4.4 Article

Investigation of urea oxidation as a potential anode reaction during CO2 electrolysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ELECTROCHEMISTRY
卷 51, 期 11, 页码 1583-1590

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10800-021-01601-w

关键词

CO2 electroreduction; Urea oxidation; NiFe catalysts; Formate

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) via the Discovery Grant Program
  2. St Francis Xavier University
  3. Canada Summer Jobs Program
  4. NSERC Undergraduate Research Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electrooxidation of urea on Ni90Fe10 electrodeposited films shows excellent activity and stability in alkaline media during CO2 electrolysis. The pH significantly affects the activity, with a steep decrease at pH 12-13 but remaining higher than the OER. The presence of urea does not significantly impact the production of formate at a tin cathode.
The electrooxidation of urea was investigated on Ni90Fe10 electrodeposited films as an alternative reaction to the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) during CO2 electrolysis. The results show an excellent activity, 135 mA cm(geo)(-2) (by cyclic voltammetry) and stability (90-76.5 mA cm(geo)(-2)) over 30 min in alkaline media (NaOH 1 M + 0.25 M urea). The activity was extremely pH dependent, decreasing sharply at pH 12-13, but remaining higher than the OER at all pH investigated. The activity could be recovered by replacing the electrolyte by a fresh solution. The absence of correlation between the amount of NiOOH sites formed and the current measured at different pH suggests a limitation, either kinetic in the formation of NiOOH or in the amount of hydroxyl anions available, at pH < 14. Nevertheless, at pH approximate to 14, chronopotentiometry measurements revealed a gain of 120 mV in the potential needed to achieve a current density of 50 mA cm(geo)(-2). Meanwhile, the production of formate at a tin cathode remained constant or slightly increased in the presence of urea at the anode at all potentials tested.

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

4.4
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