Effectiveness of chemical dispersants used in broken ice conditions
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT (no. 2017-095) In 2012, the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers initiated “The Arctic Oil Spill Response Technology Joint Industry Program (JIP)” with nine companies funding projects in a wide range of technical areas. This paper summarizes results from the project “Dispersant Testing under Realistic Conditions”, a collaboration between SINTEF (Norway) and SL Ross (Canada). The objective of the research was to build on current knowledge to increase understanding of the effect of oil type, degree of weathering, and environmental conditions on dispersant effectiveness in ice-covered waters. SINTEF and SL Ross performed approximately 70 tests using two identical recirculating flumes with variable parameters such as oil types, dispersant type, mixing energy, ice coverage, and water salinity. The oils were weathered in the flumes for 6 or 18 hours under simulated winds, waves, and cold temperatures to represent weathering that might occur at sea prior to dispersant application. The dispersed oil was exposed to various mixing energies, starting with low energy waves, followed by somewhat higher energy waves, and finally by applying propeller wash. Four crude oils were studied and the dispersant efficiency of three commercial oil spill dispersants were evaluated for the tested oils. Other test parameters were ice coverage (50% and 80%) and water salinity (35, 15, and 5 ppt). Dispersant effectiveness as a function of the different test variables were estimated using results from the flume-based experiments. As expected, shorter weathering times resulted in an increase in dispersant efficiency. The dispersant effectiveness varied with both oil type and dispersant type applied, and the effectiveness increased when higher mixing energy conditions were used. Varying the ice cover did not influence the results significantly, but water salinity did, with the lowest dispersant efficiencies found at 5 ppt salinity. The conclusions are based on the findings from testing performed under the controlled conditions and may not be directly transferable to all conditions that could be encountered in the Arctic. However, this study shows that dispersants can be considered as a response option for spills in ice, but effectiveness needs to be validated in the field during an actual event.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle