4.5 Review

WO3-Based Materials as Electrocatalysts for Hydrogen Evolution Reaction

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MATERIALS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmats.2020.00105

关键词

tungsten oxide; doping; composites; electrocatalyst; hydrogen evolution reaction

资金

  1. Nature Science Foundation of Guangdong Province [2018A030313779]
  2. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT_16R21]
  3. Chinese 02 Special Fund [2017ZX02408003]
  4. Scientific and Technological Project of Henan Province [182102210297]
  5. Open Fund of National Joint Engineering Research Center for abrasion control and molding of metal materials [HKDNM201807]
  6. Scientific Research Starting Foundation for Ph.D. of Henan University of Science and Technology [13480065]
  7. Science Foundation for Youths of Henan University of Science and Technology [2013QN006]
  8. Student Research Training Plan of Henan University of Science and Technology [2019031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Environmental pollution and energy shortage make the development of clean energy more and more urgent. As a kind of clean renewable energy, hydrogen has attracted more attention recently. WO3-based materials have emerged as one of the most promising candidates for electrocatalytic hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) due to their attractive electrocatalytic activity, low cost, as well as electrochemical durability. In this minireview, we systematically provide an overview of WO3-based materials applied for HER, including pure WO3, doped WO3, and WO3-based composite materials. Furthermore, the strategies to enhance their electrocatalytic performance are summarized and discussed, such as morphological engineering, doping, as well as compositing with other materials. Finally, the limitation and challenges of WO3-based materials for HER and their prospects for future research are proposed. We believe that this minireview will be favorable for scientists to seek more promising HER electrocatalysts.

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

4.5
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