This is sand contaminated with crude oil. The free oil on the surface indicates that the sand is fully saturated with crude oil. The sand can hold no more crude oil and any additional crude will form on the surface, kind of like a mudpuddle.” Crude oil saturates sand at about 200,000 parts per million (about 20% by volume).

In this particular demonstration there are 72 quarts of water in the tank. We added 2 quarts of enzyme forming the aqueous solution which will be used to treat the oil contaminated sand. This results in slightly less than a 3% solution.

In order to activate the Aqueous solution and make it homogenous (distribute it evenly) a pump connected to the mix tank was started. 

The bucket of contaminated sand was slowly added into the mix tank. Agitation was run for 12 minutes allowing the Aqueous solution to scrub the oil from the sand.

For demonstration purposes the cleaned sand was collected in a 5 gallon bucket and transferred by hand to separation screens.

The material was dried and the screens were shaken in order to separate the different particle sizes. Particle type, geometry, and density were evaluated. For a single stage process the cleanliness of the sand was remarkable. Notice that there is no oil sheen. In production a closed loop would be utilized to provide multiple stages of cleaning.

 

Mini Pilot Plant has been built

The mini pilot plant has been built and tested with water. Results should be ready soon!

Samples are starting to arrive!

We have received some samples from Florida and some "Free Crude" (crude oil in it's natural state from an undiscosed secret location, provider does not want to be identified) to begin our video demonstrations with a few modifications to the Pilot Plant and we are ready! We are soooo excited and can't wait to produce the video and demonstrate the capability of our Richcorp protein aqueous.

We are ready for some samples!!

We are ready for some samples. We need 5 gallons of each of the three types of oil contaminating the beaches. We need "Free Oil and Sand" (the black liquid oil and sand), some of the so called "Tar Balls" (red gelatinous emulsion created by the oil, the Corexit 9500 and Gulf water, they look more like "Tar Blobs") and the "Burn Box Tar Balls" (the black tarry residual left from burning the aromatics off of the oil) to run through our pilot plant and determine the best mechanical designs and enzyme /protein formulation to recover the oil from each of the three types of beach contamination.

Just how bad are the beaches getting hit and what is being done about it?

Please take a look at this MSNBC Slide Show to understand what we are up against. Also, reports are coming in regarding the quality of beach cleanup BP is providing. Though we cannot verify all of this information, some are saying that the cleanup is more PR oriented than focused on providing a sustainable solution. This report claims that BP is only cleaning the top layer of sand, leaving layers of oil soaked sands below the surface which as it breaks down will create noxious odors and spoil the beaches. Please take special notice of this St. Petersburg Times article describing how there is a layer of oil six inches beneath the surface along part of Pensacola Beach. To make matters worse, this report claims that the problem is literally being "covered up" by simply dumping fresh sand to cover the oil contaminated sand. We understand that keeping up with a continual tidal recontamination of beach sand is a daunting task. We believe our technology is a sustainable SOLUTION because we can continually recycle the existing beach sands. Covering up the contamination will only cause problems down the line.

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.

Initial photos of the first samples we have received from Louisiana

Pictured is the result of preliminary tests done to determine the best enzyme/protein formulation for this particular sample. Notice the tarball on the white paper. A shell of accumulated sand forms around tarballs as they are rolled back and forth by natural wave action. A similar tarball was broken down by our enzyme/protein solution in the test vial. It was transformed into the layer of oil which you can see floating on top of the milky solution.

We anticipate further work with mechanical processes and further reformulations, the results of which we will continue to post here.

We also want to thank Frank for providing us with these samples.