Nitric acid and magnesium reaction, slow gas production

AI Thread Summary
The reaction between nitric acid and magnesium is producing hydrogen gas at a slower rate than expected, potentially due to the formation of nitrogen oxides instead of hydrogen. Despite nitric acid being a strong acid and magnesium a reactive metal, the presence of nitrogen oxides may inhibit hydrogen production. The discussion suggests that hydrogen could be reacting with nitric acid, possibly reducing it to ammonia. This unexpected outcome raises questions about the reaction dynamics and the gases produced. Understanding these factors is crucial for accurately interpreting the results of the experiment.
mbeaumont99
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I need to work out what is happening with the above reaction. Why is my data showing a very slow hydrogen gas production rate (if it even is hydrogen gas), in fact, even slower than the production of hydrogen gas from the reaction of magnesium and ethanoic acid. All acids used were 1 mol/L. Magnesium ribbon used had (roughly) the same surface area and mass.

Homework Equations


Mg(s) + 2H+(aq) → Mg2+(aq) + H2(g)

The Attempt at a Solution


With nitric acid being a strong acid and magnesium being a reactive metal surely the hydrogen gas production would be very high, just like that of HCl with magnesium. Magnesium is a strong reductant and nitric acid is a strong oxidant, could this be what is causing a problem with the reaction. I read on wiki that this COULD be due to the reaction producing nitrogen oxide (+1, +2, or +4 oxidation states for nitrogen - different sources giving different nitrogen oxides). Why would nitric acid and magnesium reacting produce a different gas to hydrogen at such a slow rate. I would really appreciate help with determining why this outcome has occurred. Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps hydrogen is reacting with the nitric acid reducing it to ammonia.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top