WWF-Canada

245 Eglinton Ave. East

Suite 410
Toronto, ON
Canada M4P 3J1

Tel: (416) 489-8800

Toll-free: 1-800-26-PANDA
(1-800-267-2632)
ca-panda@wwfcanada.org
wwf.ca

Honourable Leona Aglukkaq

c/o Dr. Carl Brown
Manager
Emergencies Science and Technology Section
Science and Technology Branch
Environment Canada
335 River Road
Ottawa, Ontario
K1V 1C7
Email: ESTD.INFO@ec.gc.ca
July 31, 2015

Dear Minister Algukkaq

Re: Proposed Regulation Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act S 14.2 Listing Corexit 9500A and 9580A
The World Wildlife Fund Canada (WWF-Canada) is against the approval of Corexit 9500A as a spill-treating
agent (STA) exempt from the prohibitions against the introduction of deleterious substances into Canadian
waters. There is ample evidence that broadcasting this product not only does not protect shorelines, seabirds
and marine mammals but can amplify, rather than mitigate, harm to aquatic ecosystems. We therefore urge
you not to exempt this product from the provisions of the environmental laws that prohibit the introduction of
potentially deleterious substances into Canadian waters.

Introduction
The Canada Gazette (Vol 149 No. 27, July 4, 2015) notes that the Energy Safety and Security Act was
introduced earlier in the year to amend three acts governing the regulation of offshore oil and gas production1
to allow for the use of STAs, including chemical dispersants. The introduction of potentially deleterious
substances into Canadian waters is prohibited under several environmental acts.2 Section 14.2 of the Canada
Oil and Gas Operations Act authorizes the Minister of the Environment to make regulations establishing a list

The Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act; the Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic
Accord Implementation Act and the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act.
2
The Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, the Fisheries Act and the ocean disposal provisions of the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

of STAs that may be exempted from such prohibitions. The Energy Safety and Security Act allows for the use
STAs so listed, under certain conditions
.
The Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS)3 presented in the Canada Gazette states the Minister
proposes to list Corexit 9500A, described as a dispersant, and Corexit 9580A, described as a surface-washing
agent, as STAs. The listings would make it legal to broadcast Corexit 9500A to water bodies and apply Corexit
9580A to shorelines in the event of an oil spill. The Gazette invites comment concerning the proposed
Regulation.
WWF is Canada's largest international conservation organization with the active support of more than 150,000
Canadians. We connect the power of a strong global network to on-the-ground conservation efforts across
Canada, with offices in Vancouver, Prince Rupert, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Halifax, St. John's, Iqaluit and
Inuvik. Our Mission: To stop the degradation of the planet's natural environment and to build a future in which
humans live in harmony with nature.
The petroleum industry has been an important source of economic development in this country.
Unfortunately, its activities routinely damage ecosystems,4 as demonstrated by the just-discovered Nexen spill
in Alberta.5 Our greatest concerns with the activities of this industry are the ecological risks associated with
offshore oil development and marine shipments of petroleum products. We have all witnessed the
unacceptably high cost of the industrys failures to manage these risks. The consequences of incidents such as
the Exxon Valdez and BP Deepwater Horizon disasters are grave, widespread and long-lasting. These incidents
inflict terrible damage to ecosystems and to the wellbeing of communities.
The application of chemical dispersants is a controversial means to respond to an oil spill and for good reason.
Proponents of projects that by their very nature create the risk of very large oil spills seek regulatory approval
for their activities on the basis that they can deploy dispersants to treat such spills on a grand scale. Yet,
scientific evidence has accumulated that the consequences of this treatment include unacceptable
toxicological and ecological damage.6 It is our conclusion that the treatment is worse than the disease it is
meant to cure.

Comments re the Proposed Listings

WWF-Canada is not able to comment at the present time on the proposed listing of the surface-washing agent
Corexit 9580A. While there is evidence of potential health effects of Corexit 9580A,7 there is insufficient
evidence to evaluate the environmental toxicology.

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2015/2015-07-04/html/reg1-eng.php

The Alberta Energy Regulator, for example, has a database of releases after 2013:
http://www1.aer.ca/compliancedashboard/incidents.html; earlier releases are listed in the Energy Resources
Conservation Boards spill database, which was described inglobalnews.ca/news/571494/introduction-37-years-of-oilspills-in-alberta/
5
globalnews.ca/tag/crude-awakening/
6
See for example references cited in footnotes 16, 17, 20, 21, and 23.
7
Wang, h, S. Yongli, D. Major, Z Yang, 2012, Lung epithelial cell death induced by oil-dispersant mixtures
Toxicology in Vitro 26 (2012) 746751; Fingas, M. 2013, Surface-washing agents: an update, 2013, prepared for
PWSRCAC.

We have grave concerns with the proposed listing of the dispersant Corexit 9500A. Our concerns with the
listing of Corexit 9500A are:
1. Dispersants generally, and Corexit 9500A in particular, fail to deliver what they are supposed to
achieve. They fail to shield shorelines, seabirds and marine mammals from oil spill damage (see The
Evidence Against Corexit 9500A Effectiveness below);
2. The toxicological and ecological effects of Corexit 9500A-dispersed oil are commonly worse than the
oil spill damage itself (see The Evidence Against Corexit 9500A Toxicity below);

The Evidence Against Corexit 9500A

The environmental rationale for attempting to chemically disperse spilled oil is that removing the oil from the
water surface and driving it into the water column as suspended droplets, could prevent damage to shorelines,
seabirds and marine mammals. The practical problem with this idea is that it can only work if a very high
fraction of the oil can be driven into the water column. Otherwise, enough oil will remain on the surface to
contaminate shorelines in spite of the dispersant application. It should also be noted that there are tradeoffs
involved in moving oil from the surface to the water column.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness of a dispersant is defined as the fraction of oil that is moved into the water column
compared to the fraction that remains on the surface. The RIAS states that Corexit 9500A was shown to be
highly effective in laboratory swirl flask and baffled flask tests. Such laboratory tests demonstrate that Corexit
9500A can disperse oil under controlled conditions.
The RIAS goes on to say that laboratory test results cannot be considered an absolute measure of
performance at sea where spill and sea conditions will vary; they must be supplemented with evidence from
actual oil spill responses. In fact, laboratory tests are not evidence of what happens in the field, as was
demonstrated in the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster.8 Yet the RIAS presents no evidence for the effectiveness
of Corexit 9500A under field conditions.
In fact, the evidence on this point shows that not enough oil can be removed from the surface in practice to
achieve the desired protection of shorelines. Field estimates of the effectiveness of dispersant applications
show that only 10 to 40% is driven into the water column,9 which leaves most of the oil on the surface where it
can contaminate shorelines. Moreover, some fraction of the oil that is initially suspended in the water column
can resurface,10 posing a delayed and displaced threat to shorelines.

Uncontrolled field conditions are unlike controlled laboratory conditions. For example: By April 25, responders had
started to realize that the estimated spill volume of 1,000 barrels per day might be inaccurate. Dispersants applied to
break up the surface slick were not having the anticipated effect. Either the dispersants were inexplicably not working, or
the amount of oil was greater than previously suspected. Deep Water: The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore
Drilling, final report of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, 2011, p 133.
9
Committee on Understanding Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects National Research Council of the National
Academies) 2006. Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
10
Fingas, M. 2013. MACONDO well blowout mass balance: a chemical view. Proceedings of the Thirty-Sixth Arctic and
Marine Oil Spill Program Technical Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, pp 75-102.

According the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the unprecedented broadcast of
seven million litres of Corexit 9500A chemically dispersed just 8% of the oil from the Deepwater Horizon
blowout. Natural (physical) dispersion accounted for a further 16%.11 This was not enough to prevent the oiling
of 1,773 km of shoreline in the Gulf of Mexico.12
Corexit 9500As demonstrated effectiveness at dispersing oil in the laboratory does not translate to
effectiveness in combatting real oil spills for many reasons. These include the formidable logistic difficulties of
applying a suitable quantity of dispersant where and when it can be effective. Oil released to the environment
weathers and becomes more difficult to disperse. Dispersal effectiveness is also known to be limited by
temperature, salinity, the degree of mixing energy in the environment and, of course the type of oil. Diluted
bitumen is particularly immune to dispersant treatment because it weathers very quickly as the condensate
diluent evaporates. Cold Lake Winter Blend cannot be dispersed after one day of weathering, even in the
laboratory.13
The notion that dispersants can protect seabirds and marine mammals remains questionable. Even a
thoroughly effective chemical dispersal of oil, if it could be achieved for a limited tactical application, would
not protect seabirds and marine mammals from encountering the dispersed oil when they dive into the water
column to feed. As the evidence above shows, the more likely result is that a dispersant application will drive
some oil into the water column, while much of it remains on the surface. Seabirds and marine mammals will
then encounter oil and chemically-dispersed oil on the surface and underwater. Although more research is
required, the surfactants and solvents in dispersant formulations can damage the critical thermal insulation
and water-repellency properties of feathers, potentially leading to hypothermia.14
Summarizing the evidence with respect to Corexit 9500A: The demonstrated effectiveness of Corexit 9500A in
dispersing oil under controlled laboratory conditions does not make the product effective at preventing oil spill
damage to shorelines, seabirds and mammals
Toxicity
The Canada Gazette states that Corexit 9500A was determined to be practically non-toxic and that Corexit
9580 was determined to be non-toxic.15 These descriptions, which are based on laboratory tests of acute
aquatic toxicity of rainbow trout, Daphnia and luminescent bacteria create the impression that little harm will
be done to aquatic organisms if these materials are released into the environment. The RIAS cautions that
the reference methods traditionally used to determine the deleteriousness of the product may not be best
11

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2015. Deepwater Horizon Oil Budget.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100804_oil.html
12

Michel, J., Owens, E. H., Zengel, S., Graham, A., Nixon, Z., Allard, T., Taylor, E. (2013). Extent and Degree of Shoreline
Oiling: Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, Gulf of Mexico, USA. PLoS ONE, 8(6), e65087. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065087
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3680451/
13

OBrien, W. 2013 . A study of the fate and behavior of diluted bitumen oils on marine waters. Polaris Applied Science,
Western Canada Marine Response Corporation, Trans Mountain application V8C_TR_S&_01.
14
Committee on Understanding Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects. 2006. National Academies Press. 378 pp.
15
These descriptions refer to acute aquatic toxicity LC50 values of > 100 1000 and >1000 mg/L respectively. Joint Group
of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of the Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP), The Revised GESAMP Hazard
Evaluation Procedure for Chemical Substances Carried by Ships, Reports and Studies No. 64, International Maritime
Organization, London, 2002.
http://www.gesamp.org/data/gesamp/files/media/Publications/Reports_and_studies_64/gallery_1363/object_1400_larg
e.pdf

suited to the marine context and notes that Environment Canada is taking steps to evaluate the
applicability of alternative reference methods using relevant Canadian marine species This
acknowledgement that the toxicity testing mentioned in the RIAS may not be apply to species in the marine
environment should warn the Minister against relying too much on those results. Scientists know that species
vary in their susceptibility to toxic chemicals. Only recently, for example, has it been learned that Corexit
9500A is highly toxic to marine microzooplankton16 a critical trophic layer in marine food webs. A recent
study also shows that Corexit 9500A is more toxic to cold-water corals than oil.17
Of course, no one intends to release these chemicals into the environment except in response to an oil spill.
The measure of toxicity that matters in that context is the ratio of the toxicity of chemically-dispersed oil vs
physically-dispersed oil. The US EPA, in 2010, concluded that oil dispersed with Corexit 9500A was neither
more nor less toxic compared with alternative dispersants and that the dispersed oil was generally not more
toxic than the oil itself.18 Yet subsequent studies on a wide variety of species have concluded that chemically
dispersed oil is somewhat (1.5 4 times) to substantially (100- 300 times) more toxic than physically-dispersed
oil.19 The greater acute toxicity may be due to the elevation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).20
Experimental studies have demonstrated that Corexit 9500A-dispersed oil dramatically elevates the exposure
of fish to PAHs, detected as CYP1A induction (6x 1,100x).21
The concentration of chemically-dispersed oil in the water column of an effective dispersion is also likely to be
ten to 100 times higher than it would be for physically-dispersed oil.22 Hence, the use of dispersants exposes
organisms in the water column to higher toxicities (1.5 300 x) and higher concentrations (10 100x).
Corexit 9500A-dispersed oil in the Gulf of Mexico produced another very detrimental and unexpected impact.
The dispersed oil precipitated from the water column to smother the benthos, covering an area of 3200 km 2.23
The potential ecological consequences of the physical and toxicological properties of Corexit 9500A-dispersed
oil are far from fully understood. What is clear, however, is that broadcasting Corexit 9500A can compound
the ecological damage of oil spills. The impacts to plankton communities, which are the foundation of marine
food webs and the impacts to the seabed are very detrimental.

16

Almeda, R, Hyatt, C, and E.J. Buskey, 2014, Toxicity of the dispersant Corexit 9500A and crude oil to marine
microzooplankton, Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 106; 76-85.
17
Danielle M. DeLeo, Dannise V. Ruiz-Ramos, Iliana B. Baums, Erik E. Cordes. 2015, Response of deep-water corals to oil
and chemical dispersant exposure. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography DOI:
10.1016/j.dsr2.2015.02.028
18
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants-testing.html
19
Fingas, M. 2014. A review of the literature related to oil spill dispersants 2011-2014. Review conducted on behalf of the
Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Council, Anchorage, Alaska. 34 pp.
20
e.g. Gardiner,W.W., J. Q. Word, J. D. Word, R. A. Perkins, K. M. McFarlin, B.W. Hester, L. S. Word, and C. M. RAY, 2013.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 32, No. 10, pp. 22842300.
21

Shahunthala D., Ramachandran, Peter V. Hodson, Colin W. Khan, Ken Lee. 2004. Oil dispersant increases PAH uptake by
fish exposed to crude oil. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 59: 300-308.
22
Fingas, M. 2014. op. cit.
23

Valentine, D., G. Burch Fisher, S. Bagby, R. Nelson, C. Reddy, S. Sylva, M. Woo. 2014 Fallout plume of submerged oil
from Deepwater Horizon. PNAS 111: 1590615911 www.pnas.org/content/111/45/15906.full

Conclusion
The proposed listing of Corexit 9500A as an STA exempt from the prohibitions against the introduction of
deleterious substances into Canadian waters is not supportable given ample evidence that broadcasting this
product does not protect shorelines, seabirds and marine mammals while amplifying, rather than mitigating,
harm to aquatic ecosystems. We therefore urge you not to exempt this product from the provisions of the
environmental laws that prohibit the introduction of potentially deleterious substances into Canadian waters.

Sincerely,
(Original Signed)

David Miller, President and CEO