How Do You Modify the Stoichiometry for Sulfur-Included Food Waste Degradation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on modifying the stoichiometry of food waste degradation to include sulfur in the reaction formula. The original formula for methane production from food waste is presented, and the participant seeks to adapt it by incorporating sulfur. The challenge lies in determining the coefficients for water, methane, and carbon dioxide while maintaining balance in the reaction. A suggested approach involves using linear algebra to establish equations based on atom balances for hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen. The conversation concludes with the participant ready to apply algebraic methods to solve the modified equation.
gfd43tg
Gold Member
Messages
947
Reaction score
48

Homework Statement


There's no problem statement, I'm doing this as part of my project

For degradation of food wastes to methane, the general formula is given for food waste (without sulfur)

##C_{n}H_{a}O_{b}N_{c} + (n - \frac {a}{4} - \frac {b}{2} + \frac {3c}{4})H_{2}O \rightarrow (\frac {n}{2} + \frac {a}{8} - \frac {b}{4} - \frac {3c}{8})CH_{4} + (\frac {n}{2} - \frac {a}{8} + \frac {b}{4} + \frac {3c}{8})CO_{2} + cNH_{3}##

However, for my purpose I need to include sulfur, so my formula should be
##C_{n}H_{a}O_{b}N_{c}S_{d}##

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


This part with the N and S are easy, but figuring out the other stuff is of course my issue.
##C_{n}H_{a}O_{b}N_{c}S_{d} + (...)H_{2}O \rightarrow (...) CH_{4} + (...)CO_{2} + cNH_{3} + dH_{2}S##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
CH4 and CO2 don't change.

Can't say whole equation makes much sense to me, it looks rather arbitrary.
 
I imagine they would change, since you are using hydrogen to make H2S instead of going into CH4, right? This is a pseudo reaction of course, I'm trying to model solid wastes to methane from anaerobic digestion without having to model all the many reactions involved in a real digestion
 
OK, you are right, they are not independent.
 
What you do is call x the coefficient of H2O, y the coefficient of CH4, and z the coefficient of CO2. Then you do an atom balance on H, C, and O. This gives you three linear algebraic equations in the three unknowns x, y, and z. Just solve for these unknowns.

Chet
 
  • Like
Likes gfd43tg
Chestermiller said:
What you do is call x the coefficient of H2O, y the coefficient of CH4, and z the coefficient of CO2. Then you do an atom balance on H, C, and O. This gives you three linear algebraic equations in the three unknowns x, y, and z. Just solve for these unknowns.

Chet
Thanks, now time to crank out the algebra
 
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