Since soot is made due to incomplete combustion, and i'm going to assume its a hydrocarbon, can it be burned?

Question

For instance it is well known that the products of a complete combustion of a hydrocarbon must be carbon dioxide and water, and since soot is neither the residue caused by the combustion process must be a hydrocarbon right, but then why don't we burn soot, why do we just throw it away, or am I wrong, I hope someone can clear this up for me.

Answer 1

Your body, plants, etc. have a lot of elements like phosphorus and sulfur, that when burned produce things like phosphates and sulfates--inorganic salts that do not burn. Those make up a certain percentage of soot. The rest of soot is essentially carbon, largely as graphite. While graphite can burn (C + O2 -> CO2), it's *hard* to burn it (if you burn a pencil the wood will burn before the graphite will). Therefore soot is composed of inorganic salts that don't burn and organic material that is very slow to burn. But then let's say your chimney accumulates a lot of soot, that maybe overtime becomes porous. And then there's a fire in there for a long time heating it all up, and suddenly all the soot decides it's going to catch on fire, well, in that case kiss your house goodbye because you will have a lot more stuff burning that you thought you will. This is chimney-cleaners have jobs, even today.

Answer 2

Soot is mostly carbon and yes, it does burn. When we get our chimneys swept, we make a point of burning it so as not to waste it.

Answer 3

Soot is pretty much pure carbon, without much hydrogen in it, so it doesn't burn.

Answer 4

well im sure whatever you were burning, like if it was wood, had lots of other chemicals that don't have any reactive properties once they have already combusted.

ORORRRR maybe, you ARE right, and thats why we have chimney fires???