Response to comments on E. Huttunen-Saarivirta et al., “Kinetic properties of the passive film on copper in the presence of sulfate-reducing bacteria”

E. Huttunen-Saarivirta, P. Rajala, L. Carpén, J. Wang, F. Liu, E. Ghanbari, F. Mao, C. Dong, J. Yang, S. Sharifi-Asl, D. D. Macdonald (Corresponding Author)

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

The Comments by Martino et al.1 on the original manuscript2 criticize our interpretation of the existence and properties of the Cu2S barrier layer of the passive film that forms on the surface of copper in SRB-bearing groundwater at 10°C. First, it is necessary to recognize that this discussion involves two forms of copper, which we refer to as “pure copper (P-Cu)” (nominally > 99.999%) and “oxygen-free phosphorous copper (OFP-Cu)”. P-Cu has been used in the majority of our work3–6 with only some of our later work employing OFP-Cu,2 a point that does not seem to be appreciated by Martino et al.1 On the other hand, the Shoesmith group appears to have concentrated exclusively upon OFP-Cu, at least in recent years.7–11 This difference is of crucial importance in responding to the critique by Martino et al.1

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)Y17-Y26
JournalJournal of the Electrochemical Society
Volume166
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019
MoE publication typeA2 Review article in a scientific journal

Fingerprint

Sulfates
Copper
Bacteria
Kinetics
Bearings (structural)
Groundwater
Oxygen

Cite this

@article{2fec39becd71488081652a7070e3128f,
title = "Response to comments on E. Huttunen-Saarivirta et al., “Kinetic properties of the passive film on copper in the presence of sulfate-reducing bacteria”",
abstract = "The Comments by Martino et al.1 on the original manuscript2 criticize our interpretation of the existence and properties of the Cu2S barrier layer of the passive film that forms on the surface of copper in SRB-bearing groundwater at 10°C. First, it is necessary to recognize that this discussion involves two forms of copper, which we refer to as “pure copper (P-Cu)” (nominally > 99.999{\%}) and “oxygen-free phosphorous copper (OFP-Cu)”. P-Cu has been used in the majority of our work3–6 with only some of our later work employing OFP-Cu,2 a point that does not seem to be appreciated by Martino et al.1 On the other hand, the Shoesmith group appears to have concentrated exclusively upon OFP-Cu, at least in recent years.7–11 This difference is of crucial importance in responding to the critique by Martino et al.1",
author = "E. Huttunen-Saarivirta and P. Rajala and L. Carp{\'e}n and J. Wang and F. Liu and E. Ghanbari and F. Mao and C. Dong and J. Yang and S. Sharifi-Asl and Macdonald, {D. D.}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1149/2.0771910jes",
language = "English",
volume = "166",
pages = "Y17--Y26",
journal = "Journal of the Electrochemical Society",
issn = "0013-4651",
number = "10",

}

Response to comments on E. Huttunen-Saarivirta et al., “Kinetic properties of the passive film on copper in the presence of sulfate-reducing bacteria”. / Huttunen-Saarivirta, E.; Rajala, P.; Carpén, L.; Wang, J.; Liu, F.; Ghanbari, E.; Mao, F.; Dong, C.; Yang, J.; Sharifi-Asl, S.; Macdonald, D. D. (Corresponding Author).

In: Journal of the Electrochemical Society, Vol. 166, No. 10, 2019, p. Y17-Y26.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response to comments on E. Huttunen-Saarivirta et al., “Kinetic properties of the passive film on copper in the presence of sulfate-reducing bacteria”

AU - Huttunen-Saarivirta, E.

AU - Rajala, P.

AU - Carpén, L.

AU - Wang, J.

AU - Liu, F.

AU - Ghanbari, E.

AU - Mao, F.

AU - Dong, C.

AU - Yang, J.

AU - Sharifi-Asl, S.

AU - Macdonald, D. D.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - The Comments by Martino et al.1 on the original manuscript2 criticize our interpretation of the existence and properties of the Cu2S barrier layer of the passive film that forms on the surface of copper in SRB-bearing groundwater at 10°C. First, it is necessary to recognize that this discussion involves two forms of copper, which we refer to as “pure copper (P-Cu)” (nominally > 99.999%) and “oxygen-free phosphorous copper (OFP-Cu)”. P-Cu has been used in the majority of our work3–6 with only some of our later work employing OFP-Cu,2 a point that does not seem to be appreciated by Martino et al.1 On the other hand, the Shoesmith group appears to have concentrated exclusively upon OFP-Cu, at least in recent years.7–11 This difference is of crucial importance in responding to the critique by Martino et al.1

AB - The Comments by Martino et al.1 on the original manuscript2 criticize our interpretation of the existence and properties of the Cu2S barrier layer of the passive film that forms on the surface of copper in SRB-bearing groundwater at 10°C. First, it is necessary to recognize that this discussion involves two forms of copper, which we refer to as “pure copper (P-Cu)” (nominally > 99.999%) and “oxygen-free phosphorous copper (OFP-Cu)”. P-Cu has been used in the majority of our work3–6 with only some of our later work employing OFP-Cu,2 a point that does not seem to be appreciated by Martino et al.1 On the other hand, the Shoesmith group appears to have concentrated exclusively upon OFP-Cu, at least in recent years.7–11 This difference is of crucial importance in responding to the critique by Martino et al.1

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073236267&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1149/2.0771910jes

DO - 10.1149/2.0771910jes

M3 - Review Article

AN - SCOPUS:85073236267

VL - 166

SP - Y17-Y26

JO - Journal of the Electrochemical Society

JF - Journal of the Electrochemical Society

SN - 0013-4651

IS - 10

ER -