Water/Oil analysis of Gulf Coast

From Y/T: Oil and water samples were taken from both the Shores of Grand Isle and from 20 miles out. The preliminary analysis was done at an academic analytical chemistry laboratory. Looking for the likely pollutants from the deep water Horizon Oil spill. It was focused on the detection of benzene and propylene glycol. Benzene and other highly toxic contaminants were very low however the concentration of propylene glycol was between 360 and 440 parts per million. Just 25 parts per million is know to kill most fish and propylene glycol is just one of many ingredients found in Corexit. In short, the Gulf is being poisoned by BP's usage of the dispersants even after the EPA asked them to stop back in May. We are willing to provide ANY respected/known laboratory these samples or provide them with more. This is very serious to all people and marine life in and around the Gulf.
siftbotsays...

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by blankfist.

Double-Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Friday, July 9th, 2010 7:24pm PDT - doublepromote requested by blankfist.

laurasays...

He is saying "propanediol" & propylene glycol...
A quick wiki search tells me that propanediol can be formed by "Conversion from glycerol (a by-product of biodiesel production) using Clostridium diolis bacteria."
...so could bacteria be breaking down components of the oil into propanediol/propylene glycol? ...not necessarily that it had to have come from the Corexit? Just wondering....

GeeSussFreeKsays...

>> ^laura:

He is saying "propanediol" & propylene glycol...
A quick wiki search tells me that propanediol can be formed by "Conversion from glycerol (a by-product of biodiesel production) using Clostridium diolis bacteria."
...so could bacteria be breaking down components of the oil into propanediol/propylene glycol? ...not necessarily that it had to have come from the Corexit? Just wondering....


"In response to public pressure, the EPA and Nalco released the list of the six ingredients in Corexit 9500, revealing constituents including sorbitan, butanedioic acid, and petroleum distillates.[3] Corexit EC9500A is mainly comprised of hydrotreated light petroleum distillates, propylene glycol and a proprietary organic sulfonate.[16] Environmentalists also pressured Nalco to reveal to the public what concentrations of each chemical are in the product; Nalco considers that information to be a trade secret, but has shared it with the EPA.[17] Propylene glycol is a chemical commonly used as a solvent or moisturizer in pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, and is of relatively low toxicity. An organic sulfonate (or organic sulfonic acid salt) is a synthetic chemical detergent, that acts as a surfactant to emulsify oil and allow its dispersion into water. The identity of the sulfonate used in both forms of Corexit was disclosed to the EPA in June 2010, as dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate.[18]" wiki

rgroom1says...

I have to say, the samples that he collected and sent in looked to be from a "tarball" and a lot of surface foam. This may be making the problem look much worse than it is. I would rather have the sample be under the foam in the water.
I'm not downplaying the problem, just pointing out bad science.

GeeSussFreeKsays...

>> ^rgroom1:

I have to say, the samples that he collected and sent in looked to be from a "tarball" and a lot of surface foam. This may be making the problem look much worse than it is. I would rather have the sample be under the foam in the water.
I'm not downplaying the problem, just pointing out bad science.


When solvents are being used, that doesn't matter.

http://videosift.com/video/TED-The-Gulf-Oil-Spill-s-Unseen-Culprits-and-Victims

I am not trying to be contrary with everyone, but the spill is most likely far worse than we can even imagine right now. And getting worse with each passing day. And will stay horrible for generations to come. I have the same kind of hopeful denial that others seem to be expressing here, but it is really, really bad.

packosays...

>> ^rgroom1:

I have to say, the samples that he collected and sent in looked to be from a "tarball" and a lot of surface foam. This may be making the problem look much worse than it is. I would rather have the sample be under the foam in the water.
I'm not downplaying the problem, just pointing out bad science.


so instead of 150x the lethal ppm its say a factor of 10x less... only 15x the lethal ppm
get me my swimming trunks

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More