April, 18 2011, 01:38pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Lauren Wright, 202 683-4929, lwright(at)fwwatch(dot)org
One Year Later, Gulf Still Suffering from Environmental, Health Consequences of Unprecedented Dispersant Use
Food & Water Watch Critical of President’s Proposed Budget for NOAA’s Gulf of Mexico Spill Recovery Efforts
WASHINGTON
Approximately one year after the biggest oil spill in U.S. history, national consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch released a report detailing the public health and environmental fallout from the unprecedented use of chemical dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico, and called attention to skewed budget priorities for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the President's 2012 budget proposal.
According to the report, the administration's 2012 budget for NOAA - the agency tasked with conserving and managing living marine resources - would include $2.9 million on oil spill recovery efforts in the Gulf of Mexico, while allocating almost $60 million to promote policies that would further harm many fishermen and the Gulf environment.
"NOAA seeks to give tens of millions to push controversial fisheries management plans and promote ecologically damaging industrialization of our seafood. Gulf recovery efforts, on the other hand, don't seem to be the agency's priority," said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch. "These policies NOAA is promoting - catch and trade and factory fish farming - would further devastate the Gulf economy and the marine environment," Hauter said.
BP dumped 1.84 million gallons of the dispersants Corexit 9500A and 9527 into the Gulf over the several months following the Deepwater Horizon spill. The dispersants did not eliminate oil from the environment; they broke it down into smaller, less visible particles and sank it below the surface of the ocean where much of the toxic concoction remains.
According to the report, the toxicity of the dispersants increases when they are mixed with oil. An underwater cloud of dispersed, microscopic oil droplets contaminates a volume of water 100-1,000 times greater than if the oil were confined to the surface.
As of April 7, 2011, 153 dead dolphins have washed ashore along the Gulf Coast since the beginning of the year. A recent study suggests that the true death toll could be fifty times the number of carcasses recovered and reveals that 7,650 dolphins may have died in the gulf since the beginning of the year.
"We're still extremely worried about the underwater plumes of oil and dispersant since they're even more toxic than dispersant sprayed on the top of the water," Hauter said. "The dispersed oil in plumes is more easily absorbed and consumed by marine animals. We should definitely consider this when researching the dolphin and sea turtle deaths. A year later, the body count keeps rising. No one is forgetting that this happened and the government needs to be held accountable for recovery efforts."
Massive underwater oil plumes have been discovered across the Gulf. The University of Georgia found a ten-mile long, three-mile wide plume that was 300 feet thick at points.
Above the surface, the report lists studies and incidents of Corexit's negative health impact on humans, revealing that:
* Immediately after the spill, nine cleanup workers became violently ill. Four additional men were hospitalized after their boat was accidentally doused with dispersant. In early August, 334 people in Louisiana claimed spill-related health problems, including headaches and dizziness.
* Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) tested blood from five people that came in contact with oil and dispersants and exhibited physical symptoms. Chemicals that corresponded to those found in oil, dispersant or both were present in all those tested.
* Tulane University's Disaster Resilience Leadership Academy and the Louisiana Bucket Brigade surveyed 954 Louisiana residents to determine the spill's impact. Approximately half of all respondents reported having an unusual increase in coughing, headaches and skin and eye irritation.
* The National Institute of Health (NIH) is conducting the largest study on the dispersants' health impacts - interviewing 55,000 Gulf residents. BP originally committed $10 million to the $17.8 million study but recently cut its contribution to $6 million, leaving the government to fund the majority.
Corexit 9527 was one of the several dispersants used during the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska. Nearly 7,000 workers reported feeling ill with respiratory distress during this time. The average age of death for those that worked with Corexit during the Valdez spill is 50 years old.
Despite expert recommendations that BP used dispersants associated with less environmental and public health risk, the company decided to purchase the more toxic Corexit from Nalco Holding Company, whose board of directors includes a former BP executive and board member. Since then, Nalco has experienced tremendous revenue gains, selling over $70 million in dispersants to BP and the government.
The Obama Administration recently proposed allocating $54 million in its 2012 budget to catch shares - a policy that has put thousands of fishermen out of business, and over $4 million to ocean factory fish farming - a widely criticized, environmentally unsustainable method of mass-producing fish.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
'Collapse of Political Ambition': EU Shelves Nature Restoration Law
"To let this go now means we go into European elections saying the European system is not working, we do not protect nature, we do not take climate seriously," said Ireland's environmental minister. "That would be an absolute shame."
Mar 26, 2024
Environmental ministers in the European Union on Monday warned that the bloc's credibility on heading off the global biodiversity and climate emergencies is in peril following the European Council's decision to remove the historic Nature Restoration Law from its agenda after the proposal lost key support.
"We inspired others, yet now we risk arriving empty handed at COP16 [the 2024 UN Biodiversity Conference]," Virginijus Sinkevičius, E.U. commissioner for environment, oceans, and fisheries, said in a statement. "Backtracking now is... very difficult for me to accept."
The law, first introduced in 2022 and approved by European Parliament last month, faced one final hurdle to passage with the planned Council vote, but recent protests by farmers over the new nature restoration requirements helped push some previous supporters to reverse their positions on Monday.
The Nature Restoration Law, which supporters said they still intend to try to pass before E.U. elections in June, would require member states to adopt measures to restore at least 30% of habitats by 2030, working up to 90% by 2050. Member states would be required to take action to reverse pollinator populations, restore organic soils in agricultural use, increase development of urban green areas, and take other steps to protect biodiversity.
Since the farmer protests began in France and started spreading to other countries including Spain, Belgium, and Italy, policymakers have offered concessions including delayed implementation of another set of biodiversity rules calling for the agriculture industry to keep 4% of farming land free of crop production to regenerate healthy soil. The European Commission also shelved an anti-pesticide law in February in response to the protests.
As countries announced their new opposition to the Nature Restoration Law in recent days, some ministers suggested the demonstrations contributed to their decision.
Anikó Raisz, Hungary's minister of state for environmental affairs, said the law would "overburden the economy" and cited concerns about the "sensitive situation" in the agriculture sector. Italy also said it was concerned about the biodiversity rules' impact on farmers.
The World Wide Fund For Nature (WWF) accused far-right Hungarian President Viktor Orbán, who has dismissed European climate policies, of being behind the "unexpected and clearly politically motivated change in Hungary's position."
Hungary's opposition "was left unchallenged by Sweden, Poland, Finland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, and Italy—who continue to either abstain or oppose," and "has now put the [Nature Restoration Law] in jeopardy again, giving Hungary's President Viktor Orbán the green light to further his own agenda and hold E.U. decision-making hostage," said WWF.
Eamon Ryan, Irish minister for the environment, accused other policymakers in the bloc of "buckling" before the farmer protests, which continued Tuesday, ahead of June elections.
"The biggest risk is the collapse of political ambition and will," Ryan said. "To let this go now means we go into European elections saying the European system is not working, we do not protect nature, we do not take climate seriously. That would be an absolute shame."
BirdLife Europe called on the E.U. the continue its efforts to pass the Nature Restoration Law before the session ends this summer.
"The E.U.'s reputation hangs in the balance in this critical year of E.U. elections," said the group. "Failure to make the law a reality also undermines the E.U.'s credibility and leadership on its international commitments to tackle the biodiversity and climate crises."
"This is definitely not the end of the story," Alain Maron, Belgium's minister for climate change, environment, energy, and participative democracy, told reporters at a press conference Monday. He added that the Belgian presidency of the European Council "will work hard in the next few weeks to find possible ways out of this deadlock, and get the file back on the agenda for adoption in another council."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Under Fire for Downplaying Security Council Resolution as 'Nonbinding'
One expert accused the U.S. of working to "undermine and sabotage the U.N. Security Council, the 'rules-based order,' and international law."
Mar 26, 2024
Biden administration officials attempted Monday to downplay the significance of a newly passed United Nations Security Council resolution, drawing ire from human rights advocates who said the U.S. is undercutting international law and stonewalling attempts to bring Israel's devastating military assault on Gaza to an end.
The resolution "demands an immediate cease-fire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties, leading to a lasting sustainable cease-fire." The U.S., which previously vetoed several cease-fire resolutions, opted to abstain on Monday, allowing the measure to pass.
Shortly after the resolution's approval, several administration officials—including State Department spokesman Matthew Miller, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield—falsely characterized the measure as "nonbinding."
"It's a nonbinding resolution," Kirby told reporters. "So, there's no impact at all on Israel and Israel's ability to continue to go after Hamas."
Watch Matt Lee ask StateSpox about the passing of the UN ceasefire resolution. Basically the US position is it makes no difference and Miller calls 🇷🇺/🇨🇳 veto cynical.
Lee: Do you expect Israel is going to announce a ceasefire?
Miller: I do not
Lee: What’s the point of the UN? pic.twitter.com/FibaSKWjuh
— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) March 25, 2024
Josh Ruebner, an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University and former policy director of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, wrote in response that "there is no such thing as a 'nonbinding' Security Council resolution."
"Israel's failure to abide by this resolution must open the door to the immediate imposition of Chapter VII sanctions," Ruebner wrote.
Beatrice Fihn, the director of Lex International and former executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, condemned what she called the Biden administration's "appalling behavior" in the wake of the resolution's passage. Fihn said the administration's downplaying of the resolution shows how the U.S. works to "openly undermine and sabotage the U.N. Security Council, the 'rules-based order,' and international law."
In a Monday op-ed for Common Dreams, Phyllis Bennis, a senior fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, warned that administration officials' claim that the resolution was "nonbinding" should be seen as "setting the stage for the U.S. government to violate the U.N. Charter by refusing to be bound by the resolution's terms."
While all U.N. Security Council resolutions are legally binding, they're difficult to enforce and regularly ignored by the Israeli government, which responded with outrage to the latest resolution and canceled an Israeli delegation's planned visit to the U.S.
Israel Katz, Israel's foreign minister,
wrote on social media Monday that "Israel will not cease fire."
The resolution passed amid growing global alarm over the humanitarian crisis that Israel has inflicted on the Gaza Strip, where most of the population of around 2.2 million is displaced and at increasingly dire risk of starvation.
Amnesty International secretary-general Agnes Callamard said Monday that it was "just plain irresponsible" of U.S. officials to "suggest that a resolution meant to save lives and address massive devastation and suffering can be disregarded."
In addition to demanding an immediate cease-fire, the Security Council resolution calls for the unconditional release of all remaining hostages and "emphasizes the urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance."
Israel has systematically obstructed aid deliveries to Gaza, including
U.S.-funded flour shipments.
Farhan Haq, deputy spokesman for the U.N. secretary-general, stressed during a briefing Monday that "all the resolutions of the Security Council are international law."
"They are as binding as international laws," Haq said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
State of Emergency Declared After Cargo Ship Destroys Baltimore Bridge
Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin said he was "deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore."
Mar 26, 2024
A state of emergency was declared in Maryland early Tuesday morning after a large cargo ship slammed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, leading to its total collapse and sending a number of vehicles and people into the Patapsco River.
As the Baltimore Sunreports:
In a Tuesday morning news conference, just a few hours after the incident, Baltimore Fire Department Chief James Wallace said authorities are "still very much in an active search and rescue posture" noting they are searching for "upwards of seven individuals" and that sonar has detected the presence of vehicles in the water. There is no indication that the event was intentional, Wallace said.
"This is a tragedy that you could never imagine … It looked like something out of an action movie," Mayor Brandon Scott said.
In a later press conference, officials said that two members of a construction crew that was on the bridge at the time of the collision had been rescued while six others remained unaccounted for.
The terrifying footage of the bridge's collapse—which CNN correspondent Omar Jimenez commented was "almost unbelievable" to watch—is circulating widely on news channels and social media:
This video is almost unbelievable. The Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore literally collapsed this morning after it was struck by this large ship. pic.twitter.com/rYuy4U2r7H
— Omar Jimenez (@OmarJimenez) March 26, 2024
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said Tuesday that he had spoken with Mayor Scott and well as Maryland Governor Wes Moore and was helping to coordinate federal assistance.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," said Buttigieg.
Moore said in a statement he had declared a state of emergency and that work was underway to "quickly deploy federal resources" to the area.
"We are thankful for the brave men and women who are carrying out efforts to rescue those involved and pray for everyone's safety," said Moore. "We will remain in close contact with federal, state, and local entities that are carrying out rescue efforts as we continue to assess and respond to this tragedy."
Early reporting indicated that no crew members aboard the container ship, which sails under a Singapore flag, were injured or missing. A local harbor pilot was also said to be on board at the time of the crash.
"Deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) following the accident. "I'm profoundly thankful to first responders on the scene and will track rescue efforts by local, state, and federal authorities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular