In the past days our company was mentioned in the media in respect to the detection of dioxin in animal feed in Germany (For more information you find a summary of the facts below). Finally it turned out that there has been an erroneous use of our technical grade fatty acids by a feed producer with no legal or commercial consequences for Petrotec apart from increased scrutiny by authorities. Petrotec has acted according to the law and has applied appropriate commercial practices.
We regret that another company seems to have misused our product. In this context we would like to point out that Petrotec is very conscious of its responsibility for its products and thus has always aligned its quality management accordingly. In all contracts, delivery notes and invoices we have always clearly declared that our fatty acids and other byproducts from used cooking oil are for technical use only and not for the food and animal feed industry.
If you have any questions or concerns, please don’t hesitate to contact us!
Thank you and best regards,
Michael Fiedler-Panajotopoulos
_____________________________________________________________
Facts:
· Northern German feed producer Harles & Jentzsch admit on Tuesday morning 4th January that they have thoughtlessly mixed
technical fatty acids into animal feed, after on Monday 3rd January they claimed to have received dioxin-contaminated fatty acids. from Petrotec’s plant in Emden via Olivet, a Dutch trader. · Olivet, a Petrotec customer, issues a press release on the same day
stating that the Dutch food safety authority NWA, confirmed: the fatty acids “from Petrotec (and marketed by Olivet) were earmarked for ‘technical purposes’ andwere notmeant to be used for animal feed”.
· On Tuesday 4th January Petrotec has been visited by local authorities both in Emden and Oeding disclosing its production process
and all relevant commercial documents: the officials confirmed that the statements “not for food or feed purposes” and “for technical use” were clearly written respectively on all contracts, invoices and delivery notes.
· Based on scientific insight, it is technically not possible for dioxin to be generated within our entire production process.
The diamond wire saw that was supposed to cut off the mile-long riser from the LMRP (Lower Marine Riser Package) has stuck in the riser this will create another frustrating delay in an attempt to slow down the oil leak.
Our latest sources show that Mr. James Cameron, the director of the Titanic movie and Abyss, Avatar amongst others, was on scene and discussing with a team of top relief officials onto the issues surrounding robotic management due to his extensive experience in this field, from the Titanic movie.
Cutting the riser of the LMRP
Insider sources told us that the environmental office of the whitehouse asked James Cameron to step up to this blockbuster disaster and it seems that it is highly likely that he accepted the offer in some manner however, an official explanation onto what James Cameron role will be is still to be announced.
BP is to remove the blow-out preventer directly above the well on the sea bed at 5000 feet depth to connect a containment cap that is currently on-site. BP is expecting to take 3 days to finish the procedure.
Undersea collection system
BP said that the method has never been attempted at these depth, therefore the two relief wells are being drilled simultaneously with the containment cap.
In this situation, the containment cap on to the lower marine riser package (LMRP) is only a temporarily fix due to the oil being siphoned into a mother ship above. Hence the two relief wells that are being drilled at a 90 degree angle on the right and left side of the well will be attempting to intersect with the pipe under the LMRP to intercept it and shut it off are the permanent fix to the problem.
The top kill effort of the well failed and now they are trying the junkshot option.However with low success probability either.
The top kill method consists of a mud and cement mixture being forced down the broken well in an effort to push the oil back and eventually stoping the flow of oil by means of drying/setting. It has a 60- to 70-percent chance of working, as the method has never been attempted at such depths. However, the latest reports has shown that this method has yet failed. The next attempt at Junkshot will actually be more difficult due to the mud blocking the junk shot particles from entering deep into the well, which essentially means that the Top Kill severed the Junk Shot probability.
The Top Kill failed because the oil basicly liquified the mud as such that it was seeping out of the well piping leaks.
The leak started more than a month ago, and the Gulf region has been declared a federal disaster — more than 20-percent of fisheries have been shut down.
WASHINGTON
– Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a directive requiring BP to identify and use a less toxic and more effective dispersant from the list of EPA authorized dispersants. Dispersants are a chemical used to break up oil into small droplets so that they are more easily degraded.
Currents are changing amid BP use of stringent chemicals
The directive requires BP to identify a less toxic alternative – to be used both on the surface and under the water at the source of the oil leak – within 24 hours and to begin using the less toxic dispersant within 72 hours of submitting the alternative.
If BP is unable to identify available alternative dispersant products, BP must provide the Coast Guard and EPA with a detailed description of the alternative dispersants investigated, and the reason they believe those products did not meet the required standards.
EPA’s directive to BP can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html
While the dispersant BP has been using is on the agency’s approved list, BP is using this dispersant in unprecedented volumes and, last week, began using it underwater at the source of the leak – a procedure that has never been tried before. Because of its use in unprecedented volumes and because much is unknown about the underwater use of dispersants, EPA wants to ensure BP is using the least toxic product authorized for use. We reserve the right to discontinue the use of this dispersant method if any negative impacts on the environment outweigh the benefits.
On May 15, EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard authorized BP to use dispersants underwater at the source of the Deepwater Horizon leak. As the dispersant is used underwater, BP is required to do constant, scientifically rigorous monitoring so EPA scientists may determine the dispersant’s effectiveness and impact on the environment, water and air quality, and human health. EPA is posting the information BP collects during the monitoring to ensure the public has access to this data.
We are currently monitoring the oil spill situation 24 hours a day and updating this story immediately when new news is posted. Please comment with new news or send news tips to tip@forsake.com
BP trying to spew oil into supposed containment dome
