--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchy...@...> wrote: <snip> > BP's first-quarter 2010 profit jumped to $5.6 billion from > $2.4 billion in 2009. In case you haven't noticed BP has > done NOTHING to clean up the mess except use the toxic oil > dispersant, Corexit, which doesn't clean up the mess it only > HIDES the magnitude of the oil spill.
Not true. It's been doing controlled burns, it's been sucking up surface oil, it's been laying hundreds of miles of boom, it's been cleaning up beaches and wildlife. Whether dispersant that keeps oil from reaching the shoreline is actually worse for the environment is a tossup; nobody really knows, especially with a spill of this magnitude and at this depth. It's obviously true that damage from dispersant is not going to be as apparent as damage to the shoreline, but *in and of itself* that isn't a reason not to use dispersant. There just aren't any alternatives: either you don't use dispersant and foul up the shoreline-- including killing off the wetlands, which can't be recovered once they're gone--or you do use it and foul up the ocean.
