WORK ABSORBED IN ELECTROLYSIS. 31 



The number 1623500 kilogrammetres can be adopted as 

 sufficiently accurate in all industrial calculations. The work 

 being effected in one hour's time, it will correspond to 



1623500 ... ... 



=451 kilogrammetres per second ; that is to say, 



approximately to 6 horse-power. Therefore, one horse-power 

 corresponds to 167 grammes of water decomposed per hour. 

 In practice, the work necessary for the decomposition of water 

 is greatly increased by resistances of all kinds. M. Gramme, 

 who happened to incidentally treat the question of electrolysing 

 water, made some experiments with a certain amount of 

 precision, and with a voltameter of his own construction, and he 

 succeeded in decomposing 60 grammes of water per horse- 

 power per hour. If the calorific work absorbed by the circuit 

 is taken into account, the yield certainly exceeds 50 per cent, 



RC\ 



since it is equal to r-= , or 35 per cent, of the work required for 



the electrolysis proper. We do not pretend that better results 

 cannot be obtained, but we are not aware of anything more 

 economical having been realised in such a direction, and would 

 give manufacturers thinking of employing electrolysis for the 

 production of pure hydrogen or oxygen the advice of not 

 reckoning upon a greater yield. 



So, practically, one horse-power, acting during a period of 

 one hour, decomposes 60 grammes of water, and liberates 



6-67 grammes or 74 -4 litres of hydrogen, 

 53 33 grammes or 37 2 litres of oxygen. 



ELECTROLYSIS OF A BINARY COMPOUND WITH A METALLIC 

 BASIS. The preceding calculations in reference to the estima- 



of a book. Since the electromotive force of polarisation is precisely calculated in 

 respect of the work of combination, there should be no other discrepancy between 

 the two numbers of kilogrammetres than that arising from the neglect of some 

 decimal fractions. 



Why take the figure 1*75 as representing the electromotive force of polarisa- 

 tion, accepting M. E. E. Blavier's authority (M. E. E. Blavier has however 

 given a different figure) when direct calculation was so easy? M. Japing 

 questions as to the causes which alter the pure theory ; if our book comes under 

 his notice he will understand that pure theory is not altered in the said calcula- 

 tion. 



