Elevation in boiling point
A pot of salted water boils at a slightly higher temperature than plain water — every cook has felt this without naming it. Dissolve any non-volatile solute in a liquid and its boiling point creeps upward, in exact proportion to how much solute is packed in per kilogram of solvent. This is elevation in boiling point, the mirror-image partner of freezing-point depression, and one of the four named colligative properties on the ISC Class 12 Solutions syllabus. The reasoning is the same vapour-pressure argument used for freezing: a solute lowers the solvent's vapour pressure at every temperature, so the solution needs to be heated further before its vapour pressure climbs back up to atmospheric pressure and boiling can begin. That single idea produces a clean, testable law, , and — just like its freezing-point cousin — a direct route to measuring an unknown solute's molar mass from nothing more than a thermometer and a balance.
Dissolving a non-volatile solute lowers the solvent's vapour pressure at every temperature, so the solution must be heated past the pure solvent's boiling point before its vapour pressure reaches atmospheric pressure, giving .
The core idea
A liquid boils at the temperature where its vapour pressure equals the external (atmospheric) pressure. Raoult's law says a non-volatile solute lowers the solvent's vapour pressure at every temperature, so the solution's vapour-pressure curve sits below the pure solvent's curve throughout. That lowered curve reaches atmospheric pressure only at a higher temperature than the pure solvent needs. This rise, measured relative to the pure solvent, is the elevation in boiling point:
where: is the boiling point of the pure solvent and is the boiling point of the solution; is always positive for a non-volatile solute. For dilute solutions this elevation is directly proportional to the molality of the solute:
where: is the molal elevation constant (also called the ebullioscopic constant) of the solvent, with units , and is the molality in . is defined as the boiling-point rise produced by exactly a 1 molal solution of a non-volatile, non-electrolyte solute — it depends only on the solvent, never on which solute is dissolved. Notice that never appears with any reference to which solute is dissolved — it is purely a solvent property, tabulated once and reused for any non-volatile, non-electrolyte solute placed in that solvent. This is precisely why the property is called colligative: the identity of the solute is irrelevant, and only the number of solute particles per kilogram of solvent (the molality) controls the outcome. Because is fixed for a given solvent, a measured can be turned around to find how many moles of solute are present, and from there the solute's molar mass. Writing grams of solute (molar mass ) dissolved in grams of solvent, the molality is , so:
where: , are in grams, comes out in , and the factor 1000 converts grams of solvent to kilograms inside the molality. This formula is structurally identical to the freezing-point-depression version, with replacing and replacing . The figure below shows why: the solution's vapour-pressure curve is shifted down and to the right of the pure solvent's, so it crosses the atmospheric-pressure line at a higher temperature.
Deriving the molar-mass formula
The goal is to show, in one clean chain of substitutions, why measuring only the boiling-point rise of a dilute solution is enough to calculate the molar mass of a dissolved solute, without ever counting molecules directly.
Step 1. Start from the empirical proportionality , where molality is moles of solute per kilogram of solvent, , with the number of moles of solute and the mass of solvent in kilograms.
Step 2. Express in terms of the measured solute mass (grams) and its unknown molar mass : . Also write the solvent mass in grams, , so .
Step 3. Substitute both into the molality: . This is molality written entirely in terms of measurable gram quantities and the unknown .
Step 4. Substitute this molality into to get , then rearrange for : . Every quantity on the right is directly measurable — weigh and , look up , and measure with a thermometer — so an unknown molar mass falls out without ever counting particles directly.
Worked example
The boiling point of pure water is and for water is . Calculate the boiling point of a solution containing 6 g of urea () dissolved in 200 g of water.
Step 1. Find the molality of the solution: .
Step 2. Apply : .
Step 3. Add the elevation to the pure solvent's boiling point: . The solution boils at .
Competitive stretch
1.5 g of a non-volatile, non-electrolyte solute dissolved in 75 g of acetone () raises the boiling point by . Find the solute's molar mass.
Step 1. Apply the molar-mass formula directly: .
Step 2. Evaluate: numerator , denominator , so . The unknown solute's molar mass is approximately .
Common traps
- Writing the wrong way round — it must come out positive, since dissolving a non-volatile solute always raises the boiling point, never lowers it.
- Forgetting the 1000 factor that converts grams of solvent to kilograms inside the molality, which silently multiplies the calculated molar mass by 1000 if dropped.
- Applying to a volatile solute (such as alcohol in water) — the simple formula assumes the solute contributes no vapour pressure of its own; a volatile solute can even lower the mixture's boiling point.
- Ignoring the van't Hoff factor for electrolytes — an ionic solute like needs , not the plain non-electrolyte formula.
- Assuming the same value applies across different solvents — must be looked up (or given) for the specific solvent in the problem, since it varies widely: water , benzene , acetone , all in .
Ask the tutor: want to see how and combine in a single molar-mass-determination problem, or how values compare across common solvents?
Why does salt water take longer to reach a rolling boil than plain water?
Once both are at their respective boiling points they boil equally vigorously; the extra time comes from needing to heat the salt water past before boiling starts at all. The elevation itself is small — for typical kitchen concentrations it is usually well under — so most of the perceived delay is really just the larger heat capacity and higher starting temperature target, not a dramatic shift in .
Why is water's Kb so much smaller than its Kf?
and both depend on properties of the solvent, but through different physics — relates to the enthalpy of vaporisation and to the enthalpy of fusion, and these differ for every liquid. For water, while , so the same molality produces a much smaller temperature shift on boiling than on freezing. This is exactly why freezing-point depression, not boiling-point elevation, is the more sensitive and more commonly used method for molar-mass determination in water.
Does the formula work if the solute is an electrolyte like NaCl?
Not in its plain form. dissociates into and ions in solution, so one formula unit produces roughly twice as many solute particles as a non-electrolyte of the same molality, and colligative properties depend on the total particle count. The corrected formula is , where is the van't Hoff factor (close to 2 for NaCl at high dilution). Leaving out for an electrolyte is one of the most common numerical mistakes in this topic.