Feds to announce: 75% of BP oil gone

[DarrinS]

U.S. Finds Most Oil From Spill Poses Little Additional Risk


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/science/earth/04oil.html?_r=1&hp





WASHINGTON — The government is expected to announce on Wednesday that three-quarters of the oil from the Deepwater Horizon leak has already evaporated, dispersed, been captured or otherwise eliminated — and that much of the rest is so diluted that it does not seem to pose much additional risk of harm.

A government report finds that about 26 percent of the oil released from BP’s runaway well is still in the water or onshore in a form that could, in principle, cause new problems. But most is light sheen at the ocean surface or in a dispersed form below the surface, and federal scientists believe that it is breaking down rapidly in both places.

On Tuesday, BP began pumping drilling mud into the well in an attempt to seal it for good. Since the flow of oil was stopped with a cap on July 15, people on the Gulf Coast have been wondering if another shoe was going to drop — a huge underwater glob of oil emerging to damage more shorelines, for instance.

Assuming that the government’s calculations stand scrutiny, that looks increasingly unlikely. “There’s absolutely no evidence that there’s any significant concentration of oil that’s out there that we haven’t accounted for,” said Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the lead agency in producing the new report.

She emphasized, however, that the government remained concerned about the ecological damage that has already occurred and the potential for more, and said it would continue monitoring the gulf.

“I think we don’t know yet the full impact of this spill on the ecosystem or the people of the gulf,” Dr. Lubchenco said.

Among the biggest unanswered questions, she said, is how much damage the oil has done to the eggs and larvae of organisms like fish, crabs and shrimp. That may not become clear for a year or longer, as new generations of those creatures come to maturity.

Thousands of birds and other animals are known to have been damaged or killed by the spill, a relatively modest toll given the scale of some other oil disasters that killed millions of animals. Efforts are still under way in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida to clean up more than 600 miles of oiled shoreline. The government and BP collected 35,818 tons of oily debris from shorelines through Sunday.

It remains to be seen whether subtle, long-lasting environmental damage from the spill will be found, as has been the case after other large oil spills.

The report, which is to be unveiled on Wednesday morning, is a result of an extensive effort by federal scientists, with outside help, to add up the total volume of oil released and to figure out where it went.

The lead agency behind the report, the oceanic and atmospheric administration, played down the size of the spill in the early days, and the Obama administration was ultimately forced to appoint a scientific panel that came up with far higher estimates of the flow rate from the well. Whether the new report will withstand critical scrutiny is uncertain; advocacy groups and most outside scientists had not learned of it on Tuesday.

The government announced early this week that the total oil release, from the time the Deepwater Horizon exploded on April 20 until the well was effectively capped, was 4.9 million barrels, plus or minus 10 percent. That estimate makes the Deepwater Horizon disaster the largest marine spill in history. It is surpassed on land by a 1910 spill in the California desert.

As the scientists did their calculations, they were able to rely on direct measurements of the fate of some of the oil that spewed from the broken well. For example, BP and its contractors succeeded in capturing about 17 percent of it with various containment mechanisms, the report says.

The outcome for much of the oil could not be directly measured, but had to be estimated using protocols that were scrutinized by scientists inside and outside the government, Dr. Lubchenco said.

The report calculates, for example, that about 25 percent of the chemicals in the oil evaporated at the surface or dissolved into seawater in the same way that sugar dissolves in tea. (The government appears to have settled on a conservative number for that estimate, with the scientific literature saying that as much as 40 percent of the oil from a spill can disappear in this way.)

The aggressive response mounted by BP and the government — the largest in history, ultimately involving more than 5,000 vessels — also played a role in getting rid of the oil, the report says. Fully 5 percent of the oil was burned at the surface, it estimates, while 3 percent was skimmed and 8 percent was broken up into tiny droplets using chemical dispersants. Another 16 percent dispersed naturally as the oil shot out of the well at high speed.

All told, the report calculates that about 74 percent of the oil has been effectively dealt with by capture, burning, skimming, evaporation, dissolution or dispersion. Much of the dissolved and dispersed oil can be expected to break down in the environment, though federal scientists are still working to establish the precise rate at which that is happening.

“I think we are fortunate in this situation that the rates of degradation in the gulf ecosystem are quite high,” Dr. Lubchenco said.

The remaining 26 percent of the oil “is on or just below the surface as light sheen or weathered tar balls, has washed ashore or been collected from the shore, or is buried in sand and sediments,” the report says.

Some fishermen in Louisiana are worried about the buried oil, fearing that storms could stir it up and coat vital shrimp or oyster grounds, a possibility the government has not ruled out.

Testing of fish has shown little cause for worry so far, and fishing grounds in the gulf are being reopened at a brisk clip. At one point the government had closed 36 percent of federal gulf waters to fishing, but that figure is now down to 24 percent and is expected to drop further in coming weeks.

States are also reopening fishing grounds near their coasts. The big economic question now is whether the American public is ready to buy gulf seafood again.

The new government report comes as BP engineers began pumping heavy drilling mud into the stricken well on Tuesday, with the hope of achieving a permanent seal or at least revealing critical clues about how to kill the well before the end of the month.

Through the afternoon, in what is known as a static kill, engineers pumped mud weighing about 13.2 pounds per gallon at slow speeds from a surface vessel through a pipe into the blowout preventer on top of the well. If all goes well, cement may be applied over the next few days. But officials said they could be confident the well was plugged only when one of two relief wells now being drilled was completed, allowing the well to be completely sealed with cement.

“The static kill will increase the probability that the relief well will work,” Thad W. Allen, the retired Coast Guard admiral who is leading the federal spill response effort, told reporters on Tuesday. “But the whole thing will not be done until the relief well is completed.”

The static kill operation could last for close to three days. After it is completed, work can resume on the final 100 feet of the first relief well, which officials say should be completed by Aug. 15 unless bad weather intervenes.

[boutons_deux]

BP's willful, repeated negligence killed 11, but that's the Repug OSHA-hating, unregualated free market at work. Dead employees are just an externality that BP writes off as a business expense.

[FromWayDowntown]

At long last, this bloodlust for a good and righteous paragon of unfettered capitalism can end!!

[DarrinS]

BP's willful, repeated negligence killed 11, but that's the Repug OSHA-hating, unregualated free market at work. Dead employees are just an externality that BP writes off as a business expense.


Did you drive anywhere today?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Did you drive anywhere today?

Oh boy here we go..


WARNING:

the onslaught of right wing talking points soon to follow!

[DarrinS]

Oh boy here we go..


WARNING:

the onslaught of right wing talking points soon to follow!


Why do you guys so disappointed that this isn't turning into the environmental disaster it was feared?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Why do you guys so disappointed that this isn't turning into the environmental disaster it was feared?

Oh right.. this charge comes from the "we're hoping this is Obama's Katrina" crowd ..:lmao

[FromWayDowntown]

Oh boy here we go..


WARNING:

the onslaught of right wing talking points soon to follow!

I think what this whole "episode" proves is that any regulation of off-shore drilling is entirely unnecessary. Any environmental problems will only take us a couple of months to deal with and can ultimately be solved by Mother Nature.

Any impact on the entrepreneurs who depend upon those waters simply hastens the consolidation of their work in larger entities that can perform those tasks far more efficiently.

It's the circle of Free Marketism!

[George Gervin's Afro]

I think what this whole "episode" proves is that any regulation of off-shore drilling is entirely unnecessary. Any environmental problems will only take us a couple of months to deal with and can ultimately be solved by Mother Nature.

Any impact on the entrepreneurs who depend upon those waters simply hastens the consolidation of their work in larger entities that can perform those tasks far more efficiently.

It's the circle of Free Marketism!

Well surely you're disapointed that there wasn't an ecological disaster.

[DarrinS]

Oh right.. this charge comes from the "we're hoping this is Obama's Katrina" crowd ..:lmao

like this guy?


lO1lO1CVkTE

[boutons_deux]

This disaster isn't over, yet.

Stick around, the shit is still hitting the fan.

And BP will screw over Gulf residents and businesses and fight compensation just like Exxon did successfully, and like Chevron is doing in Ecudor/Amazon, probably successfully.

Just because one drives a carbon-fuelled car doesn't mean one accepts and cheers the oil/gas companies corporate/environmental crimes.

[DarrinS]

I think what this whole "episode" proves is that any regulation of off-shore drilling is entirely unnecessary.


Wow. As if anyone is arguing this.

P.S. It is regulated

[boutons_deux]

There are regulations, but they aren't enforced.

btw, the Senate just failed to pass the Oil Spill bill. fucking Senate, what a bunch of disgraceful assholes. They know the dumbfuck Americans will forget all about the BP spill in about 15 minutes, so there's no chance of the Dems bringing up this bill again.

[ElNono]

P.S. It is regulated

You mean regulated by the Minerals Management Service in which several of the officials “frequently consumed alcohol at industry functions, had used cocaine and marijuana, and had sexual relationships with oil and gas company representatives.” just two years ago?

[Marcus Bryant]

The White House wants this thing gone yesterday, so naturally this will be trumpted across the land. The media and most of the population will accept that and forget about it. Many supporters of the administration will also downplay the issue as it is seen as a big negative for the heroic great leader. Whatever political impetus there is to actually have BP held to account will fade away, except on the Gulf Coast.

[FromWayDowntown]

I heard a report this morning that the 25% that remains is still 500% of the amount of oil spilled in Valdez, Alaska some 20 years ago.

[rjv]

and now, because they are in the red due to the expenses of the cleanup they can get a tax write off to the tune of almost 10 billion.

and how darrin decides to leave out the human variable as part of the environment is beyond me. but the fact is that hundreds of thousands of peoples' lives were put in jeopardy as a result of the spill.

also, be very leery of any EPA studies on the toxicity of dispersants. how any conclusions can even be extrapolated on such a limited body of short term effect studies is beyond me. and , what leads the author of the article to assert that oil evaporated? 75 %of it? where did we get this value from? is it possible that there is more oil at the bottom of the gulf or even that a greater amount was consumed by microbes (which would then have an impact on oxygen levels) ?

what is odd to me is that darrin knocks the overzealousness of science on one side while he embraces that very same trait when it is on the other side.

[Parker2112]

and now, because they are in red due to the expenses of the cleanup they can get claim a tax write off to the tune of almost 10 billion.

and how darrin decides to leave out the human variable as part of the environment is beyond me. but the fact is that hundreds of thousands of peoples' lives were put in jeopardy as a result of the spill.

also, be very leery of any EPA studies on the toxicity of dispersants. how any conclusions can even be extrapolated on such a limited body of short term effect studies is beyond me. and , what leads the author of the article to assert that oil evaporated? 75 %of it? where did we get this value from? is it possible that there is more oil at the bottom of the gulf or even that a greater amount was consumed by microbes (which would then have an impact on oxygen levels) ?

what is odd to me is that darrin knocks the overzealousness of science on one side while he embraces that very same trait when it is on the other side.

On the Money.

Darrin is a fraud, btw :lol

[DarrinS]

I heard a report this morning that the 25% that remains is still 500% of the amount of oil spilled in Valdez, Alaska some 20 years ago.


I heard a report that apples differ from oranges.

[Marcus Bryant]

How there is actual sympathy for BP, as if it is anything other than a legal construct, is incredible. Naturally this fake sympathy is an outgrowth of the mindnumbing partisan circlejerk that is American politics. Opponents of the current administration reflexively take the side of any one and any thing that is seen as opposing the administration, including a company well known to operate haphazardly and with less regard for safety than other majors.

When you define your political views by opposition to everything the other side does, you end up standing for nothing and making yourself look like an idiot.

[DarrinS]

How there is actual sympathy for BP, as if it is anything other than a legal construct, is incredible. Naturally this fake sympathy is an outgrowth of the mindnumbing partisan circlejerk that is American politics. Opponents of the current administration reflexively take the side of any one and any thing that is seen as opposing the administration, including a company well known to operate haphazardly and with less regard for safety than other majors.

When you define your political views by opposition to everything the other side does, you end up standing for nothing and making yourself look like an idiot.



Actually, I predicted that this spill wouldn't be that bad and it turns out I'm right. Just a little gloating.

BP needs to be held liable for all damages.

I haven't defended BP.

[Marcus Bryant]

The magnitude of the remaining oil does not make this worse any less.

[DarrinS]

The magnitude of the remaining oil does not make this worse any less.


I'm sure the lawyers were hoping for worse.

[Marcus Bryant]

Ah, yes, the litigators who must be reflexively opposed because they are seen as generally a Democratic constituency.

[DarrinS]

Ah, yes, the litigators who must be reflexively opposed because they are seen as generally a Democratic constituency.



I think America could use fewer attorneys (regardless of policital affiliation).

[Oh, Gee!!]

the spill was bad and continues to be bad. the results could have been worse, but we can say that about anything bad that happens.

[ElNono]

The White House wants this thing gone yesterday, so naturally this will be trumpted across the land. The media and most of the population will accept that and forget about it. Many supporters of the administration will also downplay the issue as it is seen as a big negative for the heroic great leader. Whatever political impetus there is to actually have BP held to account will fade away, except on the Gulf Coast.

Probably followed by a 60 minutes report 5 years from now titled "What happened to the Oil Spill people in the Gulf?"

[admiralsnackbar]

Actually, I predicted that this spill wouldn't be that bad and it turns out I'm right. Just a little gloating.

BP needs to be held liable for all damages.

I haven't defended BP.

The government isn't the fat lady, Darrin -- next years fishermen are. Gloat later.

[DarrinS]

The government isn't the fat lady, Darrin -- next years fishermen are. Gloat later.


How many years to we need to wait?

5? 10? 20?

[admiralsnackbar]

How many years to we need to wait?

5? 10? 20?

I already answered your question.

[ChumpDumper]

Only Darrin could celebrate 50 million gallons of oil floating in the gulf.

[Wild Cobra]

I heard it differently in yesterday's news, that what was left was so diluted, it probably was no problem. Also... nevermind...

[ChumpDumper]

I heard it differently in yesterday's news, that what was left was so diluted, it probably was no problem. Also, I believe it wasn't that 25% was remaining, but that 75% was retrieved. What's remaining would be fess after breakdowns, evaporation, etc.As usual, you are wrong.

[ElNono]

I heard it differently in yesterday's news, that what was left was so diluted, it probably was no problem. Also, I believe it wasn't that 25% was remaining, but that 75% was retrieved. What's remaining would be fess after breakdowns, evaporation, etc.

I'm surprised you're not skeptical about a government report...

[boutons_deux]

"probably was no problem"

I haven't heard any non-BP-bought scientist say what the any-term results will be of 5M barrels of oil and 2 M gallons of corexit poison. Nobody (serious) knows.

[admiralsnackbar]

If you heard 75% was retrieved, you heard wrong.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm surprised you're not skeptical about a government report...
I am skeptical.

[ChumpDumper]

I am skeptical.And wrong.

[ElNono]

:lol

[admiralsnackbar]

I am skeptical.
You should be skeptical about 75% being retrieved. :lol

[Wild Cobra]

You should be skeptical about 75% being retrieved. :lol
I don't trust such reports from anyone. There is effectively two sides, who want to amplify their point.

I started with "I heard differently." Don't expect me to hold that view solidly.

[DarrinS]

Only Darrin could celebrate 50 million barrels of oil floating in the gulf.

How do you get 50 million barrels when it is only estimated there was 4.9 million barrels released +- 10%?


EDIT> And, yes, I am happy that 75% of it is gone. WHy are you unhappy about it?

[Wild Cobra]

How do you get 50 million barrels when it is only estimated there was 4.9 million barrels released +- 10%?


EDIT> And, yes, I am happy that 75% of it is gone. WHy are you unhappy about it?
He's unhappy that Obama no longer has his pet crisis to extort.

[George Gervin's Afro]

He's unhappy that Obama no longer has his pet crisis to extort.

I thought you guys said he was incompetent? If that's true, how could extort the crisis?

[admiralsnackbar]

Again with the Doug Henning shit. Define gone.

[Winehole23]

He's unhappy that Obama no longer has his pet crisis to extort.Obama wanted this to go away, you dolt. Remember, his Katrina? You and Darrin are the ones drinking his kool aid.

[Wild Cobra]

I thought you guys said he was incompetent? If that's true, how could extort the crisis?
His experts, through his teleprompter.

[Marcus Bryant]

Obviously the black president needs to be told what to say, for his kind is genetically incapable of strenuous mental thought. There's probably a bunch of Jews who write for him.

[DarrinS]

Obviously the black president needs to be told what to say, for his kind is genetically incapable of strenuous mental thought. There's probably a bunch of Jews who write for him.


I didn't take you for one of the "all critics of Obama are motived by racism" crowd.


I was mistaken.

[admiralsnackbar]

I didn't take you for one of the "all critics of Obama are motived by racism" crowd.


I was mistaken.

I think he was just countering absurdity with absurdity.

[Marcus Bryant]

And the Joose live in Noo Yawk, which is not part of real America, for there are Joose there. Ergo. Qed.

[Wild Cobra]

I didn't take you for one of the "all critics of Obama are motived by racism" crowd.


I was mistaken.

Marcus has been turned by the dark side... and I don't mean shin color...

[Wild Cobra]

I think he was just countering absurdity with absurdity.
He was going beyond that. He was making an insinuation he knows is false.

[Marcus Bryant]

I don't think so.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I didn't take you for one of the "all critics of Obama are motived by racism" crowd.


I was mistaken.

who said that?

[boutons_deux]

Repugs, tea baggers, Breitbart, conservatives, Fox, hate media have all been race baiting, race scare-mongering, since MN got the nomination. And it's cranked up now in the election season.

blacks, browns, Muslims, they're all bad, aren't Real Americans, gonna "martyrize" the (old) white guys. git yer guns, we gonna kill some unAmuricuns.

[admiralsnackbar]

He was going beyond that. He was making an insinuation he knows is false.

I'm sure he apologizes for your bruised feelings.

We all know some of your best friends are black despite your antipathy towards the Civil War.

[LnGrrrR]

I certainly hope this oil dispersed quicker than we expected. I would argue, however, that dispersal =/= neutralization. I would say it would be CONSERVATIVE to wait for further results, before proclaiming that the damage is much less greater than expected. How long, I don't know. But I can guess that a week or so after the spill stopped is probably too early.

[ChumpDumper]

How do you get 50 million barrels when it is only estimated there was 4.9 million barrels released +- 10%?Gallons. My bad.


EDIT> And, yes, I am happy that 75% of it is gone. WHy are you unhappy about it?50 million gallons! Hooray!

[DMX7]

Problem = Solved.

[Nbadan]

...meanwhile that dispersant shit they put into the gulf is showing up in fish and people along the coast who got covered in this wind-driven shit are breaking out in skin leasions and scabies...but the oligarchy-driven media says the coast is clear!

[TDMVPDPOY]

did the govt fined them yet?

[coyotes_geek]

...meanwhile that dispersant shit they put into the gulf is showing up in fish and people along the coast who got covered in this wind-driven shit are breaking out in skin leasions and scabies...but the us government says the coast is clear!

fify.

[coyotes_geek]

did the govt fined them yet?

Not yet, but there's no rush. The immediate priority is for BP to get the well closed off for good, fund the cleanup and to pay out claims. There's plenty of time to (deservedly) fine the shit outta them later.

[ducks]

BP's willful, repeated negligence killed 11, but that's the Repug OSHA-hating, unregualated free market at work. Dead employees are just an externality that BP writes off as a business expense.
in infree markerks no one ever dies right mr know it all

[George Gervin's Afro]

in infree markerks no one ever dies right mr know it all

what does the free market have to gross negligence?

[Marcus Bryant]

ducks versus boutons. Will the English language survive?

[DarrinS]

ducks versus boutons. Will the English language survive?

You're so superior. :rolleyes

[coyotes_geek]

ducks versus boutons. Will the English language survive?

:lol

[MannyIsGod]

75% of the oil being gone would be a good thing, obviously. It does not mean we're done with the bad things, however.

Fairly simple.

[MannyIsGod]

75% of the oil being gone would be a good thing, obviously. It does not mean we're done with the bad things, however.

Fairly simple.

[DarrinS]

75% of the oil being gone would be a good thing, obviously. It does not mean we're done with the bad things, however.

Fairly simple.



Fair enough

[LnGrrrR]

You're so superior. :rolleyes

What's wrong with pointing out poor grammar?

What's wrong with superiority?

[ducks]

what does the free market have to gross negligence?

ask boutons he brought it up

[boutons_deux]

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/08/16/next-major-toxic-hazard-that-can-ruin-you-and-your-childrens-health.aspx

[Cry Havoc]

You're so superior. :rolleyes

What do you have against intellectual thought and correct use of the English language?

[boutons_deux]

Uncovering the Lies That Are Sinking the Oil


http://www.truth-out.org/files/images/081610jamail.jpg

"The rampant use of toxic dispersants, out-of-state private contractors being brought in to spray them and US Coast Guard complicity are common stories now in the four states most affected by BP's Gulf of Mexico oil disaster."

http://www.truth-out.org/uncovering-lies-that-are-sinking-oil62345?print

======

The Gulf states are gonna be fucked by their own Repug governments and by BP, and it looks like by the Feds, too.

[boutons_deux]

Gulf Oil Spill: University Study Contradicts Government Estimates, Up To 79% Of Oil Could Remain

A group of scientists say that most of that BP oil the government claimed was gone from the Gulf of Mexico is actually still there.

The scientists believe that roughly three-quarters of the oil (70% to 79%) still lurks under the surface. The research team, affiliated with the University of Georgia, said that it is a misinterpretation of data to claim that oil that has dissolved is actually gone or harmless. The report was based on an analysis of federal estimates, but the Wall Street Journal notes that it hasn't been published or peer-reviewed yet.

Charles Hopkinson, who helped lead the investigation, claims "the oil is still out there, and it will likely take years to completely degrade." The UGA marine sciences professor, and director of the Georgia Sea Grant, added, "We are still far from a complete understanding of what its impacts are."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/17/gulf-oil-spill-university_n_684343.html

[DarrinS]

http://crudesurvival.blogspot.com/

Texas Tech Researchers Find No Evidence of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in ‘Good Morning America’ Samples




After receiving a shipment of Louisiana seafood samples collected by a reporter with “Good Morning America,” researchers at Texas Tech University found no evidence of petroleum hydrocarbons.

Though these samples were clean, the sample size was small and more research is necessary before the full picture can be seen, said Ron Kendall, director of The Institute of Environmental and Human Health (TIEHH).

“Our detection limits would have detected selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) had they been there, even at very low levels,” Kendall said. “Everyone should realize the sample size was extremely small and that these data represent just a snapshot of time and space. We believe sampling and analyses should continue, and that independent science-based research needs to continue.”

Scientists are concerned about PAHs because some of them are known carcinogens.

Producers with the morning news program asked TIEHH researchers to test the seafood samples prior to the federal government’s opening of waters to fishing on Monday. Reporter Matt Gutman sent the samples from Bastian Bay, La, where he is reporting.

“We collected the samples Monday in Bastian Bay,” Gutman said. “It is an area where we've found oil on the sediment. We filmed it all, including the bagging. The fishermen used a net, but found no evidence of oil directly on any of the samples.”

Gutman’s samples included shrimp, of which nine were tested from three separate locations, four oysters, two bait fish, a flounder and a speckled trout. They were shipped on ice overnight to the institute on Tuesday and Wednesday, where they were received in excellent condition and smelled fresh before processing.

Once tissues were extracted, scientists analyzed them using gas chromatography with mass spectrometry, said Todd Anderson, an environmental chemist at the institute. The process is used to determine substances within a specific test sample, and is widely regarded as the gold standard for forensic substance identification.

“We were particularly interested in polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, some of which can be carcinogenic,” Anderson said. “The analytical results revealed that the PAHs we analyzed for were below detection limits of our instrumentation, and far below any levels of concern as regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.”

Trace Analysis Inc. of Lubbock, Texas, a certified laboratory in Texas and Louisiana, assisted with the analysis.

This project took five days to complete and was done without support from BP or the United States Federal Government.




_tTUeo8qNwI

[Winehole23]

^^^Gets his news from the TV. Shares it with us. How considerate. :tu

[DarrinS]

^^^Gets his news from the TV. Shares it with us. How considerate. :tu

Another WH "gem".

[Winehole23]

For myself, I thought it was an all too routine observation.

[DarrinS]

For myself, I thought it was an all too routine observation.


You post frequently, but you actually post little actual content.

[Winehole23]

I wouldn't trust you to read any of it, but in general you could be right.

[LnGrrrR]

If that really is the case, then kick-ass. It shows that some scientists out there don't have their head up their rear ends. I'm somewhat skeptical that all this oil can disperse with no long-term effects, but hopefully that is the case. I'm cautiously optimistic.

[ChumpDumper]

http://crudesurvival.blogspot.com/

Texas Tech Researchers Find No Evidence of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in ‘Good Morning America’ Samples




_tTUeo8qNwIOne location down, several hundred more to go.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

so the article states that nothing is conclusive yet and that this result reflects a very small sample size...

what's the point of posting it? I don't understand

[DarrinS]

so the article states that nothing is conclusive yet and that this result reflects a very small sample size...

what's the point of posting it? I don't understand


A data point is a data point.

[Winehole23]

Easy. To minimize the damage before it has been conclusively measured, let alone understood from any strictly scientific POV.

DarrinS is propaganda guy with notable frequency around here.

[DarrinS]

Easy. To minimize the damage before it has been conclusively measured, let alone understood from any strictly scientific POV.

DarrinS is propaganda guy with notable frequency around here.


Meh, there's still a 20 billion slush fund out there, so I'm sure there will need to be futher studies, class action lawsuits, etc.

Either way, I'm eating shrimp.

[LnGrrrR]

A data point is a data point.

Ah, so you don't think it's any more important than data points that contradict this one. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Winehole23]

A data point is a data point.What a Clinton-esque thing to say..

[DarrinS]

Ah, so you don't think it's any more important than data points that contradict this one. Thanks for pointing that out.


I think those are important too.

Has someone found contaminated shrimp? Fish? Oysters?

[DarrinS]

What a Clinton-esque thing to say..

Uh, ok.

[boutons_deux]

"20 billion slush fund out there"

You Lie. The $20B is unfunded.

My bet is that BP will never pay $20B. They're gonna Exxon Valdez the plaintiffs down to nothing, and stretch it out for decades. Chevron's doing the same in the Amazon jungle.

[DarrinS]

"20 billion slush fund out there"

You Lie. The $20B is unfunded.

My bet is that BP will never pay $20B. They're gonna Exxon Valdez the plaintiffs down to nothing, and stretch it out for decades. Chevron's doing the same in the Amazon jungle.


If LA has anyone like "The Texas Hammer", then somebody will get their grubby mitts on that money, whether they were actually harmed, or not.

[coyotes_geek]

"20 billion slush fund out there"

You Lie. The $20B is unfunded.

My bet is that BP will never pay $20B. They're gonna Exxon Valdez the plaintiffs down to nothing, and stretch it out for decades. Chevron's doing the same in the Amazon jungle.

You lie.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2012576175_apusgulfoilspillfund.html

[Nbadan]

You lie.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2012576175_apusgulfoilspillfund.html

...that's just a down payment...lets hope B.P. honors the full obligation..

[CosmicCowboy]

My gulf shrimp for dinner was damn good.

[admiralsnackbar]

My gulf shrimp for dinner was damn good.

Seeing as how shrimping season is only just about to start, I'm guessing your dinner of frozen gulf shrimp from last year was damn good.

Edit: my bad -- season started in mid July.

[Cry Havoc]

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/17/scientists-toxic-oil-settling-on-gulf-floor/?hpt=T2

Scientists: Toxic organisms, oil found on Gulf floor

John Paul says, at first, he couldn't believe his own scientific data showing toxic microscopic marine organisms in the Gulf of Mexico. He repeated the field test. A colleague did his own test. All the results came back the same: toxic.

It was the first time Paul and other University of South Florida scientists had made such a finding since they started investigating the environmental damage from the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The preliminary results, the scientists believe, show that oil that has settled on the floor is contaminating small sea organisms.

Paul is a marine microbiologist with the University of South Florida. He and 13 other researchers were in the middle of a 10-day research mission that began August 6 in the Gulf of Mexico when they made the toxic discovery.

The researchers battled 12-foot waves and storms but returned to St. Petersburg, Florida Monday night.

We were there as the team pulled its research materials into the lab and got the first report back of their initial findings.

The researchers found micro-droplets of oil scattered across the ocean floor and they also found those droplets moving up through a part of the Gulf called the DeSoto Canyon, a channel which funnels water and nutrients into the popular commercial and recreational waters along the Florida Gulf Coast.
The scientists say even though it's getting harder to see the oil the Gulf is still not safe.

"This whole concept of submerged oil and the application of dispersants in the subsurface and what are the impacts that it could have, have changed the paradigm of what an oil spill is from a 2-dimensional surface disaster to a 3-dimensional catastrophe," said David Hollander, a chemical oceanographer and one of the lead scientists on the recent USF mission.

---

Looks to me like we still have a rather serious situation in the Gulf.

[coyotes_geek]

...that's just a down payment...lets hope B.P. honors the full obligation..

It's the first payment of a 4 year installment plan and it was paid early.

[Winehole23]

Seeing as how shrimping season is only just about to start, I'm guessing your dinner of frozen gulf shrimp from last year was damn good.

Edit: my bad -- season started in mid July.It would seem that Texas has mostly been spared the ill effects so far. Let's hope it stays that way.

[Winehole23]

The European model is to raise the oil to the surface and skim off as much as possible. They're a bit puzzled by the use of dispersants to sink the oil instead.

Has the possible impact of that even been studied yet?

If not we would seem to have a learning opportunity now.

[Winehole23]

Uh, ok.More like Slick Willie than Gertrude Stein for sure.

[Winehole23]

I love how you continually run away from your own posts: " a data point among data points."

Don't you see the banner you wrote?

75% of oil "gone?":rollin

[boutons_deux]

From Oil Spill to Oil Dump: The Dirty Secret of BP’s Clean-Up

Posted by Green For All on @ 11:54 am

Article printed from speakeasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy

By Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, CEO of Green For All

When oil was steadily gushing out of BP’s broken oil pipeline into the Gulf of Mexico, we were all desperate to stop the flow and get the oil that had already spilled safely out of the water. Sadly, we paid too little attention to where that oil would go once clean-up workers removed it from the Gulf waters. Now we know: far too much of it is being dumped in communities of color.

Robert D. Bullard, Director of the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University, wrote last week that 61% the waste from the BP clean-up (more than 24,000 tons) has been dumped at landfills in communities of color — despite the fact that people of color make up only 26% of the population in the coastal counties in Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The landfill that has received the most waste from the spill sits in a Florida community where three-quarters of the residents are people of color.

This is not a new problem. For decades, communities of color have borne an unfair share of the burdens and risks of waste disposal in the U.S. A disproportionate amount of toxic waste has found its final resting place near communities of color, which have the high cancer rates, asthma rates, and other environmental health problems that follow. The problem has been particularly acute in the Gulf region; a section of Louisiana has become known as “Cancer Alley.”

Still, the racial disparity in toxic dumping continues, and federal regulators have not done enough to stop it.

==================

well, there's 24 kilotons of oil that has disappeared out of the Gulf waters.

[DarrinS]

From Oil Spill to Oil Dump: The Dirty Secret of BP’s Clean-Up

Posted by Green For All on @ 11:54 am

Article printed from speakeasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy

By Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, CEO of Green For All

When oil was steadily gushing out of BP’s broken oil pipeline into the Gulf of Mexico, we were all desperate to stop the flow and get the oil that had already spilled safely out of the water. Sadly, we paid too little attention to where that oil would go once clean-up workers removed it from the Gulf waters. Now we know: far too much of it is being dumped in communities of color.

Robert D. Bullard, Director of the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University, wrote last week that 61% the waste from the BP clean-up (more than 24,000 tons) has been dumped at landfills in communities of color — despite the fact that people of color make up only 26% of the population in the coastal counties in Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The landfill that has received the most waste from the spill sits in a Florida community where three-quarters of the residents are people of color.

This is not a new problem. For decades, communities of color have borne an unfair share of the burdens and risks of waste disposal in the U.S. A disproportionate amount of toxic waste has found its final resting place near communities of color, which have the high cancer rates, asthma rates, and other environmental health problems that follow. The problem has been particularly acute in the Gulf region; a section of Louisiana has become known as “Cancer Alley.”

Still, the racial disparity in toxic dumping continues, and federal regulators have not done enough to stop it.

==================

well, there's 24 kilotons of oil that has disappeared out of the Gulf waters.



It was only a matter of time before this story got its racial component.

[DarrinS]

Just read up on Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins. She's pretty much the female equivalent of Van Jones.

[LnGrrrR]

It was only a matter of time before DarrinS noted its racial component.

fify :toast

[boutons_deux]

Why do racist, race-bating right-wingers always say racism isn't present?

[DarrinS]

Why do racist, race-bating right-wingers always say racism isn't present?


LMAO at "race-bating right-wingers".


I believe that racism exists -- I just don't think EVERYTHING has a racial component.


Perhaps landfills are located in "communities of color" (I really love that one) because the land is cheap? Perhaps?

[CosmicCowboy]

You guys don't get it. It is not politically expedient for there to be any problems.

Therefore there are no problems...

[Wild Cobra]

Perhaps landfills are located in "communities of color" (I really love that one) because the land is cheap? Perhaps?
I think it would be more correct to say that property near landfills is cheap, therefore people with lower wagers live there. The statistics simply are that blacks make less than whites.

Nothing racial about facts.

[Cry Havoc]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/19/gulf.oil.plume/index.html?hpt=T1

Yep. Disaster over.

[RandomGuy]

U.S. Finds Most Oil From Spill Poses Little Additional Risk


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/science/earth/04oil.html?_r=1&hp


It remains to be seen whether subtle, long-lasting environmental damage from the spill will be found, as has been the case after other large oil spills.

I'm glad we seem to have dodged the bullet this time, in the short term.

We'll see what happens long-term. Hopefully that won't be too bad either.

Such incidents will happen again. It is simply a statistical inevitability.

That is one of the costs of oil production that the knee-jerk anti-environmentalists would like to gloss over.

[leemajors]

The European model is to raise the oil to the surface and skim off as much as possible. They're a bit puzzled by the use of dispersants to sink the oil instead.

Has the possible impact of that even been studied yet?

If not we would seem to have a learning opportunity now.

this is a start:

http://io9.com/5617121/scientific-proof-that-the-deepwater-oil-plume-is-over-20-miles-long

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/19/gulf.oil.plume/index.html?hpt=T1

Yep. Disaster over.

Tell me.

Just how did they determine it was oil from the gulf spill rather than natural seepage, which when slow, would absorb enough heavier elements to keep it submerged rather than having it float?

There is so much oil there, much of it is natural seepage. Therefore, I demand, how do you know it is from the spill?

[Winehole23]

There is so much oil there, much of it is natural seepage. Therefore, I demand, how do you know it is from the spill?That's addressed in the article leemajors posted if you care to read it, WC.

[admiralsnackbar]

Tell me.

Just how did they determine it was oil from the gulf spill rather than natural seepage, which when slow, would absorb enough heavier elements to keep it submerged rather than having it float?

There is so much oil there, much of it is natural seepage. Therefore, I demand, how do you know it is from the spill?

Seepage. :lol
But seriously, why do you need to be play-pretend skeptical about something so freaking obvious? Where else would the oil have come from but the Giant Oil Disaster down the way? Can you name any other instances of giant underwater oil plumes caused by seepage that have been observed by marine biologists or any other maritime characters anywhere else ever? I, err, demand them.

[DarrinS]

That's addressed in the article leemajors posted if you care to read it, WC.


I read it.




Scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution said they detected a plume of hydrocarbons in June that was at least 22 miles long and more than 3,000 feet below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, a residue of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

According to the institution, the 1.2-mile-wide, 650-foot-high plume of trapped hydrocarbons provides at least a partial answer to recent questions asking where all the oil has gone as surface slicks shrink and disappear.

"These results indicate that efforts to book-keep where the oil went must now include this plume" in the Gulf, said Christopher Reddy, a Woods Hole marine geochemist and oil spill expert. He is one of the authors of the study, which appears in the Aug. 19 issue of the journal Science.

Researchers saw the plume over two weeks in June but were chased away by Hurricane Alex, Reddy told CNN Radio.

"I have no idea where those compounds are now," he said.

Another of the report's authors said the plume has probably moved elsewhere, noting that the BP-operated well has been capped for more than a month and that the plume was moving in a southwesterly direction at a rate of about 6.5 kilometers (4 miles) a day.

"(It's) extremely likely that the hydrocarbons in that plume have long moved elsewhere," report author Rich Camilli told CNN.

Reddy said that experts need more data before they can determine how much remains in Gulf.

Whether the plume's existence poses a significant threat to the Gulf is not yet clear, the researchers say. "We don't know how toxic it is," Reddy said in a statement, "and we don't know how it formed, or why. But knowing the size, shape, depth, and heading of this plume will be vital for answering many of these questions."

Camilli, also a Woods Hole scientist, said colder temperatures at the plume's extreme depths inhibited the degradation properties of oil.

Microbes act more slowly on the subsea oil than on surface oil because of lower temperatures, he said. If all other conditions were equal, microbes would eat up the plume's subsea oil about 10 times more slowly, Camilli said.

Meanwhile, Thad Allen, the government's point man for the oil disaster, responded Thursday on CNN to two recent studies that appeared to contradict the government's estimate that about 75 percent of the oil has been cleaned up.

Researchers at the University of South Florida have concluded that oil may have settled at the bottom of the Gulf farther east than previously suspected -- and at levels toxic to marine life. In addition, a team from Georgia Sea Grant and the University of Georgia released a report that estimates that 70 to 79 percent of the oil that gushed from the well "has not been recovered and remains a threat to the ecosystem," the university said in a release.

Allen said the government has determined the flow rate to have been about 53,000 barrels a day, or a total of 4.9 million barrels.

"The next question is, what happened to it?" he said. "There are certain things we know for certain. We produced almost 827,000 barrels that we collected and brought ashore." The government also knows how much oil was skimmed, how much was burned and how much was affected by dispersant use. When that is added up, it leaves 26 percent still in the water, Allen said.

"That's not a definitive statement, but that's a way to start a conversation about the oil," Allen said. "You can take a lot of different estimates and run that formula, but that's the one we're starting with ... other than the 26 percent, the rest can be accounted for some way. That 26 percent is going to end up on a beach or dealt with somehow."




If someone finds some giant plume still in the Gulf, let me know.

[admiralsnackbar]

I read it.




If someone finds some giant plume still in the Gulf, let me know.

WASHINGTON — A 22-mile-long invisible mist of oil is meandering far below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, where it will probably loiter for months or more, scientists reported Thursday in the first conclusive evidence of an underwater plume from the BP spill.
The most worrisome part is the slow pace at which the oil is breaking down in the cold, 40-degree water, making it a long-lasting but unseen threat to vulnerable marine life, experts said.
Earlier this month, top federal officials declared the oil in the spill was mostly "gone," and it is gone in the sense you can't see it. But the chemical ingredients of the oil persist more than a half-mile beneath the surface, researchers found.
And the oil is degrading at one-tenth the pace at which it breaks down at the surface. That means "the plumes could stick around for quite a while," said study co-author Ben Van Mooy of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, which led the research published online in the journal Science.
Monty Graham, a scientist at the Dauphin Island Sea Lab in Alabama who was not involved in the study, said: "We absolutely should be concerned that this material is drifting around for who knows how long. They say months in the (research) paper, but more likely we'll be able to track this stuff for years."
Late Thursday, federal officials acknowledged the deepwater oil was not degrading as fast as they initially thought, but still was breaking down "relatively rapidly." Jane Lubchenco, chief of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said agency scientists and others were "working furiously" to come up with actual rates of biodegradation.
She noted a bright spot from the slow breakdown of the oil: Faster would mean a big influx of oil-eating microbes. Though they are useful, they also use up oxygen, creating "dead zones" that already plague the Gulf in the summer. Dead zones are not forming because of the oil plume, Lubchenco said.
The underwater oil was measured close to BP's blown-out well, which is about 40 miles off the Louisiana coast. The plume started three miles from the well and extended more than 20 miles to the southwest. The oil droplets are odorless and too small to be seen by the human eye. If you swam through the plume, you wouldn't notice it.
"The water samples when we were right in the plume look like spring water," study chief author Richard Camilli said. "You certainly didn't see any oil droplets and you certainly didn't smell it."
The scientists used complex instruments – including a special underwater mass spectrometer – to detect the chemical signature of the oil that spewed from the BP well after it ruptured April 20. The equipment was carried into the deep by submersible devices.

With more than 57,000 of these measurements, the scientists mapped a huge plume in late June when the well was still leaking. The components of oil were detected in a flow that measured more than a mile wide and more than 650 feet from top to bottom.
Federal officials said there are signs that the plume has started to break into smaller ones since the Woods Hole research cruise ended. But scientists said that wouldn't lessen the overall harm from the oil.
The oil is at depths of 3,000 to 4,000 feet, far below the environment of the most popular Gulf fish like red snapper, tuna and mackerel. But it is not harmless. These depths are where small fish and crustaceans live. And one of the biggest migrations on Earth involves small fish that go from deep water to more shallow areas, taking nutrients from the ocean depths up to the large fish and mammals.
Those smaller creatures could be harmed by going through the oil, said Larry McKinney, director of Texas A&M University's Gulf of Mexico research center in Corpus Christi.
Some aspects of that region are so little known that "we might lose species that we don't know now exist," said Graham of the Dauphin Island lab.
"This is a highly sensitive ecosystem," agreed Steve Murawski, chief fisheries scientist for the federal agency NOAA. "The animals down at 3,300 to 3,400 feet grow slowly." The oil not only has toxic components but could cause genetic problems even at low concentrations, he said.
Lubchenco said NOAA is "very concerned about the impact" of the oil below the surface and federal officials last week started more aggressive monitoring of it.
For much of the summer, the mere existence of underwater plumes of oil was the subject of a debate that at times pitted outside scientists against federal officials who downplayed the idea of plumes of trapped oil. Now federal officials say as much as 42 million gallons of oil may be lurking below the surface in amounts that are much smaller than the width of a human hair.
While federal officials prefer to describe the lurking oil as "an ephemeral cloud," the Woods Hole scientists use the word "plume" repeatedly.
The study conclusively shows that a plume exists, that it came from the BP well and that it probably never got close to the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, Camilli said. It is probably even larger than 22 miles long, but scientists had to stop measuring because of Hurricane Alex.
Earlier this week a University of South Florida team reported oil in amounts that were toxic to critical plant plankton deep underwater, but the crude was not necessarily in plumes. Those findings have not been reviewed by other scientists or published.
The plume is probably still around, but moving west-southwest of the BP well site at about 4 miles a day, Camilli said.
While praising the study that ended on June 28, Murawski said more recent observations show that the cloud of oil has "broken apart into a bunch of very small features, some them much farther away." Texas A&M's McKinney said marine life can suffer harm whether it is several smaller plumes or one giant one.
NOAA redirected much of its sampling for underwater oil after consulting with Woods Hole researchers. The federal agency is now using the techniques that the team pioneered with a robotic sub and an underwater mass spectrometer, Murawski said.
Previous attempts to define the plume were "like watching the Super Bowl on a 12-inch black-and-white TV and we try to bring to the table a 36-inch HD TV," said Woods Hole scientist Chris Reddy. The paper, fast-tracked for the world of peer-reviewed science, was written on a boat while still in the Gulf, he said.
Reddy said he could not yet explain why the underwater plume formed at that depth. But other experts point to three factors: cold water, the way the oil spewed from the broken well, and the use of massive amounts of dispersants to break up the oil before it gets to the surface.
The decision to use 1.8 million gallons of dispersants amounted to an environmental trade-off – it meant less oil tainting the surface, where there is noticeable and productive life, but the risk of longer-term problems down below.
Retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the government's point man on the Gulf oil spill, said it was a choice between two difficult options – with the discussions going on in front of the president. In the end, officials decided to "accept the implication of the hydrocarbons in the water column rather than Barataria Bay or the Chandeleur Islands" in Louisiana.
Given the slow rate at which the oil is degrading in the cold water, Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia, and others say it is too early to even think about closing the books on the spill: "The full environmental impacts of the spill will thus not be felt for some time."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/19/huge-oil-plume-isnt-going_n_688312.html


Going by data provided here:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/329/5994/888-a

But lemme guess: it's invisible so it must not be there... right? :lol

[boutons_deux]

http://media.nola.com/2010_gulf_oil_spill/photo/gulf-oil-blue-crabjpg-536cc7f87f5f3d49_large.jpg

"the crab larvae discovery was an ominous sign that crude had already infiltrated the Gulf's vast food web -- and could affect it for years to come.

"It would suggest the oil has reached a position where it can start moving up the food chain instead of just hanging in the water," said Bob Thomas, a biologist at Loyola University in New Orleans. "Something likely will eat those oiled larvae ... and then that animal will be eaten by something bigger and so on.""

http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/08/blue_crabs_provide_evidence_oi.html

[DarrinS]

"22 mile long invisible mist of oil"

lol

[DarrinS]

Strangely enough, the 22 mile long plume became a 22 mile long invisible mist in two months.


What's with the steady 22 mile length?

[DarrinS]

The beautiful thing about a 22 mile long invisible mist is that it can't be photographed.

[admiralsnackbar]

The beautiful thing about a 22 mile long invisible mist is that it can't be photographed.

Crab nymphs, on the other hand...

[CosmicCowboy]

I guarantee you could put the water straight out of the tap at your sink through a mass spectrometer and you would find traces of bad stuff.

[ChumpDumper]

I guarantee you could put the water straight out of the tap at your sink through a mass spectrometer and you would find traces of bad stuff.Sure.

Traces.

It's all about the concentration or potential concentration. We just don't know enough yet. We know plenty about the concentrations in tap water.

[DMX7]

No, this problem is solved. Case closed. Complete overreaction by the left and the fisherman who are out of work.

I think this is the last we'll be hearing of this oil spill.

[CosmicCowboy]

No, this problem is solved. Case closed. Complete overreaction by the left and the fisherman who are out of work.

I think this is the last we'll be hearing of this oil spill.

Can I get a HALLELUJAH! :lol

[admiralsnackbar]

Can I get a HALLELUJAH! :lol

And a biggo platter of scrimps!

[Wild Cobra]

That's addressed in the article leemajors posted if you care to read it, WC.
"Helped confirm."

Give me a break. The four chemicals are present in all Gulf oil.

That's real confirmation. they didn't say the percentages of each matched, and even if it did, that's still not confirmation.

The ocean floor naturally has seepage. Nobody addressed my point that if it leaked from the well, it should have floated up like the rest of the oil. Only oil that takes a long path, like through a natural crack, will absorb enough heavy matter to keep it submerged.

Do you know what the specific gravity difference is between oil and sea water? Do you know what that means?

When you find some facts, let me know please.

[ChumpDumper]

What makes you think it is impossible for oil from the man made leak to take a "long path"?

[DarrinS]

[retracted]

[boutons_deux]

Gulf fishermen being held responsible for toxic seafood


Federal government admits not testing for arsenic, mercury or other toxic heavy metals in seafood

The US government, and even President Obama himself, have said that Gulf seafood is safe to eat in the wake of the massive BP oil spill.

But an admission from the federal government that it hasn't been testing Gulf seafood for toxic heavy metals, and news that fishermen are being forced to sign waivers making them liable for toxins in their catch, suggest not everyone is convinced of the safety of Gulf seafood.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0821/fishermen-held-responsible-toxic-seafood/

=============

Where is wealthy, elitist, celebrity pitbull bitch standing up for her Real Americans?

[Wild Cobra]

Gulf fishermen being held responsible for toxic seafood


Federal government admits not testing for arsenic, mercury or other toxic heavy metals in seafood

The US government, and even President Obama himself, have said that Gulf seafood is safe to eat in the wake of the massive BP oil spill.

But an admission from the federal government that it hasn't been testing Gulf seafood for toxic heavy metals, and news that fishermen are being forced to sign waivers making them liable for toxins in their catch, suggest not everyone is convinced of the safety of Gulf seafood.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0821/fishermen-held-responsible-toxic-seafood/

=============

Where is wealthy, elitist, celebrity pitbull bitch standing up for her Real Americans?
Will this administration ever stop fucking up?

[DMX7]

Keep the goverment away from my arsenic, mercury, and other toxin infested seafood! Free Market!!! Let the people decide what food is and is not contaminated! Big Government strikes again!!!

[LnGrrrR]

Will this administration ever stop fucking up?

Wait, I thought you were for free market type stuff? I mean, isn't that less regulation if the fed gov't doesn't test the food? If they found food sellers who didn't pass standards, that would reduce jobs, right?

[DarrinS]

Can someone please post data on environmental damage and tainted seafood from the 22-mile invisible mist, when it becomes available?

Mkay, thanks.

[Winehole23]

22-mile invisible mistYou know what PAH's are right?

[DarrinS]

You know what PAH's are right?


They're what puppies walk on.

[Wild Cobra]

Wait, I thought you were for free market type stuff? I mean, isn't that less regulation if the fed gov't doesn't test the food? If they found food sellers who didn't pass standards, that would reduce jobs, right?
Less regulation in general, but I acknowledge that some regulation is necessary. To pick any regulation, and assume I am for striking it down, would be an error on your part.