gulf oil spill 2
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/8/2019 Gulf Oil Spill 2
1/6
Related articles
Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a
green solution? Part I
Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution?Part II - Like a bird in oilMay 19th, 2010 5:11 pm ET
By Carol Everhart Roper, Philadelphia Science Examiner
In yesterdays
column, linked at
left, we talked about
the product S-200,
which is abioremediation
agent specifically designed to take oil from spills and
bind it together into clumps and then feed it to a colony of
bacteria included with the agent. The process takes
several weeks, but during that time, the oil is not able to
further pollute and at the end of the time, the oil is gone,
the bacteria die off with no more food, and carbon
dioxide and water is whats left.
In direct contrast to the current dispersalproducts being used, bioremediation agents
remove the oil - dispersants simply break it up
into smaller bits and spread it out in a larger
area.
We want to know why BP is using dispersals
instead of bioremediation when the latter
promises a much better result.
S-200 sounded like an answer to everyones
desires, a way to save the Gulf Coast and its
wildlife and industries, but we needed to find a
way to determine if these claims are indeed true.
To that end, I enlisted help from three professionals one a chemist working for the government, another
a toxicologist, and the third, a biologist. Oil spills and such technology are NOT their primary fields of work,
but they still have ample ability to understand the bulk of the documents we perused. All of us read
through multiple documents available including some provided to us by the s-200 manufacturer, as well
as spent a lot of time digging on the internet ourselves.
Sustainable DevelopmentFull-Time, Part-Time and DistanceCourses. Intensive Tutor Support.www.sobe.salford.ac.uk/Courses
Business Is DevelopmentLearn how private capital drivesdevelopment in emerging markets.www.legatumventures.com
Print Close [x]
Page 1 of 6Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution? Part II - Like a bird in oil - Philadelphia S...
9/4/2010http://www.examiner.com/science-in-philadelphia/gulf-oil-spill-is-bp-ignoring-a-green-solu ...
-
8/8/2019 Gulf Oil Spill 2
2/6
V Below: NASA image of slick on May 17, 2010.
We also reviewed stories related to previous spills which used this technology. As stated yesterday, there
are not a lot of documents which offer decisive information.
Im going to quote some of our conclusions interestingly, each of us working entirely independently
arrived at very similar conclusions. None of us felt biased either towards or against the product.
We had specific questions we wanted to answer:
1. Can we find independent evidence that this product works as described?
2. Can we determine what, if any, toxicity there is attached to this product, and compare it to the toxicity of
the current kerosene-based dispersant being used?
3. What is the cost compared to the dispersal agent?
4. What exactly is BPs position on this product, and why has it dropped considering it? - This one was
Page 2 of 6Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution? Part II - Like a bird in oil - Philadelphia S...
9/4/2010http://www.examiner.com/science-in-philadelphia/gulf-oil-spill-is-bp-ignoring-a-green-solu ...
-
8/8/2019 Gulf Oil Spill 2
3/6
addressed to BP but they have not answered, instead simply putting me on a media alert email list.
5. Where have these products been used, and what is their success?
Question 1. Can we find independent evidence that this product works as
described?
Answer Yes and no. There are indeed documents which address this and other
bioremediation agents but most of them conclude that there hasnt been enough studyto determine if they can work all the time in all areas. They did conclude, however, that
these products do SEEM to work as described in the limited studies which were done.
The 2004 EPA document (we also referenced yesterday) which talks in general about bioremediation
basically says in 61 pages, that it looks like the stuff works but we cant be sure because there are so few
studies and everyplace is different anyhow.
Question 2. Toxicity compare S-200 vs current dispersal agents.
Answer There were a number of documents discussing this, but there were
contradictory numbers or typos - but it does seem to indicate that there is some
degree of toxidity - the LC50 concentration which means how many organisms arealive at certain time intervals after application looking at survival or death of 50%. A
high LC-50 number is good, low is bad. The faster a product attains a low count, the
more disastrous it is. One report claimed that S-200 was as toxic as diesel fuel which is pretty toxic - .
ALL other reports disputed that finding. The MSDS sheet for the s-200 product states that ingesting it is
non-toxic. and that it is a mild skin and eye irritant.
A sub-concern here was whether or not the products over-use the oxygen content in the water and make
an aerobic environment turn anaerobic. (Simply put - Aerobic means aquatic life has oxygen and thus can
breathe, anaerobic means it suffocates.) Although the subject arose in some papers, there was nothing
definitive that we could determine other than a report provided to us by the manufacturer of a study
conducted by Severn-Trent Environmental Leadership A GLP compliant report titled: A study of the
Aerobic Biodegradation in Seawater of S-200C using the Closed Bottle Procedure.Obviously this could
be a very important concern. We quote from this reports Summary:
A figure of 60% degradation within 28 days is usually taken
as being indicative of a good potential for degradation in the
marine environment. The % of Degradability of S-200C in two
different concentrations was 67.2% and 73.1%.
Those are good numbers.
From our team: As for toxicity, I'm not saying it's very
toxic. It's not. Neither is diesel fuel, for that matter. Their
technical bulletin claimed toxicity values that were also
pretty much in line with their reference toxicant, sodium
dodecyl sulfate, which is a surfactant that's in all sorts of
Page 3 of 6Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution? Part II - Like a bird in oil - Philadelphia S...
9/4/2010http://www.examiner.com/science-in-philadelphia/gulf-oil-spill-is-bp-ignoring-a-green-solu ...
-
8/8/2019 Gulf Oil Spill 2
4/6
things we use, from shampoos to toothpaste. So I wouldn't say it's *particularly* toxic, just a bit more than
at least one competitor claims for their product.
But one must compare the oxygen use between both the bioremediation agent and the dispersal agents to
have a real idea of which is better. From one manufacturers website we see the characteristics of using
Kemex a typical dispersal agent. According to this Indian companys page, the dispersant is Practically
non-toxic. Exactly what is the range for practically? No info on Oxygen issues there, either. So, tothat end, weve got emails out to some specialists who might be able to answer this.
In addition, here is an excellent summary of current dispersal agents.
Question 3. COST COMPARISON: S-200 is definitely more expensive than typical
dispersal agents. But its also apparently considerably better, in particular on coastlines.
The EPA put out a document comparing multiple products which reflect costs. The
latest one we found was from 1999, meaning all costs shown would probably be
roportionately higher today. You can view that document here.
One thing which screams at you is the difference in cost between open water remediation and
once the oil hits land. One example shows that in spill incidents, Franken (1991) showed that the cost
of removing oil off shore (by either dispersants or mechanical recovery) averaged $7,350/tonne, whereas
shoreline cleanup ran as high as $147,000$294,000/tonne.These figures clearly reflect the devastation
that oil will cause once it landfalls. And, its beginning to hit land now.
From our toxologist: This stuff is recommended to be applied at a 1:10 ratio to the oil making it
exorbitantly expensive in a spill of this size. I don't think it's likely they'll be pouring this stuff on the entire
slick out on the seas. Depending on what the cost of such a treatment would be, but there would be some
serious cost-benefit considerations. Anyway, this stuff, and products like it, seems more likely something
to be used as part of a comprehensive cleanup effort for contaminated shorelines.
Question 4 What is BPs position on the use of S-200 or like
bioremediation agents? Well, BP is ignoring my calls and emails asking for
that information.
So I just dont know.
They did subscribe me to a media bulletin, though.
< At left is an image of a bird covered in oil... using bioremediation, that bird
would be clean.
I have also written to the US Fish and Wildlife organization, the EPA, President Obamas staff and Vice
President Biden, and assorted other appropriate agencies. One hopes well get some sort of answers
soon. If you agree, I hope you'll consider emailing links to these two articles to the above, and to anyone
you think might be in a position to get BP to look at bioremediation.
Page 4 of 6Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution? Part II - Like a bird in oil - Philadelphia S...
9/4/2010http://www.examiner.com/science-in-philadelphia/gulf-oil-spill-is-bp-ignoring-a-green-solu ...
-
8/8/2019 Gulf Oil Spill 2
5/6
Question 5 - Where have these products been used, and what is their success?
Bioremediation products have been used in multiple spills. Most of them seem to be in fresh water, but
there are some cases of salt water use. Some of the places S-200 was used include the following
information:
From the IEP website:
"The product has been tested thoroughly. Building on thesuccess of the largest bioremediation project in history
(Exxon Valdez, 70 miles of shoreline) and the Prestige
Spill bioremediation, the technical mechanism and its
advantages were clearly seen as our products became
the premiere products used in the spill clean up. What's
more, S-200 required only one application, not the
multiple applications required by other technologies."
Spain the location of the Prestige [tanker shown at
right]oil spill Wikipedias article on this spill says thatthe cleanup was a success but doesnt mention
products used at all.
Also used in these following locations, verified by
documents provided to me by Jim Lynn, CEO, IEP. In each case, the documents expressed extreme
satisfaction with the results.
South Branch of the Chicago River, Illinois
Commencement Bay, New Jersey
River Boyne oil spill, Ireland
Finally, note that the EPA itself lists S-200 as an approved bioremedial agent in its voluminous report
Selection Guide for Oil Spill Applied Technologies: Volume I - Decision Making
Conclusion at this time:Use of a bioremediation agent - S-200 or a similar product -seems strongly
indicated at the least in areas near the coastline and in areas of coast which have already seen oil
landfall. A dispersant agent on land is futile it just spreads the oil more thinly over a greater area.
Should s-200 or similar products be used on open water? Well look at that in Part 3, and hopefully will
have additional expert information to provide.
But we ask again, in desperation as we see the oil spreading, WHY IS BP ignoring this type of
product? Seeing a disaster of this magnitude is heartbreaking in and of itself. To see it mismanaged, and
see that such mismanagement is causing decades of damage that do not have to happen - just to avoid
spending a few more bucks - is nothing short of criminal.
IMAGES:
Tar chunk on beach: http://soundwaves.usgs.gov/2007/05/tarLG.jpg
Page 5 of 6Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution? Part II - Like a bird in oil - Philadelphia S...
9/4/2010http://www.examiner.com/science-in-philadelphia/gulf-oil-spill-is-bp-ignoring-a-green-solu ...
-
8/8/2019 Gulf Oil Spill 2
6/6
NASA sattelite view of spill:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/44000/44006/gulf_tmo_2010137.jpg
Blue Protozoans used in wastewater cleanup:
http://starcentral.mbl.edu/msr/rawdata/viewable/anaerobic_and_micro-
aerophilic_protozoa_1153235625_aampw.jpg
Bird in oil: http://skyrider.biz/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/exxonvaldez-disaster.jpg
Money: http://news-libraries.mit.edu/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/money.jpg
Prestige sinking:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/02/europe_prestige_tanker_oil_spill/img/1.jpg
If you like my articles, please click on the SUBSCRIBE link at the top of this article to receive an
email whenever a new column is posted.
Tags: oil spill
Page 6 of 6Gulf oil spill - Is BP ignoring a green solution? Part II - Like a bird in oil - Philadelphia S...