Blog Pages

Monday, June 21, 2010

Preliminary Test Descriptions and Photos from Louisiana sample

These samples represent 4 types of preliminary tests performed to determine the effectiveness of our enzyme/protein solution.



From left to right:
Vial 1: This vial shows a "water only" shake test control. A tarball was removed from the sample, placed in the test vial, and agitation was applied. Notice that the tarball remained intact and did not release oil. Only loosely held sand from the shell of the tarball was released.

Vial 2: A small amount of enzyme/protein solution was added to the water in the second vial. Agitation was performed. As evidenced, the aqueous solution (the water and enzyme/protein solution) changed color, indicating that as the tarball was broken down some portion remained in the solution of whatever dispersants were originally applied by BP to the oil. Further testing will be performed to determine more information regarding the nature of those dispersants. One such dispersant that BP uses which has garnered much media attention is Corexit 9500.

The nature of our aqueous solution is such that the oil is more attracted to it than it is to sand. Further, it changes the character of the oil/dispersant mixture (tarball) so that it no longer will congeal and hold sand. At this stage the sand is mostly clean. Since this was a simple shake test there was insufficient agitation to achieve complete contact between the aqueous solution and the sand/oil which would have provided for more complete cleaning.

Vial 3: In addition to the process performed on Vial 2, we added an emulsion breaker. In commercial operation, the clean sand would have already been removed before applying the emulsion breaker. Accordingly, this step would be performed as part of our liquid/liquid separation process which allows for the recovery of the oil. When BP applied its dispersant to the oil, an emulsion was formed between the dispersant, the oil, and seawater. In Vial 2 this emulsion was still intact which is why the oil was not clearly visible in the solution. The emulsion breaker reverses the effects of whatever dispersant BP applied, breaking the emulsion, and allowing the oil to separate out from the water/dispersant/oil mixture. The results of this are visible in Vial 3 where the layer of crude floating on top of the solution is clearly differentiated.

Vial 4 (jar): Vial 4 was a test of a portion of the generalized sample from which we had selected the tar balls for the previous tests. The same percentage aqueous solution was applied. A hand mixer was used which allowed for greater agitation than in the previous tests. This provided sufficient sheer and particular contact resulting in a more complete cleaning of the sand than in the previous tests. The emulsion breaker was not applied because the sand has not yet been separated out. Stay tuned for follow up photos and videos which will show the separation of the cleaned sand from the solution.

10 comments:

  1. Biosciguy, looks like you've got the enzyme / protein formula figured out! Just curious but would you run the contaminated oil sands through this solution using some sort of system similar to the mobile system that I have seen in use by you in the past? I know your prior experience with cleaning contaminated soil in oil fields and other hydrocarbons and I'm trying to wrap my mind around the volume you could hope to produce and the machanics that would be required here.

    How long in the solution to get desired results?

    Is the recovered oil usable?

    I'm guessing here but isn't most of the equipment needed here available for rent/lease and you add the enzyme/protein solution to the mobile cleaning units?

    Lots of quesitons but many that read here may think this is not proven technology and not a commercial solution however this has been done and used commericially before in soil, right?

    Can't wait to see the video but really can't wait to see it implemented and cleaning this mess up!!!
    Thanks for all you are doing and the photos look great!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes we are able to recover the oil during the mechanical process, ready to go to the refinery. The throughput rate will have about a 7 minute duration throught the mechanical process. We are evaluating the different mechanical treatment modules and their configurations now. We only have a small sample to do our testing so we have to be coservative in our approach until more and different types of samples can be acquired. From the news videos that we have seen the forms that the tar balls and oil washing up on the beaches are of seversl different types.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm really looking forward to the video. How much variation do you expect to see in the samples on average and how will that change your strategy for cleanup?

    ReplyDelete
  4. We are actively looking for more types of samples from anyone that will supply them. This sample represents only one form that the oil/jellies/pastes/tarballs will come into shore. The 10 mile "Burn Box" is only burning off the aromatics. At the oil water interface the water then cools the non-aromatics which then allows the tars and residuals to float around sub-surface so that they can be "out of sight, out of mind" but trust me they will begin to show up as well on the beaches.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Posted some youtube video links. We need to move fast.

    ReplyDelete
  6. They are in the recommended links on the right sidebar.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The total focus is on BP no one is talking about Anadarko and the MOECO. They share some responsibility according to wikipedia BP has 65% of the resposibility, Anadarko 25% of the responsibilty and Mitsui Oil Exploration Company the last 10%. I am just trying to present the situation fairly. Fair is fair, if you are going to share in the profits you need to share the responsibility. Why the singular focus on BP?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I've seen this technology work and have known the man behind this process for seventeen years. Some of the detergents that are being used to clean-up these spill sites are more toxic than the oil itself, in which case wouldn't it be better (wiser) to introduce a natural catalyst and allow the proteins to do what they do best? This technology is essential to an environmentally safe clean-up!

    ReplyDelete
  9. This sounds awesome for what we need to clean our beaches - no chemicals involved - the enzyme/protein solution seems like the best technology out there to clean our beaches and we need to do it TODAY - NOT TOMORROW. I've known Bill and Pauline for many years and support what they are trying to do so.

    ReplyDelete