Gulf oil spill dispersant
in [Technical]
|
Prev: $50,000 for KILLING FBI, CIA, NSA and NIS DIRECTORS
Next: IEC 60095-2 Lead-acid starter batteries
From: M.A. Stewart on 27 May 2010 19:37 ********************************************* 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.
From: chuckcar on 27 May 2010 21:06 cf005(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA (M.A. Stewart) wrote in news:htmvmu$iuc$1(a)theodyn.ncf.ca: > > ********************************************* > > 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). > 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? -- (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
From: cuhulin on 27 May 2010 21:56 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
From: cuhulin on 28 May 2010 00:14 Toxic oil rains? http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1374.htm cuhulin
From: cuhulin on 28 May 2010 16:32
Prominent Oil Industry Insider.There's Another Oil Leak, Much Bigger, 5 to 6 Miles Away. http://www.philstockworld.com/tag/leak cuhulin |