{"id":4690,"date":"2013-08-24T21:15:39","date_gmt":"2013-08-24T21:15:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/?p=4690"},"modified":"2013-08-24T21:15:39","modified_gmt":"2013-08-24T21:15:39","slug":"new-york-times-gulf-spill-sampling-questioned","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/2013\/08\/24\/new-york-times-gulf-spill-sampling-questioned\/","title":{"rendered":"New York Times: Gulf Spill Sampling Questioned"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><iframe class=\"wp-embedded-content\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" title=\"Gulf Spill Sampling Questioned\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/svc\/oembed\/html\/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2013%2F08%2F20%2Fscience%2Fearth%2Fnew-analysis-of-gulf-oil-spill.html#?secret=CXl1Wd36bS\" data-secret=\"CXl1Wd36bS\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p><em>I&#8217;m with Rikki Ott&#8230;.the seafood and water quality in the Gulf was worse than reported by official agencies and that is no surprise to anyone paying attention.<\/em>  DV<\/p>\n<p>U.S. Coast Guard, via Reuters<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/2013\/08\/24\/new-york-times-gulf-spill-sampling-questioned\/bp-spill\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-4691\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/08\/BP-spill.jpg\" alt=\"BP spill\" width=\"600\" height=\"400\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-4691\" \/><\/a><br \/>\nFireboat crews battling a blaze at the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, off Louisiana, on April 21, 2010, a day after the rig exploded, killing 11 workers and resulting in the blowout of an exploratory well owned by BP. Ultimately, roughly 200 million gallons of crude oil gushed into the gulf.<\/p>\n<p>By HENRY FOUNTAIN<br \/>\nPublished: August 19, 2013<\/p>\n<p>An analysis of water, sediment and seafood samples taken in 2010 during and after the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has found higher contamination levels in some cases than previous studies by federal agencies did, casting doubt on some of the earlier sampling methods.<\/p>\n<p>The lead author, Paul W. Sammarco of the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, said that dispersants used to break up the oil might have affected some of the samples. He said that the greater contamination called into question the timing of decisions by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to reopen gulf fisheries after the spill and that \u201cit might be time to review the techniques that are used to determine\u201d such reopenings.<\/p>\n<p>Eleven workers died and roughly 200 million gallons of crude oil gushed into the gulf after a blowout at an exploratory well owned by BP caused the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig to explode on April 20, 2010. Nearly two million gallons of Corexit, a dispersant, were sprayed on the surface or injected into the oil plume near the wellhead.<\/p>\n<p>In all, more than 88,000 square miles of federal waters were closed to commercial and recreational fishing. Some areas were reopened before the well was capped three months after the blowout; the last areas were reopened a year after the disaster.<\/p>\n<p>Like other studies after the spill, the new analysis, published last week in the journal Marine Pollution Bulletin, found that components of oil were distributed along the Gulf Coast as far west as Galveston, Tex. \u2014 about 300 miles from the well site \u2014 and southeast to the Florida Keys.<\/p>\n<p>But the study found higher levels of many oil-related compounds than earlier studies by NOAA scientists and others, particularly in seawater and sediment. The compounds studied included polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, some of which are classified as probably carcinogenic, and volatile organic compounds, which can affect the immune and nervous systems.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhen the numbers first started coming in, I thought these looked awfully high,\u201d Dr. Sammarco said, referring to the data he analyzed, which came from samples that he and other researchers had collected. Then he looked at the NOAA data. \u201cTheir numbers were very low,\u201d he said, \u201cI thought what is going on here? It didn\u2019t make sense.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Dr. Sammarco said that a particular sampling method used in some earlier studies might have led to lower readings. That method uses a device called a Niskin bottle, which takes a sample from a specific point in the water. Because of the widespread use of dispersants during the spill \u2014 which raised separate concerns about toxicity \u2014 the oil, broken into droplets, may have remained in patches in the water rather than dispersing uniformly.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSampling a patchy environment, you may not necessarily hit the patches,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>The plastic that the bottles are made from also attracts oily compounds, potentially removing them from any water sample and leading to lower readings of contaminants, Dr. Sammarco said.<\/p>\n<p>Riki Ott, an independent marine toxicologist who has studied effects of the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska as well as the BP spill, said she was \u201ctotally shocked\u201d when she read the high numbers in Dr. Sammarco\u2019s study.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTo see NOAA doing this, that\u2019s inexcusable,\u201d Dr. Ott said, referring to the use of Niskin bottles. \u201cIt has been known since Exxon Valdez that this spotty sampling does not work.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>A spokesman for NOAA said the agency would not comment because it was involved in a legal review known as a Natural Resource Damage Assessment to determine how much BP must pay for restoration work. But BP, in a statement, noted that tests on seafood by NOAA and other agencies consistently found levels of contaminants 100 to 1,000 times lower than safety thresholds set by the federal Food and Drug Administration.<\/p>\n<p>Dr. Sammarco suggested that more continuous monitoring of oil spills should be undertaken before fisheries are reopened. \u201cIt\u2019s a good idea to follow these things long term, to make sure the runway is clear so people are safe and the food is safe,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>Julia M. Gohlke, a researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham who conducted an independent review of seafood safety after the spill, said that while decisions to reopen fisheries are currently based on fish samples only, \u201cit seems like it would definitely be important to keep looking at water samples as well.\u201d <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I&#8217;m with Rikki Ott&#8230;.the seafood and water quality in the Gulf was worse than reported by official agencies and that is no surprise to anyone paying attention. DV U.S. Coast Guard, via Reuters Fireboat crews battling a blaze at the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, off Louisiana, on April 21, 2010, &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/2013\/08\/24\/new-york-times-gulf-spill-sampling-questioned\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">New York Times: Gulf Spill Sampling Questioned<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[19,6,12,11,5,4,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4690","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bp-spill","category-fossil-fuels","category-gulf-of-mexico-clean-up","category-gulf-restoration","category-ocean-pollution","category-offshore-oil","category-oil-pollution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4690","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4690"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4690\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4694,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4690\/revisions\/4694"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4690"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4690"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4690"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}