA breaks and it is being identified as a new biomarker for exposure and effect[25]. Benzene causes chromosomal aberrations in the peripheral blood leukocytes and bone marrow explaining the higher incidence of leukemia and multiple myeloma caused by chronic exposure. These aberrations can be monitored using fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) with DNA probes to assess the effects of benzene along with the hematological tests as markers of hematotoxicity[26]. Benzene metabolism involves enzymes coded for by polymorphic genes. Studies have shown that genotype at these loci may influence susceptibility to the toxic effects of benzene exposure. Individuals carrying variant of NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1), microsomal epoxide hydrolase (EPHX) and deletion of the glutathione S-transferase T1 (GSTT1) showed a greater frequency of DNA single-stranded breaks.[27]

Benzene is far from harmless or benign. Some newer research suggests it can add an extra chromosome to your sperm as well and it's been banned for use as a solvent in the US because of the risks involved in exposure. While I don't doubt your expertise, I would suggest that mitigating the dangers of a toxic substance like benzene to make a counter point on an internet forum is a little over the top.
It's deadly.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by CAELENIUM
 


Just because you call it "EPA Source" does not make it so.


From your so called source:



Institute for Southern Studies chart based on Louisianna Envornmental Action Network's analysis of EPA Data.


Why would they do that? Why not just post the REAL data?

A New Voice for a Changing South


Why not University, EPA, NOAA, BP? I know why not, because it doesn't exist.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 





Again, if you can smell the Benzene or other solvent (WD-40 type) smells, then you should concern yourself a little and see how long is sticks around. A couple of weeks ago in Pensacola Beach, I noticed the smell, and I wasn't very happy about it, but it went away the next day.

I don't mean to obligate anyone, or be judgmental I compliment and appreciate you both. Learned a gunny sac full compared to what I knew an hour a go. I'm still betting she is worth her salt though, for now.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 



Originally posted by getreadyalready
@ DarkElf,

I am concerned that they may be spraying it too close to the beaches, but I am happy that they are still spraying it out on the water. It works by breaking the surface tension of the oil, breaking it into smaller and smaller particles that bond with the solvents and sink it to the bottom. It is still dangerous on the bottom of the ocean, but it buys the beaches and marshlands some time instead of having them inundated immediately.

On the bottom of the ocean, the filter fish and natural biodegradation can happen. It will still poison the food chain eventually, but it will be a slower process.

All of this is moot if they don't stop the leak by the end of summer. If they stop the leak, then everything they have done has been helpful, but if they don't stop the leak and begin the cleanup, then everything they have done has only delayed the inevitbable and complicated the situation. If they don't stop the leak, the oceans are doomed anyway, and I will be going back to Missouri to ride out the economic apocalypse!


My concern come from this article:


Dispersants. Initial concerns regarding the BP blowout focused on coastal impacts and the need to keep oil from damaging critical coastal ecosystems and the coastal economy, which depends heavily on tourism and fisheries (in addition to the oil industry). Certainly such concerns are valid and widespread efforts to protect the coastal zone from the oil are essential. It appears that the widespread use of dispersants in response to the BP blowout is due largely to the desire to keep the beaches clean and minimize the impact of the spill on coastal environments.

However, oil on the surface ofthe ocean and even on beaches can be cleaned up. Dispersed oil cannot be cleaned up, rather it moves with the water and the oil and dispersants are likely to influence oceanic ecosystems for years to come. Because dispersed oil cannot be effectively recovered, its fate is largely tied to the activity of microorganisms that degrade it, assuming the dispersants have no negative impact on their metabolism. The implication of this is that dispersed oil may stimulate the oxygen demand of the system and potentially promote subsurface hypoxia. Source


This article is a depressing read and so far it only concern's itself with the impact on the environment. What will be the impact of this dispersed oil once it enters the Florida Strait and goes into the Atlantic? What will it do to the Sargasso Sea?



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 


Well I said "relatively" benign. OK, Ok, you got me on that one.

Disclaimer: Please do not immerse yourself, drink, seek out concentrated sources, maintain prolonged exposure to benzene or do any other boneheaded stunt because I said it was safe to breath the Gulf Air at this time.

From personal experience: I have worked around chemicals, gasoline, solvents and other things for 20 years. I have eaten food with grease covered hands, I have breathed in toxic fumes day in and day out, and I have two wonderful healthy boys born on less than 2 attempts!

Yes, these chemicals are toxic if not handled properly. People have also died from drinking too much water at the Boston Marathon and getting an imbalance of electrolytes.

I am not advocating Benzene by any means, and I am not downplaying the dire situation in the Gulf. I am only arguing this point:

THERE WILL BE NO EVACUATION OF ANY COAST DUE TO FUMES FROM THIS OIL. THERE WILL BE NO MARTIAL LAW DUE TO THE FUMES.

Now, the economy, job market, ecological system, housing market, tax base, tax revenue and overall condition in the Gulf Coast Region are extremely dire. There may be Martial Law declared after TSHTF down here, because once the jobs are gone and the seafood is gone and the beaches are gone, the riots will surely start!



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join