BP needs to stop trying to salvage this well and just cap it. Or the U.S. Government needs to do it for them if BP is too incompetent to take care of business. While BP has an incentive to try to recoup their losses and have tried to dome it and suck it up through a straw of a pipe... ask yourself, "What have they done to cap the well and stop it from spewing more into the ocean?"
Nothing. Haven't heard it mentioned yet. Maybe they can't do it until they build their second relief well or maybe their shareholders demand that they salvage as much as they can to offset the losses from this disaster. Maybe their fiduciary responsibility to their stakeholders provides a conflict of interest with all the citizens of the Gulf Region of the United States and other countries around the Gulf.
What would it take for the U.S. Government to say, "Enough is enough. We are sending in the best and the brightest to stop this problem today."
Let's demand action from Homeland Security to step in and protect the Homeland. Not just with booms and dispersants, but submersibles with the capacity to stop the flow.
This is a public health and safety issue that is essential to protecting the prosperity of citizens of the United States of America. If ever there was a time for the Department of Homeland Security to step up to the plate and demand action, it is now.
Kick BP out of there and fine them substantially for their failure to drill in a safe manner. Raise the fine limit to something proportional to the damage caused. $75 million is seriously inadequate to incentivize a company that nearly profits to the tune of $70 million per day.
The U.S. Government needs to step in now and kick BP out. It is a matter of National Security. It is a matter of protecting the Homeland. This is more important then border patrol. This is more important than bailouts for Greece. This is more important than volcanoes in Iceland. This is more important than primary elections between party-changers and teabaggers.
This is not Obama's Katrina. This is BP's disaster. They need to pay for it, but can they fix it? After the failed attempts so far and the solutions that allow them to continue to gather their precious crude are we really going to wait around for the, 'junk shot'? Now that's just a kick in the pants.
Showing posts with label environmental protection agency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environmental protection agency. Show all posts
Friday, May 21, 2010
EPA Posts Underwater Dispersant Monitoring Data
Under stringent plan, BP must conduct constant monitoring of dispersant use at leak source and provide data to the government
CONTACT:
press@epa.gov
202-564-6794
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 20, 2010
EPA Posts Underwater Dispersant Monitoring Data
Under stringent plan, BP must conduct constant monitoring of dispersant use at leak source and provide data to the government
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last night began posting results from the ongoing monitoring of BP’s use of underwater dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico at http://www.epa.gov/bpspill. EPA received this data from BP last night and posted it within hours. Dispersants are a chemical used to break up oil into small droplets so that they are more easily degraded. Dispersants are generally less toxic than the oils they break down.
This is part of EPA’s continued commitment to make air, water, sediment and dispersant monitoring data available to the public as quickly as possible and to ensure the citizens of the gulf region have access to all relevant public and environmental health information relating to the BP spill.
On May 15, EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard authorized BP to use dispersants underwater at the source of the Deepwater Horizon leak. As the dispersant is used underwater, BP is required to do constant, scientifically rigorous monitoring so EPA scientists may determine the dispersant’s effectiveness and impact on the environment, water and air quality, and human health. EPA is posting the information BP collects during the monitoring to ensure the public has access to this data.
While EPA has not yet identified any significant effects on aquatic life, EPA today also directed BP to begin using, within 72 hours, a less toxic and more effective dispersant. EPA took this step because BP is using this dispersant in unprecedented volumes and, last week, began using it underwater at the source of the leak – a procedure that has never been tried before. Given the unprecedented use, EPA wants to ensure BP is using the least toxic approved product.
Regardless of which dispersant BP uses, EPA has been and will continue to closely scrutinize the monitoring results. EPA still reserves the right to stop BP’s use of dispersants underwater entirely if the science indicates that this dispersant method has negative impacts on the environment that outweighs its benefits.
EPA continues to add information to its BP oil spill response Web site to keep the public informed about the impact of the spill and the EPA’s response. The public can also see results of EPA’s ongoing air, water and soil quality monitoring on the Web site.
The dispersant page: http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html
Continue to track EPA’s response to the spill: http://www.epa.gov/bpspill.
Additional information on the broader response from the U.S. Coast Guard and other responding agencies: http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com
CONTACT:
press@epa.gov
202-564-6794
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 20, 2010
EPA Posts Underwater Dispersant Monitoring Data
Under stringent plan, BP must conduct constant monitoring of dispersant use at leak source and provide data to the government
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last night began posting results from the ongoing monitoring of BP’s use of underwater dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico at http://www.epa.gov/bpspill. EPA received this data from BP last night and posted it within hours. Dispersants are a chemical used to break up oil into small droplets so that they are more easily degraded. Dispersants are generally less toxic than the oils they break down.
This is part of EPA’s continued commitment to make air, water, sediment and dispersant monitoring data available to the public as quickly as possible and to ensure the citizens of the gulf region have access to all relevant public and environmental health information relating to the BP spill.
On May 15, EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard authorized BP to use dispersants underwater at the source of the Deepwater Horizon leak. As the dispersant is used underwater, BP is required to do constant, scientifically rigorous monitoring so EPA scientists may determine the dispersant’s effectiveness and impact on the environment, water and air quality, and human health. EPA is posting the information BP collects during the monitoring to ensure the public has access to this data.
While EPA has not yet identified any significant effects on aquatic life, EPA today also directed BP to begin using, within 72 hours, a less toxic and more effective dispersant. EPA took this step because BP is using this dispersant in unprecedented volumes and, last week, began using it underwater at the source of the leak – a procedure that has never been tried before. Given the unprecedented use, EPA wants to ensure BP is using the least toxic approved product.
Regardless of which dispersant BP uses, EPA has been and will continue to closely scrutinize the monitoring results. EPA still reserves the right to stop BP’s use of dispersants underwater entirely if the science indicates that this dispersant method has negative impacts on the environment that outweighs its benefits.
EPA continues to add information to its BP oil spill response Web site to keep the public informed about the impact of the spill and the EPA’s response. The public can also see results of EPA’s ongoing air, water and soil quality monitoring on the Web site.
The dispersant page: http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html
Continue to track EPA’s response to the spill: http://www.epa.gov/bpspill.
Additional information on the broader response from the U.S. Coast Guard and other responding agencies: http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Dissolved Oxygen and Dispersants in the Gulf
At 20 C (room temperature) and standard atmospheric pressure (sea level), the maximum amount of oxygen that can dissolve in fresh water is 9 parts per million (ppm or mg/L). If the water temperature is below 20 C, there may be more oxygen dissolved in the sample. Generally a dissolved oxygen level of 9-10 ppm is considered very good. At levels of 4 ppm or less, some fish and macroinvertebrate populations (e.g. bass, trout, salmon, mayfly nymphs, stonefly nymphs, caddisfly larvae) will begin to decline. Other organisms are more capable of surviving in water with low dissolved oxygen levels (i.e sludge worms, leeches).
Question 1: Read the following statement and assess the normal range of DO for the Gulf of Mexico? Very Good, Good, or Bad
What is dissolved oxygen (DO) and why would dispersant application monitoring be stopped if DO levels dropped?
Dissolved oxygen (DO) analysis measures the amount of gaseous oxygen (O2) dissolved in the water. Adequate dissolved oxygen is necessary for good water quality. Normal ranges for DO in the Gulf area are 4 mg/l. The lower the concentration of dissolved oxygen, the greater the stress is on aquatic life. The evaluation criteria to determine further use of subsea dispersant include DO levels that are < 2mg/l and the results of toxicity tests.
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html#q011
DO Percent Saturation values of 80-120 % are considered to be excellent and values less than 60% or over 125% are considered to be poor.
Low DO levels may be found in areas where organic material (dead plant and animal matter or oil) is decaying. Bacteria require oxygen to decompose organic waste, thus, deplete the water of oxygen. Areas near sewage discharges sometimes have low DO levels due to this effect. DO levels will also be low in warm, slow moving waters.
http://www.ciese.org/curriculum/waterproj/saturation.shtml
What is dissolved oxygen (DO) and why would dispersant application monitoring be stopped if DO levels dropped?
Dissolved oxygen (DO) analysis measures the amount of gaseous oxygen (O2) dissolved in the water. Adequate dissolved oxygen is necessary for good water quality. Normal ranges for DO in the Gulf area are 4 mg/l. The lower the concentration of dissolved oxygen, the greater the stress is on aquatic life. The evaluation criteria to determine further use of subsea dispersant include DO levels that are < 2mg/l and the results of toxicity tests.
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html#q011
Question 2: Which organisms would you most expect to see while snorkeling in the Gulf of Mexico at 2 ppm DO? 4 ppm DO?
Monday, April 12, 2010
Re: "I thought this was a water blog... why do you keep talking about Organic?"
During the "Spring to Sandtrap" expedition last fall, we explored the Sacramento River from its source, all the way to the delta. Aerial views of this region emphasize the obvious importance of agriculture in the delta. In the past, this was one of the best salmon runs on the west coast of North America. Human impact through pollution, industrial fishing, and development practices have left us at a critical point in history to change our ways and help restore this great river.
One main source of contamination is through agricultural runoff in the region and the effects of this runoff would be minimized by adopting irrigation and pesticide application best practices to mitigate river contamination. This also helps farmers keep their costs lower by limiting pesticide costs, with the ideal goal being organic produce.
Organic produce sold locally through farmer's markets is an essential element of a vibrant community with a sustainable future. It ensures a local economy as goods and services are exchanged within the community. The food is healthier for you, it is shipped less distance, so it was riper when it was picked and its carbon footprint is diminished.
Organic produce is not new technology. Organic is not a new craze. It is quite literally as old as dirt. This is the food that evolved alongside the human race. This fantastic evolution of knowledge surrounding food enabled our survival as we picked between one plant or another based upon observation and an oral history passed down through generations. As a species, humans have the broadest variety of organic foods to choose from, as well as the most synthetic and processed ones to discern.
Lately, the game at the super market has been... which one of these soybeans was soaked in hexanes during the manufacturing process? Or does "not treated with the chemical rGBH" really mean "but we soaked it in rGBA!". Organics vs. Natural? What does a GMO monocultured crop label really look like? Food labelling laws allow for "evaporated cane syrup" to be used to disguise "sugar", and "spices" means MSG. Did you know methyl bromide can alkylate DNA, which creates foreign DNA building blocks, so instead of just Adenine-Thymine and Guanine-Cytosine pairs, you end up with a few methylated versions of these throwing a wrench in the cogs of DNA... is it any wonder that cancer is on the rise?
To understand this organic history of the evolution of plant and human within the confines of the natural environment... you first must understand evolution.
Herein lies the problem... 60% of you don't believe in Evolution. Unless you are scientists, then its like 3%, because you understand genetics. Which isn't that complicated really... there are only 4 basic building blocks for DNA... unless you alkylate them with methyl bromide or other chemicals, then there are unnatural building blocks. These end up making funny proteins that are deformed and don't work the same as the natural ones, so you get cancer and die.
One does not need to believe in evolution, because it's not a belief, it is an understanding of anthropology, history, and science, as a unifying theory of the development of the universe and earth from the big bang until today. Yes, we share many genetic similarities with apes and we have taught them sign language and communicated with them at a basic level. We eat plant matter that contains very similar molecules and proteins with those in our own bodies. The world as we know it was made possible by DNA, oxygen, etc... etc... etc... just trust me on this one, its a real well researched theory and while Darwin was incorrect on a few details, we've come along way since then, so read something published in the 21st century.
Meanwhile, while the discussion is going on about the past history of evolution, looking forward into the future allows us to analyze our options now to influence the path of evolution. This is a powerful position and a terrifying responsibility. Each year, we apply billions of pounds of pesticides to crops in this country. These pesticides were produced at a refinery, creating toxic byproducts and chemical pollution every step along the way. Download TRI.net program to pull the data of your choice regarding corporations and Toxic Releases into your neighborhood.
Many of these chemical companies have permits for Underground Injection Wells where they "release" their wastewater "under potable water sources" as if there are perfectly safe underground holding tanks impervious to our groundwater supplies. Especially with Volatile Organic Chemicals that may leach up through the groundwater supply. Time and time again, these chemicals are found leached into our groundwater supplies due to these practices. Just search, "Underground Injection" and "EPA" to read more about it. It only takes one bad corporate citizen to contaminate an entire aquifer with their industrial waste. This practice of underground injection of waste is short-sighted and should be reconsidered in the interest of public safety.
One way to help as a citizen is choose Organic produce grown locally to encourage a healthy environment and community. Choose wisely.
One main source of contamination is through agricultural runoff in the region and the effects of this runoff would be minimized by adopting irrigation and pesticide application best practices to mitigate river contamination. This also helps farmers keep their costs lower by limiting pesticide costs, with the ideal goal being organic produce.
Organic produce sold locally through farmer's markets is an essential element of a vibrant community with a sustainable future. It ensures a local economy as goods and services are exchanged within the community. The food is healthier for you, it is shipped less distance, so it was riper when it was picked and its carbon footprint is diminished.
Organic produce is not new technology. Organic is not a new craze. It is quite literally as old as dirt. This is the food that evolved alongside the human race. This fantastic evolution of knowledge surrounding food enabled our survival as we picked between one plant or another based upon observation and an oral history passed down through generations. As a species, humans have the broadest variety of organic foods to choose from, as well as the most synthetic and processed ones to discern.
Lately, the game at the super market has been... which one of these soybeans was soaked in hexanes during the manufacturing process? Or does "not treated with the chemical rGBH" really mean "but we soaked it in rGBA!". Organics vs. Natural? What does a GMO monocultured crop label really look like? Food labelling laws allow for "evaporated cane syrup" to be used to disguise "sugar", and "spices" means MSG. Did you know methyl bromide can alkylate DNA, which creates foreign DNA building blocks, so instead of just Adenine-Thymine and Guanine-Cytosine pairs, you end up with a few methylated versions of these throwing a wrench in the cogs of DNA... is it any wonder that cancer is on the rise?
To understand this organic history of the evolution of plant and human within the confines of the natural environment... you first must understand evolution.
Herein lies the problem... 60% of you don't believe in Evolution. Unless you are scientists, then its like 3%, because you understand genetics. Which isn't that complicated really... there are only 4 basic building blocks for DNA... unless you alkylate them with methyl bromide or other chemicals, then there are unnatural building blocks. These end up making funny proteins that are deformed and don't work the same as the natural ones, so you get cancer and die.
One does not need to believe in evolution, because it's not a belief, it is an understanding of anthropology, history, and science, as a unifying theory of the development of the universe and earth from the big bang until today. Yes, we share many genetic similarities with apes and we have taught them sign language and communicated with them at a basic level. We eat plant matter that contains very similar molecules and proteins with those in our own bodies. The world as we know it was made possible by DNA, oxygen, etc... etc... etc... just trust me on this one, its a real well researched theory and while Darwin was incorrect on a few details, we've come along way since then, so read something published in the 21st century.
Meanwhile, while the discussion is going on about the past history of evolution, looking forward into the future allows us to analyze our options now to influence the path of evolution. This is a powerful position and a terrifying responsibility. Each year, we apply billions of pounds of pesticides to crops in this country. These pesticides were produced at a refinery, creating toxic byproducts and chemical pollution every step along the way. Download TRI.net program to pull the data of your choice regarding corporations and Toxic Releases into your neighborhood.
Many of these chemical companies have permits for Underground Injection Wells where they "release" their wastewater "under potable water sources" as if there are perfectly safe underground holding tanks impervious to our groundwater supplies. Especially with Volatile Organic Chemicals that may leach up through the groundwater supply. Time and time again, these chemicals are found leached into our groundwater supplies due to these practices. Just search, "Underground Injection" and "EPA" to read more about it. It only takes one bad corporate citizen to contaminate an entire aquifer with their industrial waste. This practice of underground injection of waste is short-sighted and should be reconsidered in the interest of public safety.
One way to help as a citizen is choose Organic produce grown locally to encourage a healthy environment and community. Choose wisely.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
EPA Launches Web Forum on How to Best Protect America’s Waters
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking public input on how the agency can better protect and improve the health of our waters. For a two- week period, EPA is holding a Web discussion forum on how the nation can better manage some of the most significant water pollution problems facing our nation. The feedback received on the online forum will help shape the discussion at EPA’s upcoming conference in April, Coming Together for Clean Water, where we will engage approximately 100 executive and local level water leads on the agency’s clean water agenda.
"We look forward to reviewing the ideas and feedback from the public,” said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator EPA’s Office of Water. “This online discussion is for anyone who wants to share their best solutions for restoring healthy waters and creating sustainable communities across the country."
EPA wants to receive input from water professionals, advocates, and anyone interested in water quality issues about best solutions—from planning, scientific tools, low impact development, to green infrastructure and beyond—in controlling water pollution and how resources can be better focused to improve these efforts.
To join the discussion: http://blog.epa.gov/waterforum/
CONTACT:
Enesta Jones
jones.enesta@epa.gov
"We look forward to reviewing the ideas and feedback from the public,” said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator EPA’s Office of Water. “This online discussion is for anyone who wants to share their best solutions for restoring healthy waters and creating sustainable communities across the country."
EPA wants to receive input from water professionals, advocates, and anyone interested in water quality issues about best solutions—from planning, scientific tools, low impact development, to green infrastructure and beyond—in controlling water pollution and how resources can be better focused to improve these efforts.
To join the discussion: http://blog.epa.gov/waterforum/
CONTACT:
Enesta Jones
jones.enesta@epa.gov
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Be The Solution Shopping Center
Posts
