4.7 Article

First-principles study on Fe2B2 as efficient catalyst for nitrogen reduction reaction

期刊

CHINESE CHEMICAL LETTERS
卷 32, 期 10, 页码 3137-3142

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cclet.2021.02.043

关键词

Nitrogen reduction reaction; Electrocatalysts; Free energy; DFT calculations; Magnetism

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21603109, 11904081, 21876104]
  2. Henan Joint Funds of the National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1404216]
  3. Special Fund of Tianshui Normal University, China [CXJ2020-08]
  4. Scientific Research Program - Shaanxi Provincial Education Department [20JK0676]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ammonia (NH3) is deemed a clean and efficient energy carrier, with electrocatalytic nitrogen reduction reaction (NRR) being able to achieve high-efficiency NH3 synthesis. Fe2B2, as a potential electrocatalyst, shows lower free energy and enhanced electron transfer, making it favorable for NRR.
Ammonia (NH3) is considered an attractive candidate as a clean, highly efficient energy carrier. The electrocatalytic nitrogen reduction reaction (NRR) can reduce energy input and carbon footprint; therefore, rational design of effective electrocatalysts is essential for achieving high-efficiency electrocatalytic NH3 synthesis. Herein, we report that the enzymatic mechanism is the more favourable pathway for NRR, due to lower limiting potential (-0.44 V), lower free energy (only 0.02 eV) of the first hydrogenation step (*N-N to *NH-N), and more electron transfer from Fe2B2 to the reaction species. In addition, both vacancies and dopants can be helpful in reducing the reaction energy barrier of the potential-determining step. Therefore, we have demonstrated that Fe2B2 is a potential new candidate for effective NRR and highlighted its potential for applications in electrocatalytic NH3 synthesis. (C) 2021 Chinese Chemical Society and Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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