• Overview
• Food
• Baby Care
• Hazards & Threats
• News
• Our Purpose
• Prevention
• Products
• Sustainability & Lifestyle
• All Articles
• All Videos

Blog

The vast oil spill is finally coming to shore, and stuck in the thick oily sludge is BP and a slew of environmental and human health consequences.

As I write this, I am watching the ‘Top Kill’ procedure  live—the newest attempt to cap the oil spill. The procedure involves pumping thousands of pounds of heavy liquids into the pipes, which will hopefully clog the well. The word ‘hopefully’ tings with frustration. After the spraying of close to a million gallons of chemical dispersants and finding out BP had the potential to prevent the spill, my confidence in BP is shot. And, I don’t expect things will be improving anytime soon.

The Gulf Oil Spill appears to be an endless ball of yarn, unraveling problem after problem. Many concerns have been raised about toxic dispersants sprayed to break up the oil. One fisherman interviewed by the New York Times asked, "Why are they using dispersants that are illegal in other countries?" Recently, the EPA gave BP 72 hours to replace the dispersant Corexit 9500 with a less-toxic alternative or to disclose full details of the product’s environmental evaluation. BP refused and responded with a 12-page document outlining that full disclosure would threaten their legal right to keep confidential business information.

The fact that BP can refuse the EPA’s request represents a larger issue at hand: the EPA’s lack of authority. Right now the EPA can advise, but not enforce. Clearly, this comes at a devastatingly high cost in terms of our environment, and has been a main focal point of media coverage. But another emerging impact is the price we will pay with our health.

For the oil spill, the harm is already beginning to umask itself. Oil spill clean-up workers, who not too long ago were employed fishermen, have begun reporting illnesses including: severe headaches, dizziness, nausea and difficulty breathing.  Their symptoms appear identical to the EPA’s warning for coastal residents after they detected petroleum odors strong enough to cause sickness along the gulf shoreline: "Some of these chemicals may cause short-lived effects like headache, eye, nose and throat irritation, or nausea."

But, these are only the short-term effects. Some long term effects of benzene, a natural constituent of crude oil, are increased risk of cancer, reproductive problems, and decreased red blood cells. How many workers, fisherman, and local citizens will have compromised health from this spill is impossible to know, but we do know these risks will linger.

Estimates suggest the spill is far larger than the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster--making the spill the largest in US history. And, over two decades later, the environmental and health effects from the Exxon Valdez spill are still persisting.

Sadly, like the Exxon Valdez spill, the Gulf Oil Spill will affect the health of future generations. Future children of cleanup workers and coastal residents are likely to have trace chemicals from the oil spill in their bodies. Also, fish from the Gulf region for decades to come will likely have contaminants lingering from the oil spill; creating the possibility of health effects felt around the country.

It is imperative we work towards preventing another disaster like BP. I say BP and not the oil spill because of the power that has been willingly given to them. One solution, which we currently can all work towards, is the Safe Chemicals Act. If passed, the EPA would gain greater authority in regulating chemicals.

While this won’t prevent an oil spill, it will perhaps prevent an oil giant from further polluting our environment.

Find Out More:

• Ask Congress to Pass A Strong Safe Chemicals Act
• What is the Safe Chemicals Act?
• A Toxic Brew in the Gulf of Mexico
• Reduce Your Dependence on Oil by Creating a Cleaner, Greener, Safer Home

More comments:

Print this page | Email a friend