Which Iron Ion Is Truly More Stable, Fe2+ or Fe3+?

AI Thread Summary
Fe3+ is generally considered more stable than Fe2+ due to its half-filled d-orbital, which provides extra stability. However, the standard electrode potential of the reaction Fe3+ + e- → Fe2+ is 0.77V, indicating that Fe2+ formation is favored, suggesting it is more stable in aqueous solution. The discussion highlights that Fe2+ has a more negative hydration energy, contributing to its stability in that context. In non-aqueous environments or when chelating agents are involved, Fe3+ can exhibit greater stability. Overall, the stability of iron ions depends on the specific conditions and the context in which they are analyzed.
chatelier
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
In terms of electronic structure, Fe3+ is more stable than Fe2+ because it has a half filled d-orbital which gives extra stability.
i.e. Fe3+ : [Ar]3d5
Fe2+ : [Ar]3d6
But the standard electrode potential of the following reaction is 0.77V,
Fe3+(aq) + e- => Fe2+(aq)
which means formation of Fe2+is favored and Fe2+ should be more stable in this case.

so, actually, Fe2+ or Fe3+ is more stable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What state is the iron in when you're looking at electronic configurations? What state is the iron in when you're looking at the reduction potential?
 
Plz comment on my way of thinking:
Fe2+ is more stable than Fe3+ in aqueous solution because of the more -ve hydration energy of Fe2+
so in what situation will Fe3+ be more stable than Fe2+??
 
chatelier said:
Plz comment on my way of thinking:
Fe2+ is more stable than Fe3+ in aqueous solution because of the more -ve hydration energy of Fe2+

Okay.
so in what situation will Fe3+ be more stable than Fe2+??

You aren't restricted to aqueous solution. You aren't forbidden the use of chelating agents. You're not forbidden the formation of complexes.
 
in addition to what bystander noted, I think what you mean by "stability" is in regard to the ionization energies (1st, 2nd, 3rd). You'll need to consider the trend in ionization energies in relation to electronic configurations, the answer can be found in an inorganic text.
 
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