4.7 Article

Stability and Free Radical Production for CO2 and H2 in Air Nanobubbles in Ethanol Aqueous Solution

期刊

NANOMATERIALS
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nano12020237

关键词

nanobubble stability; free radical; carbon dioxide; hydrogen; ethanol aqueous solution; extended DLVO theory

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [21976039]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, stable hydrogen and carbon dioxide nanobubbles were produced in ethanol aqueous solution using the high-speed agitation method. The nanobubbles exhibited high negative zeta potential in alkaline conditions and collapsed to produce free radicals in acidic conditions.
In this study, 8% hydrogen (H-2) in argon (Ar) and carbon dioxide (CO2) gas nanobubbles was produced at 10, 30, and 50 vol.% of ethanol aqueous solution by the high-speed agitation method with gas. They became stable for a long period (for instance, 20 days), having a high negative zeta potential (-40 to -50 mV) at alkaline near pH 9, especially for 10 vol.% of ethanol aqueous solution. The extended Derjaguin, Landau, Verwey, and Overbeek (DLVO) theory was used to evaluate the nanobubble stability. When the nanobubble in ethanol alkaline aqueous solution changed to an acidic pH of around 5, the zeta potential of nanobubbles was almost zero and the decrease in the number of nanobubbles was identified by the particle trajectory method (Nano site). The collapsed nanobubbles at zero charge were detected thanks to the presence of few free radicals using G-CYPMPO spin trap reagent in electron spin resonance (ESR) spectroscopy. The free radicals produced were superoxide anions at collapsed 8%H-2 in Ar nanobubbles and hydroxyl radicals at collapsed CO2 nanobubbles. On the other hand, the collapse of mixed CO2 and H-2 in Ar nanobubble showed no free radicals. The possible presence of long-term stable nanobubbles and the absence of free radicals for mixed H-2 and CO2 nanobubble would be useful to understand the beverage quality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据