For example, consider:

$$\ce{NH3 + H2O -> NH4+ + OH-}$$

Here, the $\ce{NH3}$ is acting as a base (By Lewis theory, it is an electron pair donor).

Why don't we consider this to be a redox (there is a transfer of electrons taking place as $\ce{NH3}$ is acting as an electron donor and $\ce{H2O}$ as an electron acceptor)?

I'm aware that calculation of oxidation states is the best way to figure out if a reaction is redox or not. Then I would like to ask: why exactly do we assign oxidation states according to those rules? Is there an intuitive way to explain why a certain reaction is acid-base and not redox?


In contrary to acid-base reactions(1), a redox reaction is such a reaction, which can be formally divided into two half-reactions. At least one reactant in such a half-reaction explicitly formally acts as a donor or acceptor of one or more electrons.

$$\ce{Cl2(aq) + 2 Fe^2+(aq) -> 2 Cl-(aq) + 2 Fe^3+(aq)}$$

can be formally divided to:

$$\ce{Cl2(aq) + 2 e- -> 2 Cl-(aq)}$$

$$\ce{2 Fe^2+(aq) -> 2 e- + 2 Fe^3+(aq)}$$

In the example, there was no electron transfer between $\ce{NH3}$ and $\ce{H2O}$.

Oxidation states are nothing more but valence electron inventory with defined formal rules of electron distribution. Their sum does not change during a reaction, due the charge conservation law.

(1) A very generalized Usanovich theory of acids and basis does consider redox reactions as a special case of acid-base reactions. But this theory is not much known nor applied within chemistry community.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.