Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
This paper seems to concern itself with bituminous coal.
Lignite coal would show even lower carbon content, I expect?
Brian W
Jack Uretsky wrote:
See
http://admin.pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie50291a021
which gives, for anthracite (by weight)
78 \pm 12% C and 20 \pm 12% H. Since the atomic weight of carbon
is 12 and that of H is 1 (the H is combined in compounds), there is about
one hydrogen atom available for each 7, or so, carbon atoms.
Burning of coal, therefore, is not a simple process of combining
carbon with oxygen.
Regards,
Carbon is not, except in rare instances, a fuel. The fuels we use areHuh? Anthracite coal, the formerly dominant fuel of steam locomotives,
hydrocarbons....
Jack
is reckoned to offer between 92% to 98% carbon....
Brian W
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l