Question

Suppose that you worked at the U.S. Patent Office and a patent application came across your desk claiming that a newly developed catalyst was much superior to the Haber catalyst for ammonia synthesis because the catalyst led to much greater equilibrium conversion of \(\mathrm{N}_{2}\) and \(\mathrm{H}_{2}\) into \(\mathrm{NH}_{3}\) than the Haber catalyst under the same conditions. What would be your response?

Short answer

The claim that the newly developed catalyst has a much superior performance than the Haber catalyst due to its greater equilibrium conversion of \(\mathrm{N}_{2}\) and \(\mathrm{H}_{2}\) into \(\mathrm{NH}_{3}\) is not valid. Catalysts can only affect the rate of reaction, not the equilibrium constant. Therefore, the proposed improved conversion cannot be attributed to the catalyst itself. To support the claim that the new catalyst is superior, additional evidence is required, such as a faster reaction rate or improved efficiency in real-world application conditions.

Step-by-step solution

Understanding chemical equilibrium

Chemical equilibrium is a state in which the rate of the forward reaction is equal to the rate of the reverse reaction. It's important to note that when a reaction reaches its equilibrium point, the concentrations of reactants and products remain constant. This is described by the equilibrium constant (K), which is the ratio of the concentrations of products to reactants raised to their respective stoichiometric coefficients. The equilibrium constant is determined solely by the reaction conditions, such as temperature and pressure, and not by catalysts. Catalysts generally increase the rate of a reaction by offering an alternative pathway with lower activation energy but do not affect the equilibrium concentrations of reactants and products.

Discussing the claim

The claim made by the patent application states that the newly developed catalyst leads to a much greater equilibrium conversion of N2 and H2 into NH3 than the Haber catalyst under the same conditions. However, as discussed earlier, catalysts can increase the rate of reaction, but they do not alter the equilibrium concentrations of reactants and products. Therefore, the claim that the new catalyst affects the equilibrium conversion is not valid.

Responding to the claim

Based on the understanding of chemical equilibrium and the role of catalysts, we can respond to the claim as follows: "The claim that the newly developed catalyst has a much superior performance than the Haber catalyst due to its greater equilibrium conversion of N2 and H2 into NH3 is not valid. Catalysts can only affect the rate of reaction, not the equilibrium constant. Therefore, the proposed improved conversion cannot be attributed to the catalyst itself. To support the claim that the new catalyst is superior, additional evidence is required, such as a faster reaction rate or improved efficiency in real-world application conditions."