4.7 Review

Excluding false positives: A perspective toward credible ammonia quantification in nitrogen reduction reaction

Journal

CHINESE JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS
Volume 44, Issue -, Pages 50-66

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S1872-2067(22)64148-2

Keywords

Nitrogen reduction reaction; Ammonia quantification; False positives; Contamination; Isotope

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ammonia is important for fertilizer production and green fuels, but the nitrogen reduction reaction (NRR) towards ammonia faces challenges such as volatility, repeatability, and false-positive results. This review discusses factors that induce false-positive results and proposes methods to eliminate them, establishing a foundation for more accurate ammonia quantification in the NRR research field.
As an essential raw material for fertilizer production and promising green fuels, ammonia is significant to the national economy and social development. Recently, nitrogen reduction reaction (NRR) towards ammonia under mild conditions has received intensive attention due to environmental friendliness and low energy consumption, compared to the rigorous and contaminative Haber-Bosch process. However, as current research deepens, some fatal challenges emerged in this field-not only high volatility and low repeatability but false-positive results, casting serious doubts about its prospects. In this review, we summarized and discussed some potential factors that possibly induce false-positive results for accurate ammonia quantification, including the aspects of catalyst materials, experimental process, and quantification methods. And corresponding methods to eliminate these effects are also summarized. Furthermore, a promising protocol and several control principles are proposed to eliminate potential errors during ammonia quantification. This review establishes a paradigm base in NRR research field toward more accurate ammonia quantification. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available