Using graphite as a catalyst to break down Ozone

AI Thread Summary
Graphite's potential as a catalyst for breaking down ozone into oxygen is questioned due to its susceptibility to oxidation. Ozone is a strong oxidizer, and passing it over carbon typically results in carbon dioxide production. The discussion highlights the challenges of using graphite in this context, especially compared to more stable catalysts like platinum. While graphite has been used effectively in other applications, its effectiveness in this specific scenario remains uncertain. Overall, the feasibility of using graphite for ozone breakdown without significant oxidation is doubtful.
Hawk Eyes
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Can graphite be used as a catalyst to break down ozone into oxygen without serious oxidization?

The applied use for this is to break down ozone at the output of an ionic wind "fan". Similar operation to an ion thruster used by NASA but instead of using stored gasses and propelling them into space, the gasses would be drawn from atmosphere and propelled in a certain direction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hawk Eyes said:
Can graphite be used as a catalyst to break down ozone into oxygen without serious oxidization?

The applied use for this is to break down ozone at the output of an ionic wind "fan". Similar operation to an ion thruster used by NASA but instead of using stored gasses and propelling them into space, the gasses would be drawn from atmosphere and propelled in a certain direction.

It's not clear why you would think graphite would act to break down ozone. Passing ozone over carbon produces carbon dioxide:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone

After all, ozone is a powerful oxidizer, and all that graphite is just waiting to be oxidized.
 
You make a fine point sir! Thanks for the quick reply.

I just thought I would ask the obvious, as I have used graphite before as a catalyst in electrolysis of water. But I had a feeling that would take neutral catalysts like platinum.
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
Back
Top