4.7 Article

First principles screening of transition metal single-atom catalysts for nitrogen reduction reaction

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 612, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2022.155916

关键词

DFT screening; Single-atom catalyst; ?-Sb monolayer; Nitrogen reduction reaction; Selectivity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The discovery of metals as catalytic centers for nitrogen reduction reactions (NRR) has led to interest in single-atom catalysts (SACs). However, existing SACs have poor activity and low selectivity, which falls short of industrial requirements. Through first principles screening, doping engineering can effectively regulate the NRR performance of beta-Sb monolayer. Among 24 transition metal dopants, Re@Sb shows the best NRR catalytic performance with low limiting potential and can inhibit hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) while achieving a high theoretical Faradaic efficiency of 100%. These findings accelerate catalyst discovery for ammonia synthesis and contribute to understanding structure-performance correlations.
The discovery of metals as catalytic centers for nitrogen reduction reactions (NRR) has stimulated great enthusiasm for single-atom catalysts. However, the poor activity and low selectivity of available single-atom catalysts (SACs) are far away from the industrial requirement. Through the first principles screening, the doping engineering can effectively regulate the NRR performance of beta-Sb monolayer. Especially, the origin of activated N2 is discovered from the perspective of the electronic structure of the active center. Among the 24 transition metal dopants, Re@Sb showed the best NRR catalytic performance with a low limiting potential. The Re@Sb also could significantly inhibit hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and achieve a high theoretical Faradaic efficiency of 100%. Our findings not only accelerate discovery of catalysts for ammonia synthesis but also contribute to further elucidate the structure-performance correlations.

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