Activated carbon vs. Typical bonfire coal

In summary, activated carbon is a specially treated form of carbon with a high surface area that makes it more reactive and desirable for use in filters and pyrotechnics. This increased surface area allows it to absorb water and other chemicals from the air, unlike regular coal which is too dense for this purpose. However, once activated carbon has been used to its full extent, it becomes similar to regular coal.
  • #1
civil_dude
177
1
Does anyone know the difference? Specs and such?

Thanks
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
  • #2
Activated charcoal has lots more surface area to help for filters and stuff... They can make it with 2 square kilometers in a gram I hear.
 
  • #3
Activated Carbon is specially treated/made to that the particles have a very high surface area.
This increased surface area of Activated Carbon over regular coal-Carbon makes it much more reactive (more surfact area means more spots for a reaction to take place) and very desireable for use in pyrotechnics and in carbon filtration.
 
  • #4
Normal choal-carbon contains many inpurities compared to the chemically altered activated carbon, but I assume that you meant coal-carbon without it?
 
  • #5
Activated Carbon has a high surface area that allows it to absorb water and other such chemicals from the air. Coal is way too dense for this. However, if the activated carbon has been used to its full extent, it will be about the same thing as the coal.
 

Question 1: What is the difference between activated carbon and typical bonfire coal?

Activated carbon and typical bonfire coal are both forms of carbon, but they have different properties and uses. Activated carbon is a highly porous form of carbon that is created through a process of heating and treating carbonaceous materials. It is commonly used for filtration, purification, and adsorption due to its large surface area and ability to bind to other substances. On the other hand, typical bonfire coal is a less processed form of carbon that is used primarily for energy production through combustion.

Question 2: Which one is more effective for removing impurities from water or air?

Activated carbon is generally more effective for removing impurities from water or air compared to typical bonfire coal. This is because activated carbon has a larger surface area and a stronger affinity for adsorbing molecules, making it more efficient at removing contaminants. Additionally, activated carbon can be tailored to target specific pollutants, making it a more versatile option for purification purposes.

Question 3: Is activated carbon safe for consumption?

Activated carbon is generally considered safe for consumption, as it is non-toxic and does not pose any health risks. In fact, it is commonly used in water and air filters to remove impurities and improve taste. However, it is important to note that activated carbon may also adsorb beneficial nutrients and medications, so it should be used with caution and not consumed in excess.

Question 4: Can typical bonfire coal be used as a substitute for activated carbon?

While both activated carbon and typical bonfire coal are forms of carbon, they have different properties and uses. As such, typical bonfire coal is not a suitable substitute for activated carbon in most cases. It lacks the same level of porosity and adsorption capabilities, making it less effective for filtration and purification purposes. Additionally, typical bonfire coal may contain impurities or toxins that could be harmful if used in place of activated carbon.

Question 5: What are the environmental impacts of using activated carbon vs. typical bonfire coal?

Activated carbon and typical bonfire coal both have environmental impacts, but they differ in their degree and type of impact. Activated carbon production requires a significant amount of energy and can contribute to carbon emissions. However, it is often made from sustainable materials like coconut shells or wood waste. In contrast, typical bonfire coal is a non-renewable resource that releases carbon dioxide and other pollutants when burned. It also requires large amounts of land for extraction and can cause damage to ecosystems if not managed properly.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
944
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
32
Views
710
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
941
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
3
Views
669
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top