4.6 Article

Electrochemical Dealloying of Ni-Rich Pt-Ni Nanoparticle Network for Robust Oxygen-Reduction Electrocatalysts

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 11, 期 42, 页码 15460-15469

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c04866

关键词

alloy catalyst; catalytic stability; electrochemicallyactive surface area; Ni leaching; Pt/transitionmetal alloy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrochemical dealloying process can produce highly active ORR electrocatalysts with large ECSA. The dealloyed Pt-Ni nanoparticle network exhibits higher ORR mass activity and catalytic stability, opening up new avenues for designing TM-alloy catalysts with high ORR activity.
Increasing the electrochemically active surface area (ECSA) and alloying Pt with transition metals (TMs) are well-known strategies for enhancing the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) catalytic activities. Herein, we introduce a strategy to produce highly active ORR electrocatalysts with a large ECSA using an electrochemical dealloying process involving leaching of Ni from a Ni-rich Pt-Ni nanoparticle network. The dealloying process yielded a dealloyed Pt-Ni nanoparticle network with rugged surfaces from the Ni-rich Pt-Ni nanoparticle network, resulting in a large ECSA. We also increased the mass activity and utilization efficiency of Pt by modulating the interactions between Pt and Ni. The dealloyed nanoparticle network exhibited a high ORR mass activity, six times higher than that of commercial Pt/C. Moreover, the dealloyed Pt-Ni nanoparticle network exhibited better catalytic stability than the Pt/C after 10000 potential cycles, even without carbon support. The reduced binding energy of the O intermediate due to the effects of Ni (ligand and strain effects) enhanced the ORR activity of the dealloyed nanoparticle network, according to the results of a mechanistic study performed using density functional theory. This study opens new avenues for designing TM-alloy catalysts with high ORR activity for various applications.

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