http://lmrk.org/corexit_9500_uscueg.539287.pdf
Here’s a link to the Corexit 9500 MSDS. It may be good for Warren Buffett, Soros, and Gore but it isn’t good for the Gulf of Mexico and all the sealife, wildlife, and people that live along the coast.
I know this is going far, far out on a limb here, but somehow I think that 50 times the volume of crude oil is going to pretty much negate the minuscule risk as listed in the material safety sheet you posted for handling the fully concentrated form of dispersant.
Personally, I think the dispersant is a total waste of time. What with the up to 40% concentration of methane in the crude stream, as well as the pressure differences of the pipe (8,000 pounds per square inch) vs surface pressure of 14.7 pounds per square inch, I gotta go with the natural form of a refinery cracking tower being pretty efficient at breaking up that crude before it reaches the surface.
As for this report from Russia, I take it with the same scientific scrutiny I would apply to any checkstand tabloid.
CAS #
Name
Common Day-to-Day Use Examples
1338-43-8
Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate
Skin cream, body shampoo, emulsifier in juice
9005-65-6
Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs.
Baby bath, mouth wash, face lotion, emulsifier in food
9005-70-3
Sorbitan, tri-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs
Body/Face lotion, tanning lotions
577-11-7
* Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, 1,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester, sodium salt (1:1)
Wetting agent in cosmetic products, gelatin, beverages
29911-28-2
Propanol, 1-(2-butoxy-1-methylethoxy)
Household cleaning products
64742-47-8
Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light
Air freshener, cleaner
111-76-2
** Ethanol, 2-butoxy
Cleaners
The EPA, the Centers for Disease Control, and 30 major industrial countries all think this is much better for the environment than the oil.
The environmentalist whackos say otherwise, as does apparently the Russian minister of energy or something like that.