Into the Night ★★★★★
(23897) |
Im a BM wrote:
Let's make a "type B conflagration explosive" and try to understand why saltpeter (potassium nitrate) is used to make gunpowder, but ammonium nitrate is not.
Wrong type of black powder. You messed up already.
Im a BM wrote:
Gunpowder combines saltpeter, black carbon, and elemental sulfur. Ammonium nitrate needs only itself to be an explosive.
Nope. It needs a fuel and an impact, or a gas producing fuel and a closed container.
Im a BM wrote:
Saltpeter is potassium nitrate, KNO3. The nitrate is the terminal electron acceptor (ITN calls it an "oxidizer") needed for the explosive oxidation-reduction reaction. Gunpowder uses chemically reduced forms of carbon and sulfur as the reductant for the reaction.
There is no such thing as a 'terminal electron acceptor'. Buzzword fallacy.
There is no 'chemically reduced form of carbon and sulfur'. Black powder doesn't explode.
Im a BM wrote:
Ammonium nitrate contains nitrate as a terminal electron acceptor, and also contains ammonium as a chemically reduced form of nitrogen to use as reductant. Massive explosions in the port of Beirut this century, and Galveston in the century before are testament to the capacity of a big pile of ammonium nitrate, all by itself, to engage in explosive oxidation-reduction reactions.
There is no such thing as a 'terminal electron acceptor'. Ammonium is not a chemical. There is no such thing a a 'chemically reduced form of nitrogen'. Reductant is not a word. Ammonium nitrate does not explode by itself.
Im a BM wrote:
Gunpowder also uses nitrate as terminal electron acceptor, but uses sulfur and carbon as reductants for the oxidation-reduction reaction. The sulfur atoms and carbon atoms have no oxygen attached to them in the gunpowder. Before the explosion, the nitrogen had oxygen attached to it as nitrate, NO3-. After the explosion, most of the nitrogen was in the form of N2, or N2O, with little or no oxygen attached. After explosion, the sulfur and carbon have oxygen attached to them, as CO2 and SOx.
Nitrate is not a chemical. There is no such thing as a 'terminal electron acceptor'. 'Reductant' is not a word. Nitrate is not a chemical. Carbon dioxide is not carbon. Sulfur has no oxygen attached to it.
Im a BM wrote:
Ammonium nitrate is also substrate for anammox bacteria in low oxygen environments. They combine the ammonium and nitrate for an energy yielding oxidation reduction reaction, turning it into nitrogen gas and water. An ammonium nitrate bomb uses the same reactants to form the same products. Fortunately, the high activation energy required to set off ammonium nitrate makes it safe to use as fertilizer. Extreme conditions are required to turn it into explosive. Either incredibly stupid storage of massive quantities of fertilizer, or the deliberate manufacture of a device combining hydrocarbon fuel, with a heavy "spark" of activation energy to set it off.
Ammonium is not a chemical. Nitrate is not a chemical. Ammonium nitrate does not explode. Urea nitrate is typically used as a fertilizer. A spark of ammonium nitrate and a fuel does not cause detonation.
Im a BM wrote:
Ammonium nitrate would be a poor substitute for saltpeter in gunpowder. Much of the "oxidizer" would get wasted oxidizing ammonium, rather than sulfur or carbon. The energy yield for ammonium oxidation is lower than that obtained from oxidation of elemental sulfur or black carbon.
Ammonium is not a chemical. Ammonium nitrate already contains oxygen. You doesn't oxidize.
Obviously, you don't even know how to make black powder.
Im a BM wrote:
Back to rocks as the original source of nitrogen in the primordial atmosphere... There was a time when no organisms were here to form nitrogen gas, by anammox reactions with ammonium nitrate, or by denitrification under low oxygen conditions. The original N2 molecules in the earliest atmosphere all came from the rocks. But they have all been cycled back through the system a million times each by now. The atmosphere is dynamic, with new N2 being added every day, and N2 being removed every day by nitrogen fixing bacteria or by oxidation reactions around high heat making NOx.
Nitrogen is not a rock. Nitrogen is not created by anything. The element has always been on Earth. Nitrogen does not contain oxygen.
Im a BM wrote:
Nitrogen molecules in the atmosphere have a finite average residence time before they are brought back down to earth. Very little of the new N2 entering the atmosphere today comes from rocks, but some does get spewed from volcanoes and sea vents, etc. The vast majority of new N2 molecules entering the atmosphere are the product of denitrifying bacteria using nitrate as terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions.
Nitrogen does not have a 'lifetime'. Nitrogen is not a rock. Nitrate is not a chemical. There is no such thing as a 'terminal electron acceptor'. Carbon is not organic. Carbon is not oxygen.
Im a BM wrote:
Bedrock was DISMISSED as a potential source of nitrogen until I came along... Did I tell you how Rush Limbaugh praised our paper in Nature in 1998?
Science is not a paper. Name dropping means nothing.
Im a BM wrote:
1998. Contribution of bedrock nitrogen to high nitrate concentrations in stream water. Nature. Volume 395, pages 785-788
Nitrogen is not a rock. Nitrate is not a chemical. Nitrogen is not water. Science is not a magazine or journal.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |