| Literature DB >> 30082729 |
Seokju Seo1, Gabriela Alvarez Perez1, Ketan Tewari2, Xavier Comas3, Myeongsub Kim4.
Abstract
This work shows the potential of nickel (Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30082729 PMCID: PMC6079042 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-29605-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Conceptual illustration for the hydration of CO2. (a) Accelerated CO2 dissolution by Ni NPs catalytic potential. (b) The decreased catalytic potential of Ni NPs by the aggregation behavior of NPs in high ionic strengths. (c) Stabilized Ni NPs by polymers in brine at high salinity levels.
Figure 2A microfluidic approach for evaluation of CO2 dissolution into water. (a) A microfluidic platform with its configuration. (b,c) Representative micrographs of CO2 bubbles at two different locations (near the junction and the outlet) in the flow-focusing geometry. (d) A histogram of estimated diameters of CO2 bubbles near the junction.
Figure 3(a) A time series of CO2 bubbles at the junction of the microchannel. (b) Histograms of the initial diameter of CO2 bubbles. (c) Representative micrographs of CO2 bubbles near the outlet at the concentration of salinity (0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 15%, and 30% NaCl). (d) Variations in size of CO2 bubbles near the outlet at different salinities. (e) A diagram of percent changes (%∆ = (D − D)/D × 100) in average diameter of CO2 bubbles and the graph of Henry’s constant () at different salinities.
Figure 4(a) A representative time-lapse microscopy image of CO2 bubbles near the junction and the outlet in the presence of Ni NPs at different salinities (0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 15%, and 30% NaCl). (b) Histograms of sizes of CO2 bubbles near the junction (the initial location) and the outlet (the final location) to confirm the effect of salinity on Ni NPs’ catalytic potential. (c) The percent changes in average diameter of CO2 bubbles near the outlet in the presence and absence of Ni NPs at different salinities (**p <0.01). (d) The graphs of experimentally measured ζ potential and conductivity of Ni NPs solution at different salinities. (Error bars show mean ± standard error of the mean from three independent measurements). (e) The electrostatic double layer potential (ϕ) between two Ni NPs from the extended-DLVO theory at various ionic strengths.
Figure 5(a) Representative micrographs of CO2 bubbles near the junction (top) and the outlet (bottom) at stabilized Ni NPs by 0.01%, 0.02%, and 0.03% of DEX, PVP, and CMC at 10% NaCl. (b) A diagram of percent changes in average diameter of CO2 bubbles in Ni NPs solution with DEX, PVP, CMC and graphs () of measured ζ potential of stabilized Ni NPs as a function of polymer concentration at 0.01%, 0.02%, and 0.03%. (c) Diagrams of changes in hydrodynamic particle size (d.nm) of Ni NPs with 0.03% of DEX, PVP, and CMC at different salinities (0%, 15%, and 30% NaCl). (d) FTIR spectra of Ni NPs, polymers, and Ni NPs with DEX, PVP, and CMC.
Figure 6Schematic of test setup (not to scale) and the microfluidic chip of the flow-focusing configuration. An example of collected CO2 bubbles is shown for image processing.