The question is not straight forward, and the reason for that is that any material / compound / element that will burn in oxygen, will decay at a particular rate in a fire. So for example, highly combustible materials such as gasoline, or hydrogen, will combust rapidly in a relatively low percentage of oxygen. In the case of hydrogen, H2, the percentage of oxygen required to use up all the H2 present will be 50%, since the compound produced is H2O. If there is this much oxygen present, the result will be quite explosive. For a controlled fire or reaction, you would control the oxygen input, and / or the hydrogen input. Think of an engine in a car, only the fuel in the cylinder gets used / burned, not the entire gas tank!
In order for fire to burn, there is someting called the fire tetrahedron. The things needed for fire to burn are as listed: Heat, Oxygen, Fuel(of any sort), and a Chmeical Reaction with all of the above. I learned this from the multiple firefighting classes i have taken.
No, fire does not need carbon to burn. Fire requires three elements to ignite and sustain: heat, fuel, and oxygen. Carbon is a common fuel source for fires, but other materials like wood, paper, and gas can also serve as fuel for combustion.
It will simply go out as fire needs to burn oxygen, too. You can see this. Empty and clean an aluminum soda can. Place a burning candle deep in a jar. Pour a teaspoon of hydrogen peroxide in the soda can. Cover and shake upright. Leave the liquid in the can while you slowly pour the carbon dioxide gas into the jar and it puts the candle out by pushing all the oxygen up and out.
To make fire, you need three essential elements: fuel, heat, and oxygen. Fuel provides the material that will burn, heat ignites the fuel, and oxygen sustains the combustion process. By combining these three elements in the right conditions, you can create and maintain a fire.
When we talk about "burning" it generally means a chemical reaction with oxygen from the air, which produces heat. Nuclear scientists and engineers also talk about "burning" or "burnup" of the nuclear fuel, in this case there is no fire or chemical reaction, so perhaps this is what you have in mind.
No it can't. You need oxygen to burn for it to work.
oxygen
yes it does
No, fire requires oxygen to burn, not carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a byproduct of combustion when a material burns in the presence of oxygen.
No. Adding oxygen to a fire will make it burn faster and hotter. In fact, one of the ways of putting out a fire is to cut off the supply of oxygen.
Fires require oxygen to ignite and sustain combustion. In general, fires need around 16% to 17% of oxygen in the air to burn. This oxygen level is typically found in the Earth's atmosphere.
No, fire does not "breathe" air like animals do. Air is necessary for fire to burn because it contains the oxygen that fuels the combustion process. Without oxygen, fires cannot start or continue burning.
throwing a blanket over a small contained fire stops oxygen to the fire .to stop a fire you need to take out one of the three elements that are needed for a fire to burn witch are heat /oxygen/fuel
Fires need oxygen to burn. Without it, the fire goes out. Using CO2 displaces oxygen in the environment.
For something to burn, three key elements are required: fuel, heat, and oxygen. The fuel is what will undergo combustion, the heat is necessary to initiate the combustion reaction, and oxygen is needed for the fuel to react and sustain the burning process.
All living things need oxygen in order to survive. Animals, plants, and humans need oxygen. Fire also needs oxygen in order to burn.
Yes it does. If either fuel oxygen or heat were not sufficient or absent, fire would not be able to be sustained or ignited. :)