4.7 Review

A comprehensive review of MXenes as catalyst supports for the oxygen reduction reaction in fuel cells

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH
卷 45, 期 11, 页码 15760-15782

出版社

WILEY-HINDAWI
DOI: 10.1002/er.6899

关键词

catalyst support; fuel cell; MXene; oxygen reduction reaction

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia [FRGS/1/2019/STG01/UKM/02/2]
  2. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia [PP-SELFUEL-2020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in proton exchange membrane fuel cells is a major issue due to sluggish kinetics, and exploring 2D MXene materials as catalyst supports presents great potential. MXenes exhibit excellent electronic properties, electrical conductivity, hydrophilicity, and chemical and thermal stability, making them promising catalyst supports.
The oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) that occurs in the cathode of fuel cells is a major issue in proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) due to their sluggish kinetics. Exploring suitable materials for use as cathode catalysts can be challenging because the materials should be chemically active yet must be stable in an extremely corrosive environment in fuel cells. Since the successful introduction of graphene, 2-dimensional (2D) materials have received extensive research interest regarding their use as support materials for cathode catalysts due to their large surface area for catalyst dispersion. Recently, research on 2D MXene-based catalyst supports has started to increase. Excellent electronic properties, electrical conductivity, hydrophilicity and chemical and thermal stability are the key properties of potential MXenes used as catalyst supports. Therefore, in this review, the properties and performance of 2D MXene-based catalyst supports in the ORR are comprehensively discussed. This finding provides the groundwork for the exploration of MXenes in electrocatalysis, especially in the ORR. Challenges and future research directions are also discussed in this review.

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