Talk:Copper(II) sulfate

Random questions

does copper(II) sulphate conduct electric current?why?

Copper sulfate dissolved in water will dissociate into ions (Cu⁺⁺ and SO₄^--). These ions can conduct electric current. See ionization. Solid copper sulfate would be a poor conductor at best, . RJFJR 00:41, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

How can you turn Copper(II) sulfate into copper?

Why would you want to? It would be easier, cheaper, and safer to just buy copper in bulk.

Darrien 07:06, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)

Electrolysis will work. Also see the entry for copper which will point you to smelting for how to use a reducing agent to do it. RJFJR 00:41, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

---

Does someone have the balanced equation for that decomposition of Copper(II) sulfate into the oxides? RJFJR 00:41, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

Assuming this isn't a homework problem...

CuSO₄ · 5 H₂O + Heat (~100°C) → CuSO₄ + 5 H₂O

2 CuSO₄ + Heat (~800°C) → 2 CuO + 2 SO₂ + O₂

4 CuO + Heat (~1200°C) → 2 Cu₂O + O₂

The temperatures required are from memory. I wouldn't trust them enough to include in the article.

Darrien 12:36, 2005 Feb 12 (UTC)

Not homework. I've been out of school too long to remember some of this. First equation easy. Second I got with some work. Didn't think of the third one. The article says the the products of decomposition are CuO and Cu₂O. I read that the first time thought: shouldn't that be CuO and SO₂ (and O₂)? Thank you for clearing that up for me. RJFJR 14:22, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

I checked Handbook of Physics and Chemistry 34th edition, Chemical Rubber Company, 1952 (was my dad's) RJFJR 14:38, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

• CuSO₄ · 5 H₂O loses 4 H₂O at 110 C, loses 5 H₂O at 150 C
• CuSO₄ decomposes to CuO at 650 C
• CuO decomposes at 1026 C

The above description is right. You get CuSO4 -> CuO + SO3 as it decomposes. First of all, I've done this one before and can attest that you can't get copper. Second, the current equation has O2 and Cu metal as products. This is two reductions and nothing being oxidized. It violates the rules of redox chemistry and can't possibly be correct. If, for example, carbon was added to the reactants, it could feasibly steal an oxygen from the CuO and SO3 to make CO2, and the reduction of the CuO to copper metal would balance with the oxidation of carbon to CO2. I will change the equation. Dormroomchemist 05:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Move

• Support standardization is benefit Tobias Conradi 05:34, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone mind if I move this page to Copper(II) sulfate (i.e., the IUPAC name)? Currently this is a redirect. Thought I'd better ask since this has been a busy page, although all of the text in this page conforms to the IUPAC name. Walkerma 20:36, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You mean just remove the space in front of the left parenthesis? So far no one seems to have raised an objection. RJFJR 00:11, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

Yes I do- it may seem a minor thing, but I'm trying to get all pages standardised on the IUPAC system- nearly all of them are now (see List of inorganic compounds. That way if you type in the correct name, you find the compound. I have added a move request to the page since I was unable to do the move myself. Walkerma 23:01, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 18:00, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Americanisation

Can someone please change Sulfate to Sulphate, im not being anti-american but its internationally rcognised as sulphur/sulphate/sulphate etc., my credential to prove my knowledge is that im studying chemistry to AS-Level (hopefully beyond that too) at college

• Sorry, it's internationally recognized as sulfate, including in UK scientific publications. I can't believe the A-level boards haven't caught up with this: they have been incorrectly ramming "ethanoic acid" down everone's throat for years. "Sulphate" is still an acceptable British use, but not in scientific contexts. Physchim62, M.A.(Cantab), Ph.D (Essex) 15:53, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm also studying AS Chemistry, and I know about sulfate being the IUPAC name, but am confused as to why ethanoic acid is incorrect, as it is ethane with a carboxylic acid group on the end, 'ethan' + 'oic acid', no? (I know this isn't relevant to the page, but just confused).

• Acetic acid is simply the preferred name, as it is far more established. Walkerma 04:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Also if you are really british, the title would have no z! changing.

i am currently studying chemistry at A2 level, my teacher mentioned that the name Sulphate is officially being changed to sulfate at some point soon here in britain, also Acetic acid is the 'given' name for the chemical, Ethandioic acid is the name if you break it down for naming so to speak, both can be interchangeable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.241.30 (talk) 23:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[Copper(I) sulfate] ?

What's up with the [Copper(I) sulfate] under "Related compounds"? It's just a redirect to [Copper(II) sulfate] anyways... Jamie 09:13, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

• Copper(I) sulfate does exist, but we haven't got round to writing an article on it yet... Physchim62 (talk) 11:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Eating copper(II) sulfate or throwing it into the sea?

My Biology teacher once told me that copper(II) sulfate displaces iron in the haemoglobin of the blood, causing anaemia. Is this true, or just a misinterpretation of what's already up on the Wiki about copper(II) sulfate being used in tests for anaemia? Is this behind its 'harmful' rating?

On a similar note, why is it harmful to the environment? What regulations are there for its disposal? Firefly99 10:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I doubt this is true, as I have been informed that it is one of the most toxic compounds we use in A-Level chemistry. I think five grams is enough to kill you almost instantly. It may be possible that the copper ions (its them that's poisonous) displace the iron ions in haemoglobin, but it would have to be very thermodynamically favourable, as there is a lot of iron in blood, and as far as I know anaemia is a big dent in the natural amount. Plus, it is locked quite securely in there. In any case, if it did displace the iron, I would think it very unlikely to cause anaemia, more likely asphyxiation.

As for the disposal; if its harmless to haemoglobin molecules, its a fair assumption it kills most animals, what with haemoglobin being a bit on the common side. Except in lobsters. I guess they're immune. mastodon 20:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The reason behind its blue and white colour

What is the reason behind the change of colours when it has full water content (blue) and when it has been dehydrated, without water (white)?

Crystal field theory. —Keenan Pepper 21:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Toxic

This chemical is toxic, when taken internally, right? Shouldn't the article say so?

Feeding Copper Sulphate to Pigs

I don't know if this contradicts the supposed toxic effects of this compound, but they feed this stuff to pigs http://www.cda.org.uk/megab2/general/cuFarm/sec12.htm . I remember when i was a boy my friends dad had a pig farm, and he had a big bag of blue copper sulphate to feed the pigs with. Surely this needs to be mentioned in the article? I used to get jars of it to take home and grow crystals with.

It could be used as a supplement mixed into the food, in trace quantities to prevent copper deficiency, much like ferrous sulfate is used to prevent iron deficiency. Dormroomchemist 07:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Making Copper Sulphate

Why do you add excess copper oxide to te sulpuhric acid in the production of copper sulphate? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.152.21.198 (talk • contribs) .

I'm not going to do your homework for you, so just think about it. Why would extra copper oxide be easier to separate than extra sulfuric acid? Hint: solubility. —Keenan Pepper 21:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Poisonous?

The article says that copper sulphate is poisonous. However, I am told that it is used against algues in a pond where people are supposed to swim in and where they actually do. Of course it is not completely contradictory to being poisonous, but it should be put in perspective: it seems not to be that poisonous that you cannot swim in water with copper sulphate (a hand full in 50 m3), taking into account that most people swallow quite some water during swimming.

Am I correct?

Ingel 07:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC) (discussion moved to bottom of page by Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC))

Definition of poisonous is always difficult, it is all a matter of dose, even water is poisonous. And people in general don't drink from the pond, and indeed, the concentration is very low. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The NFPA rating is completly off. All MSDS I have on hand say it is 2-0-0. I will change as soon as I find out how to do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xenofonos (talk • contribs) 17:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

the change of the color.

why does this substance change color from blue to green when water is added?

It shouldn't. Copper (II) Sulfate forms a light blue solution. If the water has a lot of chloride ions in it, a complex ion may be formed that would make the solution green. --24.16.154.50 00:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Fire resistant?

I read that during the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco, soldiers who guarded the Federal Mint building, tore the tar roofing off the wooden rafters and dipped the rafters with "blue vitriol". What for? Is it fire resistant? Kraxler 17:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Probably because they had heard that it preserves wood. Copper(II) sulfate has long been used as a (somewhat inefficient) fungicide. Copper chromate stays longer in the wood, but has been banned for a long time because it is highly carcinogenic. Tearing the roof tarring off would obviously remove the water-resistance of the wood timbers, increasing their vunerability to fungal rot, but would also mke them more difficult to set fire to: in dipping them in "blue vitriol", the soldiers were trying to avoid rot (which was probably not the most urgent problem at that moment :), but also increased the water content of the timber (reducing the risk of fire). Physchim62 (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Ionic or Covalent

Is copper sulfate a ionic compound or a covalent/molecular compound? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.100.176.25 (talk) 22:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Ionic.

Ben 23:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, i was trying to find it.

"Sulfate" vs. "Sulphate"

The article uses both frequently. Isn't one form or the other standardized by IUPAC? toll_booth 01:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Sulfate is the correct IUPAC spelling.Lostandcold 01:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Effect on algae

I deleted this sentence from the paragraph on the use of CuSO4 in aquaria: "The algae cell dries out due to copper(II) sulphate being a desiccant." This must be a prank, right? --Jorge Stolfi 143.106.23.149 13:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Image rm

In one of my edits, I removed this image. It is left here is others think that it should be moved back. I just did not see the relevance of the image.--Smokefoot 22:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Copper(II) sulfate crystals at 100x magnification

Copper Sulfate Solution

Can we have a bit about Copper Sulfate in solution please, there much about it on the page and i think there probably should be more, as it can be used as a micronutrient in low molarity, also my coursework is based on the effect of copper sulfate solution on the germination of mung beans, so it obviously has other applications than those listed.