4.7 Article

Optimized Nanopores Opened on N-Doped Carbon Nanohorns Filled with Fe/Fe2O3 Nanoparticles as Advanced Electrocatalysts for the Oxygen Evolution Reaction

期刊

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 60, 期 21, 页码 16529-16537

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.1c02416

关键词

-

资金

  1. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2020M683671XB]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fe-N-CNHs were produced by one-step method and showed performance influenced by nanopore size of carbon carriers and size of Fe2O3 nanoparticles. The oxidation temperature and heat treatment have impact on the stability of Fe-N-CNHs.
N-doped carbon nanohorns filled with Fe nanoparticles (Fe-N-CNHs) were produced by one-step positive pressure-assisted arc discharge in the Ar and N-2 mixture. After oxidation treatments in air, Fe was converted into Fe2O3, and nanopores were opened on CNHs from 1 to 5 nm controlled by oxidation temperature. Fe-N-CNHs oxidized in O-2 at 550 degrees C (Fe2O3-N-CNH550ox) show 245 mV at 20 mA cm(-1), which is much smaller than that of the ones oxidized at 500 degrees C (Fe2O3-N-CNH500ox), contributing to the larger pore size on CNHs (3-5 nm vs 2-3 nm) and a larger number of nanopores caused by the enhanced sidewall nanopores. However, the stability of Fe2O3-N-CNH550ox becomes much poorer than that of Fe2O3-N-CNH500ox after 2000 cycles. The unique relationship between the overpotential and long-term stability can be explained by the consideration of the size of Fe2O3 nanoparticles and nanopores on CNHs. Furthermore, the stability for Fe2O3-N-CNH550ox can be rapidly increased after heat treatment in Ar for 1 h caused by shrinking the size of tip nanopores. Herein, we first reveal that the performance of OER is related to the nanopore size of carbon carriers and the catalyst of nanometal particles. The optimization of pore-opening conditions in carbon carriers can be achieved a superior electrocatalytic OER performance, including a low overpotential at high current density and long-term stability.

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