Greening the Blue Bottle
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 жов 2024
- Demonstrating the classic "blue bottle" chemical demonstration, as well as a new version from a paper I read. The new version uses completely different chemistry to achieve the same effect as the classic version, and is "green" in the sense that it is more environmentally friendly.
The paper:
"Greening the Blue Bottle", Whitney E. Wellman and Mark E. Noble
www.scheikundei...
Music: End Credits by _ghost of ccmixter.org.
link: ccmixter.org/fi...
Freely downloaded and used under the CC BY-NC 3.0 US license. This work is NOT primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or monetary compensation, and thus does not violate the non-commercial clause.
Oh hey cool to see a new video!
Not sure the new version is really that much more environmentally friendly. Definitely less caustic, but I think the addition of the copper makes it worse than having a bit of hydroxide in the classic one. Considering the dye is the least environmentally friendly piece of the whole thing and it stays constant I'd say it's a solid draw. Very cool to see new chemistry employed to do the same job though! And the new one is a hair easier to source ingredients for but not by much considering it is more ingredients. Not in the age of amazon anyway. Great video :)
Oh, hey, funny seeing you here!
I agree, the "green" one isn't more environmentally friendly. But it looks nicer, and uses a catalyst, which is neat for a chemistry demonstration.
Yeah, I was also wondering why they'd call the new version more "green". It is, if you look at the color, but the ingredients? Sodium hydroxide is (environmentally) harmless, glucose even more so. Copper ions on the other hand are poison for water treatment plants, because it inhibits/kills their bacteria.
Agreed, by having copper in the solution it is less environmentally friendly. There are limits on copper discharge in lab waste water, whereas the classic experiment only needs to be neutralized.
Yeah that's fair. They also mean it in the sense of using less total chemicals as in "green chemistry." Plus the amount of copper is tiny, so it's not a huge issue. But I see what you mean. Thanks for the comment!
@@mrhomescientist Ya the amount is tiny, it's not really an issue. I'm sure more copper is released just from old pipes. Just seems like a bit of greenwashing on the part of the papers authors without actually making it that much more environmentally friendly. My guess is probably to help the paper get accepted for publication as it's an easier sell, than "new blue bottle chemistry". Still a cool reaction non the less and not a big deal at all, people do that all the time. If you want grant funding to study a new antimicrobial, title the paper "killing anthrax spores" and enjoy your pile of grant money and instant nature publication, even if you don't really care about that microbe.
Some subscriptions are worth hanging on to "just in case". Glad to see something new from you, thanks!
hello!!!
Hola!! ^^
Why, hello there
hi Tom
Greetings from the future!
Holy moly hes back!!! Plz make more we still love u
Man I love your lab benches!
Me too!! I got them from School Specialty. They sell and deliver to individuals, and were great to work with.
If you added a bit of oil to the flask, would that reduce oxygen diffusion and stop the blue ring from forming?
Probably! That's a great idea and I'll have to try it.
Outstanding.
On one hand, I'm tempted to try this. On the other, there are days where I would waste hours shaking the bottle and watching it change colors.
Worth it!
Thanks for the new video!!! during full blue is the newer solution less opaque? it seemed like that but i couldn't tell if it was due to the lighting angle.
Yeah it never seems to get quite as dark as the classic. It's possible I didn't use exactly the same amount of dye, though; next time I'll do this more carefully.
Hard to beat a classic.
The new version is still pretty interesting, though
Come for the chemical reactions, stays for the 70s cop show music!
LOL well now that's all that sounds like to me. Spot on.
if u open up the bottle, can you "revive" the solution adding more oxygen? or it won't work?
That should work, but I've never had a need to. The classic version was still going strong after a full day of kids shaking it in a sealed flask!
if the reaction is oxidizing the methylene blue than the time to oxidize or reduce all the metheylene blue would be somewhat dependent on the amount of it. I'd be interested to see if the reaction rates were different if you made a stock solution of the methyelene blue and put say 1 drop in one and 2 drops in the other.
That's definitely a better way to do it, for direct comparisons. I'll try that next time.
How is sodium hydroxide and glucose *not* green? Hydroxide is easy to dispose of properly, and you can eat glucose.
I think they also mean it as in using less overall chemicals, one of the principles of "green chemistry". I agree it's easy to neutralize, and then you just have salty sugar water!
I wonder: if you flushed out the air in the headspace and replace with pure oxygen, how will it affect the reaction?
Interesting! That would be cool to try. I could also fill with nitrogen to show that it doesn't work!
@@mrhomescientist Definitely something to try out. Would the methylene blue remain in a permanently oxidised state because the O2 concentration is so high? How would the absence of nitrogen, CO2 and noble gases affect the diffusion of the O2? Or would the rate of colour change to the blue (oxidised) form happen much faster compared to the diluted O2 of air?
How is using copper sulphate greener than using sodium hydroxide?
I've used glucose syrup and mixedbiy with the caustic soda, I am wondering why it turns green in color
I strongly disagree that this new recipe is more enviorrnmentally friendly and easier to source chemicals. Sodium hydroxide and glucose can be bought in any grocery store and is completely non-toxic and can be pored down the drain (although in concentrated solution is corrosive). Cupper sulfate is toxic and allergenic, and should not be poured down the drain. Additionally I wouldn't even know where to source it locally without going to specialized stores och ordering online.
It depends on where you are, I suppose. I definitely can't get NaOH or dextrose (not regular glucose!) in stores here. As for CuSO4, you just need to know where to look. The paper mentions an aquarium product that contains it, and I find it pure as root killer for plumbing at hardware stores. NaOH is most definitely not completely non-toxic - it's highly corrosive and especially dangerous to the eyes. CuSO4 is an irritant and bad for aquatic life, I agree, but it's such a tiny amount here. Just 19 MILLIgrams in 250mL, which isn't enough to worry about. If you wanted, though, you could certainly precipitate it out with more baking soda.
@@mrhomescientistDextrose and glucose is exactly the same thing, same CAS number. Sodim or potassium hydroxide is normal drain cleaner, or if they contain other stuff in your area you can get it from the "organic homemade" section as it is used in pure form to make soap.
@@Richard.Andersson Huh, looks like you're right about dextrose! Good call. I must have been thinking of sucrose; that's regular table sugar. I didn't realize dextrose and glucose were the same, just named differently based on where they came from. That's interesting.
Some drain cleaners are hydroxides, true. The ones in my area all seem to be mixed with other things, though, so I avoid them for chemistry. It's plentiful online, though.
I am from the school you went on Friday
That's awesome! I hope you had fun and saw some cool stuff 👍