First off, I hope this question is not too offensive. Discussing technicalities of a genocide will certainly disgust some. I am in no way trying to condone nazi crimes. I am also not sure whether it makes sense to search for rational thought in genocide. Here goes anyway:

Nazi death camps used shower heads to introduce a gas into the gas chambers, thereby killing people. The gas used was Zyklon-B, an industrial product produced by a single supplier, and likely relatively expensive. It also meant that the gas chambers had to be aerated for a number of minutes before soldiers or forced laborers could enter the gas chambers to drag out the corpses.

Why didn’t they simply use CO2? It’s a byproduct of basically any fire. It’s cheap and could have been produced on-site trivially. It’s also part of normal air and only toxic in high concentrations, likely meaning less danger to soldiers.

  • gencha@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    1 year ago

    According to Wikipedia, they used a lot of different approaches. Zyklon-B was abundant, as it was used as an insecticide, but was dramatically more poisonous to humans. 4kg of the poison can kill 1000 people. As far as I understand, it proved itself to be the most efficient method for killing a lot of people reliably

  • Illegal_Prime@dmv.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is meta but…

    This post demonstrates the utility of having an r/askhistorians equivalent on lemmy. I seem to remember them being quite outspoken against Reddit’s bullshit, but I’m not sure if they went anywhere.

    • federalreverse-old@feddit.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think they stayed:

      Sarah Gilbert is a postdoctoral associate at Cornell University and research director of Cornell’s Citizens and Technology Lab; she studies content moderation, online communities, and research ethics. She’s also a moderator for r/askhistorians, a subreddit known for complex modding systems (r/askhistorians is not one of the subreddits with moderators removed by Reddit).

      S

    • NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I really miss that subreddit and also /r/historymemes. We have a history memes on Lemmy but the content is far from the quality on reddit

  • Rayleigh@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    First: Zyklon B was mainly used in Auschwitz, many other camps did use CO or engine exhaust gases.

    Nazi death camps used shower heads to introduce a gas into the gas chambers

    No, the showers were simply fake. Zyklon B was inserted from above into metal pipes so it would fall down into the gas chamber. You can see an animation here: https://www.zdf.de/dokumentation/terra-x/die-gaskammern-in-auschwitz-birkenau-creative-commons-100.html

    and likely relatively expensive

    It was widely used for killing insects for example on ships, cooling houses, mills or other in other storage facilities. In fact the overwhelming part of Zyklon B going to concentration camps was indeed used to kill fleas or lice and not for killing humans. The price was 4.55 RM in 1943 per kg which is roughly the same in Euros today.

    It also meant that the gas chambers had to be aerated for a number of minutes

    30 to 40 minutes

    Why didn’t they simply use CO2

    Zyklon B was again a mass product with the corresponding production capacities already there and not expensive. Also it is estimated that around 4kg of Zyklon B are able to kill 1000 people. It is also fast acting and thereby simply very effective in that sense. Plus it was also simple to transport and store as it came on a carrier material, so pressure gas bottles were not necessary but simple metal containers were used.

    • snoweA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t speak German so I couldn’t understand the video, but it looks like it was just a powder? Did they have to activate it?

    • federalreverse-old@feddit.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So, for the record, while I didn’t really write anything in here, I did read the entire thread and learned a little bit from each of the top-level comments (bar the downvoted one): Thank you for the responses and thank you for debunking me!

      (I guess I should have put a little more effort into research.)

  • empireOfLove@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They did sort of use CO2/CO in the earlier days, in the form of poorly maintained van trucks that would drive around the camps with their exhaust piped directly into the back of the van. That was slow and inefficient though, as the truck had to run long enough to actively displace all the oxygen within the volume of the van.

    Zyklon B from its Wikipedia page was intended as a pesticide so there was already a large industrial supply lying around. It works on a cellular level and will cause widespread cell death within 2 minutes of inhalation at extremely low concentrations, making it ultimately much faster with less maintenance.

    I’m not a historical expert, but the deaths caused by Zyklon B are also described to be much, much more violent than simply passing out from oxygen deprivation- and I could posit that the Nazis, viewing jews et al. as not human, would have preferred such a death for them.

  • lemmylommy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    They did not only use Zyklon B. They also used carbon monoxide from bottles and engine exhaust. But they considered Zyklon B more effective, especially the commandant of Auschwitz. They could just drop the pellets into the chamber, no need to handle large bottles, keep a hose connected, run an engine etc.

    This is pure speculation, but I can also imagine that using a pesticide to exterminate Jews and their various other enemies/victims would appeal to Nazis.

  • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    HCN was, and continues to be an industrial product and is pretty cheap. it’s used on industrial scale in some plastics precursors manufacture, like PMMA (acrylic glass) or cyanoacrylate glue among others. currently flow processes allow it to be generated and consumed in adjacent reactors, minimizing amount actually generated at any time, but it was not always the case

    it’s low-boiling liquid (bp +25C) meaning simple transport compared to gases like CO or CO2. in the era some parasites, like louse were common and HCN was used for de-lousing clothing, and some derivatives were used as a general insecticide for fumigation. that’s partly because there were no better agrochemicals developed yet. it’s dangerous for all life and by its mechanism works rather quickly (minutes) and is rather potent. CO2 is neither

    • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fast acting and easy to store and transport. They dropped in pellets that reacted to the air.

  • Taalen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I cannot remember when or where I heard or read about this, so take it with a grain of salt. But I recall hearing something about the people who had to remove the bodies from trucks where people had been gassed with CO2 finding the corpses so gruesome and agonising, as opposed to more peaceful looking bodies of people killed with other gases, that they stopped using it. Presumably the difference was because of how slow or quick the death was.

    I doubt they would have cared the tiniest bit later on when it was other concentration camp victims who had to clear the bodies.

  • vettnerk@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have to admit that I’m curious about something similar; the death camps and ots mechanism seemed highly inefficient, but the fact that I have to preface any questions on the topic with how much i detest the actual concept made me conclude that it’s probably best not to ask. That’s the annoying fact about being interested in finding efficient technical solutions while also hating nazis and everything they stood for.

    • lol3droflxp@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Think of it as less of a pure killing machine and more of a system that is supposed to extract all valuable items and labour from humans with the end goal of them not surviving. The death camps were always embedded in a system of labour camps, and most of the time those who couldn’t work (anymore) were the ones getting killed. Towards the end of the war this started breaking down more and more, as well as never working perfectly to being with.

  • wewbull@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why didn’t they simply use CO2? It’s a byproduct of basically any fire.

    I think that’s carbon monoxide. CO

    CO kills by sending you to sleep and then binding to oxygen very tightly in the blood asphyxiating you.

    CO2 drives the breathing cycle and causes you to unctrollably hyperventilate. You tend to die of a heart attack through panic.

    Very different. I suspect a large crowd of people panicking would be very difficult to control.

    It’s cheap and could have been produced on-site trivially. It’s also part of normal air and only toxic in high concentrations,

    I think you gave another reason yourself. Smaller quantities of toxin are easier to manage / use.