Q.The E∘(M2+/M) value for copper is positive (+0.34V). What is possible reason for this? (Hint: consider its high ΔaH∘ and low ΔhydH∘)
🔒You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.
🔒 Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →Concept understanding — Standard Reduction Potential
Cell Representation and the Nernst Equation: From Intuition to Precision
Imagine you have a Daniell cell — a zinc rod in zinc sulphate solution connected by a salt bridge to a copper rod in copper sulphate solution. You know it produces a voltage. But what happens if you dilute the copper sulphate solution? Or if you change the temperature? The voltage changes. The Nernst equation is the tool that tells you exactly how much it changes.
The Intuition First
A battery works because the two half-cells "want" to react — zinc wants to lose electrons, copper ions want to gain them. This "want" is measured as a tendency, or potential. But the strength of that tendency depends on how crowded the ions are.
Think of it like this: If you have a room full of people who all want to leave (like zinc ions wanting to form), the push to get out is stronger when the room is packed. If the room is nearly empty, the push is weaker. Similarly, for copper ions wanting to enter the metal (gain electrons), the pull is stronger when there are many copper ions around, and weaker when there are few.
The Nernst equation quantifies this: the actual cell potential depends on the concentrations (or activities) of the ions involved.
The Precise Statement
For a general cell reaction:
aA+bB→cC+dD
The cell potential E under non-standard conditions is given by:
E=E∘−nFRTlnQ
Where:
- E = cell potential under the given conditions (in volts)
- E∘ = standard cell potential (when all reactants/products are at 1 M, 1 atm, 25°C)
- R = universal gas constant (8.314 J/mol·K)
- T = temperature in Kelvin
- n = number of moles of electrons transferred in the balanced half-reactions
- F = Faraday constant (96,485 C/mol)
- Q = reaction quotient = [A]a[B]b[C]c[D]d (using concentrations for dilute solutions)
At 25°C (298 K), the equation simplifies to a very practical form:
E=E∘−n0.0591log10Q
The 0.0591 comes from F2.303RT at 298 K. Notice it uses log10 (common log), not natural log.
Cell Representation: How We Write It
In electrochemistry, we represent a cell with a shorthand notation. For the Daniell cell:
Zn(s)∣Zn2+(aq)∥Cu2+(aq)∣Cu(s)
The single vertical line ∣ represents a phase boundary (solid electrode | solution). The double line ∥ represents the salt bridge.
The anode (oxidation) is written on the left, the cathode (reduction) on the right. Electrons flow from left to right in the external circuit.
Applying the Nernst Equation to a Cell Representation
For the Daniell cell, the half-reactions are:
- Anode (oxidation): Zn(s)→Zn2+(aq)+2e−
- Cathode (reduction): Cu2+(aq)+2e−→Cu(s)
Overall: Zn(s)+Cu2+(aq)→Zn2+(aq)+Cu(s)
Here n=2 (two electrons transferred). The reaction quotient is:
Q=[Cu2+][Zn2+]
So the Nernst equation becomes:
E=E∘−20.0591log10[Cu2+][Zn2+]
Solids (Zn, Cu) do not appear in Q because their concentrations are constant (activity = 1).
A Worked Example
Suppose you have a Daniell cell where [Zn2+]=0.1 M and [Cu2+]=1.0 M at 25°C. E∘ for the cell is 1.10 V. …
Why this formula?
Standard Reduction Potential: Why the Formula Holds
Let's build this from first principles — understanding why before memorising what.
1. The Core Idea: A Half-Cell's "Tendency to Gain Electrons"
A standard reduction potential (E∘) measures how strongly a species wants to gain electrons (be reduced) under standard conditions (1 M concentration, 1 atm pressure, 25°C).
But why can't we measure this directly? Because every reduction must be paired with an oxidation — you can't have electrons flowing without a complete circuit.
2. The Formula: Ecell∘=Ecathode∘−Eanode∘
Why subtraction, not addition?
Consider a Daniell cell:
- Zn | Zn²⁺ (1 M) || Cu²⁺ (1 M) | Cu
Experimentally, we measure the cell potential as +1.10 V.
Now, we define the standard hydrogen electrode (SHE) as exactly 0.00 V:
2H++2e−→H2E∘=0.00 V
The reasoning step-by-step:
- We can only measure differences — like measuring height difference between two points.
- If we connect the SHE to the copper half-cell, we measure +0.34 V (Cu²⁺ is reduced).
- If we connect the SHE to the zinc half-cell, we measure −0.76 V (Zn²⁺ is reduced less readily than H⁺).
Now, the cell potential is the difference in their tendencies:
Ecell∘=ECu∘−EZn∘=(+0.34)−(−0.76)=+1.10 V
Key insight: The formula uses subtraction because we're comparing two half-cells against the same reference (SHE). The cathode is where reduction happens (higher E∘), the anode is where oxidation happens (lower E∘).
3. The Nernst Equation: Why E=E∘−nFRTlnQ
This is the thermodynamic derivation — the real "why."
From Gibbs free energy:
ΔG=ΔG∘+RTlnQ
For an electrochemical cell:
ΔG=−nFEandΔG∘=−nFE∘
Substituting:
−nFE=−nFE∘+RTlnQ
Rearranging:
E=E∘−nFRTlnQ
Why this makes physical sense:
- RTlnQ represents the entropy penalty of non-standard concentrations
- nF converts charge to energy (Faraday's constant × number of electrons)
- The minus sign means: as products accumulate (Q increases), the cell potential drops — the reaction is approaching equilibrium
At equilibrium (Q=K), E=0 — the battery is "dead."
--- …
The key idea is that the standard reduction potential E∘ reflects the net energy change of the overall process: sublimation, ionization, and hydration. For copper, the unusually high enthalpy of atomization (ΔaH∘) and relatively low hydration enthalpy (ΔhydH∘) make the overall conversion of M(s) to M2+(aq) less favourable than for other metals.
Reasoning:
- The reduction potential E∘(M2+/M) is linked to the Gibbs energy change for M2+(aq)+2e−→M(s). A more positive E∘ means the reverse (oxidation) is less spontaneous.
- For copper, the high ΔaH∘ (strong metallic bonding) means a lot of energy is needed to break the metal lattice into gaseous atoms. …
The positive standard reduction potential of copper (E∘=+0.34 V) arises because its high atomisation enthalpy (strong metallic bonding) and low hydration enthalpy (weak ion–water interaction) make the overall reduction M2++2e−→M energetically favourable compared to the standard hydrogen electrode.
The standard reduction potential E∘ for a metal ion M2+ is a measure of how easily the ion gains electrons to become the metal. A positive value means the reduction is spontaneous relative to the H+/H2 couple. But why is copper’s value positive, while many other metals (like zinc, iron) have negative values?
The answer lies in the energy changes that occur when a solid metal is converted to its aqueous ions — and then back again. The key is to think of the reduction process in reverse: the oxidation of the metal to its ions.
The Born–Haber cycle for a metal electrode
For the half‑reaction
M(s)→M2+(aq)+2e−
the overall enthalpy change can be broken into three steps:
- Atomisation — converting the solid metal into gaseous atoms:
M(s)→M(g)ΔH=ΔaH∘
- Ionisation — removing two electrons from the gaseous atom:
M(g)→M2+(g)+2e−ΔH=IE1+IE2
- Hydration — dissolving the gaseous ion in water:
M2+(g)→M2+(aq)ΔH=ΔhydH∘
The total enthalpy change for the oxidation is
ΔHox=ΔaH∘+(IE1+IE2)+ΔhydH∘
The reduction potential is related to the reverse of this process. A more positive E∘ means the reduction M2+(aq)+2e−→M(s) is more favourable — which corresponds to a less favourable oxidation (i.e., a larger positive ΔHox).
Why copper stands out
For most transition metals, ΔaH∘ is moderate and ΔhydH∘ is highly negative (strong ion–water attraction), making ΔHox negative overall — so oxidation is easy, and E∘ is negative.
Copper is different:
- High ΔaH∘ — Copper has strong metallic bonding (due to its filled d10 configuration and efficient packing), so it takes a lot of energy to break the metal into atoms.
- Comparatively low ΔhydH∘ — the energy released when Cu2+ is hydrated, though substantial, is not large enough to pay back copper's unusually high atomisation-plus-ionisation cost. This is exactly the balance the question's own hint points to: high ΔaH∘, low ΔhydH∘.
These two factors together make ΔHox less negative (or even positive) for copper. That means the oxidation Cu(s)→Cu2+(aq)+2e− is less spontaneous — and conversely, the reduction Cu2+(aq)+2e−→Cu(s) is more spontaneous, giving a positive E∘.
E∘(M2+/M)∝−[ΔaH∘+(IE1+IE2)+ΔhydH∘]
A high ΔaH∘ and a low (less negative) ΔhydH∘ both push E∘ in the positive direction.
Step‑by‑step reasoning
-
Recall the definition — E∘ measures the tendency of M2+(aq) to gain electrons. A positive value means the reduction is favoured over the H+/H2 couple.
-
Break the reduction into its reverse (oxidation) — The easier it is to oxidise M(s) to M2+(aq), the less positive (more negative) E∘ will be. …
Method: Born–Haber Cycle Reasoning for Standard Reduction Potential
This method uses the thermodynamic cycle approach to explain why a metal’s reduction potential is positive or negative by breaking the overall process into enthalpy steps.
Steps
- Write the half-reaction For copper:
M2+(aq)+2e−→M(s)
- Reverse the process to think in terms of formation of the ion Consider the reverse (oxidation):
M(s)→M2+(aq)+2e−
- Break the oxidation into two conceptual steps
- Step A: Convert solid metal to gaseous metal ions (atomization + ionization)
M(s)ΔaH∘M(g)IE1+IE2M2+(g)
Here $\Delta_a H^\circ$ is the **atomization enthalpy** (energy to separate solid into gaseous atoms).
- Step B: Hydrate the gaseous ions
M2+(g)ΔhydH∘M2+(aq)
$\Delta_{hyd} H^\circ$ is the **hydration enthalpy** (energy released when ions are surrounded by water).
4. Relate to E∘
The overall enthalpy change for oxidation is:
ΔHox∘=ΔaH∘+(IE1+IE2)+ΔhydH∘
A more positive E∘ (easier reduction) means the reverse reaction (reduction) is more spontaneous — i.e., the oxidation is less favourable (more endothermic).
- Apply to copper
- Copper has a high ΔaH∘ (strong metallic bonding, high melting point). …
Here is a breakdown of the common mistakes students make when answering this question, along with the correct conceptual approach.
The Core Concept (The "Why")
The question asks why Copper has a positive E∘ value. A positive value means Cu2+ ions have a low tendency to get reduced (gain electrons) compared to the standard hydrogen electrode.
The hint points to two key energy terms:
- High ΔaH∘ (Atomisation Enthalpy): This is the energy needed to turn solid Copper into gaseous atoms. Copper has a high value because of strong metallic bonding.
- Low ΔhydH∘ (Hydration Enthalpy): This is the energy released when gaseous Cu2+ ions are surrounded by water. For copper this release, though substantial, is not large enough to compensate the unusually high atomisation-plus-ionisation input — which is the sense in which the hint calls it "low".
The "Why" in one line: The overall energy change for the process Cu(s)→Cu2+(aq)+2e− is less favourable (less exothermic or more endothermic) than for other metals, making the reverse reaction (reduction) comparatively favourable, hence the positive E∘.
Common Mistakes & How to Avoid Them
Mistake 1: Confusing "Positive E∘" with "Easily Reduced"
- The Error: Students think a positive E∘ means the metal is easily reduced. They then say "Copper is easily reduced, so it has a high tendency to gain electrons."
- Why it's wrong: A positive E∘ means the reduction is less spontaneous compared to the standard hydrogen electrode. It means the metal ion is a weak oxidising agent.
- How to Avoid: Always remember the Electrochemical Series.
- More positive E∘ = Stronger oxidising agent (easier to reduce the ion, harder to oxidise the metal). Example: F2 (+2.87V).
- More negative E∘ = Stronger reducing agent (easier to oxidise the metal, harder to reduce the ion). Example: Li (-3.04V).
- Copper (+0.34V) is a weak reducing agent (hard to oxidise) and a weak oxidising agent (hard to reduce). The positive value tells you the metal is noble (resists oxidation).
Mistake 2: Ignoring the Hint & Using the Wrong Energy Terms
- The Error: Students try to explain the positive E∘ using only Ionisation Enthalpy (ΔiH) or Electron Gain Enthalpy (ΔegH). They say "Copper has high ionisation enthalpy, so it's hard to remove electrons, hence positive E∘."
- Why it's wrong: While ionisation enthalpy is part of the story, the hint specifically asks you to consider Atomisation and Hydration. The overall energy for M(s)→M2+(aq) is:
ΔHtotal=ΔaH∘+ΔiH∘+ΔhydH∘
For Copper, the **high $\Delta_a H^\circ$** (strong metallic bonds) and **low $\Delta_{hyd} H^\circ$** (less energy released on hydration) make the overall process **less exothermic** (or more endothermic) than for other metals. This makes the reverse reduction reaction less spontaneous, giving a positive $E^\circ$.
- How to Avoid: When a question gives a hint, use it. Write down the three-step Born-Haber cycle for the formation of aqueous ions:
- M(s)ΔaH∘M(g)
- M(g)ΔiH∘M2+(g)+2e−
- M2+(g)ΔhydH∘M2+(aq) Then explain how the high ΔaH∘ and low ΔhydH∘ for Copper make the overall process unfavourable.
Mistake 3: Misreading the Hint's "Low ΔhydH∘" as a Comparison Across Elements
- The Error: Students write "Copper's hydration enthalpy is smaller (less negative) than that of other M2+ ions like Zn2+", treating the hint's 'low' as an element-by-element comparison.
- Why it's wrong: Table 4.4 gives ΔhydH∘(Cu2+)=−2121 kJ mol−1 — actually more negative than Zn2+ (−2059) and among the most negative of the whole series. The hint's 'low' means not large enough: the energy released on hydration does not pay back copper's unusually high atomisation + ionisation input.
- How to Avoid: Be precise with the energy bookkeeping.
- Hydration is the only energy-releasing step in Cu(s)→Cu2+(aq); atomisation and ionisation both cost energy.
- For most 3d metals the hydration release outweighs a modest input, so their E∘ is negative.
- For copper, the input (high ΔaH∘ plus the very high ΔiH1+ΔiH2) exceeds the hydration payback, so oxidation is unfavourable and E∘ is positive.
Mistake 4: Forgetting the Standard Hydrogen Electrode (SHE)
- The Error: Students explain the positive value in isolation, without comparing it to the SHE. …
- TG EAPCET 2024Set eng-2024-05-11-FN1 markMCQQ.Copper matte is a mixture of (A) Oxides of Cu and Fe (B) Carbonates of Cu and Fe (C) Sulphides of Cu and Fe (D) Silicates of Cu and Fe
›Reveal solutionSolution
Copper matte is the intermediate product in copper smelting, consisting mainly of copper and iron sulphides, so the correct answer is (C).
The key concept here is the pyrometallurgical extraction of copper. In the smelting of copper ores (typically chalcopyrite, CuFeS2), the ore is first concentrated by froth flotation, then roasted and smelted in a furnace. The purpose of smelting is to separate the desired metal values from unwanted gangue (rock). The molten product that separates from the slag is called matte.
Why sulphides?
Copper and iron have a strong affinity for sulphur. During smelting, the oxides of these metals (if present) react with remaining sulphur or with added sulphide minerals to form a liquid sulphide phase. This molten sulphide mixture is immiscible with the lighter slag (which contains silicates and oxides). The matte layer sinks to the bottom and is tapped off for further processing (converting to blister copper).
Step-by-step reasoning:
-
Identify the process context: The question is about "copper matte," which is a specific term from the metallurgy of copper. It is not the final pure copper, but an intermediate product.
-
Recall the composition of typical copper ores: The most common copper ore is chalcopyrite (CuFeS2). It contains copper, iron, and sulphur. Other ores like bornite (Cu5FeS4) also contain these three elements.
-
Understand the smelting reaction: When the concentrated ore is smelted with silica (flux) at high temperature, the iron oxide reacts with silica to form slag (iron silicate), while the copper(I) sulphide and remaining iron(II) sulphide form a separate liquid layer — the matte. The overall reaction can be simplified as:
CuFeS2+O2+SiO2→Cu2S⋅FeS (matte)+FeSiO3 (slag)+SO2
The matte is essentially a solution of Cu2S and FeS.
- Eliminate other options:
- (A) Oxides of Cu and Fe: Oxides are not the main components of matte; they are either reduced or slagged off. Copper oxide would be reduced by sulphide or by added coke. …
-
- TG EAPCET 2022Set ap-2022-07-30-FN1 markMCQQ.A substance which loses its water of crystallisation [ex: CuSOX4⋅2HX2O] on exposure to the atmosphere is called (A) hygroscopic (B) deliquescent (C) efflorescent (D) isomorphous
›Reveal solutionSolution
The key idea is that a substance that spontaneously loses its water of crystallisation when exposed to air is called efflorescent. The correct answer is (C).
Concept & Intuition
This question tests your understanding of three common terms describing how solids interact with atmospheric moisture.
- Hygroscopic substances absorb moisture from the air but do not necessarily change their physical state (e.g., silica gel).
- Deliquescent substances absorb so much moisture that they dissolve in it, forming a solution (e.g., calcium chloride).
- Efflorescent substances do the opposite: they lose their own water of crystallisation to the air, often crumbling or becoming powdery (e.g., washing soda, NaX2COX3⋅10HX2O).
- Isomorphous refers to substances that have the same crystal structure, not a moisture-related property.
The question explicitly says “loses its water of crystallisation on exposure to the atmosphere” — that is the textbook definition of efflorescence.
Step-by-step reasoning
-
Identify the process described
The substance is losing water that is chemically bound in its crystal structure (water of crystallisation) simply by being in open air. This is a spontaneous dehydration driven by a lower vapour pressure of the hydrated crystal compared to the surrounding air.
-
Match the process to the correct term
- Efflorescence is exactly this: hydrated salts that give up water to the atmosphere.
- Hygroscopy involves gaining water from air, not losing it.
- Deliquescence is an extreme form of hygroscopy where the substance becomes wet and dissolves.
- Isomorphism is unrelated to water loss.
-
Eliminate the other options
- (A) Hygroscopic: Incorrect — these absorb moisture. …
- TG EAPCET 2021Set ap-2021-08-10-AN1 markMCQQ.Lyophilic sols are more stable than lyophobic sols, because (A) The colloidal particles are not solvated (B) There is a strong electrostatic interaction between the colloidal particles (C) The colloidal particles have no change (D) The Brownian movement
›Reveal solutionSolution
Lyophilic sols are more stable than lyophobic sols primarily because their particles are heavily solvated (surrounded by a solvent layer), which prevents coagulation — the correct option is (B) is not correct; the actual reason is solvation, so the answer is (A) is false, (C) is false, (D) is irrelevant; the key is that lyophilic particles are solvated, giving them stability.
Concept & Intuition
Colloidal stability is about keeping particles from clumping together (coagulating). Lyophilic (“solvent-loving”) sols, like gelatin or starch in water, have particles that strongly attract the solvent molecules. This creates a thick, tightly bound solvent layer around each particle — a “solvation shell.” This shell physically prevents particles from getting close enough to stick. In contrast, lyophobic (“solvent-hating”) sols, like gold or silver in water, lack this shell; their stability depends mainly on electrostatic repulsion from surface charges, which is easier to disrupt (e.g., by adding salt). So the primary reason lyophilic sols are more stable is solvation, not electrostatic interactions or Brownian motion.
Step-by-step reasoning
-
Understand the terms
- Lyophilic: particles have a strong affinity for the dispersion medium (e.g., water). They are often macromolecules or highly hydrated.
- Lyophobic: particles have little affinity for the medium; they are typically inorganic or metallic.
-
Identify the key stabilizing factor
For lyophilic sols, the dominant stabilizing force is solvation — the solvent molecules form a protective layer around each particle. This layer is often several molecules thick and acts as a physical barrier, preventing particle-particle contact even if electrostatic repulsion is weak.
-
Evaluate each option
- (A) “The colloidal particles are not solvated” — This is false. Lyophilic particles are solvated; that’s exactly why they’re stable. So (A) is incorrect.
- (B) “There is a strong electrostatic interaction between the colloidal particles” — Electrostatic repulsion can help, but it’s not the main reason for lyophilic stability. In fact, lyophilic sols often have little or no charge; their stability comes from solvation. So (B) is not the best answer.
- (C) “The colloidal particles have no charge” — Many lyophilic sols are uncharged (e.g., starch), but that doesn’t make them stable; it’s the solvation that matters. Also, some lyophilic sols do carry charge. So (C) is misleading and incorrect.
- (D) “The Brownian movement” — Brownian motion keeps particles suspended but doesn’t explain relative stability between lyophilic and lyophobic sols. Both types exhibit Brownian motion. So (D) is irrelevant.
-
Conclude the correct reasoning …
-
- TG EAPCET 2021Set ap-2021-08-10-FN1 markMCQQ.Lyophilic sols are more stable than lyophobic sols, because (A) The colloidal particles are not solvated (B) There is a strong electrostatic interaction between the colloidal particles (C) The colloidal particles have no change (D) The Brownian movement
›Reveal solutionSolution
Lyophilic sols are more stable than lyophobic sols primarily because their particles are strongly solvated (coated with a solvent layer), which prevents coagulation — the correct option is (B) is not correct; the actual reason is solvation, so the answer is not among the given choices as stated, but the closest intended answer is (B) if interpreted as "strong interaction" meaning solvation, though the question's options are flawed. The standard answer is (B) in many textbooks, but we must explain carefully.
Watch outMany students pick (A) because they misread "not solvated" — but lyophilic sols are solvated, so (A) is false. Option (C) is also false because lyophilic particles often carry charge. Option (D) is a general property of all colloids, not a distinguishing factor.
Concept and Intuition
The stability of a colloidal solution depends on how well the particles resist coming together (coagulating). Lyophilic ("solvent-loving") sols, like gelatin or starch in water, have particles that are strongly solvated — each particle is surrounded by a thick shell of solvent molecules. This solvation layer acts like a cushion, physically preventing particles from sticking even when they collide. In contrast, lyophobic ("solvent-hating") sols, like gold or silver in water, lack this protective layer; their stability relies mainly on electrostatic repulsion from surface charges, which is more easily disrupted by adding electrolytes.
Thus, the key reason lyophilic sols are more stable is solvation, not electrostatic repulsion or Brownian motion.
Step-by-Step Reasoning
-
Understand the terms
- Lyophilic: particles have a strong affinity for the solvent (e.g., water-loving).
- Lyophobic: particles have little or no affinity for the solvent. In water, lyophilic sols are called hydrophilic, lyophobic are hydrophobic.
-
Identify the main stabilizing factor for each
- Lyophilic sols: stability comes from solvation — solvent molecules form a tightly bound layer around each particle. This layer is often many molecules thick and is thermodynamically favorable.
- Lyophobic sols: stability comes from electrostatic repulsion — particles carry like charges, and the repulsive force prevents aggregation. This is more fragile; adding salt neutralizes charges and causes coagulation.
-
Evaluate each option
- (A) "The colloidal particles are not solvated" — This is false for lyophilic sols; they are solvated. So (A) is incorrect. …
-
🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days
- ✓Full step-by-step solutions
- ✓Concept-first explanations
- ✓Methods, shortcuts & mistakes
- ✓PYQ mapping + timed mock tests
Full access for 14 days. No credit card required.