Oil Spill in the Gulf: The BP, Exxon and Nalco Co. (Corexit) Connection

The BP, Exxon and Nalco Co. (Corexit) Connection

May 14, 2010

E&E News - BP PLC continues to stockpile and deploy oil-dispersing chemicals (Corexit) manufactured by a company with which it shares close ties, even though other U.S. EPA-approved alternatives have been shown to be far less toxic and, in some cases, nearly twice as effective.

After the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and a deepwater well began gushing crude in the Gulf of Mexico three weeks ago, BP quickly marshaled a third of the world’s available supply of dispersants, chemicals that break surface oil slicks into microscopic droplets that can sink into the sea.

But the benefits of keeping some oil out of beaches and wetlands carry uncertain costs. Scientists warn that the dispersed oil, as well as the dispersants themselves, might cause long-term harm to marine life.



So far, BP has told federal agencies that it has applied more than 400,000 gallons of a dispersant sold under the trade name Corexit and manufactured by Nalco Co., whose current leadership includes executives from BP and Exxon. And another 805,000 gallons of Corexit are on order, the company said, with the possibility that hundreds of thousands of more gallons may be needed if the well continues spewing oil for weeks or months.

But according to EPA data, Corexit ranks far above dispersants made by competitors in toxicity and far below them in effectiveness in handling southern Louisiana crude.

Of 18 dispersants whose use EPA has approved, 12 were found to be more effective on southern Louisiana crude than Corexit, EPA data show. Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on Gulf of Mexico crude, while the two Corexit products rated 56 percent and 63 percent effective, respectively. The toxicity of the 12 was shown to be either comparable to the Corexit line or, in some cases, 10 or 20 times less, according to EPA.

EPA has not taken a stance on whether one dispersant should be used over another, leaving that up to BP. All the company is required to do is to choose an EPA-approved chemical, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told reporters yesterday during a conference call aimed at addressing questions about dispersants being used in efforts to contain the Gulf spill.

“Our regular responsibilities say, if it’s on the list and they want to use it, then they are preauthorized to do so,” Jackson said.

One explanation for BP’s reliance on Nalco’s Corexit, which its competitors say dominates the niche market for dispersants because of its industry ties, was its availability in large quantities at the time of the Gulf spill.

“Obviously, logistics and stockpiles and the ability for the responsible party to pull the materials together,” Jackson said. “I’m sure that has a lot to do with the ones that they choose.”

Nonetheless, experts question BP’s sustained commitment to Corexit, given apparently superior alternatives.

“Why wouldn’t you go for the lesser toxic formulation?” said Carys Mitchelmore, an assistant professor of environmental chemistry and toxicology at the University of Maryland’s Center for Environmental Science. Mitchelmore testified on Capitol Hill this week about dispersants and co-authored a 2005 National Academy of Sciences report on the chemicals.

BP spokesman Jon Pack defended the use of Corexit, which he said was decided in consultation with EPA. He called Corexit “pretty effective” and said the product had been “rigorously tested.”

“I’m not sure about the others,” Pack said. “This has been used by a number of major companies as an effective, low-toxicity dispersant.”

BP is not considering or testing other dispersants because the company’s attention is focused on plugging the leak and otherwise containing the spill, Pack said.

“That has to be our primary focus right now,” he said.

Nalco spokesman Charlie Pajor said the decision on what to use was out of his company’s hands. He also declined to comment on EPA comparison tests, saying only that lab conditions cannot necessarily replicate those in the field.

“The decision about what’s used is made by others — not by us,” he said.

Nalco’s Connections

Critics say Nalco, which formed a joint venture company with Exxon Chemical in 1994, boasts oil-industry insiders on its board of directors and among its executives, including an 11-year board member at BP and a top Exxon executive who spent 43 years with the oil giant.

“It’s a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically,” said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.

The older of the two Corexit products that BP has used in the Gulf spill, Corexit 9527, was also sprayed in 1989 on the 11-million-gallon slick created by the Exxon Valdez grounding in Alaska’s Prince William Sound.

Cleanup workers suffered health problems afterward, including blood in their urine and assorted kidney and liver disorders. Some health problems were blamed on the chemical 2-butoxyethanol, an ingredient discontinued in the latest version of Corexit, Corexit 9500, whose production Nalco officials say has been ramped up in response to the Gulf of Mexico disaster.

Among Corexit’s competitors, a product called Dispersit far outpaced Corexit 9500, EPA test results show, rating nearly twice as effective and between half and a third as toxic, based on two tests performed on fish and shrimp.

Bruce Gebhardt, president of the company that manufactures Dispersit, U.S. Polychemical Corp., said BP asked for samples of his company’s product two weeks ago. Later, he said, BP officials told him that EPA had wanted to ensure they had “crossed all their T’s and dotted all their I’s” before moving forward.

Gebhardt says he could make 60,000 gallons a day of Dispersit to meet the needs of spill-containment efforts. Dispersit was formulated to outperform Corexit and got EPA approval 10 years ago, he said, but the dispersant has failed to grab market share from its larger rival.

“When we came out with a safer product, we thought people would jump on board,” he said. “That’s not the case. We were never able to move anyone of any size off the Corexit product.”

He added, “We’re just up against a giant.”

Correction: Nalco and Exxon Chemical Company formed a joint venture company in 1994 called Nalco/Exxon Energy Chemicals L.P. Nalco was acquired in 1999 by the multinational corporation then called Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux, which eventually bought out Exxon Mobil’s interest in the joint venture in 2001. An earlier version of this story mischaracterized the Nalco-Exxon connection.

Corexit is Killing the Gulf



The BP Corexit Connection – Why Toxic Solvents Were Used & Covered Up
We knew there was something fishy going on, but couldn’t figure out what it might be. Why did BP and the EPA keep on using Nalco’s Corexit, which is highly toxic to both humans and wildlife? Turns out that Rodney F. Chase, who sits on the board of Nalco, was also a BP board member. The likelihood that he still holds shares in both companies is very high. So it wasn’t JUST nepotism, it was a for-profit choice. But it runs deeper than that. Corexit’s manufacturer, Nalco Holding Company is owned by the Blackstone Group (along with MANY other holdings, a huge investment conglomerate); AIG has an ownership interest in Blackstone and is an investor in several of Blackstone’s private equity funds; Blackstone has a strategic alliance with Kissinger McLarty Associates; Henry Kissinger chairs both AIG’s International Advisory Board and the advisory boards of several AIG-sponsored Infrastructure Funds; and AIG, Blackstone, and Kissinger Associates established a joint venture, operating globally, to provide financial advisory services to corporations seeking high-level independent strategic advice.

Halliburton Snaps Up Boots & Coots

Why Did Halliburton Buy An Oil Cleanup Company 8 Days Before The Oil Spill?

Obama to be briefed on government's hurricane readiness
Forecasters say the 2010 Atlantic hurricane season, which started on June 1, will be above average, with 15 named storms and eight of those becoming hurricanes. Forecasters said that El Nino conditions will dissipate by summer and that unusually warm tropical Atlantic surface temperatures will persist, leading to favorable conditions for hurricanes to develop and intensify. Of the eight expected hurricanes, the forecasters predict that four will strengthen to major ones, meaning Category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson scale. Category 3 storms have sustained winds of at least 111 mph. The forecast said the probability of a major hurricane making landfall along the U.S. coastline is 69 percent. A typical season has 11 named storms, six hurricanes and two major hurricanes, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The hurricane season ends November 30, although later storms have been known to happen. Last year's hurricane season was below average, with only nine named tropical storms, three of which were hurricanes; the National Hurricane Center said it was the lowest number of tropical storms for the Atlantic basin since 1997.

Beware the 2010 Hurricane Season
As if the Gulf of Mexico and Haiti weren't experiencing disasters enough, the 2010 hurricane season that started on June 1 is shaping up to be a monster of potential malignancy. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has predicted one of the more active seasons on record, forecasting 14 to 23 named storms, with eight to 14 developing into hurricanes, nearly matching 2005's record of 15. Three to seven of those could be major Category 3 or above hurricanes, with winds of more than 110 miles per hour (177 km per hour). The Gulf Coast may see a repeat of the 2005 season when a record 28 storms formed, which killed nearly 4,000 people and caused an estimated $130 billion in total damages. The list included Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans.

Remember Rahm Emanuel's Rent-Free D.C. Apartment? The Owner: A BP Adviser

June 7, 2010

LA Times Blog - In case you were tempted to buy the faux Washington outrage at BP and its gulf oil spill in recent days, here's a story that reveals a little-known corporate political connection and the quiet way the inner political circles intersect, protect and care for one another in the nation's capital. And Chicago.

We already knew that BP and its folks were significant contributors to the record $750-million war chest of Barack Obama's 2007-08 campaign.

Now, we learn the details of a connection of Rahm Emanuel, the Chicago mayoral wannabe, current Obama chief of staff, ex-representative, ex-Clinton money man and ex-Windy City political machine go-fer.

Shortly after Obama's happy inaugural, eyebrows rose slightly upon word that, as a House member, Emanuel had lived the last five years rent-free in a D.C. apartment of Democratic colleague Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and her husband, Stanley Greenberg.

For an ordinary American, that would likely raise some obvious tax liability questions. But like Emanuel, the guy overseeing the Internal Revenue Service now is another Obama insider, Tim Geithner, who had his own outstanding tax problems but skated through confirmation anyway by the Democratic-controlled Congress.

Remember this was all before the letters BP stood for Huge Mess. Even before the Obama administration gave BP a safety award.

Now follow these standard Washington links if you can:

Greenberg's consulting firm was a prime architect of BP's recent rebranding drive as a green petroleum company, down to green signs and the slogan "Beyond Petroleum."

Greenberg's company is also closely tied to a sister Democratic outfit -- GCS, named for the last initials of Greenberg, James Carville, another Clinton advisor, and Bob Shrum, John Kerry's 2004 campaign manager.

According to published reports, GCS received hundreds of thousands of dollars in political polling contracts in recent years from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Probably just a crazy coincidence. But you'll never guess who was the chairman of that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dispensing those huge polling contracts to his kindly rent-free landlord.