4.6 Article

In situ self-assembled 3-D interconnected pristine graphene supported NiO nanosheets as superior catalysts for oxygen evolution

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 342, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2020.136118

关键词

Oxygen evolution; In situ self-assembly; Nanosheets; 3-D interconnected nanostructures; Graphene

资金

  1. Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, Ministry of Education of China, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program for Chongqing Overseas Returned Scholars [cx2017061]
  2. Chongqing Natural Science Foundation [cstc2015jcyjA50029]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [XDJK2017B057]
  4. Program for Innovation Team Building at Institutions of Higher Education in Chongqing [CXTDX201601011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Supported nanostructures of oxygen evolution catalysts with three-dimensional (3-D) architectures are promising for significantly boosting the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) efficiency, but are difficult to fabricate. We report the synthesis of 3-D interconnected pristine graphene supported NiO nanosheets via in situ self-assembly. Its overpotential at 10 mA cm(-2 )is 320 mV and Tafel slope is 52.4 mV dec(-1), both of which are low er than most reported values of NiO-based catalysts and even Ir and Ru-based ones. It exhibits only a slight loss of the current density after 20 h of chronoamperometric measurement at an overpotential of 320 mV (from 10.09 to 9.62 mA cm( -2)) and a small increase after 1000 CV cycles (from 41.47 to 46.01 m A cm(-2 )at 1.58 V). The synthesis of NiO nanosheets on graphene offers key insights into the self-assembly mechanism. The reported in situ self-assembly of metal oxide nanostructures with 3-D architecture on graphene is a low-cost, facile and mild strategy for making high-performance OER catalyst demonstrating the advantages of 3-D interconnected nanostructures supported on graphene. (C) 2020 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