Toxic chemical used on Gulf oil spill
Sunday 01 August 2010
Latest in Americas
On Facebook
From the blogs
More than half of Afghanistan’s families live in extreme poverty
Leila is watching her baby intently, as his mouth moves trying to swallow the small blob of yellow p...
Time for a new approach to alcohol
Ambulances were called and three drunk teenagers were brought to my care. One was so drunk we had to...
Bahrain: One year on
I am used to endless lies and criticism from the BNP and its favourite blogster, as well as Islamist...
Paul Volcker stands tall against the banking lobby
Why is Europe, which likes to present itself as an opponent of speculative "Anglo-Saxon" finance, li...
The US Coast Guard has routinely approved BP requests to use thousands of gallons of toxic chemical a day to break up oil slicks in the Gulf of Mexico despite a federal directive that the chemicals be used only rarely on surface waters, congressional investigators said after examining BP and government documents.
The documents show the Coast Guard approved 74 waivers over a 48-day period after the restrictions were imposed, resulting in hundreds of thousands of gallons of the chemicals to be spread on Gulf waters. Only in a small number of cases did the government scale back BP's request.
The extensive use of dispersants to break up oil gushing from BP's Deepwater Horizon raised concerns early on as to what long-term damage the toxic chemicals might be doing to the Gulf's aquatic life. That prompted the Environmental Protection Agency on May 26 to direct BP to stop using the chemicals on the water surface except in "rare cases".
But Republican Edward Markey said that the chemicals continued to be used extensively with Coast Guard approval, often at a rate of 6,000 to 10,000 gallons a day. A request was made and approved on June 13 to spread as much as 36,000 gallons of dispersant, according to data obtained by Markey's Energy and Environment subcommittee.
The EPA directive "has become more of a meaningless paperwork exercise than an attempt ... to eliminate surface application of chemical dispersants," Markey wrote in a letter sent on Friday to retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the government's point man on the spill.
Markey's office released the letter yesterday as well as the documents his panel had analysed. Markey said that instead of complying with the EPA directive, "BP often carpet bombed the ocean with these chemicals and the Coast Guard allowed them to do it".
The House investigators found that the Coast Guard routinely approved the chemical use, in some cases a week in advance. On five occasions the Coast Guard approved a BP request to use 6,000 gallons a day over a week-long period and "in many of these days BP still used more than double" the limit that was approved, Markey said in his letter.
The chemicals break down masses of oil into small droplets that allow the oil to be more easily consumed by bacteria. But the chemicals are also toxic and it's not known what impact the large volume of chemicals being used against the BP spill might be having on marine life.
The EPA has acknowledged that there are trade offs and that some use of the chemicals are essential to combat the oil spill. The EPA directive issued in May concerned only surface dispersal of the chemicals. BP also has been using large amounts of chemicals near the ocean floor at the site of the damaged wellhead.
In recent weeks, little oil has been noticed on the Gulf surface, and scientists believe one reason for that might be the extensive use of the chemical dispersants.
- 1 Ninety gaffes in ninety years
- 2 Cameron's 'drunk tanks' are dangerous, say police
- 3 Can you master a language in a weekend?
- 4 Rothschild loses libel case, and reveals secret world of money and politics
- 5 No secularism please, we're British
- 6 Apple admits it has a human rights problem
- 7 You couldn't make it up: Sun staff hope Strasbourg can save them from Murdoch
- 1 Ninety gaffes in ninety years
- 2 Spotify: 1 million plays, £108 return
- 3 Apple admits it has a human rights problem
- 4 Rangers future could be bright says administrator
- 5 Rothschild loses libel case, and reveals secret world of money and politics
- 6 MP faces charges over Nazi stag night
- 7 Six Grammys, five years off: Adele puts love before career
- 8 No secularism please, we're British
- 9 Mark Steel: If religion is 'marginal', I'm the Pope
- 10 Lightning kills an entire football team
Free trial of new Independent iPad app
Get your daily dose of the best of British journalism, sponsored by American Airlines
Win a three-week coastal jaunt
Spend three weeks exploring every nook and cranny of gorgeous Atlantic Canada.
Amazing restaurant offers
Three glasses of free champagne and a special menu at 46 top London restaurants.
Latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Career Services
Day In a Page
How an abortion divided America
Did they all live happily ever after? That's up to you...




Comments