Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Top Kill Liveblog - Diary #17 - ...Failure? (329 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks weatherdude! (17+ / 0-)

    And hey, you're just in time for the presser. We've been waiting for an hour now!

    Earth: Mostly harmless ~ The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (revised entry)

    by yawnimawke on Sat May 29, 2010 at 02:54:51 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  You're welcome (21+ / 0-)

      And thank to all other ROV operators! When the cameras go out, we're really just taking these things out for a joyride. Nothing like buzzing a jellyfish to get the blood pumping.

      BP is my new nom-de-oil-plume
      Follow me on Twitter!

      by weatherdude on Sat May 29, 2010 at 02:56:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Any station doing live stream of (10+ / 0-)

      of the presser on the web?

      "Treat everyone in Dkos like an undecided voter at a phone bank." - Decorous Contrarian

      by WisePiper on Sat May 29, 2010 at 02:57:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've got it open at CNN (9+ / 0-)

        linky

        However, during the last presser, they didn't have the audio on! And I can't hear anything now. If anyone has another link (not CNN) to the live presser, I'd be much obliged...

        There is no more important struggle for American democracy than ensuring a diverse, independent and free media. - Bill Moyers

        by StepLeftStepForward on Sat May 29, 2010 at 03:04:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Audio off again :-( What's he saying? nt (4+ / 0-)

          There is no more important struggle for American democracy than ensuring a diverse, independent and free media. - Bill Moyers

          by StepLeftStepForward on Sat May 29, 2010 at 03:13:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They're admitting that topkill didn't work (14+ / 0-)

            and they're saying the next phase will begin and will take 4-7 days.

            •  They've directed BP to stop the flow of oil (6+ / 0-)

              through the LMRP.

              •  they're going to cap the LMRP. (8+ / 0-)

                They're going over all that they've already done.  They keep saying that what we really need to get to is the relief well.

                Trying to ask what chances of success will be now with this next step.

              •  They believe the LMRP cap has the chance (8+ / 0-)

                to capture 'a great majority' of the flow.  

              •  subsea dispersants will be necessary with this. (5+ / 0-)

                they're monitoring.  it will be required, depending on how successful they are with the cap.

                •  In Gulf Spill, BP Using Dispersants Banned in U.K (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mattman, politik, princesspat, weatherdude

                  The two types of dispersants BP is spraying in the Gulf of Mexico are banned for use [1] on oil spills in the U.K. As EPA-approved products [2], BP has been using them in greater quantities than dispersants have ever been used [3] in the history of U.S. oil spills.

                  BP is using two products from a line of dispersants called Corexit [4], which EPA data [2] appear to show is more toxic and less effective [5] on South Louisiana crude than other available dispersants, according to Greenwire.

                  We learned about the U.K. ban from a mention on The New York Times’ website. (The reference was cut from later versions of the article, so we can’t link to the Times, but we found the piece [6] elsewhere.) The Times flagged a letter [7] that Rep. Edward Markey, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, sent to the EPA on Monday. The letter pointed out that both the Corexit products currently being used in the Gulf were removed from a list of approved treatments for oil spills in the U.K. more than a decade ago. (Here’s the letter [7].)

                  As we’ve reported, Corexit was also used after the Exxon Valdez disaster [8] and was later linked with human health problems including respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders. One of the two Corexit products also contains a compound that, in high doses, is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems [9].

                  Given that the dispersants are EPA-approved, the choice of which ones to use was left to BP, which had stockpiled large amounts of Corexit and is now ordering more.

                  BP has defended its choice to use Corexit. A BP spokesman called the product [5] "pretty effective," and said it had been "rigorously tested." It is not testing other dispersants, he said, [5] because it’s focusing on stopping the spill. Mani Ramesh, the chief technology officer for Nalco, which makes Corexit, disputed claims that the product is harmful to the environment [10], telling Reuters that Corexit’s active ingredient is "an emulsifier also found in ice cream."

                  Dispersants like Corexit break up oil into droplets that linger longer in the water instead of collecting at the surface. The choice to use them is inherently an environmental tradeoff. Their use in the Gulf spill has limited the instances—and images—of oil-covered seabirds, but has kept the effects of the spill mostly underwater. Scientists have discovered giant plumes of dispersed oil [11] in the deep waters of the Gulf, though the EPA has said "there is no information currently available [12]" to link the dispersants to those deep-sea plumes. The plumes are now fast approaching the Gulf loop current [13], which could spread the oil into the Atlantic Ocean.

                  In a hearing this afternoon, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works that the EPA is working with BP to get less toxic dispersants [14] to the site as quickly as possible, according to Kate Sheppard of Mother Jones.

                  The EPA, while recognizing that long-term effects on the environment are unknown [15], has said that the federal government will regularly analyze [16] the effect of dispersants, and that it will discontinue the application of dispersants underwater [17] "if any negative impacts on the environment outweigh the benefits."

                  http://www.propublica.org/...

                  •  great. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mattman, weatherdude

                    U.K. might end up with dispersants anyway---via the Gulf Stream.

                    •  Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      politik, weatherdude

                      America

                      A dire report prepared for President Medvedev by Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources is warning today that the British Petroleum (BP) oil and gas leak in the Gulf of Mexico is about to become the worst environmental catastrophe in all of human history threatening the entire eastern half of the North American continent with "total destruction".

                      Russian scientists are basing their apocalyptic destruction assessment due to BP’s use of millions of gallons of the chemical dispersal agent known as Corexit 9500 which is being pumped directly into the leak of this wellhead over a mile under the Gulf of Mexico waters and designed, this report says, to keep hidden from the American public the full, and tragic, extent of this leak that is now estimated to be over 2.9 million gallons a day....

                      The dispersal agent Corexit 9500 is a solvent originally developed by Exxon and now manufactured by the Nalco Holding Company of Naperville, Illinois that is four times more toxic than oil (oil is toxic at 11 ppm (parts per million), Corexit 9500 at only 2.61ppm).  In a report written by Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark for Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. titled "Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview" Corexit 9500 was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed. Even worse, according to this report, with higher water temperatures, like those now occurring in the Gulf of Mexico, its toxicity grows....

                      A greater danger involving Corexit 9500, and as outlined by Russian scientists in this report, is that with its 2.61ppm toxicity level, and when combined with the heating Gulf of Mexico waters, its molecules will be able to "phase transition" from their present liquid to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and allowing their release as "toxic rain" upon all of Eastern North America.

                      Even worse, should a Katrina like tropical hurricane form in the Gulf of Mexico while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit 9500 are sitting on, or near, its surface the resulting "toxic rain" falling upon the North American continent could "theoretically" destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an "unimaginable environmental catastrophe" destroying all life forms from the "bottom of the evolutionary chart to the top".

                      http://www.eutimes.net/...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (141)
  • Community (69)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Elections (37)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Climate Change (30)
  • Culture (29)
  • Environment (29)
  • Science (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Media (21)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Law (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Spam (18)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • International (15)
  • White House (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site