|WikiProject Chemicals / Core||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
|A fact from Ethylene oxide appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 3 July 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/July.||
|This article contains a translation of Окись этилена from ru.wikipedia.|
- 1 Untitled
- 2 Duplicate page
- 3 IUPAC name
- 4 New External Link
- 5 Old chembox
- 6 Epoxyethane
- 7 Use in medical sterilization
- 8 History of Synthesis
- 9 "China Petrochemical Corporation (~1000 tonnes in 2006)"
- 10 Structure of ethylene oxide: history
- 11 Cleansing of typography
- 12 Thermodynamic values
- 13 Suggestions
- 14 NFPA rating is wrong
I don't see any oxygen in the structure diagram. Am I missing something? The image is
which is identical to
Hmmm... I clicked on Reload and it appeared...
I notice that there is another (and IMHO much inferior) page on this compound at epoxyethane. I would like to turn that page into a simple redirect to this page. Any comments? Walkerma 06:10, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The article states that the IUPAC name of ethylene oxide is "1,2-epoxyethane". I don't think the numbers are needed in this case, since there is no ambiguity in the name "epoxyethane", and according to the naming guidelines, position numbers should not be used when not necessary. 18.104.22.168 14:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
New External Link
I added a new external link to http://www.eosa.org on the article page. This site deals with the safe use of Ethylene Oxide.
I'm moving the old chemical infobox here, as I've replaced it with a chembox new.
Ben 18:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
|Formula weight||44.05 u|
|Synonyms||Ethylene oxide, dimethylene oxide, oxirane, oxacyclopropane|
|Melting point||161 K (-112.1 °C)|
|Boiling point||283.5 K (10.4 °C)|
|Thermal decomposition||? K (? °C)|
|Triple point||160.6 K (-112.4 °C)
|Critical point||468.9 K (195.9 °C)
|Solubility||Miscible with water.|
|Density||0.899 ×103 kg/m3|
|Acute effects||Lung irritation, convulsions.|
|Chronic effects||CNS damage
|Flash point||-55 °C|
|Autoignition temperature||429 °C|
|Explosive limits||3 to 100%|
|MSDS||Hazardous Chemical Database|
Is there a reason I have missed why this page makes no mention of the name epoxyethane whatsoever? I was under the impression that is a fairly common name for this compound. I-hunter (talk) 20:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- It's listed as the IUPAC name. If you click Show you'll see it. If we can confirm that epoxyethane is indeed the correct IUPAC name, then we should perhaps mention it in the lead. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 21:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Use in medical sterilization
Ethylene oxide is commonly used in medical sterilization, it would be nice if a little info on its use and process for this type sterilization was included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
- There is some "little info" on that in the lead and "applications", "other uses". Materialscientist (talk) 23:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
History of Synthesis
"The first synthesis method had long remained the only, despite numerous attempts of scientists, including Wurtz himself, to produce ethylene oxide directly from ethyl". Should "ethyl" not read "ethanol" or "ethylene/ethene"? Moletrouser (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
"China Petrochemical Corporation (~1000 tonnes in 2006)"
Taken from this version of the article. There's something very likely wrong with this. The number is three orders of magnitude below the other productions mentioned nearby. The source cited requires registration. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 08:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
- 1 million, not 1000, probably my typo, fixed, thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 08:46, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Structure of ethylene oxide: history
The article states: "The heterocyclic triangular structure of ethylene oxide was not proposed until 1893." However, I suspect that the triangular structure of ethylene oxide was proposed (and in use in the literature) earlier than 1893.
In the journal Nature (April 6, 1893, vol. 47, p. 551), a report states: "The author then proceeds to discuss the orthodox formulae for trimethylene [i.e., cyclopropane], ethylene oxide, and diazoimide [i.e., hydrazoic acid] …". There follows an illustration showing the hypothetical triangular structure of each substance. "The author" (W. H. Perkin) calls these structures "orthodox", which suggests that they've been used widely for some time; i.e., prior to 1893. Ethylene oxide was depicted as having a triangular molecular structure in:
- 1890: Henry E. Roscoe and Carl Schorlemmer, ed.s A Treatise on Chemistry (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1890), vol. 3 (The chemistry of the hydrocarbons …), part 2, page 35.
- 1889: Henry Watts et al., ed.s, Watts' Dictionary of Chemistry (London, England: Longmans, Green, and Co.: 1889), vol. 2, page 490.
- 1883: Friedrich K. Beilstein, Handbuch der organischen Chemie (Hamburg, Germany: Leopold Voss, 1883), vol. 1, page 392.
- 1876: Eugen F. von Gorup-Besanez, ed., Lehrbuch der organischen Chemie für den Unterricht auf Universitäten, … (Braunschweig, Germany: Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn, 1876), vol. 2, page 253.
Cleansing of typography
A followup of user talk: Materialscientist #<math> pollution.
I think either “⋯” or “ · · · ” will be possible replacements for a moronic “•••”. Though, “•” for a free radical (i.e. an unpaired electron) is nice, isn’t it? Or, possibly, it should be superscripted, such as in •OH? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:42, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I received the following message from "DVWynn", who noted a difference between 2 sources for the compound's heat of formation--
In The Chemistry of Heterocyclic Compounds, Small Ring Heterocycles edited by Alfred Hassner, page 7-8, the heat of formation [of etylene oxide] is given as 117.2 kJ/mol, [which is] derived from heat of combustion 114.4 kJ/mol, and importantly, the ring-strain is quoted as 54.4 kJ/mol. These are at odds with the values on the page by a HUGE amount. [The ethylene oxide page lists the compound's heat of formation as: Std enthalpy of formation ΔfHo298 = −52.6 kJ mol−1 .] I presume 'angular stress' means ring-strain but maybe my terminology is out of date? Since its main use is in thermobaric weapons, I presume that it packs a lot of energy in a small (by spacial volume) 'package'. Note that heptanitrocubane is preferred over octanitrocubane because its concentration of energy (due to crystal structure) is higher.
I did some very quick checking and confirmed that Hassner's book The Chemistry of Heterocyclic Compounds … does indeed list the heat of formation of ethylene oxide as 117.2 kJ/ mol. (See: Heterocyclic Compounds ... by A. Hassner ) However, a couple of other sources may explain the difference in the figures for the compound's heat of formation. The Wikipedia article lists the heat of formation for the compound in its GAS state, whereas the heat of formation is higher for the compound in its LIQUID state. Hassner may have listed the heat of formation for the compound in its LIQUID state.
For example, on page 12 of this pdf file -- American Chemistry.com -- the heat of formation of the GASEOUS form is listed as
-1,194.8 kJ/kg = -52.6 kJ/mol ;
however, the heat of formation of the LIQUID form is listed as
-1,766.5 kJ/kg = -77.8 kJ/mol .
The National Institute of Standards and Technology lists the compound's heat of formation in the GASEOUS state as
However, in the "Comment" section, the heat of formation in the LIQUID state is listed as
So it seems likely that the difference in the heats of formation are the result of using different states (liquid vs. gas) as references for the measurements. However, in order to confirm this, it would be necessary to view Hassner's sources (which he does list). Cwkmail (talk) 17:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
About Ehtylene Oxide producers: in case anyone has the time or care to add this to the article, LyondellBasell also produces this product in Texas, USA according to their website. Reference: Http://www.lyondellbasell.com/Aboutus/WorldWideLocations/NorthAmerica/USA/Texas/Channelview/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
NFPA rating is wrong
According to the diagram it is a 3-4-3 rating (NFPA 704) but when I looked at the source (http://web.archive.org/web/20090804080033/http://www.sonoma-county.org/des/pdf/fire/bulletins/info_bulletin_nfpa_marking2009_04n.pdf) it is actually a 2-4-3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:610:1908:F000:D82E:D0AA:9CF2:39D3 (talk) 12:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)