Where Does the Second Chlorine Radical Go in Methane Chlorination?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Attraction
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radical
AI Thread Summary
In the chlorination of methane, the initiation step generates two chlorine radicals from Cl2. One chlorine radical reacts with a methyl group to form a methyl radical and HCl, while the other radical remains unaccounted for. The methyl radical then reacts with another Cl2 molecule, producing chloromethane and regenerating a chlorine radical. The unaccounted chlorine radical can continue to react with additional methane molecules, perpetuating the chain reaction. Eventually, termination reactions occur, where radicals combine to form stable molecules like Cl2.
Attraction
Messages
28
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The initiation step in chlorination of methane is as follows...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/32/MethaneChlorinationMechanismInitiation.svg/260px-MethaneChlorinationMechanismInitiation.svg.png

We get two chlorine radicals as a result.

Next we have two propagation steps

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/MethaneChlorinationPropagationStep.svg (won't let me embed the pic, sorry guys!)Ok, my understanding of this is... in the initiation step, the Cl2 was broken into two Cl radicals. ONE Cl radical moved on to the next step and reacted with the methyl group forming a methyl radical and HCl. THEN, the methyl radical reacted with Cl2 to form chloromethane and a chlorine radical.

My question is, Where does the SECOND Cl radical that was produced in the initiation step go? Because only ONE Cl radical reacted with the methyl group and then the methyl radical reacted with Cl2. In my mind, there is a Cl radical unaccounted for, but this is not explained in any example I can find (in a book or online)?

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It performs the same reaction with other molecules of methane. Eventually, you can get termination reactions that get rid of the radicals (often, this involves two radicals bonding together, e.g. Cl• + Cl• --> Cl2).
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
94
Views
11K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top