Facts - Inipol EAP 22 chemical used in Bioremediation of
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill cleanup
Has
Caused an Abuse of Workers
|
Can You Help?
|
It
affects many hundreds of men, mostly 32 & older now.
Many
affected were not even those who Sprayed the Inipol EAP
22
on
the Beaches by land or by boats
....
some just stumbled upon the containers or docks or boats where
the barrels of chemicals had leaked...& not even that much
of an exposure seems to cause health damage.
____________________________________________________________________________
72
miles of beach were sprayed with 230 tons of surfactant
and
40 tons of granular nitrogen-phosphate fertilizer
(Notice
that they say surfactant... not fertilizer in referencing
inipol EAP 22)
Could
this cause harm to the sea lion population
that
has declined in the North Pacific Waters?
The
below information on chemical ingredients is
valuable. Keep it on file.
EPA
only will tell you in their Tech Bulletin #10 on inipol EAP
22
that
it contains nitrogen & phosphorus. http://www.epa.gov/oilspill/ncp/inipolea.htm
Maybe
it is mostly refined oil with dry-cleaning solvent.
Has
it been formulated to be absorbed directly into the cells?
-
density is .9 less than water.
Workers
had no protective gear... per MSDS.
Also
check the hazard sheets from NJ and Penn on 2-butoxyethanol.
Workers
never had a chance.
If
any of them did not get, 'right away' low red blood cell
anemia
(formal
name: non-immune hemolytic anemia caused by solvents)
the
body's premature destruction of its own red blood cells
it
would be miraculous.
.
Too, it is interesting to note
that a 1993 article quoting Exxon's top scientists admits all
these chemicals.
Exxon's senior staff biochemist, Roger
Prince, makes the following comments in a 1993
Environment Reporter article Environment
Reporter, Volume 23, Number 51, April 16, 1993, p. 3169
"While 2-butoxyethanol
is biodegradable, it is potentially harmful to mammals if a
sufficient amount is absorbed through the skin." You
may quote, no permission needed, just give reference
It is also interesting to note that the
initial MSDS for inipol EAP 22 clearly shows:
EXXON
wrote the MSDS 7-28-89
(required
Material Safety Data Sheet)
'threw
the ingredients together including MSDS'
2
days after EPA gave conditional approval for an experiment
with bioremediation chemicals.
It
was field tested first, not last.
EXXON had a rep with each of the inipol EAP
22 crews of workers.
Not
so, any other products?
http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/valdez/01.htm
EPA
had only conditionally approved the bioremediation experiment
7-26-89, saying they had little
info to know whether it would work environmentally (no comment
on whether it was safe for the workers):
EPA to Exxon:
"As you are aware, all data
to make a definitive recommendation on the efficacy of
bioremediation are not available at this time"&
that "If
monitoring results demonstrate any adverse environmental
effect, the application of the fertilizer should be terminated
immediately."
|
|
A
bigger catastrophe than the oil spill itself:
What
has happened to the workers!
...
And to think that we let EXXON run the show... |
|
NIOSH
wanted to do more, but...
"They
couldn't get Exxon to release its clinical data,
and
Exxon controlled access to workers at remote locations."
http://www.adn.com/evos/stories/T99032316.html
(many good articles catalogued, by the
way!)
-
Anchorage Daily News, May 13, 1999
"Canadian
researcher Peter Wells in 1984 concluded that part of the
problem with oil dispersants is that their toxicity appears to
be linked to their effectiveness: Effective dispersants are too
toxic, and nontoxic dispersants are ineffective" quoted by
ADN 8-15-89
http://www.adn.com/evos/stories/EV147.html
Coast
Guard Vice Adm. Clyde Robbins,
the on-scene coordinator for the spill cleanup
"What
in the world are we doing testing this stuff now?"
Robbins asks.
|
Inipol
EAP 22a
Oleic
Acid - primary
ingredient
CAS
Nr 112-80-1 ?
Tri(laureth-4)-phosphate
*
No
correct CAS Nr found
Stable,
not very soluble?
2-Butoxyethanol
CAS Nr 111-76-2
10-12%
of product by weight
C6H14O2/CH3(CH2)2CH2OCH2CH2OH
Per
its own MSDS:
This
substance may be hazardous to the environment; special
attention should be given to the water environment and
aquifer.
Urea
CAS Nr 57-13-6
?
Water
CAS Nr 7732-18-5 ?
|
CH3(CH2)7CH=CH(CH2)7COOH
[C12H25(OC2H4)3O]3PO
HO-C2H4-O-C4H9
? same as:
NH2-CO-NH2
H2O
|
The focus of everyone was on the
environment; however, if you can't apply it without certain
health damage... & worse, it's not worth doing! "The
human toll alone is not worth it?" Dr. John
Middaugh, Alaska State Dept of Epidemiology (from LA Times
article 11-5-01) Newspaper articles on
workers: http://www.blessinghouse.com/inipol/pages/workers.htm
2-butoxyethanol
, besides other things, It's a dry cleaning solvent, per
NJ Hazard sheet info AKOSH sent ... causes all the
things that the MSDS says it does: hemolytic anemia, the
body's premature destruction of the red blood cells...
also
Clinical depression - a CNS damage, skin damage, kidney, bone,
liver, lymph, reproductive
...& at some point even
cancers should be showing up. Very sad...
But of course, since the company doesn't want the real results
of inipol EAP 22 to be known, these workers are not being
health monitored... a loss to science & future
decision-making, too.
If
you find any workers, have them call
toll free 1-888-853-5333
& helps will be shared.
|
Even
Those Not Working on the Beaches, were exposed to inipol EAP 22
*
Table
of Contents
Workers'
Survey |