![]() | Carbon buildup was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 25 May 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Soot. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
"this use accounts for around 85% of the carbon black market" o_O what? Carbon black market? As in [Carbon black] [market], or [Carbon] [black market]? Slightly confusing.
It might be useful to include an explanation that carbon black is an essential component in the manufacture of tires of various kinds, as it improves the traction and wear characteristics of both natural and synthetic rubbers. Perhaps, just a mention, with a referral to tire manufacturing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Homebuilding ( talk • contribs) 01:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Need to incorporate discussions of furnace black and thermal blacks, the most commercially viable forms of carbon black, much, much larger volume markets than lampblack.
"Lampblack produced in this way is both the darkest and least reflective substances known."
Can that statement really be true?
Lamp black is NOT used as a coloring agent in candy. Lamp black is made from incompletely burned petroleum, and is considered to be carcinogenic. Licorice candy is colored with molasses, carmel, and a mixture of food colorings. Iepeulas 02:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm still confused as to whether soot is the stuff in the bottom of your fire when it's gone out.
Blackbody radiation is an idealization of a uniform substance with unit emissivity in thermal equilibrium. The conditions existing within a flame are far removed from those of thermal equilibrium. In particular, there is an intense intrinsic source of thermal energy in the form of the chemical reactions producing the flame. It is, therefore, incorrect to characterize the thermal radiation produced by soot in a flame as "blackbody radiation". Hetware 03:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Unless the semi truck in the photo just thew a connecting rod at the point the photo was taken, the smoke plumes in the photo are fake. Even if a diesel engine smokes bad, it is never that bad. If a truck has bad engine that smokes, the truck and its trailer quickly get coated in a layer of grime. The tanker trailer in the photo is clean and shows no signs of soot. It appears the folks at the EPA are employing trickery to make a political point. 98.108.76.78 ( talk) 12:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
These pages seem to refer to the same substance, and perhaps they should be merged.
-- Ilnyckyj ( talk) 21:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
These sentences contradict one another "The absorbed fraction of solar radiation results in surface cooling because the solar radiation that would have reached the Earth is absorbed in the atmosphere. Although surface warming is seen under these conditions, atmospheric warming is also observed because the incoming radiation is trapped in the atmosphere.[10]" I believe that the second sentence is correct because conversion of solar radiation to heat in the troposphere by soot would be expected to increase surface warming. What exactly does the author mean by surface temperature; the temperature of the ground or the temperature of the air at ground-level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammond Forest ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree that they contradict, just wanted to log my opinion as well. I recommend removing the argument or going through the paper to see what the author really meant. 128.156.10.80 ( talk) 14:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)9/13/10 Mike134
Also, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_soot #REDIRECT [ [1]]. I was dismayed that diesel wasn't included. By now most of us know that unfiltered diesel engines spew particulates. Are railroad train engines that fill the neighborhoods with the characteristic diesel odor filtered ... I think not. So far, The Diesel Emissions Reduction Act is active only in CA and has little focus on Railroad Lines. See: http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/fy12-dera-infosession-presentation.pdf.— Preceding signed comment added by PointyHairedEE ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 15 June 2012 (UTC) PointyHairedEE ( talk) 18:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
The United States' DERA (Diesel Emmisions Reduction Act) program provides funds for clean diesel conversion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Please see my suggestions at Talk:Carbon_black#Soot.2C_Black_Carbon.2C_Carbon_black. -- NHSavage ( talk) 13:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
![]() | Carbon buildup was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 25 May 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Soot. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
"this use accounts for around 85% of the carbon black market" o_O what? Carbon black market? As in [Carbon black] [market], or [Carbon] [black market]? Slightly confusing.
It might be useful to include an explanation that carbon black is an essential component in the manufacture of tires of various kinds, as it improves the traction and wear characteristics of both natural and synthetic rubbers. Perhaps, just a mention, with a referral to tire manufacturing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Homebuilding ( talk • contribs) 01:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Need to incorporate discussions of furnace black and thermal blacks, the most commercially viable forms of carbon black, much, much larger volume markets than lampblack.
"Lampblack produced in this way is both the darkest and least reflective substances known."
Can that statement really be true?
Lamp black is NOT used as a coloring agent in candy. Lamp black is made from incompletely burned petroleum, and is considered to be carcinogenic. Licorice candy is colored with molasses, carmel, and a mixture of food colorings. Iepeulas 02:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm still confused as to whether soot is the stuff in the bottom of your fire when it's gone out.
Blackbody radiation is an idealization of a uniform substance with unit emissivity in thermal equilibrium. The conditions existing within a flame are far removed from those of thermal equilibrium. In particular, there is an intense intrinsic source of thermal energy in the form of the chemical reactions producing the flame. It is, therefore, incorrect to characterize the thermal radiation produced by soot in a flame as "blackbody radiation". Hetware 03:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Unless the semi truck in the photo just thew a connecting rod at the point the photo was taken, the smoke plumes in the photo are fake. Even if a diesel engine smokes bad, it is never that bad. If a truck has bad engine that smokes, the truck and its trailer quickly get coated in a layer of grime. The tanker trailer in the photo is clean and shows no signs of soot. It appears the folks at the EPA are employing trickery to make a political point. 98.108.76.78 ( talk) 12:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
These pages seem to refer to the same substance, and perhaps they should be merged.
-- Ilnyckyj ( talk) 21:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
These sentences contradict one another "The absorbed fraction of solar radiation results in surface cooling because the solar radiation that would have reached the Earth is absorbed in the atmosphere. Although surface warming is seen under these conditions, atmospheric warming is also observed because the incoming radiation is trapped in the atmosphere.[10]" I believe that the second sentence is correct because conversion of solar radiation to heat in the troposphere by soot would be expected to increase surface warming. What exactly does the author mean by surface temperature; the temperature of the ground or the temperature of the air at ground-level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammond Forest ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree that they contradict, just wanted to log my opinion as well. I recommend removing the argument or going through the paper to see what the author really meant. 128.156.10.80 ( talk) 14:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)9/13/10 Mike134
Also, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_soot #REDIRECT [ [1]]. I was dismayed that diesel wasn't included. By now most of us know that unfiltered diesel engines spew particulates. Are railroad train engines that fill the neighborhoods with the characteristic diesel odor filtered ... I think not. So far, The Diesel Emissions Reduction Act is active only in CA and has little focus on Railroad Lines. See: http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/fy12-dera-infosession-presentation.pdf.— Preceding signed comment added by PointyHairedEE ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 15 June 2012 (UTC) PointyHairedEE ( talk) 18:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
The United States' DERA (Diesel Emmisions Reduction Act) program provides funds for clean diesel conversion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Please see my suggestions at Talk:Carbon_black#Soot.2C_Black_Carbon.2C_Carbon_black. -- NHSavage ( talk) 13:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)