4.8 Article

Discovery and ramifications of incidental Magneli phase generation and release from industrial coal-burning

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00276-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41522111, 41271473, 41130525]
  2. Center for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology (NSF Cooperative Agreement) [EF-0830093]
  3. Virginia Tech Institute for Critical Technology and Applied Science (ICTAS)
  4. Open Foundation of East China Normal University
  5. Virginia Tech National Center for Earth and Environmental Nanotechnology Infrastructure (NSF Cooperative Agreement) [1542100]
  6. National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS) [T32-ES021432]
  7. STAR Fellowship Assistance Agreement - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [FP-91780101-1]
  8. Recruitment Program of Global Youth Experts in China
  9. Office of Basic Energy Science, Department of Energy [DE-FG02-09ER46674]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coal, as one of the most economic and abundant energy sources, remains the leading fuel for producing electricity worldwide. Yet, burning coal produces more global warming CO2 relative to all other fossil fuels, and it is a major contributor to atmospheric particulate matter known to have a deleterious respiratory and cardiovascular impact in humans, especially in China and India. Here we have discovered that burning coal also produces large quantities of otherwise rare Magneli phases (TixO2x-1 with 4 <= x <= 9) from TiO2 minerals naturally present in coal. This provides a new tracer for tracking solid-state emissions worldwide from industrial coal-burning. In its first toxicity testing, we have also shown that nanoscale Magneli phases have potential toxicity pathways that are not photoactive like TiO2 phases, but instead seem to be biologically active without photostimulation. In the future, these phases should be thoroughly tested for their toxicity in the human lung.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据