Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
296,040
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 97:
Line 97: + + +
→Environmental policy: Corexit
BP's exploration plan received in the Obama administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref> BP was granted a “categorical exclusion” by the Obama administration from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> according to reports in the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>
BP's exploration plan received in the Obama administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref> BP was granted a “categorical exclusion” by the Obama administration from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> according to reports in the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>
The Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) gave BP the green light to apply its dispersant, Corexit as cosmetic relief to the spill.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> Corexit was found to be 10 to 20 times more [[toxic]] to human and [[wildlife]] than more than a dozen other dispersants approved by the EPA.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Corexit is manufactured by Nalco of Naperville, Illinois, a company's whose current leadership includes several executives from BP. "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>''Greenwire'', ibid.</ref> At Congressional hearings investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the Obama administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>
===Cozy relationship with oil industry===
===Cozy relationship with oil industry===