Re: Obama one of Greatest Teleprompter Readers of all time!

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/10/2010 11:04 AM, G. Morgan wrote:
> JoeRaisin<joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>
>> So you can ignore that the administration through either design or
>> stupidity prevented rapid clean up response.
>>
>> Whatever it takes...
>
> I don't understand specifically what you're talking about.  What adverse action
> or policy did he purposefully put in place to prevent rapid clean up?
>

Nice parsing - but I never said that.  The administration did not wiave
rules that prevented expedient clean up.

http://dianchu.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-did-us-refuse-international-help-on.html

For one.

Also, EPA rules about watercraft not allowed to discharge water that
contains ANY petroleum type substances could have been waived (and have
been in other disasters).

That meant that skimmers that typically remove between 90% to 99% of the
oil form the water were prevented from operating because their discharge
still had some oil in it.

Instead dispersants were used, which, according to one report issued by
the Coastal Response Research Center University of New Hampshire.

"Dispersant use increases the extent of biological impacts to deep water
pelagic and/or benthic organisms, including oxygen depletion, release of
VOCs into the water column, and toxicity. This may lead to changes in
the diversity, structure and function of the microbial community,
leading to changes in trophic level dynamics and changes to key
biogeochemical cycles."

The point being, that INACTION in failing to waive rules, that have been
waived in the past in response to disasters, prevented rapid clean-up.