Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Vapor pressure of toxic solids?
Fyndium
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 10-10-2020 at 15:36
Vapor pressure of toxic solids?


Is there any risk that a solid could emit enough vapors to cause health risk? I thought this when handling lead acetate and after considering everything else I thought could I still be breathing it? Hydrates, especially in form of crystals do not appear to cause airborne dust particles, unlike some anhydrous powders which just float everywhere.

The vapor pressure of said substance is 0.1Pa.

[Edited on 10-10-2020 by Fyndium]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MidLifeChemist
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 192
Registered: 4-7-2019
Location: West Coast USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: precipitatory

[*] posted on 10-10-2020 at 18:42


Sure. Osmium tetroxide is considered dangerous for this reason.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Fyndium
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 11-10-2020 at 02:03


The compound seems to have quite low boiling point of 126C, hence no wonder. Its VP is 7mmHG which translates to 1kPa, 10 thousand times higher than my reference.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
unionised
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5102
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11-10-2020 at 04:43


Quote: Originally posted by Fyndium  

The vapor pressure of said substance is 0.1Pa.

[Edited on 10-10-2020 by Fyndium]

Which is about a millionth of an atmosphere.
Plenty of materials are toxic enough that breathing air containing 1ppm of them would be a bad idea.
Obviously, it's unlikely that you would actually reach the equilibrium concentration but...

Warm, but solid, naphthalene can generate enough vapour to exceed the TLV.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Herr Haber
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11-10-2020 at 07:00


Osmium tetroxide... vapor ? You probably thought dust right ?



The spirit of adventure was upon me. Having nitric acid and copper, I had only to learn what the words 'act upon' meant. - Ira Remsen
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MidLifeChemist
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 192
Registered: 4-7-2019
Location: West Coast USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: precipitatory

[*] posted on 11-10-2020 at 08:50


Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber  
Osmium tetroxide... vapor ? You probably thought dust right ?


No, I thought vapor. The poster did not ask about dust.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Fyndium
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 11-10-2020 at 15:09


Dust can be more easily controlled with good working practices and with simple breathing filters, but vapors need more.

What I was after here that how realistic or acute is the exposure to said low vapor pressure substances, if we are speaking minute exposures, no occupational? Is it possible to estimate the actual amount of material absorbed in the body? For lead, daily average intake is 100ug and tolerable limit for people is 250ug in their normal diet and life.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
teodor
National Hazard
****




Posts: 872
Registered: 28-6-2019
Location: Heerenveen
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-10-2020 at 02:32


Quote: Originally posted by Fyndium  
Dust can be more easily controlled with good working practices and with simple breathing filters, but vapors need more.


I think the opposite. Many vapours could be vented out or neutralised but dust is a subject for more precise treatment.

But let specify which solids we are talking about. There are different nuances with each of them.



[Edited on 12-10-2020 by teodor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Fyndium
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-10-2020 at 04:38


This hazard came up because I were just recently handling lead oxide and lead acetate.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
teodor
National Hazard
****




Posts: 872
Registered: 28-6-2019
Location: Heerenveen
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-10-2020 at 04:52


Quote: Originally posted by Fyndium  
This hazard came up because I were just recently handling lead oxide and lead acetate.


Micro quantities of lead will not make any harm, as you know people in past used its compounds everywhere. Only accumulation is the thing which matters, also it has direct danger to small and not born yet children.

So, if accumulation is the thing which matters then the dust, cleaning procedures & waste processing become most important.

As for vapours, I doubt PbO has any appreciable amount and PbAc2 has probably the same level as Pb(NO3)2 which is considered quite low at room temperature.

My most concern when working with lead compounds is my sleeves. I think they can accumulate a lot of micro droplets when I do washing etc. so my next safety measurement will be probably a lab coat.

As for wast processing I used a bottle but decided to buy a bigger plastic drum. I put NaOH solution inside and Na2Sx which converts all lead into PbS which is precipitated on the bottom on prolonged standing. I would not reccomend to use Na2CO3 because it cause effervescence (so many air-flying micro droplets) with acidic solutions. Also concentrated NaOH dissolves filter papers.
Na2Sx causes H2S smell so I will try replace this system with NaOH & Na(OCl)2 which causes precipitation of PbO2.

So, generally, I would more bother with splashing of solutions, washing procedures and dust accumulation in your lab and you should be alive if don't eat Pb salts on everyday basis.

But. If you process lead from e.g. batteries, it can contain other dangerous compounds with different properties as well.
0-2020 by teodor]

[Edited on 12-10-2020 by teodor]

BUT of course we were talking about lead (II) acetate because lead (IV) acetate is quite different thing and has a different level of danger.

[Edited on 12-10-2020 by teodor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Herr Haber
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 12-10-2020 at 08:10


Quote: Originally posted by MidLifeChemist  
Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber  
Osmium tetroxide... vapor ? You probably thought dust right ?


No, I thought vapor. The poster did not ask about dust.


Well, I guess I'd have found out sooner or later since I have Osmium in my shopping list for the element collection but thank you for the heads up !
Sooner is always better :)
Darned interesting melting and boiling point though.




The spirit of adventure was upon me. Having nitric acid and copper, I had only to learn what the words 'act upon' meant. - Ira Remsen
View user's profile View All Posts By User

  Go To Top