Concentrated vinegar technology

Gold Refining Forum

Help Support Gold Refining Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Patry0t

Active member
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
33
23823_en_1b026_10402_university-of-saskatchewan-stephen-foley.jpg


Stephen Foley is looking to get his hands on some gold… the problem is that it takes too much time, costs too much money and harms the environment.

The work of his research team—made up of Loghman Moradi, research associate, and Hiwa Salimi, PhD student— changes all of that.

“We’ve found a simple, cheap and environmentally benign solution that extracts gold in seconds, and can be recycled and reused,” said Foley, an associate professor in the Department of Chemistry. “This could change the gold industry.”

The problem with gold, explained Foley, is that it is one of the least reactive chemical elements, making it difficult to dissolve. That is why “artifacts discovered from 3,000 year ago still have gold on them.”

Given this difficulty, there are two main ways to get gold: through mining gold from the earth, which requires massive amounts of sodium cyanide; and recycling gold from secondary sources like jewelry or electronic scraps.

“The problem with mining has to do with the harsh environmental effects of the toxicity of cyanide that fills tailing ponds,” said Foley. “When one of the ponds breaks, it dumps the cyanide into nearby lakes or rivers and kills the environment.”

Recycling gold from jewelry or electronic scraps—think computer chips and circuits lined with thin layers of gold—is not without issue either.
Annually, Foley explained, the world produces more than 50 million tons of electronic waste per year; that amount is increasing rapidly due to non-stop innovation that shortens the life span of electronic devices.

Because of the lack of suitable recycling methods, he continued, more than 80 per cent of “e-waste” ends up in landfills, making it a pretty serious environmental issue.

There are two current industry standards for removing gold from electronic scraps. The first is pyrometallurgy, which burns the gold off using high temperatures. This method is energy intensive, cost prohibitive and releases dangerous gases, like dioxins.

The second is hydrometallurgy in which leaching chemicals like cyanide solution or aqua regia—Latin for king’s water, which is a mixture of concentrated nitric acid and hydrochloric acid—are used, a process Foley called “expensive, very toxic and completely non-recyclable.
“The environmental effects of current practices can be devastating,” said Foley.

Foley used the city of Guiyu, China, considered the e-waste capital of the world, as an example. Guiyu receives 100,000 tonnes of e-waste per day, and because of unregulated processing, Guiyu has the highest levels of dioxins for any city ever recorded. The result, he continued, is the majority of Guiyu’s residents have some form of neurological damage.

What Foley and his research team discovered is a process that extracts gold efficiently and effectively without any of the downfalls of current industry practices.

“We use one of the most mass-produced chemicals: acetic acid; at five per cent concentration it’s plain table vinegar. We use a minute amount of an acid and an oxidant to finish our solution.”

The solution, he continued, is the greenest solvent next to water, so eliminates the vast number of environmental concerns that come with long standing methods of gold extraction.

In this technique, the gold extraction is done under very mild conditions while the solution dissolves gold with the fastest rate ever recorded. “Gold is stripped out from circuits in about 10 seconds leaving the other metals intact” Foley said.

When time is factored in with lower toxicity and conse*quential effects, this new solution appears to be a natural replacement that could revolutionize the industry.

To highlight the improve*ment Foley’s solution presents, consider that it costs $1,520 to extract one kilogram of gold using aqua regia and results in 5,000 litres of waste. With the U of S solution it costs $66 to produce one kilogram of gold and results in 100 litres of waste that can be reused over again.

The other main advantage over current recycling processes, he continued, is that this specific solution is gold selective, meaning it only dissolves gold not other base metals, like copper, nickel, iron and cobalt, found in printed circuit boards.

“Aqua regia, for example, dissolves everything,” he explained, meaning that once dissolved, the gold still needs to be extracted from the solution and the other metals, and the solution gets saturated very quickly.

The next step for Foley and his team is to move the process into large-scale applications for gold recycling from gold-bearing materials.
By large-scale, Foley means very large.

“To extract three grams of gold from ore, you need one tonne of rock. We are not yet viable on a big scale like that,” he said, adding that to that end they are currently searching for industry partners.

Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqql-5S8dm4

SOURCE

SOURCE2

Any thoughts?
 
I may just be uneducated, and did not waste my time researching this or watching the video.
How can making a dilute form of aqua regia from an organic acid be safer or better than other methods?

I think it is a good selling point, but in the end not as true as many would like us to believe, the solution is not safer will not work as well as other methods...
If I cannot get an acid like HCl which if mixed with hydroxide will form something I could eat on my potatoes, then I may look to an organic weak acid like vinegar.

But even then I would still have to properly treat the toxic waste from that vinegar process, which is not much different than the processes we use now. and organic acid could add some other issues some of which may become more dangerous in certain circumstances.

I have seen many new boxes of tricks, although interesting not much use practically in most cases.
Maybe this is some new kind of vinegar? To prove me wrong.
just call me Doubtful Debbie on this one.
 
Patry0t said:
“We use one of the most mass-produced chemicals: acetic acid; at five per cent concentration it’s plain table vinegar. We use a minute amount of an acid and an oxidant to finish our solution.”

Any thoughts?
I could dissect the post line by line and point out flaw after flaw, but I'll just focus on the one above, because we've discussed this "new solution" before, and I've made the same comment then.

Let's start with the acetic acid. I agree it's perfectly safe at low concentrations like vinegar, and I often use it when cooking.

The water I use when cooking flows through the copper pipes in my home, and it too is perfectly safe.

But if I put that same vinegar together with a piece of the copper pipe, and leave it open to the air we breathe (an oxidizer), it creates copper acetate. As with most copper salts, copper acetate is very toxic to virtually all living things. To make it worse, it is a permeator, meaning that if you get it on your skin, some of it will be absorbed into your system.

Like butcher, I'll stick with the tried and true methods we promote here on the forum.

Dave
 
Patry0t said:
To highlight the improve*ment Foley’s solution presents, consider that it costs $1,520 to extract one kilogram of gold using aqua regia and results in 5,000 litres of waste. With the U of S solution it costs $66 to produce one kilogram of gold and results in 100 litres of waste that can be reused over again.



Any thoughts?

Yes I have a thought - how do you quantify the above statement?
 
Anytime the sales pitch consists entirely of how great it is, "fastest ever", "revolutionize the industry", and no words on how it actually works, you can bet it's all a load of hooey.

If it worked they wouldn't have to sell it at all, it'd sell itself.
 
Rick the part I'm really looking to quantify is the 5000 litres of waste AR solutions to recover 1Kg of gold, along with the $1,520 cost. To be honest though, I'm not holding my breath waiting for an answer.

Although I might be pleasantly surprised, I doubt he'll be back.
 
Unfortunately I don't know the answers either. I'm not to good at chemistry, but I have this new hobby, the precious metal recovery, and I found this article so I decided to share it here.
I hope the article is true, because it is a product of a university's research, so I doubt that it is fake.
 
Patry0t,
They come up with this kind of thing all of the time, there may be a use for it somewhere, maybe, like as an etchant in some electronic process or something. just because these study's come from a university doesn't always give them credentials in real world applications, or with what we do. will it work yes, but not well at all for what we do here, and several of the claims you stated are just plain bogus bull.

Just because someone patented something does not mean it works better than proven methods, although the patents always will claim they will. I have seen many patents of very common knowledge known and used thousands of years before it was written, they may have added or changed some minor twist, just to sell their wares.

This forum is better than any university I could think of when it comes to precious metal recovery and refining, the library of information here is better than most universities will have on their bookshelves.
I still say it is the best university in the world and registration is free.

Spend a couple of years here and you will soon begin to see what I am talking about.

Welcome to the best pace in the world to learn this field of chemistry.
 
anachronism said:
Patry0t said:
To highlight the improve*ment Foley’s solution presents, consider that it costs $1,520 to extract one kilogram of gold using aqua regia and results in 5,000 litres of waste. With the U of S solution it costs $66 to produce one kilogram of gold and results in 100 litres of waste that can be reused over again.



Any thoughts?

Yes I have a thought - how do you quantify the above statement?


Well I know some members pay well above the real cost for nitric but that is one big leap in costs, I'm sure I have had a kilo of gold dissolved in AR at well under 5 litres many many times and the cost qouted amounts to nearly 4% of the value of the gold....complete BS !
 
Today I performed another test with NaNo3 instead of NaCl2. Quit surprised with the reaction.
I could disolve a 4x4 mm gold sheet in 30 minutes at about 60C. The drawback is the smell...powerfull chlorine
 
pp2kr said:
Acetic acid, HCL, H2O2 and CaCl2 goes well for palladium...At least my tests goes nice...

pp2kr said:
Today I performed another test with NaNo3 instead of NaCl2. Quit surprised with the reaction.
I could disolve a 4x4 mm gold sheet in 30 minutes at about 60C. The drawback is the smell...powerfull chlorine
I guess one is a typo... which one?

Adding HCL and NaNo3 is what we call poor mans aqua regia on this forum and a well known process.

Göran
 
You will not find much new, that we have not thoroughly discussed. instead of trying to find "new" it is many times better to learn the older tried and tested methods, which have been developed through much more research than the new tricks.

Understanding the old methods gives a better understanding to develop further improvements or even sometimes a new method.
 
Hello

I agree that HCL+NaNo3 will be a poor man AR. However I'm trying a new way to get some results. Maybe I could be completly wrong. I just wish to share my experiments! I'm not telling anyone that my findings and errors are the right way to do!

But I'm learning with them! 8)
 
Why doesn't someone ask him to come to the forum and explain:

http://artsandscience.usask.ca/profile/SFoley#/research
 

Latest posts

Back
Top