chemical formulation from palm oil to quench petroleum fire?
358981
Can you give more info?  There seems to be much info on making fuels by this method, but nothing on quenching.
496686
Maybe you could use tabasco for an eyewash.  If that does not work drink the whole bottle and maybe fire will at least come from the other end...
955041
We've always used olive oil for that purpose to make a softer candle.\n\nChemically, paraffin is molecularily large alkanes.  The length of the alkane determines its degree fluidity (more accurately, its melting point).  Mineral oil is a purified alkane product that is liquid at room temperature, so it would be most compatible chemically with paraffin and would easily soften it.\n\nMy concern with some of the things that could be added is that it is uncertain what happens to them in the flame.  What sort of toxic substance do they become when burned?
974963
aloe vera would work well
97956
put wax in a bottle cap. burn the button until wax melts. wax will start setting on fire after awhile. Use a drop of water on it. Explain reaction.\n\nwater causes combustion
503775
I'd say it depends on how badly burnt you got.  Get some aloe vera gel to cool the skin and and help it heal.  then get wheatgerm oil to rehydrate the skin.
1155530
hmm well ethanol is flammable anyway so you could just put some in a container and light it on fire. I don't think it would make a very good candle though. Probably wouldnt be very good to breathe in either. I think they make a kind of ethanol gel you could use too.
465476
Corn  or vegetable oil
140226
ethanol and oil\nwater and chloroform
53130
spray or deo, parfum, medical-alchool, nailsdecolorant.. etc\n\nanything based on powerfull alchool or with low boiling temeprature...
293072
You could probably just dehydrate it with concentrated sulfuric acid and heat.\n\nAnother method would be to generate a alkyl halide with thionyl chloride (SOCl2) and then eliminate it in a E2 reaction with sodium ethoxide in ethanol (especially strong base to be sure you get elimination, and not SN1)
722057
Oil is portable, high in energy,and easy to control to make the right size fire.\n\nIf we didn't have petroleum, we'd probably be extracting it from plants and animals.\n\nThat's how whales got hunted practically to extinction in the nineteenth century.  Lamps using whale oil were being used all over the world.\n\nMaybe we'll learn to make hydrogen a good substitute.  It's simple to make if you have electricity, though not to store.
373023
Ultrasonic cleaners might be the best solution.\n\nHere is an excerpt from the source listed below: \n\nAlthough a range of possible alternative products is available today, experience has shown that substitution of TRI is not easy and even not feasible for a number of specific cases, either for technical or economical reasons. For all cases, substitution of TRI needs a thorough evaluation of all process aspects. For this reason we intend to work with the authorities in order to prevent a blanket implementation of forced substitution, and allow sustainable and continued safe use of TRI. \n\nThe alternatives you will probably consider first are the chlorinated solvents perchloroethylene (PER) and methylene chloride (MC). They match closest the technical features of TRI, such as non-flammability, high solvency power, a wide range of material compatibility and excellent drying and recycling properties.\n\nBeside PER and MC, you have probably also heard about other alternatives such as aqueous (water-based) alkaline systems, flammable solvents (e.g. hydrocarbons or modified alcohol based formulations), supercritical CO2 or hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), etc.\n\nIt is impossible to say definitively which technology is best. That depends on your specific application, on what you are cleaning, which materials you want to remove, the cleanliness required, the variability of the parts cleaned, the throughput to be achieved, the cycle times, etc. \n\nFor example, for the cleaning of parts between two water-based manufacturing steps (e.g. galvanising), aqueous systems may be better, since parts are put into water phase again later and no energy-intensive drying step to remove the water is required. \n\nIf you need to have very clean and dry surfaces (for coating or surface hardening, for example) and if you have a variety of different metals or blind holes, narrow distances and very fine orifices or a lot of residual oil to clean, hydrocarbons or aqueous systems may not clean and dry well enough. In these cases, chlorinated solvents will offer most often the best solution as they are compatible with most materials, have a high cleaning power, are easy to dry, don't leave residual films and are easy to recycle with high quality by distillation. In addition, chlorinated solvents are today best suited to be used in modern closed systems with minimal losses. Their ecological performance has very much increased and, when used in well-operated metal cleaning systems, they outperform aqueous cleaning as long as drying is required. This has been shown by a Life Cycle Analysis carried out by Ecobilan. \n\nPER comes closest to TRI in technical performance and is often the first choice candidate as an alternative to TRI. However, it shows clear inherent technical differences, which need to be taken into consideration. On one side, PER offers a lower volatility and therefore is advantageous to minimise emissions in closed equipment. On the other side, PER has a lower solvency power and is therefore normally used at a higher cleaning temperature to achieve similar performance. This may raise concerns regarding the compatibility with specific metal working fluids and temperature-sensitive parts. \n\nMethylene chloride (MC) shows excellent cleaning properties already at low temperatures, favouring the cleaning of temperature sensitive parts. However, its high volatility makes emission control more difficult and requires special equipment.\n\nHydrofluorocarbons (HFC) and hydrofluorocarbon ethers (HFCE) are very expensive and show very limited solvency power. A thorough evaluation of the global warming potential is also required to choose the adequate product.
295044
Many thousands of small oil spills occur each year. Oil spills occur due to negligence, the breakdown of equipment, natural disasters or deliberate dumping. These spills can be devastating to the environment and wildlife surrounding the epicenter of the spill. Thankfully, oil molecules are hydrophobic, meaning they mostly float on the surface of the water, making cleanup by boats at least theoretically possible.\n\nWhen oil spills occur, the oil initially remains concentrated, but begins to rapidly spread in all directions as time passes, producing an oil slick. If oil spills are caught early, the cleanup technique of in-situ burning (burning in place) may be used. This is the most benign method of cleanup, but also one of the most rarely used methods. This is because the oil must have a minimum thickness of 3mm (0.12 inches) on the surface of the water in order to maintain a self-sustaining burn, and oil spills quickly spread out to thinner dimensions. Therefore, a boom, a type of corral which floats on the surface of the water, must be used to contain oil spills and artificially increase their thickness.\n\nSpecial fireproof booms are used in conjunction with in-situ burning. When in-situ burning is infeasible due to the thickness of the spill, booms are used to contain the oil so that skimmers -- special boats with oil-absorbent plastics or vacuums -- can be used. Cleaning up large oil spills can be very expensive, tens or hundreds of millions of US dollars. Fines for spills are comparably severe. When an oil spill spreads out over a large area, it forms a sheen, a very thin rainbow-colored layer of oil on the surface of the water.\n\nWhen cleanup with booms or skimmers is impractical, chemical dispersants must be used. Chemical dispersants are used to break down stray oil and lessen its impact on beaches and aquatic wildlife.
1019336
any fuel that carries some oxgen with burn clean, such as most Alcohol.\n\nBut depents on what you are burning it with, and what your detection limits are, very diffcult to burn something else withe Alcohol and not leave any residue.\n\nOnly buring the Alcohol all  by itself that you may not leave any residue.
1046638
i don't really know about this but i'm fairly sure i can give a better answer than lrisjqoijgjr  \n\nyou could probably use a surfactant to break down the molecular attraction between the water molecules but this would leave pollution through the path of whatever you were using to travel through the water\n\nbut yeah not really practical but better than uingnpds
925364
Definitely not water, as those three metals will burn on contact with water (and potassium will explode.) Liquid CO2 might do, as it would cool the burning material extensively, possibly below the ignition point. The sand (SiO2) would be a smothering agent. I'm not sure about the carbon tet.\n\n5 NOV 06, 1522 hrs, GMT.