4.7 Article

Molecular Precursor Route to CuCo2S4 Nanosheets: A High-Performance Pre-Catalyst for Oxygen Evolution and Its Application in Zn-Air Batteries

期刊

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 60, 期 9, 页码 6721-6730

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.1c00545

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21776115]
  2. Six Talent Peaks Project in Jiangsu Province [XCL-2018-017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of high-efficiency non-precious metal-based electrocatalysts for the oxygen evolution reaction is crucial for hydrogen production and energy storage. CuCo2S4 nanosheets synthesized in this study showed superior catalytic performance with low overpotential and excellent stability, providing guidelines for the design and development of bimetallic sulfide electrocatalysts for the OER.
Development of high-efficiency non-precious metal-based electrocatalysts to drive the complex four-electron process of the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) is crucial for production of hydrogen and energy storage components. Herein, bimetallic CuCo2S4 nanosheets were created by a new molecular precursor route. The optimal CuCo2S4 catalyst demonstrates superior performance to catalyze the OER with excellent stability, which was confirmed by the low overpotential of 290 mV at 10 mA cm(-2) in 1 M KOH. The catalytic activity can be maintained for at least 40 h. The catalyst after the OER was then detected. The results indicate that S-doped CoOOH/CuO nanosheets formed on the catalyst surface during the OER may act as the catalytic active substance. Furthermore, when employed as an air cathode in a Zn-air battery, it reveals a high open-cycle potential of 1.38 V and a peak power density of 123.9 mW cm(-2). The performance of the rechargeable Zn-air battery is close to that fabricated with commercial precious metal-based electrocatalysts. These findings would furnish some guidelines for the design, development, and applications of bimetallic sulfide electrocatalysts for the OER.

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