Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Danielle Miller
Dr. Moerdyk
SCH 106 01
8 December 2016
process that would revolutionize the way we grow food and how we eat it. Haber and
Bosch were two scientists questing for a solution to a growing global population and the
increased needs for food production and storage. While they overcame the trials and
tribulations of dozens of scientists before them, they struggled to appease the chemical
and physical implications of ammonia production. Little did they know that their process,
the Haber-Bosch process, would later be coined as one of the greatest discoveries of
modern times, lead to two Nobel Prizes, and employ widespread usage of commercial
ammonia over a century later. While ammonia may be thought to be found only in
household cleaning supplies and seem as though it is readily available, the process of
During the beginning of the 19th century, global tensions were high pre-war as
each country competed against other powerhouse nations. Germany, specifically was
looking for an ammonia compound that could yield nitrates in order to produce
gunpowder and explosives needed to support their forces in World War I. During the
war, Germany’s supply line was stifled and the original supply line was practically
the Germans and therefore, there was no resource for the acquisition of the large
amount of sodium nitrate needing to create weapons and war technology. Germany’s
scientists were tasked with finding a solution to the lack of natural product. Fritz
Haber, a German physical chemist, developed what is today known as the Haber-Bosch
process, a nitrogen fixation process in which synthetic ammonia can be produced. This
process was the first successful attempt at affordable, large scale ammonia production.
inefficient in terms of energy use. Germany’s largest chemical company, BASF, tasked
Carl Bosch with developing ammonia at a rate feasible for commercial sale. As the war
ended, Germany wanted to keep the process confidential but Bosch was a member of
the German negotiating team and offered details in order to facilitate the building of a
While nitrates in war were in high demand, ammonia as a fertilizing product was
needed on the farming front. There was longstanding debate within the scientific
community regarding the importance and use of nitrogen in the growth of plants.
Research at the time showed that fertilizers with additional nitrogen increased crop
yields. Due to the fact all of this was occurring during the brink of a global food crisis,
a better solution was needed. At the time, the reserve of industrial grade fertilizers and
feeding crop were predicted to be used at a higher rate than production capabilities.
Unfortunately, this would result in a drastic need for ammonia, which was just not
possible at the time (Clark). Ammonia usage became more important but the product
was just not being produced at the rate required. Atmospheric nitrogen was plentiful,
Miller 3
but proved to be too stable to react. Fritz Haber and his assistant Robert Le Rossignol
were the ones who used a high pressure device and a catalyst to produce ammonia
from the nitrogen in the air that existed naturally. The process that they created
resulted in about 4 ounces of ammonia per hour because the process was completed in
a step-by-step process. Carl Bosch was the scientist responsible for scaling this
Even though the process is named for Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch, many other
generations of scientists also contributed. Alwin Mittasch worked at the same facility as
Bosch and he was responsible for discovering the iron based catalyst that is widely used
today. In 1918, Haber was the first to be credited with a Nobel Prize for the discovery
of the process. In 1932, Bosch and assistant researcher Frederick Bergius were
awarded the Nobel Prize for the invention and development of chemical high pressure
methods. Specifically, Bosch discovered the synthesis of ammonia from its elements
handle the demands of the chemical reaction. In 2007, the Nobel Prize in Chemistry
was awarded to Gerhard Ertl, a later associate of Haber, who worked at his institute in
Berlin, Germany. Ertl is credited with explaining how chemical reactions occur on
synthesis of ammonia and its catalyst, iron in the Haber-Bosch process ("The Nobel
As the first industrial chemical process to use high pressure, this process uses
nitrogen, which comprises about 80 % of the air around us and hydrogen, a form of
methane drawn from natural gas. The permeating issue is that nitrogen is unreactive,
due to the strong triple bonds it is capable of forming. Temperature and pressure were
two factors that created contention among the scientific community as far as the
equilibrium equation needs to drastically favor products ("Nobel Lecture: The Synthesis
of Ammonia from Its Elements”). Due to Le Chatlier’s principle, products will be favored
at a lower temperature. With regard to the exothermic nature of the reaction, the
around 200 degrees Celsius. When temperatures increase higher than this, the Van’t
Hoff equation states that the equilibrium is unfavorable. However, a high temperature
temperature, the reaction does not occur at the most rapid pace. An increase in
pressure can be applied to favor the forward reaction because the entropy of the
equation tells us that there are four reactant moles for every two product moles. High
amounts of energy are required for this to take place and special accommodations are
catalyst must be introduced. A catalyst is used in order to lower the activation energy,
the energy required to break the nitrogen and hydrogen bonds. Traditionally, the
catalyst used in this process was osmium, unfortunately, available in small quantities
only. The discovery of an iron based catalyst, from iron powder which has been finely
Miller 5
ground, reduced, and oxidized was the solution. Today, a heterogeneous catalyst that is
typically formed from the iron in magnetite is now used to allow the reduction in the
temperature needed for a reaction. A low temperature and higher pressure yields the
largest proportion of ammonia. Typically, the reaction occurs around 500 degrees
Celsius and 250 atm. The reaction is a gaseous equilibrium equation, where energy is
released, causing an exothermic reaction. One mole of nitrogen gas and three moles of
hydrogen gas produce two moles of ammonia gas. Due to Avogadro’s Law, equal
volumes of gas at the same temperature and pressure contain comparable numbers of
the process is efficient with a yield of ten to twenty percent. If the process is
continually run, the unreacted nitrogen and hydrogen can be effectively “recycled”,
Nitrogen fertilizers have been able to increase crop yields for consumption by
humans and animals over six times what was being produced in the 1930s
may have been too successful in its job. The global population has increased
exponentially since the process was implemented because more food is afforded. The
Haber-Bosch process is singlehandedly responsible for five percent of the entire world’s
annual natural gas production and two percent of the world’s annual energy production
(Ritter).
Miller 6
Ammonia in the air can cause irritation to the eyes, lungs, and the skin. In a
gaseous form, ammonia can destroy the eye and penetrates tissue more rapidly than
other alkalis. When vapor is inhaled, coughing, and difficult or painful breathing,
pulmonary congestion, and in the worst cases, death can happen. Depending upon the
time and concentration of ammonia exposure to skin, human flesh and organs can be
disrupted. Ammonia spreads across the surface it is exposed to until the chemical is
completely diluted by moisture. However, by the time this happens, corrosion of tissue
can occur. Ammonia as a spray is capable of essentially freezing any clothing to skin
traditional chemical process that has been discussed previously. Used as a fertilizer,
Urea, which is used to produce sedatives, is made through the reaction of ammonia and
carbon dioxide. The synthesis of nitric acid is used in the production of the explosive,
TNT as well as ammonium nitrate in explosives and hydrazine used in rocket propulsion
make nylon and other polyamides. In common households, it can be found in cleaning
products (Stubbings).
While the Haber-Bosch process is largely used today and has been for many years in
Miller 7
grow food and refrigeration elements to keep it cold. It is without a doubt that the
Haber-Bosch process is one of the most important modern technologies. Its use should
not be limited to its current field. In the future, it may be possible to refine the process
in order to diminish the few harmful effects that are caused by its widespread use.
This process, like any other scientific technology, can be used to help or to hurt. Yes,
the process was applied to the making of warfare but it also saved the lives of many
through its usage in farming. This process effectively allowed food production to occur
in a way that prevented global hunger. Scientific discoveries are inherently good in
their trial to address an issue in society. Like genetically modified organisms, the
Haber-Bosch process allows for more economical and widespread food production as
well as an increase in the quality of crops. However, both of these food sciences are
relatively young in the spectra of scientific age, and yet there is much more to learn
about future ramifications for long-term use. However, this should not detract from the
continued use and research of such technologies. Like this process, vaccines were
created in order to prevent the possibility of contracting certain diseases and sparing
the affected individual from painful symptoms. On the other hand, vaccines are now
being used in chemical warfare, much like the aforementioned process to debilitate
societies. While cryogenics may seem like science of the future and a solution to
individual who suffer from currently incurable diseases, it raises ethical and scientific
concerns. As knowledge on the topic is sparse at the time, the concern it that the
process will be used extensively. Cost becomes a factor in the facilities and resources
Miller 8
needed to ascertain this, but we have no certainty that this process is even effective or
that a cure will be found. Of course, the main concern is for the “patients” undergoing
this process and the moral repercussions of essentially freezing a person in time. Even
treatment and the hope of life for some, for others, this hope is dangerous. It is well-
known that the science behind cancer drugs gives them a potent nature. For many, the
drugs come at a cost, both financially and physically. The sign effects can be
debilitating and only worsen the remaining time for the patient. With all of these
technologies, it is important to weigh the risks and the benefits to conclude if the
science in question is in the best interest of humankind and the world as a whole.
With the wealth of information we know as of now, it is evident that science has
come a long way. Even the Haber-Bosch process itself has undergone change during
its lifespan from its scientific conception before World War I. From osmium to an iron
catalyst, from food production to German war, this process provided for many
applications throughout the years. In the future, there is hope that this science, like any
other will continue to adapt with changes in the needs of society and the science of the
time. It is certain that without this process, our world would not be able to sustain the
population nearly as well as we currently do. No system is perfect and it brings forth
concerns regarding long-term solutions, but this science is here to stay and rightfully so
due to its importance. In the end, importance should be placed on its evolution as a
modern technology.
Miller 9
References
the research of my paper, I recall the information taught by the school’s librarians.
During this lesson, we learned the “CRAP” method, which stands for currency,
reliability, authority, and purpose. Currency refers to how old a source is. While there
is some weigh to choosing a source that has been in publication for many years and has
a strong basis of knowledge, if the source has not been updated recently it may not
reflect the most current information. In the field of science, it is especially important to
means the source comes from a source that is trusted. For scientific research, it is
important to look for established journals that are peer-reviewed. For information to
achieve this status, it undergoes immense scrutiny and review. In a reliable source, the
information is cited just like a proper research paper. A source can be considered
who the author is and where their expertise is coming from. Look for experts in the
field with a strong education behind them. If the creator of the source has an
institutional affiliation, that strengthens the authority. For purpose, determine why the
audience for the piece and if the publisher is including bias or attempting to support an
information.
With all of this being said, I chose my sources based upon this method. A
At first glance, even the title does not provide much reassurance that this source is
scholarly. While it is current as far as containing testimony from a current public figure,
that is really all. The source, US Weekly, is not reliable as it holds a reputation as a
tabloid and gossip magazine. There is no authority behind either the topic, Michelle
Duggar, or the publisher, US Weekly. While overpopulation does relate to the Haber-
entertain, not to educate. I also chose not to use the article from ScienceHeroes.com
for many of the same reasons. At the very top of the page, it says “your vote matters”,
as you scroll down the page, it is evident this page is nothing more than a blog, with
followers and commenters. However, the page discusses little about the process itself
and more about the personal lives of the scientists. As the page looks homemade, the
reliability and authority of the source are questionable. No sources are cited for the
little information that is given. The purpose again is entertainment. The last source I
chose not to use was from NPR, titled, “Science: For Good or Evil”. Unfortunately, this
does not add to the reliability or authority of the source. Again, there are no citations
or sources. The purpose is persuasive as it details the author’s opinion and tries to
convince the audience of the same. There are many ads on the page and the source
Miller 11
overall is known as National Public Radio and it is just that, public. The commentators
on the piece are not from the scientific community and do not contribute knowledge,
is the page up to date with all relevant and recent developments in the field, it is
required to be updated when a new safety concern arises. As a reliable source from
OSHA and the Department of Labor, the information is trustworthy. These entities
allow for a certain reputation when it comes to knowledge. The information provided is
detailed and the original documentation is present for further research. As a whole, a
variety of topics are covered and the material is informative. “Fertilizer History: The
Haber-Bosch Process” is also a reputable source. It is not only current and updated,
but it is published by the Fertilizer Institute, a body of scientists alongside farmers and
food producers. This affiliation ensures reliability and authority. In fact, this source is
educationally based and provides additional resources. From Chemical and Engineering
News and the American Chemical Society, a body of scientists and researchers from
multiple disciplines, Steven Ritter writes informatively about the process. All sources
used by Ritter are cited correctly and reliable. Again, it is a scientific magazine that
seeks to educate.
Miller 12
Works Cited
Clark, Jim. "The Haber Process." ChemGuideUK. N.p., Apr. 2013. Web. 08 Dec. 2016.
"Nobel Lecture: The Synthesis of Ammonia from Its Elements." NobelPrize.org. Nobel
" The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2007." NobelPrize.org. Nobel Media AB, 2014. Web. 07
Dec. 2016.
Stubbings, Janice. "Uses and Production of Ammonia by the Haber Process." Haber
Process for Ammonia Production Chemistry Tutorial. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec.
2016.