Carbon survey

Tomorrow, NASA launches the OCO-2 satellite, which will make a detailed map of how much CO₂ is in the atmosphere at various points on the globe. They plan to combine that data with data from other existing satellites, atmospheric sampling, and ground sampling, with the goal of finding out where CO₂ is being produced and where it's being absorbed—in very high resolution, about 3 km² per measurement, or, smaller than a big coal-fired power plant.

The satellite will be in a polar orbit which allows it to fly over every single spot on earth every 16 days, which means it will generate a complete map of CO₂ concentrations every 16 days—less the areas that were covered in cloud when it flew over on that cycle. This repeated mapping also means that seasonal variations can be tracked, to separate a long-term trend from a seasonal fluctuation.

OCO-2 measures CO₂ by measuring how much light is absorbed by the CO₂ as sunlight travels down to the surface, reflects off the planet, and bounces back up to the satellite. So, cloud cover interferes with the measurement, and repeated mapping is one of the ways they're compensating for that.

Solar-powered jet fuel (and diesel, and...)

Sounds kind of backwards, I suppose, but there is in fact research happening on creating jet fuel, and other liquid fuels, using solar energy. One of the big advantages of liquid fuels like gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel is the large amount of energy contained in a small mass—much more energy per gram than batteries. Just recently, in fact, one such research group announced that they had produced a jar of jet fuel, starting from sunlight and CO₂.

Taking out the quotes and the hyperbole about revolutionizing anything, what they've done is still pretty neat: turned CO₂, the low energy end state of carbon-based fuel combustion, back into usable fuel.

Because CO₂ is the low energy end state, to get it back into a high energy form such as kerosene (jet fuel) or diesel, a whole lot of energy has to be put into it. In this case, the energy is solar.

Well, the energy is intended to be solar.

Chopping up pollution

Normally I just post whatever interesting bit of chemistry catches my interest on a given week, but today I'm posting about something of special interest to me. It's not about my work specifically, but it is about pollution remediation—and that, in a broad sense, is what I do.

This fascinating bit of cleanup chemistry targets some of the most difficult to remove pollutants. The unsightly colour of lignin stained water coming out of a pulp mill, pharmaceuticals passing through sewage plants (page 2), pesticide and herbicide runoff from farms, parks, golf courses, and lawns, and many others. Chemical warfare agents are even on the list of targets.

Gold, with or without cyanide

Some things are unavoidably toxic, and some things were unavoidably toxic until a new, less toxic process was discovered. Less toxic is always a good thing. Sometimes it's less expensive in terms of direct costs such as how much the reagents cost, sometimes less expensive in terms of indirect costs, such as safety precautions and environmental protection.

Sodium hydroxide is one such; the old industrial method of making it involved mercury, which is highly toxic. The new industrial method doesn't. (There are still toxic chemicals involved, but they're not mercury.)

One thing that will hopefully one day be added to the past-tense version of unavoidably toxic is gold mining. Currently, if gold can't be panned from a streambed (placer mining) where it's present as pieces of fairly pure gold, it has to be dissolved out of the rocks, often using cyanide. A newly discovered process is being described as possibly displacing the cyanide.

Greenwashing and CBC: some final thoughts

Well, that ten-post greenwashing series was a bit more work than I had anticipated, but interesting. I learned a lot, so I think that makes it worthwhile. After all, that is the point of this site!

I noticed some common threads running through nearly every item on the Marketplace list, which I've also seen and heard elsewhere. The main one is a fundamental misunderstanding of chemistry. I've lost count of how many times I've heard people in other context using "chemicals" as a blanket term for something bad. It's as if they don't realize that water is a chemical, vitamin C is a chemical, every micro- and macro-nutrient in food are chemicals, everything made of matter—beneficial, harmful, or neutral—is made of chemicals.

And they probably truly don't realize it.

Being a chemical engineer I've been so immersed in chemistry I sometimes forget that after about grade ten general science class, chemistry of any kind becomes optional. A lot of people, probably most people, don't take chemistry and don't have anything more to do with chemistry after that—sometimes to the point of not knowing the difference between an atom and a molecule.

Unfortunately, this seems to lead to a fundamental misunderstanding of what is natural and what is healthy—and what is environmentally friendly. In turn, that makes it really challenging to make informed decisions on those subjects.

At this point, I should probably reiterate my disclaimer from the first post, lest somebody claim a conflict of interest in my interest here. I have no connection with any of the companies or products listed in this series. I don't work in household products at all, in fact. I spend my days doing industrial scale environmental cleanup type work—mostly prevention lately, but I have done remediation as well. I'll also add that if some new, quality research comes to light that contradicts any of my conclusions in the previous ten posts, I'll update the relevant post accordingly as soon as I learn about it.

I'm actually more disappointed in Marketplace than I am in most people who don't understand these things, for two reasons. First, Marketplace probably has the budget to find a good expert to help them and their viewers understand this stuff—and if they don't know where to look, then they should go ask their colleague Bob McDonald: that guy has a team that can find experts in fields you didn't even know existed, and he's really good at explaining things. Second and more importantly, Marketplace have a good reputation for exposing actual problems. I had expected a higher level of accuracy from them, as well as a lower level of gullibility.

Greenwashing and CBC #1: Dawn Antibacterial Hand Soap

Continuing from last week with #1 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is Dawn Antibacterial Hand Soap dishwashing liquid.

As I mentioned last week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them approximately 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out. And hey, I don't have the format restrictions, so here's a bunch more information than they could possibly fit in.

So, product claims. It's a Dawn product, which means it's marketed as a grease-cutting dish soap that's gentle on your skin. This particular Dawn product is the only one on their website which is specifically marketed as antibacterial. It has a picture of ducks and says "Dawn helps save wildlife" on the label, also the only one shown on the website with this labelling. Their Saving Wildlife page lists two US organizations for marine animal rescue, one for marine mammals and one for seabirds, which they donate money to. They also donate dish soap to wash the birds soaked in oil. (Interestingly, the US version of the website doesn't show the ducky label, even though the organizations they support are based in the US.)

Marketplace claims that Proctor & Gamble (owners of the Dawn brand) are making a big deal out of helping wildlife while at the same time putting the ingredient triclosan in their soaps, which Environment Canada has declared toxic to aquatic wildlife, and which (unnamed) environmental groups have called for to be banned. The expert also says that it washes down the drain to the wildlife and builds up in their systems.

Greenwashing and CBC #2: Biodegradable J-Cloth

Continuing from last week with #2 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is the Biodegradable J-Cloth.

As I mention each and every week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them approximately 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out.

So, what does J-Cloth claim? Apart from being a re-usable, machine-washable, lint-free paper towel replacement, which they've established a long time ago, J-Cloth claims that its biodegradable offering is fully biodegradable, because it's made from biodegradable fibers. When called by Marketplace, they said that the fibers were cellulose from wood pulp. Unfortunately, their website doesn't seem to have any further details that I could find—and cellulose can mean a lot of things, from cotton to rayon to paper, all of which are biodegradable.

Marketplace says the biodegradable seal on the package is invented and doesn't represent any certification mark, and is there to "look official". When they asked the company, the company said that J-Cloths could go in a municipal green bin for compostable waste. The critic says J-Cloths are not certified compostable and so the city compost teams will pull it out and divert it to the landfill, and landfills are designed air tight and water tight and basically, nothing ever composts in them.

Greenwashing and CBC #3: T-Fal Natura frying pan

Continuing from my previous post with #3 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is T-fal Natura frying pan.

As I mentioned last week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them approximately 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out.

So, the T-Fal website claims for the Natura line that it's made from 100% recycled aluminium and the non-stick coating is PFOA-free, lead-free, and cadmium-free.

Marketplace says that PFOA is still used in the manufacturing process, and that it always has been not present in the final product, and that it likely causes cancer as well as being widespread in the environment. Also they acknowledge that 100% recycled aluminium is a good, environmentally friendly thing.

Greenwashing and CBC #4: Organic Melt ice remover

Continuing from last week with #4 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is Organic Melt ice remover.

As I mention each time, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them an average of 2 minutes per product, so there's only so much they can cover. I'm filling in with a bunch of stuff they couldn't have shown even if they wanted to, consisting of whatever I find that I think is relevant. Not having a 2-min time limit is handy that way.

So, the Organic Melt ice remover product brochure says that it's 100% natural, gentle on concrete and plants when used as directed, and a few other things that speak more to its effectiveness than its eco-friendliness.

Marketplace says (on asking the manufacturer) that despite the label claims, the product is only 3% organic (beets) and the rest is rock salt.

(At this point I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that rock salt is perfectly natural. If there were any above-ground rock salt deposits left (those that haven't dissolved in the rain have already been harvested) you could walk up to one and bash some rock salt loose for yourself. It's just not a plant, which is what a lot of people seem to mean when they say something is "natural".)

The Organic Melt MSDS lists the two ingredients (NaCl, aka rock salt; sugar beet extract) but doesn't display the percentage of each. The "synonyms" and "chemical class" sections, however, do acknowledge that it's mostly salt.

Greenwashing and CBC #5: Vim PowerPro Naturals

Continuing from last week with #5 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is Vim PowerPro Naturals.

As I mentioned every week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them an average of 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out.

Vim PowerPro is, according to the manufacturer's product page, "made with 98% naturally derived ingredients including fermented citric acid."

Marketplace says that the word "natural" is totally unregulated, and without an ingredients list, they can't know what that 98% natural claim actually means.

As usual, I went looking for the MSDS, but couldn't find one online. Marketplace says they asked for an ingredients list and got "only" an MSDS, which isn't an ingredients list. Funny, that's where I've been getting my ingredients lists for this series. Wish they'd posted it. It is possible that the Vim MSDS contains only the chemicals regulated as hazardous, which is what the law requires. Most companies (whose MSDS's I've seen) put all ingredients in the list, although I have seen some with only the regulated ingredients.

So, no MSDS for me, and no ingredients list either.

But—I did eventually find a candidate for an ingredients list.

Greenwashing and CBC #6: Eco Collection bath mitt

Continuing from the previous entry in this series with #6 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is the Eco Collection bath mitt.

As I have mentioned each time, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them an average of about 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out. This series is me looking to see what other information is out there.

The Eco Collection bath mitt is, according to the manufacturer's product page, a natural bamboo fiber and natural cotton product. They claim antibacterial properties for the natural bamboo fiber, and that it's made using rayon from bamboo.

Marketplace claims that bamboo can be grown sustainably but requires "funky chemical processing" to make a nice soft fiber, and the product package is unrecyclable vinyl.

This may well be the shortest segment they did of the ten—basically saying the above, then moving on. (I didn't time the segments.)

So, I'm going to look at exactly what's so "funky" about the chemical processing required to turn bamboo fiber into rayon.

Greenwashing and CBC #7: Simple Green All-Purpose Cleaner

Continuing from last week with #7 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is Simple Green All-Purpose Cleaner.

As I mentioned last week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them approximately 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out.

So, first things first: the Simple Green MSDS.

Greenwashing and CBC #8: Obusforme EcoLogic Countoured Pillow

Continuing from last week with #8 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is the ObusForme EcoLogic contoured pillow.

As I mentioned last week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them approximately 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out.

Interestingly, when I went to the ObusForme website to see how they were promoting the EcoLogic pillow, I couldn't find it there. Looking a little closer, Marketplace contacted the manufacturer to see what they had to say about it, and it turns out the EcoLogic line is no longer being marketed in Canada.

Oh, Marketplace. Why would you pick a product that isn't even being made anymore? Surely there are products still being actively marketed that are deserving of your "lousy label" sticker.

Oh well. Might as well look at it anyway. I don't know much about memory foam, and why pass up a chance to learn something new?

Greenwashing and CBC #9: Sunlight Green Clean Laundry Detergent

Continuing from last week with #9 on the CBC Marketplace "Lousy Labels" greenwashing list is Sunlight Green Clean Laundry Detergent.

As I mentioned last week, Marketplace is a 22 minute show and they did a 10-product countdown, giving them approximately 2 minutes per product, so they had to leave a lot of information out. I am the CC so I am filling the (chemistry side) gaps, to satisfy my own curiosity.

As always, I start with the MSDS to get an ingredients list.

Greenwashing?

Just this past weekend, CBC Marketplace did another one of their consumer product reviews, digging into the reality behind the marketing claims. This one is of special interest to me, because I'm both a chemical engineer and and an environmentally conscious person, and it demonstrates pretty clearly why a lot of people believe that combination isn't possible.

This episode was titled Lousy Labels: Home Edition (video, 22 minutes; text summary of their findings) and tackled "greenwashing", or overblown claims of being environmentally friendly, specifically on household products.

Since it's a 22 minute show and they covered ten products, that leaves about 2 minutes per product. There's a lot they had to leave out to fit inside that time limit.

So, because I am interested in learning, interested in being environmentally friendly, chemically inclined, and perpetually looking for something interesting to write about, I decided to take a closer look at these products.

Oh, and since I'm a chemical engineer and some people will be suspicious of me because of that, I will state up front that I have no relationship with any of the chemical products or companies talked about in this show. I don't do consumer goods, I do industrial scale environmental cleanup type stuff.

I'll do them in the same order that Marketplace did, which means I will start with #10: Raid EarthBlends Multi-bug Killer.

Where to put the carbon?

You may have seen a few articles lately about a nuisance of a chemical called carbon dioxide, namely, that it's the waste product of a number of very common chemical reactions and doesn't itself react with much (other than plants, but that reaction isn't fast or extensive enough to keep up with our current production rate) meaning it accumulates in the environment.

So, we're trying to make sure less of it gets into the environment. One class of methods which you may have heard of is carbon capture and sequestration, where after production it's captured, compressed, and often pumped deep underground—sometimes into retired oil wells, sometimes into the deep ocean, or many other places.

Before it can be stored, however, it has to be captured. Scrubbing can be highly effective at removing CO₂ from smokestacks and other concentrated sources, traditionally with amine solutions. Then there was a new discovery about the CO₂ absorption of polyethylenimine, which was what caused me to start researching this post.

One of the issues with a reaction that is very effective at grabbing a chemical out of the air is making it let go again. Most of the chemicals that are good at grabbing CO₂ are too expensive to use only once. Polyethylenimine is of great interest because it releases the CO₂ easily by heating it up, which can let the CO₂ be collected in concentrated form for use elsewhere.

Calcium Catastrophe

Generally speaking, a sudden drastic change in the chemistry of your environment is catastrophic. From bacteria to humans, there is a range of chemistry we can tolerate, and outside that range we tend to die.

I mentioned one major geochemical event last year, when free atmospheric oxygen first became common. That was a pretty catastrophic change for the living creatures (bacteria) who were adapted to the pre-oxygen conditions of the early earth.

Some time after that, another major geochemical event happened. Some researchers now think that this led directly to the cambrian explosion and to more complex life on earth. Even so, it was a catastrophic change—from the point of view of the creatures who didn't survive it.

Magnetic soap

This video demonstrates a nifty advance in surfactant science: unfortunately I can't include it here, so you have to click on supporting information then the .mpg video file link to see it.

What is shown on the right, sticking to the metallic disk being lowered into the liquid, is magnetic soap. (On the left is normal, non-magnetic soap.) The little yellow blob that lifted with the magnet-on-a-stick through the clear liquid and then fell when the magnet was lifted right out of the liquid, is the soap itself.

Three different non-magnetic surfactants were made magnetic by reacting them with ferric chloride, a common industrial chemical.

A solution of ferric chloride by itself also reacts very slightly to magnets, but it finds most of its use as a coagulant, not as a soap.

Recycling water

It may be something we don't like to think about, but one of the things the astronauts have to do while in orbit will be coming more and more to Earth. Fresh water is limited, and getting more so with time. Water conservation helps, but it may not be enough in the future.

Whether they are dependent on well water or surface water, many cities have to worry about having enough water to last through the dry season as the water levels drop. Water restrictions are common in some areas; where I grew up, part of the summer routine was that you couldn't water your lawn whenever you wanted, but only on certain days. Sometimes there was an outright ban on watering lawns if the river level was too low.

At the same time, the volume of water leaving a city's wastewater treatment plant is a substantial part of what the city brought in to start with, and grows with population more than the season.

As wastewater treatment technology improves, the sewage plant's discharge gets cleaner and cleaner, so why not use it as feed for our clean water treatment system?

Acid and oxygen

Acid rock drainage is one of the big environmental problems facing hard rock mines, because it keeps going for decades after the mine is closed and abandoned, poisoning everything downstream with the toxic metals leached from the rock. It's a natural process that occurs wherever rock is exposed to oxygen and water; metal sulphides are oxidized by the oxygen to dissolved metal and sulphuric acid. Exposed rock is eventually consumed until there is little to no unreacted metal or sulphide accessible to oxygen.

However, as the process requires oxygen, it couldn't happen until the earth's atmosphere actually had oxygen in it. I haven't yet found a definitive description of what exactly the earth's atmospheric composition was before the change, but the difference between chemistry with and without oxygen is pretty clear, as oxygen is highly reactive and tends to get into everything. For one, the acid rock drainage I mentioned above. Another indication is the type of iron minerals deposited—with or without oxygen, and how much oxygen. As iron combines very easily with oxygen, if you find an iron deposit without any oxygen there's a good chance no oxygen was available to it at the time it was formed.