Why Doesn't CH3CH2OH Conduct Electricity but CH3COOH Does?

AI Thread Summary
CH3CH2OH (ethanol) does not conduct electricity because it is a covalent compound that does not dissociate into ions in solution. In contrast, CH3COOH (acetic acid) is a weak organic acid that partially dissociates into CH3COO- and H+ ions, allowing it to conduct electricity. The discussion highlights the importance of the stability of the conjugate base formed when these molecules lose a proton, with CH3COO- being more stable than CH3CH2O-. This stability contributes to the acidity of acetic acid compared to ethanol. Understanding these differences in molecular behavior is key to grasping why some organic compounds can conduct electricity while others cannot.
MoMo Morgan
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Why doesn't CH3CH2OH (alcohol) conduct electricity but CH3COOH does?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I did some research on the website( answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080411203909AAqYaN1). It mentions about the difference of bonding between ionic coumpounds and covelant compund will result the difference in conductivity.


And in the end, the article mentions about
"Sucrose and any form of alcohol are molecular, covalent compounds (organic molecules. covalent = non-metal/non-metal bond)."

But isn't CH3COOH organic molecule?

I still don't really understand why CH3COOH will separate into two ions, CH3COO- and H+ while alcohol won't.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The compound you express as CH3COOH, ethanoic acid (commonly called acetic acid) is a weak organic acid and will dissociate into ions, therefore the ions can conduct electricity.
 
Another way to think about it is to ask which molecule is more acidic, and why. In order to do this you have to consider the stability of the conjugate base that is formed when the two molecules lose a proton. Whichever molecule has a more stable conjugate base will be more acidic. What is it that makes CH3COO- more stable than CH3CH2O-?
 
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