Derby Trail Forums - The former Gulf of Mexico

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - The former Gulf of Mexico (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36546)

I've read some articles on dangerous gasses coming from the blown well.. VOC's or something like that. the articles said the VOC's could be toxic to people living in Gulf states (like me!!). Any truth to this? And if there is truth why arent the major networks talking about it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 658069)

Yes, there is truth to it, if one is exposed to the fumes. I hope you can't smell anything where you live?

BP appears to be covering up all it can regarding media, and most of the media is light and fluffy - hardly investigative or smart - nowadays anyway.

Riki Ott is a marine biologist who was involved in Exxon Valdez and the years of after-affects. She's been more and more vocally active in the press talking about citizens near the beach, and cleanup workers, developing respiratory symptoms and other problems from the fumes. Apparently Tulane U. sent a medical team down there this week, to start investigating it.

Edit: here, found this, dated May 1: http://blogs.reuters.com/environment...-valdez-spill/

Quote:

A friend in New Orleans is concerned about the oil fumes now engulfing the southern part of town. He says it “smells pretty strong–stronger than standing in a busy mechanics shop, but not as bad as the bus station in Tijuana.”

State health officials are warning people who are sensitive to reduced air quality to stay indoors, but anyone who experiences the classic symptoms of crude oil overexposure–nausea, vomiting, headaches, or cold or flu-like symptoms–should seek medical help.

This is serious: Oil spill cleanups are regulated as hazardous waste cleanups because oil is, in fact, hazardous to health. Breathing oil fumes is extremely harmful.

After the 2002 Prestige oil spill off Galicia, Spain, and the 2007 Hebei Spirit oil spill in South Korea, medical doctors found fishermen and cleanup workers suffered from respiratory problems, central nervous system problems (headaches, nausea, dizziness, etc.), and even genetic damage (South Korea). I have attended two international conferences the past two years to share information with these doctors.

During the Exxon Valdez spill, health problems among cleanup workers became so widespread, so fast, that medical doctors, among others, sounded warnings. Dr. Robert Rigg, former Alaska medical director for Standard Alaska (BP), warned, “It is a known fact that neurologic changes (brain damage), skin disorders (including cancer), liver and kidney damage, cancer of other organ systems, and medical complications–secondary to exposure to working unprotected in (or inadequately protected)–can and will occur to workers exposed to crude oil and other petrochemical by-products. While short-term complaints, i.e., skin irritation, nausea, dizziness, pulmonary symptoms, etc., may be the initial signs of exposure and toxicity, the more serious long-term effects must be prevented.”[1]

Unfortunately, Exxon called the short-term symptoms, “the Valdez Crud,” and dismissed 6,722 cases of respiratory claims from cleanup workers as “colds or flu” using an exemption under OSHA’s hazardous waste cleanup reporting requirements.[2]

Sadly, sick Exxon cleanup workers were left to suffer and pay their own medical expenses. I know of many who have been disabled by their illnesses – or have died.

I have repeatedly warned Congress in letters and in person to strike that loophole because it exempts the very work-related injuries–chemical induced illnesses–that OSHA is supposedly designed to protect workers from.

Remember the “Katrina Crud” and the “911 Crud?” Standby for the “Gulf Crud” because our federal laws do not adequately protect worker safety or public health from the very real threat of breathing oil vapors, including low levels typically found in our industrial ports, our highways during rush hour traffic, and our urban cities.

Oil is not only harmful to people, it is deadly to wildlife. I am sickened to think of the short-term destruction and long-term devastation that will happen along America’s biologically rich coastal wetlands – a national treasure and a regional source of income.

In Alaska, the killing did not stop in 1989. Twenty-one years later, buried oil is still contaminating wildlife and Prince William Sound has not returned to pre-spill conditions – nor, honestly, will it. The remnant population of once-plentiful herring no longer supports commercial fisheries and barely sustains the ecosystem.

Here's some more, plus a news video about VOC's:

http://spotlight.vitals.com/2010/06/...-bp-oil-spill/

I'm 40 miles inland from the Gulf.. and dont smell anything but Nasty Florida Humidity & Heat..

But I'm sure the problems are more in LA and MS right now... I do worry about fumes in the near future. I wish the EPA would shed some light on it...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658078)

Luckily this woman wrote at the end of her blog "In Alaska, the killing did not stop in 1989. Twenty-one years later, buried oil is still contaminating wildlife and Prince William Sound has not returned to pre-spill conditions – nor, honestly, will it. The remnant population of once-plentiful herring no longer supports commercial fisheries and barely sustains the ecosystem."

I was surprised to see this as a neighbor had one of his best fishing trips ever to Prince William Sound 2 years ago. This man lives fishing and bragged of the many species caught in a single trip both inland and in the sound. I looked up a Prince William Sound fishing report and was quite happy to find what I did…..

Report dated 6/8/10 put out by Alaskan Fish and Game

Salmon
• Sockeye fishing in the Eyak River ramped up this last week with many anglers catching their limits in an afternoon of fishing. Fish are dispersed throughout the river with boat anglers doing well downstream and shoreline anglers catching fish at the weir.
Salt waters
Halibut, Pacific Cod and Rockfish
• Small to medium-sized halibut are being caught consistently throughout the Sound. Locations such as Knowles Head, Knight Island, and areas around Port Wells have all been productive.
• Halibut anglers fishing Hinchinbrook Entrance and Middle Ground Shoal continue to have good luck halibut fishing with some larger fish (100 + lbs.) reported last week.
• Fishing for ground fish is always better the closer you fish to ocean entrances in Prince William Sound.
• Rockfish angling has been productive. Rocky benches adjacent to reefs are good places to find rockfish.
• Anglers continue to catch Pacific cod throughout the Sound while targeting halibut. They make a great meal when halibut are hard to come by!
Shellfish
• It’s been a great year thus far for shrimpers in the Sound. Great shrimping can be found throughout the Sound with Wells Bay, Blue Fjord, and areas around Chenega Island producing exceptional catches.
• Don’t forget your shrimp permit – everyone needs one.

http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/Fishi...il/area_key/11

so she obviously has an agenda and is short on facts at least in PW Sound so take her with a grain of salt.

i dont smell anything..save the grill...and the pool..obama tied up the whole area so he could go to the beach and enter 1 building for 10 min.. fn joke..

a small development

http://www.thedestinlog.com/news/pas...and-plans.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658103)

Did you read where the woman in the article said "HERRING" when she referred to the type of fish? Herring is not mentioned in your post. I've also read articles in the past about how Herring disappeared after the spill. So it is not false if you read it correctly.

They arent positive that the herring moved because of the spill, though it is the main theory. It is true they are gone though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 658184)

She made it sound like the entire eco-system relied on herring as mainly a bait food when in fact many species have obviously substituted and supplemented their diets and are now thriving including the whales.

Here's the local's take on the herring problem. The end to the moratorium on whale hunting makes more sense now.

http://www.adn.com/2010/02/08/112967...e-william.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656407)

Let's see what comes out regarding the now famous meeting 100 days into oil man Bush's White House. Where Cheney met in secret with the oil companies. No minutes, no records. The whistleblowers are gonna fall from the skies.

Wouldn't it be more interesting to find the motives behind the signing of the Deep Water Royality Relief Act? You know the one that implemented a royalty-relief program that relieved eligible leases from paying royalties on defined amounts of deep-water petroleum production over Federal Outer Continental Shelf lands. When leases for wells deeper than 800 meters went from 39 wells to 171 wells. Then in the next three years saw 712, 1110 and 771 additional leases issued? C'mon that's going from 39 deep water leases to 2764 in four years. The fact that the Clinton/Gore administration, you know the 'green guys', were the ones that signed the Act would seemingly make it a must see comedy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658103)

so she obviously has an agenda and is short on facts at least in PW Sound so take her with a grain of salt.

She is completely anti-drilling (any drilling). But her facts are true - there is still oil on the beaches, and negative effects due to the EV spill.

Clinton certainly was the first to open up offshore drilling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658256)

She is completely anti-drilling (any drilling). But her facts are true - there is still oil on the beaches, and negative effects due to the EV spill.

her portrail of the eco-system being barely sustainable is far from the truth but why let that get in her way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658260)

Clinton certainly was the first to open up offshore drilling.

but guess why in deep water?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658270)

her portrail of the eco-system being barely sustainable is far from the truth but why let that get in her way.

Your own post regarding fishing supports it - small/med fish; big fish, best found at the mouth of the bay, not within the spill area, etc.

One person isn't the only scientist following the effects post EV. Plenty of duplicate information out there if you want to discount this person entirely.

Quote:

Despite the extensive cleanup attempts, less than ten percent of the oil was recovered[15] and a study conducted by NOAA determined that as of early 2007 more than 26 thousand U.S. gallons (22,000 imp gal; 98,000 L) of oil remain in the sandy soil of the contaminated shoreline, declining at a rate of less than 4% per year.[16]

Both the long- and short-term effects of the oil spill have been studied comprehensively.[18] Thousands of animals died immediately; the best estimates include 100,000 to as many as 250,000 seabirds, at least 2,800 sea otters, approximately 12 river otters, 300 harbor seals, 247 bald eagles, and 22 orcas, as well as the destruction of billions of salmon and herring eggs.[5][19] The effects of the spill continued to be felt for many years afterwards. Overall reductions in population have been seen in various ocean animals, including stunted growth in pink salmon populations.[20] Sea otters and ducks also showed higher death rates in following years, partially because they ingested prey from contaminated soil and from ingestion of oil residues on hair due to grooming.[21]

Almost 20 years after the spill, a team of scientists at the University of North Carolina found that the effects are lasting far longer than expected.[20] The team estimates some shoreline Arctic habitats may take up to 30 years to recover.[5]

Exxon Mobil denies any concerns over this, [editorial comment: azzholes] stating that they anticipated a remaining fraction that they assert will not cause any long-term ecological impacts, according to the conclusions of 350 peer-reviewed studies.[21] However, a study from scientists from the NOAA concluded that this contamination can produce chronic low-level exposure, discourage subsistence where the contamination is heavy, and decrease the "wilderness character" of the area.[16]

I am amazed that some think there is no tipping point. That there exists no point where man can indeed permanently ruin this earth, and hasten our own destruction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658271)

but guess why in deep water?

What does Hannity tell you think regarding "why in deep water"? :D

The Republican-lead Congress/Senate created and passed the deepwater royalty relief act to give a $ break to big oil regarding their payments to the government, lead by the GOP reps of the gulf states. Clinton signed it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658282)

Hmmm then this article published a year before Bubba signed it must have been all wrong.

U.S. offshore operators got a boost last week when the Clinton administration offered its support for a deepwater royalty relief bill pending in Congress. (Brief Article)
The Oil and Gas Journal| April 18, 1994

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658330)

Hmmm then this article published a year before Bubba signed it must have been all wrong.

:zz: What is "all wrong"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658335)

:zz: What is "all wrong"?

Sorry you made it sound like Bubba just signed it. As though he wasn't for it but signed it to appease the Republicans?

The article points out that a full year before he signed it his administration publicly came out in support of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658340)

Yes, the bill was introduced and sponsored by the GOP (look it up) primarily of the oil states, and Clinton supported it and signed it to provide financial support for the industry. Clinton didn't create the bill, or tell Congress/Senate to make that law. The GOP oil men did that.

Bush then went on to completely remove government oversight via MMS. Obama then sent Salazar to fix that disaster, and Salazar did nothing.

The far right is trying to blame this disaster on Clinton and Obama, and completely ignore what happened during the eight Bush years in the middle. That's beyond absurd.

What do you think of that Rolling Stone article?