Why Were Strontium Salts Excluded from Flame Tests?

  • Thread starter Thread starter McSpongy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Strontium salts were excluded from flame tests likely due to their cost or availability rather than toxicity, as strontium is not highly toxic except in its radioactive form. Beryllium, on the other hand, is highly toxic in both elemental and compound forms, which explains its exclusion from the lab practice. The discussion highlights that strontium can replace calcium in bones but poses minimal risk in its non-radioactive state. The focus remains on the practical reasons for excluding certain elements from flame tests. Understanding these factors can enhance safety and resource management in laboratory settings.
McSpongy
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hello PF!
I had a lab practice a while ago of using flames to identify elements by its color. It had the first three alkali metals, calcium, magnesium and barium. We didn't use beryllium or strontium for whatever reason.
I don't know why we didn't use them, and that's why I come here. They are not super toxic, so that's not it. Is it because their salts are too expensive or difficult to obtain, or anything else?
Does anyone know something?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Beryllium is highly toxic, especially in elemental form, and the danger is not completely eliminated in compound form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium

Strontium is known to replace calcium in bones, but is not considered toxic unless it is the radioisotope Sr-90.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
43
Views
17K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
20K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
757
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K