backtop


Print 24 comment(s) - last by thurston.. on Sep 2 at 9:33 PM


fisherman  (Source: bbc.co.uk)
Commercial fisherman are back to work

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reopened 4,281 square miles of the Gulf of Mexico after a reopening protocol agreed to by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Gulf states, and the NOAA.

The reopened waters, which are off western Louisiana, are ready for commercial and recreational fishing. NOAA experts recently caught fish in the area and they showed no signs of contamination. 

"Scientists, food safety experts, members of the fishing industry and local, state federal officials, are working together every day to ensure that seafood from the Gulf is safe to eat," said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. "We will remain vigilant and continue to monitor and test seafood in reopened waters.

From July 26 to July 29, NOAA sampled shrimp and finfish like snapper and mackerel. Under the procedures and methodology of the reopening protocol, chemical analyses of 125 specimens and sensory analyses of 41 samples were composited into 14 samples, and the sensory analysis showed no oil or dispersant flavors or odors. As far as the chemical analysis goes, results were "well below the levels of concern."

But NOAA data from July 29 showed a "light sheen" of oil in the area, yet there has been none detected ever since. Also, trajectory models reveal that this particular area has a low risk of being exposed to oil in the future. 

"Because of our strict adherence to the reopening protocol agreed to by the states and the federal government, we have confidence that seafood harvested from this area is free from harmful oil residues and can be enjoyed by consumers around the nation," said Margaret Hamburg, MD, Commissioner of the FDA. 

The reopened waters are approximately 185 miles west of the BP wellhead that ruptured on April 20, causing the worst oil spill in U.S. history. It is an area known for its fishing, especially for shrimp, reef fish and menhaden. The reopening of these waters should be a relief for commercial fisherman, and NOAA plan to test all fish captured through dockside sampling measures. 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

wait a little
By CowKing on 9/2/2010 12:18:02 AM , Rating: 1
shouldn't the fisheries wait a little to help the fish regain populations?




RE: wait a little
By Reclaimer77 on 9/2/2010 12:39:35 AM , Rating: 5
For what? There wasn't a dead fish problem.


RE: wait a little
By JonnyDough on 9/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: wait a little
By Solandri on 9/2/2010 4:19:23 AM , Rating: 4
NOAA has been closely monitoring the subsurface oil plume from the oil well (it doesn't float because it's mixed with dispersants, allowing it to remain dissolved in water). It's being consumed by bacteria slower than expected, meaning there hasn't been the feared large drop in dissolved oxygen concentration which could end up killing fish (like a red tide).

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100820_...
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/simulations-of-underwater...

Read the articles. They've been putting considerable effort into measuring and modeling the effects to better understand what's going on in the water. If they've decided it's ok to fish again, I'd put a lot more trust in their decision than in your speculation. (Also, I've worked with some of the people in the first article. They're good, earnest people. I trust their judgment.)


RE: wait a little
By Mitch101 on 9/2/2010 11:56:27 AM , Rating: 2
FYI JUST IN

2 September 2010
Explosion on Gulf of Mexico rig
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11014645


RE: wait a little
By Mitch101 on 9/2/2010 11:58:14 AM , Rating: 2
More Info
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38973757/

GRAND ISLE, La. — An offshore oil rig exploded Thursday in the Gulf of Mexico, and the Coast Guard was responding to reports of people in the water.

The explosion occurred west of the site of the April blast that caused the massive BP oil spill.

Coast Guard Petty Officer Casey Ranel said the blast was reported by a commercial helicopter company about 9:30 a.m.

Seven helicopters, two airplanes and four boats are en route to the site, about 80 miles south of Vermilion Bay along the central Louisiana coast.

Ranel said it hasn't been determined whether the structure is a production platform or a drilling rig or whether workers were aboard. Ranel says smoke was reported but it is unclear whether the rig is still burning.

Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer John Edwards said crews were responding to reports of people in the water. It is believed there were 13 people on the rig; one was reportedly injured and 12 were OK but not rescued yet, Edwards said.


RE: wait a little
By geddarkstorm on 9/2/2010 1:22:19 PM , Rating: 2
And some more
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/02/rescue-effort...

"[Updated at 1:05 p.m.] Mariner Energy, owner of the production platform, said in a press release that no hydrocarbon spill has been reported after an initial flyover of the incident.

"Mariner has notified and is working with regulatory authorities in response to this incident," the statement said. "The cause is not known, and an investigation will be undertaken. During the last week of August 2010, production from this facility averaged approximately 9.2 million cubic feet of natural gas per day and 1,400 barrels of oil and condensate."

The company also said no injuries have been reported."

Hopefully the BOP worked on this one.


RE: wait a little
By Reclaimer77 on 9/2/2010 4:27:24 PM , Rating: 2
*puts on tin foil hat*

Isn't it crazy how we've never had oil rigs exploding in over 60 years of drilling, and in a span of a few months under an administration hell bent again fossil fuels and green agendas we've now had two incidents??

Makes you wonder... :P


RE: wait a little
By thurston on 9/2/2010 9:23:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
*puts on tin foil hat*


I just assumed you never took it off.


RE: wait a little
By geddarkstorm on 9/2/2010 1:31:41 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, microbes are degrading the oil -much- faster than expected, while not using much oxygen in the process. This is due to the action of some new, previously unknown bacteria.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/10082...


RE: wait a little
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 5:00:26 PM , Rating: 2
Is NOAA as trustworthy as the CDC and the EPA?

CDC website: CRUDE OIL DOESN’T INCREASE CANCER RISK:
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/oilspillresponse/p...

NOAA, FDA, Bill Walker declare MS oysters SAFE TO EAT — Aug. 20: Top marine scientist says “IMMEDIATE CAUTION” because “they take in droplets and dissolved oil”
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/noaa-fda-bill-wa...

Researchers reveal 80 PERCENT of crab larvae samples from Florida to Louisiana have “oily orange droplets” — NOAA says “HAVE NOT FOUND” IT
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0824/Gul...


RE: wait a little
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 5:00:58 PM , Rating: 2
CDC to Doctors: Seafood must be “HEAVILY CONTAMINATED with oil” to pose a health risk — Would “have a strong odor and taste of oil”
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/gulfoilspill2010/seafood_saf...

What’s the Rush? “NOAA sends its samples to a lab in POLAND” — “Will take MONTHS” to know
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/whats-the-rush-n...

REVEALED: Ed Overton works for Feds and helps out company responsible for largest oil disaster in U.S. history… IN 1989!
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/revealed-ed-over...

...it goes on, and on. But that's ok, lambs are for slaughtering, and without them we wouldn't have my FAVORITE food: the GYRO! (well, ok - they make them with all beef now, but I'm gonna keep my head in the sand on that one just like so many have with what's really going on in the gulf)


RE: wait a little
By Reclaimer77 on 9/2/2010 4:33:13 PM , Rating: 1
Ok I don't know why I'm bothering because it's clear you're an idiot. But let's put the spill into perspective. The Gulf of Mexico is a HUGE body of water. The oil spill was analogous to pouring a can of coke into a large swimming pool.

I never said "any" fish didn't die. But you need to understand, the truth of the matter is the economic impact was very minor.

I almost can't even be upset at you for having this opinion. It's sick the way our media and government politicizes everything that happens, especially disasters. When weak minded ignorant masses hear how this was the "worst" disaster day after day after day, they start believing it.


RE: wait a little
By thurston on 9/2/2010 9:33:54 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
But you need to understand, the truth of the matter is the economic impact was very minor.


But you need to understand, the truth of the matter is the economic impact to me was very minor.

Fixed that for you.


RE: wait a little
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 1:12:33 PM , Rating: 1
Nah, go ahead and eat. The sooner y'all eat up the toxified life the sooner, even if a decade or more from now, I can start eating it again.

http://www.testingthewater.org/content/environment...

quote:
What do you get when you mix
oil & methane gas,
with oil dispersant (COREXIT),
with radioactive effluent,
with surface-burning oil slicks (petroleum+dispersant),
with lots of dead marine life of every sort and kind
in the Gulf of Mexico during a hot and humid summer?

Answer:
A toxic petrochemical stew which is neither safe to eat from, nor swim in. The affected beaches, wetlands, marshes and estuaries should also be viewed with great caution, or avoided altogether.

Many in the MSM have been trumpeting the miraculous recovery of the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of the successful capping of the gushing oil well at the Macondo Prospect. Of course there are also those from whom common sense has not fled. Thankfully, we still have among us reasonable people who are able to utilize the human faculty of reason. We pray that there will be many others who will understand the simple facts of life in the Gulf, which has taken on an awesome toxic burden – a toxic load of various chemicals, pollutants, contaminants, and poisons that ought to be dealt with very carefully and with great circumspection.


science?
By Nyu on 9/2/2010 3:47:56 AM , Rating: 2
what's the point of this article in a science/technology based news site?




RE: science?
By JonB on 9/2/2010 6:33:36 AM , Rating: 2
I read it. You read it. I skip the ones that aren't of interest.


RE: science?
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 12:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
Because the life in and around the Gulf is now a part of the largest biological experiment ever. That is the science. The technology is in the dispersants, the testing, and the obliteration of life and truth.


RE: science?
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 1:08:48 PM , Rating: 1
Fishing reopened, despite no lack of ability to find oil and dispersant in the water and life:

http://oilspillaction.com/photos-oily-mess-in-ocea...


For some truth on the matter(s)
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 8:58:39 AM , Rating: 2
Hit the site www.FloridaOilSpillLaw.com

It's not at all a happy, head in the sand site, though, so plenty will be better off NOT going to that site. Some of their posts/links may be trivial, but a great deal of the information they convey is important if truth, progress, and life are important to you.




RE: For some truth on the matter(s)
By Mithan on 9/2/10, Rating: -1
By Schrag4 on 9/2/2010 10:27:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I predict by 2030, America only has about 30-50 million people living in it, less if the guys in power get the typical retard in the country to support some useless war somewhere and and start launching nukes at somebody.

Sad but true .


I hate to nitpick, but are you saying your predictions about unseen events are "true"? That doesn't make sense...


RE: For some truth on the matter(s)
By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 12:40:58 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/exclusive-tests-...

quote:
“Naman [said] our pool water sample we sent him contained 50.3 ppm [parts per million] 2-butoxyethanol marker for Corexit,” according to Mrs. Schebler. Tests for arsenic came back at less than .02 ppm. A July letter from four top scientists noted, “Corexit 9527A contains 2-BTE (2-butoxyethanol), a toxic solvent that ruptures red blood cells, causing hemolysis (bleeding) and liver and kidney damage (Johanson and Bowman, 1991, Nalco, 2010).” The safety data sheet provided by Nalco, the manufacturer of Corexit 9527A, warns, “Harmful if absorbed through skin. May be harmful if swallowed. May cause liver and kidney effects and/or damage. There may be irritation to the gastro-intestinal tract.” Mr. Schebler’s “severe diarrhea and very dark urine” appear to indicate gastro-intestinal tract irritation.


By SiliconJon on 9/2/2010 12:48:17 PM , Rating: 2
Miles of Dead Fish in lower Plaquemines
http://www.wwltv.com/younews/101893783.html
Aug 31, 2010

Now Naples-area water testing shows “chemical compounds that can only come from Corexit 9527?
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/naples-area-wate...
Sept 2, 2010

...


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki