Binding energy, simple metals

Binding energy, simple metals, 355. See also Cohesive energy... 

Further studies were carried out on the Pd/Mo(l 1 0), Pd/Ru(0001), and Cu/Mo(l 10) systems. The shifts in core-level binding energies indicate that adatoms in a monolayer of Cu or Pd are electronically perturbed with respect to surface atoms of Cu(lOO) or Pd(lOO). By comparing these results with those previously presented in the literature for adlayers of Pd or Cu, a simple theory is developed that explains the nature of electron donor-electron acceptor interactions in metal overlayer formation of surface metal-metal bonds leads to a gain in electrons by the element initially having the larger fraction of empty states in its valence band. This behavior indicates that the electro-negativities of the surface atoms are substantially different from those of the bulk [65]. 

Reactions of practical interest involve the breaking or formation of chemical bonds, which require extra energy. The theory of Saveant and its subsequent developments are an ingenious extension of the Marcus-Hush type of theory to the breaking of a simple bond. The binding energy enters into the energy of activation, but the interaction with the metal electrode is still assumed to be weak, i.e., the reactants are not adsorbed. In this sense, the reaction is not catalyzed by the electronic interaction with the metal. 

Electrochemical reactions are driven by the potential difference at the solid liquid interface, which is established by the electrochemical double layer composed, in a simple case, of water and two types of counter ions. Thus, provided the electrochemical interface is preserved upon emersion and transfer, one always has to deal with a complex coadsorption experiment. In contrast to the solid/vacuum interface, where for instance metal adsorption can be studied by evaporating a metal onto the surface, electrochemical metal deposition is always a coadsorption of metal ions, counter ions, and probably water dipols, which together cause the potential difference at the surface. This complex situation has to be taken into account when interpreting XPS data of emersed electrode surfaces in terms of chemical shifts or binding energies. 

---