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.

 

Paper: Corexit appears to be washing up at Gulf beaches; Biodegradation “may not be happening” a

page: 1
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
, August 6, 2010:


The stained, brown water seen washing up in pockets along Alabama beaches for the last two weeks appears to contain the dispersant widely used on oil from the Deepwater Horizon spill, according to a preliminary analysis.

Ed Overton, a Louisiana State University chemist… [who] is analyzing oil samples for the federal government… said… “indications [are] that there was a dispersant signal in the sample.” … [T]he signal was similar to a Corexit sample.




Harriet Perry, a scientist at the Gulf Coast Research Lab in Ocean Springs [said]… “It looks like they found [COrexit],” Perry said of work by research colleagues at Tulane University [researching crab larvae]… “For a droplet to be that small, it has to be dispersed oil… It’s supposed to biodegrade rapidly. It’s supposed to disappear in days, not weeks, but that may not be happening.”


www.floridaoilspilllaw.com...


Is this what the "Blobs" of gasoline type substance will prove to be if allowed to be properly analyzed? Will the responsible parties even allow outside labs to conduct the work or will it be once again something exclusive to BP staff only?

Why was the EPa and the global community told that corexit dissolves in days and yet we now have it showing up in the marshlands and seashores weeks and even months later?

is it possible that when it was tested in the labs who created it they were not prepared for it to be mixed with many other natural occurring elements such as the dangerous methane, and others?

How long can the incompetence be allowed before we Americans watch as our shores are invaded by the United Nations groups to avert a potential catastrophic incident which will reach to every shore on the globe?




posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Interesting find.

--------------

i found this quote from the original article interesting. Is it saying they couldnt find any oil, even though they took their sample from an area with lots of oil sheen?




While heavy oil sheen was visible in the areas where the material was collected, little if any oil was found to be present in the samples, said Overton, who is analyzing oil samples for the federal government. "We didn't see oil in the analysis we do, but I passed some of these water samples to a colleague who does fluorescence analysis," Overton said. "We saw some preliminary indications that there was a dispersant signal in the sample."


also, this is at least mildly promising as it confirms bacteria are indeed consuming crude, as they are supposed to do.:




At some locations, the brown material was present from the surface to the sea floor. At other locations, the brown material was in a layer in the bottom 5 feet of the water column. At those sites, another material -- stringy, milky yellow filaments the thickness of a human hair -- formed a layer above the brown material. Overton said the filaments appeared biological in nature and might be the remnants of bacteria that consumed oil.


blog.al.com...


Antar wrote:


Why was the EPa and the global community told that corexit dissolves in days and yet we now have it showing up in the marshlands and seashores weeks and even months later?


Total layman's guess: I suspect its ability to 'dissolve' and/or biodegrade may be based on far smaller applications than the 10's of thousands of gallons a day they have applied it at.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by justadood]

[edit on 7-8-2010 by justadood]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I live in the suburbs of NYC.

At my house is a stormwater drain into the ground, and this drain has a cover with a baffle to keep twigs etc. out of the drain. Some water can collect in the baffle after a rain, but usually after a day it's all evaporated.

We have had no rain here for at least a week, and there's some water in that baffle. Furthermore there's an oily surface on that water. I stuck a paper towel in it, and the liquid in there is gray / black in color. Also there's some scummy stuff on the walls of the drain pipe; never had that before. I didn't notice a smell.

If it isn't Corexit I don't know what it would be.

And just generally things are rotting a bit more than before. Nothing major, but I noticed soft wood inside one of my trees that didn't have softness before, and a neighbor just had a big tree fall down on his yard, rotten at the base.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by antar
, August 6, 2010:


The stained, brown water seen washing up in pockets along Alabama beaches for the last two weeks appears to contain the dispersant widely used on oil from the Deepwater Horizon spill, according to a preliminary analysis.

Ed Overton, a Louisiana State University chemist… [who] is analyzing oil samples for the federal government… said… “indications [are] that there was a dispersant signal in the sample.” … [T]he signal was similar to a Corexit sample.




Harriet Perry, a scientist at the Gulf Coast Research Lab in Ocean Springs [said]… “It looks like they found [COrexit],” Perry said of work by research colleagues at Tulane University [researching crab larvae]… “For a droplet to be that small, it has to be dispersed oil… It’s supposed to biodegrade rapidly. It’s supposed to disappear in days, not weeks, but that may not be happening.”


www.floridaoilspilllaw.com...


Is this what the "Blobs" of gasoline type substance will prove to be if allowed to be properly analyzed? Will the responsible parties even allow outside labs to conduct the work or will it be once again something exclusive to BP staff only?

Why was the EPa and the global community told that corexit dissolves in days and yet we now have it showing up in the marshlands and seashores weeks and even months later?

is it possible that when it was tested in the labs who created it they were not prepared for it to be mixed with many other natural occurring elements such as the dangerous methane, and others?

How long can the incompetence be allowed before we Americans watch as our shores are invaded by the United Nations groups to avert a potential catastrophic incident which will reach to every shore on the globe?


But, Antar, you must know this is intentional.

Corexit is also bio-accumulative. It accumulates in the tissue and moves up the food chain. The bottom of the food chain is contaminated and finally it's consumed by the top of the food chain: us.

So eat up that Gulf seafood! Yum yum! "It's safe," says BP & our government.

Corexit also moves to different geographical areas as toxic rain where it can contaminate soil & fresh water & all living things.

This is part of the Depopulation agenda. It will take years to kill a large number of people, but it will kill them. But they will get very sick before they die. Watch for it.

And this method has the benefit of plausible deniability. "Oops, sorry, it was an accident. We didn't know. Blah, blah."

SeaWind



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   
wonder if this has something to do with obama care?



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
S&F Antar, good find. As I stated in my thread on the effects of corexit last week, this is absolutely awful! This stuff destroys the cell membrane, and we are likely to see cancers and some god awful illnesses coming out of this.

The figures on the bio-degradability of this stuff are very scarce and I looked far and wide trying to get hold of something. Seems this info has been wiped off of the media websites. Apparently, as I said again last week, the Bellingham Herald stated this to be 78% bio-degradable, but this would leave 220,000 gallons of corexit still intact.

Personally I think even 78% would be unacceptable, but the figure might possibly be lower because, obviously, it destroys the cell membrane, so how can it be bio-degradable if it kills the organisms that are meant to break it down, unless it were to break down as a result of sunlight etc, but if THAT were the case, then would this work in lower light conditions under the water.

As I said, it will get into the groundwater, as may be well already happening here, not only that but my research into whether it will get into rain shows that corexit will evaporate at 1/3 the rate of water.

ALL of this, IMO, to cover up the true extent of the oil spill by sweeping it underwater!


Our gov't over in the UK has banned this stuff for a good reason!

[edit on 8-8-2010 by rufusthestuntbum]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Are there any pictures of the gasoline like "blobs"? I am very interested in seeing some so that I can compare them to water in my area.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Corexit does not degrade over days or weeks. It mixes with organic molecules destroying the polarity of these molecules which allows them to stick together/group together. This is what holds oil together in big oil spills.

BUT.....the same thing that holds oil together, is what holds the molecules in people and animals together! This corexit garbage destroys any life it touches!

It also does NOTHING to get rid of oil! It merely breaks into tiny microscopic bits so it's HARDER to clean up but EASIER TO HIDE.

This garbage Corexit, is as toxic as it gets for all life forms and was added to only hide the amount of oil they haven't cleaned up.

These people and their lap dog politicians belong in prison for a long long time...



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Redwookieaz
 


Tests showed that 78% of the dispersant degrades within 28 days. Also, the action of breaking the oil down into smaller droplets (i.e dispersing it) does help get rid of it by increasing the speed and efficiency of the microbial action which breaks it down.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Chris McGee
 



Oh really? How about this statement from the manufacturer of Corexit?



The portion about bioaccumulation and carcinogenic effect is interesting, considering Nalco’s own Dr. David Horsup stated in a media advisory that “additional testing” is needed in order to assess “biodegradation, bioaccumulation, carcinogenicity and effectiveness.”


and



“Though all dispersants are potentially dangerous when applied in such volumes, Corexit [9500] is particularly toxic,” she wrote. “It contains petroleum solvents and a chemical that, when ingested, ruptures red blood cells and causes internal bleeding. It is also bioaccumulative, meaning its concentration intensifies as it moves up the food chain.”


Source

And of course did you look at what's in the OP for this thread?

You sticking up for this scum because you buy what your told w/o research or because they pay you?

[edit on 8-8-2010 by Redwookieaz]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Redwookieaz
 


Nothing you've written there contradicts what I have said. An independent French institute performed tests on this stuff and they found that 78% degraded within 28 days. The information I posted regarding the dispersal action speeding up the biodegradation of the oil is a fact.

I made no claims as to the toxicity of the substance and didn't 'stick up' for anyone at all. I just posted two simple facts which makes your hostile reaction a little puzzling.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
his 'hostile reaction' is a symptom we are seeing here a lot lately, where as anyone who presents info that contradicts someone's pre-determined thesis, no matter how useful or relevant the info is, will be greeted with anger, accusation, and hostility.

almost as if 'embrace ignorance' were the mantra.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Chris McGee
 


yes chris we had this entire discussion last week, right here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

22% is STILL 220,000 gallons.

...and YOU as well justadood, it's interesting you both post together as you did last week as well, I merked both of you! Lets not take anything away from the OP here and discuss the matter at hand

The OP stated that a scientist had reported corexit has washed up on the beaches of alabama, THAT is the fact that we are discussing today as you tried to deny a week ago when I said that would likely happen - so what is your argument now?

[edit on 8-8-2010 by rufusthestuntbum]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusthestuntbum
 


I haven't denied anything, the discussion last week began when a poster said that it would reach europe in 12 months and I just pointed out that it would most likely have degraded completely by then. If you follow this thread you'll see my post was in response to a poster who stated that the dispersant would not degrade and would not help get rid of the oil and so was relevant to the ongoing discussion.

As for 'merking' people, I assumed we were here to discuss these issues, not engage in some puerile internet pissing contest.

As pointed out, from the currently available data, the Corexit itself should largely degrade within 28 days. The amount that ends up on the beaches and in the marshlands will obviously depend on the transit time from the source of the dispersant to the area of contamination.

An interesting thing to look at would be to find out how long it is actually taking for material from the well location to reach the shore. If it's within the 28 day timeframe then this is probably expected, if it's way outside that timeframe then we have some evidence that someone might be telling porkies.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Chris McGee
 


sorry chris you are right i'm confusing you with another poster i won't name. I hold my hands up and admit I was wrong in stating you denied it would reach US shores

What may be wrong is the 28 day half life you refer to


Nalco's own Dr. David Horsup stated in a media advisory that "additional testing" is needed in order to assess "biodegradation, bioaccumulation, carcinogenicity and effectiveness."


as for merking you, sorry I was refering to some of our newer posters that seem to be on the payroll of BP, again I got the wrong guy sorry.

[edit on 8-8-2010 by rufusthestuntbum]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chris McGee
reply to post by Redwookieaz
 


Nothing you've written there contradicts what I have said. An independent French institute performed tests on this stuff and they found that 78% degraded within 28 days. The information I posted regarding the dispersal action speeding up the biodegradation of the oil is a fact.

I made no claims as to the toxicity of the substance and didn't 'stick up' for anyone at all. I just posted two simple facts which makes your hostile reaction a little puzzling.


Are you kidding? My post EXACTLY contradicts what you said. Did you read it? The first quote says from the manufacturer that more tests are needed to determine it's biodegradation. And the second quote is from a toxicologist who says that it is bioaccumulative. That means as it moves up the food chain, there is more of it!

You need to read things closer.

[edit on 8-8-2010 by Redwookieaz]

[edit on 8-8-2010 by Redwookieaz]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Chris McGee
 


Not to worry, what I have been saying along with many others so far uis that perhaps in the 'tests' they did did not include the other chemicals that have mixed with the oil and correxit.

Interesting how no matter how viral the screams by the internet are about the 'other' chemicals namely the benzine and methane, they just dont mention it.

The msm has not addressed the deadly toxic mix and that keeps me searching for some answers.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Redwookieaz
 


Yes but your news is too horrifying! People are still swiming in it, taking their families and pregnant wives on vacation and to eat the safe seafood.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Corexit, or something new that is suddenly around at the same time as they started using Corexit in the Gulf, forms a film over water, and water below it (or maybe mixed with it) does not evaporate. My drain baffle still hadn't evaporated as of today.

It will have interesting effects on weather, crop growth and health, as this mixes with surface water and maybe ground water around the world.

Will wood-frame houses start to rot as their timbers absorb moisture and don't dry out? Will they get mold, especially the ones built in the past 20-30 years that use Tyvek moisture barrier (instead of the older tar paper) which is basically a plastic bag?

Despite having had no rain in over a week (and long-term drought conditions before the last rain storms) and very hot temperatures, the soil here (NYC suburbs) is still moist enough to be "ideal growing conditions" according to Accuweather, and I agree based on casual observations. People's lawns are not turning brown any more, in fact they are turning back to green. All this with no rain!

Combining with this though is the apparent general rise in the water table caused by apparent increased internal pressure in the earth (which caused a 500 year flood this spring around here.) So it's hard to know how much of soil moisture to attribute to increased percolation up from below and how much to attribute to decreased evaporation.

But it's definitely good mold conditions. I see mold growing on firewood logs drying in direct sunlight. Water isn't evaporating!



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by oniongrass
 


Huh, very interesting, something well worth thinking more about... can you share more?

I see you are online Ill try and give you a PM.

Thanks!




top topics



 
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join