Talk:Butler–Volmer equation

untitled
This equation is wrong in the same points as the German version:

Here doesn't belong any surface area.

Furthermore should be written instead of E0 the equilibrium potential of the electrode (Erev or Eeq)

because overpotential is eta=E-Erev and not E-E0

or if you call E0 the equilibrium potential(as here) this is not right, because E0 is the standard electrode potential of the used Redox couple.
 * It is not wrong to include the surface area, because the current on the left side of the equation must dimensionally agree with the exchange current density (i.e., per surface area) on the right side of the equation. -70.235.196.65 (talk) 16:42, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

This form of the Butler-Volmer equation is somewhat antiquated, most modern texts (Bard and Faulkner- Electrochemical methods 2nd edition) deal with multiple electron transfers in terms of n' (the number of electrons transferred prior to the rate determining step) and \alpha_(rds) (the transfer coefficient for the rate determining electron transfer). This arises due to the fact that electron transfer are almost always assumed to occur consecutively and not are not concerted in nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.119.240 (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

For me, there is one important missing information : The BV equation is a empirical relationship. There are statistical mechanical arguments justifying it. But, as far as I know, no established rigorous derivation so far. Besides, a better definition of the terms used in the section "Derivation" would improve readability. For example, what are exactly S and K in the terms for the variation of ΔG (Blue, red and black curves)? Yes, I´ve seen this development before ... but I think the text still isnt self explicative --22:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)Nhmor (talk)