4.6 Article

Investigating the durability of a direct methanol fuel cell equipped with commercial Platinum Group Metal-free cathodic electro-catalysts

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 394, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2021.139108

关键词

Pgm-free catalyst; Direct methanol fuel cell; Durability; Oxygen reduction; Fuel cell

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) under the Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Technologies Office (HFTO) [DE-EE0008419]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a long-term durability investigation was conducted on a Platinum Group Metal-free cathodic electro-catalyst for direct methanol fuel cells. Results showed a significant performance decrease after 100 hours of operation, with potential causes including catalyst aggregation, reduction of carbon and nitrogen species, and Ruthenium migration leading to poisoning of the membrane and cathode catalyst.
For the first time a long-term (500 h) durability study in direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs) is carried out on a Platinum Group Metal-free (PGM-free) cathodic electro-catalyst commercially available on market. The electro-catalyst is tested for 500 h at a fixed cell voltage (0.3 V), recording the polarization curves during the operation. A drastic decrease in performance is observed after the first 100 h (from 220 to 75 mA cm(-2)); afterwards, the decrease is flatter, passing from 75 to 25 mA cm(-2) (at 500 h). The causes of this performance degradation are investigated by postmortem physicochemical analyzes, such as X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with X-ray energy dispersive analysis (EDX). Possible reasons of degradation are indicated to be PGM-free catalyst aggregation, carbon and nitrogen species decrease, Ruthenium dissolution and migration from the anode to the cathode, poisoning both membrane and cathode catalyst. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.6
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