4.8 Article

Energetic Span as a Rate-Determining Term for Electrocatalytic Volcanos

期刊

ACS CATALYSIS
卷 8, 期 11, 页码 10590-10598

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.8b03008

关键词

electrocatalysis; rate-determining term; energetic span; volcano relation; Tafel slope

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21832004, 21703250]
  2. 1000 Plan Professorship for Young Talents
  3. Hundred Talents Program of Fujian Province
  4. Fujian Science and Technology Key Project [2016H0043]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work presents a new theoretical framework to construct volcano relations (VRs) that are capable of predicting and understanding the activity of top electrocatalysts. We propose a thermodynamic form of the energetic span (delta E) as a rate-determining term for electrocatalytic reactions, which allows the essential factors such as the coverage of the stable intermediates and the energetics of the most demanding steps to be included in the rate equations and therefore overcomes the weakness of the current electrocatalytic VRs derived from kinetic models using the maximum standard free energy (Delta G(max)degrees) of elementary reaction steps as rate-determining terms. The Delta G(max)degrees-based VRs are shown to be applicable only at large overpotentials, where the intermediates involved in delta E and Delta G(max)degrees converge. At small overpotentials, where the excellent catalysts function, the Delta G(max)degrees-based VRs may give improper predictions by missing the effects of the surface phases of stable adsorbates and their evolution with the potential. As well as revealing new features of electrocatalytic VRs and reasonably explaining some recent experimental results on efficient electrocatalysts for the hydrogen and oxygen electrode reactions, the delta E-based rate models provide rich information about the catalytic mechanism and kinetics, e.g., the evolution of surface phases of stable intermediates, rate-determining transition states, and Tafel slopes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据