aq lecture

Upload: iconchandra

Post on 10-Apr-2018

221 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    1/59

    THERMODYNAMICS OF AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTES:

    IMPLICATIONS TO SOLUBILITY OF METALS IN HYDROTHERMAL

    FLUID

    Lecture Note

    M. K. PANIGRAHI

    Department of Geology & Geophysics

    I.I.T., Kharagpur

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    2/59

    WB 721302

    Email: [email protected]

    2

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    3/59

    Introduction

    Fluid-rock interaction is widespread at the lithosphere-hydrosphere interface - on the surface and ocean floor, sometimes penetrating to quite

    deeper regions of the crust. There is hardly a rock that we encounter on the earth's surface, that has not interacted with a fluid at some point of time

    in its evolution. The constructive and modificative role of fluids in the earth's crust can hardly be overstated. Here, we consider the fluid that

    mostly is a water-rich liquid, in the one or two-phase and subcritical or supercritical state and is charged with simple as well as complex and

    charged (ions) and neutral species (Fig.1). Rainwater, river water, surface stagnant water (lakes), ground water, hot spring water and of course, sea

    water - all fall into this category, characterized by appreciably higher electrical conductivity over that of pure water and appreciably higher total

    dissolved solids (TDS). That the hydrosphere runs quite deep is evident from the fluid induced melting and magmatism observed in the

    subduction-zone settings and from the hydrothermal activities observed on the ocean

    ridges and their continental analogues. The tufa, travertine andsinters deposited on

    the mouths of hot springs and fumaroles, deposition of evaporites from present day

    and ancient sea water, black/white smokers and sulfide chimneys on several

    locations on the ocean ridge crests, widespread regional scale deuteric alterations in

    granitic plutons, metasomatism of different kind associated with acid intrusives and

    skarns in such environments, extensive quartz veining in rocks of all possible

    geologic settings and ages sometimes richly mineralized with base and preciousmetals, zoned alteration pattern with distinctive mineralogy around such veins and

    mineralized bodies of rocks - are phenomena resulting from activities of such fluids

    3

    Fig.1 Phase relationship (schematic) in the H2O (+salt) system

    showing the boiling curves of pure and salt (NaCl) charged water

    and the critical curve. The supercritical region marked by dotted

    lines (V) has so far not been understood properly.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    4/59

    and their interaction with rocks. The naturally occurring aqueous solutions are thus diverse and one could possibly say that they are as diverse as

    the rock types and geological settings in the crust.

    The foregoing paragraph is enough indication to the importance of the study of aqueous solutions - in fact it is an integral part of geochemistry. It

    is just not only for the understanding of the array of phenomena just mentioned, but also for their precise quantification that one needs to have

    some insight of the fundamentals of the thermodynamics of aqueous solutions. A detailed treatment of the theory of aqueous electrolytes aspropounded by chemists is beyond the scope of this discussion. However, some fundamental principles based upon solutes and solvent relevant to

    geochemistry will be touched upon. The literature on aqueous electrolytes and the methodologies of their treatment is quite vast. Extensive

    reviews of the properties of aqueous solutions of a wide spectrum of electrolytes of geochemical relevance, retrieval of standard state

    thermodynamic parameters and their extrapolation to higher pressure and temperatures and formulations on activity coefficients in wide

    concentration ranges have been done by Helgeson and his coworkers over the last three decades (see Helgeson, Kirkham and Flowers, 1981;

    Tanger and Helgeson, 1988; Shock and Helgeson, 1988 and Shock et al., 1989 are some of the important contributions in this regard) and work on

    this line is still in progress with shifting of attention to organic species. We shall mostly confine ourselves to fundamental concepts covered in

    standard texts (Nordstorm and Munoz(1985), Richardson and McSwain(1990) and Langmuir (1997)) and touch upon more advanced stuff through

    example calculations.

    Though the present discussion is relevant to hydrothermal environments (metal transport, deposition, alteration and mass-transfer) involving fluids

    (of diverse origin) in the broad temperature range of 50 - 5000 C (max up to 5 kb of pressure), the formalism described here also would be useful

    to the study of surface and near surface conditions that have tremendous implications to the study of environmental problems. In this discussion

    we shall also restrict ourselves to only the inorganic electrolyte species in aqueous solutions and base our discussion entirely on equilibrium

    thermodynamics. Irreversible processes of water-rock interaction can also be studied under local and partial equilibrium situations with a bit of

    additional information..

    4

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    5/59

    As has been pointed out by Nordstorm and Munoz(1985), electrolyte theory contrasts with principles of thermodynamics in two ways - it is theory

    and it is microscopic. It involved mathematical derivation of thermodynamic functions from basic assumptions about the microscopic behavior of

    charged particles. However, the theory has not proceeded enough to formulate a single framework that is adequate for all species under all

    conditions. Therefore, empiricism is the rule rather than exception in treatment of aqueous electrolytes as will be discussed later.

    The Problem:

    Primarily our job is to quantify the process of mineral/rock - fluid interaction - may it be precipitation of minerals/salts from a complex brine like

    the seawater or alteration of a mass of rock by a hydrothermal fluid or transport and deposition of metals by it. We have to handle a multiphase

    multicomponent system where the compositional variabilities and hence the degrees of freedom are too large. Eventually, we shall have to take

    help of equilibrium thermodynamics to compute reaction equilibria considering subsytems within the constraints imposed by the phase rule. We

    shall be considering homogeneous equilibrium in the fluid and local or partial equilibrium in irreversible mineral/rock - fluid interaction process to

    ascertain the chemical variability of the system. We try to monitor the dynamism of the process by working out the reaction paths through

    incorporation of parameters such as 'progress variables' as a measure of change in concentration of species taking part in the reaction. We shall be

    discussing these aspects in brief.

    In computation of phase equilibria for all possible situations, one must have data on the phase properties i.e. the standard state thermodynamic

    parameters such as the molar enthalpy of formation( fH ,0 ), molar entropy( 0S ) and volume( 0V ) as accurate and consistent as possible. In

    case of crystalline solids, these have been measured to a fair degree of accuracy and retrieved through appropriate formalism. One must also have

    adequate knowledge of the parameters for pressure and temperature dependence of the phase properties for extrapolation to higher temperature and

    pressure conditions of geological significance. These parameters are also known to a reasonable degree of certainty. However, the same is not true

    for electrolyte species in solutions present either in associated (charged or neutral) or dissociated ionic states. The energetics of such aqueous

    solutions are not easy to understand and quantify because it arises out of interaction of atomic size particles (whose time in contact may be on the

    order of picoseconds) in microenvironments, hence, their phase properties (and changes in them) are not as directly measurable as those of solids.

    5

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    6/59

    Before going into the details of the formalism of deriving the standard state thermodynamic parameters or seeing how they are measured or

    retrieved, it would be worthwhile to digress from here to look at some fundamental aspects of electrolytes in aqueous solutions.

    Dissolution of electrolytes in water

    6

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    7/59

    Water has been termed as the universal solvent and also one of the most corrosive substance known. It has got unusual properties compared to

    molecules of identical molecular weight (it should have been a gas like NH 3 in normal temperature pressure conditions). Its high dielectric

    constant (78.43 at 250C), high heat of fusion and vaporization, high heat capacity, polar nature (water is a dipole with a dipole moment of 1.8 x 10-

    18 e.s.u. in the gaseous state compared to that of HCl which is 1.08) makes it almost an anomalous compound and the anomaly is mainly due to the

    presence of hydrogen bonding (Fig. 2 and 3) that arises due to the presence of two lone-pair electrons (the 2s 2 and 2pz2) in the oxygen atom. In ice,

    all lone pairs are bound to hydrogen atoms of the neighboring water molecules and the lattice consists of a puckered rigid framework of O-H 4

    tetrahedra analogous to silicate structure. In liquid water hydrogen bonds are formed with a strength of 1/10 of the O-H molecular bond in the

    individual water molecules themselves. Liquid water retains some of the tetrahedral characteristics of ice through lone pair interaction and

    hydrogen bonding. Fig.2 depicts the water structure where the electron orbitals just prior to formation of gaseous water showing 2s and 2p lone

    pairs and distribution of 2p orbitals is shown in (A), the gaseous water showing near tetrahedral H-O-H angle and lone pair distribution is shown

    in (B) and the tetrahedral structure of water in ice showing hydrogen bonding is shown in (C). Fig. 3 depicts the dipolar structure of water where it

    can be seen that the positive region is more dispersed than the negative region.

    7

    he water structure showing the bonding and lone

    ctrons

    The water dipole showing the dispersion of

    e and negative charge

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    8/59

    Fig.4 Dielectric property of water

    Fig.4 explains the dielectric property of water because of the high dipole moment.

    The dielectric constant of water at 250C is 78.47 which is extremely high and is exceeded by any other geologically likely liquid. The solvating

    power of water can be easily explained on the basis of the Coulomb's law for electrostatic force between two charged particles.

    221

    DrqqF= [1]

    where D is the dielectric constant of the medium that is equivalent to the ratio of the permitivity of the medium to that of vacuum. This equation

    then indicates that higher the dielectric constant of the medium, weaker is the force of attraction and greater is the tendency for ionic solids to

    break apart into constituent ions.

    8

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    9/59

    Fig.5 is a schematic presentation of the structure of water around a positively charged ion depicting the hydration shells. This is the Gurney's

    cosphere model. (Explain) Since the positive region of the water dipole is more dispersed than the negative region, cations tend to be more highly

    hydrated than anions. The hydrated species itself is quite dynamic and all water molecules are constantly moving and exchanging with a half life

    as low as pure water structure. Ions of high charge to radius (Z/r) ratio are more hydrated with a predominant Zone-I and are called electrostrictive

    9

    Hydration shells around a positively charged

    water.

    Fig.5 Hydration shells around a positively

    charged ion in water.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    10/59

    structure making ions (Li+, Na+, H3O+, Ca2+ and similar ions). They tend to decrease solution entropy and increase viscosity and density of the

    solution. Larger ions are structure breaking (K+, Rb+, Cs+, Cl-, etc.). Transition metals have hydration shells bound in specific geometries, forming

    true molecular entities or complex ions.

    As will be discussed later, this solvation of ions contribute significantly to the change in free energy associated with removing an ion of radius ri

    and charge Zie from vacuum and place it in a solvent of dielectric constant D (sometimes referred to as )

    )11

    (2

    )( 2=

    Dr

    eZNG

    i

    iA[2]

    Equation (2) is the Born equation and the terms outside the bracket collectively define the Born coefficient ( ) where NA is the Avagadro's

    number, e is the elementary charge, ZI is the charge of the ion and ri also referred to as re,j (effective electrostatic radius) is the radius. Since the

    dielectric constant of any medium is greater than vacuum (D>1) the Born free energy will always be negative and free energy of ionic solution

    should be more negative for ions of high Z/r ratio in solutions of high dielectric constant. These large free energies explain the stability of ions in

    aqueous solutions even without taking the additional stabilizing effect of hydration shells.

    10

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    11/59

    11

    Effect of pressure and temperature on dielectric

    nt of water. (Boiling curve shown)

    Effect of temperature and pressure on

    ic constant of water

    Effect of temperature on dissociation ofytes (in the higher temperature range)

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    12/59

    increasing pressure tries to restore it. One would therefore expect opposing effects of pressure and temperature on solubilities of electrolytes at

    higher temperatures. Fig. 8 shows the effects of increasing pressure and temperature on dissociation constants of HCl and NaCl. The behavior is as

    expected from the above discussion. This implies that there will be increasing association of ions with decreasing dielectric constant of water at

    higher temperatures at a particular pressure. The upward shift of the curves at higher pressures is to be noted. Fig.9 shows that the log K valuespass through a maxima. This is explainable on the basis of increasing molecular vibration at higher temperatures that facilitate dissociation of ionic

    molecules and thus compensates for the decrease in dielectric constant to some extent. These aspects control solubility of metals and formation

    constants of complex ions as will be discussed in later sections.

    12

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    13/59

    With this much of background, we shall proceed on to the energetics of solutions in terms of the thermodynamic parameters. As we shall see,

    these are mostly dictated by some fundamental parameters of the solvent and aqueous ions in solution -

    13

    Dissociation constants as a

    nction of temperature.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    14/59

    the dielectric constant of the solvent, charge on the ion and effective electrostatic radius of the ion. Before getting into the thermodynamic

    quantities associated with solution, it is imperative to brush up our fundamentals on concentration units. Here, the concentration unit is

    conventionally expressed as molal(m) i.e. one gram molecular weight in a kg of the solvent as against molar or mole fraction units used in

    representing concentration in crystalline solutions. We shall be referring to the thermodynamic quantities in terms of 'partial molal' or 'molal'. It

    would also be appropriate to discuss about the standard state in aqueous electrolyte solutions. In crystalline solids and gases, a unit activity

    situation is referred to as standard state. In the former, pure phases at temperature and pressure of interest and in the latter, a pure gas at 298.15 K

    and 1 bar pressure are taken as the standard state. The standard state is

    so chosen that the activity coefficient is unity (ideal case) and mole fraction is also unity (i.e. a

    pure phase). If we want to impose the same conditions on aqueous electrolytes using the molal concentration unit, it should be a 1 molal solution

    of an electrolyte at unit activity at 298.15 K and 1 bar. This becomes hypothetical because the activity coefficient in that case can never be one.

    14

    Fig.10 Standard and reference state in aqueous

    electrolytes

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    15/59

    Many electrolytes and minerals reach saturation before 1 molal and no solute can have unit activity at m=1. Therefore a state has to be chosen

    where activity coefficient can be one. If we consider an infinitely dilute solution, the interaction between ions can be taken as zero and activity

    coefficient can be unity (Henrian solution) and we can take activity = molality at any temperature and pressure. This is defined as the reference

    state as depicted in Fig.10 and it is central to the understanding of the thermodynamics of aqueous solutions and all calculations are done on this

    basis.

    Thermodynamic parameters of aqueous solutions

    As has already been mentioned, it is difficult to measure the change in any thermodynamic quantity of an ion on its dissolution. Therefore, what

    we measure is basically an apparent quantity. We can theoretically calculate the change in any thermodynamic parameter when an ion is solvated

    assuming that there is no change in the partial molal thermodynamic quantities of the solvent, i.e. water. We can express this using the enthalpy

    and free energy.

    15

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    16/59

    ),( 0,000

    rr TPTPf HHHH += [3]

    ),(0

    ,000

    rr TPTPf GGGG += [4]

    The terms on the l.h.s. stand for the conventional apparent standard partial molal quantity (enthalpy and free energy) of formation of an aqueous

    species at a given pressure and temperature. The first terms on the r.h.s. of the above two equations are the conventional standard partial molal

    enthalpy and free energy of formation of the species from elements at a reference pressure and temperature (1 bar and 298.15 K) and the terms in

    parenthesis correspond to the difference in the conventional standard partial molal enthalpy and free energy of formation of an aqueous species at

    the temperature and pressure of interest and those at a reference condition.

    If we represent a thermodynamic quantity in general by a symbol , then for an electrolyte(k)

    absj

    jkjk

    ,0

    ,

    0 = [5]This is the additive relationship among the partial molal properties of aqueous electrolytes that share common ions. In the above equation, j,k is

    the stoichiometric coefficient of the ion j in the electrolyte k. The conventional standard partial molal property represented by j0 is

    16

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    17/59

    17

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    18/59

    18

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    19/59

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    20/59

    [6]

    20

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    21/59

    Since H 0,abs is taken as zero for all practical purposes, j0 is equivalent to j0,abs. For electrical neutrality,

    0

    ,

    0

    j

    j

    kjk = [7]

    Theoretically, it is possible to calculate j0,abs for aqueous ions. However, the equation of state for aqueous ions are restricted to j0 and it does

    not impose any restriction on geochemical calculations. Prediction of j0 is sufficient for predicting the standard partial molal properties of

    aqueous ions in chemical reactions.

    For any aqueous specis in solution, the thermodynamic quantity is a result of an intrinsic and an electrostatic parts that can be written for an

    aqueous ion as

    abs

    je

    abs

    ji

    abs

    j

    ,0

    ,

    ,0

    ,

    ,0 += [8]

    The electrostatic contribution can be thought of as contributed by collapse of water molecules or structural change in water caused by the ion and

    solvation, i.e., electrostatic interaction of the ion and the solvent molecule. Thus

    abs

    js

    abs

    jc

    abs

    je

    ,0

    ,

    ,0

    ,

    ,0

    ,+= [9]

    The collapse and the intrinsic parts combined can be denoted as 'nonsolvation' contribution to the parameter. That is

    abs

    ji

    abs

    jc

    abs

    jn

    ,0

    ,

    ,0

    ,

    ,0

    , += [10]

    We can write them in the conventional terms as explained before. For the k-th electrolyte

    0

    ,

    0

    ,

    0

    ksknk+= [11]

    and the additivity relationship can be expressed in the conventional form as

    0

    ,,

    0

    , jn

    j

    kjkn = [12]

    and

    21

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    22/59

    0

    ,,

    0

    , js

    j

    kjks = [13]

    Equations (8) to (13) are the basis of the HKF model (Helgeson, Kirkham and Flowers, 1981; Tanger and Helgeson, 1988; Shock and Helgeson,

    1988; and Shock et al, 1989)

    As mentioned in eq(2), the solvation contribution to the free energy can be expressed by the Born equation. The conventional standard molal

    Gibb's free energy of a solute j can be written as

    )11(

    0

    , =

    jjsG [14]

    j is the Born coefficient of solute j. Similarly, for an electrolyte species k

    )11(

    0

    , =

    kks

    G [15]

    where jj

    kjk = , according to the additivity relationship

    In HKF model, re,j (effective electrostatic radius) was taken to be independent of pressure and temperature, hence, the terms for electrolytes and

    ions were treated as constants.

    The 0V (standard molal volume), 0 (compressibility) and0

    PC (isobaric heat capacity of solvation) can be derived by taking the appropriate

    derivatives of the free enegry expression.

    T

    k

    T

    ksks

    PQ

    P

    GV

    +=

    =

    1

    10

    ,,

    0[16]

    where( )

    TT PPQ

    =

    =

    2

    1/1[17]

    Similarly

    22

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    23/59

    T

    k

    ksks

    PPQN

    P

    G

    +=

    =

    2

    2

    2

    ,02

    ,0

    11

    2

    [18]

    where

    =

    =2

    2

    2

    2

    21

    TTPPPT

    Q

    N

    [19]

    The isobaric heat capacity term can be written as

    PP

    k

    P

    ksksP

    TT

    TTYTX

    T

    GTC

    +=

    =

    2

    2

    2

    ,02

    ,,0

    11

    2

    [20]

    where

    = 2

    2

    2

    2

    21

    PPTT

    X

    [21]

    and

    PTY

    =

    21 [22]

    Similar expressions can be derived for the j-th aqueous ion. The re,j term in the HKF model was expressed as

    ZjjxjeZrr += ,, [23]

    where rx,j is the crystallographic radius of the j-th ion in . Z is an empirical parameter taken to be 0.94 for cations and 0.0 for anions. While

    discussing the HKF model for the standard partial molal quantities, it should be mentioned that it relies heavily on empirical fit to experimental

    23

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    24/59

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    25/59

    evident from the values of0

    ,

    0

    ,

    0

    , , kckckc VandC (structural collapse terms to the respective parameters) which increase with decreasing

    temperature and approach - at Ts. Tanger and Helgeson(1988) showed from theoretical considerations that solute dependence of k is not

    needed and replaced k by (=228K) i.e., a constant irrespective of identity of ions. They proposed revised temperature functions for molar

    volume, compressibility and heat capacity as given below.

    21

    )(

    1)(

    1)(

    0

    0

    0

    =

    =

    =

    TTf

    TTf

    T

    Tf

    PC

    V

    [28]

    The advantage this refinement is that the number of solute dependent parameters in the model is decreased. Secondly, the revised function

    converts eq(24), (25) and (26) into linear equations with additive coefficients. Thus the additivity relation for nonsolvation contribution (eq. 12)

    are exact equalities as the equation of state coefficients of 0n,j for the j-th aqueous ion can be calculated from regressed values of

    corresponding coefficients of the k-th electrolyte. On further theoretical grounds, the f(P) term in the nonsolvation contribution was proposed to be

    of the form

    ( ) 21)(

    1

    )(

    PP

    Pf

    PPf

    +

    =

    +=

    [29]

    where is a constant characteristic of the solvent H2O (=2600 bar) again on structural grounds.

    To account for the discrepancies of predicted (HKF) and experimental values of partial molal volume and heat capacity at pressures corresponding

    to the critical pressure of water (the values are too negative at temperatures approaching critical point), correction should be applied to the

    25

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    26/59

    solvation contribution since at high temperatures and pressures (P=Pc,water), the nonsolvation contribution to these values become insignificant.

    Therefore revision to eq-23 was proposed as given below(Tanger and Helgeson, 1988).

    jZjjxje hZrr ++= ,, [30]

    where the additional term hj is a function of temperature and pressure expressed as hj = Djg, where again, Dj is a constant characteristic of the

    charge and/or crystallographic radius of the ion(j) and g is function of T and P independent of the identity of the ion. Regression calculation with

    NaCl indicated a nature of the function as given below.

    ( ))4(5.0 2 cbbg = [31]

    where

    14

    1

    4

    0

    ,272.3

    = =

    =

    i j

    ji

    ji Tab and

    14

    1

    4

    0

    ,72.34571.3

    = =

    =

    i j

    ji

    ji Tac ; is the specific density of water , =N0e

    (Avogadro's number x elementary charge) and aI,j are fit parameters. Values of the g-function are tabulated in Tanger and Helgeson(1988) for a

    wide range of temperature and pressure.

    At this point, we see that we have the required set of equations for expanding the difference term within brackets in eq(3) and (4) to compute the

    apparent standard partial quantities using eq(11). For eq(3)

    dPETVdTCHH

    T

    T

    P

    P

    sPTPTP

    r r

    rr )( 00000, += [32]

    where0

    sE is the standard partial molal expansivity of an aqueous ion or electrolyte. This can also be expressed as the sum of a solvation and

    nonsolvation parts written before for an electrolyte or ionic species.

    26

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    27/59

    P

    T

    T

    P

    T

    TP

    P

    sk

    P

    nk

    sknkk

    TP

    PYN

    TPaa

    T

    P

    PY

    TQN

    T

    T

    V

    T

    VEEE

    +

    ++=

    +

    =

    +

    =+=

    1111

    111

    2

    43

    0

    ,

    0

    ,0

    ,

    0

    ,

    0

    [33]

    Hence

    ( )( )

    rrrr

    rr

    rr TPrTP

    TP

    TP

    P

    r

    r

    r

    r

    r

    rf

    YTT

    TTY

    P

    PaPPa

    T

    T

    P

    Pa

    PPaTT

    cTTcHH

    +

    +

    ++

    +

    +

    ++

    +

    +

    +=

    1111

    11

    ln2

    ln

    )(11

    )(

    4322

    121

    00

    [34]

    Eq(4) can be expressed as

    27

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    28/59

    dPVdTT

    CTdTCTTSGG

    P

    P

    T

    T

    T

    P

    T

    T

    PrTPTPTP

    rrr

    rrrr ++= 00

    0000

    ,)( [35]

    Now we can write the expression for standard partial molal Gibb's free energy change as

    ( )( )

    ( )( )

    rrrr

    rr

    rr

    rr

    TPrTP

    TP

    TP

    r

    r

    r

    r

    r

    r

    r

    r

    r

    rTPf

    YT

    P

    PaPPa

    TP

    Pa

    PPaTT

    TTTT

    TTc

    TTT

    T

    TcTTSGG

    +

    +++

    +

    +++

    +

    +

    +=

    11

    11

    ln1

    ln

    )(ln11

    ln)(

    432

    122

    1

    000

    [36]

    Now we have the required equation of state for apparent standard partial molal free energy of the aqueous species in solution. The standard partial

    molal free energy and enthalpy of formation and partial molal entropy at 298.15K and 1 bar, the empirical parameters c1, c2 and a1 to a4 and j are

    tabulated for about sixty odd aqueous charged (both simple and complex ions) and a number of neutral complex species in Shock and

    Helgeson(1988), Shock et al.(1989) according to the modifications to HKF model. There is extensive tabulation of data on dielectric constant of

    water at different pressures,rrTP

    Y , values of the 'g'function (g(P,T)) for the extrapolation of the Born coefficient ( ) to high P and T in

    Tanger and Helgeson(1988). One can take the values directly from the tables while calculating the free energy change of aqueous species at

    28

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    29/59

    isothermal isobaric conditions or incorporate the equations into the equation of state (eq.33). This will permit us to evaluate the free energy change

    of reactions involving aqueous species and minerals (sulfide, oxide, silicate) with data on these minerals available in the literature.

    From the well known relationship

    KRTGG TPrTPr ln0

    ,,,, += [37]

    and imposing equilibrium of the participating mineral and aqueous phases, Gr,P,T = 0, hence G0r,P,T = -RT lnK, we can calculate the equilibrium

    constant of any reaction.

    Example-1

    Suppose that we have an assemblage of magnetite, chalcopyrite and pyrite and we want to show the stabilities of the minerals and also characterize

    the physicochemical environment of the fluid in terms of compositional variables in the Cu-Fe-S-O-H-S system. We can write simple hydrolysis-

    sulfidation reactions involving the minerals and a fluid phase.

    Fe3O4 + 4H+ + 2 H2S = FeS2 + 2 Fe

    2+ + 4H2O (R1)

    Fe3O4 + 2 Cu+ + 4H2S = 2 CuFeS2 + Fe2+ + 4 H2O (R2)

    FeS2 + 2 Cu+ + Fe2+ + 2 H2S = 2 CuFeS2 + 4 H

    + (R3)

    As we see, the reactions are written so that charge balance is maintained. As is clear from the reaction, stabilities of the phases are controlled by

    pH, activities of Fe2+, Cu+ and fugacity of H2S at any given temperature and pressure. Here we have four release parameters other than P and T. If

    we take activity ratios Cu+ and H+ (aCu+/aH+) and Fe2+ and H+ (aFe

    2+/a2H+) we can decrease the degrees of freedom and the release parameters to three.

    So, to depict the phase relations, we have to fix any one of the three. If we fix the fugacity of H2S, we can plot stability fields in the log (aFe2+/a2H+)

    29

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    30/59

    vs log (aCu+/aH+) space. This might give us some idea as to the nature of variation of the activities of the meatal ions, that may also help us in

    calculation of solubility of the metals in the fluid in the given condition once we are in a position to calculate the activity coefficients accurately

    (discussed later).

    Assuming that we have calculated the G0P,T of the reaction using eq(36) and have calculated the log K values of the reaction using eq(37), we

    can expand the K of the three reactions as follows.

    ( )( ) ( )

    =

    +

    +

    24

    2

    1

    2

    2

    SHH

    FeR

    fa

    aK [38]

    which can be rearranged so that two variables are on the either side as

    ( ) 2/)log2(log/log2

    2 1

    2

    SHRHFefKaa +=++ [39]

    Similarly for R2 and R3 we can write

    ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )

    =

    ++

    ++

    422

    2

    2

    2

    2

    SHHCu

    HFeR

    faa

    aaK [40]

    leading to ( ) SHHCuRHFe faaKaa 22 log4)/log(2log/log 22 ++= ++++ [41]

    and

    30

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    31/59

    ( )( ) ( ) ( )

    =

    ++

    +

    22

    4

    3

    22 SHFeCu

    HR

    faa

    aK [42]

    leading to ( ) SHHCuRHFe faaKaa 22 log2)/log(2log/log 32 = ++++ [43]

    31

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    32/59

    We can plot these reactions at isothermal-isobaric and iso-fH2S conditions to depict the phase assemblage as shown in Fig.11. These kind of phase

    diagrams where the effect of the activity of any one species (such as pH in the present case) are called abridged activity diagrams that are

    commonly used in geochemistry (silicate alterations etc.). We can work out the phase relationship and can have the physicochemical constraints in

    the fluid known in terms of activities of ionic species in any mineral-fluid interaction process. We can have several such abridged activity,

    32

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    33/59

    activity-activity (analogous to - diagrams), activity-fugacity (fO2 - pH) diagrams for depicting phase relations at any pressure and

    temperature of interest. The purpose behind this discussion is to show that when we are interested in only deciphering the phase relations like this,

    we are not concerned about calculation of activities of the individual ionic species. However, when we are assigned with the job of calculating

    solubilities of metals in hydrothermal fluids or computation of mass transfer between minerals and fluid or working out the sequence of

    precipitation of minerals/salts from complex brines like seawater, which we do either by considering equilibrium of the fluid with minerals of

    interest or considering homogeneous equilibria in the fluid, formation constants of complex forming reactions, mass and charge balance equations,we do need to calculate activities of individual aqueous species and in turn their activity coefficients. In these situations, we are far removed from

    ideal behavior of aqueous species because of dominance of short range solute-solute and solute-solvent interactions. Therefore, before going to the

    formalism of dealing with such processes, let us have some idea about activity coefficients of aqueous species in solutions of our interest.

    Activity coefficients of aqueous electrolytes

    Activity coefficient of species in aqueous solutions has been an outstanding problem in solution chemistry. As mentioned in the introduction, the

    theory is yet to develop to the required level and the data generated so far in this regard are inadequate and will remain so for quite sometime. We

    shall review the fundamental aspects in brief here.

    Definition of activity coefficient: Usually denoted by as the ratio of the activity of the electrolyte or solute species and its molaility, referred to

    as practical activity coefficient by Nordstorm and Munoz(1985). It is a dimensionless quantity, hence, activity of aqueous species has the

    dimension of concentration (molal), whereas it is dimensionless in crystalline solutions by convention. In the reference state discussed earlier, lim

    33

    Fig. 11 Abridged activity diagram showingstability of minerals in Cu-Fe-S-

    O-H sysyem

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    34/59

    (ai/mI) =1. For a strong electrolyte, where there is complete dissociation of the species ABaqAaq+ + Baq- for which we can write AB,aq = A,aq+

    + B,aq- because chemical potentials are additive. Assuming ideal condition ( A,aq = B,aq =1, we can write

    aqBaqAaqBaqAaqABmmRT ++++=

    ,

    0

    ,

    0

    ,, ln [44]

    34

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    35/59

    For a uni-univalent electrolyte (1:1), aqBaqAaqAB mmm ,,, == , hence eq (44) reduces to2

    ,

    0

    ,, ln aqABaqABaqAB mRT+= , which indicates, for

    an 1:1 electrolyte a m2 or a/m constant. For any salt dissolving into + positive and - negative ions for a total of = + + - ions (e.g.

    for MgCl2, = 3), the relationship becomes a m

    . Fig.12 depicts the relationship for three electrolyte species of different stoichiometries.

    Though we write in terms of chemical potentials of individual ions as shown already, these potentials can not be experimentally measured

    35

    Fig.12 Plots showing the

    proportionality relationship

    in NaCl, CaCl2 and AlCl3

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    36/59

    individually. Each ion is related to a stoichiometric amount of an oppositely charged ion by the principle of electrical neutrality. An expression

    that recognizes the existence of separate ions but allows to make real measurement of solution activities is needed. This has given rise to the

    concept of 'mean ion chemical potential' and mean ion activities and activity coefficients. The mean value of the ionic chemical potential for an

    electrolyte of composition +

    BA that dissociates into +AZ+ + -BZ- , the mean can be expressed as +

    +

    +

    =+

    BA

    BA ZZ

    ,

    [45]

    and we can write

    += aRT ln0

    [46]

    where a+ is the mean ionic activity. For an aqueous electrolyte species, the mean ion activity coefficient and molality are related to the solute

    parameters as follows.

    ( )

    /1++

    +

    ++

    +

    ===

    == aaaa[47,48]

    ( ) ( ) /1)( +++ ===+

    mmmmmm [49]

    The term ( +) +( -)

    - will be unity for 1:1 electrolyte (NaCl), 4 for 2:1and 1:2 electrolytes (Na2SO4, CaCl2) and 27 for 3:1 and 1:3 (Na3PO4,

    AlCl3) electrolytes. These relationship are important to keep in mind when it becomes necessary to convert between solute activities, solute

    molalities and mean salt values. The mean ion activity coefficients for salts in aqueous solutions ( +) are obtained from measurement of i)

    freezing point depression, ii) boiling point elevation, iii) water vapor pressure, iv) osmotic pressure, v) solubility and distribution and vi) transport

    36

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    37/59

    properties such as conductivity and diffusion. In methods i to iv the properties of the salts are obtained directly from its effects on the properties of

    water. Methods v and vi provide more direct measure of the salt's mean ion activity coefficient. In the same way as mentioned above, the mean ion

    activity coefficient of a 2:1 salt K2SO4 can be expressed in the following way, considering the dissociation K2SO42 K+ + SO42- for which

    ( ) ( ) +++ == 24

    24

    24

    222)(

    SOSOKKSOKspmmaaK and ( ) ( )[ ] 3/12, 2

    442+= SOKSOK [50]

    Before proceeding further, it would be useful to have a look at an important parameter of aqueous solution known as ionic strength denoted

    conventionally as I. It is a cumulative effect of all ionic species dissolved in solution and since the interaction between ions is largely Coulombic,

    it is proportional to the charge on the ion. It is expressed as ( )= 22

    1iiZmI and represented in molal unit since it involves concentration of

    ionic species in the same unit. When we compute ionic strength with this formula, we necessarily assume complete dissolution of the electrolyte

    species, which is not always true as we discussed earlier and also follow up later. While working out the energetics of ionic solution from the

    potential energy associated with each ion and the surrounding cloud of other ions, this term automatically comes in the expression (see Barrow,

    1992, Chap. 9 for details). Long before this theoretical treatment however, activity coefficient was empirically found out to be dependent on the

    37

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    38/59

    ionic strength. Fig.13 shows the relationship of + and ionic strength for a number of electrolyte species. Since activity coefficient is a measure of

    nonideality due to increasing short-range

    interactions among solutes, the starting point would be to consider very dilute solutions where only long range interactions prevail.. For solutions

    with TDS up to 5000 ppm (I=0.1m) activity coefficients of monovalent and divalent cations can be computed through the theoretical Debye-

    Huckel equation (given below) where the inherent assumptions are : i) ion interactions are purely Coulombic; ii)ion size does not vary with I and

    iii) ions of sign do not interact.

    2/1

    2/12

    1log

    IBa

    IAZ

    i

    ii +

    = [51]

    where A=1.824928 x 106 01/2( T)-3/2, B=50.3( T)-1/2, 0 is the density of water, is the dielectric constant whose temperature and pressure

    dependence is known from empirical equations (available in literature) for calculation of the same and in turn, the activity coefficient at higher

    temperatures and pressures. ai is effective size of the hydrated ion in , which is a function of the degree of hydration that is in turn is a function

    of the Z/r ratio as has been mentioned

    38

    Relationship of mean ion activity coeff. Of

    salts and ionic strength of solution for a

    number of electrolytes

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    39/59

    earlier. Tables containing values of a I for ions of different valency (both +ve and -ve) are available from literature. Fig. 14 shows the activity

    coefficients for a number of ions as a function of ionic strength calculated on the basis of the above equation. The D-H equation can be used to

    compute accurate activity coefficients (individual ion) for monovalent ions up to about I=0.1m, for divalent ions

    39

    Fig. 14 Single ion activity coeff. As function of

    oinic strength using eq(51). The declining trend is

    to be noted.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    40/59

    up to I=0.01m and for trivalent ions up to I=0.001m. For I=0.001 to 0.0001m, curves for I versus I for ions of same valence converge on a single

    curve. At this situation the second term in the denominator vanishes and the D-H equation reduces to

    log I = -A Zi2 I1/2 [52]

    and is known as the Debye-Huckel limiting law. Since A is proportional to -log I and A is a function of temperature (increases with temperature)

    activity coefficient decreases with temperature and because of the Z i2 factor, the effect of temperature is greater for multivalent ions. At higher

    concentration of solutes, (I > 0.1m), the assumptions in the D-H equation become invalid because of increased solute-solute interactions. Besides,

    the D-H equation predicts that decline continuously with ionic strength which is not true. One of the several reasons for the reverse trend of

    at higher ionic strength is that with increasing salt concentration, less of free water molecules are available resulting in a decrease in activity of

    water (near unity in dilute solution to 0.807 in a 5 m solution of NaCl). To accommodate the increase in , some positive term must be added, as

    proposed by Huckel and later workers. The equation known as empirical Davies equation is mentioned below.

    += I

    I

    IAZ 3.0

    1log

    2/1

    2/12

    [53]

    However, this lacks the ion-size parameter though it gives accurate values for monovalent salts from I=0.1 to 0.7m and gives same valuesfor all ions of same charge at a given ionic strength.

    The Truesdell-Jones (TJ) equation is a simple extension of D-H equation plus an additional term :

    bIIBa

    IAZ

    i

    i

    i ++=

    2/1

    2/12

    1log [54]

    40

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    41/59

    with aI and b being empirical parameters.

    Bronsted-Guggenheim-Scatchard specific interaction theory (SIT) is an ion and electrolyte specific approach of activity coefficient. It is therefore

    theoretically capable of greater accuracy than Davies equation. The general SIT equation for a single ion i

    ( ) ( )jmIjiDZj

    i += ,,log 2 [55]

    where D is the D-H term, m(j) is the molality of major electrolyte ion j which is of opposite charge to ion i. Interaction parameters (i,j,I) refer to

    the interaction between the ion i and major electrolyte ion j. is taken as zero for neutral species or between ions of like sign. The interaction

    parameters are often assumed to be independent of ionic strength that works well for I up to 3.5 m. The SIT approach to study of natural waters is

    limited by the availability of interaction parameters.

    As we move on to solutions of higher ionic strength solute-solute interaction between like and unlike charges become prominent. These

    interactions can be quantified in terms of binary (between like) and ternary (between three or more ions some of which will be of like sign)

    interaction parameters. The most accepted model for high ionic strength is the Pitzer's model (Pitzer, 1987) which has been shown to model the

    behavior of solutions accurately up to I=6.0m. The Pitzer model (see Pitzer, 1987 for details of the derivation from excess free energy of solution,

    osmotic coefficient and so on) requires interaction parameters involving aqueous species of interest and major species in water. These parameters

    have neen worked out for major ions (tabulated in Pitzer, 1987) but are not available for trace species including strong complexes, some of which

    may be approximated to be equal to similar known species.

    The activity coefficient for an individual ion in Pitzer's model approach can be written as

    ( ) ......ln,,

    ,,,

    2 +++= kjkji

    kjij

    i

    jiii mmEmIDfZ

    [56]

    41

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    42/59

    The first term in the r.h.s. is a modified D-H term where

    ( )

    ++

    +

    = /12/1

    2/1

    2.11l n

    2.1

    2

    2.11

    3 9 2.0 I

    I

    If [57]

    The Pitzer equation can be thought of as a virial-type expansion. The second term is for the binary interaction involving two solute species of

    opposite or same sign and the terms required to evaluate it are called binary virial coefficient. The parameters describing interaction of like species

    are independent of ionic strength and those describing the interaction of unlike species are functions of ionic strength. If we neglect the terms

    containing higher order interactions, the ln obtained are quite comparable to those of SIT and TJ equations below I=3.5 m. Ternary virial

    coefficients account for interactions among two like and a third unlike charged species. These are usually independent of I. Pitzer model equations

    are linear algebraic functions of ln I and are often extremely long involving numerous individual parameters and substitution and solution of

    Pitzer's model equation is best accomplished by a computer. There are many computer codes (SOLMINEQ.88, PHRQPITZ, PHREEQC available

    as freeware) which include the Pitzer model (not SUPCRT). The model is useful in the study of concentrated waters like acid-mine waters and

    industrial waste water. The model works best when cation-anion interactions produce complexes whose formation constants are less than 10 2.

    Though we have discussed equations for calculation of single ion activity coefficients we have not seen how the mean ion activity coefficients are

    actually calculated by any of the methods that was mentioned. Calculation of mean ion activity coefficient from difference in vapor pressure of

    pure water and that of salt solutions of varying molality was done by Wood et al (1984). The details is omitted here that interested readers might

    follow up.

    42

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    43/59

    We have discussed the principles and equations for mean and individual ion activity coefficients. Before we see some example calculations, it

    would be worthwhile to have a look at the McInnes convention, which has served as an important tool for calculation of individual ion activity

    coefficients from data on mean ion activity coefficients. This makes the modeling of natural water chemistry a bit flexible. The McInnes

    convention states that K+ = Cl -, based on the observation that K+ and Cl- ions are of the same charge and nearly same size; having similar

    electronic structure (inert gas) and similar ionic mobilities. The McInnes convention leads to

    KClClK ,== + . Individual ion activity coefficient of strong electrolytes can be measured for their mean values using +,KCl values as starting

    point. All such calculations must be done with + values for KCl and other salts measured at the same ionic strength, which is not the same

    molality except for monovalent salts.

    For the general cation case where M is the cation

    ( ) ( )[ ] nnClMMCln/11

    , 1

    = [58]

    where n=n++n-. Substituting +,KCl for Cl and solving for M

    ( )1,

    1

    )(

    = nKCl

    n

    nM

    MCl

    [59]

    For example, for Fe3+ from +,FeCl3,

    [ ] [ ] 4/134/13, 333 KClFeClFeFeCl ++

    == [60]

    43

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    44/59

    and since Cl = +KCl

    3

    ,

    4

    )(

    )(3

    3

    KCl

    FeCl

    Fe

    =+

    [61]

    For anion A e.g. in Kn-1A solution

    ( ) ( )[ ]( )

    1

    ,

    ,/11

    ,)(

    1

    1

    ==

    n

    KCl

    n

    AK

    A

    n

    A

    n

    KAKn

    n

    [62]

    For example to obtain SO4 from +,K2SO4

    ( ) ( )2

    ,

    3

    ,3/12

    ,

    3/12

    ,42

    44442

    KCl

    SOK

    SOSOKClSOKSOK

    === +

    [63]

    Fig. 15 is a plot of individual ionic activity coefficient of a number of cations and anions on the basis of McInnes convention where the increase of

    i with I at I> 1.0 m is shown. Fig. 16 is a plot of individual ion activity coefficients taking Ca2+ as an example with ionic strength up to 10 m,

    44Fig.15 Plot of single ion activity coeff. Of a no.

    of anions and cations vs ionic strength usingMcInnes convention

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    45/59

    where various methods are compared. As can be seen, the values obtained by different methods start diverging significantly above I>0.3m. Since

    Davies and SIT models ignore ionic size, they are likely to be less accurate. The extended D-H is inaccurate above I>0.3. The mean salt and TJ

    equations produce

    identical values since the TJ parameters are based on mean salt data. The SIT model interaction parameters result in activity coefficient that agree

    well with mean salt values over a relatively wide range of ionic strength.

    45

    Fig. 16 Activity coeff. Of Ca2+ using various

    methods. The divergence in different

    methods should be noted.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    46/59

    Fig. 17 is a summary plot of individual ion activity coefficient versus I1/2 (molal) where the validity of the equations described in the ionic strength

    range are shown.

    Effective ionic strength:

    46

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    47/59

    There is another important aspect to calculation of activity coefficients in solution. This is more so where we try to compute activity coefficients of

    species in solution at high P and T. As discussed earlier, because of decreased dielectric constant of water, there is increasing ion association. For

    concentrated solutions and solutions of weak electrolytes (whose dissociation constant is low) there is presence/dominance of uncharged or less

    charged associated or complex species. This decreases the ionic strength and the ionic strength calculated taking the degree of association of the

    electrolyte species at any desired condition, is usually referred to as 'effective ionic strength' as against the stoichiometric or total ionic strength

    calculated assuming complete dissociation of all electrolytes. For example, in seawater I s = 0.718 m whereas the Ie = 0.668 m (7% lower). Thedifference increases at higher ionic strength. Fig. 17 is a summary plot of individual ion activity coefficient versus I1/2 (molal) where the validity of

    the equations described in the ionic strength range are shown.

    An example:

    Here is an example (from Langmuir, 1997) to demonstrate the effective ionic strength calculation. Let's say a fluid is saturated with gypsum

    without any other solute. There are only Ca2+ and SO42-. The solubility product of gypsum Ksp = 10

    -4.59. At gypsum saturation, Ca= SO4 =

    0.0154. Here the stoichiometric or total ionic strength would be

    Is = 1/2(2 x 0.0154 x 4) = 0.0616m

    The effective or true ionic strength approach assumes ion pair such as CaSO40 in the present case. Now the mass balance equations become

    04

    24

    4

    4 CaSOSO

    CaSOCa

    mmSO

    mmCa

    +=

    +=

    [64,65]

    47

    Equations for calculation of single ion activity coeff.

    eir ionic strength range of applicability

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    48/59

    The solubility reaction for gypsum is CaSO4 2H2O = Ca2+ + SO4

    2- + 2H2O. Calcium and sulfate ions form the ion pair CaSO40 with the association

    constant (= 10 2.31, you can calculate given the thermodynamic data) .

    +

    =24

    2

    04

    SOCa

    CaSO

    assocaa

    aK [66]

    Since at saturation, product of the two ionic species is 10-4.59, the value of activity of the neutral ion pair can be obtained which is 10-2.28. Assuming

    activity coefficient of the neutral ion pair is unity (that is a reasonable assumption since neutral species will not experience much of interaction),

    from eq( ) we can find mCa- = mSO4

    2- = 1.02 x 10-2 m. Now we can calculate the effective ionic strength

    Ie = 1/2(2 x 1.02 x 10-2 x 4) = 0.0408 m. (Is is about 50% higher than Ie) From this Ie we can further calculate the activity coefficients of the two

    ions and in turn their individual activities. It can be checked that the activities calculated are the same in both cases but activity coefficients are

    different.

    Metal Solubility and Complexing

    As has been discussed in the introductory section, one of the most important implications of studying the thermodynamics of aqueous electrolytes

    is to compute solubility of metals. This is important from ore genetic point of view i.e. to assess the metal carrying capability of hydrothermal

    fluid whose gross chemistry has been assessed by other means such as fluid inclusion studies and mineral-fluid equlibria. Study of metal solubility

    has also tremendous implications for practical problems such as radioactive waste disposal and assessing environmental hazards. It is established

    long since that metals, particularly transition metals, are carried in natural solutions as complexes rather than simple ions, involving a metal and a

    48

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    49/59

    ligand. Spectroscopic studies and phase equilibria experiments have demonstrated the type of complexing that occurs, though much is yet to be

    known. Table-1 is a a list of ligands and their

    Ligand Concentartion

    range (moles/kgH2O)

    Cl-SO42-S2-NH32-CO32-acetate

    propionateoxalatemalonate

    7

    10-10

    to 0.3

    10-4

    to 0.1

    10-3.9

    to 10-1.5

    10-3.4

    to 1

    0 to 0.17

    0 to 0.059

    0 to 0.005

    0 to 0.025

    49

    Table-1. Ligands and their concentration in natural hydrothermal fluid indicating the dominant mode

    of transport of metals.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    50/59

    range of concentrations in natural hydrothermal fluid where we can see the dominance of chloride. Table -2 lists the metals and ligands on the

    basis of hard-soft classification proposed by Pearson to explain the dominant type of complexing of metals in natural solutions. Mnay hypotheses

    have been proposed in this regard. Fig .18 is a plot of the Pauling's electronegativity versus Z/r ratio of some metals and ligands where fields of

    dominance of ligands are depicted. This more or less explains the ligand-metal specificity in solutions within the constraint of availability of a

    particular ligand. For example, though gold forms stable bisulfide complexes,

    Hard Borderline Soft AcidsH+

    Li+ > Na+ > K+ >Rb+>Cs+Fe2+,Mn2+,Co2+,Ni2+ Au+,>Ag+>Cu+

    50

    Fig.18. Pauling's electronegativity vs Z/r explaining

    metal-ligand specificity

    Table-2 Pearson's hard-soft classification of metals and ligands

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    51/59

    Be2+>Mg2+>Ca2+>Sr2+>Ba2+

    Al3+>Ga3+

    Sc3+>Y3+; REE(Lu3+>La3+);

    Ce4+; Sn4+;

    Ti4+>Ti3+; Zr4+=Hf4+

    Cr6+>Cr3+; Mo5+>Mo4+;

    W6+>W4+;Nb5+; Ta5+Re7+>

    Re6+

    >Re4+

    ; V6+

    >V5+

    >V4+

    ;Mn4+; Fe3+;Co3+;As5+Sb5+

    Th4+;U6+>U4+

    PGE6+>PGE4+

    BasesF-;H2O,OH

    -, O2-, NH3; NO3

    -

    CO32-> HCO3

    -;SO42->HSO4

    -

    Cu2+,Zn2+,Pb2+,Sn2+

    As3+, Sb3+,Bi3+

    Cl-

    Hg2+>Cd2+

    I->Br,CN

    S2->HS->H2S

    chloride and other complexes do also form in the absence of bisulfide. Fig. 19 is a plot of the ligand-field stabilization energy (LFSE) versus Z/r

    of a number of metals. Though details of the LFSE of transition metal complexes can not be dealt here, the figure clearly explains the reason

    behind occurrence of some metals as sulfides. For example, the case of Cr, Mn, W etc. are noteworthy.

    We usually express the reaction for formation of a ligand in the following way:

    51

    Fig. 19. LFSE vs Z/r of metals explaining the type of deposit formed by them.

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    52/59

    M+q + n L-p = MLnq-np [67]

    And refer to the equilibrium constant as formation constant ( ). Metals may form complexes in steps and we represent their overall formation

    constant as n and write

    ....211

    KKKn

    i

    in ==

    = [68]

    We shall see the case of Pb in details. It implies that in order to undertake such exercise, we must have the thermodynamic data for the species in

    consideration and appropriate formulation for extrapolation to higher temperature and pressure, and, also the activity-composition relationship in

    aqueous solutions. Thus our discussions in the previous sections look justified.

    In order to calculate concentrations of species (speciation) of species from such equilibrium constants, we require to have the activity coefficients

    of all species and in turn, we must have the true or effective ionic strength of the solution. An example in this regard will give a glimpse of what it

    52

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    53/59

    really is. Suppose we want to calculate the solubility of galena (PbS) and sphalerite in an NaCl solution. If they form their chloride complexes we

    can write the following complex forming reaction and their formation constants in the following way.

    nMClnClM + =+ 22 [69]

    for which we ca write

    ( )( )( ) n

    n

    n

    n

    ClM

    MCl

    +

    =2

    2

    [70]

    and also for the hydrolysis of the minerals we can write the following reaction and equilibrium constant as

    )(222 aqSHMHMS +=+++

    for which 22

    2

    )(

    ))((+

    +

    =H

    SHMK . [71]

    +=+= +++n

    ClMClMM

    n

    n nnaaaMClMM // 22

    22 [72]

    Substituting for activity of M2+ and MCln2-n we can obtain

    += +

    +

    +

    n MCl

    M

    n

    n

    M n

    Cl

    SH

    HKM

    2

    2

    )(1

    )(

    )(

    2

    2

    [73]

    This is the expression for total concentration of Pb and Zn as a function of dissolved H 2S, Cl- activity and pH. Now we shall be requiring to

    calculate the activity coefficients of the dissolved species and in turn we have to compute the ionic strength. If we have to take the association of

    53

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    54/59

    NaCl to account, we must know the formation constant of NaCl at the temperature of interest so that we can estimate for the actual concentration

    of Na+ and Cl- in the solution. We shall see a more elaborate method of solubility calculation below. This discussion is mostly taken from Wood

    and Samson(1998). For solubility of galena in a solution of sufficiently low pH so that Pb2+ and H2S are the only species present we can write

    PbS(s) + 2 H+ = Pb2+ + H2S [R3]

    For which, taking the activity of PbS as unity, the equilibrium constant reduces to the solubility product (we shall use square bracket for

    concentration and normal bracket for activity)

    ( )( )2)(

    22

    +

    +=H

    SHPb

    spa

    faK [74]

    and taking the activity coefficient of the Pb ion, the concentration in molaity can be written as

    ( )+++ = 22

    2 )/()(2

    PbSHHspPbfaKm [75]

    If pH, fugacity of H2S and activity coefficient of Pb remain constant, the molality of Pb is fixed at constnt P and T. If additionally, the solution

    contains enough chloride ion and the Pb-chloride complexes form as follows

    Pb2+ + Cl- = PbCl+ (R4)

    Pb2+ + 2 Cl- = PbCl0 (R5)

    Pb2+ + 3 Cl- = PbCl-

    54

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    55/59

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    56/59

    )///

    //1()()(

    2432

    22

    44

    4

    33

    3

    22

    2

    1

    12

    +++

    +++

    += PbClClClPbClClClPbClClCl

    PbClClClPbSHHsp

    mmm

    mfaKPb

    [79]

    We can calculate the single ion activity coefficient with any suitable formula described earlier. The individual ion activity coefficients calculated

    by using Davies equation (taking 0.2 instead of 0.3 and taking the values of A from Helgeson et al., 1981) the activity coefficients of the species

    are calculated to be : Pb2+ = Pb4+ = 0.107 ; Cl-= PbCl+ = PbCl3- = 0.572. Substitution of these values to equation ( ), the molality of Pb is

    calculated to be 2.23 x 10-3 m (=462 mg/kg of water) that means less than half of what we got assuming ideality. We can still move a bit further to

    get a feel of solubility calculation and speciation in natural solutions - say a geothermal brine. In addition to the eight species we have already

    considered, let us include Na+, HCl0, NaCl0, OH-, NaOH0, HS-, S2-, NaHS0, Pb(OH)+, Pb(OH)20, Pb(OH)3

    0, Pb(HS)3-, Pb(HS)2

    0 and Pb(H2S)20. These

    species in fact occur in natural brines though some of them may be insignificant. Now, our compositional variables have increased (to 22) and in

    order to solve for the concentration, we must have 22 equations. We already have five mass action equations and can have thirteen more keeping

    the constraint that no reaction should be a linear combination of any two other reactions.

    56

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    57/59

    H+ + C1- = HCI0

    Na++ Cl- = NaCI0

    H2O (l) = H+ + OH-

    Na+ + OH- = NaOH0

    H2S0 = H+ + HS-

    HS- = H+ + S2-

    Na+ + HS- = NaHS0

    PB2+ + H2O = PbOH+ + H+

    Pb2+ + 2H2O = Pb (OH) 20 + 2H+

    Pb2+ + 3H2O = Pb(OH).3- +.3H+

    PbS + H2S0 = Pb(HS)2

    0

    PbS + H2S0 + HS- = Pb (HS) 3

    -

    PbS + 2H2S0 = PbS(H2S)2

    0

    Now we shall be needing four more equations. Since our solution has to be electrically neutral,

    we shall frame the charge balance equation, equating all the positive charges with the negative

    charges, and it will be again in the concentration unit abiding by the stoichiometric coefficients of

    charge that was discussed earlier.

    The charge balance equation can be written as

    +++++

    ++

    +++++=++++

    33324

    322

    )()(2

    22

    HSPbOHPbPbCl

    PbClSHSOHClPbOHNaHPbClPb

    mmm

    mmmmmmmmmm

    [80]

    We can have more equations if we know the pH (in this case pH is taken as 3), S (total sulfur,suppose for this calculation it is known to be 10 -3 m) and Cl (total chloride, in this case 1 m).

    The S will be the sum of all S-bearing species and Cl will be the sum of all chloride-bearing

    species. Since pH= - log aH+ , we can write mH

    + as equal to 10-pH/ H+. The three mass balances for

    this exaplme can be written as:

    +

    ++

    ++++++=

    =

    ++++++=

    2432

    22232

    2

    432

    /10

    323 )()()(

    PbClPbClPbClPbClNaClHClCl

    H

    pH

    H

    SHPbSHSPbHSPbNaHSSHSSH

    mmmmmmmCl

    m

    mmmmmmmS

    [81,82,83]

    At this stage the calculation scheme is quite complicated even without considering activity

    coefficients. Solution of 22 unknowns from 22 equations would be too lengthy and tedious to do

    manually and hence, you will be needing a computer. There are several numerical methods and

    computer routines that implement those methods available or can be developed if one is good at

    it. In this case, even without considering activity coefficients of all species, the activity

    57

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    58/59

    coefficient of the H+ ion has been incorporated. It is actually a case of more unknowns (23) than

    equations (22), hence some initial approximation and iterative procedure has to be adopted. The

    result obtained in the present case is 1.02 x 10-3 m of Pb i.e., 211 mg/kg (ppm). Thus, competition

    for Cl- by other cations (Na in the present case) has greatly reduced the solubility.

    Finally we can consider an example from a natural ore deposit (Panigrahi, 1992), where in the

    absence of any direct chemistry of the fluid, how the mechanism of transport and deposition of

    metals can be speculated and worked out semiquantitatively. Recall the reactions (R1 to R3) and

    the isothermal-isobaric abridged activity diagram depicting phase relationship in the Cu-Fe-S-O-

    H system. In addition to the sulfides and oxides, we also have silicates (K-feldspar, biotite,

    chlorite, epidote, quartz and so on) present in the assemblage from which we can chose the

    subsystem from mineral paragenesis. For example, for biotite-chalcopyrite (taking the annite

    component) assemblage, we can write a reaction like this involving Cu ion.

    2 KFe3Si3AlO10(OH)2 + 6 Cu+ + 12 H2S + 1.5 O2 = 2 Kal Si3O8 + 6 CuFeS2 + 6 H

    + + 11 H2O

    Now for this reaction we can have the ratio of actvities of Cu+ and H+ worked out at a particular

    pressure, temperature, activity of the H2S(aq) and fugacity of oxygen. In fact we can get a range of

    the activity ratio from different such assemblage because of varying X annite in biotite. Now if you

    also have magnetite in the assemblage, you can write an oxidation reaction of the type

    KFe3Si3AlO10(OH)2 + 0.5 O2 = Kal Si3O8 + Fe3O4 + H2O

    In fact the fugacity of oxygen in the previous reaction can be fixed from this reaction in the

    availability of the appropriate assemblage. Subsequently, you could constrain the chloride ion

    activity in the solution by considering equilibrium of the fluid with biotite considering exchange

    of OH - Cl between biotite and fluid

    Cl-Bt + H2O(fl) = OH

    -Bt + HCl(fl)

    This gives the ratio of the fugacities of HCl and H2O in the fluid. From this reaction

    log aCl- = log K - log (fH2O/fHCl) + log aOH

    -

    The above reaction has been modeled in terms of fugacity ratio of H 2O and HCl as a function of

    temperature and composition of biotite. If we have some constraint on the pH of the fluid, we can

    58

  • 8/8/2019 Aq Lecture

    59/59

    find out the activity of the Cu ion in the fluid and hence the activity product of Cu + and Cl- and

    compare with the formation of constant of CuCl to know whether chloride complexing was the

    dominant mode of transport. We can use any sulfide-silicate-oxide assemblage for the purpose of

    reconstructing the physicochemical environment in the fluid. We must have the required

    thermodynamic data and activity - composition relationship in the minerals and fluid.

    To conclude, what we have discussed would still be very preliminary in terms of concept and

    coverage. If you aim to climb the mountain, this document will take you to the base, to muster

    enough courage to move up, the success will largely depend upon how much of obstruction you

    are able to clear up the mountain - each may experience unique situations.

    Selected References: (for further readings please contact the author)

    Tanger JC and Helgeson HC(1988) Am. J. Sci., 288, 19-98

    Shock E. and Helgeson HC(1988) Goechim. Cosmochim Acta, 52, 2009-2036

    Shock E., Helgeson HC and Sverjensky D(1989) Geochim. Cosmochim Acta, 53, 2157-2183

    Hegeson HC Kirkham DH and Flowers GC(1981) Am. J. Sci., 281, 1249-1516

    Brimhall GH and Crerar DA(1987) Rev. in Min. v17, Min. Soc. Am., 235-321

    Wood SA and Samson IM(1998) Rev. in Econ. Geol., v10, 33-80

    Wood SA, Crerar DA, Brantley SL and Borcsik(1984) Am. J. Sci., 284, 668-705

    Nordstorm DK and Munoz JL (1985) Geochemical Thermodynamics, The Benjamin/Cummings

    Pub.

    Langmuir D(1997) Aqueous environmental Geochemistry. Prentice Hall

    Barrow G.M.(1992) Physical Chemistry, Tata Mc Graw Hill

    Pitzer KS(1987) Rev. in Min. v17, Min Soc. Am., Chap-6