Response to the Comment on "Work Function Changes of Polarized Electrodes on Solid Electrolytes" [J. Electrochem. Soc., 152, E138 (2005)]

Abstract

In his comment on our paper [J. Electrochem. Soc., 152, E138 (2005)], Metcalfe raised the question of how to deal with the electrostatic interaction of ions spilled over a metal surface from a solid electrolyte. In this answer we demonstrate that the suggestion of Metcalfe to add an excess term to the chemical potential µ leads to an inconsistency when Coulombic fields of adsorbed ions and counter charges have already been considered in a local electrostatic potential . An additional term in µ would thus correspond to a double counting of the same electrostatic interactions and has to be avoided.