Understanding Oxidizing Agents in 2CuO + C

  • Thread starter Thread starter Drakkith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Oxidizing
AI Thread Summary
In the reaction 2CuO + C = 2Cu + CO2, CuO is identified as the oxidizing agent because it facilitates the transfer of electrons, despite being consumed in the reaction. While Cu gains electrons and is reduced, the definition of an oxidizing agent focuses on the reactant that causes oxidation, which in this case is CuO. The discussion highlights the complexity of identifying oxidizing agents, as it can sometimes seem arbitrary based on the context of the reaction. The conversation also touches on the challenges of memorization in chemistry and the eventual understanding of exceptions to rules. Ultimately, recognizing the role of CuO as an oxidizing agent is essential for grasping the reaction dynamics.
Drakkith
Mentor
Messages
23,179
Reaction score
7,656

Homework Statement



Which substance is the oxidizing agent in this reaction? 2CuO + C = 2Cu + CO2

Homework Equations



2CuO + C = 2Cu + CO2

The Attempt at a Solution



According to the online program I'm using for homework, CuO is the oxidizing agent, but I don't understand why. The oxidizing agent is the substance that gained electrons. Cu had an oxidation state of +2 prior to the reaction, and ends up gaining electrons to form neutral Cu. Each oxygen had an oxidation state of -2 prior to the reaction and ends up with -2 after the reaction. Carbon has an oxidation state of zero prior to the reaction and ends up with +4 after the reaction since it is reduced.

So 4 electrons are taken from carbon and given to 2 copper atoms. Shouldn't Cu be the oxidizing agent here? CuO doesn't even exist after the reaction, so how can it have gained electrons?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All you want to look at is the reactant, no deeper details such as which metal oxide you're using to oxidize C, or the specific mechanism. Sorting "spectators" like K+ from chemistries of aqueous solutions can be arbitrary, and sorting oxidizer, oxidizing agent, can be equally arbitrary, but the reaction as written involves mixing two black solids and getting a bright metal and a gas as products, one reactant was oxidized, and one reactant was reduced. You can also look at it from the point of view that CuO is a way of identifying a specific oxidized copper compound to use in the reaction reducing copper.
 
So you're saying that since CuO is a reactant, you can't separate the Cu out of it and say that Cu was the oxidizing agent?
 
Correct.
 
Thanks Bystander.
 
Anytime. Chemistry can be "arbitrary" at times.
 
Eh. It's the memorization that's killing me.
 
Been there --- enough rote memory will eventually reach a critical mass in which "contexts" will begin to take shape, and you'll be able to start memorizing exceptions to general rules rather than everything that's presented.
 
Back
Top