4.8 Article

Earth-Abundant Oxygen Electrocatalysts for Alkaline Anion-Exchange-Membrane Water Electrolysis: Effects of Catalyst Conductivity and Comparison with Performance in Three-Electrode Cells

Journal

ACS CATALYSIS
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages 7-15

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.8b04001

Keywords

oxygen evolution reaction; water electrolysis; alkaline exchange membrane; electrocatalysts; electrolyzer; electrical conductivity

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [CHE-1566348]
  2. Special Excellent PhD International Visiting Program
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [16D310603]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Anion exchange membrane (AEM) electrolysis is a promising technology to produce hydrogen through the splitting of pure water. In contrast to proton-exchange-membrane (PEM) technology, which requires precious-metal oxide anodes, AEM systems allow for the use of earth-abundant anode catalysts. Here we report a study of first-row transition-metal (oxy)hydroxide/oxide catalyst powders for application in AEM devices and compare physical properties and performance to benchmark IrOx catalysts as well as typical catalysts for alkaline electrolyzers. We show that the catalysts' oxygen-evolution activity measured in alkaline electrolyte using a typical three-electrode cell is a poor indicator of performance in the AEM system. The best oxygen-evolution-reaction (OER) catalysts in alkaline electrolyte, NiFeOxHy oxyhydroxides, are the worst in AEM electrolysis devices where a solid alkaline electrolyte is used along with a pure water feed. NiCoOx-based catalysts show the best performance in AEM electrolysis. The performance can be further improved by adding Fe species to the particle surface. We attribute the differences in performance in part to differences in the electrical conductivity of the catalyst phases, which are also measured and reported.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available