Crude oil: OSHA report on hazardous chemicals

Resource:  OSHA

Hazardous chemicals recognized by OSHA within crude oil spills:

Table 1. Hazardous Chemicals and Their Effects

Hazardous Chemicals Adverse Health Effects
Benzene (crude oils high in BTEX, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene) Irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory system; dizziness; rapid heart rate; headaches; tremors; confusion; unconsciousness; anemia; cancer
Benzo(a)pyrene (a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon reproductive [see below], formed when oil or gasoline burns) Irritation to eyes and skin, cancer, possible effects
Carbon dioxide (inerting atmosphere, byproduct of combustion) Dizziness, headaches, elevated blood pressure, rapid heart rate, loss of consciousness asphyxiation, coma
Carbon monoxide (byproduct of combustion) Irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory Dizziness, confusion, headaches, nausea, weakness, loss of consciousness, asphyxiation, coma
Ethyl benzene (high in gasoline) Irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory system; loss of consciousness; asphyxiation; nervous system effects
Hydrogen sulfide (oils high in sulfur, decaying plants and animals) Irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory system; dizziness; drowsiness; cough; headaches; nervous system effects
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) (octane booster and clean air additive for gasoline, or pure MTBE) Irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory system; headaches; nausea; dizziness; confusion; fatigue; weakness; nervous system, liver, and kidney
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) (occur in crude oil, and formed during burning of oil) Irritation to eyes and skin, cancer, possible reproductive effects, immune system effects
Sulfuric acid (byproduct of combustion of sour petroleum product) Irritation to eyes, skin, teeth, and upper respiratory system; severe tissue burns; cancer
Toluene (high BTEX crude oils) Irritation to eyes, skin, respiratory system; fatigue; confusion; dizziness; headaches; memory loss; nausea; nervous system, liver, and kidney effects
Xylenes (high BTEX crude oils) Irritation to eyes, skin, respiratory system; dizziness; confusion; change in sense of balance; nervous system gastrointestinal system, liver, kidney, and blood effects
Posted in Gulf Oil Spill & Health, Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill News, Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Response | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Kevin Costner – Interview with Larry King – CNN

Resource: CNN

Resource: Ocean Therapy Solutions 
(Kevin Costner’s Group)

BP to Proceed With Costner Centrifuge Devices to Cleanup Gulf Oil Spill
June 10, 2010, New Orleans, LA

British Petroleum signed a letter of intent with Ocean Therapy Solutions to deploy thirty-two centrifuge machines to assist in the cleanup of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. BP agreed to use the technology after testing machines during the past week.

In testimony yesterday before the House of Representatives’ Science and Technology committee, Ocean Therapy Solutions partner Kevin Costner told the panel about the challenges he faced bringing the technology into industrial use, including his own personal investment of over $20 million developing the technology. He urged committee members to legislate that oil rigs be required to have mitigation equipment onsite. ”We’ve legislated life preservers. We legislated fire extinguishers,” Costner said. ”We legislated lifeboats and first aid kits. It seems logical that as long as the oil industry profits from the sea, they have the legal obligation to protect it, except when they find themselves fighting for life and limb.”

Just one of the company’s V20 machines can clean up to 210,000 gallons of oily water per day. There are 3 V20 centrifuge machines currently operational in the Gulf. Ten more should become operational within weeks. ”Once production at our factory in Nevada ramps up in July, OTS will be able to produce 10 machines a month,” said Pat Smith, Chief Operating Officer for OTS. ”We are currently ramping up production of new machines with a goal toward deploying the machines along the entire coast,” he said.

”We have chosen teaming partners that are at ground zero and understand the challenges we face, including Edison Chouest Offshore, the largest offshore supply company in the Gulf of Mexico,” said John W. Houghtaling II, Chief Executive Officer of Ocean Therapy Solutions.

The centrifuge machines are sophisticated centrifuge devices that can handle a huge volume of water and separate oil at unprecedented rates. Costner has been funding a team of scientists for the last 15 years to develop a technology which could be used for massive oil spills.

The machines are taken out into the spill area via barges, where they can separate the oil and water. The machines come in different sizes, the largest of which, the V20, can clean water at a rate of 200 gallons per minute. Depending on the oil to water ratio, the machine has the ability to extract 2,000 barrels of oil a day from the Gulf. Once separation has occurred, the oil is stored in tanks. The water is then more than 99% clean of crude.

Posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill News | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill: Letter questioning the use of toxic dispersants from Rep. Edward J. Markey to EPA

Resource:  ProPublica.org

HENRY A. WAXMAN, CALIFORNIA JOE BARTON, TEXAS
CHAIRMAN RANKING MEMBER
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
2125 RAYBURN H0usE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 205′I 5-611 5
Majority (202) 225-2927
Minority (202) 225-3641
May 17, 2010

The Honorable Lisa Jackson
Administrator
U.S. Enviromnental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson,
I write to request information regarding the use of dispersants to mitigate the effects of the catastrophic release of millions of gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico following the explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. While the estimates of the amount of oil released daily has increased significantly since the explosion and remains under question, what is certain is that the inability of BP to quickly stop the leak is leading to an environmental catastrophe, placing fragile ecosystems, wildlife and the region’s economy in peril. The release
of hundreds of thousands of gallons of chemicals into the Gulf of Mexico could be an unprecedented, large and aggressive experiment on our oceans.

It requires careful oversight by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other appropriate federal agencies. As a measure to mitigate the impact of the oil spill, the EPA recently granted BP authorization to use chemical dispersants, which are a detergent-like brew of solvents, surfactants and other compounds that break down oil into tiny particles that then scatter and sink into the sea. To date, over half a million gallons of dispersants have been used in the Gulf of Mexico. Just two days ago, the EPA and US Coast Guard authorized BP to apply these dispersants at the site of the leak, over one mile below the ocean surface, a practice that has never been authorized before.

The information regarding the chemical composition, efficacy and toxicity of the dispersants currently being used is scarce. Additionally, recent articles (l) have raised questions regarding both the relative safety and efficacy of the dispersant selected for use by BP, suggesting that other Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,

Greenwire, May 13, 2010, Spills llls Could be Found
Under the Water, Wall Street Joumal (online), May 17, 2010

formulations may have been more suited for use in the Gulf of Mexico. In light of the volume of oil that has spewed into the Gulf of Mexico and the apparent inability of BP to quickly stop its flow, I understand that other mitigating options must be explored in order to keep as much oil as possible from reaching land. However, I am concemed about the risks and consequences, and in order to understand better what actions the EPA is taking in this area, I ask that you respond to the following questions:

l. It is my understanding that the main dispersants applied so far are from a product line called Corexit, some of which had their approval rescinded in Britain more than a decade ago, because laboratory tests found them harmful to sea life that inhabits rocky shores.

a. How did EPA ensure that this dispersant’s toxicity to aquatic life was evaluated?

b. Was its toxicity to mollusks and other sea life that inhabit the Gulf of Mexico coast evaluated, and if so, what were the results? If not, why not?

c. If EPA relied on toxicity studies for coastal morphologies different from that of the Gulf Coast, what was done to evaluate the applicability of those studies for the use of the dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico environment?

d. Was the toxicity to other subsurface aquatic life evaluated? If so, please provide details, and if not, why not?

2. How is EPA tracking the volume of dispersants being used both in both surface and subsurface applications? How does EPA plan to determine whether their use causes harm to the aquatic ecosystem they come into contact with?

3. Is EPA fully aware of all chemical constituents contained within the two formulations of Corexit dispersants currently being used? If so, please provide a list of each such
constituent.

4. Did EPA ensure that tests were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the 18 dispersants it has approved for use? What were the results of the tests?

a. Did EPA rank the dispersants in terms of efficacy (in dispersing the sort of crude oil that is spewing into the Gulf of Mexico) and toxicity (to the sort of aquatic life contained in the Gulf of Mexico), as was asserted by the May 13 2010 article in Greenwire?3

If so, please provide this ranking. If not, why not?
b. Does EPA instruct entities who wish to use dispersants to use the most effective and least toxic dispersants in a particular operation? If so, then did EPA instruct BP to use Corexit? If not, does EPA lack the authority to prescribe the use of specific formulations?

c. Does EPA expect users of dispersants to themselves examine the safety and efficacy data that is applicable to the conditions of intended use and select the least toxic and most effective approved formulation?

2 http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/protecting/pollution/documents/approval_approved_products.pdf

3 Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup, Greenwire, May 13, 2010

d. Please provide copies of all documents, emails and other correspondence related to BP’s use of dispersants in response to the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe.

5. How do water temperature and pressure effect the degradation of dispersants?

a. Will the fact that the water temperatrue at the Deepwater Horizon leak is just above freezing affect the time it takes for the molecules to be degraded? If so, please elaborate.

b. Have studies been performed to assess the efficacy or toxicity of the compounds at freezing temperatures? What are the results of these studies?

c. How does the high pressure at the depth of the leaking wellhead affect where chemical dispersants and oil molecules spread in the water column? Does high pressure also affect the rate of degradation of oil and chemical molecules, and if so, how?

6. What information has EPA collected about the long-term effects of dispersants accumulating in sediment at the bottom of the ocean floor? Please provide these materials to me. If such information has been collected, then why did EPA approve their use at the ocean floor? What effect could the accumulation of large volumes of dispersants on
the ocean floor have on bottom-feeding organisms such as shrimp?

7. Has EPA determined whether chemical dispersants can accumulate in the tissue of fish and other aquatic life (including plants and un-hatched eggs) in the same or similar animals other toxic materials such as mercury? If so, please provide documentation regarding what accumulations are likely, including materials regarding the implications for human health if the fish are consumed. If not, why not?

8. Did EPA consider a variety of scenarios for the interaction ofthe dispersants with the oil plume when applied at the depth of the Deepwater Horizon leak? If not, why not? Did any scenarios considered include the formation of large underwater plumes at various depths, as appears to have occurred based on a preliminary scientific investigation as reported Sunday?4 If so, please provide all related documents.

How does EPA plan on monitoring the long-tenn effect that these chemical dispersants have on aquatic life in the Gulf of Mexico?

9. Is EPA aware of the ecological impacts of simultaneously using different formulations of dispersants (sic) the mitigation efforts? Does the combination of chemicals change the toxicity or efficacy of the dispersant? If so, please provide documentation.

10. Given the start of the Atlantic hurricane season on June l, did EPA consider the impact of the dispersants on marine life in a rapidly mixed water column should a hurricane develop in the Gulf of Mexico? If so, what did EPA determine? If not, why not?

ll. EPA has stated that although it has approved the use of chemical dispersants on surface and subsurface applications it “reserves the right to halt the use of chemical dispersants at

* Giant Plumes of Oil Forming Under the Gulf] The New York Times, May I6, 2010

any time if new data show more serious environmental harm is occurring.” How is EPA monitoring environmental harm? What metrics or other problems does EPA consider to nbe cause for halting use of chemical dispersants?

Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in responding to this request. Should you have any questions, please have your staff contact Dr. Michal Freedhoff of the Subcommittee staff or Dr. Avenel Joseph of my staff at 202-225-2836.

Sincerely,
Edward J. Markey
Chairman
Subcommittee on Energy and Enviroment

cc: The Honorable Henry A. Waxman
Chairman, House Energy and Commerce Committee

The Honorable Joe Barton
Ranking Member, House Energy and Commerce Committee

The Honorable Fred Upton
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

PBS Live Video Feed of Deepwater Horizon Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

Source: PBS

Free TV : Ustream

Resource:  PBS News Hour – UStream Live Video Feed: 

Posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill News, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Admiral Allen – Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Update – June 23, 2010

Resource: C-SPAN

Admiral Allen briefed reporters on the latest on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. In his remarks he said BP has removed a containment cap over the leaking well iafter a remote-controlled vehicle collided with it. The cap had been collecting thousands of barrels a day from the well.


Partial transcript note:
Thank you. Good afternoon. A couple developments to update you on, but first of all as of midnight last night we were able to produce 27,097 barrels which is a new high for us. Combination of the Discoverer Enterprise which did 16,668 barrells, and the Q 4000 which actually flared off natural gas and oil of 10,429 barrels.

We had an incident earlier today where they noticed that there was some kind of a gas rising through the vent that causes hydrates from forming…. Containment cap has been moved, a remote operated vehicle had bumped into one of the vents which allows the excess oil to come out. It actually closed it, and the backflow closed the water vent.

Resource: Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

“The amount of oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico jumped by thousands of barrels Wednesday after an underwater robot apparently struck the containment cap that has been capturing crude from BP’s blown out Macondo well.

Crews had to remove the cap to check for damage, said retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, commander of the spill response effort.

The device, called the lower marine riser package cap, was attached to the well’s failed blowout preventer and since early this month has been siphoning more than 15,000 barrels of oil a day into the Discoverer Enterprise drillship on the Gulf’s surface. With the cap off, that much more oil is spreading into the Gulf.

In more positive news, government scientists reported Wednesday that they have not found evidence of large plumes of underwater oil that some feared based on previous findings.”

Posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Health Meetings, Gulf of Mexico: Coast Guard Updates | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Where oil has made landfall – Gulf of Mexico oil spill

Resource: The New York Times

The New York Times has a particularly well done area on their Website which clearly shows where oil has made landfall in the Gulf of Mexico.  The Times also provides information on where oil is presently in the Gulf, efforts to stop the leak, effects on wildlife, investigating the blow out, and live video of the leak.

Click for New York Times Map

______________________________________________

 Sources: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; National Park Service; state and local officials
Posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill News | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Accident: Breaking News: Deepwater Horizon oil cap has been dislodged in an accident.

News Source: The Washington Post

The Deepwater Horizon oil cap has been dislodged in an accident from an underwater roving device bumping into it.  The oil is now flowing unabated as of 4:00 pm EST. 
_______________________________________________
Washington Post Staff Writer
Reported  By Joel Achenbach
Wednesday, June 23, 2010; 4:06 PM

“The gulf well is an uncapped geyser again after an accident forced officials Wednesday to remove the containment device that had been effectively capturing much of the gushing oil for weeks.”

The flaring operation continues, but the live video feed from the gulf shows a scene not witnessed for weeks: a plume of oil and gas surging from the sheared-off pipe atop the well’s blowout preventer. The overall flow has been estimated by the government at 35,000 to 60,000 barrels (1.47 million to 2.52 million gallons) a day.

This was not the first accident involving the ROVs, which are operated by technicians on surface ships. Weeks ago, an ROV bumped a pipe that was being used to siphon oil from the collapsed riser pipe and temporarily shut down that containment operation.”

Posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill News | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Deepwater Horizon Response: Press Briefing by National Incident Commander June 22, 2010

Resource: Deepwater Horizon Response

Key contact numbers

  • Report oiled shoreline or request volunteer information: (866) 448-5816
  • Submit alternative response technology, services or products: (281) 366-5511 
  • Submit your vessel for the Vessel of Opportunity Program: (866) 279-7983 or (877) 847-7470
  • Submit a claim for damages: (800) 440-0858
  • Report oiled wildlife: (866) 557-1401
Deepwater Horizon Incident
Joint Information Center
Phone: (713) 323-1670
(713) 323-1671

 

WASHINGTON – Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the National Incident Commander for the Deepwater BP Oil Spill response, briefed the media Tuesday afternoon.

A downloadable audio file of the conference is available here; a full transcript of the call follows:

June 22, 2010
11:00 a.m. CT

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Good afternoon. Here to give you a quick update on the last 24 hours of operations. We’d like to answer any questions you might have from here in the studio and on the line when we’re done.

We had a really good last 24-hour period as far as productions out in the Discovery Enterprise and the Q4000 production platforms. We produced 25,836 barrels petroleum. That is a new record for us, and we continue to make progress in optimizing the capacity out of the wellhead there.

Regarding the relief well operations, the Development Driller II is—remains at the 10,677 feet below the sea floor in preparation of closing in on the pipe and doing a ranging technique, which will allow them to hone in for the actual point where they’ll penetrate the wellbore. Development Driller II is at 4,662 feet and moving forward.

We continue to divide our vessels of opportunity into task force, provide them with radios, be more effective on the water as far as relating sighting information and surveillance information. This week we’re at a meeting with the United States Air Force at Tyndall Air Force Base regarding air space coordination, and we are prepared to go in with a coordinated structure on how we deal with the significant flights that are occurring in around the wellhead, these surveillance flights for oil and the flights to support logistics and so forth out there.

One other interesting note, we’ve found a—we didn’t find, we were able to recover the 40 feet of riser pipe that was cut off when we sheared off the lower ring riser pipe just below the kink. That section of pipe is important for forensics and for the ongoing inquiry. That is—that is being brought to the surface and will be brought to New Orleans, and of course that will be part of the evidentiary—the evidentiary material will be part of the Marine Board of Investigations, but also had several incursions into the closed area for fishing, where we have Coast Guard cutters out there enforcing the no-fishing areas.

There are some people, for whatever reasons, are wandering into those areas and actually fishing in areas that have been closed by NOAA, and in those cases we do boardings. I take appropriate of enforcement action and coordinate back to the National Marine Fisheries Service and NOAA, and most generally there is a citation issued, and the catch is discarded at sea. In addition to that, we are actively surveying the coastline and taking our fight, if you will, from shore out to about 15 or 20 miles regarding skimming operations as (inaudible) continues to migrate slowly towards the east moving over towards Destin Fort Walton Beach and the area between the airport and St. Joe.

I’ve got some schematics with me here today. I’ve been describing these drilling operations for many, many days. I’ve been doing it with my hands. We actually have some charts here that can explain, and if you have any questions, I’ll be glad to go into it.

With that, we can go to the question, here.

Q: (inaudible)

ADMIRAL ALLEN: If I could take you through the schematics here. This is what we’re going to try and do by the end of June. It’s on the schematic right here, and what you have is you have the current wellhead with the blowout preventer lower marine riser package connected to the Discovery Enterprise, and that’s what we’re producing right now. Then you have the Q4000, and it is drawing product off the choke line through this manifold, and that’s producing, and these two right now are the ones that gave us almost 26,000 barrels over the last 24 hours.

We are going to bring in an addition production vessel to come off the kill line. That’s the second line that comes out of this manifold over here, and that’ll add 20 to 25,000 barrels a day. That gives us up to 43,000 of barrels a day production by next week. That’s going to pretty much optimize what we can do at the wellhead site. There are three ways you can get oil out of this. You can come up to the riser pipe, and you can go through the kill or the choke lines to reverse those and actually bring oil to surface. So we’re producing through the kill and choke lines in the Q4000, and we’ll intend to do that with the Helix Producer once it gets on scene. And with the Discovery Enterprise, we have three vessels, and at that point, the total capacity will be 53,000 barrels.

Was that clear?

Q: What about the (inaudible)?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, what’s going to happen, I’ll take—I’ll take you to the next chart here. The key difference, when we start shifting to different means of production, are something called a free-standing riser. You can see it here. The riser pipe between the Discovery Enterprise and the wellhead is connected by a fixed pipe. But this is actually—let’s back up here (inaudible). Will somebody hold this—can my—hold it for me? Thanks. Got it? OK. The Discovery Enterprise is actually fixed to the wellhead through this riser pipe here. The Q4000 actually is connected through a flexible hose. We’re going to create a free-standing riser from the tanker to the bottom that floats just below the surface, so we need flexible hoses both ways to connect that, and ultimately that will be way the entire new system will be put together will make it more seaworthy for the hurricane season.

If I can walk over here and show you this one. Hopefully, I won’t knock it off here. We go ultimately—it has to go to four standing free risers with no direct connections to the wellheads, and so there’s a couple of things. First of all, it allows us to maximize the amount of oil we produce. But there is nothing as thoroughly efficient as the wellhead. These risers are all flexible couplings that can be disconnected very, very quickly. It gives us redundancy on capacity and production. It gives us better (inaudible) capability because they’re riding on a hose and not a fixed pipe going forward, which gets us to 68,000 barrels a day by the middle of July and puts us in a better position to assess our options with hurricane season coming.

Q: What are the concerns of having that …

ADMIRAL ALLEN: There are many concerns about that. They would call this … (inaudible).

Q: (inaudible).

ADMIRAL ALLEN: I’m sorry.

Q: That’s OK.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: There are many concerns. When you have four standing riser pipes and four production platforms there, all within about a three or four-square-mile area, it brings up the issue that’s called simultaneous operations, and you have to deconflict that and be very, very careful about safety when you do that. I know that’s a concern for the folks that are out there, only from the vessels that the people that are involved in it, and we’re also dealing with oil which has got volatile organic compounds. We need to be careful of the safety of the workers.

In addition to those four standing riser pipes, at each side you’ll see Development Driller II here and Development Driller III. Those are the relief wells that are being drilled. So in addition to the four production riser pipes, we have two actual drilling operations going on that are aimed at drilling the relief wells, and the schematic over here shows you the two relief wells that are in process, Development Driller III and Development Driller II. And again, this one is closing, and as I said, the next couple of weeks we’ll be setting up in positions that can actually make the drill into the – into the wellbore.

Is that a little more understandable? Any other questions here?

Q: (inaudible) ROV, the ROV …

ADMIRAL ALLEN: It’s a real significant issue with ROV. It’s going to—every single one of these operations has ROVs related to them because that’s the eyes and the ears. Deconflicting ROV operations is very, very significant. The ROVs are shown here a little orange vehicles that are on the schematic there. We actually had a case here (inaudible) where you’re trying to put the riser insertion tube in, and we had an ROV that was monitoring subsea dispersant application. They bumped into each other and had the riser tube dislodge itself about a month ago. So in every plan that’s been presented to us by BP, they have emphasized the fact we really well – we understand it very well that this is a very densely packed operation. But we need to get these four riser pipes up to give us the capacity we need.

(inaudible).

MODERATOR: Operator, we’re prepared to take questions from the phone now if you could please – questions from the phone.

OPERATOR: Yes. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one. We do have a question from Bryan Walsh of Time Magazine.

Q: Hi, Admiral. Can you tell me—we’ve heard reports about cleanup workers actually on the Gulf Shore. When they get sick, I mean the first people screening them are private ambulance and medical services hired by BP that before they would go to government services. Do you have a fix on who is actually in charge of making sure people are treated there on the Gulf Shore, especially workers, and also making sure you’re getting fair data about what could be going on there so you actually know if there’s a problem. If something toxic is happening, you have you know authentic data that’s not potentially corrupted by a company that’s you know being on the BP payroll.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, I’m not sure what’s happening right now at the tactical end. We could find out for you, but I would tell you this; for the last several weeks, we’ve been operating under a memorandum of understanding that we signed between the Department of Labor and the National Incident Command also include the role of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration on how we monitor worker health and safety and how we report that and how we coordinate that.

There is a unified structure set up down in OSHA and in Mobile to do that. Anytime there is an incident that is more than just plain first aid on scene, if somebody’s evacuated for any purpose at all, there’s a message sent up through the system, and I get those personally. I’m not aware of what you’re talking about specifically, but I’ve had fairly positive feedback that when there’s a health issue that’s come up, we’ve treated it very quickly and with the interest of the individuals that are in mind. If you’d like to give us some specific information on this case and how the patient was transported, we’d be glad to follow-up and see if that conforms to the procedures we set up with OSHA. But we have a pretty good working relationship with them, and as I understand, the coordination down on the ground is working fairly well. But we’ll follow-up if you can give us the details.

Q: OK, thanks.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Yes.

OPERATOR: Your next question is from (inaudible) of Environmental News.

Q: Hello, Admiral. Thanks for taking my question. You keep saying that the driller ship three is down to about 10,000 feet and it’s closing in on for an intercept. But BP said early on that the well had been drilled down to 18,000 feet. Does it not have to go down all the way to 18,000 feet to do the intercept?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: It does not. I believe they’re going to try and intercept somewhere around between 16,700 and 17,000 feet. We will confirm that for you and put out a statement tomorrow. They don’t have to go clear to the reservoir, which is at 18,000 feet, and what they’re going to do is they’re going to close in and very slowly close to that point where they will then drill through the wellbore casing, and if they need to, drill through the pipe itself. But you are right; they’ll be slightly above the level of the reservoir. Was that responsive?

Q: Yes. Thank you.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: OK.

OPERATOR: Your next question is from Zach Warmbrodt of Argus Media.

Q: Hi. Thank you. There’s been some reports that the first major storm of the hurricane season might enter the Gulf as soon as next week. Could you walk us through what will happen with the collection operation if that happened next week?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Sure. First of all, we’re watching the hurricane season very, very closely. I’m in constant contact with Jane Lubchenco, administrator of NOAA, and in fact, this week I talked to Craig Fugate, the FEMA administrator. We are informing each other of our respective operations. Of course you know they were involved with hurricane prep, so they would be anyway this time of year. And we do have that low depression that’s been informed in the Southeast Caribbean, and we’re watching that as well.

How we respond to a hurricane will be dictated by which production capacity we have on scene, and as you know this is evolving and will continue to evolve over the next two to three weeks. By the end of next week, let’s say, we would anticipate having three production vessels out there over the well site; the Discovery Enterprise, the Q4000 and the Helix Producer. Of those production capabilities, one of them is fixed hard to do the platform itself, and that’s the Discovery Enterprise down to the wellbore. The other two are on flexible couplings for vertical riser packages.

We would need in total to disconnect, recover to a safe harbor and return probably around 10 days to accomplish that, and we would probably have to start doing that anywhere between three to seven days in advance of the hurricane. Those procedures are being finalized right now. We’re discussing that with BP and the folks that are down at the area unified command in New Orleans. But if it happens—if we got notice that a hurricane was coming, we would need anywhere from three to seven days in advance of that to demobilize and redeploy the equipment.

Is that responsive?

Q: What kind of storm would have to be coming your way for you to do that? How—what kind of wind speed, or could you give anymore specifics on that?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, what we’re going to do is—I was asked the question yesterday. I asked some folks working on how are mooring systems related to Saffir-Simpson Scales, because I think that’s the easiest way for people to understand that. And we will get that out to you in the next 24 hours. But basically, the least capable platform that’s in production to ride out heavy weather would be the Discovery Enterprise because it’s physically hooked to the well itself.

Anything that’s working through our vertical riser that’s floating with a flexible hose coupling will have a little bit more flexibility as far as the sea state, and the large vessels that will be coming on later in July, the shuttle tankers, have much more sea keeping capability, although none of them are designed or created, nor are the production mooring facilities and everything else, created to withstand a major hurricane. Exactly when the cutoff is as far as the sea state goes, we will put that together, and we’ll give you a brief in 24 hours.

OPERATOR: Your next question is from Sandy Davis of Advocate News.

Q: Hi, General—I mean Admiral, sorry. Thank you for taking my call. First of all, I didn’t—we didn’t get a copy of the charts. Will you be putting those up on the Web site later today?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Sure. I’d be happy to do that.

Q: OK, and the second thing was why is the second relief well going so slow?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, they didn’t start at the same time. The second relief well started several weeks afterwards, and also, the second relief well—the second relief drilling rig had a blowout preventer on it that they had intended to use after Top Kill if they were going to cap the well. They decided not to use the blowout preventer because of the uncertainty regarding the status of the wellbore and what pressure might do going down. That’s the reason they abandoned the Top Kill and the capping exercise at that point.

During that time, when they were doing the Top Kill exercise, the Development Driller II moved off station with the blowout preventer and had to prepare to put on the wellbore should we—or the lower marine riser package should we need to do that. That didn’t happen. They went back and they continued their drill. They are—there are the risk mitigator for the first relief well.

OPERATOR: Your next question is from Richard Faussett of the Los Angeles Times.

Q: Hi, Admiral Allen. Can you talk a little bit about the worst-case scenarios going forward? What happens if the relief wells don’t work out? How long could this go on, and what kinds of other contingencies have been drawn up? What kinds of conversations are you guys having about those possibilities?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, first of all, we’re mitigating risk on the relief well by drilling a second relief well alongside it. Hopefully that won’t be needed. Secretary Salazar and Secretary Chu had a meeting last week in Washington with other industry representatives beyond BP, other oil-producing companies that are out there, and we’ve actually identified a couple of platforms that are in the area that might be capable of taking the product coming out of the wellbore through pipelines and either producing it or putting it back down into the reservoir. We’re exploring that over the next couple of days.

If we’re able to do that, that would give us an option of controlling the flow without having any surface vessels there, to some extent. That wouldn’t be the capacity we’re looking for, but that would be another risk mitigator to handle some of the oil. We’re in exploratory conversations, and again, that was just the result of a meeting that we held last week where we asked industry to basically unconstrain their thinking and see what they could do for us. So we’re actually looking at whether or not there are normal wells out there (inaudible) wells out there we could use as alternate production facilities.

OPERATOR: Your next question is from Ray Henry of the Associated Press.

Q: Admiral, Ray Henry. Wanted to see if you could explain a little bit about what you just talked about, putting the oil potentially back in the reservoir. Give us a little bit of a sense of where those conversations stand, what you’d be looking at. Would this be a production platform that would be brought in to do this, but you need to drill a new well to accomplish that? That’s the first time I think I’ve heard anyone speak of that.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, it is the first time we’ve talked about it. We’ve had some communications with BP. At the industry meeting that was held last week hosted by Secretary Salazar and Secretary Chu, we were looking at alternatives that would help us increase capacity, and there was an idea in the room among all the people that were talking, and this is the reason we bring other people in and ask them continually searching for new and better ways to do this. They talk about whether or not it was in the immediate area, where this well was being drilled, that there are other production facilities that are already there that we – that could be used if we were to extend the pipeline along the bottom of the ocean, and that’s what we’re looking at right now.

The question of how many of those might be available and the capacity that we could generate is all being looked at right now through a series of letters of request for information that we are working, but it is something that we’re actively looking at because it could allow us to continue production out of that well without the—requiring a service vessel to be there, which is problematic, as you know when a hurricane.

Q: So you would extend a pipeline back into the reservoir to return the oil in a loop, or would it go to someplace else?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: No. We would send the pipeline to an existing facility that’s not being used for well production right now that has access to a different reservoir.

OPERATOR: Your next question is from (inaudible) at (inaudible).

Q: Hi, Admiral. I’m—the (inaudible) says repeatedly said that his—the chemical safety limits from OSHA are not sufficient to protect workers. I mean he called them outrageously out of date, and BP has said that these are the federal limits; those are the ones that they’re going to direct their contractors to use to see if the workers are safe. Have you talked to the OSHA director about this? Are you directing BP to follow limits that the director feels are safe?

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Well, let me make sure I understood your question, because it was a little bit garbled. I think you were asking about either protective equipment or protective procedures.

Q: No, these are chemical exposure limits.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Oh.

Q: Like for (inaudible) and such that the OSHA chief has said that you know the limits that his agency has set are out of date and are insufficient for worker safety, and then BP has said that those are the official limits, so they’re going to follow them anyway.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: I was not aware of a statement by OSHA that their standards were—that they thought that their standards were out of date. But we will certainly look into that, and I’ll release a statement later on today. That’s the first I had heard of that.

MODERATOR: Operator, we have time for two more calls.

OPERATOR: There are no further questions at this time.

MODERATOR: OK. Thank you, everyone.

ADMIRAL ALLEN: Thanks.

  • Environmental Hotline/Community Information – 866-448-5816
  • Assistance Hotline/Boom Reports – 281-366-5511
  • Vessels of Opportunity (boats) – (866) 279-7983 or (877) 847-7470
  • Wildlife Distress Hotline – 866-557-1401
  • PEC Hotline (Specialty Volunteer Training) – 866-647-2338
  • Claims Hotline – 800-440-0858
  • Medical Support Hotline – 888-623-0287
  • Posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Response, Gulf of Mexico: Coast Guard Updates | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

    Toxic Chemicals within Oil Spill: Dangerous to Human Health – Methylene Chloride

    Resource:  United States Department of Labor

    Methylene chloride, also called dichloromethane, is a volatile, colorless liquid with a chloroform-like odor. Methylene chloride is used in various industrial processes, in many different industries including paint stripping, pharmaceutical manufacturing, paint remover manufacturing, and metal cleaning and degreasing. The most common means of exposure to methylene chloride is inhalation and skin exposure. OSHA considers methylene chloride to be a potential occupational carcinogen.

    Resource: Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry

    ToxFAQs™
    for
    Methylene Chloride

    (Cloruro de Metileno)
    February 2001

     Takeaway PDF on Toxic Facts of Methylene Chloride

    CAS#: 75-09-2

    This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions about methylene chloride. For more information, you may call the ATSDR Information Center at 1-888-422-8737. This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present.

    Highlights

    Exposure to methylene chloride occurs mostly from breathing contaminated air, but may also occur through skin contact or by drinking contaminated water. Breathing in large amounts of methylene chloride can damage the central nervous system. Contact of eyes or skin with methylene chloride can result in burns. Methylene chloride has been found in at least 882 of 1,569 National Priorities List sites identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    What is methylene chloride?

    Methylene chloride is a colorless liquid with a mild, sweet odor. Another name for it is dichloromethane. Methylene chloride does not occur naturally in the environment.

    Methylene chloride is used as an industrial solvent and as a paint stripper. It may also be found in some aerosol and pesticide products and is used in the manufacture of photographic film.

    What happens to methylene chloride when it enters the environment?

    • Methylene chloride is mainly released to the environment in air. About half of the methylene chloride in air disappears in 53 to 127 days.
    • Methylene chloride does not easily dissolve in water, but small amounts may be found in drinking water.
    • We do not expect methylene chloride to build up in plants or animals.

    How might I be exposed to methylene chloride?

    • The most likely way to be exposed to methylene chloride is by breathing contaminated air.
    • Breathing the vapors given off by products containing methylene chloride. Exposure to high levels of methylene chloride is likely if methylene chloride or a product containing it is used in a room with inadequate ventilation.

    How can methylene chloride affect my health?

    If you breathe in large amounts of methylene chloride you may feel unsteady, dizzy, and have nausea and a tingling or numbness of your finger and toes. A person breathing smaller amounts of methylene chloride may become less attentive and less accurate in tasks requiring hand-eye coordination. Skin contact with methylene chloride causes burning and redness of the skin.

    How likely is methylene chloride to cause cancer?

    We do not know if methylene chloride can cause cancer in humans. An increased cancer risk was seen in mice breathing large amounts of methylene chloride for a long time.

    The World Health Organization (WHO) has determined that methylene chloride may cause cancer in humans.

    The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has determined that methylene chloride can be reasonably anticipated to be a cancer-causing chemical.

    The EPA has determined that methylene chloride is a probable cancer-causing agent in humans.

    How does methylene chloride affect children?

    It is likely that health effects seen in children exposed to high amounts of methylene chloride will be similar to the effects seen in adults. We do not know if methylene chloride can affect the ability of people to have children or if it causes birth defects. Some birth defects have been seen in animals inhaling very high levels of methylene chloride.

    How can families reduce the risk of exposure to methylene chloride?

    • Families may be exposed to methylene chloride while using products such as paint removers. Such products should always be used in well-ventilated areas and skin contact should be avoided.
    • Children should not be allowed to remain near indoor paint removal activities.

    Is there a medical test to show whether I’ve been exposed to methylene chloride?

    Several tests can measure exposure to methylene chloride. These tests are not routinely available in your doctor’s office.

    Methylene chloride can be detected in the air you breathe out and in your blood. These tests are only useful for detecting exposures that have occurred within a few days.

    It is also possible to measure carboxyhemoglobin (a chemical formed in the blood as methylene chloride breaks down in the body) in the blood or formic acid (a breakdown product of methylene chloride) in the urine. These tests are not specific for methylene chloride.

    Has the federal government made recommendations to protect human health?

    The EPA requires that releases of methylene chloride of 1,000 pounds or more be reported to the federal government.

    The EPA recommends that exposure of children to methylene chloride be limited to less than 10 milligrams per liter of drinking water (10 mg/L) for 1 day or 2 mg/L for 10 days.

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has established limits on the amounts of methylene chloride that can remain after processing of spices, hops extract, and decaffeinated coffee.

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set limits of 25 parts methylene chloride per million parts of workplace air (25 ppm) for 8-hour shifts and 40-hour work weeks.

    References

    Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2000. Toxicological Profile for Methylene Chloride. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.

    Where can I get more information?

    ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns.

    For more information, contact:

    Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
    Division of Toxicology and Environmental Medicine
    1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-62
    Atlanta, GA 30333
    Phone: 1-800-CDC-INFO • 888-232-6348 (TTY) 
    FAX: 770-488-4178
    Email: cdcinfo@cdc.gov

    Posted in Methylene Chloride - Oil Spill Toxic Chemical | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

    Toxic Chemicals Contained within Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill – Hydrogen Sulfide

    Resource:  Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry

    Hydrogen Sulfide

    CAS ID #: 007783-06-4

    Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) occurs naturally in crude petroleum, natural gas, volcanic gases, and hot springs. It can also result from bacterial breakdown of organic matter. It is also produced by human and animal wastes. Bacteria found in your mouth and gastrointestinal tract produce hydrogen sulfide from bacteria decomposing materials that contain vegetable or animal proteins. Hydrogen sulfide can also result from industrial activities, such as food processing, coke ovens, kraft paper mills, tanneries, and petroleum refineries.

    Hyrogen sulfide is a flammable, colorless gas with a characteristic odor of rotten eggs. It is commonly known as hydrosulfuric acid, sewer gas, and stink damp. People can smell it at low levels.

    ToxFAQs™ for Hydrogen Sulfide

    (Ácido Sulfhídrico)July 2006CAS# 7783-06-4  PDF Version, 36 KB – Takeaway on Hydrogen Sulfide


    This fact sheet answers the most frequently asked health questions about hydrogen sulfide. For more information, you may call the ATSDR Information Center at 1-888-422-8737. This fact sheet is one in a series of summaries about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other chemicals are present.

    Highlights

    Hydrogen sulfide occurs naturally and is also produced by human activities. Just a few breaths of air containing high levels of hydrogen sulfide gas can cause death. Lower, longer-term exposure can cause eye irritation, headache, and fatigue. Hydrogen sulfide has been found in at least 35 of the 1,689 National Priorities List sites identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).


    What is hydrogen sulfide?

    Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) occurs naturally in crude petroleum, natural gas, volcanic gases, and hot springs. It can also result from bacterial breakdown of organic matter. It is also produced by human and animal wastes. Bacteria found in your mouth and gastrointestinal tract produce hydrogen sulfide from bacteria decomposing materials that contain vegetable or animal proteins. Hydrogen sulfide can also result from industrial activities, such as food processing, coke ovens, kraft paper mills, tanneries, and petroleum refineries. Hydrogen sulfide is a flammable, colorless gas with a characteristic odor of rotten eggs. It is commonly known as hydrosulfuric acid, sewer gas, and stink damp. People can smell it at low levels.


    What happens to hydrogen sulfide when it enters the environment?

    • Hydrogen sulfide is released primarily as a gas and spreads in the air.
    • Hydrogen sulfide remains in the atmosphere for about 18 hours.
    • When released as a gas, it will change into sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid.
    • In some instances, it may be released as a liquid waste from an industrial facility.

    How might I be exposed to hydrogen sulfide?

    • You may be exposed to hydrogen sulfide from breathing contaminated air or drinking contaminated water.
    • Individuals living near a wastewater treatment plant, a gas and oil drilling operation, a farm with manure storage or livestock confinement facilities, or a landfill may be exposed to higher levels of hydrogen sulfide.
    • You can be exposed at work if you work in the rayon textiles, petroleum and natural gas drilling and refining, or wastewater treatment industries. Workers on farms with manure storage pits or landfills can be exposed to higher levels of hydrogen sulfide.
    • A small amount of hydrogen sulfide is produced by bacteria in your mouth and gastrointestinal tract.

    How can hydrogen sulfide affect my health?

    Exposure to low concentrations of hydrogen sulfide may cause irritation to the eyes, nose, or throat. It may also cause difficulty in breathing for some asthmatics. Brief exposures to high concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (greater than 500 ppm) can cause a loss of consciousness and possibly death. In most cases, the person appears to regain consciousness without any other effects. However, in many individuals, there may be permanent or long-term effects such as headaches, poor attention span, poor memory, and poor motor function. No health effects have been found in humans exposed to typical environmental concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (0.00011–0.00033 ppm).Scientists have no reports of people poisoned by ingesting hydrogen sulfide. Pigs that ate feed containing hydrogen sulfide experienced diarrhea for a few days and lost weight after about 105 days.Scientists have little information about what happens when you are exposed to hydrogen sulfide by getting it on your skin, although they know that care must be taken with the compressed liquefied product to avoid frost bite.


    How likely is hydrogen sulfide to cause cancer?

    Hydrogen sulfide has not been shown to cause cancer in humans, and its possible ability to cause cancer in animals has not been studied thoroughly. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and the EPA have not classified hydrogen sulfide for carcinogenicity.


    How does hydrogen sulfide affect children?

    Children are likely to be exposed to hydrogen sulfide in the same manner as adults, except for adults at work. However, because hydrogen sulfide is heavier than air and because children are shorter than adults, children sometimes are exposed to more hydrogen sulfide than adults. Health problems in children who have been exposed to hydrogen sulfide have not been studied much. Exposed children probably will experience effects similar to those experienced by exposed adults. Whether children are more sensitive to hydrogen sulfide than adults or whether hydrogen sulfide causes birth defects in people is not known.


    How can families reduce the risk of exposure to hydrogen sulfide?

    Families can be exposed if they live near natural or industrial sources of hydrogen sulfide, such as hot springs, manure holding tanks, or pulp and paper mills. Families may want to restrict visits to these places.


    Is there a medical test to show whether I’ve been exposed to hydrogen sulfide?

    Hydrogen sulfide can be measured in exhaled air, but samples must be taken within 2 hours after exposure to be useful. A more reliable test to determine if you have been exposed to hydrogen sulfide is the measurement of thiosulfate levels in urine. This test must be done within 12 hours of exposure. Both tests require special equipment, which is not routinely available in a doctor’s office. Samples can be sent to a special laboratory for the tests. These tests can tell whether you have been exposed to hydrogen sulfide, but they can not determine exactly how much hydrogen sulfide you have been exposed to or whether harmful effects will occur.


    Has the federal government made recommendations to protect human health?

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set an acceptable ceiling limit for hydrogen sulfide of 20 parts hydrogen sulfide per 1 million parts of air (20 ppm) in the workplace. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommends a 10-minute ceiling limit of 10 ppm in the workplace.


    References

    Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2006. Toxicological Profile for Hydrogen Sulfide. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.


    Where can I get more information?

    ATSDR can tell you where to find occupational and environmental health clinics. Their specialists can recognize, evaluate, and treat illnesses resulting from exposure to hazardous substances. You can also contact your community or state health or environmental quality department if you have any more questions or concerns.

    For more information, contact:

    Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
    Division of Toxicology and Environmental Medicine
    1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-62
    Atlanta, GA 30333
    Phone: 1-800-CDC-INFO • 888-232-6348 (TTY)
    FAX: 770-488-4178
    Email: cdcinfo@cdc.gov

     

     

    Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment