Oil emanating from the site of the Deepwater Horizon oil leak is seen in this aerial photo taken Wednesday, May 19, 2010. Two Mobile-area scientists said that BP and the Coast Guard ignored their warnings that the chemical dispersants used to break up the oil spill would have long-term consequences for the Gulf environment. (Press-Register / G.M. Andrews)

By Ben Raines
May 21, 2010, 5:00AM Mobile-area scientists warned BP PLC officials and Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen a week ago that the use of dispersants both on the surface and underwater at the Deepwater Horizon well could have grave consequences for the Gulf ecosystem. The scientists, Bob Shipp of the University of South Alabama and George Crozier of the Dauphin Island Sea Lab, said they felt their concerns were ignored at the time. BP did not respond to the Press-Register’s questions. Dispersants have been used — mostly in surface applications — almost every day since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, killing 11 people and starting the massive spill. Thursday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which approved the use of more than 655,000 gallons of dispersant chemicals so far, announced that the chemical in use for the last month was too toxic. BP was ordered to find another dispersant by midnight Thursday. … Data sheets with ecological information about the Corexit dispersant include this statement: “No toxicity studies have been conducted on this product.” Crozier said Wednesday that he and other scientists were contacted a week earlier by a BP official who wanted to discuss underwater dispersant use. That official told him that BP would start a testing program Saturday, Crozier said. EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard approved the increased use of underwater dispersant the day before the testing was to begin. “How could that have happened before they’d even conducted any of the testing they told me about?” said Crozier. “I’m losing faith in the system.” Crozier said it was clear to him in his conversation with the BP scientist that using dispersant underwater was a forgone conclusion and that the BP scientist was not interested in Crozier’s scientific opinion. “He spent the first five minutes lecturing me about the dispersant toxicity. I told him I wasn’t worried about that. I was worried about the toxicity of the dispersed oil. He didn’t want to address that,” Crozier said. … The scientists said that when the oil was allowed to come to the surface, many of the most toxic components — hexane, benzene, other volatile gases — were evaporating. But when the oil is trapped underwater through the use of dispersants, those toxic chemicals also are trapped in the water. Plus, the breakdown of the oil by aquatic microbes robs the water of oxygen. “The concerns about a hypoxic (low-oxygen) issue are very real,” Crozier said. “Whether it happens, how fast it happens, I can’t predict, but the idea of that much microbial activity using oxygen, that is totally predictable.” Crozier said he fears that a decision was made to protect beaches in the short term at the risk of jeopardizing the long-term health of the Gulf.

Mobile scientists’ warnings about oil dispersants ignored by BP, Coast Guard