4.6 Article

Electrochemical oxidation of urea on nickel-rhodium nanoparticles/carbon composites

Journal

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
Volume 297, Issue -, Pages 715-724

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2018.11.205

Keywords

Cavity microelectrode; Electrochemical oxidation; Nickel; Rhodium-nickel; Urea

Funding

  1. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  2. CMTR Group of ICMPE
  3. University Paris-Est Creteil
  4. MBA Water Treatment Chemicals Co.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ni100-xRhx/C composites consisting in bimetallic nanoparticles (10 wt.%) dispersed in high surface area graphite were synthesized and their electrocatalytic performances for urea oxidation tested in alkaline media by cyclic voltammetry using a cavity microelectrode. The composites are synthesized by impregnation of a graphite powder with an aqueous solution of nickel and rhodium salts, followed by drying and reduction under H-2/Ar at 500 degrees C. TEM observations reveal that the Rh fraction influences the average nanoparticle size which varies from 15 nm for pure Ni to 2 nm for pure Rh. XRD analysis indicates that solid solutions are obtained for all compositions. Ni100-xRhx with up to 30 at.% of rhodium have a higher electrocatalytic activity than pure Ni and their voltammograms exhibit two urea oxidation peaks rather than one, the additional peak being at a potential 50 mV less positive than that of pure nickel. When the rhodium content increases above 30 at.%, the current of urea oxidation decreases and becomes almost zero for pure rhodium. These variations in current as the fraction of rhodium increases are only related to the decrease in nanoparticle size and in nickel content (within a surface layer of similar to 1 nm). Hence, there is no synergistic effect between nickel and rhodium for the oxidation of urea in alkaline media. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available