Cigarette paper with reduced CO on burning

Abstract

The present invention relates to smoking article wrappers having a non-ionic surfactant added to the wrapper. The non-ionic surfactant is added to the wrapper in an amount sufficient to reduce the amount of carbon monoxide produced upon burning of the wrapper.

Description

BACKGROUND OF INVENTION

1. Field of Invention

The present invention relates to cigarette papers and other cellulosic wrappers for smoking articles having reduced carbon monoxide emission on burning.

2. Prior Art

U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,046,994 and 3,404,687 disclose that a reduction in the "vapor phase constituents" of cigarette smoke can be attained by providing wrapper paper having a high degree of porosity.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,303,084 concerns a method for limiting the free burning time of a cigarette by coating the paper with a "polymeric chlorine-containing film-forming latex".

U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,108,151 and 4,433,697 disclose that "visible sidestream smoke" emanating from a cigarette during static burning may be reduced by incorporating in the wrapper paper gamma alumina filler and ceramic fibers in combination with magnesium oxide and/or hydroxide, respectively.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,146,041 teaches that the "gas phase constituents" on pyrolysis of cigarette paper stained brown with humic acid may be reduced by washing with water to reduce the water-soluble alkali metal salt content thereof.

U.S. Pat. No. 3,310,060 discloses incorporating a "poly(oxyethylene) compound in a cellulosic filter to absorb undesirable ingredients from cigarette smoke.

No effective method or means have been suggested heretofore, however, for reducing the amount of carbon monoxide formed by the burning of cigarette wrapper paper.

It is an object of the present invention to provide a cellulosic sheet material containing an additive which greatly reduces the amount of carbon monoxide emitted by the burning thereof.

It is a further object of the present invention to provide a wrapper for cigarettes and the like composed of the additive-containing paper.

It is a still further object of the present invention to provide a cigarette or similar smoking article wherein the wrapper comprises the additive-containing paper.

Finally, it is an object of the present invention to provide a method for the preparation of the cellulosic sheet material containing the CO emission reducing additive.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The foregoing and still further objects of the invention are achieved by providing a cellulosic sheet material containing an amount of a non-ionic surfactant sufficient to reduce the amount of carbon monoxide emitted upon burning the cellulosic sheet.

The present invention also provides a wrapper for enclosing tobacco or other smoking medium and a smoking article composed of the tobacco or smoking medium enclosed with the non-ionic surfactant containing cellulosic sheet wrapper.

The invention further provides methods for preparing the aforedescribed cellulosic sheet by (1) coating the sheet material with a solvent solution of the non-ionic surfactant followed by drying or (2) by application of the non-ionic surfactant to the cellulosic sheet by other methods, e.g., spraying.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The exact mechanism by which the non-ionic surfactant functions to reduce carbon monoxide emission upon burning of paper in which it is incorporated is not fully understood. It is theorized that they stabilize the moisture content of the paper at a level incompatible with efficient carbon monoxide production on burning.

In any event, it has been found that any water-soluble non-ionic surfactant may be utilized in the practice of the invention. Preferred among such surfactants are the following:

(1) polymers having the formula: ##STR1## wherein: n is an integer from 3 to 60 and

R is H or CH.sub.3 and wherein from 0 to 100% of the R groups in the polymer are H, or mixtures thereof;

(2) polymers having the formula: ##STR2## wherein: n is an integer from 5 to 60;

R is H or CH.sub.3, and wherein from 0 to 100% of the R groups in the polymer are H; R.sub.1 is a monovalent hydrocarbon radical consisting of alkyl and alkaryl containing 1 to 15 atoms; or mixtures thereof.

(3) polymers having the formula: ##STR3## wherein: n is an integer from 5 to 60;

x is an integer from 5 to 30; y is an integer from 5 to 30; m is an integer from 5 to 20; R is H or CH.sub.3 and wherein from 0 to 100% of the R groups in the polymer are H, or mixtures thereof;

(4) polymers having the formula:

H--OC.sub.n H.sub.2n).sub.m OH wherein: n is an interger from 3 to 15; and m is an integer from 5 to 50.

In the above formula R.sub.1 may be any monovalent alkyl or alkaryl group which does not deleteriously affect the surfactant properties of the molecule, e.g., octyl, nonylphenyl.

Most preferred among the non-ionic surfactants of the above formulae are:

(a) those produced by randomly condensing glycerol with ethylene oxide and propylene oxide and finally capping the hydroxyl ends thereof with ethylene oxide. (e.g., PG-2601, Olin Corp.):

(b) ethoxylated nonylphenol condensed with ethylene oxide. (e.g., Poly-Tergent B-300, Olin Corp.):

(c) those produced by condensing linear alcohols containing more than 10 carbon atoms, e.g., tridecyl alcohol, dodecyl alcohol, octyl phenol with ethylene oxide and, optimally, then with propylene oxide, i.e., PTS-405-LF, Olin Corp.; PTS-305-LF, Olin Corp.; PTLF-400, Olin Corp.; PTG-300, Olin Corp.;

(d) polyethylene glycols (e.g., Carbowax 2000, Union Carbide).

Any amount of non-ionic surfactant sufficient to reduce carbon monoxide emission during burning but insufficient to affect smoking enjoyment or the aesthetic appearance of the smoking article before, during or after burning may be incorporated in the paper. Generally, an amount of non-ionic surfactant in the range of from about 0.1% to about 10%, by weight, based on the weight of the paper, may be incorporated therein. The optimum amount will depend in each case, of course, upon the particular non-ionic surfactant and paper base selected.

The wrapper paper for enclosing tobacco or other smoking medium may be formed from the treated paper according to any conventional method and the wrapper papers may be utilized to enclose tobacco or any desired smoking medium according to conventional methods for preparing smoking articles.

The cellulosic fiber stock sheet or the wrapper papers prepared therefrom may be coated with a solvent (e.g., water or other aqueous medium) solution of the non-ionic surfactant, followed by drying. The most convenient method of coating comprises simply dipping the sheet or wrapper papers in a solution containing from about 0.1% to about 20%, by weight, of the non-ionic surfactant, followed by drying at room or an elevated temperature, i.e., from about 25.degree. C. to about 140.degree. C. Alternately, the cellulosic sheets may be sprayed with a solution of the surfactant and permitted to dry.

The invention is illustrated by the following non-limiting examples:

EXAMPLE 1

Ecusta's Reference 12566 cigarette paper was obtained in the form of 4" wide rolls. The paper was treated with the following (w/v) surfactant solutions and water (control) on a size press:

1. PG-2601--1.0% 2. PG-2601--2.5% 3. PG-2601--5.0% 4. Poly-Tergent B-200--2.5%.

Ecusta's Reference 12820 cigarette paper was obtained in the form of 4" wide rolls. The paper was treated with the following (w/v) surfactant solutions and water (control) on a size press:

5. PTS-405-LF 6. PTLF-400 7. PG-2601 8. PTS-305-LF 9. PTG-300.

Smoking analyses on the Phipps and Bird smoking machine were performed after rerolling the above cigarette papers onto Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns which were weight selected. The cigarettes were conditioned at 72.degree. F. and 62% relative humidity prior to smoking. The results (TABLE 1) show a reduction in carbon monoxide yields ranging from 6% to 11% compared to that obtained from the control papers. Ash type and appearance ratings are based on the following scale:

______________________________________1. Ash Appearance Rating ("A" Type)No. Letter Description______________________________________95 A Small, perfect clinging flakes85 B Small, good, clinging flakes75 C Larger flakes, fair clinging flakes65 D Flakes show some tendency to cling55 E All paper ash falls off______________________________________2. Ash Appearance on Highly Combustible Cigarette Paper(Nitrated or Citrated)Solidity - S Color - CNo. Description No. Description______________________________________1 Perfectly solid 1 White2 23 Very solid 3 Gray White4 45 Fairly solid 5 Gray6 67 78 Large flakes 8 Dark gray9 910 All paper ash falls 10 Black off______________________________________ TABLE 1__________________________________________________________________________EFFECT OF SURFACTANTS ON CARBON MONOXIDE YIELDS Percent Change Carbon Static Carbon Monoxide Carbon Burn Rate Monoxide CarbonCigarette Paper Coresta Count Per (mg/ Monoxide (mg/ Ash Per MonoxideIdentification Porosity Cigarette cigarette) (mg/puff) minute) Appearance Cigarette Dry Tar__________________________________________________________________________Reference 12556 - 24 To 26 8.41 16.0 1.90 64.8 S-5, C-4 -- 27.91 0.573ControlPG-2601 - 1.0% 24 To 26 8.19 15.0 1.83 64.4 S-5, C-4 - 6.25 27.21 0.551PG-2601 - 2.5% 24 To 26 8.10 14.8 1.83 68.5 S-5, C-4 - 7.50 25.91 0.571PG-2601 - 5% 24 To 26 8.30 14.2 1.71 64.8 S-6, C-5 - 11.40 24.81 0.572Poly-Tergent B- 24 To 26 8.10 14.5 1.78 63.8 S-5, C-5 - 9.50 24.61 0.590300 - 2.5%Reference 12820 - 26 To 30 7.90 16.9 2.14 60.0 85-B -- 26.61 0.635ControlPTS-405-LF 26 To 30 8.10 15.3 1.89 60.6 75-C - 9.50 25.31 0.604PTLF-400 26 To 30 7.70 15.9 2.06 58.9 75-C - 5.90 27.61 0.576PG-2601 26 To 30 7.80 15.1 1.93 57.2 75-C - 10.30 25.71 0.587PTS-305-LF 26 To 30 7.80 15.6 1.99 56.8 75-C - 7.40 35.61 0.438PTG-300 26 To 30 7.80 15.6 1.99 58.1 75-C - 7.70 25.91 0.602__________________________________________________________________________

The results in Table 1 also demonstrate that the amount of tar produced upon burning the treated papers was reduced.

EXAMPLE 2

Reference cigarette paper 1280 was obtained in 4" roll form. This untreated paper was used as a control. The following surfactant solutions were prepared in 2.5% concentration by weight; in water: PTS 405 LF, PTLF 400, PG 2601, PTS 305 LF and PTG 300.

The 12820 paper was cut in 4.times.15" strips. The felt side, marked with a pencil, were dipped by hand in pans containing each of the five solutions. The paper was passed on a size press at 40 PSi and dried at 250.degree. F. The papers were cut in strips and measured for porosity (Coresta). The porosity of each paper was matched in the range 28-30 Coresta. Three sets of control cigarettes (a total of 9) were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.90-0.92 grams. Similarly, three sets of test cigarettes were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.90-0.92 grams. The cigarettes were conditioned at 72.degree. F. and 62% RH for 48 hours.

For the static burn rate (SBR) studies one set each (containing 3) of each kind of paper were rerolled into cigarettes using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.88-0.89 grams.

The P and B smoking machine was calibrated and a smoking run was made. The results of smoke yielded and SBR are shown in Tables 2 and 3. ##EQU1##

TABLE 2__________________________________________________________________________SBRSurfactant Weight of Burn Rate SBR AshType Cigarettes Min. Average Type Remarks__________________________________________________________________________12820 0.88, 0.885 10.00, 10.0 59.2, 59 , 61.8 85B Small to largeControl 0.875 9.5 60 good clingingPTG 300 0.855, 0.895 10.75, 9.75 55.2, 57.2, 61.9 75C large flakes 0.90 10.5 58.1 fair clingingPG 2601 0.90, 0.89 10.1, 10.5 56.2, 58.3, 57.2 75C large flakes 0.895 10.75 57.2 fair clingingPTLF 400 0.87, 0.87 9.75, 10.10 58.4, 59.9, 58.4 0.87 58.9PTS 305 LF 0.88, 0.89 9.75, 10.75 60.6, 55.5, 54.3 75C large flakes 0.89 11.0 56.8 fair clingingPTS 405 LF 0.875, 0.88 10, 9.75, 58.7, 60.1, 62.2 75C large flakes, fair 0.88 9.5 60.6 clinging, more solid__________________________________________________________________________ TABLE 3__________________________________________________________________________SMOKE YIELDS - AVERAGE VALUES Carbon Ave. wet tar % changeSurfactant Puff count Monoxide CO (dry tar) % change wet tarType per cigarette mg/cig mg/puff mg/cig. CO mg/cig mg/cig.__________________________________________________________________________12820 7.9 16.9 2.14 33.2 -- --Control (26.61)PTS 405 LF 8.07 15.29 1.89 31.9 -9.5 -3.9 (25.31)PTLF 400 7.73 15.9 2.06 34.2 -5.9 +2.9 (27.61)PG 2601 7.85 15.1 1.93 32.3 -10.3 -2.7 (25.71)PTS 305 LF 7.84 15.6 1.99 42.2 -7.4 +27 (35.61)PTG 300 7.84 15.6 1.99 32.5 -7.7 -2.1 (25.91)__________________________________________________________________________

EXAMPLE 3

This example demonstrates the effect of the concentration of ionic surfactant in the paper on carbon monoxide yield on burning.

Reference 12556 cigarette paper was obtained in the form of 4" rolls. Untreated paper was used as a control. The following concentrations (w/v) of PG 2601 were prepared in water. Also Poly-Tergent B-300 was used in 2.5% concentration PG 2601, 1, 2.5% and 5% concentration solutions.

The reference 12556 paper was hand-dipped in each of the solutions, size pressed and dried at 250.degree. F. The porosities of the paper were matched between 24-26 Coresta. Three sets of control cigarettes, three per set (a total of 9) were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns, weighing 0.90 and 0.91 grams. Similarly, three sets of test cigarettes were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.90 and 0.91 grams. The cigarettes were conditioned at 72.degree. F. and 62% R.H. for 24 hours. For the static burn rate studies, one set each (containing 3) of each kind of paper were rerolled into cigarettes using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.88, 0.89 grams.

The P and B smoking machine was calibrated and a smoking run was made. The results of smoke yields and SBR are shown in Tables 4 and 5.

TABLE 4__________________________________________________________________________SBRSurfactant Weight of Burn Rate SBR AshType Cigarettes Min. Average Type Remarks__________________________________________________________________________12556 0.935, 0.945 9.83, 9.5, 64.8 C-4 Bet. Better thanControl 0.93 9.75 S4 + S5 fairly solidPG 2601 1% 0.93, 0.935 9.5, 9.5, 64.4 S-4 C4 Better than 0.94 10.25 S-5 fairly solidPG 2601 2.5% 0.92, 0.935 9.25, 9.25, 68.5 S4 C4 Better than 0.93 8.75 S5 fairly solidPG 2601 5% 0.94, 0.94 10, 9.5, 64.8 S6-C5 Better than 0.92 9.5 fairly solidPoly-TB-300 0.925, 0.945 9.25, 10.5, 63.8 C5-C5 Better than(2.5%) 0.93 9.66 fairly solid__________________________________________________________________________ TABLE 5__________________________________________________________________________SMOKE YIELDS (Average) Wet tar % changeSurfactant Puff count CO CO (dry tar) % change wet tar CO.sub.2Type per cig. mg/cig. mg/puff mg/cig. CO/cig. per cig. mg/cig.__________________________________________________________________________12556 8.41 16.0 1.9 34.5 -- -- 41.1Control (27.91)1% 8.19 15.0 1.83 33.8 -6.25 -2.0 40.07PG 2601 (27.21)2.5% 8.1 14.8 1.83 32.5 -7.5 -5.79 39.7PG 2601 (25.91)5% 8.3 14.2 1.71 31.4 -11.4 -8.9 39.97PG 2601 (24.81)2.5% 8.1 14.5 1.78 31.2 -9.5 -9.6 39.1Poly-TB 300 (24.61)__________________________________________________________________________

EXAMPLE 4

Reference 12820 cigarette paper was obtained in the form of 4" wide rolls. This untreated paper was used as a control. The following waxes were prepared:

______________________________________ Concentration (Grams per 100Wax Type Milliliters) Solvent______________________________________Water Insoluble WaxesCandelilla Vegetable 2.5 TolueneCarnauba Vegetable 2.5 TolueneParaffin Petroleum 2.5 TolueneWater Soluble SurfactantsCarbowax Union Carbide 2.51 WaterPoly-Tergent Olin 2.47 WaterB-300______________________________________

The solutions were applied by hand-dipping the cigarette paper in respective solutions and passed through a size press at 40 pounds per square inch and dried at 250.degree. F. The porosity of each paper was matched in the range of 26 to 29 Coresta. Three sets of control cigarettes (three per set), for a total of nine, were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.87 grams, 0.88 grams, and 0.90 grams. Similarly, three sets of test cigarettes (three per set) for each type of wax were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.87 grams, 0.88 grams, and 0.90 grams. An extra control using two sets of toluene dipped cigarette paper was also using in the experiment.

For the static burn rate studies, three cigarettes were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.91 grams to 0.93 grams for each type of coated paper and controls. The cigarettes were conditioned at 72.degree. F. and 62% relative humidity for 48 hours. The Phipps and Bird smoking machine was calibrated and the smoking run was made. The results are shown in Tables 6 and 7.

The example indicates a 13.7% reduction in carbon monoxide yields for Poly-Tergent B-300 and a 10.9% reduction in wet tar yields. For Carbowax 2000 it indicates a 4.9% reduction in carbon monoxide yields and a 4.8% reduction in wet tar yields. For water insoluble waxes no reduction is carbon monoxide or wet tar yields was found.

TABLE 6__________________________________________________________________________STATIC BURN RATE Weight Average Static AshWax Type (Grams) Burn Rate Burn Rate Appearance__________________________________________________________________________Toluene Dipped - No wax 0.93 10 minutes and 50 seconds 57.4 S-5, C-5 0.93 11 minutes 0.93 10 minutes and 45 secondReference 12820 Control 0.905 11 minutes 55.2 S-5, C-5 0.90 10 minutes and 45 seconds 0.87 10 minutes and 45 secondsCarbowax 2000 0.92 10 minutes and 45 seconds 59.2 S-5, C-5 0.91 9 minutes and 40 seconds 0.93 10 minutes and 55 secondsCandelilla 0.91 10 minutes and 15 seconds 57.1 S-5, C-5 0.91 10 minutes and 45 seconds 0.92 11 minutes and 15 secondsCarnauba 0.93 11 minutes and 15 seconds 55.7 80 0.93 11 minutes 0.92 11 minutes and 15 secondsParaffin 0.91 10 minutes and 15 seconds 60.7 80 0.93 10 minutes 0.92 10 minutes and 15 secondsPoly-Tergent B-300 0.92 10 minutes 60.8 80 0.92 9 minutes and 45 seconds 0.915 10 minutes and 40 seconds__________________________________________________________________________ TABLE 7__________________________________________________________________________CARBON MONOXIDE AND WET TAR YIELDS Average Average Average Average % Change % Change Puff Count Carbon Monoxide Carbon Monoxide Wet Tar Carbon Monoxide Wet TarWax Type Per Cigarette (mg/cigarette) (mg/puff) (mg/cigarette) Per Cigarette Per Cigarette__________________________________________________________________________Reference 12820 8.3 15.5 1.8 33.0 -- --ControlToluene Dipped - 7.8 15.7 2.0 30.5 +1.4 -7.5No WaxCandelilla 8.1 16.1 1.9 34.8 +4.1 +5.5Carnauba 8.1 16.9 2.1 33.9 +9.4 +2.7Carbowax 2000 7.9 14.7 1.9 31.4 -4.9 -4.8Paraffin 7.9 16.3 2.0 33.1 +5.5 +0.3Poly-Tergent 7.9 13.3 1.7 29.4 -13.7 -10.9B-300__________________________________________________________________________

EXAMPLE 5

Reference 12820 cigarette paper was obtained in the form of 4" wide rolls. Untreated paper was used as a control. The following surfactants prepared by dissolving 2.5 grams of each surfactant in 100 milliliters of water were prepared.

1. PTS-405-LF 2. PTLF-400 3. PG-2601 4. PTS-305-LF 5. PTG-300.

The surfactants were applied by hand dipping the cigarette paper in respective solutions and passed through a size press at 40 pounds per square inch and dried at 250.degree. F. The porosity of each paper was matched in the range of 26 to 30 Coresta. Three sets of control cigarettes (three per set), for a total of nine, were rerolled using Kentucky Referee IR3 tobacco columns weighing 0.90 to 0.92 grams. Similarly, three sets of test cigarettes (three per set) for each type of surfactant were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.90 to 0.92 grams.

For the static burn rate studies, three cigarettes were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.88 grams and 0.89 grams for each type of surfactant and control. The cigarettes were conditioned at 72.degree. F. and 62% relative humidity for 24 hours. The Phipps and Bird smoking machine was calibrated and the smoking run was made. The results are shown in Tables 8 and 9.

The experiment indicates an overall reduction of carbon monoxide with all the surfactants used. The greatest decrease in carbon monoxide yields was obtained with PG-2601 (10.3% reduction).

TABLE 8______________________________________STATIC BURN RATE Average Static Burn Rate AshSurfactant Type (mg/minutes) Appearance______________________________________Reference 12820 (Control) 60.0 85-BPTS-405-LF 60.6 75-CPTLF-400 58.9 75-CPG-2601 57.2 75-CPTS-305-LF 56.8 75-CPTG-300 58.1 75-C______________________________________ TABLE 9__________________________________________________________________________CARBON MONOXIDE AND WET TAR YIELDS Average Average Average Average % Change % Change Puff Count Carbon Monoxide Carbon Monoxide Wet Tar Carbon Monoxide Wet TarWax Type Per Cigarette (mg/cigarette) (mg/puff) (mg/cigarette) Per Cigarette Per Cigarette__________________________________________________________________________Reference 12820 7.9 16.9 2.14 33.2 -- --(Control)PTS-405-LF 8.1 15.3 1.89 31.9 -9.5 -3.9PTLF-400 7.7 15.9 2.06 34.2 -5.9 +2.9PG-2601 7.8 15.1 1.93 32.3 -10.3 -2.7PTS-305-LF 7.8 15.6 1.99 42.2 -7.4 +27.0PTG-300 7.8 15.6 1.99 32.5 -7.7 -2.1__________________________________________________________________________

EXAMPLE 6

Reference 12556 cigarette paper was obtained in the form of 4" wide rolls. Untreated paper was used as a control. The following surfactant solutions (w/v) were prepared. The solutions were prepared in water.

1. PG-2601--1% 2. PG-2601--2.5% 3. PG-2601--5% 4. Poly-Tergent B-300--2.5%.

The surfactants were applied by hand dipping the cigarette paper in the respective solutions and passed through a size press at 40 pounds per square inch and dried at 250.degree. F. The porosity of each paper was matched in the range of 24 to 26 Coresta. Three sets of control cigarettes (three per set), for a total of nine, were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.89 grams to 0.90 grams. Similarly, three sets of test cigarettes (three per set) for each concentration level of the surfactant were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.89 grams to 0.90 grams.

For the static burn rate studies, three cigarettes were rerolled using Kentucky Referee 1R3 tobacco columns weighing 0.88 grams and 0.89 grams for each of the surfactant solutions. The cigarettes were conditioned at 72.degree. F. and 64% relative humidity for 24 hours. The Phipps and Bird smoking machine was calibrated and the smoking run was made. The results are shown in Table 10.

This study indicated an overall reduction of carbon monoxide and wet tar yields for each of the surfactant solutions. The carbon monoxide yields decreased to a maximum of 11.4% for a 5% PG-2601 applied cigarette paper and the wet tar decreased by 8.9% for the same cigarette paper.

TABLE 10__________________________________________________________________________ Average Average Average Average Average Average % Change % Change Static Puff Carbon Carbon Average Monoxide Wet Tar Burn Rate Average Count Per Monoxide Monoxide Wet Tar per per mg/ AshSurfactant Cigarette (mg/cigarette) (mg/puff) (mg/cigarette) Cigarette Cigarette minute Appearance__________________________________________________________________________Reference 12556 8.41 16.0 1.90 34.5 -- -- 64.8 S-5, C-4ControlPG-2601 - 1% 8.19 15.0 1.83 33.8 -6.25 -2.0 64.4 S-5, C-4PG-2601 - 2.5% 8.10 14.8 1.83 32.5 -7.50 -5.8 68.5 S-5, C-4PG-2601 - 5% 8.30 14.2 1.71 31.4 -11.40 -8.9 64.8 S-6, C-5Poly-Tergent 8.10 14.5 1.78 31.2 -9.50 -9.6 63.8 S-5, C-5B-300 - 2.5%__________________________________________________________________________

Claims

1. Smoking article wrapper comprising a cellulosic sheet containing an amount of a non-ionic surfactant sufficient to reduce the amount of carbon monoxide produced upon burning said cellulosic sheet.

2. The smoking article wrapper of claim 1 wherein said non-ionic surfactant is selected from the group consisting of polymers having the formula: ##STR4## wherein: n is an integer from 3 to 60; and

R is H or CH.sub.3, and wherein from 0 to 100% of the R groups in the polymer are H, or mixtures thereof.

3. The smoking article wrapper of claim 1 wherein said non-ionic surfactant is selected from the group consisting of polymers having the formula: ##STR5## wherein: n is an integer from 5 to 60;

R is H or CH.sub.3, and wherein from 0 to 100% of the R groups in the polymer are H;

R.sub.1 is a monovalent hydrocarbon radical consisting of alkyl and alkaryl containing 1 to 15 atoms; or mixtures thereof.

4. The smoking article wrapper of claim 1 wherein said non-ionic surfactant is selected from the group consisting of polymers having the formula: ##STR6## wherein: n is an integer from 5 to 60;

x is an integer from 5 to 30;

y is an integer from 5 to 30;

m is an integer from 5 to 20;

R is H or CH.sub.3, and wherein from 0 to 100% of the R groups in the polymer are H, or mixtures thereof.

5. The smoking article wrapper of claim 1 wherein said non-ionic surfactant is selected from the group consisting of polymers having the formula:

H--OC.sub.n H.sub.2n).sub.m OH

wherein:

n is an integer from 3 to 15; and

m is an integer from 5 to 50.

6. The smoking article wrapper of claim 3 wherein said monovalent hydrocarbon radical is nonylphenyl.

7. The smoking article wrapper of claim 3 wherein said monovalent hydrocarbon radical is linear tridecyl.

8. The smoking article wrapper of claim 3 wherein said monovalent hydrocarbon radical is dodecyl.

9. The smoking article wrapper of claim 3 wherein said monovalent hydrocarbon radical is octyphenyl.

10. The smoking article wrapper of claim 1 wherein said non-ionic surfactant is polyethylene glycol.

11. The smoking article wrapper of claim 1 containing from about 0.1 to about 10%, by weight, of said non-ionic surfactant.

12. A smoking article wrapper for enclosing tobacco or smoking medium to form a smoking article composed of the paper of claim 1.

13. The smoking article wrapper of claim 12 comprising a cigarette paper.

14. A smoking article comprising a tobacco or smoking medium charge and a wrapper therefor, said wrapper comprising that of claim 13.

15. The smoking article of claim 14 comprising a cigarette.