Calculating Synthesis Gas Volume for Water Heating: A Combustion Problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the volume of synthesis gas needed to heat a specific amount of water from one temperature to another. The synthesis gas composition is identified as 55.0% CO, 33.0% H2, and 12.0% noncombustible gases. The user expresses uncertainty about how to use the heat equation (Q = mcΔt) to determine the required gas volume. It is suggested that consulting combustion heat tables for CO and H2 is necessary for solving the problem. The conversation emphasizes the need for understanding combustion properties to complete the calculation.
Litcyb
Messages
34
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement

The partial burning of coal in the presence of O2 and H2O produces a mixture of CO(g) and H2(g) called synthesis gas. This gas can be used to synthesize organic compounds, or it can be burned as a fuel. A typical synthesis gas consists of 55.0% CO(g), 33.0% H2(g) and 12.0% noncombustible gases (mostly CO2(g)), by volume.

Homework Equations



What volume of the synthesis gas, measured at STP and burned in an open flame (constant-pressure process), is required to heat 45.0 gal of water from 16.0 to 60.0 C? (1 gal=3.785 L.)

The Attempt at a Solution



I have no idea how to solve this. the only thing i was able to find was Q (q=mcΔt). but idk how to find volume from there.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I guess you need to check tables for combustion heat of CO and H2.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
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