Thanks for the links. I'll look at them tomorrow.
About the components of COREXIT 9500 and 9527, I believe I recall that both BP and NALCO admit that this is not a complete list, that the omitted components are "proprietary."
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1356005Yes, that wouldn't surprise me. Chemical vendors are very protective of their formulae, even under far less critical circumstances.
you have missed the point of this thread logical as your posts may seem oil exec mistakes don't sink submarines! If there was no sinking of any sub's this thread would not exist. True or false that is still the reason for this thread
Hello Blue ET,
NO SUB was SUNKEN.There was only a sub that had
damage ...
[
link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
-OP 11:39 AM Ok good news. French captain he now says his sub not sunk only badly damaged, 17 sailor injured. Asking for assistance and rescue. He says attack from aircraft and not another submarine.
-OP 11:48 AM Attack from US helicopter. All sailors bleeding from ear.
Quoting: OPThere were also other problem like magnetical issues, buoyancy, romp issues, gravitational, etc ...
The additional adding of huge amounths of IRON would/could explain some of the above issues.
Iron is highly magnetical > flocking on romps and hulls ...
Corexit (or an other substance, I have to look it up in the resumé's) was eating away material on boats and subs, some of them needed to go back in the doks for repaintjobs.
Many more NATURAL things that could be of influence were discussed in this thread.
I will look for them in my resumé's and repost them for a better view and understanding.
lets keep a global and panoramic view instead of narrowing it down to 2 or 3 things ...
xx MzK
