Gibbs Free Energy of Formation: 1°C or 25°C? (And other exciting questions.)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of Gibbs free energy (ΔG) in chemical reactions, specifically addressing the implications of using values of ΔG° calculated at different temperatures (1°C vs. 25°C) and the significance of ΔG°' in comparison to ΔG°. Participants explore the conditions under which each temperature is applicable and seek clarification on the appropriate values to use in calculations.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether it matters if ΔG° is calculated at 1°C or 25°C when using the equation ΔG=ΔG°+RT ln Q.
  • Another participant asserts that it does matter, emphasizing that the equilibrium constant must correspond to the temperature used for ΔG°.
  • A participant requests a concrete example to clarify which ΔG° value to use for a reaction at 50°C.
  • Another participant suggests that the appropriate ΔG° value should be calculated at the reaction temperature (50°C) and proposes linear interpolation as a first approximation if values at 1°C and 25°C are available.
  • Participants reference the van't Hoff equation and Gibbs-Helmholtz equation as methods to calculate ΔG° at different temperatures.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on which temperature value to use for ΔG°. While some argue for using the value at the reaction temperature, others discuss the relevance of values at 1°C and 25°C, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for temperature-specific values and the potential for linear interpolation, but do not resolve the mathematical steps or assumptions involved in these calculations.

Danny.Boy
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi there:

When using ΔG=ΔG°+RT ln Q to calculate the energy yield of a reaction, does it matter if I use ΔG° calculated at 1°C or 25°C? Also, why are there two choices and when are they each applicable? Finally, I have also seen ΔG°' written (note the prime). What does this mean and how does it differ from ΔG° conceptually and numerically?

I realize that these are very basic questions, so if you want to point me towards some elementary reading material I understand.

Thanks in advance,
Danny.Boy
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Danny.Boy said:
When using ΔG=ΔG°+RT ln Q to calculate the energy yield of a reaction, does it matter if I use ΔG° calculated at 1°C or 25°C?

Yes, it matters. If you use Delta G at 1 deg C, then you will also have to use a corresponding T and then equilibrium constant will be that for this temperature. The same way using Delta G at 25 deg Celsius yields Q for this very temperature.
The change of Q with temperature can be calculated with the van't Hoff equation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_'t_Hoff_equation
 
Thanks for your reply DrDru, but I'm afraid I don't really follow. Perhaps a concrete example would help me understand. For example, consider this reaction at 50ºC (i.e., 323.15K):

[A]+→[C]+[D]

Using ΔG=ΔG°+RT ln Q, I get something like this:

ΔG=ΔG°+R×323.15×ln (([C][D])/([A]))

but what is the value of ΔG° that I should use? The value at 1ºC or 25ºC?
 
Danny.Boy said:
but what is the value of ΔG° that I should use? The value at 1ºC or 25ºC?
Neither of the two but the value at 50 deg. Celsius.
If you have both the values at 1 and at 50 degrees, you could linearly interpolate as a first approximation.
But, as I said, it would be more exact to calculate the value of Delta G0 at 50 degs from the van't Hoff or Gibbs-Helmholtz equation, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs-Helmholtz_equation

E.g. ##T_1=1^\circ##C, ##T_2=25^\circ##C and ##T_3=50^\circ##C,
then
##\Delta G^0(T_1)/T_1-\Delta G^0(T_2)/T_2=\Delta H ^0(1/T_1-1/T_2)##.
Solve this for ##\Delta H^0## and then solve
##\Delta G^0(T_1)/T_1-\Delta G^0(T_3)/T_3=\Delta H ^0(1/T_1-1/T_3)##
for ##\Delta G^0(T_3)##.
 
Aha! Makes sense. Thanks for explaining that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 81 ·
3
Replies
81
Views
10K