Chemistry Lab Question: Calculating Water Usage in a Plant's Production Process

  • Thread starter Thread starter Choronzon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chemistry Lab
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the amount of water used for "other things" in a plant's production process. The participant calculated the total input of materials and subtracted the mass of the product stream, arriving at a figure of 591 L/day for water usage. However, it was pointed out that only a portion of the product stream's mass consists of water, indicating an error in the calculation. Additionally, there was a mention that the chemical formula AlSO4 is not recognized, suggesting a potential misunderstanding of the product's composition. The participant seeks confirmation of their method while expressing a desire to independently resolve any mistakes.
Choronzon

Homework Statement



A plant takes in 20.24 kg/day Al, 24.04 kg/day S8, 48.00 kg/day 02, and 753 kg/day H2O. It's product stream is 254.3 kg/day AlSO4+12(H2O). The rest of it's water goes to "other things".

How much water goes to other things?

Homework Equations



20.24+24.04+48.00+753=845.28 kg - 254.3 = 590.98 kg = 591 L/d

The Attempt at a Solution



I added the masses of the raw materials, subtracted the mass of the product stream, and the remainder is the water used for "other things."

It seems easy enough to me, but the simplicity of the question is giving me pause, as it's the first question in this course which seemed this simple. My result was 591 L/d.

Basically I want to know if I did this correctly, or am I barking up the completely wrong tree. If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate it if someone told me, but left it at that, as I'd like to try and figure it out on my own.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your intuition is right - it is not a correct answer.

Only part of the 254.3 kg is water.

Then, I have never seen compound with formula AlSO4.

--
methods
 
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