bechtelNalco

Nalco Company. "COREXIT® Technology." //Nalco.com//. Nalco, 2011. Web. 24 Feb. 2011. . **  Where does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? ** This page was created by the corporation that produces the dispersant Corexit, Nalco. The work done by this group is a collaboration of scientists, engineers, businessmen, and other corporate personnel. As the maker of the chemical, Nalco should be the leading expert on the effects of the chemical. This corporation does, however, have a large financial investment in the success of the dispersant, so one should use some skepticism when viewing this information. On the other hand, everything that I have seen on the site appears to be true, although maybe not always the whole truth. **  What is the main topic or argument of the text? ** The main argument that Nalco tries to make on this page is that the Corexit dispersant is not harmful to human or environmental health and helps to eliminate the effects of an oil spill. Much of this is currently being debated, but it is good to hear both sides of the argument. **  Describe at least three ways that the main topic or argument is fleshed out. ** The main topic can be fleshed out though reading the information directly on this page, watching the movie near the bottom, or following other links about the topic (left side of browser). **  What three quotes capture the critical import of the text? ** “May cause irritation with prolonged contact.”  “Based on a review of the individual components, utilizing U.S. EPA models, this material is not expected to Bioaccumulate.”  “ FACT: Corexit is approved in over 30 countries and we are unaware of a single country that has ‘banned’ Corexit. The UK does not allow the use of Corexit for rocky shoreline application because it results in snails and other crustaceans not sticking to rocks. Corexit was not designed for rocky coast application and is only applied in the United States at least 3 miles off shore. However, Corexit 9500 did pass the UK test for off-shore use (what it was designed for) and existing stock use is allowed for that intended application with notification to appropriate authorities.” **  Explain how the argument and evidence in the text supports your research focus. ** <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">This text does not provide a lot of information for me to use in my project, but it has some important information to be considered. My primary use for this source is to provide the MSDS for the chemical Corexit which can be found at []. This document provides all of the dangerous information on the effects of the substance. The biggest problem with document is that many of the suggestions that are made look like this: “Based on our hazard characterization, the potential environmental hazard is: Moderate. Based on our recommended product application and the product's characteristics, the potential environmental exposure is: Low.” This is completely useless because it says nothing about what their hazard characterization is or how it compares to that of other groups. It is also unfortunate that nowhere in the MSDS does it mention the effects of oil dispersant mixture, which is more likely to be found in the environment than the chemical itself. The section “Inaccuracy vs. Fact About Corexit Products is also very interesting. ** <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> List at least two details or references from the text that will be useful to other members of your research group. **  The MSDS sheet has information about the __human__ and __wildlife__ hazards of the dispersant. There is also other information relevant to how the chemical was used that can be important background on the effects of the spill.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Full citation. **