Stoichiometry and other questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter marinepyre
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Stoichiometry
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on stoichiometry questions related to combustion reactions. The first question involves calculating the theoretical yield of a hydrocarbon combustion reaction, given a 75% yield resulting in 16.0 grams of CO2 produced. The second question addresses the safety of burning charcoal briquettes indoors due to carbon monoxide production and asks for calculations involving the reaction of charcoal with oxygen. The user expresses concern about posting in the correct forum and requests notification if their post is in the wrong section to avoid deletion. The thread was ultimately locked, indicating a need for adherence to forum guidelines.
marinepyre
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
First of all
I hope this is the right section of the forums
My other was deleted because i posted at the wrong forum.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So here is my first question
In the combustion of a certain hydrocarbon, 16.0 grams of CO2 is produced. This represents a 75% yield. What is the theoretical yield?
A) 12g
B)21.3g
C)32.0g
D)44.0g
I know the answer but i don't know how to get it. Thanks in advance.

My second is this
Barbecues burning charcoal briquettes are unsafe for indoor use because of the colourless, odourless, poisonous gas produced.
(a) Find the n(O2) gas that reacts with 3.5 g of
charcoal briquettes (assume pure C) to produce
carbon monoxide.
(b) If there is a plentiful supply of air, a safe
colourless, odourless gas is produced. Find the mass of this gas produced if the same amount of charcoal is burnt. You will need to write another equation.

Oh by the way if i am in the wrong forum again. Notify me and let me copy what i typed in that would save a lot of time. Before you delete it.
 
marinepyre said:
Oh by the way if i am in the wrong forum again. Notify me and let me copy what i typed in that would save a lot of time. Before you delete it.

Please read your private messages. You were notified why your thread was deleted.

Topic locked.
 
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