Fates of petroleum during the deepwater horizon oil spill: A chemistry perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the initial bulk and compound specific composition of the liquid oil spilled during the Deepwater Horizon (DwH) disaster. The emphasis is on the target hydrocarbon compounds typically found in highest concentrations and on those of concern from a toxicological perspective (i.e., the target normal alkanes and isoprenoids, and PAHs on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) priority list with their alkyl homolog compounds), and/or those relevant for forensic fingerprinting of spill residues (i.e., sulfur containing PAHs and biomarker compounds). Weathering changed the oil’s composition in various environmental compartments. These compositional changes and potential environmental impacts of the remaining weathered residues are presented in this paper. Biodegradation occurred in both surface and subsurface environments while photooxidation primarily modified and removed hydrocarbons in floating oil slicks. The volatile, soluble and highly labile C 1 to C 10 hydrocarbons were rapidly degraded in the water column and/or emitted to the atmosphere (evaporation). The semi-volatile hydrocarbons (labile C 10 to C 25 ) that remained in the water column and floating oil on the water’s surface were lost from oil residues during weathering. The heavy nonvolatile and insoluble hydrocarbons (recalcitrant C 25 +) were least affected by initial weathering processes in 2010. The composition of the residual oil fraction in surface floating oil was further altered by the addition of oil soluble oxy hydrocarbons produced from photooxidation. During 2011 and 2012 the resulting highly insoluble recalcitrant C 25 + oily residues remained on the shorelines, bottom sediments, or bound to suspended particulates in the water column, with detectable residues mostly returning to near pre-spill levels by 2015 to 2020. Some recalcitrant oil residues can still be found at various locations, including some coastal environments (e.g., marshes), or deep-water sediments, at very low levels, ten years after the spill.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".