"Concentrated" nitric acid is only 70% pure. Obtaining anything stronger than that becomes costly and the shelf-life declines markedly. Sulphuric acid is commonly available (god knows why given the fact it's used as a weapon nowadays in the black community) from BnQ., plumbers' merchants and such like at concentrations of about 98% and you don't really need anything stronger than that for general use. Hydrochloric acid seems to top-out at only 36% purity and it's tough to obtain any solution of it stronger than that. Do we have any chemistry aces here who can explain the wide disparity in the maximum strengths of these commonly available acids?
Hydrochloric acid. the concentration is governed by the solubility of the gas hydrogen chloride (the irritating gas given off by brick acid) in water - max possible is 36% Sulphuric acid. As with hydrochl;oric acid but the gas involved is sulphur trioxide whic reacts with the water. Theoreticall 100% is available and can be bought from chemical suppliers
This, from way back in the memory banks. It may not be quite correct in detail, but the gist of it is OK:
If you take some dilute nitric acid, and try to concentrate it by boiling to drive off the water, the temperature slowly rises as water is driven off until it reaches 121°C and a concentration of 68%, when it forms what is known as a constant boiling mixture* (CBM), in simple terms the nitric acid (HNO3)is boiling off as fast as the water, and the vapour above the liquid has the same composition as the boiling liquid, so the boiling liquid never gets more concentrated. If you want stronger nitric acid, known as fuming nitric acid, you have to distil it from a mixture of sulphuric acid and potassium nitrate, but even then you can only get a maximum of 99%, because the nitric acid itself dissociates into N2O5 and H2O and forms another CBM.
2HNO3 N2O5 + H2O.
Pretty much the same explanation goes for hydrochloric acid, although here the CBM at atmospheric pressure is at 110°C and a concentration of about 20% HCl. But because HCl gas is very soluble in water, if you distil a solution under reduced pressure, the water boils off in preference to the HCl, and you get higher concentrations; lab grade conc. HCl is about 37%, as you say. Whiffy stuff!
But H2SO4 doesn't easily evaporate, unlike the two above, and H2SO4 forms a CBM with water of 98% that boils as 330°C, so can't be made any more concentrated by distillation.
You make it sound like the entire black community throw acid at people. The reality is that there are probably at most a few hundred acid attacks a year in this country (allowing for under-reporting). Most of the victims appear to be white, so even your proposition that this is a 'black' thing seems to be extremely doubtful. Do you have any basis for this, or is it pure supposition on your part?
Well for heavens sake, quoting te guardian is pure post truth
From the article.
*Globally, an estimated 80% of victims are women*.
Jaf Shah, the executive director of the support group Acid Survivors Trust International (ASTI), said: ?Looking at the data in general, there is a fairly large probability that a *high percentage of the incidents are male on male attacks* and most likely to be gang related. The numbers appear to be very high and suggest an increase, which is very concerning.?
So which is it then Guardian? Male on male or women?
You can pick whichever you want to support your bigotry.
Well of course, I couldn't agree more. By now we should all know that there are only two authoritative sources of information - the Daily Mail and the side of a bus.
Straw man. I was not endorsing the sides of buses or the Daily mail. I was merely pointing out that the phenomenal aplomb with which the Guardian totally contradicts the evidence IN ITS OWN ARTICLE in order to present a version of the truth that conforms to the bigotry of its readership, and I selected the guardian PRECISELY BECAUSE it was cited as a reference to prove a point, which it itself does not support, although it claims to.
That other news outlets of a less left-leaning nature are very little different, except insofar as tabloids, selling into the t*ts and bums market, they actually don't pretend the high moral ground that the Guardian does, is not the point.
The point is that the Guardian is as post truth and propaganda filled as any tabloid. The only difference being the odor of sanctity that its fast perishing corpse tries to emit.
If you read the Guardian article more carefully, you might possibly realise that it isn't self-contradictory. In some places, it is talking about the UK and, in other places, it is talking about the position worldwide.
Acid attacks in the UK are part of the cultural enrichment brought by migrants. It was virtually unknown until we had migrants from S. Asia. As you might expect. The world centre for acid attacks is Bangla Desh. (Muslims again.)
Simply ignorant, as usual. Conan Doyle included it in one of his Sherlock Holmes stories the best part of 150 years ago. Just as an example. If you stopped making up facts to suit your prejudices, you would look less foolish.
Can somebody telll turnip that if he read the article properly rather than trying to weasel contradictions out of it he'd discover that globally women get attacked more, and in the UK it's men. So the answer is "both".
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.