Sponge-Like "Swelling Glass" Absorbs Toxins in Water 93
MikeChino writes "A company called Absorbent Materials has created a new kind of 'swelling glass' that can clean up contaminated groundwater by soaking up volatile molecules like a sponge. Dubbed 'Obsorb,' the material can hold up to 8 times its weight in fuel, oil, and solvents without sucking up any of the water itself. Once the material is full it floats to the surface and the pollutants can be skimmed off."
Is there any there, there? (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Nope, that was pretty much it. I wasn't really sure what was going on. The summary was most of the article.
It is a neat idea, though. If it works, and is cheap, it could help many people in many places.
Re:Is there any there, there? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate it when people use random unrelated photos, especially when the article is about a specific new product. If you don't have an image, don't insult your audience by misleading them.
Re:Is there any there, there? (Score:5, Informative)
And after absorbing all that gunk... (Score:2, Insightful)
Does it all magically disappear?
Re: (Score:2)
What?
Once the material is full it floats to the surface and the pollutants can be skimmed off.
Last sentence of the summary...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, it seems someone below you has posted a similar question, so it isn't as stupid as I thought.
The website link says (there are only 3 or 4 sentences there...):
...can be skimmed off. Afterwards, it can be dropped back into the water and reused hundreds of times.
So the idea is you use it to make contaminated groundwater drinkable, then suck out the concentrated toxins and dispose of it in a better place than drinking water.
Re:And after absorbing all that gunk... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nah, it was stupid. It's just that I wasn't the only stupid person here.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
Does it all magically disappear?
TFA says you can skim the gunk off, then throw it back into the water to do it's work again, "hundreds of times".
Re: (Score:2)
But where does the actual harmful gunk *go*?
How is it sequestered? Is it chemically neutralized, stored in vaults? Burned? And what problems do any of these solutions cause?
Re: (Score:2)
This fixes all our problems (Score:5, Funny)
A material wich can absorb all the toxens out of the water and when it is full all we need to do is grind it back into little pieces and flush it down the toilet and all our problems are solve.
Re:This fixes all our problems (Score:4, Funny)
>>A material wich can absorb all the toxens out of the water and when it is full all we need to do is grind it back into little pieces and flush it down the toilet and all our problems are solve.
Narrator: Thus solving the problem for all time
Suzy: But...
Narrator: FOR ALL TIME.
Actually, my problem with this is the trade name. OBSORB sounds like OXYCLEAN or the SHAMWOW or all the other staples of late night TV.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
All very amusing political humor and shamwow references aside, it's a rare occasion where I can read a slashdot article and go "Wow, Cool!"
Neat and important creative advances like this pus back into me a little bit of the faith in humanity eroded by most of slashdot articles.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Global Warming Or: None Like It Hot!"
Narrator: Of course, since the greenhouse gases are still building up, it takes more and more ice each time. Thus solving the problem once and for all.
Suzie: But--
Narrator: Once and for all!
"The End".
Spelling? (Score:5, Informative)
So which is it?
Re:Spelling? (Score:5, Funny)
TFA refers to the material as Obsorb, but a linked page refers to it as Osorb.
Clearly the b was toxic
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Wouldn''t it be Oor in order to really remove all the toxic bs?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Really short on details. (Score:5, Informative)
Google is your friend. Apparently, this all centers around the use of zero-valent iron (which seems to merely be atomic iron without any binding).More info here: http://www.clu-in.org/download/remed/542-f-08-009.pdf [clu-in.org] Warning: PDF. Apparently, this is a hot topic, and Osorb isn't the only material out there using nanoZVI for cleaning purposes.
Interesting stuff. Hadn't heard of it before.
Re: (Score:2)
This product is a reason why I love capitalism. New and cool stuff all the time. I hope they don't do anything anti-market to this product, like patenting it.
Yes, until they take the crud they absorbed and bury it underground right on top of the water table, because that ends up being the cheapest way to dispose of it for one reason or another.
Now that I think of it, that would also in turn increase demand for their product.. its like having their cake and eating it over and over and over!
Joking aside, it does seem interesting if it actually pans out to be a real product.
Re: (Score:1)
It is patented... a previous poster posted a link that explained this.
Re: (Score:1)
In depth explanation? (Score:2)
I didn't see anything in the article that tells exactly how the science behind it works. Is it granulated particles? Normal sponge sized? Fiberglass like? How are the toxins removed from the material after use? etc. I assume some of it they might not be able to divulge due to pending patents or whatever, but a little more info might help to determine if it's viable or just vaporware.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm also curious show this stuff can absorb the pollution out of the water instead of just filling up with water.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It might fill up with water. If that happens, then clearly the water was the contaminant.
Now you have considerably purified your water slick, leaving only pure environmentally-friendly petroleum in your bays. Think of how happy* the salmon, the seabirds, and the plankton will be!
*Claim void if it turns out that ocean life live in water, not petroleum. You mileage may vary.
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks for the clarification. I figured there was some perfectly reasonable explanation I was missing.
Fish oil is supposed to be really healthy stuff, this sounds like it could make my sashimi even better for me. Can't wait!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Shamwow (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That was my first thought until I read more closely... this thing purportedly won't absorb the water, only the contaminants within. So, unlike ShamWow, you could put a load of this material in a lake without soaking up the entire lake.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
TFA: apply it to your forehead!
TFA: apply it to your forehead!
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds excellent. What will it cost? (Score:2)
Re:Sounds excellent. What will it cost? (Score:5, Interesting)
PRP (Petroleum Remediation Product) is made from beeswax and soaks up oils as well. Since it is so light, it floats on water and only absorbs the oils. The bee's wax encourages naturally occurring micro-organisms to eat. The microbes feast on the bee's wax and don't stop eating until all the oil is gone, safely, naturally bio-degrading the petroleum and the PRP itself.
I understand that they mix ground up corncobs into the PRP to make a version that works without water and can bio-degrade oil on land.
I can see only three reasons for the glass version.
1. If it is cheaper to make
2. Since you clean it rather than let it decompose, it is reusable. But the costs of making and cleaning still have to be cheaper than the cost of PRP.
3. If the glass version will absorb chemicals that cannot be degraded by the micro-organisms that feed on the beeswax.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This seems to be based on atomic iron in some form of nanoscale dust. As a result, its application seems to be much wider than just absorbing hydrocarbons. As an example, there are a few papers that studied the decomposition of atrazine in the presence of nanoZVI. Apparently,it's pretty successful.
Re: (Score:2)
Reason 4 - You recover whatever it is that you're cleaning up from the glass. This is particularly useful for oil spills if you think about how much oil is wasted in a decent sized oil spill. (And, I'm sure oil companies do not want to let all that profit go to waste.)
Re: (Score:1)
Will make excellent petrol bombs.
Re: (Score:2)
1. If it is cheaper to make.
Last time I checked, there was a lot more silica in the world than bees. Plus the silica is not being devastated by disease...
Yes but... (Score:2, Funny)
has it been taste tested by a Nibblonian [wikipedia.org]?
Skim the contaminants off the top (Score:2)
Re:Skim the contaminants off the top (Score:4, Informative)
NSF Grant to Aid in Further Development of Water Purifying Substance [wooster.edu]
Looks somewhat legit, let's hope for their success...
Obviously... (Score:2)
The groups that are least able to defend themselves from hazardous workplace.
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, you dont squeeze the contaminants out, you refine em out. Presto instead of a cost center disposal has become a profit center. ;-)
I can see the kids version already (Score:2, Funny)
Wait a second . . . (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The Blob [imdb.com] came from a meteorite.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. I heard Michael Moore already directed and starred in it.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to wonder (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it can hold onto the contaminant, isn't that still better than the alternative?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
One of two things (Score:2)
Either this thing is the bee's knees and will make a huge impact, or it's some mix of snake oil and too expensive. As usual, we're safest assuming the latter until we at least have details.
Wait! It's ICE-9. (Score:1)
An improved silica gel (Score:3, Insightful)
Glass - Silica.
Silica Gel - absorbent glass.
Easy, huh?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
> Easy, huh?
Yes. Wrong, but easy. Soda-lime glass, the kind you are probably thinking of, has more in it than silica. But these guys are chemists. To a chemist "glass" is a term for a large class of materials, some containing no silica at all.
Volitile chemicals? (Score:2)
So, it removes stuff that would've just evaporated off pretty quickly anyway? yipee.
Those are not "toxins" (Score:4, Informative)
They may be "toxic" but they are not "toxins". Example of toxin: Botox(TM), which stands for botulic toxin. A toxin is a toxic substance created by an organism.
So basically.... (Score:2)
So basically what you're saying is that we can build small scale models of stuff, pee on them for a few days, and they'll turn into the real deal. Kinda like those little dinosaur toys that you put in water and they grow to fill the glass. I'm down with that.
groundwater means water IN the ground... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
What about the good moleculed? (Score:2)
So when you put this in water, it creates distilled water?
Good luck keeping the fish and plants alive with that stuff...
A lucrative use? (Score:1, Interesting)
2 words: Biodiesel Harvesting
cleaning up sea water as well? (Score:2)
Great Pacific Garbage Patch [wikipedia.org], here we come!
Distillation? (Score:1)
I can see some applications for this as a way of making better moonshine.