Multiple Choice Answers
Q1, B: Propan-1-ol + NaCl, nucleophilic substitution. 1-chloropropane (CH₃CH₂CH₂Cl) + NaOH(aq) → CH₃CH₂CH₂OH (propan-1-ol) + NaCl. Nucleophilic substitution, OH⁻ replaces Cl on the same carbon (C1), giving propan-1-ol. Propane-2-ol (C) would require -OH to move to C2, which does not happen in simple substitution. Propene (A) forms with alcoholic NaOH (elimination), not aqueous NaOH.
Q2, C: Unreacted ethene is recycled. The low 5% single-pass conversion is compensated by continuous recycling of unreacted ethene back to the reactor inlet. Over many passes, almost all ethene is converted. A is wrong, excess ethene shifts equilibrium slightly right but cannot achieve full conversion per pass. D is wrong, 300°C is a rate compromise; higher temperature shifts the exothermic equilibrium LEFT (away from products), decreasing yield.
Q3, B: Glucose solution, yeast (zymase enzyme), ~35°C, anaerobic. Fermentation requires all three: yeast (zymase), ~35°C (enzyme optimum), and anaerobic conditions (no oxygen). D is the most dangerous distractor, adding excess oxygen causes aerobic respiration (→ CO₂ + H₂O), not increased ethanol. A describes alkene hydration conditions applied incorrectly to fermentation.
Q4, C: Fermentation lower temperature, lower purity. Fermentation operates at ~35°C (lower than hydration's ~300°C) but produces only ~15% ethanol (much lower purity than hydration's ~95%). Purification by fractional distillation is required for industrial-grade product. A is wrong (hydration gives higher purity). B is wrong, the feedstocks are the reverse: fermentation uses renewable plant biomass, hydration uses non-renewable ethene from crude oil.
Q5, D: Higher temperature increases rate but decreases yield for exothermic reaction. The forward hydration reaction is exothermic. By Le Chatelier, higher temperature shifts the equilibrium LEFT (favours endothermic reverse), decreasing ethanol yield. However, higher temperature increases reaction rate. 300°C is chosen to balance these opposing effects, fast enough rate for industrial viability, acceptable (not maximum) yield. A is incorrect, higher temperature does NOT increase equilibrium yield for an exothermic reaction.
Short Answer Sample Answers
Q6, Fermentation equation and conditions (4 marks):
Equation: C₆H₁₂O₆ → 2C₂H₅OH + 2CO₂ [1 mark, must have coefficient 2 on both products]
Condition 1, Yeast (zymase enzyme): biological catalyst that facilitates the multi-step conversion of glucose to ethanol; without it the reaction is too slow to be useful [1 mark]
Condition 2, ~35°C: optimal temperature for enzyme activity; above ~45°C enzyme denatures and loses function; below ~15°C rate is too slow [1 mark]
Condition 3, Anaerobic (no oxygen/air excluded): in the presence of oxygen, yeast undergoes aerobic respiration (→ CO₂ + H₂O) rather than fermentation; oxygen must be excluded for ethanol to be produced [1 mark]
Q7, Le Chatelier pressure and temperature (5 marks):
(a) High pressure [2–3 marks]: Equation: CH₂=CH₂ + H₂O ⇌ CH₃CH₂OH. Left side: 2 moles of gas (ethene + steam). Right side: 0 moles of gas (ethanol condenses as liquid under process conditions). Le Chatelier's Principle: increasing pressure shifts equilibrium to the side with fewer moles of gas, the right side (products). ∴ High pressure increases the equilibrium yield of ethanol.
(b) Temperature compromise [2–3 marks]: Forward reaction is exothermic. By Le Chatelier, decreasing temperature favours the exothermic direction (forward), shifting equilibrium right and increasing yield. However, lower temperature also decreases reaction rate, reducing economic throughput. 300°C is a compromise, the rate is fast enough for continuous industrial production while still giving an acceptable equilibrium yield.
Q8, Sustainability evaluation (6 marks):
Arguments for fermentation being more sustainable: Uses renewable feedstock (plant biomass, sugar cane, corn); grown using solar energy and photosynthesis. Near-carbon-neutral, CO₂ released during fermentation is largely offset by CO₂ absorbed during plant growth. Operates at 35°C, very low energy input compared to 300°C + 65 atm for hydration. No dependence on declining fossil fuel reserves. [up to 3 marks]
Arguments against fermentation being universally more sustainable: Produces only ~15% ethanol, must be distilled to reach industrial-grade concentrations; distillation is energy-intensive and erodes the sustainability advantage. Large-scale fermentation requires clearing land for biomass crops, potentially involving deforestation, habitat loss, and food-vs-fuel competition. Very high water consumption for crop irrigation. Slow batch process with high labour requirements at scale. [up to 3 marks]
Conclusion: Fermentation has genuine sustainability advantages, particularly in countries with surplus agricultural land, warm climate, and renewable energy for distillation (e.g. Brazil). However, it is not universally more sustainable. The net outcome depends on land use, water availability, energy source for distillation, and scale. [1 mark for qualified conclusion acknowledging context-dependence]