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.

Oily algae

Algae, as well as other biologically sourced feed stocks, has been the subject of a lot of research in oil production, for what should be obvious reasons. There are several things about using some bio-sources that concern me, however. Using food cropland to grow corn or soy intended for conversion to fuel, for one, resulting in less food production (and contributing to higher food prices).

The bio-sources that don't bother me in this way are things like manure or other waste to bio-fuel. Even wood waste and scrap paper can be turned into either oil or syngas (which can be turned into oil, among other things).

But, an interesting comment in a recent press release about oil from algae caught my eye: "byproduct stream of material containing phosphorus that can be recycled to grow more algae."

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.

Timely prizes

Here's something fun that I feel like I should have heard about before now, what with following science news and all that.

The Center for Communicating Science has an annual challenge to (surprise!) communicate a scientific subject—in a way that an 11-year-old will understand. Which means no university level math. Obviously, my posts here are not even close to what they're looking for, since I assume at least high school chemistry, most of the time, and I like including math.

One of the two winners is a canadian PhD student in chemistry and, from the look of his videos, an all-around goof. I certainly got a few laughs out of his video, and I thought his explanation was the clearest I've ever heard.

Seeing at the surface

One of the quirks of chemistry is that we measure the bulk solution, but the reaction often happens on a surface - whether it's precipitation, dissolution, or catalysis.

While we usually calculate reaction rates based on the concentrations found in the bulk solution, in a case of a surface reaction, that's out where no reaction is happening! The equations for reaction rates empirically account for this in the constants, where the reaction rate is rolled together with the rate the reagents diffuse toward the surface to react and the rate the reaction products diffuse away from the surface and out of the way.

But in terms of designing a reaction, controlling it to get, say, the product we want instead of a byproduct if there are two possible reactions, or speeding it up or slowing it down, what happens at the surface can be key. And whether we watch or measure, knowing what happens at the surface is the first step toward changing what happens at the surface.

Not chemistry

Ok, this isn't chemistry, or engineering, but I think it's pretty cool.

Archaeologists found king Richard III, for real. The location and battle wounds and twisted spine were excellent clues, but the DNA test comparing the skeleton to two people descended from his sister confirmed it.

DNA testing is chemistry-related, right? Ok, this post is chemistry related after all :-)

Bouncing liquids

Never mind hydrophobic, how about "omniphobic"?

A new material—or rather, a new shape of an existing material—has been made that rejects nearly every liquid thrown at it, both oils and waters, both acids and bases. The material is a plastic, one with slightly lower surface energy than the famous PTFE (Teflon), so it has very little stick to it to begin with.

In order to make the liquids not only not stick but actually bounce right off, they changed the shape at a microscopic level so it wasn't a smooth flat surface, but a textured surface that was mostly air:

Posted with permission from J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2013, 135 (2), pp 578–581. Copyright 2012 American Chemical Society.

Inspired by: bacteria

Here's another one where nature meets engineering on a microscopic scale: tiny submarines small enough to swim through your blood vessels.

Oops, wrong link.

The submarines I'm actually talking about won't carry people, but once built they could be made to carry small doses of medicine, and directed to swim to a specific spot in your body.

The reason this merits a mention in the "nature meets engineering" category is that down at the 10\(\mu\)m scale (which is to say, 100 of these lined up end to end would only reach 1mm long) you can't just build a tiny motor and propeller and expect to have the submarine go anywhere, because at that scale, the physics of it just doesn't work. Instead, what they looked at was how creatures that are actually that small get around.

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.

Arsenate: love it or hate it?

Science makes yet another super-interesting discovery that started from a "wait, that's weird" moment. One which was initially misinterpreted, too.

So a while back there was a big splash in the news about some bacteria which had been isolated from a lake that was quite high in arsenic, where said bacteria—and other creatures—were thriving despite the arsenic.

It wasn't just that the bacteria could live in an environment containing arsenic, as there were already known bacteria which "breathe" arsenate; it was that the initial tests seemed to show that the bacteria could grow in the absence of phosphate, by substituting arsenate for phosphate.

This last conclusion turned out to be incorrect. However, the bacteria could still thrive in lab environments where the phosphate to arsenate ratio got completely absurd—as long as there was a trace of phosphate there. That in itself was pretty strange, because arsenate is a deadly poison.

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.

Computer researcher

Looks like computers are opening up even more areas of chemistry!

Earlier this year I posted about some software that can predict crystal growth conditions.

Now, there's new software coming out that can predict organic chemistry reactions.

Organic chemistry isn't my field, so unlike the crystal software I probably won't be able to justify a purchase to my boss, but I can still think that this is pretty amazing. The researchers spent a good solid ten years putting the sum total of all organic chemistry knowledge from the past 250 years into a database.

Not only can the computer search possible reaction pathways to make whatever compound you want, you can also filter those results. For example, pathways that use only non-toxic ingredients, or pathways with fewer reaction steps.

In one excellent example, the software came up with what they're calling a "one-pot" reaction for an asthma drug, which is normally produced with four separate reaction and separation steps. The suggested one-pot reaction said that they could put all the ingredients in the same flask in a specific order with specific timing—but with no separation steps, which are often complicated and expensive—and get the asthma drug they wanted—so they tried it.

It worked.

This software sounds like it can lead to the truly ideal case that chemical engineers wish for: faster, cheaper, and safer all at the same time. There are a lot of reactions that use dangerous chemicals, because we don't know of alternate reactions to produce the same thing. Sometimes, research eventually reveals an alternate; for an inorganic example, the production of sodium hydroxide used to involve mercury, which is very toxic even in very small amounts. Now, the mercury process is rarely if ever used, because better and safer processes have been found.