N.Y. Congressman: 'Thousands and Thousands to Die From Oil Clean-up Alone'

It is true that people are becomin very sick! I like how he stated the use of the corexit is good for PR, and thats it! It was reported on CNN.com that 162 people involved in clean up have become sick! I started a thread about this report but no one seems to be interested. S&F , great job on finding that video!! here is my thread -www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by trolleleet
The sad part is that there's enough poor people out there who would gladly take this job for 7.50$/hour.

Yep thats unfortunately the truth.

BUT, I wonder just how many folks are even UNABLE to get THAT job as a result of the tons of illegals in that area who are probably being quietly hired for related positions. Theres lot of illegals in that region from what I gather.

Its just another unfortunate occurrence for the REAL American citizens there. As if the folks there haven't been through enough already, now they cant even get $7.50/hr jobs because of illegals!

That's not what he said...

Ingredients for JOY dishwashing liquid:

Water , Sodium Lauryl Sulfate , Sodium Pareth-23 , C12-14-16 Dimethyl Amine Oxide , SD Alcohol 40-B , Undeceth-9 , PPG-26 , Sodium Chloride , Cyclohexanediamine , Polyacetate , Fragrance , FD&C Yellow #5 , D&C Red No. 33

Corexit or Joy, which is worse??

Here is another good one!




Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.

[edit on Tue Jun 29 2010 by DontTreadOnMe]

I have heard, by word-of-mouth that BP has enlisted inmates to help with the clean up.

I have searched online for some reports or proof relating to this, and I can only seem to find quite fleeting mentions of it... like this article which states that 80 inmates were enlisted, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is more. I imagine that may be why they are not bothering to provide them with adequate protection and wages.

I'm not debating the rights and wrongs of this, I just thought it might be useful to some of you.

Originally posted by b.jim
Ingredients for JOY dishwashing liquid:

Water , Sodium Lauryl Sulfate , Sodium Pareth-23 , C12-14-16 Dimethyl Amine Oxide , SD Alcohol 40-B , Undeceth-9 , PPG-26 , Sodium Chloride , Cyclohexanediamine , Polyacetate , Fragrance , FD&C Yellow #5 , D&C Red No. 33

Corexit or Joy, which is worse??

www.cleancaribbean.org...

1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
PRODUCT NAME : COREXIT® EC9500A
APPLICATION : OIL SPILL DISPERSANT
COMPANY IDENTIFICATION : Nalco Company
1601 W. Diehl Road
Naperville, Illinois
60563-1198
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER(S) : (800) 424-9300 (24 Hours) CHEMTREC
NFPA 704M/HMIS RATING
HEALTH : 1 / 1 FLAMMABILITY : 1 / 1 INSTABILITY : 0 / 0 OTHER :
0 = Insignificant 1 = Slight 2 = Moderate 3 = High 4 = Extreme * = Chronic Health Hazard
2. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Our hazard evaluation has identified the following chemical substance(s) as hazardous. Consult Section 15 for the
nature of the hazard(s).
Hazardous Substance(s) CAS NO % (w/w)
Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated light 64742-47-8 10.0 - 30.0
Propylene Glycol 57-55-6 1.0 - 5.0
Organic sulfonic acid salt Proprietary 10.0 - 30.0
3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
**EMERGENCY OVERVIEW**
CAUTION
May cause irritation with prolonged contact.
Keep away from heat. Keep away from sources of ignition - No smoking. Keep container tightly closed. Do not get in
eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Avoid breathing vapor. Use with adequate ventilation. In case of
contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. After contact with skin, wash
immediately with plenty of soap and water.
Wear suitable protective clothing.
Low Fire Hazard; liquids may burn upon heating to temperatures at or above the flash point. May evolve oxides of
carbon (COx) under fire conditions. May evolve oxides of sulfur (SOx) under fire conditions.

1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
PRODUCT NAME : COREXIT® EC9527A
APPLICATION : OIL SPILL DISPERSANT
COMPANY IDENTIFICATION : Nalco Company
1601 W. Diehl Road
Naperville, Illinois
60563-1198
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER(S) : (800) 424-9300 (24 Hours) CHEMTREC
NFPA 704M/HMIS RATING
HEALTH : 2 / 2 FLAMMABILITY : 1 / 1 INSTABILITY : 0 / 0 OTHER :
0 = Insignificant 1 = Slight 2 = Moderate 3 = High 4 = Extreme * = Chronic Health Hazard
2. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Our hazard evaluation has identified the following chemical substance(s) as hazardous. Consult Section 15 for the
nature of the hazard(s).
Hazardous Substance(s) CAS NO % (w/w)
2-Butoxyethanol 111-76-2 30.0 - 60.0
Organic sulfonic acid salt Proprietary 10.0 - 30.0
Propylene Glycol 57-55-6 1.0 - 5.0
3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
**EMERGENCY OVERVIEW**
WARNING
Eye and skin irritant. Repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol may cause injury to red blood cells
(hemolysis), kidney or the liver. Harmful by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed.
Do not get in eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Use with adequate ventilation. Wear suitable
protective clothing. Keep container tightly closed. Flush affected area with water. Keep away from heat. Keep
away from sources of ignition - No smoking.
May evolve oxides of carbon (COx) under fire conditions.
PRIMARY ROUTES OF EXPOSURE :
Eye, Skin
HUMAN HEALTH HAZARDS - ACUTE :
EYE CONTACT :
Can cause moderate irritation.

I would put my bets on the Corexit being a bit more toxic than dishsoap. Now there are three different types, these being the dispersants while the 9580 is a shoreline cleaner.

However both pose a health hazard if inhaled and without proper protection, it is no wonder people are getting sick. If you accidentally ingest it, you can even get pneumonia! Then imagine this crap in the water cycle, evaporating eventually, then condensing into clouds and you start getting toxic rain that burns everything it touches! Look at the mysterious rain that is killing crops and baby birds, could Corexit be to blame?

It could, and we are not even close to an end. Mark my words.

Originally posted by Baloney

Originally posted by trolleleet
The sad part is that there's enough poor people out there who would gladly take this job for 7.50$/hour.

Yep thats unfortunately the truth.

BUT, I wonder just how many folks are even UNABLE to get THAT job as a result of the tons of illegals in that area who are probably being quietly hired for related positions. Theres lot of illegals in that region from what I gather.

Its just another unfortunate occurrence for the REAL American citizens there. As if the folks there haven't been through enough already, now they cant even get $7.50/hr jobs because of illegals!

OMG, DEY TERK ER JERBS!

In all seriousness, I would blame people for their unwillingness to work for such a low wage. That and I'm sure that they know how dangerous the job is and refuse to take it.

Think before you turn a thread about oil spill clean-up into another illegal bashing thread. Being an American citizen, would YOU take a job like that? If not, then why do you care so much?

reply to post by LiveForever8


Wow!!......way to put a sensational title on an op!!.....misleading at best!

What he said was "Thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dieing"

He also used the words "anecdotal evidence"

You have presented someone's opinion as fact

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by LiveForever8

 

Wow!!......way to put a sensational title on an op!!.....misleading at best!

What he said was "Thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dieing"

He also used the words "anecdotal evidence"

You have presented someone's opinion as fact

from what i can tell, that is 90% of the posts in this sub-section.

The time i have to spend wading through the ZOMG's!!! just to find useful info is annoying. And the good, useful threads sink to the bottom because they arent sensationalistic.

shame.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by justadood]

reply to post by Argyll


Why thank you very much

In fact the title was not mine, it was from t his, which I had forgot to include in the OP, my mistake.

Thanks for adding greatly to this thread. It is very much appreciated.

reply to post by justadood



Couldn't agree more!

the title of this thread is "N.Y. Congressman: 'Thousands and Thousands to Die From Oil Clean-up Alone"

nobody said that......so why has it been posted as if someone did?

Originally posted by LiveForever8
reply to post by Argyll

 

Why thank you very much

In fact the title was not mine, it was from t his, which I had forgot to include in the OP, my mistake.

Thanks for adding greatly to this thread. It is very much appreciated.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

I would have thought that when you posted your OP, you might have watched/listened to the video you included in it..........obviously I was mistaken.

reply to post by Argyll


Sarcasm? What's that?

Nah, I never read the material or listen to the videos I post, it's a rule I have and I'm very strict with myself when it comes to my principles.

I just bash my face against the keyboard, press enter and then blindely post whatever comes up, which is why I started a thread in the NWO Forum last week about the pros and cons of breastfeeding.

Silly me.

Now, has anyone thought to mix COREXIT with seawater, methane, H2S, oil, and whatever else is coming out the pipe at the pressures and temperatures measured where they are inserting it and check to see how they interact in that environment?

I'd lay a pretty heavy bet that what results is nothing like what they expect.


But I sure wish someone would check on it and publish the results.

reply to post by justadood

In fact the title was not mine, it was from t his, which I had forgot to include in the OP, my mistake.

What do you think that was?

Originally posted by LiveForever8
reply to post by Argyll

 

Sarcasm? What's that?

Nah, I never read the material or listen to the videos I post, it's a rule I have and I'm very strict with myself when it comes to my principles.

I just bash my face against the keyboard, press enter and then blindely post whatever comes up, which is why I started a thread in the NWO Forum last week about the pros and cons of breastfeeding.

Silly me.

No chance of a straight answer then?



Post what the hell you want mate........might be an idea to stick to facts in the future though, sensationalism isn't all it's cracked up to be

[edit on 29/6/2010 by Argyll]

I'm shocked how little outcry there has been in the media against the use of chemical dispersants. It's indefensible and inexcusable when it is already so well proven that detergents make the problem worse.

The folly of using detergents was established back in 1967, when the BP chartered Torrey Canyon ran aground contaminating 120 miles of Cornish coastline and beaches and harbours in the Channel Islands and Brittany:

In the event, the use of detergents turned out to be "the worst thing possible", according to Dr Gerald Boalch, a marine biologist with 52 years' service for the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. After the spill, the MBA's staff devoted all their days to studying it. At first, the chemical sprays seemed to work. "The detergents made it look good," says Boalch. "We thought at the time it was doing a good job because the oil was disappearing." But colleagues conducted lab tests "and it was realised that it was making the oil more toxic because it was accessible to organisms". At sea, the oil was made soluble by the detergents, which then meant it was taken in by more living organisms. On shore, the chemicals destroyed lichens and other beach-life probably for ever, says Boalch. A year after Torrey Canyon, the MBA published its conclusions: it was scathing about the disastrous use of detergents, applied by methods "that were largely ineffective, uneconomic, and wasteful of effort".

The benefit of not using detergents was positively demonstrated at the same time and again in 1978 when the supertanker Cadiz spilt crude oil off Brittany:

...Boalch "insisted" the authorities should not use detergents. "They didn't and it recovered much quicker," says Boalch now. But the French had already proved wiser than the British when cleaning up Torrey Canyon crude. Rather than bombard the slick with Napalm or toxic detergents in 1967, they used powdered craie de Champagne – humble chalk, which sunk the oil more effectively than expensive, toxic British detergents. "It would seem that the French were successful in preventing the bulk of this very large oil mass from coming ashore," the MBA researchers concluded.

Oil spills: Legacy of the Torrey Canyon The Guardian, Thursday 24 June 2010

"The dispersants used in the BP clean-up efforts, known as Corexit 9500 and Corexit EC9527A, are also known as deodorized kerosene... With respect to marine toxicity and potential human health risks, studies of kerosene exposures strongly indicate potential health risks to volunteers, workers, sea turtles, dolphins, breathing reptiles and all species which need to surface for air exchanges, as well as birds and all other mammals. Additionally, I have considered marine species which surface for atmospheric inhalation such as sea turtles, dolphins and other species which are especially vulnerable to aspiration toxicity of Corexit 9500 into the lung while surfacing."

Toxiciology expert, Dr William Sawyer, The Observer, Sunday 16 May 2010
Louisiana oil spill: toxic chemical fear over BP's clean-up efforts

The relative toxicity of Corexit compared to the earlier chemical dispersants becomes a moot point given the tens of thousands of litres being pumped. Moreover, it is not so much the toxicity of the detergents, but their effectiveness as dispersants which does the damage: "making the oil more toxic because it was accessible to organisms".


[edit on 29-6-2010 by EvilAxis]

That 700,000 gallons of dispersant is very much lowballed. If you take into account the stuff being sprayed from planes and boats and the continous introduction of it into the oil leak coming from the bottom of the ocean, It is in the millions of gallons. Also the workers they have are the poor and the ones that need jobs and aren't risking saying anything (probably written in the contract that if you say anything we can sue you for this and that.) because they want to keep their jobs and put food on the table. Two horrible things about this situation is one, when the EPA and govt. told them to use another dispersant BP essentially said no and the govt. didn't do anything. And two, by them not doing anything and knowing that this stuff is banned in not only the UK but in many parts of europe because of the toxicity to human and animal life. They allowed it to go on and this along with the oil may poison thousands if not hundreds of thousands with "Gulf Oil Syndrome" (that will be the new name of the sickness) for years to come. Not to mention the damage that is being done to the plant and animal life in the area.

In America we allow anything to be used as long as it's a big company saying it's okay. Our Oligarchial crony capitalism will be our undoing. As one person said in a forum, this will be our version of Chernobyl and it will be horrible.