from the world's big
Scientists invent method to extract gold from liquid waste
The next gold rush might take place in our sewers.
- Even though we think of it as exceedingly rare, gold can be found all around us.
- The trouble is, most of the gold is hard to get at; its too diluted in our waste or ocean waters to effectively extract.
- This new technique quickly, easily, and reliably extracts gold from most liquids.
Even though the thought of gold calls to mind incredible wealth hidden underground or horded away in Fort Knox, you can actually find the stuff all over the place. there's gold in nearly every kind of consumer electronic, gold in our sewage, gold in the cracks of New York City sidewalks, and even trace amounts in our brains. The trouble isn't that gold is rare, per se, it's just hard to get to.
In human history, we've mined about 190,000 tons of gold out of the ground. If you want to visualize that amount, it would fit in a box about 20 m on each side; not all that much in the grand scheme of things. We've been able to get at this because it was stored in a way that's relatively easy for us to access. It was buried in the Earth, so we just had to dig it up. In contrast, we've estimated that there's about 20 million tons of gold in the ocean—it's just distributed throughout the seas, making it difficult to refine and extract.
In the past, we didn't use gold for much of anything besides as a method to store value, so the fact that most gold on Earth was inaccessible was more of a feature than a bug. But now, we're increasingly finding practical applications for the precious metal. It can be used in medicine to treat arthritis or for dentistry; it's an excellent conductor, so it can be used in electronics and communication technology; and it reflects infrared radiation, so we use it on our spacecraft and spacesuits. Suddenly, getting at those 20 million tons of gold in the ocean and elsewhere on Earth has become more about technological and societal progress than about accumulating wealth.
New research from the Journal of the American Chemical Society has uncovered one of the most effective methods to date to extract gold from liquids. That includes electronic waste, sewage, ocean water, waste water—almost any liquid where we might find gold. Just to highlight how potentially useful this is, sewage from Switzerland alone is estimated to carry away 1.8 million dollars' worth of gold every year.
Making a sponge for gold
The object to the left shows the basic framework, a lattice of iron ion clusters connected by organic molecules. On this structure, a polymer that helps catch gold is coated, represented by the purple dots.
Sun et al. 2018
The method consists of a metal-organic framework—essentially, clusters metal ions connected by an organic "skeleton." In this case, the framework consists of iron ions connected by an organic compound called 1,3,5-benzenetricarboxylate. The researchers then coated this structure in a polymer with an even more difficult-to-pronounce name (for the curious, it's poly-para-phenylenediamine, or PpDA), which helps the framework catch stray molecules of gold.
Essentially, the framework and polymer work as a very granular sponge, only this sponge doesn't hold soap or water; instead, it holds gold.
Other researchers have built structures like this one before, but the new framework works exceptionally well. For every gram of this gold-seeking sponge submerged in a liquid, it can hold up to a gram of gold. What's more, it can catch 99% of the gold in a given solution in as little as two minutes.
Once the framework's sucked up the gold, it can easily be destroyed to retrieve the gold captured inside. The figure below shows how this works. After it's been suspended in a gold-containing solution, the framework is dissolved in hydrochloric acid. After some time, all that's left is 23.9 K gold, which is the highest purity of gold reclaimed from similar projects.
On the left, a sample of liquid is shown with the new material suspended inside. After the material is dissolved in acid, 23.9 K gold particles are leftover. On the right side, the gold particles are shown under a microscope.
Sun et al. 2018
The researchers tested the method out in a few different real-world cases. One of the most useful applications for a method like this is in reclaiming gold from electronic waste. It can take as much as a ton of gold ore to build just 40 smartphones, so getting the gold out of electronic waste would be extremely practical.
The researchers physically removed the metal from a CPU and treated it with some chemicals to form a solution. In the figure below, you can see that this produced a blue solution. So far, this technique is nothing new. The trouble is that a CPU also contains copper and nickel as well as gold, all of which is mixed up in this solution. So, the trick is how to get the really valuable metal out of the mixture. Using the new method, the researchers managed to get 95% of the gold out of the solution.
The top-left image shows a regular CPU. To its right, we can see the various elements that comprise the CPU (copper, nickel, and gold). In the bottom-left corner, we can see the CPU after its material has been physically removed. The image to its right shows the material dissolved into a blue solution and a graph showing how much of each material the new method recovered from the solution.
Sun et al. 2018
They found similar results with different liquids, too. The new framework captured 99% of gold from Swiss sewage (which, if you'll recall, allegedly washes away $1.8 million worth of gold every year). The researchers also tried extracting gold from seawater, and, once again, they were able to extract 99% of gold from their sample. These last two examples are especially promising; sewage and seawater contain a huge variety of different compounds that could interfere with any kind of filtering system.
We're still a long way off from, say, filtering the oceans for the precious metals they contain. But as we continue to use up the easily accessible resources buried in the Earth, exploring new techniques like this will be important if we want to continue to use smartphones, explore space, and collectively advance as a society.
Join us at 2 pm ET tomorrow!
Construction of the $500 billion dollar tech city-state of the future is moving ahead.
- The futuristic megacity Neom is being built in Saudi Arabia.
- The city will be fully automated, leading in health, education and quality of life.
- It will feature an artificial moon, cloud seeding, robotic gladiators and flying taxis.
The Red Sea area where Neom will be built:
Saudi Arabia Plans Futuristic City, "Neom" (Full Promotional Video)<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c646d528d230c1bf66c75422bc4ccf6f"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/N53DzL3_BHA?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Coronavirus layoffs are a glimpse into our automated future. We need to build better education opportunities now so Americans can find work in the economy of tomorrow.
- Outplacement is an underperforming $5 billion dollar industry. A new non-profit coalition by SkillUp intends to disrupt it.
- More and more Americans will be laid off in years to come due to automation. Those people need to reorient their career paths and reskill in a way that protects their long-term livelihood.
- SkillUp brings together technology and service providers, education and training providers, hiring employers, worker outreach, and philanthropies to help people land in-demand jobs in high-growth industries.
Source: McKinsey Global Institute analysis [PDF]<p>Work in understanding the skills at the heart of the new digital economy is leading to novel assessments that allow individuals to prove mastery to faithfully represent their abilities—but also to give weight and stackability to the emerging ecosystem of micro-credentials that make education more seamless across time and education providers. And we are seeing the beginnings of a renewal in the liberal arts, focused on building human skills in affordable ways that are accessible to many more individuals and far more effective.</p><p>Amidst these dark times, there is much opportunity to refresh the nation's education and training solutions to support the success of individuals and society writ large.</p>
Do we really know what we want in a romantic partner? If so, do our desires actually mean we match up with people who suit them?
- Two separate scientific studies suggest that our "ideals" don't really match what we look for in a romantic partner.
- Results of studies like these can change the way we date, especially in the online world.
- "You say you want these three attributes and you like the people who possess these attributes. But the story doesn't end there," says Paul Eastwick, co-author of the study and professor in the UC Davis Department of Psychology.
Do we really know what we want in love or are we just guessing?<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="204859156383d358652fda6f7eadda0f"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vQgfx2iYlso?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>More than 700 participants selected their top three qualities in a romantic partner (things like funny, attractive, inquisitive, kind, etc). They then reported their romantic desire for a series of people they knew personally. Some were blind date partners, others were romantic partners and some were simply platonic friends.</p><p>While participants did experience more romantic desire to the extent that these personal connections of theirs (people they knew) had the qualities they listed, there was more to the study. </p><p>Paul Eastwick, co-author and professor in the UC Davis Department of Psychology <a href="https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-07-romantic-partner-random-stranger.html" target="_blank">explains</a>: "You say you want these three attributes and you like the people who possess these attributes. But the story doesn't end there." </p><p>The participants also considered the extent to which their personal acquaintances possessed three attributes nominated by some other random person in the study. For example, if Kris listed "down-to-earth", intelligent and thoughtful as her own top three attributes, Vanessa also experienced more desire for people with those specific traits. </p>
Does what we want really match up with what we find?<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQ0NDA4Ni9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTU5NjM3NzY5OX0.gdUo-UbjYhKUDOL39BDZseRynbwaK2H5dfJtbV0nw8Y/img.jpg?width=980" id="ff376" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7c1e3a1bb9d576872ef5dce39b2e8e80" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="illustration of a man and woman matching on a dating app" />
What we claim to want and what we look for may be two separate things...
Image by GoodStudio on Shutterstock<p>So the question became: are we really listing what we want in an ideal partner or are we just listing vague qualities that people typically consider as positive?</p><p>"So in the end, we want partners who have positive qualities," Sparks explained, "but the qualities you specifically list do not actually have special predictive power for you." </p><p>In other words, the idea that we find certain things attractive in a person does not mean we actively seek out people who have those qualities, despite saying it's what we want in a love interest. The authors of this study suggest these findings could have implications for the way we approach online dating in the digital age. </p><p>This isn't the first study of its kind to suggest that what we find in love isn't really what we were looking for. The evidence suggests that we really are consistent in the abstract of it all: when asked to evaluate what you want on paper, you are more likely to suggest overall attractiveness in accordance with what you've stated are important ideals to you. But real life isn't so similar. </p><p>According to <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/meet-catch-and-keep/201506/when-it-comes-love-do-you-really-know-what-you-want" target="_blank">Psychology Today,</a> who covered a 2015 study with similar results, initial face-to-face encounters have very little effect on our romantic desire. "When we initially meet someone, our level of romantic interest in the person is independent of our standards."</p><p>While you might have no immediate interest in John, he may fit your criteria of being kind, loyal, and intelligent. Similarly, someone may be attracted to Elaine even though she doesn't have any of the qualities they originally said were important to them. </p><p><strong>What does this all mean? </strong></p><p>The authors of both the 2015 and 2020 studies say the same thing: give someone a chance before writing them off as a poor match. If your initial attraction is independent of the standards you've set out, the qualities which you've listed as important to you, the first time you meet someone may not give you enough information to make an informed decision.</p><p>"It's really easy to spend time hunting around online for someone who seems to match your ideals," said Sparks, "But our research suggests an alternative approach: Don't be too picky ahead of time about whether a partner matches your ideals on paper. Or, even better, let your friends pick your dates for you." </p>