During this project, we worked with Mountain Studies Institute to investigate the effectiveness of biochar on mine tailings. We then wrote a scientific paper and made a scientific poster. Link to scientific paper, Link to scientific poster.
New and Improved Project
Project Description:
In this project, we each chose something that we thought could be improved in some way or something new that would do something better. I chose to replace sodium laureth sulfate with disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in shampoo to reduce drying of the scalp and to reduce the carcinogenic qualities associated with sodium laureth sulfate. Once we decided on our thing, we then researched the chemical qualities of what we were changing, and the bonding found within. The final product was to write a letter to the company suggesting a change in their product.
Letter:
Animas High School
3206 Main Ave.
Durango, CO 81301
October 27, 2011
Garnier Consumer Affairs
PO Box 1010
PO Box 1010
Clark, NJ 07066-1010
Dear Consumer Affairs Specialist:
My name is Aiyana Anderson, I am a student at Animas High School in Durango, CO. We are currently doing a project involving improving products, and I chose to do my project on your Garnier Fructis Shampoo. In order to have a safer and more effective product, I recommend that you replace Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES) with Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate (DLS).
Sodium Laureth Sulfate is a surfactant that is in your Garnier Fructis Color Shield Shampoo. SLES is very irritating to the skin and dries out the hair. 1,4-dioxane, which is a known carcinogenic, is often found in products containing SLES, and because of the small size of the SLES molecule, it can be absorbed into the skin. In addition, it contains ethylene oxide, which is classified as a probable human carcinogen.
However, there is an alternative to SLES - Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, which is far less harsh and toxic. DLS, like SLES, is an anionic surfactant, which means that it has a negative charge, so it has the same strong cleaning and frothing capabilities, which are more effective than most other surfactants. The DLS molecule is considerably larger than the SLES molecule, which means that it cannot be absorbed into the skin. This reduces the irritation, the drying, and the exposure and absorption of potentially carcinogenic components.
The hazards associated with SLES include 1,4-dioxane, which is known to the state of California to be a carcinogenic. In addition, the California EPA found it to be a neurotoxicant, a kidney toxicant, and a respiratory toxicant, among other things. The FDA has found it to cause cancer in large quantities, but in miniscule amounts it will not be detrimental. However, many people would rather not take that risk in their everyday life if there is an alternative.
Ethylene oxide is a gas, but it is very soluble in water. It is considered by the EPA to be a probable carcinogen, and to have other detrimental effects on health, especially with prolonged or repetitive exposure.
SLES has 57 atoms in a molecule, CH3(CH2)10CH2(OCH2CH2)2OSO3Na, whereas DLS has 75 atoms, C22H40Na2O10S, making it a bigger molecule that is more difficult to absorb.
Although SLES is very cheap and effective, it has damaging effects on the human body. Many people would be willing to pay the extra money to get a product with a safer ingredient in it. DLS is still highly effective, but much less harmful to one’s health. For these reasons, it would be beneficial to replace Sodium Laureth Sulfate with Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate in your shampoo.
Sincerely,
Aiyana Anderson
Animas High School
3206 Main Ave.
Durango, CO 81301
Enclosures: 1
Enclosure 1: Appendix
Surfactants
Surfactants
A surfactant is a compound that decreases the surface tension of a liquid. They can be used for things such as shampoos, hair conditioners, toothpastes, sanitizers, detergents, fabric softeners, inks, paints, adhesives, ski waxes, anti-fogs, pipelines, leak detectors, firefighting, insecticides, herbicides, and de-inking recycled papers. They are made up of a water or oil soluble component and a water or oil insoluble component. The insoluble head is just outside the interface of the water, and the soluble tail end stays in the water, which serves to change the properties of the interface, resulting in less surface tension.
Ethylene Oxide
Ethylene Oxide, or C2H4O, is a cycelic ether, which means that it is arranged in a circular shape, with two carbons and one oxygen atom. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classified it as a known carcinogen.
1,4-Dioxane
1,4-dioxane is a compound that is known to possibly cause cancer in humans, because it does in animals. It is a byproduct of ethoxylation, which occurs when you add ethylene oxide to a phenol or alcohol.
Sodium Laureth Sulfate Chemical Structure
Sodium Laureth Sulfate, or SLES, has 57 atoms in a molecule: CH3(CH2)10CH2(OCH2CH2)2OSO3Na. The chain of Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Sulfur atoms in this compound are all covalently bonded, however, the Sodium on the end is ionically bonded to them. This results in a boiling point of 100°C, a melting point of about 5°C, and it is non-reactive and soluble.
Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate Chemical Structure
Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, or DLS, has 75 atoms in a molecule: C22H40Na2O10S. Like the SLES molecule, it is mostly covalently bonded, with the exception of the sodium atoms, which are ionically bonded. The boiling point is 513°C and it is soluble, and non-reactive.
Project Reflection:
I think that my project turned out quite well. I was very thorough, and identified the most important reasons for changing the shampoo, as well as the chemical reasons for changing it. At the beginning, I thought that replacing the SLES with DLS because of the carcinogenic properties would work, (and that's what I stuck with to the end) but about a day before the project was due, I found out that DLS also had slight carcinogenic properties. Those properties were less severe than SLES, but still present. At that point, I had to decide if it was ok to keep going, but I realized that it was still a better alternative so I just went with it. If I had more time, I would have tried to research other surfactants more to find one that was not carcinogenic at all. I would also try to find more details of the bonding within the molecules, and how that makes the surfactant work to create foam.
One of the biggest things that I learned through this project is to start the process of deciding what to do early, and making sure that it is plausible with the information on the internet, because with this topic, it was very hard to find any reliable detailed information. I do this in most other classes, because I have learned this same lesson, but for some reason I haven't yet applied it to chemistry. Now that I have realized that I need to do this in every class, I hope that my future projects will be even more refined because of it. This project has also helped me to realize that chemistry is really in everything that we use. Because of this, I think that I will look at everything differently, now that I know what it is made of, and the differing chemical properties of each variation.
1st Semester Artifact of Learning
Following is the most recent lab that we did up at Fort Lewis College. It is the honors lab, and so was very challenging. The thing that made this lab different from most of the others that we've done is that the actual process of collecting the data wasn't that difficult, but figuring out how to do the equations and find the answer was. In order to figure out the answer, we had to use a lot of critical thinking and knowledge of molar masses and ratios. We got the answer in the end, but it was wrong not because of our calculations, but because of our measurements.
I think that my project turned out quite well. I was very thorough, and identified the most important reasons for changing the shampoo, as well as the chemical reasons for changing it. At the beginning, I thought that replacing the SLES with DLS because of the carcinogenic properties would work, (and that's what I stuck with to the end) but about a day before the project was due, I found out that DLS also had slight carcinogenic properties. Those properties were less severe than SLES, but still present. At that point, I had to decide if it was ok to keep going, but I realized that it was still a better alternative so I just went with it. If I had more time, I would have tried to research other surfactants more to find one that was not carcinogenic at all. I would also try to find more details of the bonding within the molecules, and how that makes the surfactant work to create foam.
One of the biggest things that I learned through this project is to start the process of deciding what to do early, and making sure that it is plausible with the information on the internet, because with this topic, it was very hard to find any reliable detailed information. I do this in most other classes, because I have learned this same lesson, but for some reason I haven't yet applied it to chemistry. Now that I have realized that I need to do this in every class, I hope that my future projects will be even more refined because of it. This project has also helped me to realize that chemistry is really in everything that we use. Because of this, I think that I will look at everything differently, now that I know what it is made of, and the differing chemical properties of each variation.
1st Semester Artifact of Learning
Following is the most recent lab that we did up at Fort Lewis College. It is the honors lab, and so was very challenging. The thing that made this lab different from most of the others that we've done is that the actual process of collecting the data wasn't that difficult, but figuring out how to do the equations and find the answer was. In order to figure out the answer, we had to use a lot of critical thinking and knowledge of molar masses and ratios. We got the answer in the end, but it was wrong not because of our calculations, but because of our measurements.
Decomposition of Sodium Bicarbonate Investigation
- Purpose: To determine the formula for the product of the thermal decomposition of sodium bicarbonate using masses, mole ratios and molar masses.
- Background Info: Sodium bicarbonate undergoes a decomposition reaction when heated at temperatures in excess of 70̊C. The products are water, carbon dioxide and a solid. The reaction that takes place is partially shown below.
n NaHCO3 + ΔE_______ + H2O + CO2
The n in front of NaHCO3 is an integer that corresponds to the number of molecules of sodium bicarbonate necessary to balance the reaction. The underlined blank represents the solid product of the decomposition reaction. The reaction produces only one molecule of water, one molecule of carbon dioxide and one of the unknown solid for n molecules of sodium bicarbonate.
A balanced chemical reaction is a reaction in which the same number of atoms of each element is found on the reactant side and on the product side. Reactions are balanced by changing the coefficients in front of the formulas for the compounds that represent the number of molecules of each compound.
· Materials/Equipment:
-Sodium Bicarbonate -Crucible Tongs
-Bunsen Burner -Crucible
-Electronic Balance -Wire Gauze
· Safety: When working with the Bunsen burner, use caution around the open flame. Be careful to not break the porcelain or to burn yourself on it.
· Procedure:
o Tare the scale for the crucible, then measure out 6 grams of the sodium bicarbonate into it.
o Place the crucible on the wire gauze above the Bunsen burner, and turn it on.
o Wave the flame across the bottom of the crucible for a couple minutes, and then turn off the Bunsen burner.
o Let the crucible cool, and then weigh it again, with the scale still tared. If the mass is lower than it was last time, then put it back on the Bunsen burner.
o Continue this cycle until the mass stays the same a few times in a row – that means that all of your water and carbon dioxide have evaporated off.
o Record your final weight.
· Results:
o Started with 6 grams of sodium bicarbonate.
o Ended with 4.725 grams of the remainder, which means that there was 1.28 grams of water and carbon dioxide.
o The molar mass of H2O is 18.0148g/mol
o The molar mass of CO2 is 44.009g/mol
o You need a minimum of 2 molecules of sodium bicarbonate for the reaction (because you need two hydrogens), and if you take out one carbon dioxide and one water from two sodium bicarbonates, you are left with Na2CO3.
o Any value of n that is bigger than 2 must be Na2CO3 + x amount of molecules of NaHCO3
o The molar mass of Na2CO3 is 105.99g/mol
o The molar mass of NaHCO3 is 84.0059g/mol
o 18.0148g/mol H2O + 44.009g/mol CO2 = 62.0238 g/mol (H2O + CO2)
o 1.28g(H2O+CO2) * 1mol/62.0238g = .02mol(H2O+CO2)
o This mole value must equal the mole value for the other unknown portion of the decomposition reaction.
o I first tried assuming that there was 2 molecules, but the equation came out to be .04molNa2CO3, which is not equal to .02
o Then I tried assuming that there were 3 molecules, with a molar mass of 190g/mol. So, 4.725g(of the unknown molecule) * 1mol/190g =. 02mol. This value equals the other value, so that means that there started out with 3 molecules of sodium bicarbonate.
· Conclusion/Analysis:
o In this lab, we aimed to find the number of molecules of sodium bicarbonate needed for a decomposition reaction. In this test, we took the mass before the decomposition reaction, and then took the mass after. Using this data, we then used a series of equations and reasoning to determine our results.
o Above are the measures of our masses, the calculated molar masses, the calculations that led to our conclusion, and brief explanations of the equations. All of the information is pertinent to our result, and as you go down the list of results, the information presented is built upon, to come up with the moles of 2 substances, giving us our n value.
o Once we knew from our tests the masses of our initial substance, the amount of water and carbon dioxide that was cooked off, and the remainder substance, we were able to figure out a lot of other things. However, for this to work, we also had to know the molar masses of the substances we were dealing with, which we were able to figure out using the periodic table. Lastly, we had to know that the moles of what was cooked off had to equal the moles of what was left. The first step was to figure out what our remainder substance possibilities were. Once we got that, then we figured out the molar masses of the initial amount, and the subsequent amounts. Then, using the combined molar mass of carbon dioxide and water, we used the mass of what cooked off to find the moles of our water and carbon dioxide. Next was the guess and check method for finding the correct number of moles. We began with trying 2 molecules, the initial amount, (due to the necessity of 2 hydrogens in water), but this gave us too big of a number. So then we tried 3, which gave us the correct molar value – it equaled the moles of water and carbon dioxide.
o However, we looked this up online, and the correct answer is 2, not 3. There is one main source of error for this discrepancy – the crucibles that we used to tare the scale. They varied highly – sometimes up to 8 grams from one to another. We didn’t know this though, so we used a different crucible to tare the scale than we did to hold the substance. This discrepancy is random, because we don’t know the exact weights of the different crucibles that we used. If I was to do this lab again, I would weigh the crucible before we put the substance in it, and using that more accurate number, subtract that from our end (not tared) value.
