Updates on new oil spill near BP’s Macondo well

[sce56]

Reported new evidence of a growing oil sheen in the Gulf of Mexico, originating near the site of last year’s Deepwater Horizon disaster. Bonny Schumaker of nonprofit group On Wings of Care took a flyover of the Gulf, photographing and shooting video of a 10 mile long by 4 mile wide oil slick extending along the surface. She also communicated via radio with two ships, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Okeanos Explorer and the Sarah Bordelon, allegedly hired by BP to collect samples of the new oil.

First, chemists Ed Overton and Scott Miles of Louisiana State University have confirmed for us that the oil found bubbling to the surface this week is a fingerprint match for BP’s Macondo well, which lies in Mississippi Canyon Block 252 of the Gulf of Mexico. “After examining the data, I think it’s a dead ringer for the MC252 oil, as good a match as I’ve seen,” said Overton. “My guess is that it is probably coming from the broken riser pipe or sunken (Deepwater Horizon) platform… However, it should be confirmed, just to make sure there is no leak from the plugged well.” Of course, BP officials are sticking to their story and have responded that “there is still no evidence that the oil came from the Macondo well.” Next, NOAA has received reports back from the Okeanos Explorer indicating that heavy amounts of dispersant had been found mixed with the oil (leading some to speculate that the Sarah Bordelon may have been doing more for BP than simply collecting oil samples).

U.S. Coast Guard Petty Officer Bill Colclough confirmed that the oil sheen emanating from the area of the Macondo well was “too dispersed to recover” from the surface. “We received a report from the NOAA vessel Okeanos Explorer,” said Colclough. “They reported to us that (the oil) was dispersed and unrecoverable, whereupon we conducted an overflight to verify it.” BP official Curtis Thomas responded, stating that the oil “very well could be from natural seeps… What we are saying for sure is that it is not from our well head.” In the coming days, the Coast Guard, NOAA, and independent groups are expected to continue investigating the growing oil sheen as well as the area around the Macondo well.

Now once the gulf clears up from the storms they will look some more and like I said in earlier posts last week looks like BP is hiding the slick by using Corexit again!

Related DU postings here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x624668

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x613555

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4974137

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1855121

[sce56]

1. Dispersants Used in BP Gulf Oil Spill Linked to Cancer

By , Environment News Service
Posted on August 29, 2011, Printed on September 9, 2011
http://www.alternet.org/story/152204/dispersants_used_in_bp_gulf_oil_spill_linked_to_cancer

Five of the 57 ingredients in dispersants approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for use on oil spills are linked to cancer, finds a new research report based on data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by environmental groups on the Gulf of Mexico. The report from Earthjustice, an environmental law firm, along with Toxipedia Consulting Services, is based on material released by the U.S. EPA in response to a Freedom of Information Act request made by Earthjustice on behalf of the Gulf Restoration Network and the Florida Wildlife Federation. Dispersants are used to clean up oil spills and contain chemicals that break up oil into smaller droplets and move the oil from the surface of the water into the water column.

Two oil dispersant products were used heavily in the BP oil leak: COREXIT 9500 and 9527, both produced by Nalco/Exxon. BP used over 1.8 million gallons of dispersant during the three-month long oil leak that gushed 4.9 million barrels of crude oil from the Macondo well located about 40 miles southeast of the Louisiana coast. The report "The Chaos of Clean-Up: Analysis of Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Chemicals in Dispersant Products" highlights the fact that some dispersants are safer than others. "The testing can't be done in the moment of the disaster," said Marianne Engelman Lado, an attorney with Earthjustice. "It has to be done ahead of time to avoid the chaos we witnessed during the disaster response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster."

Among the dispersant chemical ingredients linked to cancer are:

Amides, coco, N,N-bis(hydroxyethyl), which is classed as a likely carcinogen
Cyclohexene, 1 - methyl - 4 - (1 - methylethenyl) -, (4R) -, which is classed as carcinogenic to rats
Ethanol, 2-butoxy- which is listed as a possible carcinogen
Petroleum distillates, hydrotreated light, which are classed as a confirmed animal carcinogens with unknown relevance to humans. These distillates carry the additional warning that exposure by inhalation can cause dizziness, headache, nausea, drowsiness, and unconsciousness and prolonged inhalation of high concentrations may damage the respiratory system.

Gulf residents continue to suffer health effects related to the disaster clean-up. "The illnesses we observed were quite unique and different from anything that I had ever witnessed before," said Dr. Michael Robichaux, a physician in Raceland, Louisiana. "Although there were scores of complaints early on, the main problems at this time are a loss of memory, seizure type problems, severe abdominal pain, fatigue, irrit

[xchrom]

2. recommend