posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:09 PM
reply to post by loam
I'm onboard with the concern for hydrocarbon compounds to be picked up in storms and then depositing with the rain; I think a lot more testing and
analysis needs to be done in order to say with any credible assurance that that is what is happening -- at least as a result of the BP disaster.
I've just gone through the first three vids, Loam and will watch the rest, as this issue is a great concern for nearly everyone, regardless of your
The Corexit 9500 -- I tend to believe (at least right now) that it was used primarily to disguise the oil by causing formation of the oil/water
mousse, which seems to reach a slightly negative buoyancy, causing it to sink below the surface, but not entirely to the sea floor. I also think
that the nature of Corexit by itself lends itself well to evaporative dispersion, and would be difficult to measure.
I know from personal experience that a major hurricane picks up seawater and deposits that 'saltrain' on land. Hurricane Paloma turned nearly
everything on this island gray and dead after it hit here, my garden included as well as most of the native plants and trees. Everything was
burned. It took the better part of a year for things to grow back; some of our fruit trees did much better as we used up over 4000 gallons of
water to wash them off.
I'd really like to see some analytical testing of both the BP oil and the 'fallout' on these places. I hope it isn't so. I don't doubt it,
but would really like to see much more than anecdotal information. Back in the day when I was doing environmental work, atomic absorption or
perhaps organic mass spectrometry would've been the testing methodology; likely there is better today.
Thanks much for bringing this to us!