To Our Leadership - What we need to learn from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup!

To Our Leadership...

What we need to learn from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup

What EPA and Congress Need to Know

before Future Decisions are Made about

permitting of Dispersants... Surfactants

The Story *

Don't expect EPA to be your Watchdog

Spain * Alaska shares Best Equipment *

Exxon's Current Experiment - Corexit *

NO!

Although it was thought bioremediation was taking place, that is not the the success it seemed

Skip the Chemicals... But Bring Back

the Exxon Valdez *

Do Not USE!

Dispersants

such as Inipol EAP 22 and now Corexit

with strong concentrations of 2-butoxyethanol

Should not be allowed!

Very nice to meet you in Valdez, Senator Stevens:

I thank you for your letter's comments on

Inipol EAP 22 , that was a chemical used during the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup.

The reason it was so dangerous is that it had a

strong concentration of poison,*

2-butoxyethanol...

C₆H₁₄O₂/CH₃(CH₂)₂CH₂OCH₂CH₂OH

which it appears is now the ingredient of concern for Corexit. First version of Corexit had

ethylene oxide which is terribly lethal. *

It does no good to test in cold waters,

because at 4 degrees Centigrade no biodegrading takes place

& marine life are at risk for running into the chemical held in suspended animation. This is what I believe happened to the herring of 1993. The whole fishing industry could be at stake if use of dispersants is not stopped.

And people will be harmed, just in transporting & experimenting with it. Please, it is not worth the risk.

It was the winter storms that cleaned the beaches of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill...

so what's the hurry?

The risk is too great. * Don't do it again! *

Please put a stop

to Exxon Dumping

experimental Corexit

in Alaska waters *

"The human toll alone is not worth it?"

Dr. John Middaugh,

Alaska State Dept of Epidemiology

Have we learned anything from the Exxon Valdez

Oil Spill cleanup? ... whether it was the oil or the chemicals, it was all bad for the environment AND the PEOPLE.

There was no point in putting PEOPLE in harm's way when nature's storms did the best job of cleaning the beaches.

If we've learned anything... it is keep the people out of harm's way: don't expose them to the oil and don't make a bad situation worse by 'cleaning' the beaches with surfactants!

Inipol EAP 22 was an Exxon owned product 7-28-89, not the fertilizer it was purported to be, but a surfactant of 12% by weight which is 2-butoxyethanol! and now Exxon wants to test Corexit in Alaska's waters... ... hoping for a money-maker?

Please no more damage to Alaska!

These are just a big version of 'Spray 'n Wash' *

l i t e r a l l y

but the damage to herring...

to people:

Oil exposure can cause aplastic anemia

(low red blood cells, low white blood cells, low platelets) and leukemia *

2-butoxyethanol in Inipol EAP 22 and

now Corexit causes hemolytic anemia (low RBCs)... the body prematurely destroys its own

red blood cells and worse. Workers feel tired

all the time from blood damage. Their children

are at greater risk for brain tumors and leukemia

from over exposure to this solvent. (WHO) *

Please, next time . . .

Hurt no people!

Use no Chemicals! *

Mother Margaret

Valdez, Alaska

Don't forget our own: 9-11

These workers could be anywhere... in your district too

Can you put out an SOS to help find them? Worker Survey

and please REMOVE the BAN on THE EXXON VALDEZ

These dispersants should be banned,

what good do they do?

They just ad poison to the oil.

They make a bad situation worse.

Letter to the Editor Version *

Sample of Public Response *

HOME PAGE: www.valdezlink.com/inipol

This website began June 20, 2002 and evolved with multiple pages being added weekly...

the more was learned, the more was shared...

Worker?

If a journalist?

ALERT!

Ban 2-butoxyethanol

& all such surfactant use,

but bring back the EXXON VALDEZ , please! *

Concerned?

Contact Your US Congress Senators and Representatives... *

The only story worth hearing is from the WORKERS themselves... workers say * worker survey *

Have you ever used Accutane? It appears the risks are not worth the purported benefits *

	To Our Leadership... What we need to learn from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup
		What EPA and Congress Need to Know before Future Decisions are Made about permitting of Dispersants... Surfactants
	The Story * Don't expect EPA to be your Watchdog Spain * Alaska shares Best Equipment * Exxon's Current Experiment - Corexit *	NO!
	Although it was thought bioremediation was taking place, that is not the the success it seemed Skip the Chemicals... But Bring Back the Exxon Valdez *	Do Not USE! Dispersants such as Inipol EAP 22 and now Corexit with strong concentrations of 2-butoxyethanol Should not be allowed!
	Very nice to meet you in Valdez, Senator Stevens: I thank you for your letter's comments on Inipol EAP 22 , that was a chemical used during the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup. The reason it was so dangerous is that it had a strong concentration of poison,* 2-butoxyethanol... C₆H₁₄O₂/CH₃(CH₂)₂CH₂OCH₂CH₂OH which it appears is now the ingredient of concern for Corexit. First version of Corexit had ethylene oxide which is terribly lethal. * It does no good to test in cold waters, because at 4 degrees Centigrade no biodegrading takes place & marine life are at risk for running into the chemical held in suspended animation. This is what I believe happened to the herring of 1993. The whole fishing industry could be at stake if use of dispersants is not stopped. And people will be harmed, just in transporting & experimenting with it. Please, it is not worth the risk. It was the winter storms that cleaned the beaches of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill... so what's the hurry? The risk is too great. * Don't do it again! *	Please put a stop to Exxon Dumping experimental Corexit in Alaska waters * "The human toll alone is not worth it?" Dr. John Middaugh, Alaska State Dept of Epidemiology
		Have we learned anything from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup? ... whether it was the oil or the chemicals, it was all bad for the environment AND the PEOPLE. There was no point in putting PEOPLE in harm's way when nature's storms did the best job of cleaning the beaches. If we've learned anything... it is keep the people out of harm's way: don't expose them to the oil and don't make a bad situation worse by 'cleaning' the beaches with surfactants! Inipol EAP 22 was an Exxon owned product 7-28-89, not the fertilizer it was purported to be, but a surfactant of 12% by weight which is 2-butoxyethanol! and now Exxon wants to test Corexit in Alaska's waters... ... hoping for a money-maker? Please no more damage to Alaska! These are just a big version of 'Spray 'n Wash' * l i t e r a l l y but the damage to herring... to people: Oil exposure can cause aplastic anemia (low red blood cells, low white blood cells, low platelets) and leukemia * 2-butoxyethanol in Inipol EAP 22 and now Corexit causes hemolytic anemia (low RBCs)... the body prematurely destroys its own red blood cells and worse. Workers feel tired all the time from blood damage. Their children are at greater risk for brain tumors and leukemia from over exposure to this solvent. (WHO) * Please, next time . . . Hurt no people! Use no Chemicals! * * Mother Margaret Valdez, Alaska Don't forget our own: 9-11 These workers could be anywhere... in your district too Can you put out an SOS to help find them? Worker Survey and please REMOVE the BAN on THE EXXON VALDEZ
	These dispersants should be banned, what good do they do? They just ad poison to the oil. They make a bad situation worse.	Letter to the Editor Version * Sample of Public Response *
	HOME PAGE: www.valdezlink.com/inipol This website began June 20, 2002 and evolved with multiple pages being added weekly... the more was learned, the more was shared... Worker? If a journalist?	ALERT! Ban 2-butoxyethanol & all such surfactant use, but bring back the EXXON VALDEZ , please! * Concerned? Contact Your US Congress Senators and Representatives... *