The model is also employed to interpret existing experimental data. As for the data measured by Pajkossy and Kolb, the model explains the capacitance peak seen near the pzc, rather than a capacitance valley as predicted by the classical GCS theory, as a consequence of water effects. However, the model and experiments are inconsistent in terms of the concentration-dependence of the capacitance curves, calling for further efforts from both theoretical and experimental sides. The model impressively fits recent CV-based capacitance data of Pt(111)-aqueous solution interfaces. The explanation is based on the ansatz that the experimental data are not the pure double-layer capacitance but include chemisorption capacitances. This ansatz resolves the discrepancy that the CV-based capacitance values are several fold higher than the values obtained using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. In addition, it removes the need to introduce unknown attractive metal-ion forces in a previous model. The ansatz and the resulting explanation, though being appealing, must be taken with care, as it implies that there is no pure double layer region even for Pt(111), an aspect that is yet to be verified.