4.6 Review

Research Progress in ZIF-8 Derived Single Atomic Catalysts for Oxygen Reduction Reaction

期刊

CATALYSTS
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/catal12050525

关键词

oxygen reduction reaction; transition metal single atomic catalyst; zeolite imidazolate framework (ZIF-8); catalytic performance

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [52171218, 21905174, 51902301]
  2. Program of Shanghai Subject Chief Scientist [17XD1403000]
  3. Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission [2019-01-07-00-07-E00015]
  4. Shanghai Pujiang Program [21PJ1411100]
  5. Shanghai Rising-Star Program [20QA1407100, 21QA1406500]
  6. General Program of Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai [20ZR1438400, 22ZR1443900]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review presents the latest advances of M-SAC-N-C catalysts derived from ZIF-8 precursors in ORR electrocatalysis, highlighting key challenges and future research directions.
Transition metal (TM) single atomic catalysts (M-SAC-N-C) derived from doped zeolite imidazolate frameworks (ZIF-8) are considered attractive oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) catalysts for fuel cells and metal-air batteries due to their advantages of high specific surface area, more active catalytic sites, adjustable pore size, and coordination topology features. This review provides an updated overview of the latest advances of M-SAC-N-C catalysts derived from ZIF-8 precursors in ORR electrocatalysis. Particularly, some key challenges, including coordination environments regulation of catalysis center in M-SAC-N-C, the active sites loading optimization and synergistic effects between TM nanoclusters/nanoparticles and the single atoms on M-SAC-N-C catalysis activity, as well as their adaptability in various devices, are summarized for improving future development and application of M-SAC-N-C catalysts. In addition, this review puts forward future research directions, making it play a better role in ORR catalysis for fuel cells and metal air batteries.

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