• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

Bicarbonate = Alkalinity * 61/50

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The HCO3- ion has a molecular weight of 61.01684 grams/mole and a valance (or charge) of minus one. 1 molar HCO3- is also 1 Normal (or its normality is 1).

CaCO3 has a molecular weight of 100.0869 grams/mole and Ca++ and CO3-- have valences (or charges) of +2 and -2 respectively. So to equilibrate the charges (or valances) for reaction purposes, half of a mole of CaCO3 has a weight of 50.04345. One molar CaCO3 is a solution of 100.0869 grams in one Liter of water, but one "Normal" CaCO3 is a solution of 50.04345 grams in one Liter of water. Reactions take place on a normality to normality basis so as to balance electrical charges.

61.01684/50.04345 = 1.219277

61/50 = 1.22

61/50 is within 0.06 percent of the actual value, so it is close enough for most all practical purposes. However, in reality the various carbonate species migrate from one to another based upon water pH, so the above is technically only highly true for a pH of about 8.3
 
Last edited:
The HCO3- ion has a molecular weight of 61.01684 grams/mole and a valance (or charge) of minus one.

CaCO3 has a molecular weight of 100.0869 grams/mole and Ca++ and CO3-- have valences of +2 and -2 respectively. So to equilibrate the charges (or valances), half of a mole of CaCO3 has a weight of 50.04345.

61.01684/50.04345 = 1.219277

61/50 = 1.22

Close enough.

That explains it along the lines in which I was thinking but in the link to the sticky AJ seems to explain a little different maybe I'm not following him correctly.

Because it is true that if 100 mg of calcium carbonate is placed in a liter of water and if that calcium carbonate is dissolved by bubbling CO2 through the water until its pH reaches 8.3 that it will take approximately 2 mEq of acid to reduce the pH of that mix from 8.3 to around pH 4.3 water chemists in North America often multiply the acid mEq by 50 and represent alkalinity as 50*mEq 'ppm as CaCO3' on the basis that the water we just described got its alkalinity from 100 mg/L calcium carbonate. The number of milliequivalents of EDTA required to chelate the calcium in this liter is also 2 and so, multiplying that number by 50 we get 100 'ppm as CaCO3' hardness as well. Very handy, when talking about natural waters.
 
If you have seen that and if you understood it then you should have the answers to your questions. Note that I am not suggesting that you should be expected to understand it at first glance. It's been kept brief and concise to make it accessible.

61 is indeed the approximate value of the equivalent weight of the bicarbonate ion. That sticky shows how to calculate the mEq/L bicarbonate content in a water sample from the sample's pH and its alkalinity measured to a specific, but arbitrary (though convention demand one of a couple of distinct values), pH. Once the mEq/L value is in hand one can obtain the mass by multiplying by the equivalent weight. The reason 61 is usually used as opposed to 61.0168 is that it is, clearly, easier to remember and that ignoring the 0.0168 introduces 0.03% error. This error would be swamped by the error in measurement of the volume of acid used in the alkalinity titration (0.08% for class A glassware; alkalinity is the volume of acid dispensed to endpoint) and the propagated errors from the two pH measurements. IOW carrying the extra 0.0168 isn't justifiable. You can, of course, use it if you want to. But I reiterate that no one who knows his onions really cares about bicarbonate content.

50 is about half the molecular weight of calcium carbonate. If 100.09 (the actual molecular weight) g of CaCO3 be dissolved in water with carbonic acid until pH 8.3 is attained the hardness of that water will be 2 mEq/L and the alkalinity will be approximately 2 mEq/L depending on the chosen end point pH. It has, thus, become convention to multiply the measured alkalinity and hardness by 50 as it gives a rough indication of how much limestone would have been dissolved in the sample were that mechanism the sole source of the alkalinity. As it is a number specified by convention it is precise to an infinite number of decimal places. In making calculations with respect to the effects of alkali in water we want the alkalinity in mEq/L. To obtain that number divide by exactly 50 mg/mmol.
 
AJ is explaining where the concept of 'ppm as CaCO3' comes from, even though most natural waters don't actually contain CaCO3 (the alkalinity is typically from bicarbonate).
Edit: AJ answered before I did (and in a bit more detail)!
 
HCO3.png


This chart tells us why for most water pH's the presumption of bicarbonate being 61/50 in relation to alkalinity is somewhat of a lie. The relationship is pH dependent, and is only technically true for water at about 8.3 - 8.4 pH.

Alkalinity is a better value to base calculations upon.
 
Last edited:
Why do you want a formula for the curves?
The point is that, for brewing, it is not overly relevant which form of alkalinity is present, it's only the amount of acid needed to neutralise it that we are concerned with.
That might be different if you want to start designing software/mathematical models like Silver and AJ.
 
Reproducing those curves is MUCH easier than that pdf implies. Those curves represent the values, respectively, of f0, f1 and f2 in the post at https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/calculating-bicarbonate-and-carbonate.473408/

So that's what section 5.0 of your Alkalinity PDF is all about. That also explains the variables Ct (Total Carbonate) and the f's (Fraction of total).

So the 6.38 and 10.38 constants are the pk's of Carbonic Acid which I believe you mentioned in a PM is adjusted by a formula in the routine pKCarbonic.

So at pH 6.38 (not sure of temperature) the Carbonic Acid dissociates from one of its H+ ions to form bicarbonate and at pH 10.38 the bicarbonate dissociates another H+ ion to form carbonate. So what happens to those dissociated H+ ions? They are absorbed by the base that is added to raise the pH? and of course the same happens in the opposite direction.

Hrm... wikipedia mentions another pka of 3.6 so if we keep going left on the diagram what happens to the Carbonic Acid at that pka?

Pretty interesting stuff, I wonder if there are any textbooks with all of this stuff in or if it's just general chemistry knowledge.
 
So the 6.38 and 10.38 constants are the pk's of Carbonic Acid which I believe you mentioned in a PM is adjusted by a formula in the routine pKCarbonic.
For the moment I'll just say yes and would leave it at that had you not stumbled across the pKa = 3.6 thing which I'll get to in a minute. 6.38 and 10.38 represent the values at 20 °C. pKCarbonic calculates pK's at other temperatures.

So at pH 6.38 (not sure of temperature) the Carbonic Acid dissociates from one of its H+ ions to form bicarbonate and at pH 10.38 the bicarbonate dissociates another H+ ion to form carbonate.
Consider the general case of an acid with n protons bound to A: HnA. As pH increases protons are stripped from the acid one at a time. We have a set of reactions
HnA <--> H+ + Hn-1A-
Hn-1A- <--> H+ + Hn-2A--
Hn-3A-- <--> H+ + Hn-3A--

The double headed arrows symbolize the fact that while the molecules are releasing protons they are simultaneously taking them back up and so the fundamental question becomes "What is the ratio of the number of molecules that have lost the (for example) first proton to the number that have retained it. This is where the pK's come in. The pK is proportional to the energy it takes to pry the proton off its molecule.

For the first proton we call the ratio [Hn-1A-]/[HnA] in which the bracketed terms represent the molar concentrations r1. It's value depends on the where the pH falls relative to the pK for that proton and has value r1 = 10^(pH - pK1). Thus when pH = pK1 the value of r1 is 1 and there are, thus equal numbers of molecules with all the protons and molecules that have lost the first one. Thus pK1 doesn't determine a threshold level at which the first proton is released but rather the level at which half of them have been released. Thus the curves for bicarbonate and carbonate cross in the picture in No. 6 at 10.38 - the second pK of carbonic acid. Half the bicarbonate ions have lost their (remaining) proton to become carbonate ions.


So what happens to those dissociated H+ ions? They are absorbed by the base that is added to raise the pH?
Take away the question marks. That is exactly what happens. But let's broaden that a bit and note that not only something added in order to increase mash pH absorbs protons (H+). Things that are already in the mash such as bicarbonate, carbonate, OH- and any malt whose DI pH is higher than the desired pH will absorb protons. The fundamental theorem of mash pH determination is that the quantity of protons emitted by acids (which are, by definition, things that emit protons) must be equal to the number of protons absorbed by bases (which are, by definition, substances which absorb protons). Protons are conserved. There are no electron capture decays going on in your mash tun. If there are get out of there tout suite!

Hrm... wikipedia mentions another pka of 3.6 so if we keep going left on the diagram what happens to the Carbonic Acid at that pka?
I'm really sorry you spotted this because dealing with it is likely to add confusion. I begged Palmer to keep this out of his book but he wouldn't. I was being disingenuous when I implied above that half of carbonic acid molecules have lost the first proton at pH 6.38. It is the fictitious species H2CO3* whose dissociation is half complete at pH = 6.38. When CO2 gas dissolves in water the CO2 molecules become entrained in a shell of water molecules. Only a small fraction of them actually react with the water to form carbonic acid. The molar concentration of H2CO3* is the sum of the molar concentrations of so-called aqueous (entrained) CO2 and the dissolved CO2 that actually reacted to form H2CO3. The reason we do this is that the equilibrium concentration of all the carbonic species of water under CO2 and over CaCO3 is determined by the partial pressure of the CO2. We multiply that partial pressure by the Henry coefficient to get [H2CO3*] and then calculate the concentration of bicarbonate [HCO3-] from r1 = 10^(pH - 6.38) in which 6.38 is the first pKa for H2CO3*. As you have probably guessed by now 3.6 is the pKa for real H2CO3. It is seldom that we care about the concentrations of true H2CO3 and CO2(aq) and so we usually use 6.38 and pretend that H2CO3* is really H2CO3. Now you will forever wonder when you see H2CO3 if the author is talking about H2CO3 or H2CO3*. If you don't see H2CO3* mentioned in an article and/or if the first pK is stated to be 6.38 then it is talking about H2CO3* even though it is writing it as H2CO3.

Pretty interesting stuff, I wonder if there are any textbooks with all of this stuff in or if it's just general chemistry knowledge.
The key to the whole thing is r = 10^(pH - pKa) and that is a direct consequence of the Henderson - Hasselbalch equation which in turn is the logarithmic form of the law of mass action as applied to the dissociation equation. So look for those two terms in indices and on the web.

You are definitely exploring the right part of the forest here. Grasp this and you will understand water and mash chemistry. Once the light comes on you will ask yourself why it seemed so hard when you started out.
 
There are no electron capture decays going on in your mash tun. If there are get out of there tout suite!

Had to look that one up but LOL!

Thanks for patiently explaining, I'm beginning to understand.
 
Back
Top