Talk:Iron pentacarbonyl

Toxicity?

Datatable says "very toxic" and NFPA 704 says Health 1. Seems to be contradiction? 88.112.203.25 (talk) 01:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To add to this - the NFPA diamond posted for this article is dangerously wrong. The health number should be a 4, not a 1. See the MSDS from Sigma Aldrich or Alfa Aesar for this compound. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.185.162.50 (talk) 22:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

W

What is the problem with water exactly, this chemical is immiscible with it. Whilst searching for the unexpected reaction I came across many results regarding the water gas shift reaction and evolution of hydrogen gas. I briefly listed this as a hazard but have since removed it, as it turns out this requires "high temperature." However, it would seem "high temperature" is relative and only refers to the current infeasibility of using this as an effective means of industrial hydrogen production. Instead, the rxn seems a very real possibility under lab conditions. Thoughts anyone? --Belg4mit 08:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "problem with water" - iron carbonyl is just not very soluble in it. The use of iron carbonyl in water gas shift is long known but mainly only of interest to academics. It is kind of hard to out-do steam reforming. The CO in iron carbonyl is generated from hydrocarbons anyway. It is an interesting cmpd. One thing missing is any discussion of its discovery by Ludwig Mond.--Smokefoot 13:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then why does the diamond contain a W-bar? (Not present in all descriptions of the material, but then the Health value ranges from 1 to 2 as well.) --Belg4mit 20:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you got the wrong guy - I dont pay any attention to that stuff.--Smokefoot 22:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]