New sub sea oil plumes found near the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. (Picture inside)


While BP continues to assure Gulf Coast residents that the MacondoWell/ Deepwater Horizon oil spill that devastated our coastline less than a year and a half ago has been capped since September 2010 is no longer leaking any oil, recent reports and flyover pictures of approximately subsea oil plumes, 300 feet wide and separated from the next one by about that same distance, running roughly south to north near the Macondo Well (image left,  Credit: Jonathan Henderson and Tarik Zawia) are showing otherwise.

There are several theories behind the fresh oil and, forewarning, none of them are pretty.

The 1st first theory is that the cap that was placed on the well is leaking.  Although BP ignores this concern, it is still a very real possibility. Especially after Japan’s multiple severe earthquakes. It is logical to assume that considering the massive damage and the crippling of Japan’s nuclear plants- that the vibration of the earthquake could have reached the Gulf of Mexico and knocked loose the already fragile plug.

A 2nd theory, is that all of the oil BP that sunk to the seafloor due to nearly 2 million gallons of toxic Corexit 9500 & 9527A dispersant is beginning to break free and rise to the surface and blacken the coastline with fresh oil.  However, according to civil engineer and petroleum expert, Marco Kaltofen, oil that has been lying on the seafloor for several months would be much significantly more weathered than the fresh oil that is currently spotted.

Along the same theory, it is also possible  that the broken riser pipe and oil rig platform has trapped oil inside of it and it is slowly making its way to the surface.

A 3rd theory is that this 6 miles long and rainbow-colored oil sheen is coming from  Green Canyon Block 463, which is near the Macondo well site, officials state that its “probably”  silt from a subsurface shallow water pool. Records for that well indicate that it was drilled through a shallow lens of groundwater. The company is awaiting the results of tests on samples of the material and something tells me that we are going to waiting on those test results for a loooong time.

A 4th theory is that the oil sheen is contributed by BP’s Thunder Horse oil platform in the Mississippi Canyon  on August 16, 2011 where a  0.000108 gallons of oil was released but, let’s be real, that is less than half a CC and would not be enough to create a 6 mile long oil sheen. BP has admitted that “a silvery oil sheen measuring 2 feet by 30 feet has been reported on the surface” there, and they have supposedly sent vessels to monitor the situation.

A 5th theory, and this is by far the most concerning, is that oil may be coming from cracks and fissures in the seafloor caused by months of high-impact work  of BP failed capping attempts of the Maconda Well.  If this is the case,  there is a possibility of hundreds of little cracks and fissure (picture the seafloor cracks like a broken windshield) and  to the extent of my knowledge, there is no known way to cap the cracks and fissures which means the oil would continually leak into the Gulf of Mexico.

Either way, there is new oil in the Gulf of Mexico and it is, coincidentally, near the Deepwater/Macondo oil platform.

Unfortunately and dishearteningly, while  everyone is pointing fingers in attempt to escape responsibility for the leaked oil and no reports show that there are any intentions of cleaning it up; the Gulf of Mexico and her inhabitants are – once again- at the mercy of big oil.

Copyright (c) August 20, 2011. All rights reserved.

The reward is not worth the risk; Just Say No to new driling in the Gulf of Mexico.


The chant of, “Drill baby Drill”  and hungry looks towards the Gulf of Mexico happens a lot more often that what I would like.

In fact, I wish we would not allow any additional drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and would prefer that our current oil producing rigs were up to code in safety regulations and passed the audits of a 3rd party independent agency (something that President Obama should have pushed for  while he held our oil fields on a moratorium; but refused to acknowledge.)

Why, such a strong (and controversial; given my political leanings) statement?

First hand damage assessment of 2 oil spills that affected Florida within a 14 year period

Back during the  Maconda/BP oil spill in 2010 where 4.9 million barrels (read: 260 Olympic swimming pool worth) of oil polluted the Gulf of Mexico, I drew on my journalism strength and became an investigative reporter for my self produced investigative channel,  ClearWater Perspective, and participated in backstage teleconferences with BP, TransOcean, EPA, NOAA, MMS and the Coast Guard.

Additionally, I had close friends fly over and report on the oil spill and encounter harmed, innocent, wildlife who either swam into the oil and toxic dispersant or who ate off the oiled covered shores or were residing in a nearby tree branch when BP engaged their aerial dispersing.  The results were horrifying and something that I truly will never forget.

If you have a moment, please click into this video. A friend of mine made it with pictures of the real damage of the BP oil spill.  Warning: this is not suitable for children.

The reality of the oil spill became very real to me and contrasting and comparing my first hand experience with living near Tampa Bay  back in during the oil spill in 1996 (where 300,000 gallons of heavy oil and another 33,000 gallons of jet fuel spilled after a collision in West Central Florida) convinced me that it is only a matter of time until Florida suffers a backlash comparable to Louisiana.

Seeing the not so lucky wildlife and economic damage and how it negatively impacted the  fishermen, shrimpers, tourism industry, realtors, wedding planners, coastal businesses and coastal communities and wrecked havoc on our innocent wildlife made me vow to not allow a 3rd mistake of reckless and greedy drilling happen in our beautiful Gulf of Mexico.

Its’s like the saying– “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. ” — Fool me thrice and I should have known better than to expect that  big oil’s operations were ‘under control” and being properly scrutinized for safety precautions.

Florida is the most at-risk state in the event of another oil spill. (Economic and residential)

People of NW Florida have seen first hand, how public perception can hamper our local economy.

Florida’s main draw is tourism. When people think that Florida has oil-laden beaches; they will be less likely to come down for vacation or buy Gulf seafood; if they feel that it was tainted with oil and toxic dispersant. This change of perception, as has been proven with the 2010 oil spill, can cause a detrimental effects to the very way of life as Floridians have known to grow and love.

As stated above, many community factors suffer and have the potential to increase unemployment, causing people to vacate their home in search for income; whether it be by selling their home the conventional way or short selling their home; resulting in the housing industry value to decrease directly related to the increase in the unemployment rate.

But the possible oil spill damage doesn’t end there… (Military impact)

As many know, there is a huge military mission off of Tyndall AFB, Eglin AFB, Duke AFB and Hurlburt AFB and Pensacola NAS that run alongside the Gulf of Mexico.

The influx of news reporters and clean up crew would be too invasive for our military zone.

At this point in the game; the US cannot afford to take too many chances with nationals security.

But wait there’s more… (Loop Current, possible oil seepage to South Florida, East Florida and the Eastern Seaboard)

If there was an oil spill off the West Coast of Florida, the oil (and toxic dispersant that big oil will use to sink the oil into the water column so nobody can see it) has a chance of getting swept into the Loop Current which is a current (diagramed left) that transports warm Caribbean water through the Yucatan Channel between Cuba and Mexico.

The current flows northward into the Gulf of Mexico, then loops southeastward just south of the Florida Keys (where it is called the Florida Current), and then just west of the westernmost Bahamas.

Here, the waters of the Loop Current flow northward along the U.S. coast and become the Gulf Stream and run northward, up the East Coast of Florida.

The Loop Current was a big concern of many Floridians during the 2010 oil spill as a handful of times, oil/toxic dispersant became dangerously close to the loop current (some reports show that small traces of oil were pushed into the loop current but weathered before it impacted land) but were swept away by ever changing warm and cold water eddys.

However, next time- we may not be so lucky.

Turn to renewable alternative energy as a primary source for our energy needs

Instead of investing in new equipment and new deep water drilling techniques to search for a resource that will eventually extinguish- let’s put that money towards the wave of the future and a renewable resources that we can draw off of for years to come.

Projects such as  energy efficient constructionoffshore wind farms, solar landfills, geothermal and aqueduct electricity can help us curb our dependence on oil.

If the US reallocated the money they have towards new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and put it towards alternative energy; we could pave the way for a new future where ultimately- we become dependent on ourselves and not at the hand of our Environment, the Middle East or even Brazil (where Obama promised we would be their biggest customer earlier this year).

The reward is not worth the risk

While I understand that drilling is needed and I fully support state’s sovereignty for wanting to drill (and am in support of drilling in places where the general consensus welcomes the drilling).

As a born, raised and currently residing Floridan. I say the reward is NOT worth the risk for new drilling to take place in the Gulf of Mexico. Not when our wildlife, food chain, fisheries, tourism industry, coastal communities, military intelligence and the entire coastline of Florida is at risk.

Especially when it has been proven that there is no way to adequately prepare for a hurricane and the precautions needed to be taken to avoid churning the oil sunken into the water column and spewing the oil onto coastal communities) until only days before the hurricane comes into the Gulf of Mexico (as remembered with the lack of hurricane preparation during the 2010 hurricane season).

If Mexico wants to drill; we cannot stop them but, more than likely, any spill in their area will not travel into the Gulf of Mexico because of the placement of eddys. Let them destroy their own country; if they so desire.

As for the United States,  I advise that we stay on the side of environmental conservation as well as to look to alternative energy as our sustaining life force as that can be renewed so we can pass on our energy capability to our children instead of banking on a non renewable source of energy that will leave our future generations in the dark.

Copyright (c) August 1, 2011. All rights reserved.

Why the blowout preventer failed re: the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill and who is at fault.



A report released Wednesday identified the primary cause of the blowout preventer’s failure as the blind shear rams failing to close completely and seal the well due to a portion of drill pipe becoming trapped.

This differs from the original conclusion that the blind shear rams did close and the oil blasted through rubber gaskets around the rams.

A blowout preventers sits at the wellhead of exploratory wells and are supposed to lock in place to prevent a spill in case of an explosion.

The blind shear ram consists of hydraulically powered blades, a sort-of extremely high-powered scissor, that cut through the pipeline, effectively sealing it.

Effectively, that is, when there is no interference from a drill pipe.

Yet, the blind shear ram is not at sole blame for the failure.

BP and Transocean failed to equip the Deepwater Horizon with two blind shear rams, and Minerals Management Service, the federal agency in charge of regulating offshore drilling, failed to require them to do so.

These 4  failures combined are  ultimately responsible for the enormous extent of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Neither BP nor Transocean attempted to fit the Deepwater Horizon with a an additional  safety measure, that is another blind shear ram, due to “size constraints” despite Transocean’s assertion that 11 of its 14 rigs stationed in the gulf have 2 blind shear rams.

All other BP rigs under contract are also outfitted with 2 blind shear rams.

“Size constraints” is the reason BP is now relying on as to why there was only 1 blind shear ram aboard the Deepwater Horizon .

However,  according to a handful of Engineers-  another blind shear ram could have been added, provided some components were swapped out.

Looks like safety measures were cut in the name of a quick dollar; as I predicted.

A drilling engineer interviewed by the new York Times, referred to a blind shear ram as, “…kind of like a parachute — it’s nice to have a backup.”

While no backup was present on the Deepwater Horizon, what is even more confounding this that there was no federal mandate that required there to be.

Not only that, but there are not even government regulations that requiring routine checks of important elements of blind shear rams.   given the fact that many studies are now being unearthed showing the many vulnerabilities of a blind shear ram.

One thing’s for certain, before we allow additional deepwater drilling- it is imperative that there are 2 blind shear rams installed on the blowout preventer.

Stay tuned to Heart of America for details on the latest and greatest on the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill.

For fast action breaking news on the oil spill, follow on Twitter at @AmericasHeart.

Copyright (c) March 23, 2011. All rights reserved.

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Case Is Back in Court


More than two decades after the spill caused by the 1989 wreck of the Exxon Valdez in Alaska’s Prince William Sound, oil still coats the rocks on remote beaches and the great runs of herring that once filled fishermen’s nets have yet to return.

And now, even after the Supreme Court has had its say, even after the company now called Exxon Mobile has pronounced the matter closed and said it would pay no more for environmental and economic damages, the company, the government and a marine biologist with a history of not letting either off the hook are heading back into federal court on Friday to argue over the meaning of a special section tucked into the original 1991 agreement over the spill that may or may not cost the company about $100 million.

The section is known as the “reopener” provision, and, for the moment at least, it has reopened questions about Exxon Mobil’s continuing obligations and the government’s efforts — or lack thereof — to hold the company accountable.

“If they were to be a responsible corporate citizen, they’d just cut a check on Friday and be done with it,” Rick Steiner, the marine biologist who has spent much of his career studying oil-spill issues, said of Exxon Mobil.

As for the government, Mr. Steiner said his “greatest fear” is that it “wanted people to forget about” the remaining legal options in the Valdez case. Mr. Steiner has essentially forced the issue back into court single-handedly.

In December, he filed a motion asking a judge to rely on the reopener provision to order Exxon to pay $115 million for what he said were unanticipated environmental damages caused by the wreck, which spilled 11 million gallons of oil into the sound and on its shores 22 years ago this month.

Mr. Steiner points to studies that show a majority of the species affected by the spill have yet to fully recover. The amount he cites includes $92 million in damages — the reopener provision capped new damages at $100 million — and $23 million in interest.

He also said the government itself demanded the $92 million payment back in 2006, but has yet to follow up.

The government, in consultation with the State of Alaska, replied to Mr. Steiner’s motion with one of its own saying that he had no standing in court. It also cited the government’s continuing studies of environmental damage. A spokesman for the Justice Department referred to a 2009 letter that said “these studies may well affect the scope of the government’s reopener claim.”

Then, on Jan. 14, Judge H. Russel Holland of the United States District Court in Alaska, who presided over the 1991 agreement, surprised many people by ordering the parties to hold a hearing on the matter. The case was back on, the reopener provision suddenly relevant.

“No doubt the public is interested in knowing the status of the latter proceedings,” Judge Holland wrote, referring to the 2006 reopener claim, “and this court is very seriously interested in seeing overall closure of the litigation flowing from the grounding of the Exxon Valdez.”

One can only hope that justice is served and Exxon Mobile will be find liable as the repercussions of the oil spill is still alive today.

Copyright (c) March 4, 2011. All rights reserved.

Published in: on March 4, 2011 at 4:35 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

BP claims: ‘Delay, Deny, Defend’. Tampa, FL lawyer stands up against the fraudalent activity.


A first-of-its-kind lawsuit alleging gross negligence and fraud has been filed in a Florida state court against Kenneth Feinberg, the administrator of the 20-billion-dollar compensation fund for victims of BP’s Gulf oil spill, and the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF).

Attorney Brian Donovan of the Donovan Law Group from Tampa filed the complaint against Feinberg, his firm Feinberg Rozen, LLP and the GCCF on behalf of Pinellas Marine Salvage, Inc. and John Mavrogiannis.

The complaint alleges, in part, gross negligence, fraud, fraudulent inducement and unjust enrichment on the part of the defendants.

“Feinberg and the GCCF have done more damage than the oil spill,” Donovan told IPS. “My client has relied on what Feinberg said he would do. They’ve made promises they didn’t keep. John’s company was promised money they have not received.”

Mavrogiannis told IPS, “We’re sick and tired of this runaround. I’m tired of Feinberg’s lies. He’s made promises he hasn’t kept. He’s manipulating the system and that’s not right.”

Mavrogiannis is far from alone in not having received compensation for the severe losses his business has suffered as a direct result of BP’s oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico that began last April.

It was recently revealed that more than 130,000 compensation claims will be refused by Feinberg, who claims they lack adequate documentation.

State governments of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana are accusing Feinberg of delaying claims and causing great hardship to local businesses, as well as underestimating losses to coastal businesses.

Donovan believes Feinberg is simply doing what he is being paid by BP to do.

“He’s doing his job,” Donovan told IPS, “Feinberg is a defense attorney representing BP. To think otherwise is being foolish. As a defense attorney, he’s doing a great job for BP. But they are saying ‘go with us, or sue us’.”

Feinberg’s Washington-based firm, Feinberg Rozen, was being paid 850,000 dollars a month by BP to administer the compensation fund and claims process for Gulf residents and fishermen.

A 46-page contract between BP and Feinberg detailing the arrangement was made public on Jan. 7 when it was filed in the U.S. District Court in New Orleans as part of the multi- district spill litigation against BP.

As of Jan. 15, the firm’s fee, according to the document, will be “mutually agreed to by the parties on a quarterly basis in advance of the first day of each successive calendar quarter.” This clause has led many critics to believe that Feinberg could stand to gain from dispensing less of the fund’s 20 billion dollars to claimants and tying the amount of its payments to Feinberg’s success in limiting BP’s liability.

Any funds remaining from the 20 billion would revert to BP under an agreement with the White House. Feinberg has told reporters, “My understanding is that if 20 billion dollars is sufficient and there is money left over it is retained by BP.”

In late December, Feinberg told Bloomberg Television that he anticipates about half of the fund should be enough to cover claims for economic losses.

“The only attorneys involved in the BP oil spill who I know are those trying to sign up victims for class action lawsuits,” Donovan added. “This is understandable given that Reuters recently reported that fewer than three percent of the approximately 470,000 businesses and individuals who have filed claims with GCCF have lawyers helping them negotiate.”

Mavrogiannis feels their complaint is solid, “Because Feinberg has lied to us on several occasions. Had he told me from the beginning he was working for BP, I would have filed suit against BP right when this happened. I believed he was impartial with no ties, but he has deceived me, and that’s fraud.”

“If I lose my property, business, and house because I can’t make my mortgage payments because Feinberg is late in paying me, who is going to compensate me for this?” Mavrogiannis, whose home is close to being forclosed, told IPS. “I have to take my IRA’s [individual retirement accounts] out to pay my bills. I can only hang in there for another month or two then the banks are going to want their money.”

Mavrogiannis’ lawsuit alleges, in part, “The defendants employ a ‘Delay, Deny, Defend’ strategy against claimants. This strategy, commonly used by unscrupulous insurance companies, is as follows: Delay payment, starve claimant, and then offer the economically and emotionally-stressed claimant a miniscule percent of all damages to which the claimant is entitled. If the financially ruined claimant rejects the settlement offer, he or she may sue.”

Other people amongst the Gulf States need to follow suit. Do not allow Feinberg and the GCCF to swindle you out of money in which is needed to live. Stand up against the deception.

Copyright (c) March 2, 2011. All rights reserved.

CG Adm Thad Allen and Bureau of OEM support an independent drilling regulatory agency.


The hearing of the U.S. House Coast Guard and maritime transportation subcommittee came as news surfaced that the Obama administration may oppose a commission recommendation to create an independent regulatory agency because it could clash with reforms already being undertaken by the Interior Department.

If reports from an independent regulatory agency clashes with the government agencies, that is a GOOD thing. Do we not remember how MMS (Minerals and Management Services) were partially to blame for the lack of safety measures and protocol for the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill?

It is imperative that we have an independent agency doublechecking the work of our government. It has been proven that the government oversight needs independent oversight. Too shun this idea is a slap in the face to the Gulf States and families of the oil rig victims.

After the April 20 accident, the Interior Department separated its regulatory arm from the royalty collection division reasoning that there could be a conflict of interest between the two operations. That came to no surprise to anyone closely following the MMS or the Interior Department and was actually a much needed relief.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement replaced the Minerals Management Service in the department as the industry regulator. The commission recommended that a new independent agency be formed to monitor regulation.

The seven-member panel wants an agency similar to how the FBI operates independently of the Justice Department, including having a director who is appointed for a time period in order to avoid any political interference.

Commission member Donald Boesch told the subcommittee the independent agency recommendation should be implemented.

Boesch also testified that the oil industry should pay for any step-up of industry enforcement. In response to subcommittee questions, Boesch said the commission recommendations would cost the oil industry from seven to 12 cents per barrel.

The tax would amount to a quarter of a cent increase on a gallon of gas and boost the regulation needed to police the industry.

A price that I, personally, would be willing to pay in order to avoid another explosion and catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico.

I urge an Independent Commission to commence and oversee the operations of oil drilling and environment affairs. There is simply too much to stake to leave it in the hands of the Federal Government.

Copyright (c) February 16, 2011. All rights reserved.

BP and EPA in cohorts and shortchanging Gulf states.


Who hasn’t seen those “Making It Right” ads that BP is using to flood the media like so much run-away oil saturating the Gulf?

Over the past nine months, BP has conducted a full-throttle charm offensive, taking out full-page ads in The New York Times , sponsoring small-town festivals all along the Gulf Coast, and running countless television spots, repeating their relentlessly conciliatory message.

They’re pulling out all the stops — clearly subscribing to the notion that the amount of penance owed is directly proportionate to the size of the sin. And with the enormity of the transgression of public trust embodied in the spill, BP sure has a lot of “Making it Right” to do.

But BP’s a company whose bottom line doesn’t account for the cost of restoring our precious natural resources or the health of our communities.

The amount of “Making it Right” BP is going to do is purely a function of some number-crunching cost/benefit analysis. They spend money on ads because they’re more interested in cleaning up their image than cleaning up the Gulf. A clean image means increased profits; a clean Gulf means financial losses in the form of remediation and wildlife rehabilitation costs and Clean Water Act fines.

So while they’re working hard, with a whole lot of fanfare, in street festivals and in TV commercials to make it right, they’re quietly working even harder behind closed doors in Washington to make it all wrong.

In DC, they’re undercutting the American public and our Gulf Coast communities, ensuring that at the bottom line of the ledger, they protect their shareholder profits.

This shouldn’t be news. From day one, BP has tirelessly downplayed the number of barrels of oil that gushed into the Gulf waterways during their 87-day disaster. Remember when they claimed only a 1,000 barrels a day, and then, when pressed, 5,000? That whole time, their internal documents that were turned over to Congress had BP admitting that in truth, 100,000 barrels a day could have been pouring from their blown well.

Even today, in the midst of their “Making it Right” push, BP still struggles mightily to re-shape the truth.

It is now rumors that BP is lobbying hard in private meeting rooms at the Environmental Protection Agency to once again minimize their impacts and stick a make-believe low number on the amount of barrels that poured forth per day from their disastrously faulty oil rig.

It seems as if BP has the EPA over a barrel — the word is that EPA is actually negotiating with agency to officially reduce the number of barrels spilled in order to reduce the company’s fines under the Clean Water Act. By not living up to the true size of this disaster, BP is doing anything BUT making it right.

Correctly assessing the number of barrels released per day during those three months matters. It directly impacts the Clean Water Act fines that BP must pay.

Since this money is to be used to help restore the millions of devastated lives, miles of coastline, and communities that were impacted by BP’s negligence, the impacts of BP’s attempt to rewrite history goes way beyond the immediate financial impacts to the company.

Without an accurate accounting of how much oil was really dumped into the Gulf by BP’s irresponsible actions, researchers will be at a significant disadvantage. There’s no reason, other than pure profit, for BP to lie about the amount of oil it released.

Surely, we can all recognize that “making it right” is nothing more than a transparent public relations slogan; we shouldn’t expect more from a multinational that’s in the business of making money.

But, if its true that EPA is in fact considering officially reducing the scope of BP’s oil spill, than we should question this slogan: “to protect human health and the environment.”

The EPA’s job is protect America’s waters and people – not to protect a polluter corporation or to soften the blow of accountability against a bad actor, mandated by the federal laws the EPA was created to uphold.

The industry-wide problems that led to the Deepwater Horizon disaster must be fixed. We can’t stand by and watch BP shy away from taking total responsibility from fixing its own mess nor can we stand by and watch the company move into less protected and less organized areas to wreck havoc on their environment, health and way of life.

“Making it right” means being honest about how much oil was spilled into the Gulf, paying the fines owed under the Clean Water Act – in their full and correct amounts. It means providing Gulf Coast communities impacted by this disaster with whatever it takes to restore their lives and their livelihoods.

If BP and the EPA won’t make it right, then it’s up to you and me to compel them to truly “make things right”. Lives and livelihoods are dependent on the Truth.

Copyright (c) February 14, 2011. All rights reserved.

Seafood, seafood everywhere and not a bite to eat.


While seafood in the Gulf of Mexico is currently “safe to eat” (and I use that saying loosely), the wide-ranging impact of the oil spill on physical and mental health of people across the coast could continue for years, a panel of scientists and environmentalists told a south Mobile, AL crowd.

Riki Ott, a marine toxicologist who has studied the long-term impact of the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, painted a gruesome picture of the long-term effects of the BP PLC spill.

Ott told the audience that the oil industry tends to spin the story in order to decrease their liability.

“BP likes to put a filter up there to try to minimize the extent of harm that the public understands,” Ott said.

She talked of oil spill cleanup workers becoming sick across the northern Gulf Coast, fish kills in four states, and even dive gear disintegrated by dispersants in the water.

“It’s in the water; it’s in the air,” Ott said. “And I’m sorry that five federal agencies cannot measure it.”

George Crozier, with the Dauphin Island Sea Lab, said that much of the seafood, such as shrimp and fish, had likely not yet been impacted by the oil, though future harvests may be.

“There has not been time for this to be bio-magnified,” Crozier said.

He echoed Picou in saying that people may suffer for years, but added that the ecosystem would be more resilient.

“The problems we’re dealing with are going to be long-term, particularly in the human environment,” Crozier said. “The human system is not going to recover in three to five years. It depends on the recovery of the seafood industry. The natural system will recover.”

Crozier said that dispersants have caused the oil to sink below the surface of the water so deep that makes it difficult to find.

“We don’t know where it all is, we don’t know the concentrations of it and we simply do not know what the rates of degradation are — if they are, in fact, taking place,” Crozier said.

Environmentalist Casi Callaway, who heads Mobile Baykeeper, said she would continue to push for “transparency” in scientific studies.

Her group has organized roughly 6,000 volunteers dedicated to ensuring that the seafood is safe and the waters are clean, she said. Despite what Crozier said about seafood, Callaway expressed a reluctance that many appear to share.

“I want to buy seafood. I miss it like crazy. But I’m scared,” she said, receiving a round of applause.

Personally, I am not so worried about the oil (as that is compatible with Mother Nature) then I am with the toxic corexit dispersant.

I have yet to find any testing results on the long term toxicity and degradation levels and knowing that the Corexit 9500 & 9527A has toxicity levels leaves my faith shaken in the government who claims that the seafood is “safe to eat”.

If you have access to reports indicating long term affects of Corexit 9500 & Corexit 9527A please contact me directly at: TheHeartofAmerica@hotmail.com

Copyright (c) February 13, 2011. All rights reserved.

Man burst into song at Oil Spill Commission.


Great point about hurricane season. That still rings true today.  Last year, we were lucky- we didnt have too many active storms. Next year, could be a whole different story. What’s going to happen when all that disperse oil sunken into the water column is brought to the surface and sprayed out over the Gulf states?!

“Little brother – he aint feeling well, what’s that your spraying on the oil spill?” Indeed, that’s what I would like to know.

One point on HAZMAT training, I received my hazmat training level 3 certification and all it entitles us to do is pick up tar balls. We cannot help oiled wildlife or anything else more helpful.

Even then, most of the opportunities within BP were given to contractors who came in from OUT of state instead of giving those jobs to the people who were living in the oily mess.

If you have any inside contacts of people dealing directly with the oil spill, please contact me directly at TheHeartofAmerica@hotmail.com

Thank you for you attention to this matter.

Report concludes, Clean up on the oil spill is over. Personal pictures and testimony state otherwise.


Yesterday, the Gulf Coast Incident Management Team released a report from its interagency Operational Science Advisory Team 2  regarding oil from the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill that remains on or near sandy beaches along the Gulf Coast left not only the Gulf Coast residents questioning but the Gulf of Mexico as well (left picture).

Federal officials indicate that cleanup operation from the Deepwater Horizon/Gulf of Mexcio oil spill have removed as much oil as is practical from the Gulf coast states by examining data sampled from four representative beaches at Grand Isle, La., Petit Bois Island, Miss., Bon Secour, Ala., and Fort Pickens, Fla.

This report is inconclusive as the oil reached much further East then Fort Pickens, FL and leached into areas such as Navarre and Destin, the later representing a huge tourist industry which has suffered greatly at the hands of big oil as well as are still seeing the effects of the oil and dispersant in their waterways and rolling onto their beaches.

Essentially, the report is intended to inform ongoing beach-area clean up operations by examining the environmental and human health risks posed by three types of remnant oil – tar mats in the shallow water, small tar balls on the shore and buried oil on beaches above the high tide line – that may remain in certain beach areas after standard clean up operations are completed. These risks are compared to the potential environmental impacts of pursuing additional cleanup operations.

Please note how they did not include oil/dispersant in the water column nor the long term affects of the toxic corexit dispersant that they used to weigh down the oil so that it would drop into the water column, out of the public’s view.

Further, the report states that oil damaged areas are “minimal”.

Are they kidding? Is this some kind of cruel joke? Living off the Gulf,
I can assure that the oil and toxic Corexit dispersant is still very much here.

Just because BP sunk the oil into the water column, doesn’t mean that it disappeared. In fact, it’s quite the opposite as now the oil has less of a chance been weathered by the sun and wind.

The report titled, “Summary Report for Fate and Effects of Remnant Oil in the Beach Environment” was drafted by the federal science advisory team studying the BP PLC oil spill in the Gulf suggests the following:

Submerged mats of oil still being discovered just off the beaches in Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida are considered an exception to the rule, the report indicates. Yet the report does not mention any form of removal or clean up.

Aside from the mats, the remaining oil — the report states — is either buried under a few inches of sand or present in small tarballs on the beach.

Take note parents of small children who like to build sandcastles at the beach. Dont dig too deep or you will find your hands submerged in toxicity.

Additionally, what about the the exposure risk  of buried oil and sea turtle eggs and young? That will definitely be a factor in the extinction of the sea turtle if left ignored.

A local Florida resident, Linda Carter, who resides on the Gulf of Mexico disagrees vehemently with this recent ruling and provides her own personal testimony to the ever-standing affects of the oil spill.

“My husband and I took our dog to Princess Beach, an Airforce owned beach between the Fort Walton Beach and Destin bridges in Florida on Friday, February 4th, 2011.”

“It was cold and rainy, but a perfect day to find the small sand dollars that wash in, during the winter. The effects of the oil spill never entered our minds, until we looked down and saw the tar stuck to our shoes.”

“Then we noticed that it was everywhere. Was this why our dog kept wanting to go home? ”

“After seeing the tar and foam bubbles from the Corexit dispersant, we left the beach, only to get home to a very different dog!”

“We immediately bathed her and made sure her feet were clean. She became almost catatonic.  As if she was in shock.”

“She was lethargic and would barely respond to us. Mostly she just stared straight ahead. We held her and petted her and she just laid there like a lifeless lump.”

“She went to sleep and when she woke up she was better and continued to improve. She is fine today, but I have noticed all the exposed areas (she had on a sweater) of her fur are almost mottled with, what looks like tufts of hair that have been cut with scissors.”

“I know the shedding season is almost upon us, but it’s still bitterly cold here, so I don’t really think that’s what it is. She was getting exposed to the toxins on the beach being closer to the sand than we were, and having a nose so sensitive.”

“Mother nature tells the animals when there is danger to get away from. I think this was a perfect example!”

Tell that to the federal officials and BP executives who parrot, “Cleanup operations beyond established standards may disturb sensitive habitats and wildlife — posing a greater environmental risk than leaving the residue in place. In these instances, further cleaning will likely do more harm than good to the ecosystem.”

Way to rip a response from the marshes clean up guide, BP. Unbelievable. I understand the concept of  a fragile ecosystem but not all of our Gulf coast are marshes or wetlands and even then it blows my mind that the govt is not using the foam set in a large cage that was already presented to them to soak up the oil from the fragile areas.

If you look at the NEBA report that I attached below and note the “further cleanup impact”, half the reports reads HIGH. So how did the federal officials come to the conclusion that further clean up would cause more harm than good?

Especially when all one needs to do is drag their foot to see the oil underneath the sand. Remember, if the sand covers the oil then the oil is less likely to become weathered because the sand creates a buffer from extreme elements such as wind and sun. (left picture).

Not to mention that there are ZERO reports of the long term affects of the corexit dispersant that was used in truckloads to weigh the oil down and that of the bubbly residue approaching our shore lines.

Some critics argue that the after effects are “minor” but tell that to a child or an elderly person who had pre existing health conditions who accidentally came into contact with the oil, tar or dispersant after going to the beach after the local officials gave the “all clear”.

The fact of the matter is that the oil is still here, it is not going anywhere and it provides a health risk to the people who come into submerged (via water or sand) contact with it.

Ignoring the facts will not make this issue go away and its imperative that the people of the Gulf Coasts stand up and make their voices heard or our opinion will get sunken just like the oil. Out of sight, out of mind.

Below is a great documentary on newly dispersed oil patties on the Fort Morgan Peninsula on February 9, 2011.

Have you forgotten? Here’s a recap of the after effects of the DeepWater Horizon oil spill which happened less than a year ago.

Copyright (c) February 12, 2011. All rights reserved.