Erratum to: J. Solid State Electrochem. (2011) 15: 2095–2100DOI: 10.1007/s10008-011-1398-4

The authors regret an error made in this review (p. 2096).

The main proponents of the bridge-bonded formate pathway being dominant are the Osawa group (see Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 1159 and references therein), whereas the Behm group (references as per the review) propose the dominant pathway is via adsorbed formic acid with the formate pathway contributing <25% of total current.