Gulf Oil Platform Explosion and Spill

COREXIT, NALCO, ALGORE, SOROS, APOLLO, MAURICE STRONG,
GOLDMAN SACHS...... GULF OIL SPILL... AND WHY IT'S NOT BEING STOPPED.
FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!

Bombshell expose'. The real reason the oil still flows into the Gulf
of Mexico.

http://www.resistnet.com/profiles/blogs/corexit-nalco-algore-soros

As you know, the Deep Water Horizon has exploded in the Gulf of
Mexico. It has been spewing oil from a ruptured wellpipe for over a
month.

BP and the US Government has said they are trying everything possible
to stop that multi million gallon oil from continuing to flow into the
Gulf.


I am about to dispute that claim and offer an expose' as to why that
story about them doing everything possible is a lie and a profitable
enterprise to those who would make money from this disaster.
The Top Kill method was started and suspended several times. It was
being attempted only half heartedly. The reason is, there is no money to
be made with a solution that simple.
The real money is in the use of dispersements.
There is a company called NALCO. They make water purification systems
and chemical dispersements.
NALCO is based in Chicago with subsidiaries in Brazil, Russia, India,
China and Indonesia.
NALCO is associated with UChicago Argonne program. UChicago Argonne
received $164 million dollars in stimulus funds this past year. UChicago
Argonne just added two new executives to their roster. One from NALCO.
The other from the Ill. Dept of Educaution.
If you dig a little deeper you will find NALCO is also associated
with Warren Buffett, Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Soros, Apollo, Blackstone,
Goldman Sachs, Hathaway Berkshire.
Warren Buffet /Hathaway Berkshire increased their holdings in NALCO
just last November. (Timing is everything).
The dispersement chemical is known as Corexit. What it does is hold
the oil below the water's surface. It is supposed to break up the spill
into smaller pools. It is toxic and banned in Europe.
NALCO says they are using older and newer versions of Corexit in the
Gulf.. (Why would you need a newer version, if the old one was fine?)
There is big money and even bigger players in this scam. While they
are letting the oil blow wide open into the Gulf, the stakes and profit
rise.
The Dolphins, Whales, Manatees, Sea Turtles and fish suffocate and die. The coastal regions, salt
marshes, tourist attractions and the shore front properties are being
destroyed, possibly permanently.The air quality is diminished. The Gulf
of Mexico fishing industry is decimated.
All to create a need for their expensive and extremely profitable
poison.
Some friends and I have compiled extensive articles and reports to
support this claim.
Thank you:
Sir_Templar. He brought this to our attention and hs supplied links
and articles.
Spongedocks. She tirelessly searched through mountains of information
& supplied valuable links & resources..
Bobbi85710 She has contributed links articles and uncovered the
Stimulus funds.
The Research:
'This is NALCO:
http://www.nalco.com/index.htm
Goldman Sachs was part of a three-pronged group
that purchased NALCO:
http://bit.ly/8Z3Ai6
Buffett’s Bet On Water, NALCO (NLC is trade code):
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/3095068
'Blackstone, Apollo and Goldman Sachs to acquire
Ondeo NALCO' (COREXIT 9500):
http://bit.ly/bVHQkR
The Milken Institute - Leon Black of Apollo
Management LLC (i.e. NALCO): http://bit.ly/vJLz
BP plc, Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs, NALCO
Holding Co., Halliburton Co:
http://yhoo.it/amEhiS
The Chicago, NALCO, Arab, Blago, Rezko Connection:
http://bit.ly/d88x31
Obama's Economic Adviser Buffet,= Berkshire
Hathaway Inc - NALCO Holding Co:
http://bit.ly/ati3AL
NALCO and the China Connection:
http://bit.ly/daKYmk
'NALCO eyes doubling of sales in China:
http://bit.ly/bi7BZw
Berkshire the second-largest shareholder in NALCO:
http://bit.ly/cvHDAl
Company Profile 'NALCO Holding Co:
http://bit.ly/9qeTkd
'96 "partnerships with enviro products thru 2010"!
Attendees: Gore M. Strong & NALCO:
http://is.gd/ctV7p
Gore/Strong EPA Conference '96:
http://is.gd/ctVfN
BP Embraces Exxon’s Toxic Dispersant, Ignores Safer Alternative


It has been confirmed that the
dispersal agent being used by BP and the government is Corexit 9500 , a solvent originally developed by
Exxon and now manufactured by Nalco Holding Company of Naperville, IL. Their stock
took a sharp jump, up more than 18% at its highest point of the day
today, after it was announced that their product is the one being used
in the Gulf. Nalco’s CEO, Erik Frywald, expressed their commitment to
“helping the people and environment of the Gulf Coast recover as rapidly
as possible.” It may be that the best way to help would be to remove
their product from the fray. Take a look at some of the facts about
Corexit 9500:


A report written by Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark for Exxon
Biomedical Sciences, Inc. entitled “Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An
Overview ” states that “Corexit 9500, Corexit 9527, and
Corexit 9580 have moderate toxicity to early life stages of fish,
crustaceans and mollusks (LC50 or EC50 – 1.6 to 100 ppm*). It goes on to
say that decreasing water temperatures in lab tests showed decreased
toxicity, a lowered uptake of the dispersant. Unfortunately, we’re going
to be seeing an increase in temperatures, not a decrease. Amongst the
other caveats is that the study is species-specific, that other animals
may be more severely affected, silver-sided fish amongst them.


http://www.protecttheocean.com/gulf-oil-spill-bp/

Love Always
mudra

Dispersants add to Gulf spill’s toxic threats

By: Susan Buchanan, Contributing Writer

Tuesday, June 1, 2010 http://www.louisianaweekly.com/news.php?viewStory=2862

The Obama Administration has started to rein in BP's use of dispersants to break up spilled oil while a toxic stew swirls off Louisiana's coast, threatening marine life and human health. A month after BP's oil-rig explosion on April 20, over 800,000 gallons of dispersants had been applied to Gulf waters, including 100,000 gallons that were injected underwater. Helicopters distribute the chemical cleaners, or deodorized kerosene, on the ocean's surface, while robots dispense them deep in water. After the spill, the Environmental Protection Agency let BP use dispersants because they were seen as "the lesser of two evils," said Ronald Kendall, director of The Institute of Environmental and Human Health (TIEHH) in Lubbock, Texas. Dispersants break oil into small droplets more quickly than ocean waves do, but they can also widen the area of the spill. Using them is "a tradeoff between, on the one hand attempting to keep oil from the shore by dispersing it, and on the other, injecting the ocean with chemicals," he said. Dispersants have never been applied in the quantities that BP is using them in the Gulf, he noted. The EPA on May 10 authorized BP to use two dispersants-COREXIT 9500 and COREXIT EC9527A, distributed by the Tennessee and Texas units of Nalco Co. in Illinois. BP had already applied those products at the spill site for nearly two weeks. As concerns about COREXIT grew, however, the EPA asked BP on May 19 to find a less-toxic dispersant within 24 hours, and to start using its replacement in 72 hours. BP answered that it wanted to stick with COREXIT. Frustrated EPA and Coast Guard officials said the company's response was inadequate, and told BP to start reducing its use of surface dispersants. But in a decision questioned by some scientists, officials said BP's subsea or underwater dispersant use, authorized in mid-May, could continue. Last week, the EPA and the Coast Guard said that they would start calling the shots about BP's dispersant use and that COREXIT applications could be scaled back by as much as 50% to 80%. COREXIT is not the best possible choice for combating the Gulf spill, according to experts, who question why BP first selected and then asked to stick with the dispersant. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of advocacy group Food & Water Watch in Washington, DC, pointed to corporate ties between BP and Nalco as possibly contributing to the decision to use COREXIT. Nalco board member, Rodney Chase, worked for BP for 38 years. For its part, BP continues to say that large quantities of COREXIT are readily available and that Nalco can deliver as much as 75,000 gallons per day indefinitely. Coastal experts worried about the ecosystem have sifted through past evidence about COREXIT and other dispersants. After the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, a version of COREXIT was used, but abandoned when weak wave action made it ineffective. And in the 1969 Santa Barbara spill, some dispersants were applied before hay turned out to be a better solution. Oil-coated clumps of hay spread by boat washed ashore, and were hauled away by dump trucks. Weeks into BP's Gulf spill, scientists questioned the company's decision to use dispersants on a wide scale and in particular its choice of COREXIT. On its own, COREXIT 9500 can be four times as toxic as oil, according to product evaluations. And of 18 dispersants approved earlier by EPA, twelve were found to be more effective on southern Louisiana crude than COREXIT, EPA data show. Kendall said he was very concerned that EPA hadn't assessed risks to the Gulf earlier from BP's massive dispersant use. And in contrast with EPA statements, he is particularly worried about underwater injections. "LC 50 studies have shown that COREXIT is toxic to young marine and other aquatic life," he noted. In toxicology language, a Lethal Concentration 50 rating means that a chemical can kill at least 50 percent of a sample population. Marianne Cufone, fish program director at Food & Water Watch in Washington, DC, said "COREXIT in studies was shown to be twice as harmful to shrimp as an alternate dispersant called Dispersit," produced by Polychemical Corp. in New York. That's problematic for the huge Gulf shrimp industry, she noted. Meanwhile, according to test results compiled by the EPA, seven alternative dispersants are less toxic to shrimp than COREXIT and at least 14 alternatives are less toxic to fish. Cufone noted that Dispersit is about twice as effective in breaking oil down as COREXIT and is also far less toxic. If dispersants must be used in the Gulf spill, choosing the right one makes a big difference because "the dose makes the poison," Kendall said "We're watching the biggest ecological, toxicology experiment in our nation's history," he stated. "Underwater pools of oil have formed that are 20 miles long. And the mixture of chemicals-oil, dispersants and residue from setting oil on fire-presents new threats to the sea bottom, the shore, marshes and the air." Randy Lanctot, executive director of the Louisiana Wildlife Fed?eration, worries that dispersants are being used too close to the coast. "Dispersants are not supposed to be applied from aircraft within three miles of land, according to Coast Guard protocol." But he said "I'm not sure that rule is being precisely followed with respect to the barrier islands that are havens for shore and seabirds. Because of the proximity of birds and other wildlife, dispersants should not, in my opinion, be applied landward of these barriers, and they shouldn't be applied within three miles seaward either." He added "wetting birds with dispersants may put their survival at risk." Dr. Andy Nyman, associate professor of Wetland Wildlife Manage?ment at Louisiana State University, said marsh food chains, starting with micro organisms and moving up to herbivores and carnivores, are often altered by an influx of oil or oily dispersants. Oil and dispersed oil can pass under containment booms, he noted. While fishermen usually don't enter marsh grasses, fish larva and young marine organisms spend their first few months of life there, he noted. Moreover, findings from Nyman's experiments appear to contradict BP's reasoning that it's better to use dispersants to protect the coast than to allow oil to break up on its own. An experiment conducted in the late 1990's by Nyman and other LSU researchers on soil from many of the state's tidal freshwater marshes found that dispersants mixed with oil reaching marsh soils were more toxic to fish, crustaceans and benthic invertebrates than undispersed oil for months after arriving in the soil. Benthic invertebrates are small, growing organisms that live at the bottom of the marsh. Nyman said "it appeared in our experiments that COREXIT 9500 was toxic to microbes in the marsh soil that eat the oil." And in another experiment with salt marsh soils, Dr. Nyman found that dispersed oil biodegrades, or was eaten by oil microbes, much more slowly than non-dispersed oil. Based on recent reports likening them to dish detergent and shampoo, dispersants might be viewed as safe to handle. But Kendall warns "for humans, dispersants contain solvents, so you don't want to touch them." A solvent is a substance capable of dissolving another substance. Solvents can be carcinogens, and touching, much less ingesting them, threatens the central nervous system, along with the heart, liver and kidneys. Inhaling solvent vapors can irritate the eyes, nose and throat. The mix of chemicals at the BP spill site explains why the company requires fishermen under its Vessels of Opportunity program and others employed for cleanup to have HazMat training. A concoction of oil and dispersants is already hovering over corral beds, like the Pinnacles south of Louisiana. And Kendall said the mixture is getting into the Loop Current, which heads to south Florida-where ancient corral reefs could be devastated. With hurricane season approaching, the presence of chemicals in Gulf Coast waters frightens him. Winds from a big storm will push the dispersed oil mixture around, and that could be catastrophic for the salt-and-fresh or brackish-water balance of Lake Pontchartrain, he warned. The lake has only recently been judged safe again for swimming after industrial and farm waste was brought under control. "Given the size of the Gulf spill, we need to try everything that's environmentally sound to get rid of the oil and the added chemicals," Kendall said. Texas Tech Univer?sity, he noted, developed Fibertect, a product with an activated, carbon core between layers of non-woven cotton that can be used in containment booms and to clean wildlife. He said a marketing firm has explained Fibertect's several applications to BP. Lanctot said the use of "dispersants in the Gulf is a huge, unplanned and not very well-controlled experiment." He added that it's anybody's guess how dispersants will effect the Gulf ecosystem as it tries to recover after the oil well is plugged. Meanwhile, the price of Nalco stock rallied in early May after BP said it was using two forms of COREXIT, Cufone noted. Shares swiftly retreated however, after the EPA expressed its concern about using the company's products in the Gulf. This article was originally published in the May 31, 2010 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper

Love Always
mudra

Love Always
mudra

Love Always
mudra

the short film BP does not want you to see, it's all a big show folks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRl6-o8CpXA&feature=player_embedded#!,

They are spraying a very toxic dispersant over populated areas now...
This is from Mel, from Veritas, who is doing an outstanding job to find out what's going on there..
1. BP is now spraying dispersants at night and on top of populated
areas.

2. BP is using Wackenhut as their security company to harass/threaten
the media.

http://www.manticoregroup.com/radio/...00613-jfox.mp3

It's also here: http://www.veritasshow.com/veritasplayer.html

What that dispersant, Corexit does to humans :

http://www.valdezlink.com/evos/others.htm

Corexit 9500 with ethylene oxide? * "As stated in MSDS, once it had
one, Corexit 9500 can cause central nervous system depression, nausea,
and unconsciousness ... liver, kidney damage, and red blood cell
hemolysis with repeated or prolonged
exposure through inhalation or
ingestion according to the MSDS. The threat to human health via
exposure is characterized as 'MODERATE'." uspoly.com/dispersit
Corexit tested by VECO's NORCON union workers - volunteers.. .
even women (reproductive damage possible - men
& women) *
"The Corexit 9500 * is the primary chemical stockpiled in Alaska.
Unfortunately there are still plans to use this."

http://www.answers.com/topic/hemolysis

n. The destruction or dissolution of red blood cells,
with subsequent release of hemoglobin.

hemolytic he'mo·lyt'ic (hē'mə-lĭt'ĭk) adj.

hemolysis (hĭmŏl'ĭsĭs), destruction of red blood
cells in the
bloodstream. Although new red blood cells, or erythrocytes, are
continuously created and old ones destroyed, an excessive rate of
destruction sometimes occurs. The dead cells, in sufficiently large
numbers, overwhelm the organ that destroys them, the spleen, so that
serum pigments resulting from hemoglobin breakdown appear in the blood
serum. Jaundice is caused by overloading the liver with pigment.
Large-scale destruction of red blood cells, from any of a variety of
causes, results in anemia. Rh disease, or erythroblastosis fetalis, is
a hemolytic disease of newborns caused by an immune reaction between
fetal red blood cells and maternal antibodies to them. Some hemolytic
conditions, e.g., those in which red blood cells are fragile and
rupture easily, are treated by removal of the spleen to slow cell
breakdown or by administration of steroids. Autoimmune hemolytic
conditions result from splenomegaly. The spleen not only sequesters
red blood cells, but produces antibodies against the body's red blood
cells. This is a potentially lethal condition that occurs more often
in women than men.

Mudra was asking about this and so since I have the Info - I will Post it even though I do not really want to with what It likely means to Health in the Gulf Area...

Volatile Organic Compounds in Gulf of Mexico Air Samples as found by EPA

Hydrogen Sulfide > Allowable Limits = 5 to 10 ppb (Parts Per Billion) > Current Readings = 1200 ppb



Benzene > Allowable Limits = 0 to 4 ppb > Current Readings = 3000 ppb



Methylene Chloride > Allowable Limits = 61 ppb > Current Readings = 3000 to 3400 ppb



I am simply stunned. Not much to say after this...

Add the above to the likely Collapse of the Bore Hole being Imminent / Then following that the Collapse of the Well Proper / Then the Batholith under It causing additional havoc if It erupts with Sea Water rushing in to fill the Hole as Pressures equalizes. All of this too with that Chamber likely being at a Temperatures of 400+ Degrees Fahrenheit. At any rate - You get the Picture...

Dispersants have not been the first line of defense for oil spill cleanup in the US
because dispersants present toxicity threats and health threats to those applying the products." uspoly.com/dispersit

Do you know the 10 Experimental Chemicals used during the Exxon Valdez oil spill cleanup?

(Which of these 10? Do you have any more info? )

How much poison C₆H₁₄O₂/CH₃(CH₂)₂CH₂OCH₂CH₂OHin each of these?

Began summer 1989 - many untested technologies used

Human Toxicity abstract excerpts on CNS





EPA's Technical Bulletin leaves
something to be desired *
*



Is

Dennis Kelso

OK

today?

He checked a recently 'inipoled' beach end of 1989 season.


... or Coast
Guard Vice Adm. Clyde Robbins, the on-scene coordinator for the
spill
cleanup - now retired?

...
looking for the workers of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup!



Looking
for volunteers - to check your health


Contact
*
regarding
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Cleanup Workers



www.valdezlink.com/inipol




Tribute to those
no longer with us
*

Toxic Undersea Oil Plumes Lurk in Gulf of Mexico (Update2)
June 08, 2010,
By Jessica Resnick-Ault

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-08/toxic-undersea-oil-plumes-lurk-in-gulf-of-mexico-update2-.html

June 8 (Bloomberg) -- Undersea clouds of oil that kill marine life have spread for miles in the Gulf of Mexico from BP Plc’s leaking Macondo well, according to data released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration today.

Water samples collected by the R/V Weatherbird II vessel have confirmed biodegraded crude oil in two undersea layers as far as 40 nautical miles northeast of BP’s seabed leak, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco said at a press briefing. The vessel’s samples show oil as deep as 3,300 feet in the water, Lubchenco said.

“The bottom line is that yes, there is oil in the water column, it’s at very low concentrations, and we will continue to release those data as soon as they are available,” Lubchenco said at a press conference held jointly with Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. “That doesn’t mean that it does not have significant impact.”

Researchers have said the oil slick washing ashore is a small portion of what has leaked and the undersea crude can wipe out marine life while remaining invisible from the surface. Lubchenco said not enough data is available to determine the quantity of oil below the surface. However, she said oil was found at volumes of 0.5 parts per million in the cloud to the northeast of the leak.

‘No Evidence’

The tests are the second confirmation of the existence of oil plumes in the Gulf, which BP Chief Executive Officer Tony Hayward has disputed. Research by Samantha Joye at the University of Georgia, and analyzed at Texas A&M University, also confirmed the presence of undersea oil.

Hayward said June 6 that there was “no evidence” of the plumes in the Gulf of Mexico. The company is waiting for confirmation from NOAA and the Environmental Protection Agency, Robert Wine, a BP spokesman in Houston, said in a telephone interview yesterday.

NOAA and the University of South Florida held a joint press conference this afternoon with more information on the undersea oil. NOAA Chief Science Advisor Steve Murawski said the oil is not in continuous plumes, but is broken up in cloud-like patterns.

‘Invisible’ Oil

Ernst Peebles, a University of South Florida professor who was aboard the Weatherbird, said oil was found in the water across 22 nautical miles of sampling area. While the oil was ‘invisible’ to the naked eye, it was detectible with analysis, he said.

The university’s scientists found oil in two layers of the ocean at 400 meters and 1,000 meters. They tracked the plumes for tens of kilometers, starting 35 kilometers north-northeast of the well, said Vickie Chachere, a university spokeswoman.

BP didn’t immediately return a phone call seeking comment on NOAA’s confirmation of the new data.

The concentrations at more shallow depths were identified as having come from BP’s leaking well, Lubchenco said. The scientists were not able to find conclusive evidence that the deeper concentrations came from the well, she said. Water samples taken 142 nautical miles to the southeast of the well were not consistent with the spill, she said.

“These are huge volumes of oil, many kilometers of oil, and to have oil in many cubic kilometers of water suggests a very significant total amount,” said Ian MacDonald, an oceanographer at Florida State University in Tallahassee, who is doing separate research on the spill.

Ocean Slices

MacDonald estimates the well is leaking 26,500 barrels to 30,000 barrels a day, six times more than the figure that BP and the government used from April 28 to May 27. The company has captured 14,842 barrels in the last 24 hours, Allen said today.

Additional data will allow researchers to produce images of slices of the ocean similar to those produced by magnetic resonance imaging machines used by doctors. The data will allow the scientists to determine crude concentrations in the different slices, Lubchenco said. The NOAA vessel Gordon Gunter has returned to shore and is analyzing its findings. A second research ship, the Thomas Jefferson, is collecting additional samples, she said.

Hayward said June 6 oil naturally floats in water, and that crude seen deep in the water was in the process of making its way to the surface, according to reports in the Associated Press.

Chemical Dispersants

Scientists maintain that oil could have become trapped in the water due to the company’s unprecedented application of chemical dispersants, natural phenomenon, or a combination of the two.

BP has applied more than a million gallons of dispersant to the spill, and has almost another half-million gallons on hand to apply if needed, according to a statement from the Unified Command made up of BP and U.S. Coast Guard officials. The dispersants have been applied to oil at the surface, as well as to crude gushing out of the well on the sea floor.

The dispersants may have caused the crude oil to sink more than it normally would have.

“There would be a threshold where putting dispersant in the oil would modify the viscosity,” said Nicholas Wienders, a professor in the oceanography department at Florida State University. If the viscosity of the oil was changed, it could react differently to the ocean’s circulation, and behave in ways not normally expected, he said.

Trapped Oil

Natural density differences in water layers could also have trapped the oil, said Nancy Rabalais, executive director of the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium.

The pressure being applied to crude surging out of the well may also change its dispersion, said MacDonald of Florida State University.

As the oil is forced out of the broken pipe at hundreds of miles an hour, it hits the relatively lower-pressure area near the sea floor that breaks the oil into particles about the thickness of a human hair, MacDonald said. Their small size, exposure to significant pressure, and cold temperatures near the sea floor may all contribute to oil sinking, he said.

‘Derelict’ in Duty

“There is no scientific doubt about the processes that would form mid-water plumes,” he said. BP and the Coast Guard haven’t gauged the pressure of the leaking oil, making it more difficult for scientists to predict and track plumes, said MacDonald. “It’s another example of both BP and the government being derelict in their duty,” he said.

Captain Brent “Hollywood” Shaver, 59, who operates a charter fishing boat in Florida and Alabama waters, laughed when asked about BP’s comment that there aren’t underwater oil plumes.

“They’re crazy,” he said in a June 7 interview. “You know, when you spill diesel fuel in the water they always tell you not to put dish soap on it because it just makes it sink. That’s what is happening here. It’s sinking.”

Love Always
mudra

Signs of protest against BP in several areas





Here one brave man stands alone



Love Always
mudra

Gulf Oil Spill Workers Report Health Problems

By Amanda Gardner
HealthDay Reporter
THURSDAY, June 3 (HealthDay News) --

With the giant oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico now in its sixth week, reports of clean-up workers falling ill are on the rise.

"Within the past week, we've seen a number of workers hospitalized. That's new," said Dr. Gina Solomon, a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

More than a dozen workers have been treated at local medical centers for flu-like symptoms ranging from chest pain to dizziness, nausea and headaches, presumably due to exposure to different chemicals emanating from the slick, according to news reports.

The Unified Command in Louisiana -- a coalition of government agencies that includes the U.S. Coast Guard, the Department of the Interior and the National Parks Service -- last week called back to shore 125 boats helping with the clean-up after medical complaints from crew members.

"The reports that we've heard from hospitals and doctors have been [that the symptoms are due to] inhaled irritant exposure, but they've not gone so far as to say what exactly they think the responsible agent might be," Solomon said. "The workers are widely blaming the dispersants."

Dispersants are chemicals used for the oil clean-up. The solvent used after the massive 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill off the Alaska coast, for example, was limonene, which can cause skin inflammation and asthma, said Robert Emery, vice president for safety, health, environment and risk management at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

"There's no doubt that people are getting sick out there [in the Gulf of Mexico]," Emery said. "The key question is what is it that is causing them to get sick."

BP's Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank in the Gulf of Mexico about 40 miles south of Louisiana on April 20, killing 11 workers and spewing an estimated 21 million to 45 million gallons of crude oil into the water.

BP and the U.S. Coast Guard have said dehydration, heat, food poisoning or other unrelated factors may have caused the workers' symptoms. The Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals is investigating, the Associated Press reported.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports that "air quality levels for ozone and particulates are normal on the Gulf coastline for this time of year." But, the agency added, it has detected some "odor-causing pollutants associated with petroleum products along the coastline at low levels." These chemicals could cause headache, nausea and throat irritation.

There have been few studies that have examined the long-term health risks of exposure to oil. Brief contact with small amounts of light crude oil and dispersants aren't thought to be harmful, the AP reported. But, extended exposure to dispersants can cause central nervous system problems, or damage to the blood, the kidney, or the liver, and leave a metallic taste in the mouth, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The unprecedented size and duration of this spill makes it unsettling, Solomon said.

"It's pretty much in every sense a historical spill," Solomon said. "Previous spills have all happened over a relatively short period of time and then the clean-up effort has mostly been on what's called weathered oil" -- oil that's been floating on the surface of water for some period of time.

"In this case, we still have fresh oil bubbling up from underwater, which is a completely different situation than has ever been seen before," she said. "Approximately 40% of crude oil evaporates within several hours of reaching the surface of the water. It ends up airborne. It's really a problem for people who are working out there, especially those closest to where oil is surfacing."

Clean-up workers are being advised to follow federal guidelines that recommend that anyone involved wear protective equipment such as gloves, safety glasses and clothing, the AP said.

BP CEO Tony Hayward has said the symptoms that workers are reporting -- dizziness, headaches, coughing -- could be due to any number of causes, including diesel fumes, exhaustion and heat from wearing Tyvek safety suits.



It is appalling that amongst the federal guidelines they mention wearing a mask is'nt mandatory

Love Always
mudra

does anyone know if WATCHER has come back? is he ok?... i read that he was in contact w the "Elders"...can he ask them if they will intervene in some way and help w the spill?

dolphin wrote:can he ask them if they will intervene in some way and help w the spill?

Do we deserve it? It's just a rhetorical question. :)

are we ready not to use oil (petrol) anymore?? even I don`t have a car need oil to heat my room in winter.!!
Ihope some of the bene good ET`s would help but than the humanity will continue like before
most of people did not recognized the disaster till now. they think it will stop somehow!!???
that is why the ETs will do nothing they can`t !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i think i already knew the answer to that one...just eternal optimist i guess.

Documents show BP chose a less-expensive, less-reliable method for completing well in Gulf oil spill

By Kevin Spear, Orlando Sentinel

Oil company BP used a cheaper, quicker but potentially less dependable method to complete the drilling of the Deepwater Horizon well, according to several experts and documents obtained by the Orlando Sentinel.

"There are clear alternatives to the methods BP used that most engineers in the drilling business would consider much more reliable and safer," said F.E. Beck, a petroleum-engineering professor at Texas A&M University who testified recently before a U.S. Senate committee investigating BP's blown-out well in the Gulf of Mexico.

He and other petroleum and drilling engineers who reviewed a log of the Deepwater Horizon's activities obtained by the Sentinel described BP's choice of well design as one in which the final phase called for a 13,293-foot-long length of permanent pipe, called "casing," to be locked in place with a single injection of cement that can often turn out to be problematic.

A different approach more commonly used in the hazardous geology of the Gulf involves installing a section of what the industry calls a "liner," then locking both the liner and a length of casing in place with one or, often, two cement jobs that are less prone to failure.


The BP well "is not a design we would use," said one veteran deep-water engineer, who would comment only if not identified because of his high-profile company's prohibition on speaking publicly about the April 20 explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon or the oil spill that started when the drilling rig sank two days later.

He estimated that the liner design, used nearly all the time by his company, is more reliable and safer than a casing design by a factor of "tenfold."

But that engineer and several others said that, had BP used a liner and casing, it would have taken nearly a week longer for the company to finish the well — with rig costs running at $533,000 a day and additional personnel and equipment costs that might have run the tab up to $1 million daily.

BP PLC spokesman Toby Odone in Houston said the London-based company chooses between the casing and liner methods on a "well-by-well basis" and that the casing-only method is "not uncommon."

Investigators and Congress have already homed in on a series of suspected instances of recklessness or poor maintenance aboard the Deepwater Horizon — looking, for example, at why the well's blowout preventer failed. Those instances, taken together, may have weakened the rig's defenses and fueled the April 20 explosion on the rig, which killed 11 workers and caused the biggest offshore-drilling spill in U.S. history.

Many of the experts interviewed by the Sentinel for this report, including Beck, would not directly criticize BP's choice of well design because some site-specific factors might still not be publicly known. But those experts provided extensive details about, and insight into, the company's chosen approach for completing the well versus the alternative method that's more commonly used by drillers in the Gulf.

Several other major companies active in the Gulf of Mexico, including Shell, Chevron and Marathon, declined to comment on their well designs.

"We're confident that the incident is being thoroughly investigated and findings will be communicated across the industry to prevent such events from occurring in the future," said Shell spokeswoman Kelly op de Weegh in Houston.

Formidable

Hunting for enormously rich deposits of oil and natural gas in deepwater regions of the Gulf of Mexico entails some of the most formidable drilling in the world. And BP's ill-fated Macondo exploratory well had more than its share of trouble and warning signs, according to the rig's activity log, or "well ticket."

Drilling began last year on Oct. 7, in water 4,992 feet deep and nearly 50 miles southeast of the tip of Louisiana's Mississippi River delta.

The first 4,023 feet of drilling was done by the rig Marianas, owned by the Switzerland-based Transocean Ltd. But a month later, that rig was damaged by Hurricane Ida and towed to a shipyard. Transocean's Deepwater Horizon, fresh from drilling a record-deep well elsewhere in the Gulf, arrived to take over by early February.

The rig, weighing about as much as the 900-foot-long Titanic and considered one of the most capable drilling vessels in the world, almost immediately encountered some of the problems for which the Gulf is known.

Beneath the Gulf's seafloor is a mush of sand, shale and salt in formations that are geologically young, unsettled and fragile. Coupled with that are layers of sand that hold crude oil and natural gas under high pressure.

For rigs such as Deepwater Horizon, drilling a Gulf well means working between a dangerous rock and a risky hard place.

While boring into the Earth's crust, a rig pumps a chemical slurry called "mud" down the center of the drill pipe. The mud exits through the drill bit in a blast that washes cuttings out of the freshly cut hole and back up to the rig.

Mud plays another critical role: It often weighs significantly more than seawater, and so it serves as a kind of liquid plug that can hold pressurized reservoirs of natural gas and crude oil within their formations.

If oil and gas show alarming signs of wanting to "kick" up and out of the well, as they did twice on Deepwater Horizon — once temporarily and later catastrophically — drillers can call for a heavier mud.

In many of the world's petroleum regions, heavier mud will counteract the threat of a blowout. In the Gulf of Mexico, however, it can and often does make matters worse.

Pumping heavy mud into a deepwater well in the Gulf runs the risk of fracturing fragile layers of sand and shale. If that happens, mud can quickly vanish into subterranean voids and leave a rig increasingly defenseless against a blowout.

"The deepwater Gulf of Mexico is an especially challenging place to drill," said John Rogers Smith, a professor in Louisiana State University's department of petroleum engineering.

Geology won

The classic and potentially perilous duel for drillers in the Gulf is to maintain a mud weight that keeps pressurized gas and oil underground but doesn't crack open fragile formations.

According to the Deepwater Horizon's well ticket, that struggle defined almost every foot of progress made by the rig — until the Gulf's geology finally won.

In late February, the rig was losing mud in a weak formation, according to the well ticket. Among the variety of tricks drillers have at their disposal when that happens, the most reliable is to continually reinforce a well with permanent sections of casing or with liner and cement. Deepwater Horizon did that nine times.

In early March, the rig experienced a double dose of trouble, according to the well ticket: The pressure of the underground petroleum temporarily overwhelmed the mud, triggering alarms on the rig. At nearly the same time, the rig's drill pipe and drill bit became stuck in the well.

Just one or the other of those occurrences would amount to a bad day for any rig.

Deepwater Horizon recovered, but only after losing hundreds of feet of drilling pipe — likely at an equipment cost of several million dollars — and losing nearly two weeks of rig time.

The rig then progressed an additional 4,955 feet before again losing mud to a weak formation.

By mid-April, Deepwater Horizon reached the well's total depth of 18,360 feet — more than 3 miles — where it again encountered a formation that swallowed mud.

Rig workers twice lowered measuring instruments connected to steel cable into the well. The tools should have passed smoothly to the bottom, but instead they hit obstacles near the bottom — more evidence of an unstable well.

Petroleum engineers who reviewed the rig's well ticket and other documents said drilling the well appears to have been more difficult than usual, though not beyond what current technology and extra care are capable of handling.

After rig workers ran the final section of casing into the well, they opted to fix it in place with cement modified to have foamlike consistency. That makes the cement lighter and less likely to fracture or break weak formations and, as can happen with overly heavy mud, drain away into underground voids.

At that point, said the big-oil engineer who reviewed the ticket, rig workers must have been "jumping for joy" at having completed a stubborn well and discovering petroleum. Based on the array of measuring instruments lowered into the well — and detailed by the well ticket — the rig had most likely made a significant discovery.

But among the several possible errors and failures involving the Deepwater Horizon well, that final cement job is widely suspected of having broken down, allowing oil and gas to erupt up into the rig. That is what apparently occurred as rig workers were pumping out the well's costly and reusable mud — the liquid plug — and replacing it with seawater.

The well ticket's last entry states: "10:00 PM 4-20-10, EXPLOSION & FIRE."

More options

Engineers interviewed by the Sentinel said it's common knowledge among drillers operating in the Gulf of Mexico that final cement jobs are rarely perfect and often badly flawed. That's a key reason, they said, why many of them rely on a liner to complete a well: It offers more options for injecting, testing and repairing cement, and so is more effective at keeping petroleum under control.

While complicated to explain, using a liner can have the additional benefit of installing extra barriers deep in the well to prevent an uncontrolled flow of gas and oil to the surface. Whether there were enough, effective secondary barriers in the BP well is likely to draw much scrutiny in coming weeks and months.

U.S. Minerals Management Service regulations leave the choice between a liner or casing to the drillers. That may change as many industry practices are examined by various investigators and task forces.

"I would expect there to be some pretty significant implications in terms of blowout preventers, regulation, redundancy, safety, those sorts of things," BP chief executive Tony Hayward said during a recent media briefing.

Love Always
mudra

BP Well Bore/Casing Integrity Issues and Senator Nelson’s Statements
By: bmaz Monday June 14,

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/06/14/bp-well-bore-integrity-nelson-statements/

One week ago, on the morning of June 7, I wrote about questions on the substantive physical integrity of the BP Macondo well casing and bore, and statements by Florida’s Senator Bill Nelson on the same, as well as potential resulting seepage from the sea floor surrounding the well head. To say the least it raised a few eyebrows.
I have again attached the FDL video from the appearance Nelson made on the Andrea Mitchell MSNBC show where he became the first official to materially discuss the game changing issue of sea floor seepage from a structurally compromised well below the surface. Since Nelson first made the statements and raised the questions, I have spoken to his office several times.

Here is a quote given directly to Emptywheel/Firedoglake by Senator Nelson:

Why do scientists and others suspect the well casing is breached beneath the seafloor? Well, for one, in one of my briefings I learned that a lot of mud used in the so-called “top kill” attempt didn’t come back up after it was pumped down there.

Clearly, from Senator Nelson’s quote, he has received multiple briefings in addition to the information in the public domain, and he is hearing other private disturbing reports. Quite frankly, this should be of no shock in light of that which is, and was, already in the public domain. In this post, mindful of the fact there is likely a wealth we in the public do not yet know, I would like to delve into the public evidence Senator Nelson was relying on and why this is an issue that should, and must, remain squarely in the forefront of public and media conscience.

First off, it is clear Senator Nelson’s measured statements to Andrea Mitchell were not an off the cuff or uninformed gaffe by Nelson. Quite the contrary, he and his staff had been probing the issue of the integrity of the well bore long prior to the MSNBC appearance. On June 2, Sen. Nelson directed the following correspondence to BP:

June 2, 2010

Mr. Lamar McKay
Chairman and president, BP America, Inc.
501 Westlake Park Boulevard
Houston, Texas 77079

Dear Mr. McKay:

I understand the priority of your company right now is capping the Deepwater Horizon well. But new information about the accident has come to light in two recently published accounts that raise serious questions I hope you can promptly address.

Specifically, a recent Wall Street Journal account indicates that BP altered the design of the Deepwater Horizon well even up to five or six days before the rig exploded. And one of these design decisions, according to drilling experts cited in the Journal, could have left the well more vulnerable to the blowout that occurred April 20.

Also, a Washington Post report cites sources including a BP official saying that sometime during or after the recent abortive top kill operation, new damage was discovered inside the underground well. Some of the drilling mud that was forced into the well was moving sidewise into rock formations, sources told the newspaper.

If the sourced information is accurate and mud leaked out the side of the well casing, oil and gas likely are leaking beneath the seafloor as well, according to Professor Ian R. MacDonald, an oceanography expert at Florida State University who advised my staff.

Both of the published accounts, then, raise serious questions. Please address these accounts and provide my staff with any and all information and documents regarding the following:

· The discovery of breaks or leaks in the well casing beneath the seafloor;
· Records of any monitoring BP is undertaking of the Deepwater Horizon wellbore for structural integrity;
· Records of any monitoring of the seafloor surrounding the Deepwater Horizon well, including any geological or geophysical information showing changes in the formations within the proximity of the Deepwater Horizon well;
· Records reflecting whether any oil, natural gas, or residual drilling mud might be migrating to the seafloor beyond the boundaries of the casing, including any analysis of how this might impact the drilling of two relief wells or other methods to mitigate the flow of oil;
· All documents related to BP’s casing strategies for wells in the Macondo prospect.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Sincerely,

Bill Nelson

The first of the two articles Nelson relies on in his June 2 correspondence to BP is from the Washington Post on May 31, 2010. After noting that drilling experts were afraid the failed “Top Kill” attempt by BP, which involved shooting drilling mud down through the heavily damaged blow out preventer (BOP) and into the well “might have done further damage to the well”, the Post article stated:

Sources at two companies involved with the well said that BP also discovered new damage inside the well below the seafloor and that, as a result, some of the drilling mud that was successfully forced into the well was going off to the side into rock formations.

“We discovered things that were broken in the sub-surface,” said a BP official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. He said that mud was making it “out to the side, into the formation.” The official said he could not describe what was damaged in the well.

Therein lies the issue at the heart of the issue regarding the lack of well integrity; with the Post citing multiple (if some unnamed) sources confirming the well casing was completely breached to such an extent that, when the Top Kill attempt was made, they lost drilling mud out through the breached casing, well walls and into the surrounding rock formation. Now the other thing I find absolutely fascinating about this Washington Post article in the discussion of Dr. Steven Chu and the Department of Energy (DOE) tucked in toward the end:

“At the end of the day, the government tells BP what to do, and at the end of the day, we will hold BP accountable for all of this,” she said.

She also sought to portray the administration as in charge and engaged. She said an administration “brain trust” led by Energy Secretary Steven Chu urged BP to stop adding pressure to the well through the top-kill maneuver because “things could happen that would make the situation worse.”

But she stopped short on CBS of saying that Chu ordered an end to the top-kill maneuver.



Well, Carol Browner may have “stopped short” of saying that Dr. Chu and the DOE were the ones who ordered the premature termination of the ill fated Top Kill attempt by BP, but it is pretty clear that is exactly what happened.

A decent question is by what mechanism did Chu and DOE come to be so in the middle and calling the shots on the Top Kill operation? Not that DOE has no interest, but MMS/Department of Interior are the lessors, and generally the well operation authority, for the government for this area of the Gulf; why is DOE micro-managing well operations? A copy of the actual BP lease for the Macondo Well at Mississippi Canyon 252 is here. And who else from DOE beside Steven Chu was tasked to this “brain trust” and calling shots for the BP Macondo catastrophe reclamation effort? What information and evidence regarding the compromised and blown state of the Macondo Well are they still withholding from the public? Oh, and another thing, under the terms of the lease, BP was, and is, supposed to be providing weekly reports, well logs and other information to MMS. Where is all that information, and why is none of it, apparently, available to the public?

The Wall Street Journal article Nelson cited only reinforces the the above facts, issues and questions, but also gives a view of how rickety the BP casing work was on its Macondo well, why there was an almost immediate blowout and why it is a given there is little, if any, integrity of the well bore:

By April 14, when BP filed the first of three permits that would later be amended, the London-based oil company had already faced many problems with the well, including losing costly drilling fluid and fighting back natural gas that tried to force its way into the well. The problems had caused BP to use eight pieces of steel pipe to seal the well, rather than the planned six pieces. The permit filed on April 14 dealt with the eighth and final section, which hadn’t yet been installed in the well.

BP had hoped to get a 9 7/8-inch pipe—big enough to handle a lot of oil and gas—into the reservoir. But for the final section, the largest pipe they could fit was a 7-inch pipe. The company had to decide whether to use a single piece of pipe that reached all the way from the sea floor down to the oil reservoir, or use two pipes, one inside the other.

The two-pipe method was the safer option, according to many industry experts, because it would have provided an extra layer of protection against gas traveling up the outside of the well to the surface. Gene Beck, a longtime industry engineer and a professor at Texas A&M University, said the two-pipe method is “more or less the gold standard,” especially for high-pressure wells such as the one BP was drilling.

But the one-pipe option was easier and faster, likely taking a week less time than the two-pipe method. BP was spending about $1 million per day to operate the Deepwater Horizon.
……
At 9:54 a.m. on April 15 BP filed another permit informing the MMS of a correction. Rather than using a 7-inch-wide pipe the whole way, it planned to run a tapered pipe that was wider at the top than at the bottom. This was approved by the MMS seven minutes later.

Then, at 2:35 p.m., BP filed another revision. This one informed the MMS that it had “inadvertently” omitted mention of a section of pipe already in the well. Four and one-half minutes later, MMS approved this permit also.

Last year, the MMS floated a proposal to require all companies to “document and analyze” all major changes. BP responded during a comment period that the proposed safety rules were unnecessary.

Less than five days and a whole lot more warning signs later, the Macondo well had blown, the Deepwater Horizon rig had exploded and was on fire and the biggest environmental disaster in American history was well underway. And now, 55 days later, and a series of ever more destructive and futile attempts to stanch the flow of hydrocarbon from the mouth of the Macondo, we stand with a well head leaking more than ever into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico and its fragile ecosystem. Not to mention serious concerns as to whether the oil and gas pollutants are also seeping up from the immediately surrounding sea floor.

To return to the original issue of this post, it appears quite clear Florida’s Senator Bill Nelson was on very solid ground with his statements about the compromised state of the Macondo well casing and well bore walls, there is a record of everyone from BP officials to government officials to drilling professionals to outside experts agreeing on the substantial loss of well integrity. The only part of the well that appears to still have any known integrity is the cement collar immediately below the well head, and there is little reason to believe even that will necessarily remain intact under the circumstances.

The only question at this point whether or not there has been seepage or leakage detected from the sea floor surrounding the Macondo well head as suggested by Senator Nelson and Professor MacDonald and, if so, to what extent. Senator Nelson and the public are entitled to answers from BP, and for that matter from the Obama Administration and its officials, to the material and germane questions raised in Nelson’s June 2 letter to BP, and they are entitled to them immediately. Lastly, the Obama Administration, the DOE and its head Steven Chu, and BP should all explain exactly what role each played in the ill fated Top Kill and Junk Shot operations, and why the DOE, and through what agents, was so centrally involved in the Top Kill/Junk Shot and what damage they caused to the Macondo well structure in the process.


Love Always
mudra

dolphin wrote: i read that he was in contact w the "Elders"...can he ask them if they will intervene in some way and help w the spill?

Remember brother we bought our ticket to this place well in advance .
The Elders said " Children are you sure you want to go ? Things may look quite different once you arrive in 3D .
Shall we give you a hand ?
And as good teenagers we said " NO , that is'nt necessary ,we can handle it by our own . It's a piece of cake . We are no kids any longer "

And that was a Done deal .

The Elders trust us and know we are going to make it to the other side of the veil .



Love from me
mudra

Announcements :

Announcement :

Friends here is the portal Floyd opened just opened for us to discuss the practical side of the situation in the gulf . Here we deal we real problems at hand and find effective solutions to them.
Everyone concerned and eager to help is welcome to participate.

http://newearthpioneers.forumotion.com/forum.htm

Love from me
mudra

if you don't mind, here are some excerpts from barbara marcinak's book, EARTH.

( some profound messages for what we are going through now. i just wnated to share some of these. i'm amazed at how appropriate it is right now. it's hard to decide which are best bec. every page seems so relevant. also talks about how to handle the intense energy from the sun, to integrate it as w time speeding up.
http://www.pleiadians.com/)

"The times are changing, and it is not for you to panic over what is coming. It is time for you to feel the exhilaration inside your being. The time you have been waiting for, your purpose, is on the cusp of being fulfilled. We remind you that you are the Family of Light, and millions of you are on assignment on Earth at this time. As members of the Family of Light, you each carry the ability to pull the light frequency into your body and disperse it onto the Earth plane. In this way Earth herself, a viable living creature, can move into her own transition and die to an old order.

Some of you are petrified that Earth is dying. You want to build a big wall to stop the death of Earth and the deterioration of the environment. In actuality, all the events that seemingly are distasteful, difficult, and heinous, create the impetus that is needed to move and activate Earth's six billion people into change"

Many of you are very disturbed by the masses of people that continue to choose to kill and go to war. We remind you that those who believe in this experience will create it and seek it out. You can exist in a parallel reality simultaneously with this and not attract it to yourself. There is a great cleansing that is occurring, and you cannot stop it.

Those systems that do not work are indeed falling apart, and you will be rattled to the core of your being to find something that will work and that values Earth. If you cannot take care of your home then perhaps you do not deserve one."

"Humans who do not operate with love of self and love of the planet will be departing in vast numbers very quickly after exposure to the rays entering Earth. This is part of the electromagnetic change of the civilization. In death, the human vehicle moves consciousness in to another realm."

mudra wrote:The only question at this point whether or not there has been seepage or leakage detected from the sea floor surrounding the Macondo well head as suggested by Senator Nelson and Professor MacDonald and, if so, to what extent.

"Ask and Yee shall receive...

If One has not the Answer - All They need do is ask and It shall be delivered unto Them..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGxGVGiD3yk

BP Death clouds already onshore ! Benzine 3400 ppb ( part per billion )