I'm Back & Updated Oil Spill News

Well I am back again.  My apologies for my abrupt departure but I had an unexpected family crisis that I needed to deal with and it took me away for a little bit.  I do have a lot of catching up to do on things as while I was "out of the loop" a lot happened.  It will take me a while to read through all that I have missed, and to find out a lot of the specific details, but for the time being until I can get caught up, I'll post about some of what I have found out. The most obvious one is the capping of the well.  This is, so far, the biggest news to date in this catastrophe and will hopefully work until the relief wells are drilled and the well shut in or closed off.


Capping the leaking Oil

It seems that the Oil Gushing into the Gulf has stopped, at least for the moment.  They were running pressure tests on this capping system to make sure that it would work, and from what I have gleaned in reading about it, low pressure would indicate leaks somewhere and a high pressure result would mean that the cap was working effectively.  

The sight that everyone has wanted to see since this all began:

After reading about the capping process at The Oil Drum, I'll quote one of their posts that explains what happened as they are much better at the details of this than I am, having missed the process at the time it happened.

So the well is currently shut-in, though the results have not been all that had been hoped for. Admiral Allen has already issued a terse comment:


"We're encouraged by this development, but this isn't over. Over the next several hours we will continue to collect data and work with the federal science team to analyze this information and perform additional seismic mapping runs in the hopes of gaining a better understanding on the condition of the well bore and options for temporary shut in of the well during a hurricane. It remains likely that we will return to the containment process using this new stacking cap connected to the risers to attempt to collect up to 80,000 barrels of oil per day until the relief well is completed."



Part of the problem, apparently, is that the well pressure has not reached the 8 - 9,000 psi level that it was hoped it would reach, but instead it is reportedto have fallen slightly shy of 7,000 psi. While this is below the expectation, it is higher than the 6,000 psi that Admiral Allen had set as the target below which they would assume a loss in integrity, and restart the flow of oil to the surface vessels.
To try and add a little context to this, at the beginning of the leak, the pressure of the oil and gas in the rock at the bottom of the well was measured at 11,900 psi. When the oil and gas fill the well that fluid column has a certain weight that balances some of the rock pressure, and the difference should be the pressure at the top of the column (which is where the BOP and stack sit). That gives the 8 – 9,000 psi range.
If the well pressure at the BOP is measured, however, at just shy of 7,000 psi then there are two possibilities. The first is that there has been so much flow of fluid out of the well that the driving pressure of the fluid in the rock has fallen by the 1,500 psi or so that brings the pressures down to those seen.
While that is a possibility, it may be unlikely because, at the time that the Top Kill was tried and as the Admiral noted just the other day, the well pressure could not be raised above 6,000 psi as they pumped in mud, even though at one stage they stopped the flow of oil out of the well.
What this could indicate is that there is a possibility of crossflow at the bottom of the well. What this means that the oil and gas that are flowing out of the reservoir into the bottom of the well, are, under the pressure in the well, now flowing into a higher reservoir of rock, now that they can't get out of the well. Depending on where that re-injection flow is, this may, or may not, suggest that the casing has lost integrity.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6737


The Oil Drum IRC channel has also been keeping a FAQ on what has been happening over the last several days which can be found here:

http://docs.google.com/View?id=dff7zmqz_7c6rdwsc9

It is a bit technical but full of good information.

So for the moment the well is capped.  We'll see if that changes anytime soon.  There are people who are watching the gauges to see if the pressure continues to increase of if it begins to decrease which as stated would mean that there are leaks somewhere.  Let's keep our fingers crossed that this cap holds until the relief wells can be completed.


Now while getting the well capped is a great step if it holds, this is not the end of the problems that Gulf Coast residents will be facing.  There is a lot of oil still out there and it will take a very long time to come ashore, clean it up and then there is the problem of determining exactly what kind of damage is being done beneath the surface of the water to the ecosystem.

I had also previously posted about the berms being built at the demand of Bobby Jindal and others.  At the time they were screaming loudly that the berms were needed and would protect the coast from further damage, while others stated that this idea would not work, it was a waste of time and money not to mention a waste of a finite resource that could not be replaced once used.    It seems like that is the case.

Chandeleur sand berm segment shrinking like a wool sweater in hot water!

These sad and shocking images document the waste of enormous resources and time. It’s very hard to resist the temptation to say, “I told you so.”


June 25, 2010

July 2, 2010

July 7, 2010

http://lacoastpost.com/blog/?p=25001


It is a sad thing to see, and I would hope that no one wastes time with an "I told you so",  no matter how much that might make some feel better, and instead lets try to get this turned around so that money, time and resources are not continued to be wasted on this project when the time, money & effort could be used elsewhere to make a positive impact.

More to come.......

Updated Information on Oil Spill & Rumor Patrol

First of all let me say that I had to take a bit of time off, as the story was really getting to me and I was struggling with the depression that comes hand in hand with spending so much time looking at all the information that is out there about this situation.   When that happens I feel guilty for feeling that way, as for the moment, I am the "outsider looking in" on the story.  While I do live along the gulf coast, I have fortunately have not had to deal with the oil on my own beaches as of yet, so I do not understand personally what it is that those who have dealt with it are going through.

I can imagine what it is like, as I worry about how this is going to change the way of life in the gulf coast.  So many will lose out on a way of life, so many creatures have died, and others will die because of the oil spill.  Sometimes there are just not the words to describe it.   Sometimes you just have to walk away from it all, if even for a short time, to save your sanity.


Okay, so what is going on?


So, based on what Unified Command is stating here is how things look as far as what is going on:

Thursday, July 1 Statistics

RESPONSE VESSELS
Vessels of Opportunity: 3,200
Barges: more than 600
Skimmers: more than 550
Other Vessels: more than 2,600
Total active response vessels: more than 6,950

Aircraft: 115

BOOM DATA
Boom deployed: more than 2.79 million feet
Boom available: more than 811,000 feet
Total boom: more than 3.6 million feet

OIL RECOVERED 
Oily water recovered: nearly 28.17 million gallons
Amount estimated burned: nearly 9.99 million gallons

Oil captured (CAP) over last 24hrs: more than 1.05 million gallons

DISPERSANTS
Surface dispersant used: more than 1.05 million gallons
Subsea dispersant used: more than 600,000 gallons
Total dispersant used: more than 1,650,000 gallons

PERSONNEL INVOLVED
Overall personnel responding: more than 43,000 personnel responding


Here is your Day 73 daily tally on the animals:

dead birds : 881
oiled but alive : 1,248
cleaned and released : 322


dead sea turtles: 441
oiled but alive: 102 
cleaned and released: 3


dead mammals: 52         
oiled but alive: 2
cleaned and released: 1


http://dailydeadbirds.com/

Rep. Edward Markey says BP's disaster response plan for an oil spill doesn't mention hurricanes or tropical storms.      Markey says the omission is yet another example of what the oil giant was not prepared to handle.

Big Surprise there right?  Obviously BP (nor any of the other oil companies) have shown themselves to be prepared for a spill nor the consequences that follow, so why expect them to have any kind of real time plan on what they should do in the event of a  hurricane.   You do have to wonder if they considered anything at all besides rushing a job done in order to claim as many profits as possible.


Okay Now Onto Rumor Patrol~


I've heard rumors that the Unified Command is threatening arrest of a class D felony and or a $40,000.00 fine of anyone including press who is caught within 20 meters of a "safe zone".
Of course there have been no links or verified proof to those claims so I went looking to see what I could find.

I did find something sorta similar but not really.

Coast Guard establishes 20-meter safety zone around all Deepwater Horizon protective boom; operations

NEW ORLEANS - The Captains of the Port for Morgan City, La., New Orleans, La., and Mobile, Ala. , under the authority of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, has established a 20- meter safety zone surrounding all Deepwater Horizon booming operations and oil response efforts taking place in Southeast Louisiana.

Vessels must not come within 20 meters of booming operations, boom, or oil spill response operations under penalty of law.
The safety zone has been put in place to protect members of the response effort, the installation and maintenance of oil containment boom, the operation of response equipment and protection of the environment by limiting access to and through deployed protective boom.
In areas where vessels operators cannot avoid the 20-meter rule, they are required to be cautious of boom and boom operations by transiting at a safe speed and distance.
Violation of a safety zone can result in up to a $40,000 civil penalty. Willful violations may result in a class D felony.
Permission to enter any safety zone must be granted by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port of New Orleans by calling 504-846-5923.

Unified Command Deepwater Horizon Response


So that sounds a bit different from what I have seen reported on some of the conspiracy websites.


I was also reading Huffington Post and came across this story by Allison Kilkenny who says she spoke to a friend of hers named C.S. Muncy, who is a photojournalist and had taken a very, very brief video that shows some potentially disturbing images.
Video claiming that sand has been dumped over oil in attempt to cover it up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaHJf1GLD1E

After watching the video, I cannot confirm or deny the claims made in this video, but I have say I remain skeptical simply because  there was no attempt to remove the sand from the top to show what was underneath, and the description of it as seeming to be like "asphalt" under the sand seems unrealistic.  I cannot imagine that it would become that hard and unyielding.   We've seen the images of the tarballs, and the oil that is washing ashore, and it is gooey and sticky not hard like a rock.
I could be wrong, but I think before I call this one confirmed, I'll wait for more information, and more independent verification.



Now another rumor I've heard is that there is a giant methane gas bubble forming beneath the surface of the sea floor which is going to explode out and possibly cause a giant Tsunami.

Now this is patently ridiculous.  First and foremost, I cannot imagine that if this was indeed happening that BP or the Coast Guard would allow themselves to be sitting atop a potential danger like that that could kill all of them should such a thing happen.   Take into account that methane is coming up with the oil as that is what is being burned off on the rig/ship on the surface.   Methane bubbling up is not unusual and it is being studied, but it has been naturally occurring instances.   Now am I prepared to say that this would never happen? No, because I know better than to say "never", but in all likelihood it is not happening and won't happen.  As with the gushing itself, we would have independent scientists who are knowledgeable on this issue who would be stepping to the forefront to state this was indeed not only possible but probable.  So far, I have not see a rush rush from the scientific community to make any such claims.

The bigger concern is the amount of methane which is escaping (and not building up) which could cause more dead zones as it depletes the oxygen in the ocean.

For anyone who has never heard of it before, a dead zone in the ocean is an area where the oxygen in the water has depleted to the point where it cannot sustain life.  

The Gulf of Mexico is already home to one the the largest dead zones in the world, so this would be just another deadly blow to the gulf.

Director James Cameron Produces More than Movies ~ Gulf Oil Well Solutions

James Cameron,  noted director of such films as recent blockbuster "Avatar", as well as "Titanic", The Terminator Series, and producer of many other films, is not just a famous director and producer, but he is also  a screenwriter, an editor and an inventor as well.
In mid-May, Cameron offered BP use of his private fleet of submarines, currently moored in Lake Baikal in the Russian federation. is considered an expert in the technology of deep-sea diving, having used submersibles in a succession of his films.

His 1989 film The Abyss is set underwater around an oil rig where a US nuclear submarine has crashed. The film was shot in a deep-sea canyon in the Caribbean known as the Cayman Trough. The make-believe oil company that owns the rig in Cameron's underwater thriller is called BP, standing for Benthic Petroleum.

In preparation for his 1997 blockbuster, Titanic, he created a new generation of mini remotely operated vessels (ROVs) that were small enough to enter the inside of the sunken ship.

He later returned to the site of the shipwreck to make a 3D documentary of the Titanic remains, Ghosts of the Abyss (2003).

In addition to his own submersible creations, Cameron has worked with the Russian-made Mir submarines on lease from the Russian Academy of Sciences.

He has filmed at depths of as much as two miles – twice the depth of the Deepwater Horizon well.

He once told the public radio network NPR: "There are four submersibles in the world right now that can go to 20,000 feet and, you know, that's like trying to explore an area the size of all the continents of the world put together with four Jeeps."

Cameron also works closely with fellow-Canadian Phil Nuytten, a designer of remotely- and human-controlled deep-sea vessels.

BP turned down the offer, but that didn't stop Cameron from plugging forward with his decision to help in some manner, and so he gathered together 28 experts to see what they could come up with.  The following is part of the report that his group issued:

On June 1, 2010 twenty-eight experts in marine engineering and science, as well as government and oil industry technical advisors, met at the EPA building in Washington to consider possible alternative solutions to capping or controlling the runaway well in the Gulf of Mexico.


The group included leading experts in deep ocean engineering, marine science, remotely operated vehicles, piloted submersibles, offshore oil operations and well control. Also attending were representatives of NOAA, EPA, and the Coast Guard.


Executive Summary
On June 1, 2010, at the invitation of James Cameron, a group of twenty-eight experts in deep ocean engineering and exploration met in Washington, DC. This group included representatives from marine industry, oceanography, government agencies, and ocean advocacy and represented a unique and powerful talent base focused on one purpose: to identify possible solutions to capping and ultimately controlling the runaway Deepwater Horizon well in the Gulf of Mexico.
At meetings end it was recognized that the situation was much more complicated than portrayed through the media and that the potential for making matters dramatically worse was significant. With that in mind this group recommended three near-term solutions.




1. Tap into the 8 additional 3” ports that currently exist
on the BOP to draw off more oil through the second
riser (2nd riser was established for the two 3” lines used
for the kill shot). Using this technique should allow the
capture of significantly more oil than is currently being
recovered. These lines will function in parallel with the
existing LMRP Cap while the new valve/cap is being
fabricated. These additional lines could also be used to
pump heavy mud, and then cement, in a repeat of the top
kill procedure should one be attempted.


2. Replace the existing LMRP Cap with a new cap
that produces a solid seal, and has a valve that can be
controlled from the surface to produce the necessary back
pressure for a more effective top kill procedure. The cap
would be mechanically locked over the existing flange at
the top of the BOP, using hydraulically actuated clamps,
then filled with cement, epoxy or ferrofluid to generate
a permanent seal. A rubber tube or skirt inside the cap
would keep a channel clear for the oil to flow through
while the sealant is injected. Variants on this cap/valve
concept include a temporary or permanent expanding
bladder inserted into the bore of the BOP if the bore is
unrestricted with drill pipe.


3. As an alternative to top kill, it may be possible to
engage the existing drill pipe with an overshot, using
high frequency sonar to image within the venting oil. If
sufficient unobstructed internal clearance exists through
that pipe it could have a tube inserted through it. The
object is to pump heavy mud into the well deep in the
hole. A version of this concept that incorporates an
expanding bladder cap (pipe through the middle of the
bladder) would combine the best of both concepts... back
pressure and deep injection of mud.


The optimal outcome is that some combination of these techniques could be used to kill the well, which is vastly superior to the current situation in which the cap system is estimated to be capturing only about half the oil, and the whole thing is vulnerable to work stoppage in the event of a hurricane. Killing the well is a 100% solution. In addition to consideration of the Deepwater Horizon well itself, the group discussed steps that should be taken to more efficiently manage similar environmental threats in the future.


These included encouragement for the deployment of long term undersea environmental monitoring systems, the establishment of environmental baselines, and the design and development of a rapid response capability consisting of an assortment of platforms and sensors.



(Subsequent to the meeting of the task force BP revealed there are three 16” rupture/burst disks in the well, the condition of which is not known. If their integrity has been compromised any effort at a top-kill has a very low probability of success and may further damage the integrity of the well.)


Conclusions and Recommendations

Regarding BP’s post-accident response, our general conclusion is that BP have assets on scene sufficient to deal with the problem. BP’s expertise is excellent at the engineering level, and the post-incident decisions made to date are, for the most part, correct, at least regarding well control, however we believe that more needs to be done.
Although the media have given the impression of sequential processing of the problem as each new procedure is attempted, it is clear that sufficient parallel processing has been applied to solve the problem on several fronts.  However, external advisory support and analysis from the deep ocean community should have been sought out, both by BP and government, at an early stage
The transparent flow of information from BP to responding agencies and from the marine science/engineering community to the government would have helped enormously. Obtaining critical information on flows, pressures and status of the well was beyond arduous and thus much of it was estimated or inferred.  Going forward, BP should avail itself of the analytical and engineering support offered by the deep ocean community, which is highly expert in deep vehicle design and operation, and in deep ocean operations at depths greater

than the well site.


BP should consider restricting BOP internal pressure at the top flange and then repeating the top-kill, because the LMRP cap is subject to leakage and forced removal in a hurricane. This would involve creating a new cap or plug containing a surface controlled valve. The valve would be used to meter the flow, maintain enough back pressure in the BOP and give the top-kill a greater chance to work. The new cap/plug would make a high pressure seal to the upper flange, as opposed to the LMRP cap’s “loose seal.”


A variant on this idea is using the existing drill pipe, already in the well, or an additional pipe or tube inserted through it (or replacing it) to inject heavy mud all the way to the bottom of the well and attempt a kill that way. BP should be asked if they have analyzed this. The opaque flow of the oil will require the use of high frequency multi-beam sonar to image the pipe’s position inside the BOP. To increase capture of oil, BP should add more 3” lines (same as the choke and kill lines) to take advantage of the multiple valve ports on the stack. This would require significant work with ROVs, but could happen after the LMRP cap is in place. Two and possibly as many as eight 3” lines could be added. These lines would pump more volume of oil to the surface without relying on the LMRP cap. They will also relieve the flow at the LMRP cap and provide backup if it fails or needs maintenance. In addition, they could be used to pump mud into the well bore at high volume in a second attempt at a topkill.


Combined with higher back pressure and fine control of BOP internal pressures from the proposed valve/cap, this could insure success months in advance of the relief well.



A major flaw in the current LMRP cap strategy is that it depends on the ship holding station without interruption. If a hurricane forces the ship to move, the well will vent without restriction into the sea. We predicted during the meeting that the flow would increase significantly when the riser was cut off, and it has more than the predicted 20%. This rate is the new normal any time the LMRP cap is removed because of weather or loss of function. With a minimum of two months required to complete the relief wells, we recommend that another attempt to kill the well be made soon.



BP has assets on scene sufficient to deal with the control of the well. The deep ocean community has vehicles that could assist, but they are unnecessary for work directly at the well, and integrating working styles with the offshore ROV operators already on the scene would be counter productive.


However, assets like ROV’s, 3D cameras, and manned submersibles from the deep ocean community should be employed by government agencies immediately to independently image and monitor the site and the midwater and benthic communities. Quantitative optical imaging in 3D and from uncompressed sources could be used to monitor flow rates. Acoustic volumetric monitoring similar to what has been accomplished at deep sea hydrothermal vent sites could be utilized. Right now the government is relying on the perpetrator’s poor-quality surveillance video of the crime scene.



Commander Greene of Coast Guard assured us that all command decisions were being made jointly between BP and USCG. But this can only truly happen if Incident Command has an independent flow of data and imaging, to make informed decisions. Currently it does not. We recommend independent imaging and data acquisition in situ within visual range of the work as it proceeds. This would allow the government to monitor progress, leakage, and scan for additional leaks and hazards, as well as have a data set for accident investigation, independent analysis of well control efforts, and flow measurement.





Coordination of all vehicles on the bottom is critical so as not to impede the critical work at the well site, but can be done. This group has extensive experience in operating multiple vehicles, both piloted and ROV, within a small theater of operations. Piloted vehicles and fiber-spooling vehicles could approach the well by traversing across the bottom from a deployment point outside the cluster of ships directly over the work site, so as to not interact with BP’s ROVs, tethers, and risers.



In addition to independent imaging and monitoring of the site, the responsible agencies should look to our group to assist with incident investigation. Phoenix has performed search and recovery operations for the US Navy under Sup/Salv. Lightstorm, working with the Russian Academy of Sciences Mir research subs, has carried out exterior and interior forensics studies at Titanic and Bismarck. (Both wrecks are at much greater depths than the blown out well.) Woods Hole has decades of experience with deep-sea surveys, bottom mosaics and marine archeology including the Titanic wreck site and Challenger debris field.


There is no better capability anywhere in the world.



Creating a definitive seafloor survey of the site, including the wreck of the Deepwater Horizon, will be a critical part of the accident investigation. Members of this group have extensive experience operating small fiberspooling ROVs inside shipwrecks hundreds of feet and several decks away from the entry point. It may be possible to recover valuable data from the Deepwater Horizon that could assist in understanding the accident. A comprehensive interior and exterior survey of the wreck should be performed as a basic part of the investigation. Our experience with wrecks is that “the steel does not lie.” Deepwater Horizon holds many answers to urgent questions.


Many of the people in the room will be involved in studies to determine the damage to the environment below the ocean’s surface. There was a strong level of commitment and desire to work cooperatively in an unprecedented way.  Typically these institutions organize vertically under their funding agencies (Navy, NOAA, NSF and others) and work in an uncoordinated fashion.


Dealing with the aftermath of the biggest environmental disaster in US history will require unprecedented coordination; all present were eager to work within this framework. Craig McLean of NOAA offered to function as a pro-tem hub for that effort, specifically in creating a master list of assets and capabilities.



One example of this kind of coordination is the need to establish a centralized database for existing Gulf samples, imaging, and research currently residing within many institutions and researchers. What the conditions were before the spill and how much good data exists is critical generating a baseline for the
upcoming studies. It will also be important to standardize the instrumentation, regardless of the vehicular platform, so that the same types of data are coming in from all measurement sites.


Different institutions have different ships, ROV’s, AUV’s, manned subs, and deep-sea capabilities, so it will be important to cast each one in its right role. We also concluded that this group represented an excellent nucleus for a Rapid Response Team to deal with deep ocean incidents environmental or otherwise.
(Such as the search still underway for the Air France black box.) There are precedents for this in earthquakes, submarine rescue, and aircraft disasters
.
The team would be international and have a webbased inventory of private-public sector deep-sea scientists, technical systems and scientific packages. It would have a central command structure. It would be an independent body that governments could call on for high-resolution imaging and scientific accuracy. It was agreed to follow up on this idea; one of our members offered to host a meeting on the subject at his institution.



We are finished with regard to our recommendations on the well control and oil capture task (unless specific recommendations are adopted and create ongoing engineering or execution roles for some of the members), but we believe that this is just the start of the conversation for the coordinated research, site survey, independent site monitoring, and rapid response concepts.

http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=64023&pt=10&p=43992

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute Oil Spill Page:
http://www.whoi.edu/topic/oilspills/

Despite the lampooning David Cameron took in the media for his offers to help, this report shows how important his help could be to the U.S. in their independent investigation into the Deepwater Horizon Explosion that resulted in the rig's sinking and creating the worst environmental disaster this country has ever faced.  His group is willing to work with helping BP to stop or reduce the flow of oil into the gulf, in assisting the U.S. in gathering evidence for the investigation, and to help create a group that would be capable of responding to disasters around the globe.

I am impressed with the report and am doubly impressed with Mr. Cameron's desire to help not just in this situation, but others that might arise.

The Dangers Oil Spill Clean Up Crews Are Facing

We've heard the reports over and over again.  The oil spill clean up crews are getting sick.  So sick in fact that there have been health centers set up to deal locally with the workers who get ill.

Reports are coming more and more frequently of these workers who are getting ill and they are all complaining of the same symptoms.  Dizziness, headaches, vomiting, difficulty breathing.  Flu like symptoms.

In the past week, 11 workers who have been out on the water cleaning up oil from BP's blown-out well have been treated for what Dietrich calls "a pattern of symptoms" that could have been caused by the burning of crude oil, noxious fumes from the oil or the dispersants dumped in the Gulf to break it up. All workers were treated and released.

"One person comes in, it could be multiple things," he said. "Eleven people come in with these symptoms, it makes it incredibly suspicious."

Few studies have examined long-term health effects of oil exposure. But some of the workers trolling Gulf Coast beaches and heading out into the marshes and waters have complained about flu-like symptoms - a similar complaint among crews deployed for the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska.

Gulf spill workers complaining of flulike symptoms

BP and U.S. Coast Guard officials have said dehydration, heat, food poisoning or other unrelated factors may have caused the workers' symptoms. Any excuse they can come up with to deny it is illness borne from working with the toxic chemicals they are being subjected to day in and day out trying to clean up the disaster created by BP and their desire to put profit ahead of safety.   
Both BP, The Coast Guard and OSHA are stating that repirator's are not needed as air quality testing shows no need for them.

The head of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration on Thursday said workers hired by BP PLC to clean up spilled oil don't need respirators, despite complaints from some employees and lawmakers about toxic fumes.David Michaels, assistant secretary for the Department of Labor's OSHA, said in an interview Thursday that based on test results so far, cleanup workers are receiving "minimal" exposure to airborne toxins. OSHA will require that BP provide certain protective clothing, but not respirators.

OSHA Tells Clean Up Workers Respirator's Not Needed



We have reports that BP have told worker's if they wear the respirator's they will be fired. 

Fishermen who've been hired to do cleanup and containment work in BP's Gulf Coast oil spill have been told they would be fired for using their own respirators or safety equipment that wasn't provided by BP, reported Louisiana Environmental Action Network, a Louisana-based environmental group.

"It appears that, despite the obvious potential for exposure to respiratory toxins, BP does not consider respiratory protection necessary equipment," said Paul Orr, Lower Mississippi Riverkeeper in LEAN's statement. "And even so to prevent the fishermen from using their own respiratory protection if they chose to do so is deeply troubling."

Wearing even your own respirator will get you fired


Fisherman's wife breaks the silence

Kindra Arnesen's husband often calls while he's out on a shrimping trip, so she wasn't surprised to hear her cell phone ring the night of April 29 while he was on an overnight fishing expedition.

However, this time, her husband, David, wasn't calling to tell her about the day's catch or to wish their children Aleena and David Jr. a good night. He was calling to tell her he was sick, and the strange thing about it, so were men on the seven other shrimping boats working near his.

"I received several calls from him saying, 'This one's hanging over the boat throwing up. This one says he's dizzy, and he's feeling faint. Everybody's loading up their stuff, tying up their rigs and going back to the docks,'" Arnesen remembers......

For several weeks, she hesitated to talk publicly about it. Like many fishermen who can no longer fish in the Gulf, her husband has signed a contract to work with BP to clean up the oil, and she doesn't want to bite the hand that puts food on her family's table...........

His wife says he was diagnosed with respiratory problems and prescribed medicines, including an antibiotic and cough medicines.

She says while he's feeling better, he still doesn't have the energy he used to have.

"Here we are over a month later and he's still not completely well," she says......

One of her immediate goals is to persuade BP to give its workers masks.

Graham MacEwen, a spokesman for BP, says the company isn't providing masks because their air monitoring shows there's no health threats to workers.

Arnesen says she is indeed scared that her husband will lose his job now that she's speaking out.

One Gulf Fisherman's Wife Speaks Out

Seriously?  This is how these people are being treated?  They have lost their livelihood, had their way of life stripped from them, their bills are piling up and they are being offered paltry sums to work for the company who did this to them and then they must worry about being fired for showing concern for their health due to the environment they are being forced to work in just to help save their community, the environment that BP screwed up due to putting profit over safety?    Not to mention the fact that they are being told that it is not the toxic fumes they are inhaling constantly day in and day out that are making them sick but they are told it must be something else, when we know that this atmosphere did the exact same things to workers exposed to the same toxic soup during the Exxon Valdez?

What country are we living in?  How is this allowed?  How is this even considered acceptable?

Rachel Maddow spoke to Dr. Riki Ott, a marine toxicologist who was there during the Exxon Valdez and saw this same thing happening to the people from Alaska who were exposed to the toxic fumes.




Riki Ott also expressed her views on the Environmental Forum/Reuters in an article titled:
"Lessons from the Exxon Valdez"

State health officials are warning people who are sensitive to reduced air quality to stay indoors, but anyone who experiences the classic symptoms of crude oil overexposure–nausea, vomiting, headaches, or cold or flu-like symptoms–should seek medical help.

This is serious: Oil spill cleanups are regulated as hazardous waste cleanups because oil is, in fact, hazardous to health. Breathing oil fumes is extremely harmful.

After the 2002 Prestige oil spill off Galicia, Spain, and the 2007 Hebei Spirit oil spill in South Korea, medical doctors found fishermen and cleanup workers suffered from respiratory problems, central nervous system problems (headaches, nausea, dizziness, etc.), and even genetic damage (South Korea). I have attended two international conferences the past two years to share information with these doctors.

During the Exxon Valdez spill, health problems among cleanup workers became so widespread, so fast, that medical doctors, among others, sounded warnings. Dr. Robert Rigg, former Alaska medical director for Standard Alaska (BP), warned, “It is a known fact that neurologic changes (brain damage), skin disorders (including cancer), liver and kidney damage, cancer of other organ systems, and medical complications–secondary to exposure to working unprotected in (or inadequately protected)–can and will occur to workers exposed to crude oil and other petrochemical by-products. While short-term complaints, i.e., skin irritation, nausea, dizziness, pulmonary symptoms, etc., may be the initial signs of exposure and toxicity, the more serious long-term effects must be prevented.”[1]

Unfortunately, Exxon called the short-term symptoms, “the Valdez Crud,” and dismissed 6,722 cases of respiratory claims from cleanup workers as “colds or flu” using an exemption under OSHA’s hazardous waste cleanup reporting requirements.[2]

Sadly,  sick Exxon cleanup workers were left to suffer and pay their own medical expenses. I know of many who have been disabled by their illnesses – or have died.

I have repeatedly warned Congress in letters and in person to strike that loophole because it exempts the very work-related injuries–chemical induced illnesses–that OSHA is supposedly designed to protect workers from.

Riki Ott: Lessons From The Exxon Valdez


So we know that Oil is considered a "hazardous material", even based on OSHA standards.  What about the chemical dispersant that is being use by the hundreds of thousands of gallons?  What do we know about that?

Thanks to some fine work by the team at Palingates who did some digging We have a lot of information on the chemical dispersant's being used and none of it is good.

One of the dispersants being used is Corexit 9500, also called Corexit EC9500A.

"Themoneytimes" reports:

At present BP is using Corexit 9500. which features high in terms of toxicity and low in terms of efficacy in comparison to 18 other EPA-approved dispersants.

"Based on the information that is available today, BP continues to believe that Corexit was the best and most appropriate choice at the time when the incident occurred, and that Corexit remains the best option for subsea application," BP said.
The EPA, had, in a directive issued Thursday, ordered BP to find a less toxic but equally effective chemical than Corexit 9500.

The instructions also demanded that the replacement should be effected within 72 hours.

The availability of this substitute had to be abundant given the enormous need.

Another dispersant used is Corexit 9527 (also called Corexit EC9527A).

Wikipedia also has a good overview about these two chemicals which are used now in the Gulf of Mexico.

The main ingridient of Corexit 9527 is 2-BUTOXY ETHANOL.

The New Jersey Department of Health published a fact sheet about 2-Butoxy-Ethanol (PDF).

Under "Health Hazard Information", the department notes:

"Acute Health Effects

The following acute (short-term) health effects may occur
immediately or shortly after exposure to 2-Butoxy Ethanol:

􀁦 Contact can irritate the skin and eyes with possible eye
damage.
􀁦 Inhaling 2-Butoxy Ethanol can irritate the nose and throat
causing coughing and wheezing.
􀁦 2-Butoxy Ethanol can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea
and abdominal pain.
􀁦 Exposure can cause headache, dizziness, confusion,
lightheadedness, and passing out.
Chronic Health Effects

The following chronic (long-term) health effects can occur at
some time after exposure to 2-Butoxy Ethanol and can last
for months or years:

Cancer Hazard
􀁦 2-Butoxy Ethanol may be a CARCINOGEN in humans
since it has been shown to cause liver cancer in animals.
􀁦 Many scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure to
a carcinogen."

Scientists believe that the use of these dispersants will lead to a horrible environmental disaster - the UK Independant reports:

"It's the biggest environmental disaster of our time and it's not even over yet," said the marine toxicologist Dr Susan Shaw, director of the Marine Environmental Research Institute based in Maine. She has been diving among the damage and is horrified by the contamination caused by BP's continued use of dispersants. "They've been used at such a high volume that it's unprecedented. The worst of these – Corexit 9527 – is the one they've been using most. That ruptures red blood cells and causes fish to bleed. With 800,000 gallons of this, we can only imagine the death that will be caused."

According to Dr Shaw, plankton and smaller shrimps coated in these toxic chemicals will be eaten by larger fish, passing the deadly mix up the food chain. "This is dismantling the food web, piece by piece," she said. "We'll see dead bodies soon. Sharks, dolphins, sea turtles, whales: the impact on predators will be seen in a short time because the food web will be impacted from the bottom up."

The largest of the clouds, confirmed by a University of South Florida research ship last week, has gone deeper than the spill itself, defying BP's assurances that all oil would rise to the surface. It is now headed north-east of the rig, towards the DeSoto Canyon. This underwater trench could channel the noxious soup along the Florida coast, impacting on fisheries and coating 100-year-old coral forests. Tests on the toxicity of another chemical cloud, some 10 miles long and heading south-west of the site, are also being done by scientists from the University of Georgia.
Marine biologists say the timing of this underwater contamination could not be more catastrophic. "This is when all the animals are reproducing and hatching, so the damage at this depth will be much worse," said Dr Larry McKinney, director of the Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies in Texas. "We're not talking about adults on the surface; it will impact on the young – and potentially a generational life cycle."

According to ProPublica, during the Exxon Valdez oil disaster, an earlier version of Corexit lead to severe problems amongst clean-up workers:

According to a 2005 National Academy of Sciences report, the dispersants and the oil they leave behind can kill fish eggs. A study of oil dispersal in Coos Bay, Ore. found that PAH accumulated in mussels, the Academy’s paper noted. Another study examining fish health after the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska in 1989 found that PAHs affected the developing hearts of Pacific herring and pink salmon embryos. The research suggests the dispersal of the oil that’s leaking in the Gulf could affect the seafood industry there.

“One of the most difficult decisions that oil spill responders and natural resource managers face during a spill is evaluating the trade-offs associated with dispersant use,” said the Academy report, titled Oil Spill Dispersants, Efficacy and Effects. “There is insufficient understanding of the fate of dispersed oil in aquatic ecosystems.”
A version of Corexit was widely used after the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill and, according to a literature review performed by the group the Alaska Community Action on Toxics, was later linked with health impacts in people including respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders. But the Academy report makes clear that the dispersants used today are less toxic than those used a decade ago.

“There is a certain amount of toxicity,” said Robin Rorick, director of marine and security operations at the American Petroleum Institute. “We view dispersant use as a tool in a toolbox. It’s a function of conducting a net environmental benefit analysis and determining the best bang for your buck.”

However, can we really trust what the producers of Corexit tell us?

The US-company Nalco with offices in Illinois and Texas has already made huge profits with the product through the Gulf spill. Two weeks ago Nalco announced that they already sold dispersants worth $ 40 million through the sale of the dispersants for the Gulf spill.

On their website they are not shy to report about the use of their valuable product in the Gulf of Mexico in detail. Look what they have to say:

"Data published by Environment Canada, that country’s main environmental agency, showed common household dish soap as having a substantially higher rainbow trout toxicity than COREXIT 9500. Put another way, COREXIT 9500 is the more than 27 times safer than dish soap."

You really would need to be brain-amputed to believe this spin.

They also found an excellent video which is a documentary about the hazards that clean-up workers face in an oil spill disaster - with the Exxon Valdez oil spill as an example, which you can view at their site (I've linked in a couple of places so that it takes you there).



So we know that reports are everywhere about the dangers of inhaling toxic fumes.  Oil is considered a hazardous substance by OSHA who has rules regarding the PPE (personal protection equipment) one needs to have when dealing with  hazardous substances (which I detailed in an earlier post), and we see from all indications that the dispersant being used by BP on this gargantuan oil spill is toxic and there is a history of the use of this stuff causing the exact same symptoms in people during the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and yet with all that, we still have not only BP but the Coast Guard & OSHA telling these clean up crews that they are not in danger and that they don't need respirator's?

We know why they are doing this.  PR.  That is it plain & simple.  It looks bad to everyone to have the workers walking around in respirators.  People might think that this is more serious than it is and we just can't have that now can we?  Much like the ban on photographing animals washing up dead and covered in oil, or the refusal to allow reporters to onto the beaches without a BP or Coast Guard Representative with them, or the refusal to allow people to fly over the Gulf below a certain level and never without one of the previously mentioned rep's, this is all done to control the message that is getting out to the general public to put a better face on this catastrophic disaster.   This should NEVER be acceptable to the public.  NEVER!

This is absolutely unacceptable.  We are treating our own people like they are worthless, like their health and well being is worthless.  This is showing that their future means nothing to those who are supposed to be doing everything to protect them from harm.   Sure, I can understand that BP could care less about them.  Look at what they are doing to our Gulf.  Look at their history of safety violations.  They are a corporation like many others who put their bottom line and profit above anything else.  That is how they got to be one of the most profitable companies, but we should expect better from the Coast Guard and OSHA, and our representatives, our elected officials.
No expense should be spared to ensure that these people are being taken care of properly while they are out cleaning up the DISASTER that BP created.   There is no such thing as overkill in this instance.  Why would you not do everything in your power to ensure that their health and welfare was protected in light of the situation, the work they are doing and the circumstances we find ourselves in because of a multinational company who makes BILLIONS of dollars every year?  Isn't it enough that BP has ruined their lives by taking away their livelihood, their way of life, the environment they rely on to make a living, must BP demand their health be another casualty of this disaster too?

Haven't these people suffered enough?

Tony Hayward said he wanted his life back, well so do these people and they aren't asking for much at all.  They deserve better then what they are being given.  Much Much Better!