Anotation+3

** 2. Where does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? **  I was un able to find any useful information. ** 3. What is the main topic or argument of the text? **  The main effects of the dispersant are not known yet. People form the EPA and BP believe that it was the correct thing to do for the situation. However this is not president for the use of the dispersant under the surface of the ocean. ** 4. Describe at least three ways that the main topic or argument is fleshed out. **  There are several EPA representatives and scientists interviewed who all agree that there was very little research on the topic of the dispersants long term effects. The EPA believed that the dispersants were the best thing at the time, however they still did not know the true effect of such large scale use. They were using this as a test. President Obama said they would make all decisions based on science, when there was no real science to back up the use of the dispersants. ** 5. What three quotes capture the critical import of the text? **  Richard Denison, a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, "big tradeoffs are being made between trying to spare the coastlines and organisms and animals that live there, versus the much-harder-to-study effects of taking the same amount of oil and turning it into large underwater plumes that are going to be migrating around for years, perhaps, making it more bio-available to the water column." Lisa Jackson, EPA administrator, acknowledges that, "none of the testing that was done prior to this incident was what I'd call extensive and geared toward the long-term effects or effects in the sub-sea." Richard Fredricks, president of Maritime Solutions in New York, "The hue and cry for almost two months has focused on the toxicity of the dispersants and that issue could have been, not eliminated, but it would have been moderated, if the Coast Guard had put its oar in the water." ** 6. Explain how the argument and evidence in the text supports your research focus. **  It is very difficult to acutely study the long term effects of the dispersant in the water. Also it looks better for BP to have as little oil on the surface as possible. There is less interest in the oil that is at the bottom of the ocean. There is another dispersant, Dispersit. This is an water based alternative to Corexit. It has been shown to be less toxic to humans and wildlife. This was ignored by the Coast Guard, they wished to focus on current technologies to respond to the spill. 100% effective of south Louisiana crude by EPA. [] [] ** 7. List at least two details or references from the text that will be useful to other members of your research group  **
 * 1. **Jonathan Tilove, “Subsea Dispersants the right call, EPA administrator believes”. Nola.com, june 27, 2010