CNN "Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees" - Transcript

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

ROBERTS: You were really concerned about this report that it was released too early before it had been peer-reviewed?

REP. EDWARD MARKEY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: My concern is that -- that, while this report was released last week, we have yet to really see the backup work, the homework that was attached to it. And now it will be peer-reviewed.

My view is that the -- the algorithms, the assumptions should be released right now...

ROBERTS: Right.

MARKEY: ... so that independent scientists can do an evaluation as to whether or not they believe that the assumptions that were made by NOAA and the other agencies were, in fact, valid.

ROBERTS: There's a couple of other studies out there, of course the one from the University of South Florida that we talked about earlier this week that found there are droplets of oil, dispersed oil, and dispersant widely spread throughout the De Soto Canyon.

And then there's another new one that has just come out from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution -- it's actually being published tomorrow in the "Science" journal -- found a huge plume of oil beneath the surface at a depth of about 3,600 feet, 20 miles long, a mile wide, 600 feet deep in -- some 600 feet thick in some places, with the belief that that's toxic to marine life, another -- another troubling development here. MARKEY: Well, what Woods Hole Oceanographic has found is that they there were underwater plumes that were created after this spill began.

And, again, as you point out, they were 20 miles long, a couple of miles wide, very, very large. In addition, what Woods Hole also found was that, contrary to what the federal government was saying, which is that the water -- that is, the oil was dispersing relatively quickly, they found that the oil was, in fact, dispersing relatively slowly.

ROBERTS: Yes.

MARKEY: And, so, there's a big difference now.

And the Woods Hole study has been peer-reviewed. So, that's why I think it is important for there to be a public dissemination of the assumptions of the federal government, so that the independent scientists can do, in real time, that peer review work.

ROBERTS: The fact that the Woods Hole study was peer-reviewed means that the data is actually older than perhaps some other data. The readings were taken back in June.

But the chief scientist on the project, Dr. Richard Camilli, said, given the amount of oil that we have out there and the slow rate at which it's degrading, this oil could be with us for some time.

What are your concerns about that?

MARKEY: I think that we need to ensure that there is a cop on the beat. We have to make sure that people don't, basically, allow themselves to be lulled to sleep by the ads by BP on every television station.

There is still a massive environmental catastrophe taking place. Yes, perhaps on the surface, the oil has stopped. But there is internal bleeding in the Gulf of Mexico.

This toxic combination of dispersants and oil is still there for a large part of the Gulf. We have to make sure that the work is done.

ROBERTS: Well, we know, Mr. Chairman, that you are committed to following until to the end, as are we here at CNN, even if it takes years.

Congressman Ed Markey, thanks so much for joining us tonight. Really appreciate it.

MARKEY: Thank you. Thanks for having me on.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source