What is the equation that connects pH and its effect on electric potential of an electrochemical cell?

1 Answer
Aug 7, 2017

Well, first off, you'll need to begin with the Nernst equation:

E_(cell) = E_(cell)^@ - (RT)/(nF) lnQEcell=EcellRTnFlnQ

where:

  • E_(cell)Ecell is the overall cell potential. ""^@ indicates "1 atm"1 atm and 25^@ "C"25C.
  • RR and TT are known from the ideal gas law.
  • nn is the mols of electrons reportedly transferred in the redox reaction.
  • F = "96485 C/mol e"^(-)F=96485 C/mol e is Faraday's constant.

Note that "pH"pH only affects reactions that are done in acidic or basic media, i.e. those that contain significant ["H"^(+)][H+] or ["OH"^(-)][OH] in solution already.

FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF POURBAIX DIAGRAMS

The "pH"pH dependence is of both E_(cell)^@Ecell and E_(cell)Ecell, but again, only if the half-reactions or overall reactions contain "H"^(+)H+ or "OH"^(-)OH directly in them.

This can be seen in Pourbaix diagrams:

https://www.researchgate.net/

These are E_(cell)^@Ecell vs. "pH"pH diagrams.

  • Diagonal lines indicate an E_(cell)^@Ecell that is "pH"pH-dependent.
  • Vertical lines indicate 100%100% "pH"pH dependence.
  • Horizontal lines indicate 0%0% "pH"pH dependence.

As a cursory example, for a given E_(cell)^@Ecell, the "Mn"_3"O"_4//"Mn"("OH")_2Mn3O4/Mn(OH)2 half-reaction equilibrium in basic media is:

"Mn"_3"O"_4(s) + 4"H"_2"O"(l) + 2e^(-) rightleftharpoons 3"Mn"("OH")_2(s) + 2"OH"^(-)(aq)Mn3O4(s)+4H2O(l)+2e3Mn(OH)2(s)+2OH(aq)

It shifts towards "Mn"_3"O"_4Mn3O4 as "pH"pH increases (as we cross the diagonal line horizontally). Or, we could notice that when "pH"pH increases, ["OH"^(-)][OH] increases, promoting an equilibrium shift leftwards in accordance with Le Chatelier's principle. The reaction quotient QQ changes accordingly away from KK, which changes E_(cell)Ecell accordingly.

FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE NERNST EQUATION

Or, using the Nernst equation, we can investigate the "pH"pH dependence of the reaction quotient QQ more thoroughly:

Q = \frac(prod_i^(N_P) [P_i]^(nu_i))(prod_j^(N_R) [R_j]^(nu_j))Q=NPi[Pi]νiNRj[Rj]νj,

where:

  • prod_k^NNk indicates a multiplication of terms 1, 2, . . . , k, . . . , N1,2,...,k,...,N.
  • ii is the index of individual product concentrations [P_i][Pi] being multiplied together.
  • jj is the index of individual reactant concentrations [R_j][Rj] being multiplied together.
  • nu_kνk is the stoichiometric coefficient of the kkth reactant or product. Note that in general, i ne jij, meaning the number of products and reactants may differ.

So, we have the following conditions:

As the "pH"pH decreases, the solution is more acidic, so 10^(-"pH") = ["H"^(+)]10pH=[H+] increases and 10^("pH" - 14) = ["OH"^(-)]10pH14=[OH] decreases.

  • If "H"^(+)H+ is a product, QQ therefore increases, and the nonstandard cell potential decreases.
  • If "H"^(+)H+ is a reactant, QQ therefore decreases, and the nonstandard cell potential increases.
  • If "OH"^(-)OH is a product, QQ therefore decreases, and the nonstandard cell potential increases.
  • If "OH"^(-)OH is a reactant, QQ therefore increases, and the nonstandard cell potential decreases.

This is very situational, so it's not exactly possible to write one single equation for this, unless we make some assumptions.

PLAUSIBLE EQUATION

If the reaction does have an "H"^(+)H+ product or reactant, then... (and this is not in any textbook I know!)

E_(cell) = E_(cell)^@ - (RT)/(nF) ln (Q^"*"cdot["H"^(+)]^(pmnu_("H"^(+))))Ecell=EcellRTnFln(Q*[H+]±νH+)

where:

  • Q^"*"Q* is the "pH"pH-independent reaction quotient with ["H"^(+)][H+] separated out.
  • nu_("H"^(+))νH+ is the stoichiometric coefficient of "H"^(+)H+ in the reaction.
  • In the pm± for nu_("H"^(+))νH+, the (+)(+) indicates "H"^(+)H+ product, while the (-)() indicates "H"^(+)H+ reactant.

We could write ["H"^(+)] = 10^(-"pH")[H+]=10pH to get:

E_(cell) = E_(cell)^@ - (RT)/(nF) ln Q^"*" - (RT)/(nF) ln (["H"^(+)]^(pmnu_("H"^(+))))Ecell=EcellRTnFlnQ*RTnFln([H+]±νH+)

= E_(cell)^@ - (RT)/(nF) ln Q^"*" - (pmnu_("H"^(+))RT)/(nF) ln (10^(-"pH"))=EcellRTnFlnQ*±νH+RTnFln(10pH)

= E_(cell)^@ - (RT)/(nF) ln Q^"*" + "pH" cdot (pmnu_("H"^(+))RT)/(nF) ln 10=EcellRTnFlnQ*+pH±νH+RTnFln10

Rearrange this further to get:

E_(cell) - E_(cell)^@ + (RT)/(nF) ln Q^"*" = "pH" cdot (pmnu_("H"^(+))RT)/(nF) ln 10EcellEcell+RTnFlnQ*=pH±νH+RTnFln10

"pH" = (E_(cell) - E_(cell)^@ + (RT)/(nF) ln Q^"*")/((pmnu_("H"^(+))RT)/(nF) ln 10)pH=EcellEcell+RTnFlnQ*±νH+RTnFln10

= ((nF)/(RT)(E_(cell) - E_(cell)^@) + ln Q^"*")/(pmnu_("H"^(+))ln 10)=nFRT(EcellEcell)+lnQ*±νH+ln10

Since (lnx)/(logx) ~~ 2.303lnxlogx2.303, we can approximate this as:

color(blue)(barul|stackrel(" ")(" ""pH" ~~ ((nF)/(2.303RT)(E_(cell) - E_(cell)^@) + log Q^"*")/(pmnu_("H"^(+)))" ")|)

keeping in mind that Q^"*" neglects the ["H"^(+)] that would have been in the mass action expression, and that whether it was a product or reactant changes the sign of nu_("H"^(+)).