Post on 03-Jul-2015
description
transcript
IN-SITU TRACKING OF OIL FROM THE DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL
USING SPECTRAL FLUORESCENCE
Corey Koch,1 Paula Coble,2 Leslie Slasor,3 Joseph Needoba,3
Andrew Barnard,1 Scott Pegau4
1-WET Labs Inc. Philomath OR. 2-University of South Florida, St. Petersburg FL. 3-Oregon Health and Sciences University,
Portland, OR. 4-Oil Spill Recovery Institute, Cordova, AK.
Photo: Dave Martin/AP
• Deepwater Horizon spill generated an underwater oil plume
• Oil Fluoresces, making it amenable to in-situ measurement
• Primarily CDOM optimized fluorometers were used
In-situ tracking
JAG_Report_1_BrooksMcCall_Final_June20
Right: WL ECO (370/460 nm) and neat LA Sweet crude oil. Left: Visible Oil
fluorescence
What causes oil to Fluoresce?• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
– Highly toxic to aquatic life, known carcinogens
– Fluorescence signatures shift due to alkylation and energy transfer effects (Ryder, 2002)
– Fluorescence correlated to API gravity, viscosity, aromaticity (Ryder 2002, Fuller et al. 2005, Budgen et al. 2008)
• Oil-in-water forms: neat (slick), emulsion/colloid (mousse, dispersion), dissolved hydrocarbons
• Weathering can transform signals (Erhardtet al., 1992; Pradier et al., 1990; Hagemann et al., 1986)
Photo: Dave Martin/AP
Christensen et al, 2005 Anal Chem
In DCM
Excitation Emission Matrix Spectra: EEMS
• Incrementally change excitation wavelength and measure entire emission spectrum
• Provide “fingerprint” of steady state fluorescence EX
EM
Excitation Emission Matrix Spectra: EEMS
• Incrementally change excitation wavelength and measure entire emission spectrum
• Provide “fingerprint” of steady state fluorescence EX
EM
Some Regions
of Interest
Excitation Emission Matrix Spectra: EEMS
• Incrementally change excitation wavelength and measure entire emission spectrum
• Provide “fingerprint” of steady state fluorescence
• SAFire spectral fluorometer
• 6 Ex and 16 Em
Excitation Emission Matrix Spectra: EEMS
• Incrementally change excitation wavelength and measure entire emission spectrum
• Provide “fingerprint” of steady state fluorescence
• SAFire spectral fluorometer
• 6 Ex and 16 Em
EX
EM
A few areas of SAFire
Spectral Fluorometer
Measurement
Excitation Emission Matrix Spectra: EEMS
• Incrementally change excitation wavelength and measure entire emission spectrum
• Provide “fingerprint” of steady state fluorescence
• SAFire spectral fluorometer
• 6 Ex and 16 Em
SAFire Grab sample
Gulf EEMs
• Oil has distinct fluorescence regions compared to CDOM
• Oil Fluorescence varies with sample site and depth, presumably due to transformations
CDOM, Florida coastal water
Filtered water near fresh oil slick
Weathered oil
EX
EM
Weatherbird cruise (Aug 2010)
From Rosette samples
acidified (pH2) and
frozen unfiltered.
Lab Experiments• Understand EEMs from Gulf
• Evaluate effects of degradation (photo, bio, aging)
• Must be able to reproduce soluble fraction formation– Controls, triplicates, daily EEMs
– ONTA Inc. crude oil kits, artificial sea water– 40:1 sea water : oil
– Minimize light, control temperature, eliminate contamination sources, sample through oil slick, minimize oxidation
– Glass bottles, Stainless steel tubing, high-purity silicone stoppers/gas tubing, Nitrogen purged headspace, postive displacement sampling, temperature controlled shaker table (90 RPM).
(Ali et al. 1995, Ziolli et al. 2002, Shiu et al. 1990,
Ashton LSU JAG report 2)
Stability of Soluble Fraction
PAH Solubility mg/L
Pyrene 0.135
Fluorene 7.22E-05
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
8-Nov 18-Nov 28-Nov 8-Dec 18-Dec
Rat
io o
f Em
issi
on
In
ten
sity
(3
45
/32
0)
Qua Iboe: Ratio of pyrene-like to fluorene-like Fluorescence
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
19-Oct 22-Oct 25-Oct 28-Oct
No
rmal
ize
d F
L In
ten
sity
TX Hoops Average I vs T
250/320240/345270/300270/320
Crude Oil EEMs, soluble fraction
• Oil types analyzed to-date have PAH-like fluorescence signatures.
• Light oils display the same peaks, heavier oils have red-shifted signatures.
• The soluble fraction of light oils do not exhibit CDOM-like fluorescence.
Louisiana Sweet-API 31.4 Qua Iboe (Nigerian)-API 35.8
Vasconia (Colombia)-API 24.2 Mevey (Venezuela)-API 18.7
HOOPS (Texas)-API 31.4
DSH10 Aug 2010, 400 m
Preliminary Photodegradation
• Solar simulator irradiation (4 hr)
• Differential degradation rates for components
• May provide insight into differences in field spectra
Fixed excitation wavelengths indicated by arrows. Time series wavelengths: Ex/Em
Summary
• SAFire effective at identifying oil in-situ
– Against CDOM background and as oil transforms
– Potentially put discrete fluorescence data in context
• Can reproducibly form stable dissolved oil fraction in the lab
– Permit controlled studies to understand EEM dynamics (photodegradation, biodegrade, aging)
– Facilitate ID of fluorescent components
• Identified key Ex/Em pairs to use simple fluorometers to track various oils as they transform in the environment
Acknowledgements
This work has been funded by an NSF RAPID response grant. This material is
based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant
No. OCE-1048455. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or
recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Special thanks to:•Paula Coble, Kendra Daly, and the Weatherbird crew
•Leslie Slasor (OHSU, Lab EEMs)•Lori Ayoub (USF, field EEMs)
•Dave Stahlke and Cobie deLespinasse (WET Labs, SAFire service)
• Ali, L.N; Mantoura, R.F.C.; Rowland, S.J. (1995) The Dissolution and Photodegradation of Kuwaiti Crude Oil in Seawater. Part 1: Quantitative Dissolution and Analysis of the Seawater-Soluble Fraction. Marine Environmental Research, 40, 1-17.
• Bugden, J.B.C., Yeung, C.W., Kepkay, P.E., Lee, K., 2008. Application of ultraviolet fluorometery and excitation-emission matrix spectroscopy (EEMS) to fingerprint oil and chemically dispersed oil in seawater. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56:677-685.
• Christensen, Jan H.; Hansen, A.B.; Mortensen,J.; Andersen, O. 2005. Characterization and matching of oil samples using fluorescence spectroscopy and parallel factor analysis. Anal. Chem. 77:2210-2217
• Ehrhardt, Manfred G., Burns, Kathryn A., Bicego, Marcia C., 1992. Sunlight-induced compositional alterations in the seawater-soluble fraction of a crude oil. Marine Chemistry 37:53-64.
• Fuller, Christopher B., Bonner, James S., Kelly, Frank, Cheryl A. Page, Temitope Ojo, 2005. Real time geo-referenced detection of dispersed oil plumes. International Oil Spill Conference Monitoring:1-4. http://www.iosc.org/papers/IOSC%202005%20a356.pdf
• Joint Analysis Group, 2010. Report 1: Review of R/V Brooks McCall data to examine subsurface oil. http://ecowatch.ncddc.noaa.gov/JAG/files/JAG%20Report%20Brooks%20McCall%20final.pdf
• Joint Analysis Group, 2010. Report 2: Review of preliminary data to examine subsurface oil in the vicinity of MC252#1 May 19 to June 19 2010. http://ecowatch.ncddc.noaa.gov/JAG/files/JAG%20Data%20Report%202%20FINAL.pdf
• Hagemann, H.W. and Hollerbach A., 1986. The fluorescence behavior of crude oils with respect to their thermal maturation and degradation. Advances in Organic Geochemistry 10:473-480.
• Pradier, B., Largeau, C., Derenne, S., Martinez, L., Bertrand, P., 1989. Chemical basis of fluorescence alteration of crude oilsand kerogens—I. Microfluorimetry of an oil and its isolated fractions; relationships with chemical structure. Advances in Organic Geochemistry 16(1-3):451-460.
• Ryder, Alan G., 2002. Quantitative analysis of crude oils by fluorescence lifetime and steady state measurements using 380-nm excitation. Applied Spectroscopy 56(1):107-116.
• Ryder, Alan G., 2005. Analysis of crude petroleum oils using fluorescence spectroscopy. Reviews in Fluorescence. Ed.: C.D. Geddes and J.R. Lakowicz, Springer Science. pp 169-198.
• Shiu W.Y.; Bobra,M.; Bobra, A.M.; Maijanen, A.; Suntio, L.; Mackay, D. 1990. The water solubility of crude oils and petroleum products. Oil & Chem. Poll. 7: 57-84.
• Ziolli, R.L.; Jardim, W.F. (2002) Operational problems related to the preparation of the seawater soluble fraction of crude oil. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 4 138-141.
References
Extra slides
Sample pH effect on EEMs
pH 2
Samples taken at 215 m depth DSH8
pH 8 pH 8 - 2
•Bringing sample pH back to 8 increases oil and CDOM signatures•pH primarily affects signal strength, although signatures of the polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon fluorene (330/350) and CDOM (375/450) are more evident in the spectral differences of pH 8 and pH 2
Emulsion vs. Dissolved FL response
• The form of oil could significantly effect sensor response and consequently data interpretation
WET Labs B.M. Ashton, LSU
Example of precision and control in lab experiments
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Qua Iboe Average I vs T
270/320
Controls
Error bars are ± 1 standard deviation
EEM data corrections• The correction process follows the recommendations from the AGU
chapman conference on Organic matter fluorescence. The process is:• 1) Daily check of instrument to ensure excitation and emission
monochromators are calibrated• 2) Curvette blank to check for fingerprint contamination• 3) Apply the inner filter effect correction following Lakowicz
equation (important when absorbance at any wavelength is > .05 AU• 4) We have triple checked the manufacturer instrument correction
procedure and we know use that instead of manually doing it• 5) Remove dark current signal • 6) Raman normalizedBeyond scope of current RAPID:• PARAFAC –not enough samples we need >100 different samples
(different could mean different time points, degradation points, etc). SAFire does not have enough resolution, also can not Raman normalize
• PCA/PLS – we need relevant environmental variables to include. Greater group effort is needed.