Changes

''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies and BP are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> U.S.[[Department of Homeland Security]] Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] reported the dispersants were  dropped form [[C-130]] cargo aircraft.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report  dispersants have not been used in the United State "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Dennis Takahashi-Kelso, executive vice president of the [[environmental]] group Ocean Conservancy, said dispersants risk damaging [[ecosystem]]s and hurting wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies and BP are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> U.S.[[Department of Homeland Security]] Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] reported the dispersants were  dropped form [[C-130]] cargo aircraft.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report  dispersants have not been used in the United State "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Dennis Takahashi-Kelso, executive vice president of the [[environmental]] group Ocean Conservancy, said dispersants risk damaging [[ecosystem]]s and hurting wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in  urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and bone marrow of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and [[reproductive]] problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>  Many species are being threatened at a crucial in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref>

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>  Many species are being threatened at a crucial in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref>