Is it worth investigating the effect of temperature on EMF in a galvanic cell? I suspect the change will be very very small and maybe impossible to test precisely in a high school lab.
This article said the variation of E with temperature can be find with E(T2)=E(T1)+dE/dT(T2-T1) where dE/dT=R/nF (lnQ) but how is this different to using the Nernst equation?

New contributor
Mr. Mister is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.

1 Answer 1


TL;DR; version:

Testing the EMF dependence on temperature does make sense, because it is not the matter just of the term $\dfrac{RT}{nF} \ln {Q}$. But you cannot use the Nernst equation directly as it does not explicitly enumerate the temperature dependence of standard reduction potentials.

The derivative of $\text{EMF}$ by absolute temperature depends on:

  • the current component thermodynamic activities(concentrations,pressures, fugacities) ($\dfrac{RT}{nF} \ln {Q}$)
  • the reaction entropy ( $\Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}$)
  • the difference of the heat capacity of products and reactants ($\Delta C_p$)

Detailed evaluation:

\begin{align} \text{EMF}(T) &= \Delta E^{\circ}(T) - \frac{RT}{nF} \ln{Q} =\\ &= - \frac{\Delta_\text{r} G^{\circ}(T)}{nF} - \frac{RT}{nF} \ln{Q} =\\ &= - \frac{\Delta_\text{r} G^{\circ}(T) + RT \ln{Q} }{nF}\\ &= - \frac{\Delta_\text{r} H^{\circ}(T) - T \left( \Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}(T) - R \ln{Q}\right) }{nF}\\ &\approx - \frac{\Delta_\text{r} H^{\circ}_{T_1} +\Delta C_p(T - T_1) - T \left( \Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}_{T_1} + \Delta C_p \ln {\frac{T}{T_1}} - R \ln{Q}\right) }{nF} \tag{1} \end{align}

The key influence has the parameter $\Delta C_p$, what is the difference between the total heat capacity of reaction products and reactants. The approximation in the last step assumes constant molar heat capacities of involved components. If such a condition is not met, things would get complicated because of the need of integration of the functions $\int_{T_1}^{T_2}{\Delta C_p(T)\text{d}T}$ and $\int_{T_1}^{T_2}{\dfrac{\Delta C_p (T)}{T}\text{d}T}$

$$\frac{\text{d}(\text{EMF}(T))}{\text{d}T} \approx -\frac 1{nF} \left( \Delta C_p - \left( \Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}_{T_1} + \Delta C_p \ln {\frac{T}{T_1}} - R \ln{Q}\right) - T \left( \frac{\Delta C_p }{ T} \right) \right)= \\ = \frac 1{nF} \left( \Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}_{T_1} + \Delta C_p \ln {\frac{T}{T_1}} - R \ln{Q}\right) \tag{2} \label{2}$$

In the case where $\Delta C_p \approx 0$, the equation gets simplified to:

\begin{align} \text{EMF}(T) = - \frac{\Delta_\text{r} H^{\circ}_{T_1} - T \left( \Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}_{T_1} - R \ln{Q}\right) }{nF} \tag{3} \end{align}

$$\frac{\text{d}(\text{EMF}(T))}{\text{d}T} = \frac 1{nF} \left( \Delta_\text{r} S^{\circ}_{T_1} - R \ln{Q}\right) \tag{4} $$

As the direct conclusion of the equation \eqref{2} comes the TL;DR; answer.

  • $\begingroup$ Would it be valid instead of using the textbook iteration of the Nernst equation I use the quotient of the ionic activity constants instead of the equilibrium constant? I'm thinking of making a linear trend of the theoretical and see the correlation between that and the experimental values. $\endgroup$
    – Mr. Mister
    May 16 at 1:54
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure what you mean. You can go further and replace the standard reaction Gibbs energy by the -RT ln K, but then you may have trouble to express K = f(T). $\endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    May 16 at 3:50
  • $\begingroup$ Remind me: can you use Le Chatelier's principle to predict how EMF changes with temperature? $\endgroup$
    – unstable
    May 16 at 11:21
  • $\begingroup$ It can be, qualitatively. Quantitatively, you can use van't Hoff equation d(ln K)/dT = Delta_r H/(RT^2). $\endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    May 16 at 11:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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