New Pensacola Beach Sign: Swim at your own Risk?

July 7th, 2010. By LucyC

If you’re on the Gulf coast and thinking of going down to the beach to get away from the heat—a heads up. An interesting piece in the Christian Science Monitor last week tells of illness reported by people who visited Pensacola beach in Florida two days after it had been covered in oil from the BP oil spill.

On June 23^rd, thick crude oil washed ashore on what was a pristine beach very—popular among visitors and locals alike. Who hasn’t heard of Pensacola? (For all the right reasons). Consequently, federal health officials closed the beach and wanted it to remain closed. However, two days later local officials reopened it. No doubt, the decision was in part due to economic pressures being felt by local business. Beaches bring people, and people bring money. 

Reportedly, there were no visible signs of oil on the beach when it was reopened. But let’s bear in mind that we are also talking about petrochemicals, toxins, that are being used to disperse the thick black oil, and, as some reports state, send it to the ocean floor where it literally suffocates the seabed. 

Last week health officials in Escambia County, FL, including Pensacola, said they had reports from some 400 people who claimed they felt sick after visiting the beach and swimming in the Gulf. The illnesses reported included sore eyes, respiratory problems, skin irritation and nausea. These symptoms echo those reported by the Louisiana Health Department which knows of 108 cleanup workers who have become ill from working on the oil spill.

Apparently the University of West Florida has done some water testing in the area which revealed small amounts of petrochemicals in the water near Pensacola Beach. “There are molecules dissolved in the water and you can’t see them,” Dick Snyder, a biologist at the University of West Florida, is quoted in the Christian Science Monitor. “We don’t know how much of that there is, but we suspect there’s a lot.” Notably, beaches either side of Pensacola that are federally managed have remained closed to swimmers. 

What’s actually being done about any possible adverse health effects related to the BP oil spill remains in question. To make matters worse, the effects of petroleum dissolved in the water remain unknown. Part of the problem is that the water safety tests take three days to complete and, in practice, are useless, because of the movement of the oil slick. So the authorities are relying on life guards to spot the oil along an eight mile stretch of sand at Pensacola. 

So it seems that not only do we lack the technology to clean up after ourselves, but also an understanding of the health effects of the stuff we’re using for so called ‘clean up’. 

The only thing we could have ensured was done to reduce the likelihood of a disaster like this one—the one thing that BP should have done as a responsible corporation governed by ethical business people—(a utopian message that the PR flacks for BP are working hard to convince you of right now) was to drill a safety well first. And while you could say hindsight is always 20/20—the counter to that is—this is hardly the first time economics have won out over safety—whether you’re a hugely profitable international petrochemical company or a struggling beach community.

Tags: BP, BP Oil Spill, Pensacola

This was posted on Wednesday, July 7th, 2010 at 1:32 pm and is filed under Environment . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.