| comments
Henry, the molecular weight of sodium thiosulfate pentahyrate is 248 while the atomic weight of chlorine is 35.5, the molecular weight of Cl2 is 71. If we assume one molecule of sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate neutralizes one molecule of chlorine (Cl2), then the ratio of solid sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate to chlorine would need to be 248/71 or 3.5, not the value given by AES. In fact, the reaction stoichiometry given in the Encylopedia of Chemical technology for the reaction of sodium thiosulfate with chlorine in dilute aqueous solution is:
Na2S2O3 + Cl2 + H2O --> Na2SO4 + S + 2HCl
Like I said above, one molecule of sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate weighing 248 neutralizes one molecule of chlorine which weighs 71.
You may find the remarks I wrote below on an entire pond dying from charging 600 PPM of sodium thiosulfate interesting. The point is that you don't want to use a huge overcharge of sodium thiosulfate because of the possible toxicity of the decomposition products of sodium thiosulfate in a pond environment.
Please note the normal sodium thiosulfate charge is only 3.5 times the chlorine level, so a chlorine level of 3 PPM would need about 10 PPM sodium thiosulfate charge. The ponder discussed below added 600 ppm sodium thiosulfate to his pond, and all the fish died in about 4 days from the sodium thiosulfate decomposition.
Copied/pasted from a post of mine on koivet on this issue is seen below:
The description of sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate in the Aquatic Eco-Systems catalogue states, "Excess levels up to 100 PPM will not harm fish". Well, here we are talking about a charge of 600 PPM which may have slowly harmed fish over a period of several days. So let's think again.
The Acros Chemicals MSDS for sodium thiosulfate states, "This chemical is expected to cause some oxygen depletion in aquatic systems." Well, maybe here is the problem with that huge sodium thiosulfate overcharge? Did the fish run out of oxygen at 600 PPM sodium thiosulfate dose? I don't know....
Now let's see what my old copy of the Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology says about sodium thiosulfate decomposition in a pond environment.....
The stability of sodium thiosulfate solutions are oxygen sensitive, meaning that exposure to oxygen will cause a sodium thiosulfate solution to gradually decompose according to the decomposition reaction in alkaline solution (my normal pond environment):
Na2S2O3 + H2O---> Na2SO4 + H2S
Well, now we have it! An overcharge of sodium thiosulfate can decompose thje thiosulfate to make too much hydrogen sulfide, which will definitely kill the fish. One on line reference says, "Hydrogen sulfide at 0.5 PPM causes hyperpnea, apnea, and respiratory arrest (death) in catfish." We can expect 600 PPM thiosulfate to create 0.5 PPM hydrogen sulfide, it would appear, which will kill the fish. This specific decomposition reaction of sodium thiosulfate is listed as being accelerated by either oxygen contact, or exposue to sunlight. A pond has plenty of both of those!
The decomposition of sodium thiosulfate in neutral or acidic pH is given by:
Na2S2O3 ---> NaSO3 + S
So if the pond water is not alkaline enough to make that very toxic hydrogen sulfide out of sodium thiosulfate, then it will make the less toxic, but toxic nevertheless, sodium sulfite instead. The aquatic LC50 at 96 hours for goldfish for sodium sulfite is 100 PPM, meaning that in 4 days at 100 PPM sulfite concentration 50% of goldfish die.
So if a ponder dumps 600 PPM of sodium thiosulfate in a pond, the fish will die from either the hydrogen sulfide, or the sodium sulfite, concentrations from the gradual decomposition of thiosulfate. And the oxygen concentration may also be depleted, making matters somewhat worse.
I knew there had to be an explanation somewhere in those pages of my chemical books, finally found it.
So the moral of the story is that the overcharge of sodium thiosulfate itself probably did not kill the fish from the sodium thiosulfate concentration itself, instead the decomposition products of that much sodium thiosulfate killed them instead. At least it makes sense to this old chemist.....
|