Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-gs9qr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T04:55:33.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effect of N2O, Catalyst, and Means of Water Vapor Removal on the Graphitization of Small CO2 Samples

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

A M Smith ,
Vasilii V Petrenko ,
Quan Hua ,
John Southon  and
Gordon Brailsford
A M Smith
Affiliation:
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), Lucas Heights, New South Wales 2234, Australia
Vasilii V Petrenko
Affiliation:
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California 92037, USA
Quan Hua
Affiliation:
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), Lucas Heights, New South Wales 2234, Australia
John Southon
Affiliation:
Earth System Science Department, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California 92697, USA
Gordon Brailsford
Affiliation:
National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), Wellington, New Zealand
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The effect of nitrous oxide (N2O) upon the graphitization of small (∼40 μg of carbon) CO2 samples at the ANSTO and University of California, Irvine, radiocarbon laboratories was investigated. Both laboratories produce graphite samples by reduction of CO2 over a heated iron catalyst in the presence of an excess of H2. Although there are significant differences between the methods employed at each laboratory, it was found that N2O has no effect upon the reaction at levels of up to 9.3% by volume of CO2. Further, it was systematically determined that more effective water vapor trapping resulted in faster reaction rates. Using larger amounts of the Fe catalyst generally resulted in higher yields or reaction rates (but not both). The effects of changing the type of Fe catalyst on the final yield and reaction rate were less clear.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , 2007 , pp. 245 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Copeland, LE, Bragg, RH. 1954. The hydrates of magnesium perchlorate. Journal of Physical Chemistry 58(12):1075–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fink, D, Hotchkis, M, Hua, Q, Jacobsen, G, Smith, AM, Zoppi, U, Child, D, Mifsud, C, van der Gaast, H, Williams, A, Williams, M. 2004. The ANTARES AMS facility at ANSTO. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 223–224:109–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hua, Q, Zoppi, U, Williams, AA, Smith, AM. 2004. Small-mass AMS radiocarbon analysis at ANTARES. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 223–224:284–92.Google Scholar
Lowe, DC, Brenninkmeijer, CAM, Tyler, SC, Dlugkencky, EJ. 1991. Determination of the isotopic composition of atmospheric methane and its applications in the Antarctic. Journal of Geophysical Research 96(D8):15,455–67.Google Scholar
McNichol, AP, Gagnon, AR, Jones, GA, Osborne, EA. 1992. Illumination of a black box: analysis of gas composition during graphite target preparation. Radiocarbon 34(3):321–9.Google Scholar
Olsson, RG, Turkdogan, ET. 1974. Catalytic effect of iron on decomposition of carbon monoxide. II. Effect of additions of H2, H2O, CO2, SO2 and H2S. Metallurgical Transactions 5(1):21–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, A. 2000. Biogeochemical applications of compound-specific radiocarbon analysis [PhD dissertation]. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 352 p.Google Scholar
Pearson, A, McNichol, AP, Schneider, RJ, von Reden, KF, Zheng, Y. 1998. Microscale AMS 14C measurement at NOSAMS. Radiocarbon 40(1):61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, GM, Southon, JR, Druffel-Rodriguez, KC, Griffin, S, Mazon, M. 2004. Magnesium perchlorate as an alternative water trap in AMS graphite sample preparation: a report on sample preparation at KCCAMS at the University of California, Irvine. Radiocarbon 46(1):165–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southon, J, Santos, G, Druffel-Rodriguez, K, Druffel, E, Trumbore, S, Xu, X, Griffin, S, Ali, S, Mazon, M. 2004. The Keck Carbon Cycle AMS Laboratory, University of California, Irvine: initial operation and a background surprise. Radiocarbon 46(1):41–9.Google Scholar
Verkouteren, RM, Klouda, GA. 1992. Factorial design techniques applied to optimization of AMS graphite target preparation. Radiocarbon 34(3):335–43.Google Scholar
Verkouteren, RM, Klouda, GA, Currie, LA, Donahue, DJ, Jull, AJT, Linick, TW. 1987. Preparation of microgram samples on iron wool for radiocarbon analysis via accelerator mass spectrometry: a closed-system approach. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 29(1–2):41–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar