4.8 Review

Critical review on the synthesis, characterization, and application of highly efficient metal chalcogenide catalysts for fuel cells

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2022.101044

关键词

Metal chalcogenide; Synthesis techniques; Characterization techniques; Oxygen reduction reaction; Selective catalysis; Anode poisoning; Fuel cells

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review article explores the unique capabilities of metal chalcogenides (MC) as tailored catalysts in fuel cells. By controlling their morphology and quantity, MC catalysts can enhance the performance of fuel cells. As anodic catalysts, MCs can efficiently oxidize various fuels, while hindering the formation of poisonous species. As cathodic catalysts, MCs exhibit selective reduction of oxygen and provide current values similar to noble metal catalysts.
The shift in the energy sector toward green resources makes fuel cells increasingly relevant as a supplier of green and sustainable energy. However, factors such as expensive catalysts, anodic poisoning, and fuel crossover reduce the lifetime and performance of the fuel cells, necessitating catalysis improvement. This review article presents the unique capabilities of metal chalcogenides (MC) as tailored catalysts, elucidating their synthesis, testing techniques, and performance evaluations. MC catalysts are matured via various physical and chemical methods to control their morphology, quantity, dimension, and size. Upon synthesis, the catalyst performance is quantified using three-electrode cells, followed by tests in fuel-cell prototypes. As anodic catalysts, MCs oxidize various fuels such as methanol, ethanol, urea, and impure H2 at high current densities and low onset potentials, while hindering the poisoning species. As cathodic catalysts, MCs exhibit current values similar to that exhibited by their noble metal counterparts while reducing oxygen selectively in the vicinity of the fuels via four electron transfers at a wide range of potentials.

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