A post today raised a question about a possible error in the section discussing battery chemistry.

The actual section in question is this:

This flow of electrons into into the lead dioxide (PbO2) electrode, gives it a positive electrical charge. Consequently, lead atoms in the negative electrode give up two electrons each to produce lead Pb(II), which combines with sulfate ions (SO4-2) produced from the disassociation of the hydrogen ions (H+) from the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) to form lead sulfate (PbSO4). The flow of electrons out of the lead electrode gives it a negative electrical charge. These reactions are shown diagrammitically below:[DOE]

Perhaps the first sentence should be:

As a consequence of this flow of electrons into into the lead dioxide (PbO2) electrode, it is called by convention the positive electrode.

And the second sentence would become:

As a consequence of the flow of electrons out of the lead electrode, it is called the negative electrode.

What are your thoughts?

John

 

My head hurts. If electrons flow into an electrode, would it not become negative, as in a surplus of electrons? If electrons flow out of an electrode ditto for positive, as in a deficit?

 

Sure, electron flow into a positive electrode would make it less positive, not negative, and visa verse (ignoring the completed circuit through the electrolyte). Why would electrons flow into a negative electrode? In order to avoid that confusion, I think "by convention" solves the dilemma. John