4.8 Article

Atomically engineering activation sites onto metallic 1T-MoS2 catalysts for enhanced electrochemical hydrogen evolution

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-08877-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation Major Research Instrumentation Program [CHE-1338173]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [91022010, 21631007, 21471087, 21225103]
  3. Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China
  4. Tsinghua University Initiative Foundation Research Program [20131089204]
  5. San Diego State University (SDSU) start-up funds
  6. SDSU University Grants Program
  7. NSF [CEBT-1704992]
  8. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, and Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC02-76SF00515]
  9. NSFC [61722403, 11674121]
  10. Program for JLU Science and Technology Innovative Research Team

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Engineering catalytic sites at the atomic level provides an opportunity to understand the catalyst's active sites, which is vital to the development of improved catalysts. Here we show a reliable and tunable polyoxometalate template-based synthetic strategy to atomically engineer metal doping sites onto metallic 1T-MoS2, using Anderson-type polyoxometalates as precursors. Benefiting from engineering nickel and oxygen atoms, the optimized electrocatalyst shows great enhancement in the hydrogen evolution reaction with a positive onset potential of similar to 0 V and a low overpotential of -46 mV in alkaline electrolyte, comparable to platinum-based catalysts. First-principles calculations reveal co-doping nickel and oxygen into 1T-MoS2 assists the process of water dissociation and hydrogen generation from their intermediate states. This research will expand on the ability to improve the activities of various catalysts by precisely engineering atomic activation sites to achieve significant electronic modulations and improve atomic utilization efficiencies.

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