Guest User

Untitled

a guest
May 24th, 2018
92
0
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 1.15 KB | None | 0 0
  1. urning is efficient and most of the black smoke is soot and not very toxic. You always have to look at every response technique in comparison to the others. So burning will get rid of 95% of the oil and then it is completely dealt with. No more handling. All the other recovery stuff involves a long chain of support to accommodate the waste stream.
  2.  
  3. The problem is that there is not very much fire poof boom on the planet. It fails often due to the heat. So you have to keep replacing the failed parts, which reduces the efficiency. I think they will run out of fire proof boom quickly. And I think this blow out is going to continue for months. So it is probably not sustainable. Also, because this oil is rising a mile through the water, it is actually a water-in-oil emulsification by the time it reaches the surface. Sometimes there is more water than oil in the mix. This is called chocolate mousse and it is the brown ropy stuff you see in the pictures. My guess is that it will not burn as efficiently.
  4.  
  5. Dispersants won’t work very well on mousse.
  6.  
  7. They will need to do everything they possible can. This is going to continue for months. It is REALLY, REALLY bad.
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment