Impact of Temperature on Fuel Cell Work Output

AI Thread Summary
As temperature increases, the maximum work output from the fuel cell reaction decreases. This is derived from the relationship between Gibbs free energy (G), enthalpy (H), and entropy (S), where both dH and dS are negative for the reaction. The equation w_max = -RT ln(K) indicates that as temperature (T) rises, the value of w_max becomes more negative due to the positive nature of ln(K). Therefore, the conclusion is that increased temperature leads to decreased work output from the fuel cell. This understanding is crucial for optimizing fuel cell performance.
eraemia
Messages
53
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



2 H2(g) + O2(g) 2 H2O(l) K = 1.28e83

As temperature increases, does the maximum amount of work obtained from the fuel cell reaction increase, decrease, or remain the same?

Homework Equations



1. G = -RTln(K)
2. dG = dH - tdS
3. w_max = dG

The Attempt at a Solution



Okay, using formation values, I calculated that for this reaction, both dH and dS are < 0.

If dG = w_max (eq. 3), then w_max = -RT ln K (1 and 3)
Since ln(K) is positive, the larger the T, the more negative w_max.
Thus, as T increases, w_work decreases?

Is that right? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eraemia said:
Thus, as T increases, w_work decreases?

Is that right? Thanks.
Sounds good.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top