4.8 Review

Toward Excellence of Transition Metal-Based Catalysts for CO2Electrochemical Reduction: An Overview of Strategies and Rationales

期刊

SMALL METHODS
卷 4, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/smtd.202000033

关键词

CO(2)electrochemical reduction; electrocatalysis; heterogeneous catalysts; transition metals

资金

  1. HBIS Group, China
  2. Australian Research Council [LP160101729]
  3. University of Queensland (UQ)
  4. Australian Research Council [LP160101729] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rational modulations of interactions between the catalyst surface and intermediates are challenging but extremely important to achieve an efficient and selective electrochemical CO(2)reduction (CO2R). Current CO2R catalyst design remains inefficient because of a gap between existing practical design paradigms and theoretical studies in catalysis. This review attempts to mitigate this gap through a critical discussion of the correlations between recent strategies to develop transition metal-based catalysts and the underlying rationales and mechanisms. These strategies include surface engineering, the introduction of heterogeneous atoms, and dimension control, and can be implemented by tactics such as controlling catalyst surface facets, surface tethering, alloying, inducing strains, oxide derivation, molecular scaffolding, and nanostructuring. How these tactics are able to tailor the electronic structure, adsorption geometry, density of active sites, and local environment of catalyst to achieve an efficient and selective CO2R is described. This review concludes with a discussion of the key research needs in this field such as the surface proton formation and transfer involved in CO2R, the roles of mass-transfer or electrode kinetics in CO2R catalysis, development of robust, standardized catalyst testing protocols, and application of machine learning and high-throughput experiment to accelerate catalyst screening processes.

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