4.8 Article

Highly Efficient Oxygen Evolution Reaction Enabled by Phosphorus Doping of the Fe Electronic Structure in Iron-Nickel Selenide Nanosheets

期刊

ADVANCED SCIENCE
卷 8, 期 18, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/advs.202101775

关键词

electronic structure; Ni0 75Fe0 25Se2; oxygen evolution reaction; P doping

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21802086]
  2. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation [ZR2019MB048, ZR2020YQ09]
  3. QiLu Young Scientist Program of Shandong University
  4. Shenzhen Fundamental Research Program [JCYJ20190807093411445]
  5. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) [16/IA/4629]
  6. SFI Center MaREI [12/RC/2302_P2, 12/RC/2278_P2, 16/RC/3918]
  7. SFI Center AMBER [12/RC/2302_P2, 12/RC/2278_P2, 16/RC/3918]
  8. SFI Center Confirm [12/RC/2302_P2, 12/RC/2278_P2, 16/RC/3918]
  9. Irish Research Council (IRC) [IRCLA/2017/285]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The authors reported a facile approach to independently regulate the electronic structure of Fe in Ni0.75Fe0.25Se2 by P doping, resulting in an electrode with superior catalytic performance for the oxygen evolution reaction. The new strategy presented in this work allows for rational design of efficient electrocatalysts for OER.
The electronic structure of active sites is critically important for electrochemical reactions. Here, the authors report a facile approach to independently regulate the electronic structure of Fe in Ni0.75Fe0.25Se2 by P doping. The resulting electrode exhibits superior catalytic performance for the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) showing a low overpotential (238 mV at 100 mA cm(-2), 185 mV at 10 mA cm(-2)) and an impressive durability in an alkaline medium. Additionally, the mass activity of 328.19 A g(-1) and turnover frequency (TOF) of 0.18 s(-1) at an overpotential of 500 mV are obtained for PNi0.75Fe0.25Se2 which is much higher than that of Ni0.75Fe0.25Se2 and RuO2. This work presents a new strategy for the rational design of efficient electrocatalysts for 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

4.8
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