Gulf oil spill dispersant

*********************************************

Posted by: tomemerald | 05/6/10 | 12:06 pm | to wired.com

The supposedly proprietary composition of the dispersant Corexit 9500 is a joke being played on journalists. Its chemical composition was disclosed years ago in toxicity studies and patent and regulatory filings, all in the public domain and all readily available on the internet.

First note Corexit 9500 does not contain 2-butoxyl ethanol, unlike its predecessor Corexit 9527 (which caused adverse health effects in Exxon Valdez responders). The solvent was replaced in Corexit 9500 by propylene glycol and a mixture of food-grade(!) aliphatic hydrocarbons called Norpar 13 (n-alkanes ranging from nonane to hexadecane according to ExxonMobil rsearchers Varadaraj et al. in 1995).

Second, the supposedly secret sulfonic acid salt was disclosed in the 2001 patent filing US 6168702. The basic chemicaly formula is that of a sulfonic and carboxylic double quaternary amine salt but a range of substituents makes the overall composition quite variable. The patent filing shows a picture of the chemical which conveys its chemical makeup.

Third, Corexit 9500 contains two non-ionic surfactants, Tween 80 (eicosethoxy sorbitan monooleate) and the somewhat similar Span 80 (ethoxylated sorbitan mono- and trioleates).

Relatively little toxity testing has been done with either version of Corexit. Oil is only dispersed from the surface into the greater volume of undersea water and neither goes away in the short term. Better or worse, nobody can really say for sure.

************************************************

Propylene glycol is an ingredient in food colouring and liquid vanilla flavoring. It is also used in inkjet printer ink. Anyone for vanilla cupcakes with thick green icing? Yum yum.

Reply to
M.A. Stewart
Loading thread data ...

snipped-for-privacy@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (M.A. Stewart) wrote in news:htmvmu$iuc$ snipped-for-privacy@theodyn.ncf.ca:

What exactly is the problem with using ordinary run of the mill organic soap here? The whole point is to have something which bonds with the oil and stays on the surface of the water to be scooped up. A bit late for that as it's already washing ashore, but that's the point isn't it?

Reply to
chuckcar

A few days ago, I read somewhere they could have used underwater robots and welded some plates on those leaking pipes and stopped the leaking in eight hours. cuhulin

Reply to
cuhulin

Toxic oil rains?

formatting link
cuhulin

Reply to
cuhulin

snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@storefull-3173.bay.webtv.net:

There's all kinds of things they could have done to stop it IMHO. The Russians have closed such wells with explosions. They used nukes, but enough TNT would do it too. Although the shockwave would probably kill all animal life in the ocean for hundreds of miles if not more.

Reply to
chuckcar

Prominent Oil Industry Insider.There's Another Oil Leak, Much Bigger, 5 to 6 Miles Away.

formatting link
cuhulin

Reply to
cuhulin

There are plenty of surfactants which can disperse an oil spill without being toxic. Ordinary soap is not very effective in this regard, but IS essentially of low toxicity and biodegradable.

The dispersants are NOT used to bring the oil to the surface..They are used somewhat negatively to reduce the oil sheen from platforms which are discharging levels of oil into the sea AND they are used to try to disperse oil into the seawater so that bacteria can act on the microparticles and metabolize them.

To be approved for use, these surfactant formulations have to be tested by various testing organizations. One of the primary ones was Warren Springs. If done properly, the dispersant AND a goodly portion of the petroleum hydrocarbon will be destroyed by bacterial degradation.

If you just want to "hide" the apparent oil slick, some effective compounds have been used, but they often do not result in cleaning the hydrocarbon from the ocean.

Dont believe everything (anything) you hear news commentators say. These people are ignorant beyond belief, and seem bent upon stirring public sentiment.

What we need now are sound heads, good technology, and a lot of luck..

Reply to
hls

You can hear all sorts of crap, from people who dont know anything about this environment.. Dont lose sleep over it.

Reply to
hls

snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@storefull-3173.bay.webtv.net:

And the amount of oil leaking has all of a sudden multiplied by a factor of 5 - the day the government took over.

Reply to
chuckcar

"hls" wrote in news:ZtGdneK7bdBC1p3RnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

That's not at all relevant the the proesent context.

And removal of all the corruption that led to this mess in the first place.

I just would like *someone* tell me how exactly this soap, as that *is* what we're talking about here, is supposed to help clean up the oil spill. I proposed a viable reason, but I see nothing in your reply with either confirms or negates that it would work.

Reply to
chuckcar

"hls" wrote in news:s8udnYhtI9WVxJ3RnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

I read in the WSJ that about 1% of the crude oil in North American waters is from man's accidents. Some 62% is from natural sources. They didn't specify where the other 37% comes from.

Reply to
Tegger

Then you are a little slow. I have told you the science behind it, and you cant seem to understand. Oil spill dispersants are intended to break the oil into microparticles so that naturally occuring bacteria can attack and metabolize the oil more efficiently.

These bacterial can metabolize oil, and convert it to, among other things, aminoacids which are further biodegradable.

A lot depends upon the temperature of the system, the dispersion of the oil, the bacterial present, the time available, etc.

If you cant understand that, you need to have some remedial education.

Reply to
hls

"hls" wrote in news:RtudnQYES6_39J3RnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

Bacterial decomposition was the primary mechanism by which the Valdez spill was eliminated. The human element was mostly for the TVs.

Reply to
Tegger

"hls" wrote in news:RtudnQYES6_39J3RnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

No, soap bonds to grease and oil and then floats to the surface. The basic nature of soap itself (chemically) would remove any possibility of microscopic life living around it. Just as you couldn't survive in a bath of Javex.

Reply to
chuckcar

Hard to say, Cuhulin. Tar balls seep up from the ocean floor all the time. This is a natural contamination. Some comes from ships which wash tanks and dump offshore. Some comes from runoff from the continent after rains.

The oceans can take a little contamination, but not a lot. In warm waters, bacteria can biodegrade some degree of contamination, but they are easily overcome.

There are ways to mechanically remove oil spills, but this is work intensive, and is not a good solution.

BP, Cameron, Halliburton, MI Swaco and others have some answers to come up with. But, just as we blew up two space shuttles, lose some aircraft every year, and kill a ton of people in traffic accidents, some of this is statistically not unexpected. Some of it may well be carelessness or bad choices of operational procedures, or mechanical failure.

People who want Obama, or the military, or the coast guard,or even another oil company to take over are just foolishs. When you change horses in midstream, you will prolong the plugging of this well, and the cleanup, by months.

Reply to
hls

Chuck, with all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about. "Soap" is sodium stearate, or sodium oleate or similar. Bacterial can degrade this easily in nature.

"Soap", or synthetic surfactants, can form microemulsions, essentially solubilizing hydrocarbons. This is done by the formation of micelles. Bacterial can, and do, attack hydrocarbons (Pseudomonas is one of the common ones) but to do so effectively, they have to have intimate contact, as you would have with a microemulsion.

These have been used onshore to clean up oil pits, leaking gasoline tanks, etc. You have to enrich the effective bacteria in the contaminated area, mix it to allow oxygen to be readily available, and you have to fertilize the bacteria (Miracle Grow will even work). It takes time, but it can work.

It is a complicated subject. There have been some "snake oil" sales campaigns in the past, simply because some companies want to sell a ton of product, and when the poop hits the fan, they are gone.

Been there, seen that.

The news presenters like, unfortunately, Joe Scarbrough, have been raving about "toxic oil dispersants". He should focus on something he really knows about (if we could find an area of expertise for someone that is technically incompetent.)

I am now pessimistic that the top down kill mud strategy will work. It WOULD work if you could get the kill mud where it needs to be.. and that is very difficult if not impossiblein this case.

Reply to
hls

"hls" wrote in news:7aidnTEjiPjHHZ3RnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

No, soap can be lye, javex, or *anything* that is a base when disolved in water. That's why there can be a second type of bleach.

Give me a link to an example where this *has* completely undone an oil spill then. Just one.

I certainly have no solution to the actual problem at the source.

Reply to
APLer

"hls" wrote in news:7aidnTEjiPjHHZ3RnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

Please set your news reader to snip sigs. I posted with the wrong nick again, so am reposting this with the correct one. Apologies again. F1 quali day you see.

No, soap can be lye, javex, or *anything* that is a base when disolved in water. That's why there can be a second type of bleach.

Give me a link to an example where this *has* completely undone an oil spill then. Just one.

I certainly have no solution to the actual problem at the source.

Reply to
chuckcar

You haven't ever washed dishes, have you?

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

Ummm... no. In fact, there are surfactants that aren't even alkaline. Surfactants lower surface tension and make oil and water miscible. That is their job, and that is why soap takes grease off your body in the shower.

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.