4.8 Article

Structural heterogeneity of single-atom catalysts and true active site generation via ligand exchange during electrochemical H2O2 production

期刊

JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS
卷 419, 期 -, 页码 49-57

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcat.2023.02.003

关键词

Single -atom catalysts; Heterogeneity; Ligand exchange; In situ XAS; Hydrogen peroxide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used in situ X-ray absorption spectroscopy to investigate the electrocatalytic properties of S-doped zeolite-templated carbon (SZTC) with 1-10 wt% Pt in the synthesis of H2O2. It was found that SZTC with a curved polyaromatic framework and abundant sulfur functional groups could stabilize isolated Pt sites. The specific activity of Pt increased rapidly with increasing Pt loading, and upon contact with aqueous electrolytes, only the labile sites were converted to true active sites via ligand exchange with water.
Although often overlooked, single-atom catalysts inevitably contain heterogeneous active sites and their structures can further change under reaction conditions. Here, we conduct rigorous in situ X-ray absorp-tion spectroscopy with 1-10 wt% Pt on S-doped zeolite-templated carbon (SZTC) to elucidate their remarkable electrocatalytic H2O2 synthesis properties. SZTC with a curved polyaromatic framework and abundant sulfur functional groups can stabilize isolated Pt sites with up to 10 wt% Pt loading. Although all catalysts contain apparently identical Pt-S4 sites in their as-synthesized form, the Pt-specific activity increases rapidly with increasing Pt loading. It appears that Pt first forms inert Pt-S4 in SZTC and then forms labile Pt-S4 with increasing Pt loading. Upon contact with aqueous electrolytes, only the labile sites are converted to true active sites, Pt-S2(H2O)2, via ligand exchange with H2O. The results provide invaluable insights for understanding the heterogeneity and dynamic structural changes of single-atom catalysts. (c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.8
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