Archive for infrared

"The b.s. WH Report, that falsely claims 75% of oil is gone, will be used by BP to save billions in penalties"


When I turn on Mr. Computer every morning, I am hit with a barrage of e-mails, tweets, and Facebook messages from people who want me to read important articles that they link me to.  It's a little overwhelming, and I often don't have time to get to a lot of them.

However, some really are mandatory reading, and those are the ones I share with you. For example...

Here are several Facebook messages that Hugh Kaufman, senior policy analyst with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, sent me within the past 12 hours or so:

Remember folks. under the law, BP has to pay natural resource damages for the mess they created. The BS WH Report, that falsely claims that 75% of the oil is gone, will be used by BP to save billions of $ in penalties.
Hmmm. This case is looking more and more crooked every day.


Hmm, the NYT doesn't know why the folks in the Gulf aren't jumpin' up and down about the WH lies saying 75% of the oil is gone. That's because they are smart enough to see and smell the oil and dead fish in their Gulf neighborhoods.
Maybe if they had gone to an ivy league school, they would know that the WH and the main stream media are right, and their eyes and noses are lying. 😉

Tomorrow's WashPost is reporting that the scientists who worked on the BS White House report are disowning it and saying its BS.
CLEAR water, in the Gulf, where people swim and seafood is caught, contain loads of toxic chemicals from the BP oil spill, that will be around for a long time:

Each kind of chemical in the crude oil responds to tides, currents, saltiness of the sea water, and natch, chemistry, in different ways, Anderson says. "Tracking them all down is like chasing bees from a smashed hive, they go every which way possible."

Complicating the search for the chemicals is the amount of dispersant, about 1.84 million gallons, applied to oil from the leak. The dispersant has done its job, acting like dish soap on bacon grease, congealing the oil into tiny droplets that microbes can begin eating. "That means they are in the food chain." Short says. "Whether people will want to swim or eat food from water that looks clear but has high concentrations of (toxins) will be interesting," she says.

Another open question is the issue of photo-enhanced toxicity from the chemicals, says Short, a former NOAA scientist who worked on the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill's aftermath. In the marshes, oil may be cleaned from foliage and end up buried by Mississippi mud, where it ends up near the roots of growing plants. "The toxins get inside the surfaces of cells and release oxygen in response to sunlight," he says, burning up the plants from the inside. Mangrove swamps in Panama were hit hard by this reaction after a 1986 spill, and the effects are still seen today, according to Smithsonian Tropical Research Institution scientists.

And then my own "DeepwaterThroat", Barkway, linked me to this, via Mother Jones:

Feds Giving Spill Data to BP—But Public Stays in Dark

You get the idea.

Happy reading.


"At least the WH is no longer making EPA the fall guy. They are now doing the lying for BP."


Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


[A] federal report released Wednesday indicated that only about a quarter of the spilled oil remains in the Gulf and is degrading quickly, with the rest having been contained, cleaned up or otherwise disappeared. [...]

Nearly three-quarters of the oil — more than 152 million gallons — has been collected at the well by a temporary containment cap, been cleaned up or chemically dispersed, or naturally deteriorated, evaporated or dissolved, according to a report by the Interior Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [...]

That leaves nearly 53 million gallons in the Gulf. The amount remaining — or washed up on the shore — is still nearly five times the size of the 11 million-gallon Exxon Valdez spill, which wreaked environmental havoc in Alaska in 1989. [...]

A Florida State University oceanographer who has long been tracking the spill, and who early on challenged the government's low estimates of its size ....

"There's some science here, but mostly it's spin, and it breaks my heart to see them do it," said the oceanographer, Ian McDonald. [...]  I'm afraid this continues a track record of doubtful information distributed through NOAA."

Here's what Hugh Kaufman,, senior policy analyst with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, messaged me about that article:

I'm sad to say this is false, misleading, and inaccurate. In short, a lie. Shame.

Robert Gibbs, just now on CSPAN:

"A lot of the doomsday scenarios... will not come to fruition."

I'm going to post a series of tweets that were posted as Thad Allen, Robert Gibbs, Carol Browner, and NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco were giving their White House briefing today. By the way, they're saying the long term impact isn't as bad as we anticipated. Really?

AltaKocker is Hugh Kaufman. My Kaufman-sourced posts can be found here.

Barkway is my "DeepwaterThroat", a hazardous waste worker in the Gulf who has been collaborating with me to bring you what the news media won't, as you can see for yourself here. Here are her first impressions:

Hugh chimed in immediately:


In a Facebook message to me, he added:

Study actually documents that over 75% of oil is still in Gulf. EPA guy who did the BS toxicity tests was WH Enviro Science Advisor in Bush WH.

The EPA toxicity tests on the 2 species of marine life was a fraud. Those species are NOT in the Gulf. Water temperatures used were NOT Gulf temperatures. Sub-lethal and chronic toxicity not tested.

Looks like Bush/Cheney on 911 Ground Zero Health. "Deja vu all over again."


We all got the same impression of this briefing, and sadly, it wasn't a good one.

UPDATE, Hugh just e-mailed this:

Head of NOAA at WH Press Conference just lied and said that chemically dispersed oil degrades same as natural degredation. (Anastas said 50% faster, Amoco-Cadiz spill proves oil degrades muuuch slower if chemically dispersed)

Professor Hazen says his study found non-dispersed oil areas recovered within 5 years, while dispersed oil areas still haven't recovered  after over 30 years, in the Amoco Cadiz spill in France in 1977.

UPDATE, another quote from Hugh:

One of the key technical experts on the BS "no more oil in the Gulf" Report is a professor from the BP funded department at LSU. He is also Rush Limbaugh's technical expert on the Gulf Spill.

The Key technical guy at EPA for the Obama Administration's environmental policy, on this, is EPA Assistant Administrator Paul Anastas. He was the Environment Science Advisor to the President, in the George W. Bush WH, until 2004.

Remember folks. under the law, BP has to pay natural resource damages for the mess they created. The BS WH Report, that falsely claims that 75% of the oil is gone, will be used by BP to save billions of $ in penalties.
Hmmm. This case is looking more and more crooked every day.


Report: Justice Dep't. to Probe whether BP executives traded stock based on insider information, more


No matter what element of the BP disaster we hear about, it all points to BP's extreme douchery and negligence. Now they've got another major legal headache:

The U.S. is examining whether BP Plc made misleading statements after its Gulf of Mexico oil spill and if company executives traded stock based on insider information about the accident, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The Justice Department is investigating possible criminal wrongdoing and the Securities and Exchange Commission is probing potential civil violations, said the person, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly and asked not to be identified. [...]

The government has been reviewing whether there were violations of the Clean Water Act, which carries civil and criminal penalties, and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which can be used to hold companies liable for cleanup costs.

Also under review is whether there were violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Endangered Species Act, which provide penalties for injuries to wildlife, and other criminal laws.

Of course, they sweartogod they're cooperating fully. And by cooperating fully they mean lying through their teeth, deceiving, putting up roadblocks, dragging their feet, and going yachting.

H/t: Hugh Kaufman


BP Watch: Obama administration's scientists admit alarm over chemicals + moratorium could end early


What would our day be like without a another reminder of how Corexit is poisoning our world? The EPA has snapped back and forth on whether dispersants are "safe" or whether we should all be screaming bloody murder (literally) over the millions of gallons that have been dumped into what used to be a healthy, living ocean.

Let's not forget that dispersants enter living things more easily on a cellular level ("the chemicals break down cell walls making organisms more susceptible to oil"). Oil is more easily collected when it floats on top of the water or balls up on shore. And just because the oil is invisible doesn't mean it isn't there. It's everywhere, including in the sand on shore, only visible via infrared light.

In addition, let's not forget that the plumes beneath the ocean's surface are lethal to sea life. And what is lethal to sea life is lethal to us, especially if we eventually consume the affected sea life:

The Obama administration is facing internal dissent from its own scientists for approving the use of huge quantities of chemical dispersants to tackle the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Guardian has learned.

The Environmental Protection Agency has come under withering attack in Congress and from independent scientists for allowing BP to spray almost 2 million gallons of the dispersant Corexit on the slick and, even more controversially, pump the chemical into the leak site 5,000ft below the sea. Now it emerges the EPA's own experts have been raising similar concerns within the agency.

And what are the concerns? Jeff Ruch, exective director of the whistleblower support group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility:

"There was one toxicologist who was very concerned about the underwater application particularly [...] The concern was the agency appeared to be flying blind and not consulting its own specialists and even the literature that was available."

Well now, that's reassuring.

And now a word from my friend and very reliable source, Hugh Kaufman:

Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst and veteran whistleblower at EPA, dismissed the tests as little more than a PR stunt. "They are trying to spin this limited piece of information to make it look like dispersants are safe and that the Corexit dispersant is safe."

Meanwhile, it's so very nice to know that the Obama administration is getting "comfortable" with oil drilling again, now that BP's going to shoot some mud into what's left of their good ol' reliable rigaroony. See? The danger is over. We can all rest easy and trust Big Oil to do the right thing again.

Stupid, baby, stupid:

The Obama administration hopes to lift a freeze on deepwater drilling well before its scheduled Nov. 30 expiration date, the nation's top drilling regulator said Tuesday.

Michael Bromwich, director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, said he and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar were gathering information to decide whether to revise or even lift the ban, which has shut down drilling at 33 ocean wells in the wake of the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

"I think it is everybody's hope that we will feel comfortable enough that the moratorium can be lifted significantly in advance of Nov. 30," Bromwich told reporters Tuesday. "But I can't say when."

What was that definition of insanity again? Doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result?  If the goo fits...

All my previous posts related to dispersants can be found here, including the breakdown of Corexit ingredients.