University of Georgia report reveals 80% of oil from BP spill remains in Gulf
The report was announced Monday, the same day the fall shrimping season began in the Gulf of Mexico.
The report, authored by five prominent marine scientists, strongly contradicts media reports that suggest that only 25 percent of the oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill remains.
"One major misconception is that oil that has dissolved into water is gone and, therefore, harmless," said Charles Hopkinson, director of Georgia Sea Grant and professor of marine sciences in the University of Georgia Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. "The oil is still out there, and it will likely take years to completely degrade. We are still far from a complete understanding of what its impacts are."
The group analyzed data from the Aug. 2 National Incident Command Report, which calculated an “oil budget” that was widely interpreted to suggest that only 25 percent of the oil from the spill remained.
Hopkinson notes that the reports arrive at different conclusions largely because the Sea Grant and UGA scientists estimate that the vast majority of the oil classified as dispersed, dissolved or residual is still present, whereas the NIC report has been interpreted to suggest that only the "residual" form of oil is still present.
Hopkinson said that his group also estimated how much of the oil could have evaporated, degraded or weathered as of the date of the report. Using a range of reasonable evaporation and degradation estimates, the group calculated that 70-79 percent of oil spilled into the Gulf still remains. The group showed that it was impossible for all the dissolved oil to have evaporated because only oil at the surface of the ocean can evaporate into the atmosphere and large plumes of oil are trapped in deep water.
Another difference is that the NIC report estimates that 4.9 million barrels of oil were released from the wellhead, while the Sea Grant report uses a figure of 4.1 million barrels since .8 million barrels were piped directly from the well to surface ships and, therefore, never entered Gulf waters.
On a positive note, the group noted that natural processes continue to transform, dilute, degrade and evaporate the oil. They add that circular current known as the Franklin Eddy is preventing the Loop Current from bringing oil-contaminated water from the Gulf to the Atlantic, which bodes well for the East Coast.
Joye said that both the NIC report and the Sea Grant report are best estimates and emphasizes the need for a sustained and coordinated research effort to better understand the impacts of what has become the world's worst maritime oil spill. She warned that neither report accounted for hydrocarbon gasses such as methane in their oil budgets.
"That's a gaping hole," Joye said, "because hydrocarbon gasses are a huge portion of what was ejected from the well."
Source: uga.edu / UGA News Service
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MEDIA CONTACT:
S. Smith (504) 593-9600
C. Brylski/H. Harper (504) 897-6110 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (504) 897-6110 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
August 16, 2010
News from Stuart Smith, Attorney Smith Stag LLC
Independent toxicologists issue warning:
We object to the FDA Claim that chemical dispersants have a low potential for accumulating in seafood and do not pose a public health concern Attorney Stuart H. Smith, representing the United Commercial Fishermen’s Association, the Louisiana Environmental Action Network, public and private entities, and citizens harmed by the BP oil catastrophe, today issued this statement:
“Independent analysis by toxicologists dispute FDA claims made in the last few days that chemical dispersants used by BP during the oil catastrophe may not accumulate in seafood.
“In fact, in a full report by Dr. Bill Sawyer released today, there is a grave problem caused by dispersants, due to the fact that these were used in deep waters and on such a vast scale.
“Studies of other spills show that the toxic components of crude oil ‘bio-accumulate’ into the food chain and become highly toxic to marine reproduction and harmful when consumed by humans, even when dispersants are applied at the surface and the chemical toxins may be sufficiently diluted over time to pose only minimal risks.
“However, BP’s use of dispersants deep underwater in the Gulf, and on such a vast scale, represents the first time dispersants have been used in this manner. The greatly-reduced biodegradation in the DEEPWATER HORIZON case, resulting from lack of sunlight, extreme cold temperatures at 5000 feet, and other environmental factors significantly reduce the rate at which the dispersed crude components are degraded.
“Eight months would be required to remove 96 percent of the petroleum under ideal conditions, thus we can only assume what remains in the Gulf waters will be a ‘toxic soup’ of chemicals for the foreseeable future, due to the worst-case scenario which has unfolded.
“The most potentially dangerous of the components in the Gulf’s toxic soup are ‘polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons’ (PAHs), dangerous cancer-causing chemicals which slowly break down after being ingested by marine life, persist in marine organisms and can be passed to both humans and other wildlife through consumption.
“PAHs are not contained within the dispersants used, but rather, have been extracted from the BP crude and suspended in the water column via dispersant use.
“It must also be noted that the deep water National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Weatherbird analyses and our own near shore water, tunicate and beach samples have revealed a consistent pattern of dispersant-induced C19-C36 hydrocarbons and PAHs. Unfortunately, these specific PAHs are of the most toxic variety. Clearly, analyses of seafood in impacted regions require additional testing for PAH uptake protective of human carcinogenic potential.
“It is important that the public be vigilant and educate itself to these risks, as further compounding this misinformation from FDA are published news reports which show the government trying to discount university studies about the toxicity of the Gulf water column and seafood, and denying the continued use of dispersant spraying off the coast of Florida.”
FOR MORE INFORMATION: www.smithstag.com or www.oilspillaction.com
COMMENT:
One Response to “FDA Claims about Dispersants Challenged”
- Don says:
I cannot imagine many worse case scenario’s than this described above. I must again ask this question. Where is the criminal investigations by the states ordered by the Governors into the actions of both federal authorities and BP? I don’t even want to hear that states can’t prosecute federal empolyees under some federal exemption clause because no person, no comapany, no government official is above the law when it comes to deliberate criminal actions such as using these dispersants which I know was hotly contested early on.
It is dereliction of their sworn duty for these state officials not to seek criminal and civil penalties against all those who had a hand in making the decision to use this dispersant at all and or gave cover for its use let alone in the massive qunatities that they did.
It’s time for some real action called guts in office not words. I certainly would not allow this to go on in Pennsylvania as its Governor and there would certainly be a very huge standoff over who trumps who when it comes to state sovereignty. I’d use what ever means were at my disposal as Governor as outlined in our Commonwealths Constitution and I mean everything and our Pennsylvania Constitution makes it clear what powers I have and who I can call up.
- Mystery Dispersant STILL being sprayed, Agenda 21 Continues
- Obama Swims in Gulf – or Maybe Not
- Dead Fish All Over the East Coast, Lack of Oxygen or Toxic Dispersant?
- Shrimp Covered in Oil Found in BP Gulf Oil Spill Waters Being Opened for Fishing
- Videos: Jindal Calls Obama’s Actions in Gulf a ‘War’ on Louisiana
No comments:
Post a Comment