Australia is facing a controversy that is all too familiar to Americans. Fundamentalists in state schools are teaching children that humans and dinosaurs lived together and Noah brought dinosaur eggs on to the Ark.
Children are also taught that Adam and Eve were not eaten by dinosaurs “because they were under a protective spell.”
This is consistent with Palintology — the new science advanced by Sarah Palin — which insists that man and dinosaur must have co-existed despite carbon dating and simple logic.
Source: News
Oil Spill Dispersants Shifting Ecosystem Impacts in Gulf, Scientists Warn
By ELANA SCHOR of Greenwire
Published: July 30, 2010
http://WWW.NYTIMES.COM/GWIRE/2010/07/30/30GREENWIRE-OIL-SPILL-DISPERSANTS-SHIFTING-ECOSYSTEM-IMPAC-95608.HTML
Excerpt:
A seemingly feel-good story showed up this week on the nation’s front pages and newscasts: The oil that befouled the Gulf of Mexico for 86 days is vanishing from the surface, leaving workers with little to clean.
But scientists warn the oil’s ecological impacts are shifting, not ebbing, thanks to massive volumes of dispersants that have kept the crude beneath the waves.
“This is a management decision, to use dispersants,” College of William and Mary marine science professor Robert Diaz said yesterday. “It doesn’t make the oil go away, it just puts it from one part of the ecosystem to another.”
That dispersed oil now hovers, diluted in the water column, posing a challenge for scientists to track and measure the subsea plumes. Mapping the long-term effects of the nearly 2 million gallons of dispersant used by BP PLC may well be equally difficult, given the array of unanswered questions that surround the products’ rapid breakdown of oil droplets and their chronic toxicity.
In other words, while dispersants may have helped spare the Gulf’s birds, the chemicals are likely shifting dangers to other species lower in the food chain. The National Research Council described dispersant use in 2005 as “a conscious decision” to direct hydrocarbons to one part of the marine ecosystem, “decreasing the risk to water surface and shoreline habitats while increasing the potential risk to organisms in the water column and on the seafloor.”
Byron,
I had not seen the two articles. Thanks for posting them.
From Scientific American (May 25, 2010)
Slick Solution: How Microbes Will Clean Up the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
Bacteria and other microbes are the only thing that will ultimately clean up the ongoing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico
By David Biello
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-microbes-clean-up-oil-spills
Excerpt:
Regardless, the oil will linger in the environment for a long time. The microbes break down hydrocarbons in “weeks to months to years, depending on the compounds and concentrations—not hours or days,” Atlas notes. “Much of the real tar or asphalt compounds are not readily subject to microbial attack…. Tar tends to persist. Asphalt tends to persist.”
Adds Valentine: “We wouldn’t make roads out of them if the bacteria ate them.”
Repeat:
Overflights in the past week have found only scattered patches of light sheen near the Mississippi Delta – an indication that aggressive efforts to capture and disperse the oil have been effective and that the remaining oil is naturally dispersing and biodegrading.
Shoreline Threat Update
Southern Florida, Florida Keys and East Coast Deepwater Horizon/BP Oil Spill, July 30, 2010
Given that the Deepwater Horizon/BP wellhead has been temporarily capped and the flow of oil has been suspended until the relief well is complete and the well is finally killed, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is issuing this update of its shoreline threat analysis. Given current conditions, Southern Florida, the Florida Keys and the East Coast of the United States are not likely to experience any effects from the remaining oil on the surface of the Gulf.
The updated shoreline threat predictions for Southern Florida, the Florida Keys and the East Coast are based on two factors: 1) the current amount of oil on the surface of the water and, 2) the present configuration of the loop current. This analysis is based on the assumption that there will be no further release of oil from the BP wellhead.
Overflights in the past week have found only scattered patches of light sheen near the Mississippi Delta – an indication that aggressive efforts to capture and disperse the oil have been effective and that the remaining oil is naturally dispersing and biodegrading.
Around May 24, a large loop current eddy, called Eddy Franklin, started to “pinch off” and detach, from the loop current. For a number of weeks, Eddy Franklin and the loop current showed varying levels of connectivity. The eddy is now clearly disconnected from the loop current and will likely migrate to the west over the next few months. As of July 25, 2010, Eddy Franklin was more than 100 miles from the nearest surface oil associated with the Deepwater Horizon/BP source.
There is no clear way for oil to be transported to Southern Florida, the Florida Keys or along the East Coast of the United States unless the loop current fully reforms with Eddy Franklin, or moves northward, neither of which is likely to happen for several months. At that point, essentially all of the remaining surface oil will have dissipated.
http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/topic_subtopic_entry.php?RECORD_KEY%28entry_subtopic_topic%29=entry_id,subtopic_id,topic_id&entry_id%28entry_subtopic_topic%29=815&subtopic_id%28entry_subtopic_topic%29=2&topic_id%28entry_subtopic_topic%29=1
TraderB:
did you see this article?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/01/gulf-oil-spill-ixtoc-ecological-tipping-point
the important paragraph is:
“”This is not to say there were no consequences. Just that the evidence is that these are not as dramatic as we feared,” says Luis Soto, a marine biologist from the National Autonomous University of Mexico. “After about two years the recuperation was well on the way.””
They also mention the possibility that dispersants may cause some problems.
This link speaks to some of those issues, however the link said that most dispersants break down after 16 days.
http://toxipedia.org/display/toxipedia/Oil+Dispersant
In my opinion from what I have read, the overall outlook appears to be good for a recovery in a few years possibly sooner.
Gyges,
This is the best source:
National Research Council, Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects (2003).
It can be purchased here:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10388.html
“Biodegradation of hydrocarbons has been considered one of the principal removal mechanisms in the aquatic environment.”
“Rates of biodegradation in a natural experiment range from 50 to 100 g/m3 per day (Lee and Levy, 1987). In the environment, rates of degradation have been reported to be between 0.001 and 60 g/m3 per day (Atlas and Bartha, 1992). Rates for anaerobic
degradation of hydrocarbons have not been measured but are generally thought to be a fraction of aerobic respiration rates.”
“There is a general hierarchy for rates of biodegradation of hydrocarbons: saturated alkanes are more quickly degraded by microorganisms than aromatic compounds; alkanes and smaller-sized aromatics are degraded before branched alkanes, multi-ring and substituted aromatics, and cyclic compounds (Leahy and Colwell, 1990; Atlas and Bartha, 1992).”
Yissil,
I don’t really consider a thread long until it breaks 1000 posts, but I’ll help with the unending debate…
If this thread does not go up to 833 like this one:
http://jonathanturley.org/2010/07/21/can-sherrod-sue-over-edited-naacp-tape/
I will lose all faith in everyone’s commitment to vigorous, unending debate. As my contribution, in a video response to DallysDad’s post, here is the famous Dawkins “What if you’re wrong?” clip. I always liked it although it’s point is a bit obvious.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg&hl=en_US&fs=1]
I heard that all Aussie schools have the finest School Dragons to carry the children to school and Unicorn stables for those who choose to ride theirs to school.
Mike,
You link to the EPA did not work. However, they issued a report today that said COREXIT 9500A alone is only slightly toxic to shrimp larvae and practically non-toxic to the inland silverside. The mixture with crude is no more toxic than the oil itself.
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants-testing.html
My guess is that most of the toxicity is from the major component, petroleum distillates. Basically, they are adding more oil to the oil. Another ingredient, propylene glycol, is a common household solvent and is used to dissolve medicines for injection. A third ingredient is docusate sodium is used in laxatives.
{W(t)=C : b < t < (now)} said:
"I personally can no longer afford that manner of corporate behaviour."
I think the most important lesson that we need to learn out of this is that none of us can afford it.
TraderB: ‘These results confirm that the dispersant used in response to the oil spill in the Gulf, Corexit 9500A, is generally no more or less toxic than the other available alternatives.’
the thing that gets me is…the use of any agent, especially the toxic ones, is related to the humongous disastrous oil well debacle that necessitated their use in the first place. Over and over again these ‘bad boy’ corporate entities take it upon themselves to do whatever they want, without restraint, without thought and without even admission…but the real price is usually paid, initially and financially, by someone else. In this event, the highest price has been paid by others, including the marine mammals and fish.
I personally can no longer afford that manner of corporate behaviour.
Slartibartfast
“Rejected the idea of microbes’? Do you mean ‘rejected the existence of microbes’ or ‘rejected that microbes eat oil’ or ‘rejected that microbes eating oil in the gulf has cleaned everything up and is unqualified good news’?
It was obvious from the context that it was not the first. It was the second until lately.
Buddha Is Laughing
1, August 1, 2010 at 11:01 pm
Blouise,
I submit that the last good Republican was Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Anyone who said, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist” clearly knew what was going wrong and what to do about it.
I blame his experience as a wartime General for “ruining him” as a Republican. He had reality poisoning.
==============================================================
I’m sorry to be posting so late … I get lost on the threads and miss things …..
I concur 100% with your assessment. He also seemed to realize his vice-president’s proclivities would not serve the country well.
TraderB
1, August 1, 2010 at 5:54 pm
I found that most liberals are as ignorant of science as these people seem to be. ….
================================================================
I believe you all are disabusing the poor boy of his erroneously held impressions.
oops, that post was in response toTraderB 1, August 2, 2010 at 11:38 am
thanks for citing the MANUFACTURER…
28 days is more than enough invivo exposure to effect damage to any fetal or ova developement.
Also, the wikipedia article you sourced had this to say: ‘Corexit[1] is a product line of solvents primarily used as a dispersant for breaking up oil slicks. It is produced by Nalco Holding Company which is associated with BP and Exxon.’
AND
‘The relative toxicity of Corexit and other dispersants are difficult to determine due to a scarcity of scientific data.[3] The manufacturer’s safety data sheet states “No toxicity studies have been conducted on this product,” and later concludes “The potential human hazard is: Low.”[20]’
you are being silly
Gyges
1, August 2, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Trader,
So we’re agreed, you don’t really have any proof about the scientific literacy thing, just an anecdote (which is fine as long as you admit to the fact) gathered from a sources with extreme selection bias?
Now, onto more complex issues. Give me some actual science backing up your claims that the fact that oil consuming microbes exist some how mitigates a large amount of the impact of the oil spill.
My dog drinks water. He can’t drink enough to compensate for my house getting flooded.
*************************************************
Slartibartfast
1, August 2, 2010 at 1:30 pm
Gyges,
Sounds like you just need a bigger dog.
=========================================================
lol again … love it 2
Elaine M.
1, August 2, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Gyges–
“Now, onto more complex issues. Give me some actual science backing up your claims that the fact that oil consuming microbes exist some how mitigates a large amount of the impact of the oil spill.
“My dog drinks water. He can’t drink enough to compensate for my house getting flooded.”
**********
The devil’s in the details!
===============================================================
lol … love it!