Standard state data

Standard state ladder data (aqueous)

Here is the data table of relative ViV^\circ_i values for water, as plotted in the Solutions topic. These are converted from Atkins' Physical Chemistry (8th edition, Table 2.7 in the back pages). Note these are all:

  • for ideally dilute ions in water,
  • at 298 K and 1 bar,
  • using a reference ionic concentration of c=1 mol/Lc^\circ = 1~\mathrm{mol/L} (actually for molality b=1 mol/kgb^\circ = 1~\mathrm{mol/kg}, but for pure water these are equivalent)
  • continuing our usual convention that neutral chemical potentials are equal to the Gibbs formation energies (see below for how this works technically).

The third column follows from the second by ViVH+=ΔfGi/(ziF)V^\circ_i - V^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+} = \Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i / (z_i F) (with the reference value ΔfGH+\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+} set to zero; see the derivation below).

Ion ii ΔfGi\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i (kJ/mol) ViVH+V^\circ_i - V^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+} (V)
HSO4\mathrm{HSO_4}^{-} -755.91  +7.8345 
Cr2O72\mathrm{Cr_2O_7}^{2-} -1301.1   +6.742  
HCO3\mathrm{HCO_3}^{-} -586.77  +6.0814 
SO42\mathrm{SO_4}^{2-} -744.53  +3.8583 
CrO42\mathrm{CrO_4}^{2-} -727.75  +3.7713 
PO43\mathrm{PO_4}^{3-} -1018.7   +3.519  
F\mathrm{F}^{-} -278.79  +2.8895 
CO32\mathrm{CO_3}^{2-} -527.81  +2.7352 
OH\mathrm{OH}^{-} -157.24  +1.6297 
Cl\mathrm{Cl}^{-} -131.23  +1.3601 
NO3\mathrm{NO_3}^{-} -108.74  +1.1270 
Br\mathrm{Br}^{-} -103.96  +1.0775 
Hg2+\mathrm{Hg}^{2+} +164.40  +0.8519 
Ag+\mathrm{Ag}^{+} +77.11  +0.7992 
Hg22+\mathrm{Hg_2}^{2+} +153.52  +0.7956 
I\mathrm{I}^{-} -51.57  +0.5345 
Cu+\mathrm{Cu}^{+} +49.98  +0.5180 
Cu2+\mathrm{Cu}^{2+} +65.49  +0.3394 
H+\mathrm{H}^{+} 0.    0.     
Fe3+\mathrm{Fe}^{3+} -4.7   -0.016  
HS\mathrm{HS}^{-} +12.08  -0.1252 
Pb2+\mathrm{Pb}^{2+} -24.43  -0.1266 
Sn2+\mathrm{Sn}^{2+} -27.2   -0.141  
Cd2+\mathrm{Cd}^{2+} -77.612 -0.40220
Fe2+\mathrm{Fe}^{2+} -78.90  -0.4089 
S2\mathrm{S}^{2-} +85.8   -0.445  
Zn2+\mathrm{Zn}^{2+} -147.06  -0.7621 
NH4+\mathrm{NH_4}^{+} -79.31  -0.8220 
Al3+\mathrm{Al}^{3+} -485.    -1.68   
CN\mathrm{CN}^{-} +172.4   -1.787  
Mg2+\mathrm{Mg}^{2+} -454.8   -2.357  
Na+\mathrm{Na}^{+} -261.91  -2.7145 
Ca2+\mathrm{Ca}^{2+} -553.58  -2.8687 
Ba2+\mathrm{Ba}^{2+} -560.77  -2.9060 
K+\mathrm{K}^{+} -283.27  -2.9359 
Cs+\mathrm{Cs}^{+} -292.02  -3.0266 
Li+\mathrm{Li}^{+} -293.31  -3.0399 

Some readers will notice that many of these entries coincide with standard electrode potentials, and that is for good reason! For elemental metals (with μM=0\mu_{\mathrm{M}}=0 under our convention) in equilibrium with an ideal-dilute cc^\circ concentration of their ion Mn+\mathrm{M}^{n+}, we do expect E=VMn+VH+E = V^\circ_{\mathrm{M}^{n+}} - V^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+}.

Here is the plot again; note that a few of these values were omitted from the plot due to overlapping too tightly or being too extreme.

HSO4\mathrm{HSO_4}^{-}Cr2O72\mathrm{Cr_2O_7}^{2-}HCO3\mathrm{HCO_3}^{-}SO42\mathrm{SO_4}^{2-}CrO42\mathrm{CrO_4}^{2-}PO43\mathrm{PO_4}^{3-}F\mathrm{F}^{-}CO32\mathrm{CO_3}^{2-}OH\mathrm{OH}^{-}Cl\mathrm{Cl}^{-}NO3\mathrm{NO_3}^{-}Br\mathrm{Br}^{-}Ag+\mathrm{Ag}^{+}I\mathrm{I}^{-}Cu+\mathrm{Cu}^{+}Cu2+\mathrm{Cu}^{2+}H+\mathrm{H}^{+}HS\mathrm{HS}^{-}Sn2+\mathrm{Sn}^{2+}Fe2+\mathrm{Fe}^{2+}S2\mathrm{S}^{2-}Zn2+\mathrm{Zn}^{2+}NH4+\mathrm{NH_4}^{+}Al3+\mathrm{Al}^{3+}CN\mathrm{CN}^{-}Mg2+\mathrm{Mg}^{2+}Na+\mathrm{Na}^{+}Ca2+\mathrm{Ca}^{2+}K+\mathrm{K}^{+}Li+\mathrm{Li}^{+}−3−2−10123Standard species voltage ViV^\circ_i (V) - arbitrary offset

A subtle technicality with a happy ending

Chemical tables like Atkins' commonly list standard Gibbs energy of formation, ΔfGi\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i, for ionic solutes in water. But what do these values actually mean? We want to continue our usual convention that chemical potentials equal the molar Gibbs energy of formation but we have to be careful here.

This chemical data is only for bulk homogeneous solutions, which requires charge neutrality. So suppose we add ionic species ii and jj in charge-neutral amounts, that means we add 1 mole of ii and zi/zj-z_i/z_j moles of jj, and the standard state of this neutral combination is:

ΔfGi with j=ΔfGizizjΔfGj.\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_{\text{$i$ with $j$}} = \Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i - \frac{z_i}{z_j}\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_j.

This seems so complex but it reflects the reality that we can't measure the standard state of H+\mathrm{H}^+ alone. Rather we experimentally measure, say, the standard state of aqueous HCl\mathrm{HCl} that dissociates into H+\mathrm{H}^+ and Cl\mathrm{Cl}^-, and all we really learn is that ΔfGH+ with Cl=131.23 kJ/mol\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+\text{ with }\mathrm{Cl}^-} = -131.23~\mathrm{kJ/mol}.

Note that all of these equations leave one degree of freedom unsatisfied. Accordingly, the table makers freely choose ΔfGH+=0\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+} = 0. In fact we even assert this to be 0 at all temperatures, so the formation entropy of H+\mathrm{H}^+ is zero, and the formation entropy for some other ions is negative!

Now, we assert our convention that charge-neutral chemical potentials are equal to Gibbs formation energies, but we only apply it to that charge-neutral measurable difference:

μi with j=ΔfGi with j,\mu^\circ_{\text{$i$ with $j$}} = \Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_{\text{$i$ with $j$}} ,

so,

μint,izizjμint,j=ΔfGizizjΔfGj.\mu^\circ_{\mathrm{int},i} - \frac{z_i}{z_j}\mu^\circ_{\mathrm{int},j} = \Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i - \frac{z_i}{z_j}\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_j .

And finally, we can bring in ViV^\circ_i, using μint,i=ziF(Viϕ)\mu^\circ_{\mathrm{int},i} = z_i F (V^\circ_i - \phi) and μint,j=zjF(Vjϕ)\mu^\circ_{\mathrm{int},j} = z_j F (V^\circ_j - \phi), divide both sides by ziFz_i F, and we have a beautiful result:

ViVj=ΔfGiziFΔfGjzjF.V^\circ_i - V^\circ_j = \frac{\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i}{z_i F} - \frac{\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_j}{z_j F}.

So, we can trivially re-tabulate all the ΔfGi\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i values into a ViV^\circ_i-differences table.

And, to clarify, this means we have the following relationship:

μint,i=ΔfGi+ziFξ,\mu^\circ_{\mathrm{int},i} = \Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_i + z_i F \xi,

for some value of ξ\xi that we simply do not know, nor do we need to know it in order to get our ViV^\circ_i's. The value of ξ\xi depends on solvent, temperature, and pressure, and especially it depends on how we defined ϕ\phi, and this broad freedom is what lets chemists keep ΔfGH+=0\Delta_{\mathrm{f}} G^\circ_{\mathrm{H}^+} = 0 for all situations.

NEXT TOPIC: Traditional electrochemistry, translated