- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Dispersant will only hide true amount of oil....
Posted on 5/14/10 at 10:26 am
Posted on 5/14/10 at 10:26 am
Spending Millions on this crap, sinking oil deeper and who knows how this will affect the underwater ecosystem, wouldnt we rather have access to it on top the water anyway???? 
Posted on 5/14/10 at 10:28 am to 10Percenter
That is one question I would like an answer to as well. The oil is still out there just not on the surface. Seems like it would be a bigger problem suspended in the water column than just on the surface.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 10:30 am to 10Percenter
the only way to get it out the ecosystem is to recover it and that can only be done at the surface. The use of soap will create a much larger long term problem.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 10:33 am to Placebeaux
im getting so sick of this crap 
Posted on 5/14/10 at 10:41 am to 10Percenter
IMHO, dispersant's only benefit is PR related, breaking up the oil to hide the real impact of the spill. As long as there are no black waves breaking on the beaches in Gulf Shores and Panama City, the sleepy average person won't be aware of just how significant the spill was...
Posted on 5/14/10 at 11:12 am to DvlsAdvocat
quote:
IMHO, dispersant's only benefit is PR related, breaking up the oil to hide the real impact of the spill.
This
Posted on 5/14/10 at 11:31 am to DvlsAdvocat
quote:
IMHO, dispersant's only benefit is PR related, breaking up the oil to hide the real impact of the spill. As long as there are no black waves breaking on the beaches in Gulf Shores and Panama City, the sleepy average person won't be aware of just how significant the spill was...
no
the oil is pooled on the surface and concentrated in a relatively small area
if a non-toxic dispersant is used the oil molecules are not pooled any more they are SPREAD OUT (dispersed) amongst the water molecules. when they are less concentrated in one area then the sun and water born bacteria can digest the oil much more efficiently
dilution is the solution for pollution
Posted on 5/14/10 at 11:36 am to supatigah
In reality, the spill would be cleansed naturally by the ocean itself in open water. I understand the pressure to protect the coast and wetlands from the spill but I'm sure there are millions of natural vents on the ocean floor that spew oil directly into the underwater ecosystem. It may temporarily disrupt the local environment but long-term the oceans have the natural ability to cleanse the spill. The vast majority of the Exxon Valdez spill was cleansed naturally by the ocean and surrounding environment. Mops and rags cleaning up the oil at that time had little substantial effect and I suspect the same will be true here even though this dwarfs the Exxon spill in Alaska.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 11:39 am to supatigah
quote:
if a non-toxic dispersant is used
does not compute
Posted on 5/14/10 at 11:53 am to supatigah
find me a non-toxic dispersant then maybe it will compute
Posted on 5/14/10 at 11:56 am to genuineLSUtiger
quote:
It may temporarily disrupt the local environment but long-term the oceans have the natural ability to cleanse the spill.
Yeah, well, long-term is the key here.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 12:21 pm to Decatur
non-toxic dispersants are mainly water soluble surfactants that penetrate the surface area of the spill and cause them to disperse/emulsify into the water phase. once the oil molecules are dispersed into the water phase they become food for micro-organisms. non-toxic dispersants are used primarily in spill response and soil remediation but they can be cut with water and sprayed on an oil spill on a water surface
here is a common one in the industry:
LINK
HazClean™ ESR (Emergency Spill Response & Soil Remediation)
HazClean ESR is the new technologically advanced, environmentally safe, completely biodegradable product developed as a spill response agent for incidental hydrocarbon spills and to aid in natural biological soil remediation.
HazKlean ESR rapidly bonds itself to hydrocarbon particles quickly surpressing the hydrocarbon vapors to reduce the threat of fire or explosion.
HazKlean ESR stimulates the indigenous soil bacteria’s capabilities to attack the hydrocarbon particles without adding excessive amounts of chemicals or bacteria foreign to the soil
here is a common one in the industry:
LINK
HazClean™ ESR (Emergency Spill Response & Soil Remediation)
HazClean ESR is the new technologically advanced, environmentally safe, completely biodegradable product developed as a spill response agent for incidental hydrocarbon spills and to aid in natural biological soil remediation.
HazKlean ESR rapidly bonds itself to hydrocarbon particles quickly surpressing the hydrocarbon vapors to reduce the threat of fire or explosion.
HazKlean ESR stimulates the indigenous soil bacteria’s capabilities to attack the hydrocarbon particles without adding excessive amounts of chemicals or bacteria foreign to the soil
Posted on 5/14/10 at 1:47 pm to 10Percenter
The solution to piluution is dilution.....
Posted on 5/14/10 at 2:41 pm to TigerBandTuba
Dude I am in the chemical business
some of the info in that link is extremely outdated
there have been significant advances in surfactant and cosolvent technologies in the past 5 years
the problem with water based surfactant technologies is they are very effective but expensive
the nalco corexit product is cheap but it is
also toxic. The corexit chemistry is roughly equivalent to the chemical used in the dry cleaning process
some of the info in that link is extremely outdated
there have been significant advances in surfactant and cosolvent technologies in the past 5 years
the problem with water based surfactant technologies is they are very effective but expensive
the nalco corexit product is cheap but it is
also toxic. The corexit chemistry is roughly equivalent to the chemical used in the dry cleaning process
Posted on 5/14/10 at 2:49 pm to supatigah
quote:
the nalco corexit product
It's my understanding that's what they have been using
Would be nice to know if they are using something safer
Posted on 5/14/10 at 2:50 pm to supatigah
well i guess we have no choice but to wait and see what will happen with this untested(on this scale) crap. i still like the hay idea.
Posted on 5/14/10 at 4:05 pm to Decatur
Nalco reported they had 150,000 gallons of available corexit inventory when this started and they have alledgedly depleted their inventory
Posted on 5/15/10 at 7:12 am to supatigah
Latest Satellite Imagery-Writeup
Hi-res version -- direct link
Pic is too large to post here.
The visible slick looks to be about 100 miles long and about 30-60 miles wide based on the pic linked above and its legend/scale.
Hi-res version -- direct link
Pic is too large to post here.
The visible slick looks to be about 100 miles long and about 30-60 miles wide based on the pic linked above and its legend/scale.
Popular
Back to top

4





