fusso
International Hazard
Posts: 1922
Registered: 23-6-2017
Location: 4 ∥ universes ahead of you
Member Is Offline
|
|
Nilered obviously don't know how to minimise the amount of Cr waste
https://youtu.be/b6R2sTjtUFs?t=165
From 2:45
He actually did fucking not need to add water to the flask!!! Why add more water when you already have enough??? Just put that flask in the fucking
sulphite solution you previously made!!! That already has enough water and sulphite to dissolve all of the byproducts and reduce all Cr(IV)!!! Only
add more if not enough so you can save water and chemicals!!!
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1247
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
because that bath was to soak and clean the glassware, if he added the content of that flask the concentration of the contaminants would have been too
much.
same reason why you don't scrub the residue of your dishes in the water you are using to soak them, or same reason you don't shit in the same water
you are bathing
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
DavidJR
National Hazard
Posts: 908
Registered: 1-1-2018
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Tired
|
|
He also didn't fully reduce all of the hexavalent chromium. Look at that yellow crust...
|
|
|
fusso
International Hazard
Posts: 1922
Registered: 23-6-2017
Location: 4 ∥ universes ahead of you
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Ubya  | because that bath was to soak and clean the glassware, if he added the content of that flask the concentration of the contaminants would have been too
much.
same reason why you don't scrub the residue of your dishes in the water you are using to soak them, or same reason you don't shit in the same water
you are bathing |
He's gonna rinse the flask and evaporate all water in the box afterwards anyway isn't it?
Shit and bathing water are different "things" but concentrated Cr waste and dilute Cr waste are the same "thing".
|
|
|
draculic acid69
International Hazard
Posts: 1371
Registered: 2-8-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
I see what your getting at but your being a bit too nitpicky
|
|
|
j_sum1
Administrator
Posts: 6338
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: At home
Member Is Offline
Mood: Most of the ducks are in a row
|
|
In my experience, dealing with Cr waste is always messy and surprisingly volumous. Nile also admitted that he was playing a bit and certainly was not
aiming for any kind of efficiency. It is evident also that he stretched this process out for a long period of time and returned to it on several
occasions.
I see little grounds for being critical of procedural inefficiency in this case
[Edited on 30-9-2019 by j_sum1]
|
|
|
fusso
International Hazard
Posts: 1922
Registered: 23-6-2017
Location: 4 ∥ universes ahead of you
Member Is Offline
|
|
Yea its messy, so why not just play with a fraction of that waste? Say treating a half of that waste normally with minimal amount of chemicals as I
described, and only play with the remaining waste so you can both do things normally and still have fun. I'd actually wanna see him treating bulk
waste normally and using a minimalistic way while still able to have fun.
[Edited on 190930 by fusso]
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1247
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
In my opinion is easier to work with waste high in volume and low in concentration and waste high in concentration but low in volume. Mixing the two
wastes gives you high volume and medium/high concentration of contaminants, IMO not the best option
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
fusso
International Hazard
Posts: 1922
Registered: 23-6-2017
Location: 4 ∥ universes ahead of you
Member Is Offline
|
|
But I think high conc low vol waste is easier to handle. Smaller containers can be used, and rxns are gonna faster.
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1247
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by fusso | | But I think high conc low vol waste is easier to handle. Smaller containers can be used, and rxns are gonna faster. |
eh, exactly what i said hahaha
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
phlogiston
International Hazard
Posts: 1379
Registered: 26-4-2008
Location: Neon Thorium Erbium Lanthanum Neodymium Sulphur
Member Is Offline
Mood: pyrophoric
|
|
Saving water is not an issue. Just let it evaporate, as he did. Did not add any nasties to the environment and lots of people in the western world
uses several times that amount of potable water to flush their crap down the toilet.
And playing like that is educational too.
In the end he collected everything, bagged it and stored it.
I think he dealt with it fairly responsibly and made a fun video.
You can continue to discuss it for many days, but is it really worth getting so angry about?
-----
"If a rocket goes up, who cares where it comes down, that's not my concern said Wernher von Braun" - Tom Lehrer |
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
