+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

  1. Link to Post #1
    Switzerland Avalon Member Helvetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th March 2010
    Thanked 5,538 times in 1,288 posts

    Default BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    BP Embraces Exxon’s Toxic Dispersant, Ignores Safer Alternative


    It has been confirmed that the dispersal agent being used by BP and the government is Corexit 9500, a solvent originally developed by Exxon and now manufactured by Nalco Holding Company of Naperville, IL. Their stock took a sharp jump, up more than 18% at its highest point of the day today, after it was announced that their product is the one being used in the Gulf. Nalco’s CEO, Erik Frywald, expressed their commitment to “helping the people and environment of the Gulf Coast recover as rapidly as possible.” It may be that the best way to help would be to remove their product from the fray. Take a look at some of the facts about Corexit 9500:

    A report written by Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark for Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. entitled “Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview” states that “Corexit 9500, Corexit 9527, and Corexit 9580 have moderate toxicity to early life stages of fish, crustaceans and mollusks (LC50 or EC50 – 1.6 to 100 ppm*). It goes on to say that decreasing water temperatures in lab tests showed decreased toxicity, a lowered uptake of the dispersant. Unfortunately, we’re going to be seeing an increase in temperatures, not a decrease. Amongst the other caveats is that the study is species-specific, that other animals may be more severely affected, silver-sided fish amongst them.

    Oil is toxic at 11 ppm while Corexit 9500 is toxic at only 2.61 ppm; Corexit 9500 is four times as toxic as the oil itself. Sure, a lot less of it is being introduced, but that’s still a flawed logical perspective, because it’s not a “lesser of two evils” scenario. BOTH are going into the ocean water.

    The lesser of two evils seems to be a product called Dispersit, manufactured by Polychem, a division of U.S. Polychemical Corporation. In comparison, water-based Dispersit is toxic at 7.9-8.2 ppm; Dispersit holds about one third of the toxicity that Corexit 9500 presents. Dispersit is a much less harmful water-based product which is both EPA approved and the U.S. Coast Guard’s NCP list. So why isn’t it being used?

    We spoke with Bruce Gebhardt at Polychem Marine Products, asked him if Dispersit was being used in the Gulf Oil Spill situation. “Very little,” he replied. When asked why, the impression was that the government had used Corexit 9500 in the past, and was going with what they know — no matter how dangerous that might prove to be.

    Dispersit has a demonstrated effectiveness of 100% on the lighter South Louisiana crude, and 40% on Pruhoe Bay’s heavier crude. Exxon’s Corexit 9500 is just 55% effective on SL and 55% effective on PB. On an average, Dispersit is 70% effective, and may prove 100% effective, while 9500 is an average of 50% effective, with a maximum effective use of just 55%. Corexit 9500 is a harsh petroleum-based solvent which is dangerous to people and sea life. Dispersit’s human health effect is “slight to none.” Whether or not a dispersal agent is a wise move, the question remaining unanswered is: Why is Corexit 9500 is being used at all, when the water-based Dispersit is available, markedly more effective and less toxic? Follow the money.

    Dispersal of the oil does not eliminate it, nor does it decrease the toxicity of the oil. It just breaks it up into small particles, where it becomes less visible. It’s still there, spewing toxicity at an even greater rate (due to higher surface area.) But now it’s pretty much impossible to skim or trap or vacuum or even soak up at the shoreline, because most of it will never make it to the shoreline. Instead, that toxic crude oil AND the dispersant will be spread all over the ocean’s waters. This is why introducing such a product into the crude oil as it comes out from the pipe is a very bad idea for the ocean.

    It may not be pretty, but if the oil makes it to the shore, it can be soaked up, cleaned up. To “disperse” it means it will NEVER be cleaned up. It will just stay out there, polluting and poisoning the ocean, her inhabitants, and all the food we take from it. It’s unwise to be using Corexit 9500 at all, but introducing it to the oil as it leaves the broken pipe is approaching madness. Mr. Gebhardt agrees that the oil should be contained, and what has been leaked should be allowed to come to shore where it can be removed from the ocean by less toxic means.

    BP’s use of Corexit 9500 on the oil before it rises to the surface seems to be a deliberate attempt to mask the poison, to cover up that it continues to flow out from the ocean’s floor, while making it impossible to recover. In short, BP and Exxon want to spread the toxic oil throughout the oceans of the world, pollute everywhere, rather than allow it to be seen coming to shore where BP would have to pay for its containment and clean-up. It’s our job to keep them from getting away with sweeping this ugly mess under the surface
    "Earth is currently restricted today for normal development of timeline progress. With us telling you everything would change everything."

    Website: Information Machine

  2. Link to Post #2
    Avalon Member Operator's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th March 2010
    Thanked 8,151 times in 1,799 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    I wonder ... is corexit only used for these purposes ? If there are other purposes ... where and how are they used ? How can a company exist/survive making this stuff ... what are they producing
    besides corexit ? How come that publicly 'known' names show up in the top of companies like this.

    It appears as if they are not planning to definitely close it but even want to keep it for production later ... Will this become a standard procedure for accessing high risk wells ?
    Perhaps for moral reasons alone this can not be allowed to happen.

    Unfortunately I have no time and means to investigate this in depth myself ... but there are some investigative minds around here. I am convinced that instead of following the happenings we could take on a more leading role if we get to know the answers on the questions 'surrounding' the happenings.
    And it's great to see that people acquire more and more detailed knowledge about what just happened ... it's a start. Before you know it ... next time we will anticipate what 'they' are up to when they start their preparations.

    Do you remember Alex Collier talking about the holographic organization ? He was 100% right ! When we leave inspection/detection/regulation/control over to special organizations, commissions or governments they will be infiltrated rather sooner than later to eliminate their power. A holographic organization cannot be infiltrated ...

  3. Link to Post #3
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Thanked 199,828 times in 14,335 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?


    If that's a question, the answer is yes.

  4. Link to Post #4
    Join Date
    19th March 2010
    Where ever I am supposed to be.
    Thanked 72 times in 32 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    The only good thing about this is that they have allowed success to breed failure within their own organization. What I mean by that is that they have become so arrogant because of past successes in the execution of devious planning that they actually believe that they can get away with anything they want to in plain site.

    Even 911 was not nearly as in your face as this is. Why is this a good thing? We may not see it yet, but they will not be able to keep a lid on what they have actually done there in the gulf. There is a saying that is sometimes used here in the U.S. to describe a huge blunder like this. We sometimes say "that was a real Bopaw.

    Why do we say that? Because once upon a time a huge American chemical company released toxic chemical gas into the city of Bopaw India killing hundereds. You can bet your ass that with a bopaw on this scale that the world will eventually find out what has happened other than the oil alone and they will be out for blood when they do. Then the rest of the world will create a new saying "that was a real GOM"
    Last edited by tone3jaguar; 18th July 2010 at 03:54.

  5. Link to Post #5
    Avalon Member ascendingstarseed's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th June 2010
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Thanked 515 times in 142 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    The use of Corexit has broken the oil up into tiny particles, so tiny that what appears to be clear, unpolluted water if viewed under a microscope reveals TOXIC OIL all over the place on a molecular level. So when people in Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas say that the water is nice and clean they might want to take a closer look, real close.

    Corexit is also expected to cause the worst case of acid, or toxic rain the US has seen to date that will most likely lead to food shortages. In addition, other food producing countries are experiencing their own problems right now with crop failures.

    BP might as well be called Bilderberg Petroleum, the international bankster links to this event make it all really appears to be genocidal in nature when the massive over-use of Corexit is taken into consideration. Max Igan brings up some interesting connections and theories about what's going on in the GOM...

    Last edited by ascendingstarseed; 18th July 2010 at 10:54.

  6. Link to Post #6
    United States Avalon Member Snowbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2010
    The CORPORATION of the United States of America
    Thanked 4,485 times in 1,079 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    Max Igan reminds me of a soft spoken polite Alex Jones.

    Thanks for posting his show.

    Is it the Corexit that is forcing much of the oil to sink to the bottom of the Gulf? If not, what is causing that?
    Last edited by Snowbird; 20th July 2010 at 01:24.
    We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.

    Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
    Martin Luther King, Jr.

  7. Link to Post #7
    Avalon Member Mozart's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd June 2010
    Sierra Nevada mts in Northern California
    Thanked 4,793 times in 611 posts

    Default 42 MILLION GALLONS of Corexit in the Gulf?

    I was going to post a separate thread on this topic of the massive over-use of Corexit, but I saw this thread, so I am posting this here.

    In this article...


    ... the author indicates that it was not "a million gallons" of Corexit... it was "A MILLION BARRELS" of that dammed Corexit being flooded into the Gulf.

    An excerpt:

    Breaking News:

    The New Orleans Times Picayune reports that Christopher Reddy, an associate scientist of marine chemistry and geochemistry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, recently stated that BP injected one million BARRELS of Corexit into the Gulf, not one million GALLONS.


    If this breaking news is true, that means 42 million gallons of Corexit, rather than one million gallons of it have poisoned our Gulf and Atlantic Oceans.

    If Christopher Reddy is correct, the amount of Corexit alone dumped into the Gulf exceeds the amount of oil ever spilled in any single accident prior to the BP disaster.

    Could it be that BP, the government, and media have purposely confused BARRELS with GALLONS in order to mislead us?

    And now with the first named storm of this season (Tropical Storm Bonnie; it's very likely to develop further into a hurricane) bearing right down the bull's eye of the Gulf Oil Gusher area of the Gulf, one can only imagine how much Corexit would be spread into the lower Gulf states where the storm would make landfall.

    Already there are widespread reports of plants' leaves being burned in all the Gulf states, from Texas to Florida; on top of that, there are reports of inexplicable burning of leaves up the Midwest States as well -- the patterns of the burning of leaves are very similar throughout the states where such burning have been reported.
    Last edited by Mozart; 24th July 2010 at 01:00.

  8. Link to Post #8
    Greece Avalon Member
    Join Date
    29th April 2010
    Glasgow Scotland
    Thanked 1,474 times in 518 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    I am wondering does bonnie need to become hurricane to create a huge problem? check this...

    Tropical Depression BONNIE

    with wind speeds of 39-73 mph when it hits the coast... how much water and fumes can it move inland? Ofc if it turns into a hurricane ... all we can do is pray i guess

  9. Link to Post #9
    Portugal Avalon Member
    Join Date
    15th July 2010
    Thanked 312 times in 134 posts

    Default Re: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?

    BP is hidding friends.

    Dont you know about the pictures they released on their website?
    Picture about them: saying they are working hard??
    but someone found that the pictures were photoshop edited... even checking the metadata of the files the images were taken in 2001 !!

    This picture you cant see at first glance, but the contol pained is warning that the main door is opened...
    then the oil rigs are weird, blured..
    there is a control tower on the sea??
    you can observe some crop artifacts on the man silhouette

    This is the original

    This is the BP piblished...

    Now closer look:

    Do you still believe their BP crap?
    Last edited by MiguelQ; 24th July 2010 at 19:31.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Toxic Mimic
    By Thinker in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 25th July 2010, 00:22
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10th July 2010, 01:36
  3. BP TOXIC Death Clouds Already Onshore in Louisiana
    By jackovesk in forum The 2010 Gulf Oil Disaster
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 16th June 2010, 04:18
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 23rd April 2010, 20:09
  5. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12th April 2010, 14:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts