4.6 Article

Sandwich-like NiOx/NiCo2O4/Co3O4 nanoflakes enable efficient oxygen evolution electrocatalysis

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 322, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2019.134753

关键词

Dealloying; NiOx/NiCo2O4/Co3O4 nanoflakes; Electrocatalysis; Oxygen evolution reaction

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China of China [51771098]
  2. Science Challenge Project [tz2016004]
  3. international cooperation project on scientific and technological innovation between China government [2016YFE0104000]
  4. National Energy Novel Materials Center China Academy of Engineering Physics [NENMCelle1703]
  5. Academician Workstation Building Project of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Scientific and Technological Department [[2014]91]
  6. international cooperation project on scientific and technological innovation between Italy government [2016YFE0104000]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Water splitting is one of the most viable methods for obtaining green energy. However, due to the high energy consumption and low conversion efficiency of water splitting, it remains a challenge to design an oxygen-efficient and stable catalyst. In this work, NiOx nanoflakes were prepared by electrochemical codeposition and dealloying, and Co3O4 films were deposited on the NiOx nanoflakes by atomic layer deposition (ALD). After annealing, it was found by HRTEM that NiCo2O4 formed between the NiOx nanoflakes and Co3O4 layers. These nanoflakes had a low overpotential of 315 mV at a current density of 10 mA/cm(2) in a 1 M NaOH solution. Furthermore, the sandwich-like nanostructure also provided good oxygen evolution stability and a large carrier concentration. Due to the Co+2/Co+3 and Ni+2/Ni+3 electron pairs of NiCo2O4 combined with NiOx and Co3O4, the charge transferred easily and the activity increased. Thus, an efficient and simple OER catalyst was developed, which can contribute to the production of green energy. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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