https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.2059
“IC of MDEAH+ and TEAH+
The IC of MDEAH+ and TEAH+ are summarized in Table 3. The IC and absolute value of electric charge of OH− and HCO3− involved Eqns (1) and (3) are listed in Table 3.44, 45
| Ions | absolute value of electric charge (z) | Ionic conductivity (S·cm2·mol−1·z−1) |
|---|---|---|
| OH− | +1 | 198.644 |
| HCO3− | +1 | 44.5045 |
| MDEAH+ | +1 | 46.51a |
| TEAH+ | +1 | 37.60b |
- a Estimated in present works.
- b Estimated in previous works.36
The calculation to verify the IC of the two R3NH+ ions obtained from the estimated values was iterated with MATLAB programs until the IC satisfied the certain point that minimizes the calculation deviation between ECm and ECc values in all CO2 absorbed solutions of the two systems. As a result, the IC of MDEAH+ and TEAH+ was calculated to be 46.51 and 37.60 S · cm2·mol−1 · z−1, respectively, and the minimum calculation deviation was 9.2 and 14.73%.37
The IC of MDEAH+ is about 1.24 times larger than that of TEAH+, which was attributed to the different molecular (or ionic) weight and volume of the two R3NH+ ions. IC is strongly affected by ionic weight and volume, which are directly related to ionic mobility and charge density, respectively. The ionic weight of TEAH+ and MDEAH+ is 150.19 and 120.16 g·mol−1, respectively, and the ionic volume of MDEAH+ is smaller than that of the TEAH+. Therefore, the mobility and ionic charge density of MDEAH+ are larger than those of TEAH+.”