Electrochemical cells: Is gibbs free energy dependent upon concentration?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the Gibbs free energy of reactions in electrochemical cells is dependent on the concentration of reactants. Participants explore this concept through various angles, including thermodynamic principles and the Nernst equation, while also addressing potential misconceptions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that Gibbs free energy is indeed dependent on reactant concentration, as indicated by the Nernst equation and its relationship to open circuit potential.
  • Others argue that entropy considerations suggest that higher concentrations correspond to lower entropy, which could imply a different relationship with Gibbs free energy.
  • A participant suggests that confusion may arise from the distinction between standard potentials and standard free energy, which could lead to differing interpretations of the relationship.
  • One participant emphasizes that in a concentration cell, differing concentrations lead to a potential difference, reinforcing the idea that Gibbs free energy is concentration-dependent.
  • Another participant expresses frustration at the perceived lack of clarity in the discussion, indicating that their intuition aligns with the idea that Gibbs free energy should be influenced by concentration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the dependence of Gibbs free energy on reactant concentration, with some supporting the idea and others presenting counterarguments.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various thermodynamic principles, including the relationship between Gibbs free energy, enthalpy, and entropy, but do not resolve the mathematical or conceptual uncertainties surrounding these relationships.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in electrochemistry, thermodynamics, and related fields who are exploring the nuances of Gibbs free energy and its dependence on concentration.

Topher925
Messages
1,563
Reaction score
7
Is the gibbs free energy of some reaction in an electrochemical cell dependent upon reactant concentration? The Nernst equation clearly states that open circuit potential is dependent upon concentration, and basic thermodynamics states that open circuit potential is directly proportional to gibbs free energy, so my intuition says yes. However, some sources (not the most credible) I have found say no. My electrochem text doesn't seem to give a definitive answer.

Approaching the question from another angle, I would think that entropy would be higher with a system with a lower concentration of reactants so given a constant temperature the gibbs free energy should be less via \DeltaG = \DeltaH - T\DeltaS.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Topher925 said:
Is the gibbs free energy of some reaction in an electrochemical cell dependent upon reactant concentration? The Nernst equation clearly states that open circuit potential is dependent upon concentration, and basic thermodynamics states that open circuit potential is directly proportional to gibbs free energy, so my intuition says yes. However, some sources (not the most credible) I have found say no. My electrochem text doesn't seem to give a definitive answer.

Approaching the question from another angle, I would think that entropy would be higher with a system with a lower concentration of reactants so given a constant temperature the gibbs free energy should be less via \DeltaG = \DeltaH - T\DeltaS.

You need to go back to the fundamentals. Entropy tends to increase unless energy is expended to reduce it within a closed system. Therefore, the more concentrated a solution is (be it solid liquid or gas) the less entropy it has. COncentrating and purifying takes enormous energy (heat, financial, & human). Think of it this way - a single crystal silicon, sapphire or diamond has less entropy than a multicrystalline form of the same material. It takes more effort to process these from impure natural materials states into single crystalline form than to make them into multicrystalline form. As they weather, age, or wear in service their entropy is increasing as the 2nd law of thermo holds true.

Please reorient yourself to see the forest through the trees. Take time to review and reflect on the fundamentals. Ask for help. If you are indeed truly overwhelmed, then perhaps you should orient your studies elsewhere. Only you know the answer to that...
 
looking at this another way. If as you mention delta T = 0 then delta H = 0. Therefore, delta G = (-1)* T * delta S, subsequently if concentration increases delta S is negative. Negative times negative is positive therefore delta G is positive! I hope that simplifies the concept and brings clarity for you. :)
 
glassengineer said:
Please reorient yourself to see the forest through the trees. Take time to review and reflect on the fundamentals. Ask for help. If you are indeed truly overwhelmed, then perhaps you should orient your studies elsewhere. Only you know the answer to that...

How's the view from up there on your high horse? You've only just reiterated what I already said in my second paragraph.

Therefore, the more concentrated a solution is (be it solid liquid or gas) the less entropy it has.

If as you mention delta T = 0 then delta H = 0.

I didn't mention this.
 
Topher925 said:
Is the gibbs free energy of some reaction in an electrochemical cell dependent upon reactant concentration? The Nernst equation clearly states that open circuit potential is dependent upon concentration, and basic thermodynamics states that open circuit potential is directly proportional to gibbs free energy, so my intuition says yes. However, some sources (not the most credible) I have found say no. My electrochem text doesn't seem to give a definitive answer.

Approaching the question from another angle, I would think that entropy would be higher with a system with a lower concentration of reactants so given a constant temperature the gibbs free energy should be less via \DeltaG = \DeltaH - T\DeltaS.

Maybe the 'no' comes from a confusion with 'standard potentials' and 'standard free energy', something like that?

Your intuition is right. E.g. eliminating complicating factors of different materials, imagine a 'concentration cell', so same electrode material both sides, same ions but 2 different concentrations. If the concentrations on both sides are equal there will be no current nor potential, so that answers you question, it must depend on concentration. For an electric current to flow is a way towards equalising the concentrations. So that will happen unless stopped by an opposing potential. Magnitude RT ln (c1/c2). (Ignoring junction potentials.) You worry about the sign! :biggrin: (However in any given setup this will be clear, so this is just about conventions.)

Same damned RT ln c that you get in every damned chemical thermodynamic thing.

I would not completely agree that anyone whose grasp of thermodynamics is shaky, unconfident, unstable should get out of the field because that would be a lot of people, also in any other field at all nearby they will still need the thermodynamics.
 
epenguin said:
Maybe the 'no' comes from a confusion...

THANK YOU! I knew that I wasn't crazy, even though some fellow colleges and some people of "academic authority" said otherwise. I really needed a sanity check.

I thought it would be a well understood concept given the popular equation RTln(K) = \DeltaG, but when everyone tells you "no" you start to question your intuition. That darn equation shows up in all of my electrochem, combustion, and stat thermo books.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K