The energy giant has sprayed 1.8m gallons of Corexit into the sea to break up the oil released when its Deepwater Horixon rig exploded and sank, killing 11 men.
But the practice was strongly criticised over a lack of scientific studies into it effects and the manufacturer's reluctance to reveal the product's chemical make-up.
The class action suit related to Corexit could potentially unleash a new wave of litigation, as BP already faces more than 300 claims over economic hardship, environmental damage and alleged safety breaches.
It has been filed in Alabama against BP and the chemical's maker, Nalco, by Glynis Wright and Janille Turner, two Gulf Coast residents, alleging that Corexit 9500 is "four times more toxic than sweet crude oil".
They are seeking compensation for "negligence and wanton misconduct, as well as nuisance, trespass, battery and medical monitoring".
The claimants also argue that "the toxic dispersants were used deliberately to lessen the financial burden on the defendants and lessen public reaction to the oil spill".
Scientists from the University of Southern Mississippi's Gulf Coast Research Laboratory last week found that the substance has now "probably" entered the food chain following tests on crab larvae.
However, little is known about the consequences of releasing the chemical on such a large scale.
A safety sheet produced by Nalco concludes that Corexit's "human hazard potential is low" but also admits that "no toxicity studies have been conducted on this product".
The same document notes that while ingestion is "not a likely route of exposure" the chemical "may cause nausea and vomiting [and] can cause chemical pneumonia if aspirated into lungs".
Corexit did not pass tests in the UK and was banned from being used to tackle oil spills in 1998. However, it was approved for use by the US Environmental Protection Agency, after BP argued that this was the only suitable chemical to help get rid of
the oil.
...continues
Deepwater Horizon
Moderator: Peak Moderation
-
- Posts: 2590
- Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 19:06
BP sued over dispersant used on spill
BBC News - 20/08/10
Energy giant BP has been accused of hiding key data needed to investigate the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.
Article continues ...
The Ecologist - 06/09/10
More than 200 million tons of crude oil have gushed into the Gulf of Mexico since the rupture of Deepwater Horizon. The chemicals used to clean up the spill have received less attention but could have devastating long-term effects on the marine ecosystem.
Article continues ...
The Guardian - 06/09/10
MPs to question BP rig operator amid fears of similar disaster in North Sea
Article continues ...
The Guardian - 01/03/11
BP fund lawyer to refuse 100,000 Gulf spill disaster claims
Article continues ...
BBC News - 03/04/11
The offshore drilling firm responsible for running the Deepwater Horizon rig has given its top executives bonuses for its "best year" for safety.
Transocean was blamed along with BP and Halliburton after last year's massive spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
Eleven workers, nine of whom worked for Transocean, died when the Deepwater Horizon exploded almost a year ago.
But Transocean said there had been a drop in the rate of recorded incidents and also in their potential severity.
Article continues ...
The Guardian - 15/04/11
BP attempts to control research into impact of Gulf oil spill
Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show BP officials discussing how to influence the work of scientists.
Article continues ...
Please excuse the thread-necromancy...
BP Found Grossly Negligent in 2010 Spill; Fines May Rise
Just sayin'.
BP Found Grossly Negligent in 2010 Spill; Fines May Rise
BP's stake in Russia (Rosnoft), accounting for a third of it's production, represents 'the biggest single foreign investment in Russia’s oil industry'.Sept. 4 (Bloomberg)
BP Plc acted with gross negligence in setting off the biggest offshore oil spill in U.S. history, a federal judge ruled, handing down a long-awaited decision that may force the energy company to pay billions of dollars more for the 2010 Gulf of Mexico disaster.
U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier held a trial without a jury over who was at fault for the environmental catastrophe, which killed 11 people and spewed oil for almost three months into waters that touch the shores of five states. The case also included Transocean Ltd. (RIG) and Halliburton Co. (HAL), though the judge didn’t find them as responsible for the spill as BP.
“BP’s conduct was reckless,” Barbier wrote in a decision today in New Orleans federal court. “Transocean’s conduct was negligent. Halliburton’s conduct was negligent.”
Barbier apportioned fault at 67 percent for BP, 30 percent for Transocean and 3 percent for Halliburton. BP shares closed down 5.9% to 455 pence.
The ruling marks a turning point in the legal morass surrounding the causes and impact of the disaster. Four years of debate and legal testimony have centered on who was at fault and how much blame each company should carry.
BP Exploration & Production Inc. is “subject to enhanced penalties under the Clean Water Act,” because the discharge of oil was the result of its exploration unit’s gross negligence and willful misconduct, Barbier said. BP said it “strongly disagrees” with the decision and will challenge it before the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
Just sayin'.
- biffvernon
- Posts: 18538
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Lincolnshire
- Contact:
- emordnilap
- Posts: 14814
- Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
- Location: here
$50bn worth of damage by the oil industry on the Gulf coast? Not guilty, off you go!
Source
SourceThe oil and gas industry has admitted that its canals and drilling rigs have destroyed 1,900 square miles of coastal wetlands on the US Gulf Coast, but a Federal Judge with deep industry ties has ruled that 97 companies off have no liability for the $50 billion damage.
Source
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
- biffvernon
- Posts: 18538
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Lincolnshire
- Contact: