Counterfeit Helium?

[macboy]

Apparently it's not just fake electronic components and yummy melamine-tainted baby formula to watch out for, but fake helium-filled  balloons as well:


I don't think helium does that.

[Dr. Frank]

 

Well, this kind of Helium first has to be fusioned from hydrogen..

Frank

[helius]

Helium is a non-renewable resource and really shouldn't be used for entertainment. As seen in the video, the dangers of hydrogen balloons are overstated; they contain relatively little energy and, when ignited, the temperatures achieved are too cool to ignite much else. Keep in mind that that only a tiny percentage of party balloons will ever be exposed to open flames.

[macboy]

Keep in mind that that only a tiny percentage of party balloons will ever be exposed to open flames.

Yes, because candles, sparklers, and fireworks are never seen at parties. 

[helius]

Where I live, fireworks and sparklers are illegal. But everyone should be able to agree that lighting them indoors is reckless and a fire hazard.
Really, what is more blatant, a balloon that catches fire, or a "candle" on a cake that more closely resembles a bunsen burner? There is only so much allowance you can make for total stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."

[babysitter]

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."

As soon as you design something foolproof, the fools get an update.

[German_EE]

Fun fact: The amount of hydrogen in a thermonuclear device is about a party balloon full.

[ivan747]

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."

As soon as you design something foolproof, the fools get an update.

Okay, that's my new signature. 

[boffin]

Where I live, fireworks and sparklers are illegal. But everyone should be able to agree that lighting them indoors is reckless and a fire hazard.
Really, what is more blatant, a balloon that catches fire, or a "candle" on a cake that more closely resembles a bunsen burner? There is only so much allowance you can make for total stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."

Kind of mind boggling that the United States can ban sparklers, but not guns.

[edavid]

Kind of mind boggling that the United States can ban sparklers, but not guns.

Only 5 states ban sparklers.

[CatalinaWOW]

When you have the kind of idiots that can't handle sparklers safely, why should you expect consistency in legislation?  Remember this a country that generated a law stating that when two trains meet at a crossing "each must stop and wait for the other to pass".   You can fill books with the idiocy of our laws.

I love my country, but have to laugh because otherwise it hurts too much.

[Paul Moir]

They have the right to bear arms written into their charter of rights and freedoms.  Their founding fathers unfortunately did not consider the need to protect party favours.

We on the other hand thought about what they had done for 200 years and then figured some language rights would be equally disruptive. 

[Melt-O-Tronic]

Helium is a non-renewable resource and really shouldn't be used for entertainment. <snip>

A minor quibble:  helium is constantly being produced naturally within the Earth.  So it's certainly not a non-renewable resource.  You could argue that it is being consumed & released into the atmosphere (where it rises) at a rate greater than natural production, but I don't think anyone can prove that one way or the other.  Seems like a reasonable speculation though.

[mtdoc]

Funny video.  Reminds me of when I was in high school. We would fill up a balloon from an oxyacetylene welding tank then put it in a paper bag.  Light the paper bag and stick it in a school garbage can. Someone sees the smoke, goes to investigate - and boom!   Loud and scary but harmless, I think....  Ah, good times..

[Psi]

I have my doubts that those baloons were filled with pure hydrogen.
I've done that before and it's not that yellow when it burns.

I reckon it's hydrogen mixed with something else to bring the buoyancy back to match helium.  Maybe LPG or similar.


Baloons filled with pure hydrogen don't behave like helium baloons. They dont want to "float away" they want to fly the f%#& away   

[rs20]

Helium is a non-renewable resource and really shouldn't be used for entertainment.

+100.

Baloons filled with pure hydrogen don't behave like helium baloons. They dont want to "float away" they want to fly the f%#& away   

I have my doubts that it's that easy to tell the difference -- the buoyancy of hydrogen w.r.t. air (1.12 kg/m^3) is only 7% more than that of helium (1.04kg/m^3). However, I think you're probably right that it's not pure hydrogen, on the basis of the flame colour.

[Psi]

I found it very obvious to tell the difference


I'm not a chemist but do you have to take other things into account than just the buoyancy, like how densely both will pack into the same space under the pressure of the balloon

[amyk]

I have my doubts that those baloons were filled with pure hydrogen.
I've done that before and it's not that yellow when it burns.

It could be the camera, but it looks pretty close to pure hydrogen to me; here's another example:



LPG burns slightly slower, and makes a more sooty flame because it has carbon.

[rs20]

I found it very obvious to tell the difference

I'm not a chemist but do you have to take other things into account than just the buoyancy, like how densely both will pack into the same space under the pressure of the balloon

Gases don't "pack", the ideal gas law prevails to a very high level of precision at normal pressures (the pressure inside a balloon is 1 or 2 psi above atmospheric). If I may be so bold, I suspect the difference you observed was more likely to be caused by a different balloon material/size, or even two identical balloons filled to a different amount. But, perhaps you have a super-sensitive touch, 10% might be detectable I suppose. It's also very true that I may be missing something.

My overarching point isn't to doubt you btw, just doubting whether the average joe public would notice the difference.

[helius]

A minor quibble:  helium is constantly being produced naturally within the Earth.  So it's certainly not a non-renewable resource.

By that logic, fossil plants are constantly being reformed by natural, geothermal processes into oil. 
The real problem is that there are only so many places where it's economical to collect it, which coincide with certain natural gas deposits. I have no idea if we are past "peak helium" or not, but without those gas wells it would be prohibitively expensive.

[richard.cs]

I have my doubts that it's that easy to tell the difference -- the buoyancy of hydrogen w.r.t. air (1.12 kg/m^3) is only 7% more than that of helium (1.04kg/m^3). However, I think you're probably right that it's not pure hydrogen, on the basis of the flame colour.

I think you could tell the difference between a balloon filled with hydrogen and one filled with "balloon gas", the cheap option which is just enough helium to float and the remainder nitrogen. In the UK at least noone puts pure helium in balloons commercially.  A H₂ and N₂ mix might work just as well and would reduce the available combustion energy.

[Skimask]

It's called "herium", pronounced "hee-ree-um"
Used in a sentence..."I have a herium barroon"

[cowana]

I have my doubts that it's that easy to tell the difference -- the buoyancy of hydrogen w.r.t. air (1.12 kg/m^3) is only 7% more than that of helium (1.04kg/m^3). However, I think you're probably right that it's not pure hydrogen, on the basis of the flame colour.

I think you could tell the difference between a balloon filled with hydrogen and one filled with "balloon gas", the cheap option which is just enough helium to float and the remainder nitrogen. In the UK at least noone puts pure helium in balloons commercially.  A H₂ and N₂ mix might work just as well and would reduce the available combustion energy.

Density of nitrogen: 1.165kg/m^3
Density of helium: 0.164kg/m^3
Density of balloon gas (70% helium, 30% nitrogen): 0.464kg/m^3
Density of hydrogen: 0.082kg/m^3

So for a 0.02m^3 balloon, the lift generated (assuming a zero mass balloon and 1atm pressure - not true, but fine for this comparison):

Balloon gas: 12.3 grams lift
Helium: 19.2 grams lift
Hydrogen: 21.1 grams lift

And with a 10 gram balloon, this is a pretty convincing result - 5 times the net lift for hydrogen over balloon gas.

Balloon gas: 2.3 grams net lift
Helium: 9.2 grams net lift
Hydrogen: 11.1 grams net lift

[Melt-O-Tronic]

A minor quibble:  helium is constantly being produced naturally within the Earth.  So it's certainly not a non-renewable resource.

By that logic, fossil plants are constantly being reformed by natural, geothermal processes into oil. 
The real problem is that there are only so many places where it's economical to collect it, which coincide with certain natural gas deposits. I have no idea if we are past "peak helium" or not, but without those gas wells it would be prohibitively expensive.

Oh yeah, I forgot.  All the organic matter that became fossil fuels was put into place at one time.  On a Tuesday.   

[wraper]

A H₂ and N₂ mix might work just as well and would reduce the available combustion energy.

Too expensive  . Could be methane or natural gas.