Reaction of PbO and NaOH: What's the Product?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sniffer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Base Lead
AI Thread Summary
The reaction between lead(II) oxide (PbO) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) can yield different products depending on the concentration of the base used. In the presence of excess NaOH, lead(II) hydroxide (Pb(OH)2) can convert to lead(III) hydroxide (Pb(OH)3^-) when water is also present. If excess lead is involved, the reaction produces Pb(OH)2 directly. For lead(IV) oxide (PbO2), the reaction with NaOH and water results in lead(IV) hydroxide (Pb(OH)6^2-). The concentration of NaOH is crucial in determining the final product of the reaction.
sniffer
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
what is the product of the reaction:

PbO + NaOH -> ?

or

PbO + NaOH + H2O -> ??

is there any difference?:frown:

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok finally got latex how I wanted. It depends upon concentration of the base. Look up hydrolysis.

Excess Lead:
Pb(s) + 2OH^-(aq) \rightarrow Pb(OH)_2(s)

Excess NaOH:
Pb(OH)_2(s) + H2O(l) \rightarrow Pb(OH)_3^-(aq)

Lead (II) Oxide:
PbO(s) + H2O(l) + OH^-(aq) \rightarrow Pb(OH)_3^-(aq)

So if you use excess NaOH there will be no difference in your products.

Lead (IV) Oxide:
PbO2_(s) + 2H_2O(l) + 2OH^-(aq) \rightarrow Pb(OH)_6^{-2}(aq).
 
Last edited:
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