Oil Dispersants - A Primer

As oil continues to leak unabated in the gulf, BP and a myriad of federal agencies are working nonstop to mitigate the environmental impacts.  Yesterday, I brought you a particularly bad idea to stop the leak - nuke the well.
 
Today, I thought I would bring myself up to speed on chemistry's actual impact on the crisis, which brings me to oil dispersants.
 
Here is a pretty great overview of oil dispersants from the ITOPF (International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation).  You should read the whole thing, but I am going to excerpt just the "how it works" section:
Natural dispersion of an oil slick occurs when waves and other turbulence at the sea surface cause all or part of the slick to break up into droplets and enter into the water column. The addition of dispersants is intended to accelerate this natural process.

Dispersants have two main components: a surfactant and a solvent. Surfactants molecules are made up of two parts: an oleophilic part (with an attraction to oil) and a hydrophilic part (with an attraction to water). When dispersants are sprayed onto an oil slick, the solvent will transport and distribute the surfactants through the oil slick to the oil/water interface where they arrange themselves so that the oleophilic part of the molecule is in the oil and the hydrophilic part is in the water. This creates a reduction in the surface tension at the oil/water interface and small oil droplets will break away from the oil slick with the help of wave energy. These droplets will be of varying sizes and although the larger ones may rise back to the surface some will remain in suspension and will drift apart and become degraded by naturally occurring bacteria. If dispersion is successful, a characteristic brown plume will spread slowly down from the water surface a few minutes after treatment.

According to CNN, dispersants are being aggressively used in the cleanup:
A federal official monitoring the environmental impact of the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico said Tuesday his agency is closely watching what he called BP's "unique idea" to break up the spill with dispersant chemicals underwater.

In addition to the traditional method of using dispersants on the surface, BP has attempted to inject chemicals near the source of the leak deep underwater. Oil has been gushing out of the seabed since at least April 22, when the Deepwater Horizon sank two days after an explosion and fire.

Charlie Henry, scientific support coordinator with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told reporters Tuesday that the agency is evaluating the pros and cons of the effort.

The highly respected National Research Council visited oil dispersants in a 2005 report entitled, "Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects".  Because the dispersants are being used in such large quantities, this section of the the executive summary is especially relevant:
Oil spill dispersants do not actually reduce the total amount of oil entering the environment. Rather, they change the inherent chemical and physical properties of oil, thereby changing the oil’s transport, fate, and potential effects. Small amounts of spilled oil naturally disperse into the water column, through the action of waves and other environmental processes.
The objective of dispersant use is to enhance the amount of oil that physically mixes into the water column, reducing the potential that a surface slick will contaminate shoreline habitats or come into contact with birds, marine mammals, or other organisms that exist on the water surface or shoreline. Conversely, by promoting dispersion of oil into the water column, dispersants increase the potential exposure of water-column and benthic biota to spilled oil. Dispersant application thus represents a conscious decision to increase the hydrocarbon load (resulting from a spill) on one component of the ecosystem (e.g., the water column) while reducing the load on another (e.g., coastal wetland).
Decisions to use dispersants, therefore, involve trade-offs between decreasing the risk to water surface and shoreline habitats while increasing the potential risk to organisms in the water column and on the seafloor. This trade-off reflects the complex interplay of many variables, including the type of oil spilled, the volume of the spill, sea state and weather, water depth, degree of turbulence (thus mixing and dilution of the oil), and relative abundance and life stages of resident organisms.
 I think that in this situation, in which the leak is so large, it is imperative that we do everything we possibly can to limit the total amount of damage.  If that means passing some damage to all ecosystems instead of the complete destrucion of one, I am all for it.
 
What do you think?
 
 
A giant science experiment - On 5/6/10 at 1:57 PM Unstable Isotope said:
Unstable Isotope's Gravatar I think we're now in the middle of a giant science experiment.  No matter what we do that area is pretty much screwed, I think.
#
Experiment - On 5/7/10 at 1:32 PM Kevin said:
Kevin's Gravatar Isotope, I agree. They are definitely experimenting on the fly. I think the benefits of mitigating as much damage as possible are worth the attempt. The environmental damage from Exxon Valdez is still being felt. I hope that the leak is closed before it gets that bad. I guess I am hoping for the best, but planning for the worst.
#
Reclaiming the spill - On 5/27/10 at 2:42 PM steve paraskevas said:
steve paraskevas's Gravatar Let's keep the oil hydrophobic. It will float at the water surface, instead of being dispersed. Equip tankers with hydro-cyclones. Skim water and oil from the ocean surface and pump it through the hydro-cyclones to separate the two (95%+ separation efficiency at 20 psi pressure drop with 5" diameter h'cyclones, at 70 to 80 gpm capacity per h'cyclone). Store the reclaimed oil in the tankers and return the water to the sea. By using dispersants we change the oil surface charge, rendering it hydrophylic and aloowing it to break-down in order to increase its now hydrophylic surface to better adhere to water. Now the oil follows the water. Currents such as the Golfstream can carry that broken-down oil and its toxicity all over. I think for large size spills reclamation is much more desirable than dispersion.
#
Chemistry of Oil Dispersant - On 8/5/10 at 6:28 AM Don Deresz said:
Don Deresz's Gravatar My troublesome question is, what exactly is the chemical make-up of the solvent component of the dispersant? Certain solvents can be extremely toxic.  I am getting the impression that the solvent used is proprietary information of the production company and I can't find a definitive answer.
#
New article on FDA opinion - On 8/6/10 at 12:58 PM Brad said:
Brad's Gravatar The Washington Post just published an article about FDA and its decision regarding oil dispersants. The article can be found here -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080603185.html?hpid%3Dtopnews
#
/////PLACE THIS CODE AT THE END OF THE PAGE, JUST BEFORE THE CLOSING BODY TAGS body ///////////