Nopakit Lerthirunvibul Science 11E 9/2/12

What is in My Water?
Personal Summary
Water is the most essential substance in sustaining life on Earth. This is due to the properties it has, such as polarity, which allows molecules to stick together. Water also has a high boiling point and low freezing point, meaning that temperature outside cant change its state. For these reasons, contamination of water can jeopardize entire eco systems and cause serious problems for every life form on Earth. The BP Deep water Horizon oil spill is the perfect example of such an issue. We have looked closely at the effects of the oil spill on many aspects of life and the role of science in solving the issue. The method we are investigating is the use of Chemical dispersants in the BP oil spill, specifically the dispersant sold under the trade name Corexit. On the surface of the water, dispersants are applied directly to the oil spill, by specialized equipment mounted on an airplane, helicopter or ship. Once in use, the molecules of the dispersants attach to oil molecules, separating it from itself thus lowering surface tension between oil and water. The dispersed oil then forms droplets just below the surface of the water and can be easily degraded by micro-organisms as it is now diluted and not in clumps like before (EPA). Chemical dispersants are also being applied at the source of the leak through the use of underwater robots. This is a novel approach to reducing the impact of the oil spill (Cressey). This approach was initiated in order to disperse the oil at its source, and therefore, reduce the amount of oil rising up to the surface in clumps. Extensive laboratory and field research has shown that crude oil from the oil spill takes around 12-70 days to biodegrade naturally. The use of chemically-dispersed oil allows for a more rapid biodegradation of the oil. In the case of Corexit, the rate increases by around 50% (Corexit). This is of importance as oil slicks can have a great impact upon ecosystems on shore, and on the surface of water. The mass leakage of oil required an efficient and quick way to rid of the oil slicks, therefore the use of dispersant was the ideal solution. By breaking the slicks into tiny drops, BP hoped to negate the effects that would occur, and also rid of the oil as quickly as possible so that there are no longer lasting impacts. It was found that Corexit was 54.7-63.4% effective in dispersing the oil spill (Corexit). The value is of significant amount, as this means that more than half of the oil slick was ridden of. As it was a mass leavage, the factor of availability had to be evaluated. Corexit was available in mass amounts, it was deemed to be a suitable dispersant to use as a solution to the problem. Although Corexit is the greatest used type of dispersant in the oil spill, the Environmental Protecting Agency (EPA) has listed up to twelve other types of dispersants more effective in dealing with oil in a way that is safe for the environment. Studies from researchers at Wood Holes Oceanographic institute stated that some of Corexit that was applied "did nothing to break up the oil and simply drifted into the ecosystem" (Cressey). It such a statement is true, then Corexit may not be the most effective solution to the problem, but one that was most accessible and at-hand. This means that the solution to the oil spill here may not be most efficient, and that we should have used other alternatives in dealing with the problem. This contradicts to the benefit stated above, as here the choice to go with availability in mass quantity becomes a limitation. With this choice, potential environmental and other such benefits may have been lost. The environmental impact of the implementation of Corexit has been a debate, and still is in current times. Different researchers have presented their data on specific parts on the impact, yet have failed to mention the big picture. As stated, Corexit is a benefit to the environment due to its function and relationship to water-oil. As it is able to pull oil apart, it negates the effect of shores and animals near surface having to struggle due to oil slicks that will not easily go away, and is very toxic to every life form. It is claimed by the government of the United States of America that the use of dispersants is a trade-off for the environment (EPA). This means that the choice of using dispersants leads to a good benefit for the environment in one way, yet a limitation in another. In this case, it has been stated that the use of dispersants on the surface decreases risk to life forms near the surface and on shorelines have an effect on ecosystems deep down in the water which sometimes eat in dispersants and the great amount of tiny droplets of oil (Jamail). However, the future and total effects are unknown as it is still too early and there is not enough information gathered. Therefore, close monitoring had been initiated in order to gather as much information as possible. The use of Corexit in the BP oil spill in a way represents an economic choice. The question about why no other less-toxic dispersant has been applied has not been directly answered. BP claims that it is pretty effective, and pretty much the only dispersant they were sure about. However, what we do know is that Nalco, the producer of Corexit has links within the BP. Therefore, this becomes an economic cycle where Corexit is a chemical that was made by the oil industry to sell it itself. The availability of Corexit also means that the company is generating a lot of money for itself, and thus, controlling the economic market with the creation of its product (Quinlan). Other competitors will not have a fair share of being part of the solution. This may lead to a loss in potential again where the choice to use one product for economical purposes doesnt reduce the amount of impact as if it were to be if a better solution was chosen. Now to look at the whole, wide economic impact, it can be observed that the use

Nopakit Lerthirunvibul Science 11E 9/2/12 of dispersants in the oil spill was an experiment. With the data on the product collected, new, better produces can be created and sold to a larger global market that has just been introduced to this solution (Termotto). In other words, it opens the door for a greater dispersant trade and usage. To conclude, the solution to this problem in water is not straightforward, and has major points that need consideration. As stated, this is a trade-off and is based purely on our choice of how to implement it, and what effects will this implementation cause. The science world has created a product with the properties to rid oil slicks from water; it is up to the users on how they want to use it. However, from investigating, there needs to be much more research and data collecting on this topic before a solid conclusion can be made, and definitely more improvements to the product if we are to solve this water problem more effectively.

Nopakit Lerthirunvibul Science 11E 9/2/12

Works Cited 2010, April. "Corexit." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. MediaWiki, 6 Dec. 2011. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corexit>. Cressey, Daniel. "The Science of Dispersants." Nature Publishing Group. 12 May 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100512/full/news.2010.237.html>. "EPA Response to BP Spill in the Gulf of Mexico." US Environmental Protection Agency. 14 Oct. 2011. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants-qanda.html>. Jamail, Dahr. "BP Dispersants 'causing Sickness'" Al Jazeera. 29 Oct. 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2010/10/20101027132136220370.html>. Quinlan, Paul. "Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup." The New York Times. 13 May 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energyenvironment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html>. Termotto, Dr. Tom. "Health Alert." Gulf Oil Spill Solutions Now! Wordpress, 7 Aug. 2010. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://oilspillsolutionsnow.org/?page_id=176>.

Nopakit Lerthirunvibul Science 11E 9/2/12

Y11 MYP Science One World

Name _______________________________________________ Assignment __________________________________________ Teacher Comments: MYP Grade:

Criterion A

LEVEL

DESCRIPTOR
The student explains how science is applied and how it may be used to address a specific problem or issue in a local or global context.

Task Specific Clarification

[ ] The student gives a clear account, including causes and reasons for the method used to solve the water issue chosen. [ ] The student gives an account including, where possible, a range of arguments for and against and if possible a comparison tof alternative methods. [ ] The student gives a detailed account (outcome and limitations) of how this method will have a wider impact/effect on at least two social factor. This is given for both factors mentioned.

5-6

The student discusses the effectiveness of science and its application in solving the problem or issue. The student discusses and evaluates the implications of the use and application of science interacting with at least two of the following factors: moral, ethical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental. The student describes how science is applied and how it may be used to address a specific problem or issue in a local or global context.

[ ] The student gives a detailed account of a method used to solve the water issue chosen.

3-4

The student describes the effectiveness of science and its application in solving the problem or issue. The student describes the implications of the use and application of science interacting with at least one of the following factors: moral, ethical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental. The student states how science is applied and how it may be used to address a specific problem or issue in a local or global context. The student states the effectiveness of science and its application in solving the problem or issue.

[ ] The student gives a detailed account of the benefits or limitations of this method [ ] The student gives a detailed account of how this method will have a wider impact on a social factor (... this impacts .... because....)

1-2

[ ] The student names a method to solve the water issue chosen [ ] The student states how well this method solves the water issue chosen.

0
Pupil reflection:

The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.

To improve my next one world assignment I will

Nopakit Lerthirunvibul Science 11E 9/2/12

Checklist for Criterion B

1. There is sufficient use of scientific language.

You are using the right vocabulary words correctly.

2. There is a variety of ways used within your summary such as pictures, graphs, diagrams, etc.

This means you are not just using words.

3. The is proper acknowledged of sources

This means that you have correctly referenced your information within your summary with intext referencing or footnotes. - If you use data, factual information, etc. there must be some reference.

5. Demonstrates honesty by giving a correctly written bibliography.

Bibliography of sources is done in MLA format.

MYP Science Communication

Criterion B

Nopakit Lerthirunvibul Science 11E 9/2/12

Name _______________________________________________ Assignment __________________________________________ Teacher Comments: LEVEL DESCRIPTOR Task Specific Clarification
[ ] The student uses suitable scientific words in the right context. [ ] The student succeeds in communicating the required information. [ ] The student produces complete list of sources using the MLA referencing format and links each with in-text referencing.

MYP Grade:

The student uses sufficient scientific language correctly.

5-6

The student communicates scientific information effectively. When appropriate to the task, the student fully documents sources of information correctly.

The student uses some scientific language correctly.

[ ] The student uses some scientific words in the right place at the right time and in the correct way. [ ] The student succeeds in communicating some of the required information [ ] The student produces complete list of sources which attempts to use the MLA referencing format [ ] The student uses few suitable scientific words correctly. [ ] The students attempts at communicating the required information are valiant. [ ] The student produces a list of sources.

3-4

The student communicates scientific information with some effectiveness. When appropriate to the task, the student partially documents sources of information.

The student uses a limited range of scientific language correctly.

1-2

The student communicates scientific information with limited effectiveness. When appropriate to the task, the student makes little attempt to document sources of information.

The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.