(Invited) Atomic Scale Details in Electrochemistry & Electrodeposition: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Abstract

Since the invention of the STM more than 40 years ago, which enabled the direct observation of surfaces on the atomic scale, it took us around 25 years full of surprises, before we gathered enough knowledge to formulate a decent background including almost all surface science phenomena [1].At this time, it was often believed that fundamental surface science was dead. However,progress in nanotechnology and the semiconducting industry, kept this discipline alive, although the number of researchers steadily decreased. Being at the border between physics and chemistry, electrochemistry and electrodeposition research was executed on the atomic, fundamental level by only a few “Mohicans”.The Good is:- that the required energy transition makes our discipline increasingly relevant.- that this leads to a revival of surface science.- that more and more researchers from different fields step into our business.- that we developed in operando methods, like ECSTM, SXRD, and XPS, that deliver atomic insights.- that inventive new methods become available, like the reaction volume or entropy on the atomic scale.- that our complex machines get easier over time.- that we constantly gain new fundamental, atomic scale insights.The Bad, however, is:- that the combination of electrochemistry with surface science is a real complex matter.- that the parameter space in electrochemistry is orders of magnitudes larger than surface science.- that there are too less groups and researchers, in general, to tackle all emerging problems.- that the time is ticking: global climate change is not waiting to figure out all details.- that we will need at least one generation to educate new students.The Ugly is severe, interesting and challenging, as it becomes clear:- that, instead of directly gaining more insights, often a multitude of additional questions emerge.- that there is a complex interplay of fundamental atomic and molecular processes.- that “known” textbook knowledge should be taken with a grain of salt.- that some fundamentals are even missing completely: our research is still in its infancy.- that there exists an enormous amount of literature describing a magnitude of different effects.- that one needs expertise of several different fields to really understand one detail.In my talk, I will present several recent examples, in which we thought that we had understood it. Often one last, small experiment was required to deliver the final confirmation. Oh boy, and how often have we been wrong. Nature confronts us with what we do not know! It will be a long and arduous journey, but similar to the early days in surface science, full with exciting and surprising puzzles from nature.I hope that I can trigger your enthusiasm to join our important journey![1] H. Ibach, “Physics of Surfaces and Interfaces”, Springer (2006)