Comparison of the potential for tuning adsorbate binding energy via external stimuli are presented for imposed electric field (Figure ) and surface strain (Figure ). As calculated by McEwen and co-workers , electric fields ranging from -1.0 to +1.0 V/Å applied to a Nickel surface resulted in significant variation of the binding energy of methane (blue in Figure ), hydrogen (black), and formaldehyde (red) relative to methanol. From the slopes of a linear best fit, methane varied less with changes in methanol (slope ~ γ CH4-CH3OH ~ 0.18) than hydrogen (γ H2-CH3OH ~ 0.51), while formaldehyde actually decreased in binding energy as methanol increased in binding energy (γ CH2O-CH3OH ~ -1.31). Another method of varying surface binding energy of surface strain is presented in Figure using the calculated binding energies of Shengchun Yang and co-workers . As depicted in Figure , the binding energy of carbon monoxide and atomic oxygen were calculated for the lowest energy adsorption geometry on the M(111) surface of five different metals: Cu (black), Rh (green), Ir (purple), Pd (orange), and Pt (blue). Binding energies varied due to imposed surface strain of -3.0% to +3.0%; while this large surface strain is likely not physically feasible, it does provide insight into the relative impact of strain on oxygen relative to carbon monoxide. From these calculations, there exists some initial evidence that a two-parameter linear model can effectively describe the relative change in binding energy between two surface adsorbates. . (C) The heat of adsorption of methanol varies differently than methane (CH 4 ), hydrogen (H 2 ), and formaldehyde (CH 2 O) on Ni metal in the presence of an electric field varying between -1.0 to +1.0 V/Å calculated by McEwen and co-workers . (D) The binding energy of oxygen, O*, and carbon monoxide, CO*, on Copper (black), Rhodium (green), Iridium (purple), Palladium (orange), and Platinum (blue) with strain of -3.0% to +3.0% .