Dispersants such as COREXIT 9527 

Have Adverse Effects on Biological Processes

Corexit 9527 pdf  

 1-3-03 MSDS of the 6-14-92 Corexit 9527

looks the same as 6-12-92 reiterated?  *

 Doesn't look like very much is known about Corexit 9527 

& no other Corexit is found in this data base....

http://hazard.com/msds/tox/tf/q46/q49.html 

                     *** CHEMICAL IDENTIFICATION ***

RTECS NUMBER            : GM2750000
CHEMICAL NAME           : Corexit 9527
CAS REGISTRY NUMBER     : 60617-06-3
LAST UPDATED            : 199710
DATA ITEMS CITED        : 2
COMPOUND DESCRIPTOR     : Mutagen
 
                       *** HEALTH HAZARD DATA ***
 
                            ** MUTATION DATA **
 
TYPE OF TEST            : Mutation in microorganisms
TEST SYSTEM             : Microorganism - not otherwise specified
DOSE/DURATION           : 24300 uL/L
REFERENCE :
   HEREAY Hereditas (Lund, Sweden).  (Gjoerloffsgatan 121, S-261 34 Landskrona,
   Sweden)  V.1-    1947-  Volume(issue)/page/year: 104,317,1986

                          *** STATUS IN U.S. ***
 
   EPA TSCA TEST SUBMISSION (TSCATS) DATA BASE, JULY 2000

 
                            *** END OF RECORD ***

http://www.valdezlink.com/inipol/pages/again.htm  

Exxon's Planning on Dumping Corexit in Alaska waters again?

Note: 8-1-89 version of Corexit only gives ethylene oxide as the dangerous ingredient & no others

Note:  6-14-92 only lists 2-butoxyethanol as an ingredient, no others  *

"The Corexit 9500 * is the primary chemical stockpiled in Alaska. 

So far, in RCAC sponsored research, unfortunately,

9500 is more toxic and less effective than 9527,

but that is for Alaskan waters - considering temperature and salinity. 

The 9527 is more effective in warmer waters.

The ingredients for Corexit 9527 include: 2-Butoxyethanol

(Ethylenenglycol Monobutyl Ether), Butyl Cellosolve, Butyl Glycol, Glycol Ether EB
(See above pdf document for more details).

For more info. you might want to try this website link:
http://msds.pdc.cornell.edu/msds/siri/files/bry/brybg.html

And, unfortunately, they still have plans to use these chemicals as a
tool for addressing spilled oil on water." says RCAC member.

So why use any dispersants?

It only ads chemicals that may never leave the water... & for what purpose?

Even the 'purported' bioremediation chemicals

only claimed to 'speed things
up by a few days'

The damage to the herring ... they'll probably never recover...
www.valdezlink.com/inipol/no.htm
Biologists saying that a virus was the cause ... is only a theory, too, 

they didn't input what chemicals could still be in the water.

"dispersants like Corexit 9527  (another Exxon formulation) are much less toxic than the dispersants used in the 1960s," Wells said, "but even these new dispersants have adverse effects on biological processes." quoted by ADN 8-15-89

http://www.adn.com/evos/stories/EV147.html 

Contact * regarding Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Cleanup Workers