E&E: Data lacking on underwater impacts of oil spill dispersants — GAO

Finally–someone is casting a critical eye on the presumed reliance on the use of large volumes of dispersants in the water column to clean up oil spills. This after the grand BP experiment in the Gulf wreaked havoc on the water quality and benthos in areas where dispersants were used. I think it is patently unsafe to do so—the dispersants settle on the bottom and smother all life. They don’t dissipate as on the surface; it’s a whole new cycle of death to marinelife. It’s high time this came to light in Congress. Yay Markey and Miller!!!!! You are my heroes of the day! DV

Jeremy P. Jacobs, E&E reporter
Published: Friday, June 29, 2012

Little is known about how chemical dispersants used following an oil spill behave when applied below the water surface or in extremely cold environments, the Government Accountability Office said today. There’s a general understanding of how dispersants behave on the surface of water, GAO said, but questions remain about how quickly or slowly the dispersants biodegrade.

“[A]ll the experts GAO spoke with said that little is known about the application and effects of dispersants applied subsurface, noting that specific environmental conditions, such as higher pressures, may influence dispersants’ effectiveness,” GAO said. “Knowledge about the use and effectiveness of dispersants in the Arctic is also limited.”

GAO’s report, requested by Democratic Reps. Brad Miller of North Carolina and Ed Markey of Massachusetts, found that the government has spent $15.5 million on dispersant research, with the majority of that money coming after the 2010 Gulf of Mexico spill. However, “relatively few projects” focused on applying the dispersants below the surface of the water and hardly any focused on cold-water environments.

Miller and Markey said they requested the study because of how little is known about how dispersants interact with the environment and whether they pose a risk to ecosystems or human health.

“It’s stunning how little we know about the effect of dispersants just two years after using millions of gallons in the Gulf of Mexico,” said Miller, a senior member of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. “And whatever lessons we learned from the Gulf of Mexico are probably useless in the Arctic.” They also noted that the report comes just days after Shell announced plans to send two drilling rigs to the Arctic.

The report also says that there are several challenges for dispersant research, most notably that demand and, consequently, funding only pick up following an environmental disaster. “It is difficult for federal agencies to fund longer term studies,
such as those needed to understand chronic toxicological effects of dispersants,” GAO said.

Miller and Markey also sent a letter to EPA today asking the agency what steps it has taken to make sure the dispersants are safe before they are used again. “In light of the expansion of offshore drilling in both the Gulf and Arctic regions, it is necessary that the EPA ensure that future spill mitigation agents, such as dispersants, have undergone appropriate testing for real response situations prior to their deployment in our waterways,” the lawmakers wrote.

Special thanks to Richard Charter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *