I dumped a quart of oil on my driveway & it evaporated!

[AnArmyVeteran]

Okay, I lied. I changed oil in the past and the oil pan accidentally got knocked over and it spilled onto the concrete driveway. It didn't evaporate. It spread out and permanently stained the driveway. Yeah, okay, maybe some of it turned into toxic fumes and went up to contaminate the air, but the rest remained blackening the concrete.

There is no way 75% of the oil in the gulf 'disappeared'. Just because it's out of sight doesn't mean it's left the minds of us smart enough to know oil doesn't just disappear. And BP's claim that they captured 25% of it is a lie too. There's no way they even got a tiny amount by skimming. Even when they had ships supposedly getting spilled oil they were only getting a small percentage of it.

Does anyone else believe 75% of the oil that gushed into the gulf non-stop for 100 days just disappeared or was captured? I haven't seen or heard of anyone verifying that claim. Have you? I also don't believe their claims that the seafood is safe to eat. I know I won't be eating anything out of the gulf.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. We are being lied to. Period.

And I am royally pissed off.

Royally.

[EFerrari]

28. Is it just me, Peggy, or does it seem like we get more versions of the Big Lie

nowadays? I don't mean under Obama but under the government generally. Just in the last ten years, Bush's "election", 9/11, WMD, Katrina, now this. It's as if it doesn't even matter any more if the government knows we know we're being lied to.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

31. I think you may be on to something here.

It sure feels like it to me.

I don't get it, especially under Obama, and I sure as hell don't like it.

[Poboy]

35. Yes indeed. The pretense is over. They create their own reality.

And we are supposed to just pretend to believe.

[EFerrari]

39. This is how they used to do things in small Central American countries

under the rule of US-backed dictators. We're now just a much bigger Guatemala.

[flyarm]

154. If that isn't the 100% truth! you got it! eom

[CanonRay]

130. I remember a saying by Soviet workers;

"We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us". Sounds kind of similar.

[jannyk]

50. It's like they looked at 'Baghdad Bob' and saw...

... a 'Role Model' to aspire to.

[paparush]

141. Like this?

[WinkyDink]

65. They need to get all the loot ASAP.

[EFerrari]

120. They're doing a good job. n/t

[obxhead]

94. I think it all comes from not having any aggressive news source.

Traditionally the news has helped to keep the lies in check. Todays commentary sources simply can not do that.

[LTX]

108. What big lie are you specifically referring to?

Is it that volatiles actually do evaporate? Is it that the clean up in the Gulf and on the Gulf coast (conducted by a lot of concerned, hard working folks who actually live here and not by flaming heads on internet boards) has actually had a significant impact? Is it that better than 3/4ths of the Gulf was not affected by the spill and remained open to commercial and recreational fishing? Is it that the NOAA reopened 26,388 square miles of the previously restricted area to commercial fishing on July 22? Is that New Orleans and other Gulf cities are not, in fact, toxic wastelands? Is that Gulf seafood from unrestricted areas is actually safe?

Or is the big lie you're referring to the one being pounded ceaselessly here on DU -- that Gulf seafood is poison, that the Gulf coast and Gulf cities are irretrievable toxic wastelands, that no one should go near the Gulf because there are "cancers" and "life threatening diseases" to be contracted there, and that the Gulf will never recover and is destroyed forever? You know, the big, malicious lies from the apocalypse fetishists who could give a rat's ass about the meaningless little people who actually live and work on the Gulf coast?

[BlueJac]

111. I think you made a wrong turn and ended up on this site

[LTX]

113. Why?

Because I'm not on the bandwagon with the flaming heads who piss all over the Gulf coast?

[Grinchie]

169. The only flaming head I see is the one on your shoulder.

Sorry to see your home turned into a toxic mess though.

It's something you are going to have to work through with BP, the US Government, and your Real Estate agent.

[backtomn]

134. Ooopps!! Can't let FACTS get in the way....

of you getting worked up about a story. The previous writer is correct. The oil for your car is merely of crude oil with volatiles and tar (mostly) removed. Why did coastal residents complain of oil fumes?? Why are they seeing "Tar Balls"? Does that maybe suggest that there is something at work here?? Read a little.....start with "fractional distillation".

[Kermitt Gribble]

115. You make a lot of claims

but don't give any sources to back it up. That's the point of the OP - that BP and the US Govt is making the same claims as you, but have no scientific data to back them up.

[LTX]

129. No, I make some very specific claims:

That oil volatiles do evaporate. Is it your contention that they don't?

That the clean up in the Gulf and on the Gulf coast has actually had a significant impact. Is it your contention that it hasn't?

That better than 3/4ths of the Gulf was not affected by the spill and remained open to commercial and recreational fishing. Is it your contention that this is false?

That the NOAA reopened 26,388 square miles of the previously restricted area to commercial fishing on July 22. Is it your contention that they didn't?

That New Orleans and other Gulf cities are not, in fact, toxic wastelands. Is it your contention that they are?

That Gulf seafood from unrestricted areas is safe to eat. Is it your contention that it isn't?

I am frankly sick and tired of the posts from folks who obviously do not live on the Gulf coast telling everyone that the Gulf is now a permanent toxic wasteland. It's not. How about this -- you tell me where you live and work, and I'll start flaming posts all over the internet about what a shithole it is and how everyone needs to wear a gas mask when they visit and everyone needs to stay away from your nasty, toxic food and restaurants. I'm sure your local workers and farmers and fishermen would greatly appreciate that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

133. I wish I could recommend your post

And let me add a few claims that they don't like to hear.

There are bacteria that have evolved that eat this stuff.

Spills did not start with humans...

If these bacteria were not around, the oceans would indeed be oil pits.

Oh and my favorite, I have asked my fish monger if and when they will carry gulf product. Mind you, on the West Coast they mostly have not before the spill. But I am willing to pay premium to support the gulf region.

:hi:

No, not all of us are flaming shit heads on message boards.

[JDPriestly]

219. Most of the fish and seafood will be safe, but some of it won't.

How are you going to know the difference. The oil has been dispersed but not really cleaned up. In time, you will have pockets of ocean that are contaminated in an area that may or may not be generally pretty clean. How are you going to know the difference? Are you going to trust individual fishermen to test the water and identify the pockets of oil?

Do you want to take a chance? Think how long it took to clean up after the Exxon-Valdez. The work on the Gulf is by no means done.

[nadinbrzezinski]

222. I've taken a chance

when I go to Mexico City and I consume, I know the horror, food caught in the Golf... in that bay where the Ixtoc I had it's ahem small blow out.

You think food is not tested? What is more, you think all food from the gulf is now a toxic waste, or potentially could be?

Yes I will go out of my way to try to find Gulf sea food. I want to support the people from the Gulf Coast. We call this solidarity and the culture of fear will not stop me from trying. But I also know that whatever I find here in the land of fruit and nuts, WAS tested, and IS safe.

[JDPriestly]

249. I can't afford to eat seafood. I'm sore because I used to live in Mobile

back in the 1950s. The beaches on Dauphin Island were beautiful expanses of white sand and wonderful sand dunes. The thought of any oil at all on those beaches makes my heart hurt. You have no idea how angry I am. BP could have avoided this whole thing by taking a few precautions. We need to revise our CERCLA and EPA law to make it worthwhile for companies to avoid causing environmental contamination. This whole thing could have been avoided.

Is the seafood safe? I don't know. But then, I'm not eating much if any beef because I don't know that it is being adequately tested or that the feeding of cattle is really being adequately supervised.

I suspect I know a bit more about oil than you do.

[Kermitt Gribble]

240. Your response is mostly speculation.

You provide no data as to how "significant" the clean up has been.

You have no way of knowing where the dispersed oil and dispersant is or how widely it will spread, and still provide no data.

You provide no data on how safe the Gulf seafood is, or how large an area has been affected.

I'm frankly sick and tired of posts from people who buy the BP/Govt claims as absolute fact when BP/Govt won't release any specifics on how they came to these conclusions.

I live in Clearwater Beach, FL, by the way, which you could have seen if you had the sense to click on my profile before attacking me. Tourism here is about half of what it was at this time last year, and I do support businesses on the beach as much as I possibly can.

[backtomn]

136. Read about "FRACTIONAL DISTILLATION" of crude oil

Crude oil contains gases (meaning fumes), the gasoline for our cars, the oil for lubrication, and tars for roads, etc. Some are volatile, some are not.

[JDPriestly]

217. Google toxic clean-up filling stations.

See what you find.

[EFerrari]

119. There is no scientist that doesn't work for BP or the government that agrees with you.

Now run along and find someone that will engage your bs because I'm already bored with you.

[LTX]

125. Yeah, those evil "government scientists"

are all lying. But since you now think "government" is the enemy (the tea party would be proud), why don't you point me to scientists who do claim that:

Oil volatiles do not evaporate;

The clean up efforts in the Gulf and on the Gulf coast have had no effect;

The entirety of the Gulf was affected by the spill;

The entirety of the Gulf should have been closed to commercial and recreational fishing, and should be closed today?

That New Orleans and other Gulf cities are toxic wastelands that should be avoided by humans; and

That Gulf seafood from unrestricted areas is unsafe to eat?

[EFerrari]

139. And become responsible for your chorus line of straw men? See above. n/t

[LTX]

146. So tell me,

where do you live and work?

[Grinchie]

171. Actually, I'd rather know where you live and work.

Because it certainly would reveal your motives in being such a pro gulf parrot.

[LTX]

176. I live and work

In Houston and New Orleans, splitting my time about 50/50 between the cities. You?

[Grinchie]

257. In the middle of the Pacific Ocean, on the most Isolated Archipelago on the planet(tm)

Out here, I see Corals Dying, the Fisheries Decimated, and unemployment in the 20% range.

I see huge expenditures in Military Buildup and pollution from their activities, while everyone on the mainland suffers from economic hardship.

I take offense at bloggers like you that insult the intelligence of people by claiming that we are against the people of the Gulf by being rightfully concerned for the safety of the Seafood contaminated by the largest industrial accident in the history of mankind.

Put your flaming chip away until you actually do some research and stop spouting off such hateful rhetoric.

[Grinchie]

170. Fine bird the Norwegian Blue...

How long did it take to train him to say those talking points?

[AikidoSoul]

228. Absolutist crap. N/T

[backtomn]

138. There is NO scientist.....

ignorant of the volatile material in crude oil. Look up "Fractional Distillation" of crude oil.....for a start.

I am amazed that someone so ignorant would try to tell others what scientists actually think. Please.

Pick up a book, check the internet.....try something that might be a little bit intellectually curious. You are worse than a bunch of evangelical Repubs. Yikes

[EFerrari]

140. More defense of a straw man. LOL. n/t

[backtomn]

143. Facts about the properties of oil is a straw man??

Only in your world. What was the "straw man"??

I note that you didn't question the facts.....just tried to hide from them.

[EFerrari]

155. It wasn't the issue. Maybe you need to look up "straw man".

And you're right. I avoid from time-eating, useless irrelevancy. In fact, you could call it a way of life.

lol

[Name removed]

145. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[backtomn]

147. Try some intellectual curiousity

Read about "fractional distillation" of crude oil.....properties and components of crude oil....differences between crude oil and car engine oil....temperature difference between the Gulf and the Alaskan coast......about stories from Gulf coast residents complaining about fumes.......why are "tar balls" coming ashore, but not oil??

Does any of that mean anything to you.....or does it just get in the way of your complaints about the administration??

[Binka]

148. Complaints About The Administration?

WTF:wtf: are you grousing about? My post was about sock puppets dear. Now please go away...scoot...bye bye.

[backtomn]

149. Sock puppets??

I didn't read any stories about sock puppets.....unless Obama's daughters have one.

I like it when they go down with a wimper. Happy to go away....now.

[Grinchie]

172. Another Strawman, as if you display intellectual curiosity.. Lol

I find it humorous because you are using my Sarcastic response to the OP about Empirical Evidence being invalid I posted earlier..

Man you guys are so fricking predictable.

When was the last time you distlled Sulfur, Lead, Phosphous, Cadmium, Mercury or other contaminants found in Crude Oil?

I'm sure you do it daily, millions of tons a year right?

[LTX]

204. Phosphous?

Spelling errors aside (just a bit of return snark), what's your scientific specialty and your area of research?

[Grinchie]

260. Obviously it is not Typing 80 Words Per Minute

Otherwise you wouldn't be pointing out my typo.

My Specialty and Area of Research?

Everything of course. It's the only way to survive these days.

[LTX]

262. So you live on Pukapuka?

And your scientific specialty and area of research is "everything"? Wow. So I guess it's safe to say that your training and areas of research include:

Analytical chemistry
Biochemistry
Computational chemistry
Electrochemistry
Geochemistry
Inorganic chemistry
Materials science
Medicinal chemistry
Organic chemistry
Polymer chemistry
Physical chemistry
Quantum chemistry
Spectroscopy
Stereochemistry
Thermochemistry
Thermodynamics
Physics
Acoustics
Agrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical physics
Biophysics
Computational physics
Condensed matter physics
Cryogenics
Dynamics
Electricity & Magnetism
Electronics
Fluid dynamics
Geophysics
Materials physics
Mathematical physics
Mechanics
Nuclear physics
Optics
Particle/High Energy physics
Plasma physics
Polymer physics
Quantum physics
Thermodynamics
Astronomy
Astrobiology
Astrochemistry
Astrodynamics
Astrometry
Astrophysics
Cosmochemistry
Cosmology
Extragalactic astronomy
Galactic astronomy
Physical cosmology
Planetary geology
Planetary science
Solar astronomy
Stellar astronomy
Biogeography
Cartography
Climatology
Coastal geography
Geodesy
Geography
Geoinformatics
Geology
Geomorphology
Geostatistics
Geophysics
Glaciology
Hydrology
Hydrogeology
Mineralogy
Meteorology
Oceanography
Paleoclimatology
Paleontology
Petrology
Limnology
Seismology
Soil science
Topography
Volcanology
Ecology
Freshwater biology
Marine biology
Parasitology
Population dynamics
Environmental chemistry
Environmental soil science
Environmental geology
Toxicology
Anatomy
Astrobiology
Bioinformatics
Biophysics
Botany
Bryology
Mycology
Lichenology
Palynology
Phycology (Algology)
Cell biology (Cytology)
Chronobiology
Conservation biology
Developmental biology
Embryology
Gerontology
Epidemiology
Ecology
Evolution
Evolutionary biology
Evolutionary developmental biology
Paleobiology
Paleontology
Genetics
Genomics
Proteomics
Population genetics
Microbiology
Bacteriology
Molecular biology
Structural biology
Morphology
Physiology
Immunology
Neuroscience
Histology
Systematics
Cladistics
Phylogeny
Taxonomy
Virology
Zoology
Arachnology
Acarology
Entomology
Myrmecology
Ethology
Helminthology
Herpetology
Ichthyology
Malacology
Mammalogy
Cetology
Physical anthropology
Nematology, and
Ornithology.


Well, like the old joke goes, on the internet, no one knows you're a dog.

[Grinchie]

266. Actually, I haven't tackled or run across Malacology or Myrmecology yet.

So I guess you certainly cleaned my clock.

I grant you permission to give yourself a hearty pat on the back for your cut and paste skills.

You might want to update your list though..
You missed plain old:

Biology, Forestry, Agroecology and Agroforestry, Information Technolgy, Psycholoy and Sexology

Otherwise, with the addition of the omitted items above, thats a pretty good list.

As Mel Brooks once said: "It's Good to be the King".

[LTX]

269. Psycholoy?

So you're in one of the more cryptic soft sciences? Or are you an IT mechanic, since you add that to the list? Or is it "plain old sexology?" Of course, it would be easier if you just said what field your research is in. No sense hiding your light under a bushel.

[Grinchie]

273. Well, it isn't typing 80 words per minute...

Everything.

De. Ja vu all over again.

[phleshdef]

218. Straw man, straw man! Everythings a straw man. If I just say "straw man", I winz teh argumentz!!!

[Chulanowa]

158. No, simply that crude oil is not made of 75% evaporable volatiles

Compounded with the knowledge that even "weathered" or "decayed" oil still is a toxic substance, simply one with shorter polymer chains.

No one's attacking the Gulf Coast here, so you can take that straw man somewhere else.

[LTX]

168. Huh?

No one said that 75% of the Gulf spill evaporated (though that is the false impression left by the o/p). Current estimates are that about 25% of the spill remains in open water or on the shoreline, and that about 75% has been effectively dealt with by capture, burning, skimming, evaporation, dissolution or dispersion. Evaporation estimates range from 25% of the total (on the conservative side) to 40% of the total (on the, in my opinion, improbably high side).

As for no one attacking the Gulf coast, you obviously haven't been following these threads lately. Let's just say that there is a contingent here for whom statements such as the following are routine:

"the harm has already been done and cannot ever be repaired, not by you, not by BP, not by the government, not even by God"

"yeah while people on the gulf contract cancers , and many life treatening diseases . . . while toxic fish get into our food chain for all to share the cancers and diseases"

The Gulf, "once contaminated, will never be the same in any of our lifetimes."


I live and work on the Gulf coast, and we are battling an image fostered daily in the press and on the internet that we are a toxic wasteland down here, and that Gulf restaurants, seafood, resorts, cities, beaches, and fishing grounds should be shunned. And if you don't think that this regularly spouted slander has had an impact, come on down and see for yourself.

[Chulanowa]

181. I grew up on the Gulf Coast

In my late teens, I moved to Cordova, AK. this is a little down a bit of a distance south of Valdez, AK. Ring a bell? The Cordova Fishing fleet and our meager little Coastie base were the first responders on the scene to the Exxon-Valdez spill. The effects of the spill on the workers, on the local population, and on the ecology of the place are well-documented.

"Dissolution" and "dispersion" do not actually remove the oil, LTX. It removes oil slicks. The chemicals involved are going to remain in the ecosystem for quite a long time, and will continue being dangerous for most of their existence, at least until they break down into chains short enough for bacteria to gain nourishment from them.

The harm has been done, and truthfully, all that can be done is wait for the Gulf of Mexico to metabolize the hydrocarbons now in its waters. That's really it. The Gulf Coast itself is very certainly not going to be "the same." I imagine several local shrimping and oyster fishing areas are going to be SOL. The blow to both adult populations and spawning grounds, plus the remaining "dispersed" chemicals in the water column mean that there is strong pressure on the fisheries, even before we look at the impact of actually fishing them, as well.

It's not the apocalypse, but let's not then try to claim that everything is hunky dory. The oil and the dispersants are going to remain a feature of Gulf Coast waters for a nice long time. They will gradually dilute either by spreading through the rest of the Gulf or getting carried out the the Atlantic, with some small amount ending up buried under sand or mud, broken into harmlessness by UV, or digested by microbes. It is going to take time for the fisheries to recover (for a hint, herring have still not returned to Prince William Sound. Twenty years after the spill) and I fully expect a lot of gulf residents, fishermen, and those who worked on the spill are going to fall ill.

Things will get better, but BP is telling us that everything is perfectly fine, four months after the biggest spill in US history, in one of its most ecologically important and most densely-populated shorelines. There's simply no way that that is true, it defies everything we know about oil spills, LTX.

If you are truly concerned about the Gulf Coast - and I'd like to imagine you are - then this is stuff you need to seriously think about. Pretending that everything is perfectly fine is only going to cause more damage to where you live. Despite the cliche, ignorance is NOT bliss.

[LTX]

187. Of course

dissolution and dispersion don't remove the oil. I never claimed they did. They only dilute its ecological effects, while at the same time, unfortunately, spreading those effects into additional niches. However, the Gulf has a rather unique bacteriological environment, and on the optimistic side (on which I remain), dilution may be of as much or more benefit in rapid recovery as mechanical collection.

And I'm not under some illusion that "everything is hunky dory," nor have I ever claimed as much. I am, however, frustrated at the persistence of the image of the Gulf and its coast as an apocalyptic wasteland. It is fostered heedlessly, and it has played a significant role in undermining the coastal economy. You are clearly more balanced in your assesment than most, but such balance appears to be relatively rare at times.

[Chulanowa]

191. I certainly got the impression that you were

BP's claim that 75% of the oil is now evaporated / dispersed / kittens is, plain and simply false. You don't need to defend their claim in order to protest the hyperbole being expressed by some about the situation.

it's actually two different arguments. pointing out that BP is feeding us bullshit, as the OP on this thread does, is not the same as claiming that Mobile Bay is now a toxic hellh- okay, okay, Mobile Bay has ALWAYS been a dump, bad example... But still.

[LTX]

202. Well, we'll have to disagree somewhat --

The current situation is perplexing to a great many scientists. There is, of course, a vested monetary interest on the part of BP in downplaying the spill and its effects, so its only natural to discount their assessments. But they are not the only ones assessing the situation, and it was in fact the NOAA that made the 75% capture, burn, skim, evaporate, and dispersion estimate. I don't have any legitimate reason at present to discount that estimate (and I don't view "government scientists are liars" as a reason). I think it is as irresponsible to claim that the current scientific estimates are giant conspiratorial lies as it is to claim that "everything is hunky dory."

[caseymoz]

227. How about government scientists are not actually independent anymore.

And it hasn't gotten any better under Obama than it was under Bush. Government scientists have complained that their work is interfered with by vested or ideological interests. Given, also, BP's demonstrated clout over other government agencies (the Coast Guard) there is little reason to believe numbers like that, which are fantastical anyway.

I'll put it like this, if they had made such an optimistic assessment after a year, if they, in the meantime, let independent scientists look a the Gulf, I would be more inclined to to believe them. Within a month? No.

If you look at an impartial history of corporations, and the reason they came into being in the first place, the fact is they are huge liars. It's irresponsible to ignore that and say that they won't lie, or to give them the BOD you would give to an ordinary person. They are in existence to avoid individual responsibility.

[Grinchie]

167. Got a chip on your shoulder?

It's obvious.

The seafood from the gulf was poisonous long before the Deepwater disaster. The Deepwater well, along with the Corexit has just made it exponentially worse.

If you disagree, I'm sure their will be plenty of very inexpensive seafood available for you until the fisheries collapse. It's your choice to make up your own mind, and I'm sure you've done thorought research into the matter, and are not depending on the "Apocalypes fetishists" on some blog like DU.

As far as not giving a rats ass about the meaningless little people who actually live and work on the gulf coast, the reality is that I don't. They don't give a rats ass about me or my scientific research, so why should I? They apparently are unable to read the detailed studies over the past 70 years regarding the carcinogenous nature of petroleum based products, and frankly have the attitude that "Life is Short, and then you die" attitude that allows them to consume toxins throughout their entire lives and not expect repurcussions.

Nor do I care about the people that are morbidly obese, and refuse to put the connections together as to why. Certainly, not all morbidly obese people are predisposed genetically.

No, your grandstanding is pretty hopeless and without merit. Feel free to consume mass quantites of whatever crap you think tastes good.

[Name removed]

173. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[caseymoz]

225. Why are you on such a high horse when you obviously have a vested commercial interests?

Other than your commercial interests in the area, and your obvious camaraderie with others that do, you seem to be a total, misanthropic asshole, who can't do anything but sling names and cite the words of authorities who are obviously in bed with big oil.

Is it now the conservative strategy to make sure progressive-liberals get the blame for the great economic repercussions of this spill rather than BP and its enablers, and to have conservative operatives troll the progressive boards and get the message out that way?

I'm suspicious.

[LTX]

250. Yes Indeed --

I have a "vested commercial interest" in the place where I live and work. And where I fish and play and sleep and eat and live my life. And my "camaraderie" with a whole bunch of other families, friends. neighbors, and colleagues who also live and work down here is indeed "obvious." To them and to me. I guess that's surprising to you. I can't imagine why, but I suppose it's always possible that you don't give a damn about where you live and work, so you view people who do as kind of weird and sinister.

And I'm citing the words of the NOAA, not big oil. You apparently believe that the NOAA is just a pack of lying "government scientists" who are "in bed" with big oil. Well, I don't. And in the twisted political world of today, that apparently makes me a "conservative operative" (although I am certain that conservatives would label me a "typical liberal" for accepting the findings of those same "government scientists.")

Down here on the Gulf, we've suffered the calamity and economic repercussions of an enormous oil spill caused by the negligence of BP. We've worked our asses off to clean it up and to mitigate its harm. We're very cognizant of what harm it did cause, and what harm it did not cause. The NOAA is cautiously optimistic about the short and long term consequences, and so are we. But we're not just battling the spill and its effects. We're also battling the economic repercussions of an image that the Gulf is now a permanent toxic wasteland. It's not. Not by a long shot. But reality has little effect on the parade of cranks who persistently declare the devastation to be total and irreparable, apparently for the sole purpose of proving their bona fides as seers of doom and decoders of conspiracy. I am angry with BP, and I am angry with the cranks who persist in slandering my home. I don't think that's so hard to understand.

Now, as for the post of mine that triggered your comments, I was responding to a poster who stated the following:

As far as not giving a rats ass about the meaningless little people who actually live and work on the gulf coast, the reality is that I don't. They don't give a rats ass about me or my scientific research, so why should I? They apparently are unable to read the detailed studies over the past 70 years regarding the carcinogenous nature of petroleum based products, and frankly have the attitude that "Life is Short, and then you die" attitude that allows them to consume toxins throughout their entire lives and not expect repurcussions.

That statement (coupled with a gratuitous non sequitur about the poster's hatred of fat people) led me to a rather logical conclusion, which I stated in my now deleted post.

Since you took umbrage with me, and not with him, I have to assume that you agree with the sentiment, and that you too could give a rat's ass about the meaningless little people down here on the Gulf coast. And that you too think of Gulf coast residents as a bunch of ignorant rednecks who have the attitude that "life is short, and then you die." And in your own twisted way, that I am now the misanthropic asshole for daring to defend the region against thoughtless slander.

Life is strange sometimes.

[caseymoz]

252. Yes, I'd call that an invested commercial interest.

What do you think I'm talking about? Just because your interests are deeper as well doesn't elevate them. Commercial interests are almost never in isolation of other interests. Such as: even organized criminals have family and friends they're looking after. Their interests run deeper than "just business." My advise: move. Don't try to further your interests at the cost of possibly poisoning other people and claim its somehow pure and that everybody should be behind it, and don't let the depth of your interest blind you to that fact. Otherwise, you're morally no better than tobacco companies.

Here's what I cite:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/final-deepwater-horizon-f_n_673880.html

My argument is not necessarily your opponents argument. I hope you know that. I don't give a rat's ass about the straw man of the little people that's being marshaled out now. Unlike him, I'll emphasize that. And I could see, from what he's saying, it will never be used to refer to him, nor can the working people Louisiana be counted on to come to his aid if it ever is. Like the petro-chemicals in the Gulf, people are too easily persuaded to disregard their own health by some very sly corporate campaigns, suppression of information, and disinformation. The fact is, though, people can resist it, but don't.

The the interests and fate of the "little people" are often brought out as a straw man simply to bring people back into the corporate fold. You hate the idea that I'd advise, like him, that you're making a mistake taking the hastiest, optimistic projections. Now you're stating your gamble as such a sure thing that other people should put their chips on it too, eat the oysters from the Gulf coast because not doing so is going to kill you and friends and neighbors commercially. Please, tell your friends and neighbors to move, too. Go into other businesses and keep in contact by the Internet. I have better bets to take with my life. So do other people.

I know that's hardship. However, I think it will be better for your family in the long run if you know when to fold.

But put the blame where it belongs, and remember, if BP gets away with this, it's just a matter of time till the next spill.

[LTX]

255. Thanks --

I think you have just proved my point. Histrionics in lieu of rational assessment.

[caseymoz]

256. It depends on how good your information is.

And if the information is suspect, and there's every reason to suspect it . . .

Like: the fact that BP has been caught red-handed manipulating information and suppressing independent information on this spill.

Like: that NOAA isn't set up to assess anything on this scale.

Like: that complaints have been made, prior to this crisis, that the Obama Administration has not kept its promise to return integrity and keep political interference from the work of government science.

Like: that the Coast Guard was caught red-handed serving BP's interests. Is NOAA be far behind?

Like: both BP and the Federal government have a vested interest in downplaying the seriousness of this. The administration doesn't want to be given the blame for not handling this.

Like: it's not even two weeks after the well is capped. Is that enough time to give, and go with, the optimistic assessment?

Yes, you're right. All those concerns are based on total histrionics. Every one.

I have to say, this spill has ended far better than I thought it would. I thought it probably would be the death of the whole damn Atlantic. If we haven't lost the whole Gulf, I'd be happy.

Sorry if your life doesn't go back to normal after this, or doesn't go back to normal for some years, but don't blame me. Also don't blame me if you cling to a way of life that's no longer viable. If not from this, then also from pesticide runoff and global warming. It would be better if you didn't poison yourself to prove me wrong, and don't say you weren't warned.

[LTX]

258. You know, ignorance is curable.

You clearly have no idea how big the Gulf of Mexico is. It is roughly the size of the Mediterranean. It is not the pond down the street from you. Here's a map of the closed fishing area:

http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sf/deepwater_horizon/BP_OilSpill_FisheryClosureMap_072210.pdf

You'll notice that nothing west of Port Arthur and south of 27 has been closed or effected. That's the entire Texas coastline to Brownsville, south through Tampico to Veracruz, the Sigsbee Deep and Campeche Bay, east past the Yucatan peninsula, north past the Cuba coast, the Keys and the Dry Tortugas to the Florida straits, and up the Florida escarpment and western Florida coast to Cape San Blas. But in your little world, I (and, I suppose, the other 40+ million people on the Gulf coast) should RUN FOR THE HILLS because the oyster beds off Plaquemines have been closed. Sheesh. Do you have any idea how idiotic you sound?

And referring to your earlier post, no, I'm not out poaching oysters from closed beds and trying to trick people into eating them, your fantasies of evil conspirators trying to murder people with poison fish notwithstanding.

Finally, you've kind of given away the histrionic farm by confessing that you believed that it "would be the death of the whole damn Atlantic" and that you'd be happy "if we haven't lost the whole Gulf." You are obviously susceptible to whatever whole-hog hysteria is tossed up by the apocalypse mongers. And it is precisely the kind of ridiculous disinformation in your posts that I am trying to combat with an appeal to some modicum of rationality. Unfortunately, nobody seems to be listening.

[caseymoz]

261. I'm going to wait for at least a year, maybe eighteen months.

If I'm, yes, pessimistic, it's not like I've seen a "leak" on that scale in my lifetime.

As for your culling oysters out of contaminated beds, that was not the image I was calling up. More like simply taking the first word of any authority set up to call them safe and then promoting them as such during Jazzfest.

There's no reason to think that this won't eventually poison areas apparently unaffected so far. A quart of oil can poison a swimming-pool size aquarium for most sea life. The one thing that will thrive very well is petrophagic bacteria, possibly not to the best ecological interests of other life during or after, analogous to how an algae bloom can kill everything else in a body of water.

Yes, I've traveled the Gulf by boat. It's vast. So is the Atlantic, and fisheries are collapsing all across it: not because of this oil spill, I'll emphasize. I wouldn't trust that the unaffected areas have been studied yet. There has definitely been no time for that.

Nor has there been time for the plumes to circulate. Oh, yeah, those plumes. Funny I haven't heard about them recently since BPPR with the support of the US government, took such effective control over reporting them.

[LTX]

263. Well, I haven't heard about the plumes either.

And frankly, that scares the crap out of me. I have an image of some beach remediation team on stilts calling their supervisor and saying, "guess what, we found them." But I remain cautiously optimistic. I'm sorry that I've been snarky. I'm kind of stressed out, and tired.

[caseymoz]

267. No doubt. And I'm sorry for what you've been put through.

And that I'm not being of any help. Good luck.

[JDPriestly]

216. The point of the OP is that oil just does not disappear that fast.

First, the volatiles that evaporated may have an effect on the health of people in the Gulf that will not be manifest for many years.

Second, while the people of the Gulf and, perhaps even BP, have diligently tried to retrieve as much of the heavier portions of the crude and other chemicals spouting from the leak(s), there is, necessarily, still a huge amount left in the Gulf

The damage from the Exxon-Valdez remained for years and some traces of it may still be there. As the OP points out, if you ever spill oil on cement (and it does not contain some of the very heaviest parts of the crude oil), you will learn that it does not just disappear. You have to fully remove it. You can look at some of the toxic waste sites around old filling stations. The clean-up of those sites is a huge job if it can be adequately done at all.

Third, the oil in the Gulf has not disappeared, it is simply spreading out. The problem in the future is likely to be that patches oil suddenly appears where it was not previously seen. There will be contamination of seafood and fish -- but you won't be warned of it.

The Gulf will look great, but the poisons will still be there in unexpected places and quietly do their damage. Some seafood, some fish will be perfectly safe, but some won't. We either have to find a way to test the seafood and fish from the Gulf or avoid eating any of it because some of it will not be safe. This is my opinion.

[caseymoz]

223. My concerns with what you're saying

1) How much harm did the volatiles do before they evaporated? When the volatiles evaporate does that necessarily reverse or repair the harm?

2) Who owns NOAA and the Coast Guard? And who was able to put an arrest order in effect for people taking pictures within 65 feet of an effected area? And quite possibly, still has areas like that in effect?

3) If you're concerned that the truth about the healthiness of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast just isn't getting out, why does BP and the Coast Guard see fit to keep people from reporting about it?

The claim that 3/4 of the Gulf is utterly unaffected is simply impossible to verify. Claims that the rest is bouncing back so fast are . . . impossible to believe coming so quick, that is for anybody who isn't gullible or doesn't have a vested commercial interest in the Gulf's economy, as you obviously do. Fact is, it's far too soon to scientifically make a claim like that. Far too soon. Especially since, by most reports, independent scientists outside of NOAA haven't been allowed to look into it. What scientists outside of the government have given are scenarios on how it might be coming back.

I'd say, if the Soviet Union had been "healthy" at the time, this is exactly the way they would have been presenting the immediate aftermath of Chernobyl.

The smart money stays away from the Gulf. Sorry.

[tnlefty]

244. Dudley?

Or the most arrogant Doug Suttles...is that you?

I mentioned to many people around me that this PR stunt of changing the 'foreigner', now former CEO Tony Hayward with the good ole' boys who supposedly grew up on the Gulf wouldn't work. I saw Dudley lying on c-span at about 1-2 weeks into this disaster. Doug Suttles is a lying sack and everyone around me is just as pissed if not moreso at these 'Murican guys as Hayward.

Keep it up, keep trying, it isn't working when so many from the Gulf are stating otherwise. Bought off sons of bitches are bought off sons of bitches.

Where are these apocalypse fetishists anyway?

[Fire1]

268. Hey! LTX! Don't listen to that shit!! YOU ARE DEAD ON POINT!!

GAME! SET! MATCH!:thumbsup: :toast:

[Grinchie]

164. It's not just you that's noticing...

It's happening on a broad scale, including State, County, Police, Banking, Insurance, and Pharmaceuticals.

We all know that the MIC has carte blanche to lie under the premise of "National Security".

The only way to fight back in my opinion is to stop playing the game, exit from the rat race with dignity, and craft our own Heaven on Earth with the sweat of our own labor.

It's healthy, frugal, and immensely liberating. I've done this for nearly 10 years now and I am so happy I have left the system behind, yet I still have the same or better lifestyle than when I made 6 figures in the Software industry.. Go figure.

Simplifying does not automatically imply that your standard of life declines, like the Corporations would have you believe. The only thing that declines is the market for their cheap chinese crap that is bought on impulse without clearly defined needs on the part of the consumer.

I manage a huge farm with only a few hand tools, just like the people that lived here prior to Europen contact 170 years ago.

It can be done, but I guarantee people would lose a few pounds doing it, which is a good thing.

[EFerrari]

237. Sounds good to me, Grinchie.

:)

[Grinchie]

259. It took a lot of soul searching to get the courage to stop believing the Corporate mantra.

It is difficult to start questioning everything you have been taught, along with what your parents have been taught, and follow through until you actually wake up.

And believe me, you wake up with a Smile everyday of the year, simply because you have the free time to decide what activities you are optimized for on any particular day, or can adjust if their is rain, or determine that it's time to let your body recuperate from some strenuous labor or mild injury.

As the veils are lifted as time goes on, you see the outrageous lies we are told on a daily basis, and can actually prove the lies by simply heading out into the world and taking note of the Thousands of empty homes and businesses that litter the countryside.

I don't believe that people are allowing themselves to wake up. I think they are still hoping that its only a nightmare, and somehow, the economic, ecologic and societal collapse are just a bad dream.

Maybe it is just a nigtmare, but the reality is that it is wise to prepare for them, and time wasted pretending that any of these events will not occur is time lost, and the environment to adapt may not be as friendly as it currently is, and maybe prohibitively costly due to lack of time, social unrest, or the need to find a source of food, water and shelter.

I do not believe that hoarding canned goods is the answer, nor do I believe that a shotgun guarantees my security, but I do know that I have abundant food, water and resources for shelter, and that is the best security that anyone can have.

Augment the above with a good selection of hand tools for woodworking, and you are all set.

Life can be extremely simple once you get past the lies we've been led to believe for the last to years, starting during the last Great Depression, where all the people were led to belive that Industry could supply everything we need to be happy, which is a lie. Happiness starts at home, and a love for ones self, and the ability to treat yourself to the love of work, enough free time to remain healthy, and the ability to attract other healthy people to share your life, and avoid the rest of the damaged people that go out of their way to prey upon the success and happiness of others.

Life is good, and we can make Heaven on Earth. The trick in knowing the difference between Heaven and Hell. Most people don't or are taught to expect it after a miserable life of toil and sweat. What is up with that?

[Poll_Blind]

2. I've been thinking about that too. n/t

PB

[old mark]

3. That's why oil comes in carefully sealed containers - if it evaporates,

it's no good and you have to buy more. Just vanishes like honesty in government...


mark

[cherokeeprogressive]

4. You shoulda poured some dispersant on it. That would have taken care of the problem.

It totally saddens me to see what bullshit we'll swallow just to seem "supportive" of the President and his administration.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. Dispersant = detergent

Detergent does indeed work well for cleaning up oil. I use it myself on greasy dishes and dirty clothes.

It saddens amuses me to see the shit people make up in order to criticize the president.

[rucky]

40. Do you drink your dishwater afterwards?

[tabasco]

62. Do you drink water straight from the Gulf of Mexico?

[WinkyDink]

66. Shrimp. Fish. Oysters. You eat them? Think about it.

[Grinchie]

175. I haven't eaten Seafood for nearly 20 years... It's too late for the oceans.

[flyarm]

159. when I am swimming in the Gulf , which is my back yard , I do or did tend to get it in my mouth..

now i won't swim in it and may never ..at least not for years and years beyond now.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

92. Do you dump the detergent down your drain afterwards?

Or do you send it to a hasmat facility because OMG, detergent is incredibly toxic and causes cancer and dissolves cell membranes and junk!

[rucky]

135. That wastewater gets treated.

at least it's supposed to.

[Grinchie]

178. Your detergent is not required to label ingrediants, as it is a Consumer Product.

Ever smell the sickly scent of Laundry detergent as the clothes dryer churns out thousands of cubic feet of contaminated air, adulterated with who knows what?

Why is unscented Detergent more expensive than "Springtime Fresh" detergent?

Why does corexit have ingrediants that could be considered precursors to Pesticides and Nerve agents?

Please do tell, I can't wait to see you responses Mr. Fructose. Or is it Pron?, or is it syrup, because your arguments are just about as substantial.

[glowing]

53. saying that shit is just like Dawn is bull shit, otherwise, they would be cleaning the birds with it

instead of Dawn.. No the dispersants kill the animals and it will be killing people along the Gulf coast well into the future..

[leveymg]

60. Dawn probably doesn't burst blood cells like Corexit . . . I hope it doesn't.

Corexit is a much more highly concentrated industrial solvent. Among its laboratory tested side-effects is that it's highly toxic to fish eggs and embryos, as well as the effect, if ingested, of dissolving the membrane surrounding blood cells. BP turned the Gulf of Mexico into a giant vat of liquid smog mixed with blood thinner. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/6/15/884/26549

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

93. They could use it to clean bird, yes.

It's better formulated to disperse oil in water, while dawn is better formulated to disperse oil from dishes, and birds apparently.

But the chemistry's the same.

You could look it up yourself. Corexit's used and been used for numerous household products for years.

It's fucking detergent.

[SOS]

106. A home experiment may be in order

Find an apple tree in your neighborhood.
Pour one gallon of crude oil around the base.
Now eliminate the surface oil with Correxit.

Wait until fall.
Enjoy the harvest!

[backtomn]

142. You have a problem with scale here

Take one drop oil and drop it a half of a mile from the tree. Wait until harvest. Send the apples to me, if you are worried.

[SOS]

274. Re: scale

June 8, 2010 - The New York Times:

Scientists Awed by Size, Density of Undersea Oil Plume in Gulf

"Vast underwater concentrations of oil sprawling for miles in the Gulf of Mexico from the damaged BP well are unprecedented in "human history" and threaten to wreak havoc on marine life, a team of scientists said today, a finding confirmed for the first time by federal officials.
Researchers briefed reporters on a two-week cruise in which they traced an underwater oil plume 15 miles wide, 3 miles long and about 600 feet thick. The plume's core is 1,100 to 1,300 meters below the surface, they said.
"It's an infusion of oil and gas unlike anything else that has ever been seen anywhere, certainly in human history," said Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia, the expedition leader.
Bacteria are breaking down the oil's hydrocarbons in a massive, microorganism feeding frenzy that has sent oxygen levels plunging close to what is considered "dead zone" conditions, at which most marine life are smothered for a lack of dissolved oxygen."

Convenient for BPs stock price that everything magically corrected itself in eight weeks.


http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/08/08greenwire-scientist-awed-by-size-density-of-undersea-oil-98517.html

[K Gardner]

153. This is the most absolutely DELUDED response I have ever seen. Do some research before you

make a further fool out of yourself. There is a reason it is banned in the U.K.

Read this for a good summary: http://usahitman.com/?p=13072

Then go wash yourself in it. It's NOT fucking detergent.

[Grinchie]

179. Obviously, you haven't seen the other DELUDED responses made by Mr. Fructose

This poster like to choose the shallowest, most immature explanation to support the point at hand, in the hopes that he may be able to contaminate the thread with some propaganda that might somehow control the damage.

Unfortunately, Mr. Fructose has been called out many times on similarly framed issues, and the jig is up for him.

Personally, I love reading his ridiculous posts, as well as poking him repeatedly with those darned facts he seems to have a problem with.

[flyarm]

162. The Chemistry is NOTHING THE Same..are you that ignorant?

Can you read? can your research anything before spewing utter garbage and disinformation and out right lies?


Toxic Corexit dispersant chemicals remained secret as feds colluded with Big Business
Friday, June 11, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)


(NaturalNews) After weeks of silence on the issue, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally decided to go public with the list of ingredients used to manufacture Corexit, the chemical dispersant used by BP in the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. There are two things about this announcement that deserve our attention: First, the ingredients that have been disclosed are extremely toxic, and second, why did the EPA protect the oil industry's "trade secrets" for so long by refusing to disclose these ingredients until now?
As reported in the New York Times, Brian Turnbaugh, a policy analyst at OMB Watch said, "EPA had the authority to act all along; its decision to now disclose the ingredients demonstrates this. Yet it took a public outcry and weeks of complaints for the agency to act and place the public's interest ahead of corporate interests."

On the toxicity question, you could hardly find a more dangerous combination of poisons to dump into the Gulf of Mexico than what has been revealed in Corexit. The Corexit 9527 product has been designated a "chronic and acute health hazard" by the EPA. It is made with 2-butoxyethanol, a highly toxic chemical that has long been linked to the health problems of cleanup crews who worked on the Exxon Valdez spill.

A newer Corexit recipe dubbed the "9500 formula" contains dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, a detergent chemical that's also found in laxatives. What do you suppose happens to the marine ecosystem when fish and sea turtles ingest this chemical through their gills and skin? And just as importantly, what do you think happens to the human beings who are working around this chemical, breathing in its fumes and touching it with their skin?

snip;

But it gets even more interesting when you look at just how widespread this "chemical secrecy" is across Big Business in the USA... and how the U.S. government more often than not conspires with industry to keep these chemicals a secret.


do read it all!!!!!!!!!!!!


http://www.naturalnews.com/028974_Corexit_dispersants.html

I haven't heard of people dying from dawn..but this shit..oh yeah..just ask the families of the dead rescue workers from the Valdez!!

Hey ladies ..this person thinks you are going to die using Dawn in your sink!!

Wow the ignuts are out in full force!

[K Gardner]

165. This is a wonderful article. Thanks for posting it!

[Grinchie]

182. Actually, I believe people are dying from Dawn

It just takes 40 years for the symptons to show up, and by then, there is no clue how the disease or whatever ailment was able to take advantage of the host came about.

I had the misfortune to leve nest door to a tenant in an Apartment complex that did 4 loads of laundry a day, every day. She used "Springtime Fresh" detergent (The cheapest you can buy at WalMart).

When the clothese were in the Dryer, the fumes would vent out in between our building, and contaminate the whole neighborhood with "Springtime Fresh" scent.

I thought about the widespread contamination of my fresh air, and the overwhelming scent, which drove me indoors due to headaches. I thought, what is this scent composed of? What makes it so robust so to be able to survive a clothes washer, and then into the clothes dryer intact, and then become vaporized and pumped out into the environment?

When I did the research, I found out that Consumer Product are not required to divulge the ingrediants such as "Scent". I had to do deep research into it and found that these detergent scents are based on Acetone!

No wonder I was getting headaches.. I was inhaling massive quantities of the VOC Acetone, along with whatever else they through in their to mask the Acetone smell...

Americans are clueless regarding what they consume, and it has come to the point where they don't even have to print the ingrediants of Paint on the cans anymore, not like the manufacturers would like to list Mercury, Barium Sulfate, Cadmium, or other "Fillers" used in paint, which is made from what is left over from the Fractional Distilling process of Crude Oil....

[flyarm]

210. You do have a Valid Point!

when i lived in Kansas, I had a neighbor who had the symptoms of heart attacks, she was rushed to the hospital numerous times , and the docs were perplexed, she had all the symptoms of a heart attack , without having the actual heart attack..

Wht they finally concluded ..she was allergic to all chemicals we all take for granted..she had 5 boys so was using cleaners all the time in her home, and then with people spraying their yards and gardens, the chemicals all became so toxic to her , she would have these non heart attack heart attacks.,( I dont know what it was called.) It was caused by over use of the chemicals!

All the neighbors were asked to stop having their yards sprayed for bugs and weeds or to notify her if we were having anything done with the use of chemicals so her home could be sealed up and she would stay indoors.
She had all the carpet in her home ripped up and hard wood put down as a replacement.


From then on I stopped using all that crap in my home..I went to using Vineagar as the main cleaner in my home, and have continued to do so for almost 30 years! Now all my friends and family do the same thing!
And when I saw how much I was saving, I liked it even more! I buy the big giant jugs of it and I have it in all the bathrooms in Spray bottles. I use a steam cleaner for the hardwood floors..

I don't use any of that Bounce stuff or crap in my dryer..it has many side effects. Look them up..it will make you vomit!

Warning..it takes a while for your family to get used to smelling the Vineagar..they were used to the nice smelling chemical crap..but now my family relates the smell of Vineagar to "CLEAN"

My girlfriends son 18 yrs came over last week and he said when he comes into my house..it always smells like "HOME"..my girlfriend and I just laughed! I had just washed the floors with vineagar..it probably made him hungry! BOYS!!

[Grinchie]

265. I recently spoke to a Naturopath that described this very common condition of Hypersensitivity

She was the first Doctor that I have been to in about 3 years since I abandoned the Allopathic Medicine and started treating myself.

I spent 2 hours for a cost of 120 dollars, and it was the most informative session I have ever had regarding health, nutrition, and the hazards of these Chemicals that have been propagandized into the lives of ever Consumer until they wake up one day with Rashes, panic attacks, false heart attacks, seizures, latex allergies, etc.

Just imagine for a moment how disrupting it would be if you one day became morbidly allergic to Latex.. It's in just about everything.. From Underwear, to Spandex, to Golves, to Tupperware, Sippy Cups. It's actually quite an eye opener when Surgeons suddenly can't wear Latex surgical gloves any more. In fact, it's almost as bad as a beekeeper becoming allergic to bee stings one day, which happened to a friend of mine.

Another example was a and Exploration Geologist in Nevada, that one day, became deathly allergic to Sagebrush. That was the end of his career searching for minerals in the outback of Nevada, thats for sure.

As far as Vinegar, we use it, along with Boraxo, which makes a very fine liquid hand soap if you slake it and pour off the liquid. We also use Dr. Bronners quite a bit because we like it, and have used it for years.

For disinfection, we run an Ozone generator 24 hours a day in the house which sanitizes the surfaces.

Ozone is a miracle substance that the Corporate Powers that Be would like to eradicate, but they can't. Instead, the EPA hobbles the manufacturers of Ozone Machines by forcing them to produce very little Ozone which barely has any effect in large rooms. Plus, the technology to meter out the very low dosage is incredibly expensive for the manufacturer. What I do is comb second hand stores for these defective machines, and modify them to increase their output, or scavenge the import Ozone element for use in a homemade device.

I grew up in Los Angeles in the 60's and 70's, and I rememember days where the smog was so bad that it physically hurt to take more than a shallow breath. In those days, it was just plain old smog, and cars did not have Catalytic Converters. The whole problem eventually morphed into High Ozone days, and ominous warnings were blasted out on the radio for all people that had impared lungs to stay indoors to avoid the bad old Ozone, which they labeled "Ozone is the primary constituent in Smog".. In fact, the California Air Resources Board still trumpets this marvelous piece of Propaganda on their website.

While semantically, one could agree with this statements, it omits the fact that Smog is a mixture of Unburnt Hydrocarbons, as well as Oxides of Nitrogen, which are formed when Ambient Air, composed of 70% Nitrogen, and 18% Oxygen, with fractions of other gases is used to burn fuel. The large amount of Nitrogen in the Air mixture creates Oxides of Nitrogen, which are released into the atmosphere in large quantities. The Nitrogenous compounds react with water vapor and sunlight and create molecules of Nitric Acid, and in the process, create Ozone or O3.

What is most humorous about placing all the blame on Ozone, is that it conveniantly puts the Nitric Acid and Unburnt Hydrocarbons behind the curtain, and now paints Ozone in a very bad light.

Nikola Tesla had patents on Ozone Generators in the late 1800's. He virtually lived in high Ozone environments for much of his life. He died at 70 years of age, but not from lung damage.

If you were to withold Oxygen from the human organism, life would cease in a very short time. It drives our amazing metabolism, and each of our cells has a protective enzyme called perixodidase to protect itself from oxidation by Oxygen Ions. When a cell gets old, damaged, diseased or depleted, the enzyme goes away, and the cell is oxidized and flushed away through normal cleansing mechanisms. It is normal to want to get rid of damaged or dying cells, and we do that constantly ever moment of our lives. To think that we are born with a finite number of cells that we have to preserve at all costs is just more Corporate Bullshit for face cream, happy pills, and miracle youth enhancers.

The Corporations would like you to believe that cells never become contaminated or adulterated with their "Fresh Scent" products, tobacco smoke and the chemicals they deliver to your bloodstream, and other sordid compounds that are in the air, water and food we eat.

That fact is that it takes a while for these adulterants that make it into our system to be cleansed. It takes months to replace all of the cells that are contaminated. Some cells are never replaced (perhaps bone cells, teeth, etc..)

No, the fact is I have been breathing high concentrations of Ozone for years. When I first started, I went to a cleansing/herxheimers effect with symptoms of a mild cold, but after that my lung function is positively optimal, and I am totally convinced that it is a good thing by the lack of any illness for the past four years.

It's funny, because China, and the European Union use Ozone for everything from sterilizing Operating rooms, disinfecting Public Swimming Pools, deodorizing subways, and sell these Ozonator units in a robust consumer market, while the EPA goes out of it's way to make the units too expensive for the mainstream American to afford. It's a big scam by Pharmaceuticals, that sits on top of the smokescreen that hides the true danger of Fossil Fuel emissions, and makes one of the most useful molecules inaccessible or difficult to obtain..

An Ozone machine costs next to nothing to operate, does so much, and is dirt cheap and easy to make. It is the regulations that were written by Lobbyists against Ozone that make the devices so outrageously expensive.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

230. LOL, Natural news.

Aren't they the fluoride people? It's shit tier pseudoscience hack work.

"After weeks of silence on the issue, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally decided to go public with the list of ingredients used to manufacture Corexit, the chemical dispersant used by BP in the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster."

Actually, the chemical supplier of corexit decided to go public with their proprietary formula after public demand.

"First, the ingredients that have been disclosed are extremely toxic"

The big "secret ingredient" turned out to be detergent.

"dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate"

dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate is a detergent. It is found in certain laxatives, as well as numerous other household products. It is not the active ingredient in laxatives.

What happens when sea turtles eat it? Probably the same thing that happens to you if you eat detergent, it depends on how much you eat. If you don't eat to much, nothing will happen to you whatsoever. And that's a lot better than eating big globs of oil which haven't been dispersed.

"breathing in its fumes"

dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate doesn't produce fumes. It's not volatile. If a basic chemistry education didn't tell you that, a simple search should have.

Christ, it's like arguing with Creationists.

"I haven't heard of people dying from dawn..but this shit..oh yeah..just ask the families of the dead rescue workers from the Valdez!!"

Nobody has ever died from exposure to corexit or any other detergent. Anybody who claims otherwise is a liar and a fearmonger.

[flyarm]

231. LMAO..you! Didn't I just read Fructose causes Cancer..watch it ..You may already be it! eom

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

233. joke's on you.

I mean, you accuse me of not understanding chemistry, and then you post an article from "Natural News" with blatant chemistry errors right in the body.

Do you worry about fluoride in the water supply? Vaccines causing autism? Because that's the level of pseudoscience they post on your source.

[tnlefty]

245. Nope, BUT

I do buy Seventh Generation cleaning products.

[Chulanowa]

183. This reminds me of a movie quote...

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

[flyarm]

211. great response!!!..good one!! wonder if it will be understood by the previous poster? nahhh..eom

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

232. And you remind me of another movie quote.

"Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream. "

[Chulanowa]

247. You're claiming the chemistry of Dawn and Corexit are the same

Even if all you're talking about is the detergents in each, that is still false.

And the claim that "Dawn is formulated to disperse oil from Dishes" rather than water is... jesus, that's so bad that it's not even wrong. Do you even know what a detergent is?

get the fuck out. Shit.

[Cetacea]

254. EPA just reported that it is "no more or less toxic than oil"

This..detergent.

[Veilex]

109. I don’t think you and I are reading the same thread....

Let’s see here…

Post # 28 by EFerrari blames the government generally
Post # 35 by Poboy agrees with EFerrari that the Govt. are making up their own rules
Post # 65 by WinkyDink suggests a greed motive with the Govt.
Post # 94 by obxhead suggests it may be due to a lack of aggressive news sources…
Nope… no comments against Obama
In fact, I don’t see a single posting on this thread that criticizes the president. I see a lot of blame thrown at the government in general…and frankly that is where it belongs…not just with the senators or representatives, but the enormous amount of corrupt and often republican leaning middle men that were put in place from previous administrations.
I understand and respect your desire to defend the president. I hope you would also be willing to call the president on any missteps as well. But more to the point, if you’re going to refute those who are making comments against Obama, I would suggest to you that first, you must find a thread where that is actually happening.

[flyarm]

157. It is a toxic Chemical sort of detergent..it is Highly Toxic soup! Read here about Corexit>>

Toxic Corexit dispersant chemicals remained secret as feds colluded with Big Business
Friday, June 11, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)


(NaturalNews) After weeks of silence on the issue, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally decided to go public with the list of ingredients used to manufacture Corexit, the chemical dispersant used by BP in the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. There are two things about this announcement that deserve our attention: First, the ingredients that have been disclosed are extremely toxic, and second, why did the EPA protect the oil industry's "trade secrets" for so long by refusing to disclose these ingredients until now?
As reported in the New York Times, Brian Turnbaugh, a policy analyst at OMB Watch said, "EPA had the authority to act all along; its decision to now disclose the ingredients demonstrates this. Yet it took a public outcry and weeks of complaints for the agency to act and place the public's interest ahead of corporate interests."

On the toxicity question, you could hardly find a more dangerous combination of poisons to dump into the Gulf of Mexico than what has been revealed in Corexit. The Corexit 9527 product has been designated a "chronic and acute health hazard" by the EPA. It is made with 2-butoxyethanol, a highly toxic chemical that has long been linked to the health problems of cleanup crews who worked on the Exxon Valdez spill.

A newer Corexit recipe dubbed the "9500 formula" contains dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, a detergent chemical that's also found in laxatives. What do you suppose happens to the marine ecosystem when fish and sea turtles ingest this chemical through their gills and skin? And just as importantly, what do you think happens to the human beings who are working around this chemical, breathing in its fumes and touching it with their skin?

snip;

But it gets even more interesting when you look at just how widespread this "chemical secrecy" is across Big Business in the USA... and how the U.S. government more often than not conspires with industry to keep these chemicals a secret.


do read it all!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.naturalnews.com/028974_Corexit_dispersants.html

[Chulanowa]

166. Actually it's a solvent, not a detergent.

All a detergent does is break oils into smaller particles. When you wash your dishes, the detergent is pulling oil off the plates and isolating htem, basically turning the dishwater into a suspension similar to salad dressing; mostly water with little oil droplets filling it.

A solvent like corexit (the full components of which are not disclosed, but it does contain significant amounts of Butoxyethanol along with sorbitan, an emulsing agent) reacts chemically with hydrocarbons, bonding with and breaking them. This creates a solution of water and the compounds created when the solvent and the oil react. Unlike a suspension, the chemicals will not precipitate out, unless another chemical reaction is created. UV light could cause such a chemical reaction, but in this particular case it would be able to do so only very slowly, since most of the corexit / oil solution is pretty well spread (dispersed, you might say!) in the water column, and UV radiation does not penetrate very far in water.

Comparing the stuff to your dishwashing detergent is about like... well, you know how when it snows, the nutballs claim that the snow disproves global warming? Yeah, it's like that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

234. Oh for fuck's sake.

The 2-butoxyethanol is the solvent. It's the formulation that helps the "active" ingredient, dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, get into the oil.

"the full components of which are not disclosed"

Actually, the full components have been disclosed. And if you were really interested in the stuff, you'd have learned that by now.

The big mysterious ingredient that all the fearmongers were freaked out about turned out to be dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate.

What is that? Fucking detergent.

"A solvent like corexit (the full components of which are not disclosed, but it does contain significant amounts of Butoxyethanol along with sorbitan, an emulsing agent) reacts chemically with hydrocarbons, bonding with and breaking them. This creates a solution of water and the compounds created when the solvent and the oil react. Unlike a suspension, the chemicals will not precipitate out, unless another chemical reaction is created. UV light could cause such a chemical reaction, but in this particular case it would be able to do so only very slowly, since most of the corexit / oil solution is pretty well spread (dispersed, you might say!) in the water column, and UV radiation does not penetrate very far in water."

What kind of dipshit creationist hackwork pamphlet are you getting this from.

Neither detergent nor solvents chemically react with oils to break or form bonds. Detergents form micelles with oil. Making it soluble in oil. This basically turns one giant oil glob that chokes birds and turtles and whales into tiny little molecular scale blobs, which means they can be rapidly broken down by U.V. as you mentioned, or microoganisms, which I'm not sure if you believe exist.

"Comparing the stuff to your dishwashing detergent is about like... well, you know how when it snows, the nutballs claim that the snow disproves global warming? Yeah, it's like that."

I don't think people who are demonstrably scientifically illiterate are in much position to be comparing anybody else to other people who are scientifically illiterate, in this case global warming deniers.

[Chulanowa]

246. It is a detergent, yes

It is a different detergent from what is found in Dawn (indeed, most household detergents are either sodium lauryl sulfate or ammonium lauryl sulfate) but it is a detergent. In fact, dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate is used as a stool softener.

Harmless stuff, right? Well, detergents aren't exactly human-friendly. Like any other chemical they have an effect on our bodies. They're not lethal, but they cause damage to us. This is why even gentle, oh-so-innocuous Dawn dish soap still dries out your skin and weakens your nails; the detergent acts on your skin in the same way it acts on your plates. Stronger detergents have stronger effects, of course, as do greater concentrations.

However, the detergent, much like the sorbitan, is kind of a non-issue with Corexit. The trouble comes from the light petroleum distillates that these are mixed with; the solvents. Tell me, Fructose, would you be willing to dip your scrotum in a jar of automotive degreaser? How about Mr. Clean? Nail polish remover or turpentine? How about plain ol' kerosene? I'd be a little hesitant to swish my boys around in this stuff, and I imagine you would be too, and for the same reason; solvents are toxic and damaging to most forms of life.

My dipshit creationist hackwork pamphlet is found on the back of every bottle and can of any kind of solvent you can buy, and several other products besides that have these distillates. They're bad for you. They always have been, and odds are, pouring several million gallons of the stuff into the Gulf of Mexico, along with the oil it is being used to break up, in addition to the detergents involved, is probably not going to have a net positive effect on the eco system.

if you have a fishtank, you can try it at home, and tell us what happens.

[Grinchie]

174. Ahh Mr Fructose chimes in....

Yep, just detergent, please move along....

You DLC stooges are incredible. Better get back to work Mr. Monsanto.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

235. My goodness.

Looks like a person with a history of 9-11 truther posts, vaccines cause autism, fluoride is poisoning our water supply, AND HIV/AIDS denialism is a little upset.

Oh noes.

[Grinchie]

271. Don't forget H2O2 Adulterated with Monsanto Sequestrants...

Or the Hazards of GMO and High Fructose Corn Syrup..

Looks like it's too late for you however.

[jgraz]

5. Only a billion more quarts to go and you can have the Coast Guard cover it up for you

I'd get to work if I were you.

[AnArmyVeteran]

236. I'd have to drain the oil out of 200 million cars to get that much oil!!!

I'll work on it though. :)

[jgraz]

248. Now think about all that in the Gulf

Scary, isn't it?

[Warpy]

6. I got 99% of the oil off my driveway

using clay kitty litter to absorb what was on the surface and an industrial degreaser to get rid of the rest. Now it's just a pale brown stain that you have to look for.

However, that's not what's happening in the Gulf. The dispersed oil is in the food chain, fouling gills and guts. The undispersed oil is partially congealed and will be washing up all over the Gulf and the east coast for decades.

Anybody who thinks the world oil disaster in our history has just magically evaporated into thin air is too stupid to live.

[DCBob]

7. Surely you understand refined engine oil is not crude oil..

from article "Evaporation of Oil Spills" in Journal ASCE..

Evaporation is the most important change that most oil spills undergo. In a few days, light crudes can evaporate as much as 75% of the starting oil mass andmedium crudes up to 40%. Heavy or residual oils may only evaporate to the extentof 10% in the first few days following a spill.

http://www.boemre.gov/tarprojects/120/120BG.PDF

[Honeycombe8]

17. That's not a 10-4, good buddy.

Check the Valdez area, 20 years post-spill. Still polluted, despite massive "cleanup" and "evaporation."

Oil is a natural substance, 'tis true. But only where it naturally appears in nature. It is not natural, say, in the open waters of the Gulf. Therefore, it pollutes and kills; such open waters, once contaminated, will never be the same in any of our lifetimes. It is not natural in, say, your body. If you drink a cup with dinner, you will die. You will never be the same. Even if it takes you a really, really, long time to drink it, and some of it evaporates. It is not natural in a marsh. If the natural oil enters a marsh, that marsh will disappear. Forever. The grass will die, and that is the only thing that keeps a marsh where it is. Once the marsh is gone, so do the creatures that depend on it (oysters, nesting birds, etc.). Even though some of the oil may "evaporate."

Don't be fooled. Once oil is spilled (or any other truly toxic substance...and that is what oil is), the area of the spill will be contaminated for many decades, and there will be permanent damage. There is no such thing as a 100% cleanup. "Cleanup" is a term that means...we'll clean it up to the best of our ability. Most people assume it really means "I'll totally clean it up." But that's not what that term means.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. LOL wut?

Crude oil is a mixture of hydrocarbons. Light weight hydrocarbons evaporate, large weight hydrocarbons do not. Motor oil is made of the heavier stuff, it does not evaporate.

In both the Valdez Spill and the Gulf spill and every other spill of crude oil, much of the oil evaporates, and the heavy stuff evaporates.

Now as it turns out, the heavy stuff biodegrades. Both from sunlight, and from microorganisms which eat it.

How fast it biodegrades can vary from place to place. Those tropical conditions in the Gulf are much better for those microorganisms than the conditions in Prince William Sound.

Really, these are very basic scientific principles that have been topic of discussion by lay people for months now.

There's no excuse for not understanding them.

[Honeycombe8]

27. As I explained to you, despite your quotes from textbooks, the Exxon Valdez area is

still polluted 20 years post-spill, despite a massive "cleanup" and "evaporation" (also known as...the environment taking care of the problem).

The area is much, much better, of course. But it's still polluted.

I think you are maybe too impressed by the numbers, and are not thinking clearly about what it means for millions of gallons of "natural" oil to be dumped in an unnatural location, where it kills everything it touches. Instead of being impressed by evaporation numbers, think instead of the length of time the millions of gallons are in the water, length of time the creatures are exposed to it before it "evaporates," and the number of gallons that do not "evaporate."

You will quickly see the common sense problem. Think of it in practical terms. Better yet...roll your pants up, take your shoes off, and go for a walk on the Gulf shore, as I have done in years past. Visually look at the tar balls (which exist, even when there are no spills), pick them up, handle them, smear them on your body...find a Pelican and smear the tar all over it...whisper into the Pelican's ear, while it slowly dies, that the tar will "evaporate."

There is no substitution for real world common sense. Read up on the Valdez area.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. "The area is much, much better, of course."

And the gulf is much, much better than it was a few weeks ago.

Nobody's saying the oil is gone, people who know the facts say there is much less of it than there used to be. The people who just want to attack Obama and want the gulf to be worse off than it actually is disagree.

"There is no substitution for real world common sense."

You can't laud the benefits of common sense while being supportive of loony conspiracy theories and lacking basic, high-school level scientific literacy

[trotsky]

59. "people who just want to attack Obama and want the gulf to be worse off than it actually is"

Nail on the head.

[Statistical]

75. +1. n/t

[flyarm]

212. oh bullshit , they have covered up a shit load of it..who the fuck do you think you are kidding?

wow ..pathetic you are!

Worse than that..tell your bullshit to the people who have had to breathe corexit..tell them that when they get cancers!and more.

I was one of them that had to breathe that shit..you can not and will not bullshit me!

you are ..well I won't say it..it is too ugly for words!

[DCBob]

42. The Exxon Valdez spill is comparing apples to oranges.. that was a heavier crude plus

obviously, the temperature is much cooler there than the Gulf. But those kinds of actual facts probably dont make any difference to someone like you.

[Warren Stupidity]

56. a) both are fruit - this aphorism never made any sense;

b) in this case both are crude oil, so it is like comparing one variety of apples to another. Otherwise you make a very good point, perhaps unintentional, that we should in fact look at other massive spills to understand what is happening with this one.

[DCBob]

73. ok pecans and potatoes.. hows that?

regardless.. its different.

[Warren Stupidity]

151. your assertion was that we should not look at other oil spills

to understand this one, and that assertion seems devoid of reason. of course we should look at other oil spills, understand the differences, and use that understanding to think about this one. Assertions such as yours are calls to not use critical thinking but to instead use the official pronouncements.

[Grinchie]

186. Maybe you should look at the difference between Citrus and Rosacie

The Apples part is Cold northern Climate, and the Oranges part is Tropical Climate, compounded with exponentially larger amounts of Oil.

Does that help you see the difference?

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. One reason is that the bacteria are far less efficient

since they only have a few months to work on it.

As is, you really think spills started with humans? And you believe nature has not had natural means before?

See La Brea for a natural point of oil oozing out.

The environment changes from place to place, and the GULF is warmer, hence the bacteria will have more time to eat filet mignon. For them this is great... and will take care of it a little faster.

Regardless you believe in that in geologic time this is the end of life on earth?

And yes, the gulf will have problems... not denying that... but the end of the world? I guess we will need a new shiny soon... to distract the masses.

[Grinchie]

188. It's actually the end of a way of life for many people on the Gulf.

I guess you forget about the ultimate waste products produced by the trillions upon trillions of Bacteria, assuming they are not altered by exposure to the toxic Corexit product. Bateria also tend to have "Membranes" compose to lipids that are directly altered by the Corexit product..

Assuming that the Bacteria can survive and be prolific, just what prducts are produced by these bacteria? Are they Aerobic or Anaerobic? Are they going to deplete the Oxygen content of the water by utilising it in the consumption of oil? What will happen if more oxygen starved dead zones are produced, similar to what has already been documented in the gulf do you pesticide and fertilizer effluent from the Mississipi River?

Diminishing this to the wonders of Geologic time is pretty lame.. It's almost as lame as promising a heaven full of vestigial virgings while you suffer a lifetime of wrath under the whims of a vengeful god.

I'm ere for the present, and although I can viisualize recovery in the Gulf in Several Centuries, just as I can visualize the oceans teeming with life when I view fossils at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, it does not change the fact that this was a man made event of epic proportions. It affected a web of life that isn't even fully understood, and you want to shovel it under the rug.

Just another, move along, its pointless... Excuses that seems to be de rigeur for the Big D DLC Democrats.

[nadinbrzezinski]

199. I can foresee recovery in ten to twenty years

based on previous experience in the Gulf... see Ixtoc I.

Yes that affects life for many folks, why I AM trying to go out of my way to get Gulf Sea food.

As to the bacteria, they are anareobic and again based on that experience, we know the dead zone will be bigger THIS YEAR.

As to corexit, yes it is an issue.

And why did I go for geologic time? You probably don't remember a few members explaining that the gulf was now dead and would lead to the extinction of life on earth. Well life on earth will go extinct in geologic time, so will humans... but that is a fact jack that you can take to the bank.

Now I am not a DLC democrat, just go out of my way to FIND the science behind these things and UNDERSTAND them.

And as the SCIENCE and previous experiences tell us, well sorry things will not be as bad as you think... and that is a good thing. Nor as good as some folks think in the short to medium term... and that is a bad thing. But the gulf will recover, thank you very much, and so will the chain of life in the Gulf... it is far more resilient than we like to think.

Now if you want to think I am a DLC democrat, well there's nothing I can do or say about that... I guess that is the common meme when the message don't fit the pre-conceptions, and I admit to that crutch from time to time as well.

[Grinchie]

206. Good for you.. So can I. What about the people who live there?

In twenty years, when the cancer cluster become too big to shovel under the rug, you'll be retired and sipping peas through a straw at the old folks home.

I never said the the Gulf would be extinct. I said that it will radically altered by it's ability to support the life it was once able to. I really don't think an ultimate 100% recovery is relevant to this discussion, as we are also facing many other horrendous environmental collapses at the moment.

Go ahead and eat those Gulf products. Let me know how that works for you, and how it affects your life in the years ahead. Let me know how many more weeks it allows the fishermen to stay solvent (Pardon the pun) until the fisheries collapse. You going to fund his childs college fund and help with his mortgage or job training program?

Stop being so simplistic Nadine.. You are showing your naievete, and personally, I think you insult the intelligence of most awake DU'er when you try and foist this simplistic point of view on us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

221. We have had no cancer cluster in the gulf

from Ixtoc I.

And if I am sipping peas in the old folks home in 20 years, I guess I had a stroke. I expect to be happy and active still.

That said the US Government should be ready to invest the necessary money to take care of the folks who ARE affected right now, and who's way of life is over. Thankfully, again from that experience in the past, not that far in the past, we know that this will not be as extensive as you seem to believe.

Now if you chose to call naiveté understanding science and precedent, then guilty as charge. I am the most naive person in the world for doing shitty things like readying SCIENTIFIC Journals and actually TRYING TO UNDERSTAND what at times is HIGHLY TECHNICAL language.

What I am seeing here is preconceived thought, and if REALITY does not conform then it is ignored. What is more, we are also seeing a pattern of conspiracy thinking that is part of the American DNA going back a long time... this the government is lying to us is not new. (And they do at times)... or for that matter the magical thinking that don't understand science.

Oh and yes... this is frustrating. After all it prevents real policy discussion, which is replaced by platitudes and half truths.

Now I do recommend you GO and read a little about the Ixtoc I. Suffice it to say, I HAVE eaten food from the fisheries affected by Ixtoc I...

[Grinchie]

272. Stop trying to intimate that the Cancer will show up in the short term.

But since the Government placates the little people in the short term with a few trinkets and shiny baubles, everything will be good..

Now that people must purchase Health Insurance as mandated by law, they'll be covered right?

As far as your comment "doing shitty things like readying SCIENTIFIC Journals"...

Thats the difference between you and me. I actually like to read scientific journals. It usually opens my mind up to the wider range of interconnectedness and understanding that most people care to think about. Reading them allows one to see the pattern languge present in the universe, and it does so quite often.

This toxicity is not about policy, it's about molecular biology, pollution of the environment, the destruction of the food chain, etc, etc, etc.

Go ahead and continue eating your precious seafood. Not only are you loading up on minute amounts to toxins, you are adding to the pressure on an already endangerered category of ocean life on the planet. Which I'm sure is the furthest thing from your mind because you've always eaten fish, and by jiminy, nobody is going to force you to lay off the fish while you have a hankering for a big plate of seafood.

Of course, they are all mostly in the process of dying right now anyway.. This years spawn is wiped out, and in two years time when you've eaten all the remaining adults that survived, there will be few left, if any to eat.

Don't worry, I'm sure WalMart will ship in massive containers of Chinese fish caught in the rich waters of Antarctica for you for 29 cents a pound.

[backtomn]

144. HELLO........Warm water versus Cold

Can you really be that dense?? Can you really not see the difference between the Alaskan coast and the Gulf?? Did you not hear stories about coastal residents complaining about fumes??

Believing that there have been no adverse effects is clearly not a reasonable position, but believing that this will be completely different than the Valdez is reasonable......if you think about it a bit.

[Grinchie]

185. Yeah, but you conveniently remove inhalation of the vapors from your point

Which is 100% typical from you Mr. Fructose.

Do you actually remember when you sold your soul to the Devil?

[DCBob]

21. so "good buddy" you deny crude oil evaporates?

if so you are denying basic physics.

[sofa king]

47. What about this physics?

It's warm during the summer days on the Gulf of Mexico, which is really big. Say some oil does evaporate each day.

What happens when the air cools off at night? The oil condenses. Right back into the damned ocean. Or, if one is lucky, onto dry land, where humans get to breathe in the benzene and spin out in the rainstorms.

Evaporation is one more dispersal procedure--one The Man really wants us to support because the price--nothing--and the effort--none--happens to be the only cost-effective response in BP's budget. But it's all still out there, instead of being cleaned up.

[DCBob]

55. chemistry prevents the volatiles from condensing back into oil..

they just form various ionic compounds in the air and remain as a gas.

[leveymg]

63. You're wrong Bob. The ionic bond is strong enough so that hydrocarbons cling to raindrops that fall

What you're describing only occurs in the absence of significant water molecules in the atmosphere, like on Mars.

Now, Bob, you can take an Incomplete for this course and go back and re-register for Biochem 101 next semester. Please don't try to tutor other students, again. We'll discuss your future at this institution after your mid-terms in the Spring. You're free to go now.

One more thing. You might want to do some reading. Please, see:

#
Scavenging of Airborne Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons by Rain
by PCM Van Noort - 1985 - Cited by 20 - Related articles
The variation of the concentrations of some polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in rain with time during three precipitation events was determined. ...
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es00141a003
#
Annual Variation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Concentrations ...
by P Sun - 2006 - Cited by 6 - Related articles
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations were measured in ... Chan and co-workers studied OC pesticides and PCBs in rain and snow collected in Ontario, .... The calculated half-lives of PAH concentrations in precipitation at ...
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0514949
Show more results from pubs.acs.org
#
Precipitation scavenging of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ...
by SK Sahu - 2004 - Cited by 8 - Related articles
J.H. Offenberg and J.E. Baker, Precipitation scavenging of polychlorinated biphenyls and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons along an urban to over-water ...
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S004896970300370X - Similar
#
Aliphatic and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in urban rain, snow ...
by C Leuenberger - 1988 - Cited by 52 - Related articles
Aromatic hydrocarbons in urban rain, snow and fog 703 S3 U a.e s <S03 SS'i- 00 .... Distribution of poly- cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in precipitation. ...
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0004698188900078
Show more results from linkinghub.elsevier.com
#
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon in rain and street runoff in Amman ...
(Jiries, 2001a) investigated heavy metals and the major ionic composition of streel ..... concentrations were observed in the following months as rainfall events and ... Road runoff pollution by polycyclie aromatic hydrocarbons and its ...
http://iospress.metapress.com/index/HWX2BPREWWDRM8F7.pdf - Similar
#
Occurence and Distribution of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in ...
by EO Gaga - 2003 - Cited by 4 - Related articles
on glass petri dishes at the other bucket in the absence of rain. ... Envi-18 (octadecyl bonded silica, C18) disks were used to extract the PAHs from .... review of atmospheric polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Sources, fate and behavior', Water, ... in the bulk precipitation and surface waters of Northern Greece', ...
http://www.springerlink.com/index/P02893R0347564G1.pdf
#

[DCBob]

72. These are rare cases.. dont worry about it.

[leveymg]

76. Gee, just a little benzene rain . . . What me worry?

Benzene - nothing to worry about, right, Bob? It's only 15 percent per weight of all the millions of pounds of aromatic hydrocarbons evaporating from the Gulf.

#
ATSDR - ToxFAQs™: Benzene
- Jun 26
Mar 1, 2010 ... Benzene in the air can attach to rain or snow and be carried back down to the ground. It breaks down more slowly in water and soil, ...
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=38&tid=14 - Cached
#

[DCBob]

81. Ok feel free to worry as much as you like..

but pardon me if I dont join you.

[leveymg]

83. You don't worry about an oil spill of this size in the Gulf of Mexico?

What's wrong with you, Bob?

[DCBob]

84. Yes, I worry about that but not about your oil condensing fears..

I worry about things that are actually problems. What's wrong with you?

[leveymg]

86. Aromatic hydrocarbons don't generally condense in the atmosphere, they bond to rain molecules

And, yes, benzene is carcinogenic in small ppms, which is an actual problem when huge amounts of it are released into the water and air. That particular problem will manifest as increased cancer deaths years from now.

The extraordinarily high levels of hydrocarbons reported by NOAA on July 21st over Gulf coastal cities are cause to worry, for a number of other reasons. Do I have to reel them off for you?

* Kidney and liver damage
* Skin rashes
* Developmental problems in children
* Nervous system disorders
* Cough, throat irritation
* Birth defects, miscarriages
* Asthma, chronic bronchitis
* Long-term pollution of soil, ocean water and fresh water sources

[DCBob]

87. send links to reports of an epidemic of these illnesses..

there must be if you are correct.

[leveymg]

88. You've seen the reports, as well. Here's a link to Congressional testimony:

by http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100610/Solomon.Testimony.2010.06.10.pdf Testimony of GINA M. SOLOMON, M.D., M.P.H.
SENIOR SCIENTIST, NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL,
ASSOCIATE CLINICAL PROFESSOR, U.C. SAN FRANCISCO
DIRECTOR, UCSF OCCUPATIONAL & ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE
RESIDENCY PROGRAM
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, UCSF PEDIATRIC ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
SPECIALTY UNIT

Dr. Solomon's testimony references some of the early reports.

As you know, most of these illnesses (the most serious ones) don't manifest immediately, and that's for epidemiological studies to estimate over time.

There have been repeated reports of throat and skin irritation in coastal areas. They have appeared as clusters, rather than as uniform outbreaks, which is not surprising. You've probably also seen some of them, and can look them up.

It's all consistent with a serious, long-term health hazard. Why are you trying to deny that?

If not this, what do you think are the "real" issues?

[DCBob]

97. Doesnt sound like an epidemic to me which is what would be expected if your fears are real..

but thats just me.

[leveymg]

104. Exposure to airborne carcinogenic hydrocarbons surely can't be good for people. That's the point.

There's no widespread detectable "epidemic" today, but I suspect the short-term health effects will be dwarfed by the longer-term effects of these exposures. Most of those will take years to manifest. That's consistent with studies of health effects on petroleum industry workers before the adoption of effective respirators and protective clothing.

[Grinchie]

194. I'd love to study this and need a test subject.. Would you like to volunteer?

Apparently, you don't think it is an issue, so how about helping out by being a guinea pig?

You will need to sign a release of liability in order to assist me.

[Grinchie]

193. Hah hah hah! As if we care... Exit, stage right DCBob

[Grinchie]

190. And you breathe it, where it gets trapped in your body for processing.

Nice disposition. Cheap, until you get sick.

Never mind all the birds, mammals and other creature that happen to breathe air.

[Grinchie]

189. Yeah, they hate it when you point out simple Thermodynamics

Because they already assume that the Educational System has removed that curricula decades ago..

You nail it on the head when you mention price = nothing, Effort = none, because that is the whole precept behind capitalistic wealth building.

[LTX]

110. Hogwash.

"Oil is a natural substance, 'tis true. But only where it naturally appears in nature. It is not natural, say, in the open waters of the Gulf."

Actually, oil is natural in the open waters of the Gulf.

"such open waters, once contaminated, will never be the same in any of our lifetimes."

Gulf waters will recover from this spill, just as they did after the Ixtoc spill. Your assertion is not only wrong, it is maliciously wrong. While there has been considerable ecological damage, the effects of the spill will be relatively long term in some areas, and short term in other areas. But the "never in our lifetimes" mantra by the apocalypse fetishists, and your application of that mantra to the entirety of the Gulf, is hyperbole. And very unhelpful hyperbole for those of us who actually live and work and fish run businesses here on the Gulf coast.

[flyarm]

213. 1. it was not a "spill" 2. it was a gusher!! 3. millions and millions of galllons of oil and

Corexit are now in the gulf laying on the bottom of the gulf! And dispersed throughout the entire Gulf!

[AnArmyVeteran]

242. Absolutely, remember Tony Hayward saying he'll get every drop?

What a liar that guy is, but you have to be a liar to be a CEO of an international oil corporation.

[EstimatedProphet]

160. So you refine a chemical into a purer compound...

and that compound is less likely to evaporate than the original?

Does gravity shove things away from the planet on your world?

[Grinchie]

184. Just take a ride through west texas where some "Gushers" occured inthe past

You'll be nauseated by the smell, 50 years after the fact.

[mzteris]

198. can you put up an intelligent discussion of this

in the SCIENCE forum?

I feel like i'm in freeperville in here... geesh!

[AnArmyVeteran]

238. Yeah, I know they are different, I was just protesting the obvious lies being told.

[sabrina 1]

8. Same thing happened in our driveway and in the garage.

No, I have not seen anyone verifying the claims. I HAVE seen the reaction of Scientists though, and they are with you, they don't believe it either.

Scientists Skeptical About Report

WASHINGTON -- Many scientists say they're skeptical of a widely publicized government report Wednesday that concludes much of the oil that gushed from BP's leaking well is gone and poses little threat to the Gulf of Mexico.

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the "vast majority" of the 4.9 million barrels released into the Gulf has either evaporated "or been burned, skimmed and recovered from the wellhead, or dispersed."

"I'm suspect if that's accurate or not," said Ronald Kendall, the director of the Institute of Environmental and Human Health at Texas Tech University and one of the scientists who testified Wednesday at a congressional hearing about the need for more research into the composition and use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil in the Gulf.

[kirby]

100. Perspective is needed...

Both the admin and even Obama personally said 'vast majority'. The number was 75%. The remaining 25% of the 4.9 million barrels that is listed as 'residual' is a HUGE quantity itself. We in really unknown territory here. Stuff that has been 'dispersed' means broken into tiny micro-droplets. All that stuff will impact fish in some way for generations.

PDF Source:

http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/Oil_Budget_description_8_3_FINAL.844091.pdf

[AnArmyVeteran]

239. Thanks for that great information Sabina!

Have a great weekend!

[lib2DaBone]

9. The oil evaporated...all gone... now move along...

[GoCubsGo]

118. Google "alewife die-off"

Bait fish often die in droves. Just ask anyone who lives along the Great Lakes. They're not always caused by oil or other chemicals. Just sayin'.

[flyarm]

214. ahhh the fish that have died in the Gulf, have not died from natural causes..enough of that crap ok?

just enough!
I cant even stand the bullshit anymore! what is wrong with people here? Youthink this shit now in our atmosphere won;t get to you too?

You only fool yourself!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. Did you remember to add the oil eating microorganisms?

And the conditions in which such microorganisms flourished?

And you think some of it evaporated? In motor oil? That's quiet a bit heavier than crude. Are you sure?

Maybe you should repeat your experiment. Only research it a little first before you try it again. Oh, don't just dump it into the environment. BP's mess was at least an accident. You're claiming you did it on purpose.

[cherokeeprogressive]

12. Um... "and the oil pan accidentally got knocked over and it spilled onto the concrete driveway"

Where did the OP claim he dumped oil on purpose?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. To be honest CP,

I don't think OP did either.

[glowing]

54. Yes, but the microorganisms that eat oil creat anoxic dead zones that create

other problems. This is still the greatest environmental disaster to happen. To foolishly suggest like BP (who is monitarily on the hook) and the govt (who seems to want to tie this all up before Nov and the elections) that its everything is all good move along now, is putting those of us who live in the shit in serious harms way.

A smaller oil spill occurs in Michigan. Homes are evacuated. A major gushing volcano from the ocean floor occurs, and no one is in jeapordy? Our lives don't matter because its too big and would make a nightmare politically and monitarily for corporate overlords.. so, hiding and lying is the way forward.

[Cant trust em]

13. Maybe it is all a lie, but your driveway analogy is bullshit.

Maybe it would be more relevant if you had spilled the oil onto your driveway while also dumping thousands of gallons of water onto it during a rainstorm.

The spill didn't occur on dry land. It occurred in the Gulf of Mexico.

Again, maybe these reports by NOAA and BP are wildly erroneous and completely full of shit. But I do want to point out that your analogy doesn't fit the situation.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. All of NOAA's data is published daily online for public consumption.

"I haven't seen or heard of anyone verifying that claim."

^you'd think anybody who actually cared about the gulf would be paying more attention to it.

[Cant trust em]

19. I remember that Rolling Stone article a few months ago that was a big indictment...

of Obama's spill response. They mentioned that NOAA's reputation was based on their independence.


Watch how quickly now they get accused of being co-opted by BP. Their independent analysis won't be good enough.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. Oh, they have from the start.

NOAA's the secret gubmint in league with the Joos to bring Armageddon.

[Cant trust em]

22. I heard they also faked the moon landings and were behind the Kennedy assassination. NT

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

23. I have to wonder just how many of the Obama critics...

are just really upset because he won't release the truth about 9-11.

[Cant trust em]

26. One of the many slights against them.

They have a tally running.

[EFerrari]

24. Their independence? Where was that independence when they covered for Bush

after Katrina? They're not independent. They've been politicized for years now.

[Johonny]

46. If NOAA is lieing then they are bad at it

These reports seem to indicate that about 25 percent of the spill has been recovered or removed, another 25 percent has been dispersed, and another 25 percent has been evaporated or dissolved. But the reality is that only 25 percent has been removed from the ocean.

Teams of scientists and experts have been carefully tracking the oil since day one of this spill, and based on the data from those efforts and their collective expertise, they have been able to provide these useful and educated estimates about the fate of the oil, says Jane Lubchenco, under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. Less oil on the surface does not mean that there isnt oil still in the water column or that our beaches and marshes arent still at risk. Knowing generally what happened to the oil helps us better understand areas of risk and likely impacts.

The estimates do not make conclusions about the long-term impacts of oil on the Gulf. Fully understanding the damages and impacts of the spill on the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem is something that will take time and continued monitoring and research.

People seem to think NOAA and the administration think the oil has magically disappeared. However it only takes a quick look at their releases to see they say just the opposite.

[leveymg]

70. NOAA (07/21/10): BP spill has toxic effect on air quality in US cities

In a sampling of a wide spectrum of pollutants, The NOAA report went on to state that as far away as 50 miles from the spill site extraordinarily high levels of hydrocarbons had been detected: http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100721_p3_oilspill.html

Scientists found common air pollutants, such as ozone, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide, in amounts typical of urban areas in U.S. cities. However, 15 to 70 kilometers downwind from the oil spill, concentrations of certain hydrocarbons were much higher than found in typical polluted air.

The health effects of aromatic hydrocarbon emissions from oil slicks, such as benzene and other known carcinogens, are well understood. Crude oil slicks, as they evaporate, naturally emit high percentages of benzene, the the most deadly aromatic hydrocarbons discussed below. The initial explosion and burning, as well as the later intentional flaring (burning) of methane and other hydrocarbons which BP did for weeks at the well site, also added a combustion emissions plume to the toxic mix . . .

MORE: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/27/13589/5266

[AnArmyVeteran]

241. Would it help if I told you I did it during a thunderstorm? :)

My post was a protest about the lies being told from day one. 75% of the oil isn't gone. Scientists believe there are still huge plumes of it hovering at very deep and cold waters. Not much evaporation can occur at pressures of 151 atmospheres and in cool waters. My accident wasn't a scientific experiment.

So far, I haven't heard one person who could substantiate the '75% gone' theory. Zero data has been published that I've seen in any of the media. Even the administration's people offered no proof of their claims.

[tularetom]

15. You are correctamundo - it's all bullshit

The liberal media seems to have swallowed the story hook line and dipstick however.

BP spends a ton of advertising dollars on TV. Wouldn't want to piss 'em off would we?

[Tx4obama]

25. Has anyone heard anything about how Kevin Kostner's machines have been doing lately? n/t

[scheming daemons]

30. If your driveway was water filled with micro-organisms, you'd see a different result

You do realize that your analogy is completely bogus, right?


The govt might be lying to us... but your analogy is crap.

[Berserker]

34. When I change my oil

I just feed it to my micro-organisms and they are as happy as clams. NO PROBLEM.

[laughingliberal]

32. +1000 nt

[Kringle]

33. crude oil contains gasoline, which will evaporate, .nt

[Berserker]

36. Thats RIGHT

and when the Easter bunny comes next year all will be fine.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

96. So...

you're saying gasoline doesn't evaporate?

[Grinchie]

195. Another Strawman? My aren't you productive!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

229. Do you or don't you?

Simple question.

[rucky]

41. and then?

[Kringle]

43. the low-molecular-weight molecules in crude, will evaporate .nt

[U4ikLefty]

37. I dumped 100% of my hope into this administration and 75% has evaporated

...or is much of my hope just being dispersed by toxic legislation?

[WinkyDink]

69. Best. Comment. Yet.

[truebrit71]

117. Agreed.

Brilliant!

[SammyWinstonJack]

105. +1

:evilgrin: :thumbsup:

[racaulk]

122. Fantastic!

:applause:

[tnlefty]

243. Yep!

Dispersed by the lack of transparency and what appears to be collusion with BP in the Gulf.

[villager]

38. Everything in the gulf is doubleplus good now!

You're not feeling "unmutual," are you!?

(Yes, I've mixed cultural referents!) ;-)

[jmowreader]

44. This is worse than your driveway...

because crude oil is thicker than motor oil.

[niyad]

45. I certainly don't--look at prince william sound.

as for the evaporation--I guess that means it is going to be raining oil for quite some time to come.

agree with several of the other posters--the lies are getting bigger, more obvious, and they have stopped even trying to pretend. apparently they think we are all sheeples.

[Grinchie]

196. At least the ones that watch Cable TV

[snot]

48. Doesn't evaporated oil get rained down somewhere?

[JoeyT]

49. Yep.

But it makes Obama look good and the Cult of Personality can call people "bashers" for demanding we stop coddling BP. So expect to hear it repeated a LOT.

Odd, none of the people cheering about it seem to live on the Gulf. Otherwise they could take their kids swimming in the "clean" water.

[truedelphi]

51. I guess your driveway is short of the needed

Little old oil-eating microbes.

They just suck up the oil particles and then they get eaten by seagulls and it all turns out to be a non catastrophe.

[Mimosa]

52. Some people will say anything to protect the administration & by extension BP

Look at the video report from the Louisiana Gulf Coast. Oil is bubbling up through the sand on the beach:

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/8001294/21211370


The Gulf has been turned toxic. The massive loss of se life was concealed from the eyes of reporters.

ArmyVeteran, I won't be eating Gulf seafood any more.:( I remember how wonderful it was for all the years I was able to enjoy it.

[Vinca]

57. It's hard to imagine the "worst oil spill in history" is now in better shape

than Prince William Sound. What's happened to the toxic dispersant? Does everything just - POOF - evaporate? I would have thought all those tiny, dispersed droplets would sink to the bottom - as planned - and be eaten by the smallest members of the food chain who would then be consumed by the next larger member of the food chain, the next, the next and the next, until you're sitting down to a plate of deep fried crude and Corexit.

[Grinchie]

197. Actually, ommiting facts from the documented record is typical

If it doesn't make it into the evidence list, it never happened, never has to be reviewed or questioned, and can be corroborated by colluding official in a nice, good old boy fashion.

In that way, the true nature of the violation of regulations can be masked and hidden from public view, until such a time as a well funded, tenacious legal team can be funded to do the real research and build the inventory of factual data for the courts, where they will be shot down by an appeals process, or the supreme court full of Corporate Friendly cronies implanted into the Judicial System by the same oil interests that they are deciding upon.

If you don't believe me, just take a look at the Exxon Vadez, and the decades long legal process.

[malaise]

58. Clearly it was not

BP Reconstructionist Crude. :sarcasm: :evilgrin:

[SidDithers]

61. Your driveway is not the Gulf of Mexico...

your attempted driveway analogy falls flat.

Sid

[WinkyDink]

64. Funny how it stayed inside the earth for eons, but disappeared as gossamer once released.

[kenny blankenship]

67. Did you remember to put a slice of moldy bread on top of the spill?

If the oil eating microbes aren't introduced to the spill you won't get to see their fantastic oil disappearing powers make it go away. Failing that, did you remember to pray over the spill? If not, then it's hardly likely that the oil would be Raptured either.

[southmost]

68. its a spin of carefully placed numbers and words

or truthiness, yeah 75% disappeared is you count the lightweight components of the gusher (methane, ethane,all the other gasses) and if you include natural dilution (but that just means the oil got spread out) and if you include the dispersants (which spread out heavier weight oil,) but that still leaves over a million barrels of tar in concentrated forms (stuff you can still see). The rest well, it's much less noticeable, but it is still there, either in the gulf / atlantic/ or atmosphere.

[DailyGrind51]

71. I can tell when I changed my oil just by taking a date-stamped photo of my garage floor!

You can fade those spots with solvent or detergent, but they are always there as ghost images reminding you to slip a damn sheet of cardboard under the pan when you remove the plug next time!

[Statistical]

74. Motor oil != crude oil.

Pour a gallon of gasoline on your driveway and then wait 100 days. Let me know how much remains. While 100% won't be gone but 99%+ will. If you look closely some of the heavier components due to imperfect refining will remain as a stain.

Crude oil is what spilled in the Gulf not a billion qts of Penzoil 10W-30.

Crude oil is a mixture of various petroleum products. It isn't a single entity. Many of the components (like gasoline, benzene, butane, propane, Naphthalene, Kerosene, Hexane, etc) are very volatile and don't survive very long. Some of it (components used it make asphalt and heavy oil do).

75% is comparable to other major spills. The lighter components will evaporate very rapidly. Now just because 75% is "gone" in 100 days doesn't mean 100% will be gone in 150 days. It doesn't work that way. What remains is the heavier harder to break up stuff. It will be broken down by microbes and other natural processes more slowly.

[leveymg]

82. Doubt if the OP would happen to have crude oil to spill on his driveway - if he did, he could

"pack up and move to old Beverly, Hills that is . . . movie stars . . . swimming pools."

Penzoil 10W-30 has most if not all of the benzene and aromatic hydrocarbons removed. It's not nearly as likely to evaporate or nearly as toxic in evaporated form as crude oil.

Benzene is a major component of crude oil, and a well-known carcinogen in very low ppms, transportable in the atmosphere, droplets falling back to earth with rain (see my response to Bob, above). Nobody should be celebrating the evaporation of large amounts of crude oil, any more than than they should be celebrating the large-scale emission of any other toxic gas.

[DailyGrind51]

251. "Crude" is like cow's milk, refining separates the various "products".

Clarity determines how easily it will evaporate, like "clear" liquors are more easily absorbed than "amber" ones.

[lunatica]

77. They went from not being able to find their asses with both hands

to being undisputed experts on the disaster in 3 seconds flat. Five miles down, at a depth that the best submarines can't go to with only some robot cameras and they know the oil has evaporated? Not fucking likely.

Our intelligence has been royally insulted again.

[elehhhhna]

78. 'diluted' is not a synonym for "disapeared", but "deluded" IS a synonym

for NOAA.

[madokie]

79. Anything and everything coming from bp is bullshit

a big steaming pile of bullshit too I might add

[bherrera]

80. it is reasonable to believe 75 % of the oil is gone

Analysis of the oil shows it has many volatile molecules, which evaporate. Also, many of them are very attractive food for bacteria. Thusly one can say it is reasonable 75 % of the oil is no longer in the environment. Which leaves a significant amount of oil in the water. This means the comparison using lubricating oil is not valid. This lubricating oil you spilled is not the same as the crude oil spilled by BP, which is natural oil, unprocessed, and also lacking the chemicals created in an auto engine. In Spain, we are more reasonable about these matters, it is a simple issue to have scientists estimate things, and then proceed with facts. In the USA, you are more emotional.

[leveymg]

85. It isn't "gone" - evaporation isn't cleansing, it's just wider dispersion of toxic materials

And, if you don't believe that benzene and the other aromatic hydrocarbons aren't toxic and don't fall back to earth with rain, you're deluded. As for the material that's been ingested by algae and microrganisms, GOOGLE, "Gulf Dead Zones" and "Gulf Anoxia." NOAA scientists found anoxic "dead zones" as far down as 1300 meters last week, after the gusher was capped. That's not good news.

[Blue Owl]

89. Well I'd eat my dinner off that driveway!

n/t

[slackmaster]

90. I always put a plastic sheet down first

Spillage is inevitable.

[Javaman]

91. Here's a link I used to refute

someone here on DU claiming that oil "evaporates".

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/chem03/chem03025.htm

there are several examples there explaining exactly how oil "evaporates".

There were a number of responders to various posts here on DU that defended the governments position of "oil evaporating" because some paid off "expert" came out stating, "all is well!".

Sometimes I get so dumbstruck at the level of gullibility here on DU all because some "expert" says so.

The bottom line question that needs to be asked is: Who benefits the most from the oil magically disappearing? BP and the Government. They can wrap a neat little bow on all this BS and "get their lives back".

I have this sick feeling in my stomach, that this is very far from over. That there will be some uncovering done and it won't reflect very nicely on Obama.

We as a nation have been experiencing the "bury the past" era for the past 30 plus years. The past is like a zombie, it may appear dead, but at some point in the future it will come back demanding brains.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

95. Well your link doesn't do a very good job of refuting it.

Are you familiar with something called natural gas? Methane? Ethane? Propane? Butane? Pentanes? Hexanes? And so on?

[jobycom]

102. Yeah, you're right, some people on DU are very gullible.

That link was talking about processed oil, not crude oil. Crude oil does evaporate because it's a multi-component liquid comprising more than the oil that your link is discussing.

http://www.boemre.gov/tarprojects/120/120BG.PDF

The NOAA scientists said one sixth of the oil evaporated. That link explains how and at what rate that can happen.

[Grinchie]

200. The past is like a zombie

no shit.

[truth2power]

98. #1 . No I don't believe them. #2.....When the OP asks a reasonable question

why is it that one has to scroll through dozens of cute little one-liners, or worse, thinly-veiled ridicule, in order to find some reasonable commentary about the OP?

Just sayin'..

[anarch]

99. well, I've certainly seen the light

Dumping untold millions of gallons of oil into the gulf and following it up with dispersant doesn't cause any harm, everything's fine, and we should all go on about our business. Clearly this is proof that we should expand our off-shore drilling, since the worst-case happened and it didn't have any significant effect on the environment, so why not just go for it?

Why, I feel better already...let's grab our credit cards and go shopping!

...


Go back to bed, America. Your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed, America. Your government is in control again. Here. Here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up. Go back to bed, America. Here is American Gladiators. Here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their fucking skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom. Here you go, America! You are free to do as we tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!

/Bill Hicks

[SOS]

101. BP stock price

$41 today, up from $28 in June.
The "disappearance" of the 15 mile underwater plume (reported below) is good for shareholders.
Does anything else matter in contemporary America?

June 8, 2010 - Scientist Awed by Size, Density of Undersea Oil Plume in Gulf:
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/08/08greenwire-scientist-awed-by-size-density-of-undersea-oil-98517.html

[L0oniX]

103. There are enough dumb americans ...and they count on that.

[snooper2]

107. You should use Muriatic Acid to clean that up

Don't leave it on too long or it will eat right through the concrete...you can have your own dispersant :evilgrin:

The concrete will be as clean as ever :)

[BlueJac]

112. What has happen to everyone.......

Oil does not just go away, period. Take a bath in it tonight and enjoy if you think it just goes away. That is not a driveway but it might give some of you a taste of reality and a very nasty bathtub!


Koolaid anyone?

[Yeahyeah]

114. I used to be a rich Texas oilman til one day I left the lid off my oil well.

Danged if it didn't all e-vaporate.

[mnhtnbb]

116. I don't believe the oil evaporated or was captured. I do believe the truth is not being told.

[nadinbrzezinski]

121. You do understand that only a quarter of that

evaporated, and the rest dispersed or was collected or burned, right?

You also understand that what is left is still LARGER than the whole Vladez.

You also realize that your drive way does NOT have the bacteria that evolved to eat this this stuff, and without their existence the seas would be covered in oil.

Or is all this too complex for some people? I guess Americans are really science illiterate to scary levels.

[Uncle Joe]

124. I believe BP vastly underestimated the amount of oil being spewed by the Gusher from the beginning.

They continually ratcheted it upward as the evidence became too overwhelming to deny, I believed that to be a deliberate lie as a means to diminish their liability but even if it wasn't that doesn't speak well for their capability to estimate the amount of oil gushed in to the Gulf.

They or their hired contractors did their best to deny access to journalists, scientists and environmental groups to assess the scope of the catastrophe.

They hired some of the best scientists from the Gulf to work on their behalf.

With that kind of record; I see no reason to trust their estimates or that of their hired scientists as to the elimination of the oil and the stage of it's environmental impact.

Thanks for the thread, AnArmyVeteran.

[femrap]

126. If BP says it,

I don't believe it.

[earth mom]

127. Totally agree but most of the fish, birds, turtles and mammals in the gulf are DEAD.

Check out this thread and see how MASSIVE the coverup is-THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY-and please take a moment to kick each DU thread:

The Crime of the Century:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-cope/the-crime-of-the-century_b_662971.html?ref=fb&src=sp#sb=765536,b=facebook

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8891778
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8879581
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=551888
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8877233

[Skittles]

128. they really, really think the American people are stupid

and for the most part, they are correct

[backtomn]

131. Are you serious???

Obviously, the oil coming from a well is completely different than that you get in a can. Also, the material taken from your car after 3000 miles of driving is going to be a bit different from that in the can. Both contain almost no volatile petroleum components.

Oil from the well is taken through a "fractional distillation" process to remove volatiles....including octane (a large part of our gasoline), gaseous components, etc. These volatiles can evaporate, particularly in the warm waters of the gulf. Remember coastal residents complaining about the effect of fumes??? Such volatility might not have been an issue in the waters off the Alaskan coast, but things are different here. Why do you think that "Tar Balls" are washing up on shore??? Maybe because much of the tar fraction of crude oil is NOT volatile???

I am not convinced that we suddenly have no lingering environmental issues in the gulf......but I am also a bit more intellectually curious than you.

[Paper Roses]

132. I'll never believe it, sorry, BP. n/t

[davidwparker]

137. They know how stupid the general American population

is and how docile we are. They could have MSM say Santa and his elves came to clean it up and people would believe them.

It just shows how much in control corporations have become to our gov't and the whores in Congress. (No offense to sex workers.)

[texastoast]

150. Anyone who believes BP is a fool

Or any oil company who says they haven't hurt the environment.

[joeybee12]

152. But it "dispeserd" which is SOOOO DIFFERENT...

...yeah, different to people who still can see the light of day. They are lying, browner is lying...it's sickening.

[EstimatedProphet]

156. HAHA! Best laugh of the day from that subject heading! Thanks!

[Grinchie]

161. Stop using Empirical Evidence!

Crude oil is no way like Used Motor Oil! Where is your scientific proof and peer reviewed papers supporting your statements?

Get back to me with Scientific Proof that Crude Oil can stain concrete! Don't bother me with comparing it to highly refined oil that has been contaminated with unburnt fuel and hydrocarbons!

:sarcasm:

We know where it went... I got dispersed into the ecosystem where nobody will notice until the fisheries collapse and never return.

It's amazing how all the data that was collected in the 1970's regarding the awful contamination of the world by Oil has somehow been conveniently forgotten by the same party that was responsible for creating the studies in the first place.

That's because the Democratic party no longer exists, as it has been subverted by the DLC and Corporate Interests infested with Corporate Product Liability Attorneys and Brand Image counselors.

[librechik]

163. We had an accidental toxic spill at my house a week or two ago

My husband is restoring an old Winnebago, and as he went to check the gas tank, a panel came off and the contents spilled into the alley. Fortunately, the tank was nearly empty, so my hubby thought he could take the hose to the spill and wash it away. Unfortunately all that water made the small spill into a big spill. My hubby called the city to see what to do, and they said put kitty litter on it. So off he goes to the store to get kitty litter.

By the time he got back home, there were three huge trucks in our alley, one hazardous materials firetruck, a truck full of sand and another truck to pick up the sand. Now we're quaking in our boots about a possible cleanup bill which was mentioned. How much do you think an operation like that will cost us?

[Grinchie]

203. Several thousand, depending on where you live.

There are huge costs associated with contamination, which is why you see gas stations boarded up and abanadoned for years because the underground tanks leaked, and the owner is now liable for massive cleanup costs, as well as being saddled with illiquid, unsalable property.

If fact, just look at the disclosure clause of many real estate transaction in relation to this matter.

This applies to old Meth Labs, old farm property that were once using Pesticides and herbicides like water, as well as private dumped where they dump their used motor oil. I have personally seen all of these scenarios in my lifetime, and believe me, it sure installs motivation for "Due Diligenge" when it comes to buying property.

Old vehicles are prohibited on my property. No exceptions, because 5 quarts of used Motors Oil, plus Transmission, Plus Brakes, Plus Differentials, Plus Gasoline can add up to a horrendous mess if it escapes into the environment. In many cases, you will be stuck with it depending on the soil conditions..

Not many people think like I do however, and they seem to think that "One little spill" won't matter. Uh Uh. It does matter, unless you are BP.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

177. I once flushed a radiator in the rose garden...

:shrug:

[treestar]

180. This goes in the 911 forum!

The whole thing weirdly sounds like the stuff you read there!

[Grinchie]

205. Trying to send this post to the Dungeon Treestar?

[valerief]

208. Truth IS stranger than fiction. nt

[onethatcares]

192. the hell with evaporation, what happens to the clams, shrimp, invertebres

the basic start of the food chain, the marsh grasses?

I started watering my lawn, st augustine hybrid, with used motor oil last night. This morning it looked kinda dead and the birds weren't out there looking for worms or grubs or anything, Hell, even the lizards that got sprayed by accident,cause it was an accident they got sprayed, were belly up on the lawn.

Do you think it'll evaporate and give me a lusher more beautiful lawn next spring? Or should I put some Roundup on it to help it disperse?

I am at a loss here.

Also, I might have misspelld invertebres, but hey I'll just feed them some crude too. :wtf:

[Shining Jack]

201. K&R

[valerief]

207. I drank a whole bottle of olive oil. It's still on my hips. nt

[poverlay]

209. I spill one drop and it spreads ten feet in every direction.. It went somewhere...n/t

[DissedByBush]

215. The volume of the Gulf of Mexico

2,434,000 cubic kilometers of water

643,000,000,000,000,000 (643 quadrillion) gallons

Worst estimate of spill volume: 4,200,000 gallons per day

Percentage of Gulf volume spill per day: 0.0000000006532%

Percentage of Gulf contaminated after 100 days: 0.00000006532%

Let's equally contaminate an Olympic-sized swimming pool, approx. 600,000 gallons.

You need 0.3 teaspoons of oil.

Now stir up that pool, make waves, rain on it, send a storm through it.

Do you think anybody would notice the contamination?

People forget how big the oceans are, and how small stuff we do is in comparison.

[phleshdef]

220. You about as intellectually honest as Cons saying global warming doesn't exist because it snowed.

Do you honestly think refined oil spilled into your driveway is even close to a valid test case? Short answer, no, it fucking isn't, not even close.

Oil mixed in sea water in a very hot area can and will evaporate. There is plenty of scientific evidence to back that up. Use the Google.

Thats not to say everything is great down there. No one is saying that. Even if 75% of the oil is gone, that means 1,250,000 more barrels worth that isn't. Despite that, whatever observations you are experiencing with spilled motor oil in your drive way means fuck all to what would happen to crude oil spilled out into the sea water in the Gulf of Mexico.

[TBF]

226. I'll believe that when I see you out there swimming in it.

Such BS...

[phleshdef]

253. And you obviously didn't even read what I said.

If only 25% of the oil were out there, just as the government is saying, then that would still be bad because that would still be copious amounts of crude. No one is denying that. Not me, not the Whitehouse, not even BP. You just want to pretend people are saying all is fine and dandy, when no one is actually saying that, so you have something to argue against.

[nightrain]

224. knr. of course they couldn't have swept up 75%. Yep. Lies.

[petronius]

264. I pour my used oil in the local creek - but it's OK, I do it just above a waterfall so

that it gets dispersed. (And what's the big deal anyway? If the darn steelhead were fit to survive they wouldn't have gotten endangered in the first place...)

;)

[unkachuck]

270. you have to be patient....

....I have a 50 year old oil-patch on my garage floor that is just beginning to evaporate....

....good things come to those who wait, or not....