The Long-term Environmental Consequences of the BP Oil Disaster
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-05-25/long-term-environmental-consequences-bp-oil-disaster
Oil in the South Pass area of Louisiana, April 2010
Petty Officer 1st Class Jesse Kavanaugh for the U.S. Coast Guard via Flickr
Oil from the BP disaster has entered currents that will likely carry it out into the Atlantic Ocean and possibly up the East Coast. Scientists on the long-term environmental consequences of the disaster.
Guests
Douglas Rader
chief oceans scientist, Environmental Defense Fund.
Jackie Savitz
pollution campaign director, senior scientist,
Oceana
Carys Louise Mitchelmore
associate professor, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
William Hogarth
dean, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida,
former administrator for fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I'm wondering if you can talk about the dispersant Corexit 9500 that has been used in the Gulf....For starters, is it banned in Europe? I've read that it has been banned, but not on authoritative/official sites. I've read that the EPA now wants BP to stop using it and to use less toxic and more effective dispersants . I've also read that EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said it was not "as bad" as an earlier formulation of the product, used in the early days of the spill. (I've also read in the NYT that BP officials sit on the board of the company that makes Corexit and that BP bought about 1/3 of the world's supply of Corexit 9500 after the spill. I suppose its availability in mass quanties is part of the reason it was used. )
What is the story there? Marine scientist Sylvia Earle from Nat'l Geographic spoke eloquently against its use to a congressional panel:
"The instructions for humans using Corexit, the dispersant approved by the EPA to make the ocean look better warn that it is an eye and skin irritant, is harmful by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed, and may cause injury to red blood cells, kidney or the liver. People are warned not to take Corexit internally, but the fish, turtles, copepods and jellies have no choice. They are awash in a lethal brew of oil and butoxyethanol. ..."
Aside from closer scrutiny of British Petroleum, exactly what COULD the government do to expidite recovery from this disaster? For example, does the Federal Government have enough deep water drilling expertise and equipment to just take over the operation from BP? Also, if the U.S. government stepped in at this point, could BP then push the blame off onto the U.S. and refuse to pay for damages?
Since we already live in a chemical soup, I have a problem with dissolving oil into our water. I understand the general consensus states "the solution to pollution is dilution." I would like to know how much you have to dilute oil until it is considered safe to drink. Since we are diluting it, there must be a study.
QUESTION
Diane, it seems like dispersants were used without much debate. I have yet to hear someone explain why breaking oil up in such a manner that it will damage the environment and cannot be cleaned up is a better choice than allowing it to do damage to the enviroment in a way that we can at least make an effort to mitigate its affects.
It is terrifying to think that oil companies are drilling wells all over the world and have no way of controlling the flow of oil in the event of a mishap. We really got it wrong when we thought the major threat to our planet was nuclear proliferation or global warming.
What about "microbe" treatments that actually consume the oil. I haven't heard a word about this. We have microbes that go into the bilges of boats that eat the petroleum waste and create environmentally safe discharge. Why are we not injecting this by the tanker at the site. Also, in answer to the question who is in charge...it appears that no one is. All contact numbers are the same. No one either at Govt or BP returns a phone call. This is insane. The ecology in in Keys in no more valuable than that of the Delta area. I have had it with experts telling us what we need to know here. What we need to know is that there are thousands of barrels of oil still pouring out into the Gulf.
Images of the leak show a dark cloud of oil and a lighter colored cloud of natural gas and methane issuing from the hole. You are discussing the problems of the oil leak, but what about the implications of all the natural gas which I have heard described as 2/3rds or 3/4's of the output from the leak? This has been described as harmlessly dissolving into the atmosphere, but what is so harmless about such a large quantity of natural gas and methane entering the air?
With the permafrost melting, the methane entering the air is supposed to be pushing us to a global warming tipping point or forcing our future temperatures much higher. Why wouldn't this leak in the Gulf of Mexico also exacerbate global warming? Is there any way to measure its impact?
Is a barrel of oil the same as an oil drum (about the same size as a large trash can)?
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S ALBATROS!
I AM A TEXAS DEMOCRAT…BUT NASHVILLE COULD WELL BE THE PRESIDENT’S “KATRINA”.
ALL OF THE ATTENTION HAS BEEN ON THE OIL SPILL, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FOLK IN NASHVILLE THAT CAN’T BUY GAS.
SURE THE OIL SPILL IS BAD.
BIRDS CAN’T FLY
BUT THOUSANDS OF JOBS HAVE FLOWN OUT OF NASHVILLE AND WILL NOT RETURN.
SURE SHRIMP WILL NOT BE ON OUR TABLES,
BUT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN NASHVILLE DONT EVEN HAVE TABLES.
As a lifetime resident of Texas and a benificiary of the benifits of the oil industry, I am weary of the negative comments.
I wish folks would use generic names along with meaningless/misleading brand names when discussing chemicals used to disperse oil spills.
The name, Corexit 9500, is meaningless. The list materials used in this product are included in the materials safety data sheet here: http://lmrk.org/corexit_9500_uscueg.539287.pdf
If this product contains 1-5% propylene glycol, commonly known as antifreeze, Corexit 9500 is probably not totally harmless to marine mammals.
There's always a benefit/risk to consider in emergencies like the BP spill. Transparency in terminology will help educate all interested parties, regardless of knowledge of organic chemistry.
Soylent Green, Xyklon-B, Corexit 9500...all meaningless, unless you know what is in them.
Diane-
I grew up in Florida,
A very old remedy for sopping up chemicals in an environmentally friendly way is native peat moss.It thoroughly filters,is immediately available and cheap.Natives of all the Gulf states are familiar with it and have offered to help use it.A Russian scientist has volunteered to give us his long coil invention made of this moss.
Thank you,
City farm
PS Your voice is always a comfort to us-congratulations on successful treatment but we love to hear it either way.Your show reminds us of sitting in someone?s living room for a good cup of tea and good conversation !
I always appreciate the content of NPR and this is my first comment. I am from Louisiana, born in Louisiana, but my concern is about the problem as well as everyone that this has and will impact, especially the families of those lost in the accident. I have searched for a way to suggest a possible solution for the immediate issue, stopping the leak. This may not be the correct place to post this comment but I have been compelled to try and help. Has anyone thought about the possible simplicity of using a shaped explosive charge to pinch the existing pipe closed. I am certain that we can find someone to figure out exactly how to do it. If it worked, it would buy time for BP to fix the well and concentrate on collecting the oil that is already in the water.
Just trying to find a way to help.
Probably well in excess of 80% of human expertise and equipment in this field belongs to the oil industry. The government has already admitted they lack the capability. The depth limit for the most sophisticated dive suits are about 2000 feet, the operational depth limit of Navy submarines is much less than that, and bathyscaphes are experimental and incapable of doing heavy external work.
All this was well known when the plans were made for work at these depths. This is not so much a technology failure as it is a result of inadequate planning and regulation.
So, is it getting worse as predicted by some who know how this kind of thing goes?
http://monkeyfister.blogspot.com/2010/05/major-change-down-below.html
We may be on course to a Valdez a day and there really is no way of stopping this short of a nuclear device.
As we are pretty sure we are not being told the whole truth there is no real way to gauge just what the truth really is.
Best, Dan.
Good Morning all,
Is it feasable to pay the fishing community to go out and collect the oil, and BP pay them the going rate for the price of a barrel of crude oil? Today oil is trading around $70 dollars a barrel, and it seems to me the oil would be fairly easy to skim up off the top of the water.
At $70 dollars a barrel, collecting 50 barrels a day (a doable amount for the average shrimp boat) would be worth $3,500 which seems like pretty good money to me.
Many Thanks
Mark McMunn
San Antonio, Texas
The level of unfairness disrespect of people in the work-place is common. This should come as no surprise to anyone that employers will disgard workers when they no longer serve a purpose. People have always found ways to start over and provide support for home and family. Why has it taken a magazine editor's story to bring this to the public? The elite of our country and world are coddled while the people who suffer out of sight of the media.
I have designed a concept to recover oil from the source. Although I have contacted several senators, President Obama, NBC News, Gov. Crist, Gov. Jindal and many others, I do not receive any response from anyone. BP has also been contacted many times. Any ideas?
I really enjoyed Diane's interview with author Dominique Browning about her new book, Slow Love! If you are in the Boston area, you can meet Dominique in person for a lecture and book signing on Thurday, June 3 at 7:00PM at the Trinity Church,Copley Square, Boston. For more information:
617-536-0944 X225.