Reply With Quote
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/
Topical current articles for those interested.
EXCLUSIVE: Tests find sickened family has 50.3 ppm of Corexit’s 2-butoxyethanol in swimming pool — JUST ONE HOUR NORTH OF TAMPA (lab report included)
Posted By oilflorida On August 30, 2010 @ 9:13 am In Damage Reports,Health Risks | 46 Comments
*Exclusive* Credit: FloridaOilSpillLaw.com
“Our heads are still swimming,” stated Barbara Schebler of sassa, Florida, who received word last Friday that test results on the water from her family’s swimming pool showed 50.3 ppm of 2-butoxyethanol, a marker for the dispersant Corexit 9527A used to break up and sink BP’s oil in the Gulf of Mexico.
[1]
The problems began for the Scheblers a few weeks after the April 20 blow-out. “Our first clue were rashes we both got early in May. Both my husband and I couldn’t get rid of the rashes and had to get cream from our doctor,” Schebler noted, “I never had a rash in my life.”
Then, on “July [23], my husband Warren mowed the lawn. It was hot so he got in the pool to cool off afterward. That afternoon he had severe diarrhea and very dark urine. This lasted about 2 days,” she revealed.
View Larger Map[2]
Initially, they reasoned this was caused by the heat. The following week Mr. Schebler again mowed the lawn and went in the pool, and again he was sickened with the same severe symptoms.
Su ious that the pool may be a problem, the family set out to get the water tested. “We have a 15 year old and felt we owed it to him to live in a clean, healthy environment,” said Mrs. Schebler.
The Scheblers found Robert Naman, a Mobile, Alabama chemist who’s performed multiple tests (1 [3], 2 [4], 3 [5]) for WKRG Channel 5, also out of Mobile.
“Warren collected a water sample from the pool filter on August 17th… packed the sample according to Mr. Naman’s instructions, and overnighted it to his Mobile, Ala. lab that same day,” she noted.
The results were delivered by Naman over the phone on August 27 at 11:00 a.m. EDT. A copy of the findings were then e-mailed to the Scheblers. To view the do ent, click here [1].
“Naman [said] our pool water sample we sent him contained 50.3 ppm [parts per million] 2-butoxyethanol marker for Corexit,” according to Mrs. Schebler. Tests for arsenic came back at less than .02 ppm.
A July letter [6] from four top scientists noted, “Corexit 9527A contains 2-BTE (2-butoxyethanol), a toxic solvent that ruptures red blood cells, causing hemolysis (bleeding) and liver and kidney damage (Johanson and Bowman, 1991, Nalco, 2010).”
The safety data sheet [7] provided by Nalco, the manufacturer of Corexit 9527A, warns, “Harmful if absorbed through skin. May be harmful if swallowed. May cause liver and kidney effects and/or damage. There may be irritation to the gastro-intestinal tract.”
Mr. Schebler’s “severe diarrhea and very dark urine” appear to indicate gastro-intestinal tract irritation.
BP Press Officer Daren Beaudo released a statement [8] on August 28 that reads, “Unified Command records indicate that the last date of use of the Corexit 9527 was May 22,” almost three months before the samples were taken from the pool.
Yet, the Schebler’s report is the second time in the last 10 days that the 2-butoxyethanol marker for Corexit 9527A has been discovered near the Gulf. It has also been found near the Florida border in Cotton Bayou, AL, at about 1/4 the level as in sassa, FL. A WKRG segment from August 19 [5] featured an inland water sample that tested for 13.3 ppm of the Corexit dispersant.
The question remains, how did this chemical find its way into the Schebler’s pool in such a high concentration?
“At night we would hear very low aircraft, including helicopters. We figured they were just heading to help out in the Gulf,” and Mrs. Schebler added that she was told, “The prevailing winds from the Gulf are easterly — and when they spray, it is airborne — and that we are right in the path of those winds.” It was also noted that, “We had alot of rain here before my husband got sick, and wondered what was going on… We had been having daily downpours in July.”
There is no way to be sure at this point. Though she stated, “Friends a few miles away… are having [a] similar situation. They are now thinking of getting their water tested.”
As for the family’s current physical well being, “We both still have rashes that will not go away if we stop the cream we were given by our doctor. Warren still gets diarrhea on and off – this never happened with this frequency before.”
But the trauma is not only physical. Here are the answers of the Scheblers when asked about the current situation at their home and in their area:
“We spoke to a number of mothers and fathers last evening [August 27]. Most have not even heard of Corexit. … But for the most part, parents with small children were concerned.”Additional responses shared by the Scheblers:
“Some of the neighbors we spoke to were more worried about home values than pollution.”
“We are hoping for someone to come and do more samplings, we were told we shouldn’t eat anything from outside as it probably will all be tainted. It seems that we are the first to check on this, we’re sure all our neighbors on this coast will have the same outcome.”
“We are lost. We would like more testing. We’ve reached out to a few people we thought could tell us where we go from here, but haven’t as of yet received any direction. We are not completely able to grasp what this means.”
“We feel it is a horrible environment to live in and frankly, would like to leave the area. We believe that if this substance is in our pool, it could very well be in the air, especially because of the rashes we continue to apply medication to. We’re not sure if this will enter the groundwater, or even already has. We feel other people need to know that if it’s in our backyard, it is most definitely in other backyards.”
“Where we go from here, we do not know.”
Additional information on dispersant use:
- A friend told us a few months ago that [the nuclear power station located less than 15 miles north is] checking constantly for the underwater plumes, because they could shut down the plant.
- Warren cleans the lanai [around the pool] with a power washer, no chemicals at all. We’ve never used or purchased Simple Green [which contains 2-butoxyethanol].
- We were stunned to see our beautiful, wine red daylillies turn a yellow-white color and die [around the end of June]. The plant kept producing sickly blooms after that, which would die on the stem. We’ve never seen a red flower turn color. The plants are 3 years old. Extremely odd – we should have taken pictures of that, but didn’t…
- One of our dogs had severe diarrhea for a week [in early May]. Neighbors have reported similar findings.
- BP Press Officer Daren Beaudo’s August 28 statement [8] on dispersant use: “The last day of all dispersant use was July 19… Unified Command has not used any dispersants since then.”
- Because the Unified Command claims to no longer be using dispersant since as of July 19, does not mean all dispersant use has ended. As BP Mobile Incident Commander Keith Seilhan revealed [9] last week, “‘We are not using dispersants and haven’t been for some time’… But when asked whether contractors who operate in state waters could be, he said he could not be certain. ‘We have lots of contractors, but no one should be using them.’”
- Why would dispersants still be in use? See yesterday’s article [10] in the Pensacola News Journal, that reported do ents show tons of submerged oil being removed by the bucket full from Pensacola coast — Feds, BP still in public denial [11]
- Aug. 28: INLAND: City officials find 66 ppm of COREXIT DISPERSANT near Florida/Alabama border (VIDEO) [12]
- Aug. 25: 13.3 ppm of COREXIT found INLAND, near Florida border — Chemist says tests show “toxic solvent” 2-butoxyethanol that “RUPTURES red blood cells” (VIDEO & PHOTOS) [5]
[1]
Toxicologist discusses dispersants being sprayed on land:
Article printed from Florida Oil Spill Law: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com
URL to article: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/ex...eport-included
URLs in this post: [1] Image: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/wp...sa_results.gif
[2] View Larger Map: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...29&z=7&iwloc=A
[3] 1: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/sh...ane-or-corexit
[4] 2: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/wk...-watches-video
[5] 3: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/al...7-video-photos
[6] July letter: http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us
[7] safety data sheet: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...XWUOxyTWXX64sw
[8] released a statement: http://www.dailyfinance.co.uk/2010/0...l-dispersants/
[9] revealed: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/bp...-be-using-them
[10] article: http://www.pnj.com/article/20100829/...n-local-waters
[11] do ents show tons of submerged oil being removed by the bucket full from Pensacola coast — Feds, BP still in public denial: http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/co...-public-denial
[12] INLAND: City officials find 66 ppm of COREXIT DISPERSANT near Florida/Alabama border (VIDEO): http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/in...a-border-video
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/
Topical current articles for those interested.
Please explain how sea water is getting into people's swimming pools.
Just how big is this swimming pool anyway? If it is 1200 cubic feet, it would have almost 1/2 gallon of the chemical in it. If it's a lawn pool like 12 ft diameter, 4 ft tall, it would still have 1/6 gallon. Even a kids pool at 4ft diam x 1 ft deep would need 2.4 fluid ounces.
Just how was this to get in? At this level, I would suspect an enemy purposely put that in their pool if this is true, and not from equipment out of calibration, or contaminated from a previous test.
Didn't Wild Cobra just destroy Nbadan on this same topic yesterday?
very well I think.
They're not getting seawater in their pools WC. It's in the article, the dispersant was sprayed and the wind carried the mist to their pool. Since then they have had minor medical problems that fit the MSDS. I wonder who their lawyer will be.
Check out the lab report...it was in there. I dont know these folks, and cant explain whats going on down there.
Keep in mind these guys are not the only ones complaining of issues with the swimming pool..
and also keep in mind you are not there WC, and all your conclusions are based on assumptions as a result.
Arent you destroyed here on a daily basis, you little numbskull weasel
Yeah, I read it in the article. Their friends are all thinking of getting their pools tested. Class Action?
sassa, Florida
Yes, but a mist to the magnitude I listed to get to 50 ppm?
Just how do you get 2.4 ounces of it in mist form over a 4 ft. diameter swimming pool, or 1/6th gallon over a 12 ft diameter, or 1/2 gallon over a normal sized personal ground swimming pool?
This place is how far inland? Looks like about 10 miles. Wow... I found an article with a goggle map link:
EXCLUSIVE: BP Spill Dispersant Found in Florida Pool. Tests find sickened family has 50.3 ppm of Corexit’s 2-butoxyethanol in swimming pool — JUST ONE HOUR NORTH OF TAMPA (lab report included)
Here is their covered pool from street view:
Looks like approximately 15 x 10 ft.
That is one magic mist. It stayed airborne (how many miles) and landed in that one pool. Sweet.
EDIT> And it's covered? WTF?
A covered pool at that!
misleading discussion here.
The point is not how it got there.
The point is toxicity of the dispersant.
How did it get there is enough quan y to register at 50.3 ppm?
The only solution I see is either the measurement was way off, or someone purposely put it in the swimming pool.
You should probably go live there.
So, in the face of first hand accounts, folks on the scene, lab reports and cited info throughout, you, WC, from all the way across the continent, with no first-hand knowledge whatsoever, are disputing this event as having any validity whatsoever.
And it just so happens to conflict with your own preconceived notions of what is going on with the spill.
And with your party affiliation's line as well.
It all adds up!
One rounded sentence suffices for the banner. JMO.
@Parker2112:
Who's pissing black again?
Why are you so willing to believe what is obvious bull ?
Explain how 1/4 to 1/2 gallon of that chemical, which is only 30% to 60% of COREXIT® EC9527A, and doesn't exist in COREXIT® EC9500A. It would require between 1/2 gallon to 1-1/2 gallon of the dispersant to do so.
Please explain to me how that is possible, 10 miles inland. If there was that much in the air, there would be serious issues other than just swimming pools.
Tell me. How many other pools tested for close to this level?
Are you looking in a mirror?
Question...
Do you ever research your statements, or do you one of those useful idiots that repeat the propaganda of others?
WC, how the do you expect anyone to trust your scientific and mathematical conclusions here? Why would anyone trust you on these issues? And anyway, you have a clear and admitted conflict of interest here. Please just give it up.
And 2. You want to say that I buy this solely because it supports my views? The thing is, you havent provided any credible criticism to cast doubt of the statements in this article. You have never shown where your rough calculations come from. You have no one double checking your work. Wheres the formula? What nmbers are you using here? Looks more like rough guestimates of a ready-made skeptic.
Sorry, but you arent really the goto guy when it comes to debunking the oil spill's affects...you are a biased source. You will not be trusted outside of remarkable transparency. And the transparency of the logic behind your statements is 0.
your continual "how could this happen? this couldnt happen." doesnt fly. Unless you can attack the facts as written, it happened.
Can you discredit the sources? No. The accounts? no.
Can you discredit the analyses? No. The lab? no.
All you can do is cry impossibility. from thousands of miles away.
I'm sorry if you don't understand certain things.
53 parts per million means that it isn't part of the remaining 999947 parts. The recipical of 0.000053 is 18,868. If we assume that pool to be 10' x 15' x 4' average depth, it would be 4,488 gallons. That, multiplied by 0.000053 is 0.236 gallons needed for that size pool of the chemical. If only 30% in in it, it would take 0.8 gallons of the dispersant. At 50%, it would take 0.4 gallons.
If you cannot explain how an aerial mist can travel the multiples of miles out at sea from where it was sprayed, to ac ulate in that quan y so far away, I'm all ears.
I don't know what the facts are except it is impossible for that much to end up in the swimming pool, without being intentionally placed there.
No, but I offered the possibility that the equipment was still contaminated from a different sample, and that maybe the calibration was off.
can you prove either theory wrong?
Maybe hundreds of miles. I don't know how close to Florida dispersants were sprayed. But yes, impossible. If there was that much in the air, the whole city would be having health problems, and populations within the path it was carried.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
