Today, I attended a teleconference with the Department of the Interior, BP and the US Coastguard.

I went into the conference with mixed emotions because I was hoping that the new riser insertion tool process would be successful and confused as to why I have not heard ANY news about it today.

After a comment of how there was only 25 minutes allowed for this teleconference due to time constraints, there was at least 15 minutes of general comments that anyone who was even remotely aware of the situation could have read on my blog.

BP has been hammered for the past two days as to why they are catering to Corexit alone and not allowing other alternative sources of *already approved EPA dispersants* who have been tested to be “less toxic” to be ordered.

It was said several times that “logistics” is a big factor. That is, the company closest to them, who has been pre-approved by the EPA, with the most amount of  dispersant on hand was the main determent in their selection process. The second determent was which dispersant they felt comfortable using in “large quantities”.

Allow me to translate.  BP and the Govt are catering to Corexit because they have used them for years and not even giving consideration to already approved EPA companies who can get the most dispersant to them with the lowest toxicity rate.

Noticing the uncomfortable and unsettling silence in the room, Suttles was quick to mention that there is a “new alternative”, Sea (C) Wrap 4, that is being looked at. That’s it. Not a lick of information further.

Funny how Sea Wrap can also be written like C-rap, and read as CRAP, which is exactly what BP is trying to feed us.

Another question was taken and clarification was asked about why the riser insertion tool that was attempted yesterday failed.

After much hemming and hawing, Suttles stated that as BP attempted to connect the drill pipe to insert the riser insertion tool, the frame bent so they had to pull the frame and tool back to the surface in order to re orientate the frame.

When asked if it was due to the pressure or temperature of the water at 5000 feet was the cause of the bending of the frame, Suttles replied, “No, that this was purely a mechanical failure, the insertion tool is back on the seabed and will attempt to connect tonight “.

Another call was taken asking for elaboration on the “mechanical failure”;

“As you can imagine, it is rather difficult mechanical act of taking a 5k foot long string and connect it into pipe.  Once we insert the tool into the pipe,  we will attempt to exclude the water so that we wont have the hydrate problems.

[chirp,chirp- chirp, chirp]

Then the question and answer session was over.

In conclusion, he mentions that “all information will be up at”.

Based on my experience with that website, Im not holding my breath for answers.

As information comes available for the REAL reason for the mechanical failure and elaboration on the new dispersant, Sea Wrap 4, I will be updating my blog with the utmost speed and dedication.

Please check back for frequent updates as this is one of my missions in life to discover what is REALLY going on so that we dont make the same mistakes in the future. Our children’s future depends on it.

Copyright © 2010 ClearWater Perspective.  All rights reserved.