Главная Обратная связь To favorites

The world of the unknown - Onua.org

Onua.org - this site created to familiarize the user with the world of the unknown, news of technology, space discoveries and mysteries of the Earth UFO, Video , Photo, the Witnesses, the mysteries of history and ancient civilizations.
onua.org » Flora and Fauna » Intentional ban on environmentally friendly technologies
To learn more about 2012
Curiosity Mission
Discovery Channel
Discovery World
Discovery Science
Animal Planet
Nat Geo WILD
National Geographic Channel
Viasat History
Viasat Explorer
News calendar

Join

Popular Onua.org
Photo
?=t('Новости аномалий и неопознанных явлений')?>
To learn more about the planet Nibiru

Предлагаем восстановить, заказать, купить диплом Вуза в любом городе России. Только настоящий бланк ГОЗНАК с гарантией.

Viewings: 2729
Намеренный запрет на экологически чистые технологииSurprisingly, of all developed and tested over the last 18 years (since 1993) dispersant permitted for application was corexit. Despite the high toxicity and cost, and also low efficiency. Emission friendly and technologically more advanced ways of liquidation of oil pollution was rejected by the Department of environmental protection (EPA) with such persistence that easily guessed "order" major oil companies and those who stand behind them. This is confirmed by the facts, and insiders who worked in the EPA.

An example of an alternative to corexit could be considered dispersant OSE II (Oil Spill Eater II, "devourer of oil spills II"), which since 1996 has been successfully used during more than 18,000 elimination of oil pollution (including India, Greece, Nigeria and South Korea). Scientific studies suggest that this drug is completely safe and effective alternative to most other dispersants. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Law on the improvement of the quality of water resources, the Charter of the EPA and common sense, EPA rejected the request of the authorities of the States bordering the Gulf allow to apply in its waters it OSE II. Although even in the safety of the material on corexit written: "do not contaminate surface water".

Actually, production and application of dispersants is the only one sense: they hide the sea and ocean oil spills, lowering oil down there, where 60% of the species of organisms. No oil, no fines and trouble. As they say, business and nothing personal. From the point of view EPA dispersant is considered effective if it is within half an hour able to "remove from sight" 45% of its oil. About toxicity and Carcinogenicity/mutagenicity't say a word. Scientific publications like "Carbon oil origin entered the food chain coastal plankton during the cleanup of Dipute Horizon" any consequences have not. What is negligible concentrations Neftemarket mixture kill all life and penetrate all levels of the food chain, as if no one cares.

Therefore, the chosen one "advanced thinkers" of the West the way to solve the problem of oil pollution only protects interests of "big oil", you deliberately condemning all interconnected biosphere of planet on mutations, extinction and famine caused by the violations established in the food chain relationships. (See the study about the damage caused by the use of such dispersants.) But the true purpose of this attitude of state officials and environmentalists are clearly different. As already mentioned, is guilty of a small spill of diesel fuel and oil change freedom for a prison cell. And after a disaster of global importance top managers simply change one office to another.

Several attempts to interest EPA in the transition to a safe methods for liquidation of pollution encounter inexplicable in its irrationality perseverance. Once again this issue was discussed on April 16, 2012 (with the participation of the Ministry of internal resources of the USA), but the decision on transition to the preparations type OSE II was not accepted. To explain this blatant sabotage can only bias of certain officials of a number of departments. However, as will be shown, this whole situation is much bigger and is only a small element of the process, has long been a global character.

Melvin Fingas (Mervin Fingas, a scientist, who previously worked for the canadian government, said that of about 40 research on the biological decomposition, conducted in the period from 1997 to 2008, about 60% of cases dispersants slowed the proliferation neftianykh microbes, and 15% had no effect. It has a positive effect was observed only in 25% of cases. And in the comprehensive report prepared by the National research Council of Canada in 2005, 12 the authors concluded that "there is irrefutable evidence indicates the acceleration or deceleration of microbial biological treatment [oil pollution] when using dispersants," and that the active growth of colonies of bacteria may be related to the fact that bacteria ate not oil, and the dispersant.

According to Fingas, some components of dispersants willingly consumed by bacteria in food, others - on the contrary - block the ability of the bacteria to attach to a tiny droplets of hydrocarbons. So the main task of dispersants remains the removal of oil from the surface. With this large spot of oil into the smallest suspension, rich compounds that cause cancer, kidney and respiratory tract, poisoning of fish and other aquatic organisms. And this despite the fact that live at a depth of about 60% of living organisms. Consequently, the use of dispersants, precipitating oil on the bottom of the absurd and criminal in every sense. As stressed marine biologist Rick Steiner (Rick Steiner; richard.g.steiner@gmail.com), "any living organism that come into contact with that stuff (especially if it's a mixture of dispersant chemical and oil) is likely runs the risk of dying".

According to first reports EPA, in those places where corexit has been applied, he killed up to 25% of all organisms living at a depth of over 150 m But later a group of academic researchers found that the contamination spread throughout the water column, to a depth of 1370 m, where the dispersed oil killed corals. The fate of coral have repeatedly reported on the National Geographic website. Where they did not die immediately, in a few years could be in trouble with reproduction. According to the biologist Charles Fisher (Charles Fisher; cfisher@psu.edu): "These corals hundreds of years, and to even increase them takes a very long time. In the best case, the survivors of these colonies, may continue to do so, and probably will die completely. Do not undertake to predict how it will turn out".


As mentioned earlier in the review, in September 2010, Professor Samantha joy (Georgia state University, faculty of Oceanology) made repeated dives to the bottom of the Bay on a research vessel. Deposits of oil with patches of dead marine organisms stretched for dozens of kilometers in all directions, and there was no evidence that this oil is falling apart or evaporates; she just sinking to the bottom. "A huge area [oil precipitation] all leads us to the view that it is the oil from the oil spill because it everywhere," said S. joy.

A well-known scientist from the University of South Florida Professor David Hollander (David Hollander; davidh@marine.usf.edu) reported that from August 2010 to January 2011, the thickness of the deposits of oil near the scene of the accident has increased five times. He also stressed that "the presence of oil on the seabed with time has not diminished; these deposits is very extensive and stretch over enormous distances from the wellhead".

Comparing the characteristics and properties with information on the impact of corexit on "proving grounds" like BP Alaska (after which killed almost all the liquidators and disappeared fish) with long and massive injection of this dispersant chemical in the water column and spray air (and the hero of the catastrophe, refused to obey the demand of the us authorities in a one-day deadline to find less dangerous dispersant and 3 days to go to use it), can be seen in these actions, the explicit intent. Because of the dozens more effective and less toxic (or safe) means of splitting and recovery was used the most destructive and "long-playing".

And in addition to this, allegedly to combat oil pollution were thrown artificially created bacteria that eat hydrocarbons (including at low temperatures and high pressure). And not the fact that bacteria decompose the oil with the speed reported by scientists working on grants BP. And not the fact that they were released in the Gulf to combat oil pollution. It is not excluded that the operation "gushing deep-well" was a cover for massive pumping waters of the Gulf of artificial bacterial and chemical components necessary for their active growth...

Looked like the Gulf coast this spring, you can see in a series of video reports from Denis Radnor (April 2012), and eloquent video dedicated to the 2nd anniversary of the disaster and displays a wide range of mutations, illness and dying organisms on the coast of Alabama.

Markus Hettel (Markus Huettel; mhuettel@fsu.edu), an ecologist benthic flora and fauna from Florida state University spoke about weathered oil.
"These oil carpets likely be covered with sand and bottom sediments, and then naked in the conditions of a storm, so that they would be subjected to destruction and removal ashore. And then the sand and the waves will grind and crush them. Many of oil clots come to the beaches of the kind of "pockets", [because] under water can be deflections or basin in which oil can accumulate".

Thus, the Gulf of Mexico poisoned seriously and for a long time. At least for decades. What we can add to this? Except that the puzzle pieces and facts for thought, quietly scattered in the General flow of news.

Cuba discovered a new strain of cholera. Epidemic (85 cases at the beginning of July). Haiti is still reeling from a cholera epidemic (also previously unknown pathogen strains detected in 2010; the number of victims exceeded Cand 7000). In freshwater lakes and marine waters of the Gulf on the South of the USA found new strains of E. Coli bacteria. In the North the U.S. unexpectedly rose" bubonic plague. There appeared genetically updated version of the "Spanish flu", although now it is described as a combination of avian and swine influenza (article called "Swine it's the flu or bird, and in that and in other case we are waiting for a pandemic"). Up to full-fledged status of WMD she has only three mutations.

And, because neither local nor Federal authorities are unwilling or unable to do anything for the salvation of the population from hand to hand from April 2012 attend these leaflets explaining chemical and bacteriological the dangers that await visitors once popular American beaches and made calls to call poisoners children, liquidators and inhabitants of the coast. Complete this part of the quote from a note about what's happening in the Gulf of Mexico large-scale biological disaster. "Like many others, I am afraid, we are witnessing the end of life and heritage of thousands of people, whose life is in danger". But those who poisoned in the Gulf with the 2010-th year - the next part.
Com-Eva: 0 Author: admin
You are reading news Намеренный запрет на экологически чистые технологии if You liked the article Намеренный запрет на экологически чистые технологии, prokomentiruet her.
an html link to the article
BB-link to the article
Direct link to the publication

Add comment