Earth’s Waters are YOUR Waters – Get Outraged!
Alaskan and Arctic waters are critical to sustaining complex ecosystems around the world which in turn support your life which is dependent on the vary organisms in earth’s oceans that produce the air we all breathe.
Federal Agencies responsible for protecting the environment are pushing to gain pre-authorization for the use of toxic chemical dispersants in these waters. Click HERE for more info.
This is unacceptable!!
BE OUTRAGED. GET YOUR GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES TO DO SOMETHING BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!
Download Urgent Request to KEY Senators
Click above for a copy of a letter just hand routed to the offices of key U.S. Senators in Washington DC.
In short, the situation is this: There are no oil or hazardous chemical spill response plans in place that would prevent the catastrophic consequences of a major spill in Alaska, the Arctic; nor, for that matter, are we prepared for another spill of significance in the Gulf of Mexico or on any other U.S. Coastline.
Current Government Agency activities in Alaska amount to federal government interagency officials running a chemical dispersant public information and education campaign along with legally questionable Tribal government to government engagement practices using tax payer dollars to ram through their predetermined decision to use Corexit/dispersants. This is being done regardless of citizens’ strenuous objections to dispersant use and the known negative impacts to Alaska Native communities subsistence, commercial fisheries and the long term risks posed to the ecological and human health of the region. The Alaska Regional Response Team public comment gathering and Tribal consultation program around their Dispersant Plan is a public deception conveying only positive attributes while withholding negative information on the subject from the public. The EPA and USCG’s unreasonable and unshakable determination to use these chemicals has made many wonder if the people making these decisions are somehow connected to the oil and gas industry. Their total lack of reason in the face of data and scientific fact that better technologies are available (as demonstrated in many other parts of the world that have banned dispersant use) is curious and raises important questions. Natural Resource Trustees have held this unwavering dispersant-position despite qualified Alaska-specific science based reviews to the contrary and despite clear evidence during and after the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and Exxon Valdez that these chemicals absolutely do have questionable efficacy with lethal effects on marine and human lives.
Write your representative with a copy of this letter/information and ask for their participation in getting these sensible recommendations implemented. At best, why do we have to obtain permission to effectively get the clean up of the Gulf of Mexico Oil spill completed? Tell them to help us get proven, already known non-toxic methods used to completely remove residual spilled oil from our oceans and sensitive environments. Ask them to find out why Alaskan federal officials only have toxic chemicals in their plans that we already know do not work in Alaska or anywhere else!
Get your Senator or Representative to assist with getting the U.S. National Response Team to better invest time and resources into finding solutions for
• Effectively addressing the threat of a major oil spill or chemical accident. The lessons learned from the BP spill have resulted in absolutely no significant change in chemical agent plans as part of the U.S. NCP (virtually the same response plan as used on the Exxon Valdez spill decades ago). Current regulatory reviews are way off target—although officials claim much is being done it amounts to the same old decisions over and over to the detriment of the American people, and the environment. For example if there were a significant spill by tanker vessels or drilling in Arctic waters, this would be an international nightmare to deal with due to the unique ice and oceanographic conditions, in addition to the fact that the Arctic is where many fish species and bird species reproduce. Such a spill would crash our fisheries and bring economic devastation to Alaska and many other coastal regions. There are no spill plans in place that would prevent the catastrophic consequences of a major spill in the Arctic; nor, for that matter, are we prepared for another major spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
Write your representative to gain support for more effective actions and pass on the Change Oil Spill Response Global Alliance petition!:
The Lawrence Anthony Earth Organization’s (LAEO) work specifically involves finding and implementing solutions for cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska’s sensitive ecosystems, Niger Delta and other notable spill sites around the world. We have done a substantial amount of research and compiled materials and data to educate and encourage global cooperation to invest in the technological advancements that have been made in spill response and oil cleanup. We have also sent educational materials to all interagency members of the U.S. National and Regional Response Teams.
LAEO’s Science Advisory Board did an analysis of key EPA/NOAA internal oil spill response guidance documents. The study found the material contained false and misleading information and faulty science being used by the EPA to justify the continued use of toxic dispersants and to continue to obstruct effective, non-toxic solutions. LAEO’s science advisors provided suggested revisions, with full documentation, to correct those inaccuracies. The information was not acted on by EPA officials. See copy of this analysis at: Download A Call for a Twenty-First Century Solution in Oil Spill Response.
LAEO has filed Freedom of Information Requests to further investigate why the EPA, Coast Guard and other trustee agencies are blocking our efforts to get the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill truly cleaned up using effective already approved methods and is currently in talks with EPA/NRT Officials to correct these issues. We have made constructive recommendations and believe they should be seriously considered.
Additional Information can be found at: