Advertisement

Arabian Journal of Geosciences

, 12:555 | Cite as

Mechanism of the dissolution of methane in the complex micellar system of NaOA/cyclohexane

  • Zhian Huang
  • Yi Zhang
  • Zhenlu ShaoEmail author
  • Jingjing Wang
  • Yinghua Zhang
  • Linghua Zhang
  • Xiaohan Liu
  • Hui Wang
  • Min Zhang
ISMSSE 2018
  • 60 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Mine Safety Science and Engineering

Abstract

The surfactant sodium oleate (NaOA) has important applications in dissolving methane, but there is insufficient research regarding the dissolution mechanism of methane in compound solutions of NaOA. Cyclohexane can also be used as a reagent to dissolve methane because of the similar phase dissolution principles. Thus, surfactant NaOA and the compounding reagent cyclohexane are selected as the experimental subjects of this study. In this study, the optimum ratio of NaOA to cyclohexane and the dissolution mechanism of methane in the mixed solution are microscopically determined by measuring the amount of methane dissolution, critical micelle concentration, particle size, and micelle morphology in the mixed solutions. Compared with the single NaOA solution, the mixed solutions of NaOA and cyclohexane have lower critical concentrations of micelles, more concentrated micelle particle size distributions, and more extended and aggregated micelle morphologies, all of which lead to higher methane solubilities in the mixed solutions. The optimum NaOA to cyclohexane ratio for dissolving methane is 1:3. The NaOA to cyclohexane concentration ratio of 1:3 demonstrates the lowest critical micelle concentration, which is most likely to generate micelles with a hydrophobic environment favorable for the dissolution of methane. The mixed solution at this ratio also demonstrates the most suitable particle size distribution and micelle morphology for the retention of methane in the core of the micelle.

Keywords

Surfactant NaOA/cyclohexane Dissolve Methane 

Notes

Funding information

The authors appreciate the financial support of project No. 51474017 provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, project No. 2017CXNL02 provided by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (China University of Mining and Technology), project No. WS2018B03 provided by the State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base for Gas Geology and Gas Control (Henan Polytechnic University), and project No. E21724 provided by the Work Safety Key Lab on Prevention and Control of Gas and Roof Disasters for Southern Coal Mines of China (Hunan University of Science and Technology).

References

  1. Alawi SM, Akhter MS (2011) Effect of N, N-dimethyl acetamide on the critical micelle concentration of aqueous solutions of sodium surfactants. J Mol Liq 160(2):63–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alshaheri AA, Tahir MIM, Rahman MBA, Ravoof TB, Saleh TA (2017) Catalytic oxidation of cyclohexane using transition metal complexes of dithiocarbazate Schiff base. Chem Eng Sci 327:423–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baek S, Ahn YH, Zhang J, Min J, Lee H, Lee JW (2017) Enhanced methane hydrate formation with cyclopentane hydrate seeds. Appl Energy 202:32–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhattacharjee G, Kushwaha OS, Kumar A, Khan MY, Patel JN, Kumar R (2017) Effects of micellization on growth kinetics of methane hydrate. Ind Eng Chem Res 56(13):3687–3698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cai L, Pethica BA, Debenedetti PG, Sundaresan S (2016) Formation of cyclopentane methane binary clathrate hydrate in brine solutions. Chem Eng Sci 141:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Di Profio P, Arca S, Germani R, Savelli G (2005) Surfactant promoting effects on clathrate hydrate formation: are micelles really involved? Chem Eng Sci 60(15):4141–4145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. García-Aguilar B, Ramirez A, Jones J, Heitz M (2011) Solubility of methane in pure non-ionic surfactants and pure and mixtures of linear alcohols at 298 K and 101.3 kPa. Chem Pap 65(3):373–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gayet P, Dicharr C, Marion G, Graciaa A, Lachaise J, Nestero A (2005) Experimental determination of methane hydrate dissociation curve up to 55 MPa by using a small amount of surfactant as hydrate promoter. Chem Eng Sci 60(21):5751–5758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hameed A, Ismail IMI, Aslam M, Gondal MA (2014) Photocatalytic conversion of methane into methanol: performance of silver impregnated WO3. Appl Catal A 470:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Horn R, Schlögl R (2015) Methane activation by heterogeneous catalysis. Catal Lett 145(1):23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hosseini M, Ghozatloo A, Shariaty-Niassar M (2015) Effect of CVD graphene on hydrate formation of natural gas. J Nanostruct Chem 5(2):219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kakehashi R, Shizuma M, Yamamura S, Takeda T (2004) Mixed micelles containing sodium oleate: the effect of the chain length and the polar head group. J Colloid Interface Sci 279(1):253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karakashev SI, Smoukov SK (2017) CMC prediction for ionic surfactants in pure water and aqueous salt solutions based solely on tabulated molecular parameters. J Colloid Interface Sci 501:142–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li Q, Ruan M, Lin B, Zhao M, Zheng Y, Wang K (2016) Molecular simulation study of metal organic frameworks for methane capture from low-concentration coal mine methane gas. J Porous Mater 23(1):107–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lin BQ, Liu T, Zou QL, Zhu CJ, Yan FZ, Zhen Z (2015) Crack propagation patterns and energy evolution rules of coal within slotting disturbed zone under various lateral pressure coefficients. Arab J Geosci 8(9):6643–6654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu Z, Yang H, Cheng W, Xin L, Ni G (2017) Stress distribution characteristic analysis and control of coal and gas outburst disaster in a pressure-relief boundary area in protective layer mining. Arab J Geosci 10:358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lv Q, Song Y, Li X (2016) Kinetic study on the process of cyclopentane + methane hydrate formation in NaCl solution. Energ Fuel 30(2):1310–1316Google Scholar
  18. Messina P, Morini M, Schulz P (2003) Aqueous sodium oleate–sodium dehydrocholate mixtures at low concentration. Colloid Polym. Sci 281(11):1082–1091Google Scholar
  19. Periana RA, Mironov O, Taube D, Bhalla G, Jones CJ (2003) Catalytic, oxidative condensation of CH4 to CH3COOH in one step via CH activation. Science 301(5634):814–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ramirez AA, Jones JP, Heitz M (2012) Methane treatment in biotrickling filters packed with inert materials in presence of a non-ionic surfactant. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 87(6):843–858Google Scholar
  21. Skutil K, Taniewski M (2006) Some technological aspects of methane aromatization (direct and via oxidative coupling). Fuel Process Technol 87(6):511–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tang P, Zhu Q, Wu Z, Ma D (2014) Methane activation: the past and future. Energy Environ Sci 7(8):2580–2591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Torchilin VP (2001) Structure and design of polymeric surfactant-based drug delivery systems. J Control Release 73(2):137–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Uner A, Yilmaz F (2015) Efficiency of laundry polymers containing liquid detergents for hard surface cleaning. J Surfactant Deterg 18(2):213–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Verrett J, Posteraro D, Servio P (2012) Surfactant effects on methane solubility and mole fraction during hydrate growth. Chem Eng Sci 84(52):80–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang F, Jia ZZ, Luo SJ, Fu SF, Wang L, Shi XS, Wang CS, Guo RB (2015) Effects of different anionic surfactants on methane hydrate formation. Chem Eng Sci 137:896–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang L, Liu R, Hu Y, Sun W (2016) Adsorption of mixed DDA/NaO NaOL surfactants at the air/water interface by molecular dynamics simulations. Chem Eng Sci 155:167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wu J, Li P, Hui Q, Zhao D, Zhang X (2014) Using correlation and multivariate statistical analysis to identify hydrogeochemical processes affecting the major ion chemistry of waters: a case study in Laoheba phosphorite mine in Sichuan, China. Arab J Geosci 7(10):3973–3982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zang X, Lv Q, Li X, Li G (2017) Experimental investigation on cyclopentane–methane hydrate formation kinetics in brine. Energy Fuel 31(1):824–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhao WL, Zhong DL, Yang C (2016) Prediction of phase equilibrium conditions for gas hydrates formed in the presence of cyclopentane or cyclohexane. Fluid Phase Equilib 427:82–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhian Huang
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Yi Zhang
    • 1
  • Zhenlu Shao
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jingjing Wang
    • 5
  • Yinghua Zhang
    • 1
  • Linghua Zhang
    • 1
  • Xiaohan Liu
    • 1
  • Hui Wang
    • 1
  • Min Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of High-Efficient Mining and Safety of Metal Mines (University of Science and Technology Beijing)Ministry of EducationBeijingChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Gas and Fire Control for Coal Mines (China University of Mining and Technology)Ministry of EducationXuzhouChina
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base for Gas Geology and Gas Control (Henan Polytechnic University)JiaozuoChina
  4. 4.Work Safety Key Lab on Prevention and Control of Gas and Roof Disasters for Southern Coal Mines (Hunan University of Science and Technology)XiangtanChina
  5. 5.Beijing Key Laboratory of Operation Safety of Gas, Heating and Underground Pipelines (Beijing Research Center of Urban System Engineering)BeijingChina

Personalised recommendations