Submitted by Arks_traveler t3_1173egj in askscience
PerspectivePure2169 t1_j9dj0j1 wrote
A lot of confusion here between charcoal and coal, which us understandable with their English etymology.
What you asked about is charcoal which is not at all the same as the combustible mineral called coal. Though coal does have a "charred coal" pure carbon corollary, confusingly known as coke
Charcoal is what is used for filtration and absorption, and is simply pure carbon produced by pyrolysis of (usually) woody material in the absence of oxygen. When this is done, all of the non carbonaceous volatile compounds are driven off, leaving pure charcoal.
If the pyrolysis is done completely, then the parent wood has no bearing on the properties of the charcoal, because all of its other components have been removed.
I have cooked quite a bit of charcoal from woods of all types for use in forging and metal casting. And regardless of the starting wood, the end product is the same. Indeed the only difference is the yield, which is simply because of conservation of mass - starting with denser hardwoods allows packing more material into the same space within the retort when compared to a light softwood.
Once cooked, it's all the same.
Arks_traveler OP t1_j9eigoa wrote
Yes, that’s what i was talking about. Very interesting, thanks !
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments