Enthalpy of formation means the enthalpy readjust which occurs (readjust in energy) when 1 mole of a compound creates from the individual elements existing in the compound.

Example: the development of #"1 mol"# of water from the elements (hydrogen and also oxygen)

#"H"_2(g) + 1/2"O"_2(g) -> "H"_2"O"(l)#, #DeltaH_"rxn" = -"285.8 kJ/mol"#

The facets which will form #"H"_2"O"# in this reactivity are current in their elemental says.

You are watching: Standard enthalpy of formation equal to zero

The enthalpy of development for an facet in its elemental state will always be #0# bereason it takes no power to form a naturally-developing compound.

So in this situation, #DeltaH_("rxn", "H"_2"O") = DeltaH_(f,"H"_2"O")#.

Answer attach

Stefan V.
Feb 26, 2015

I"ll attempt and emphasis a little more on why the worth for the conventional state enthalpy of formation of elements in their natural state was collection to zero.

Enthalpy, which is a state function, has an extremely exciting property - it depends on the initial and the last says of the system, however not on just how the system got from one state to the other.

An important implication of this is that enthalpy, which fundamentally expresses the capacity to create warmth, cannot be measured, or more particularly, absolute enthalpy cannot be measured. We deserve to only meacertain changes in enthalpy.

Now, the enthalpy change for a development reaction is called enthalpy of formation. When a substance is created from the most steady form of its aspects, a adjust in enthalpy takes area. You can check out the reactants as the initial state and also the product as the last state.

See more: Why You Wanna Player Hate On Me, Player Hater

But in the case of herbal facets in their most stable state, no adjust in enthalpy takes location because the reactants and also the product are the very same. The facet is already developed, so a formation reaction is not important. An element can not "react" to form itself.


So, if no change in enthalpy takes area, shouldn"t zero be the finest option to describe the enthalpy of formation for an facet in its traditional state?

The truth is that zero was an arbitrary, but pragmatic alternative (if that"s even possible) both because it"s even more suitable to associate no change through zero, and bereason it"s much easier to compare to zero.

Because no absolute procedures have the right to be made on enthalpy worths, a relative range is the next finest thing. And what much better zero suggest on this range if not the the majority of secure aspects in their conventional state?