4.2 Article

The origin of overpotential in lithium-mediated nitrogen reduction

期刊

FARADAY DISCUSSIONS
卷 243, 期 -, 页码 321-338

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d2fd00156j

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The verification of the lithium-mediated nitrogen reduction system in 2019 has resulted in an increase in literature on improving the faradaic efficiency, stability, and activity. However, accurately quantifying the overpotential and analyzing voltage losses has been challenging. This study presents a simple method for determining the Reversible Hydrogen Electrode potential in the system and identifies sources of potential losses. The observed minimum overpotential was -3.59 +/- 0.07 V vs. RHE, with a faradaic efficiency of 6.5 +/- 0.2%.
The verification of the lithium-mediated nitrogen reduction system in 2019 has led to an explosion in the literature focussing on improving the metrics of faradaic efficiency, stability, and activity. However, while the literature acknowledges the vast intrinsic overpotential for nitrogen reduction due to the reliance on in situ lithium plating, it has thus far been difficult to accurately quantify this overpotential and effectively analyse further voltage losses. In this work, we present a simple method for determining the Reversible Hydrogen Electrode (RHE) potential in the lithium-mediated nitrogen reduction system. This method allows for an investigation of the Nernst equation and reveals sources of potential losses. These are namely the solvation of the lithium ion in the electrolyte and resistive losses due to the formation of the solid electrolyte interphase. The minimum observed overpotential was achieved in a 0.6 M LiClO4, 0.5 vol% ethanol in tetrahydrofuran electrolyte. This was -3.59 +/- 0.07 V vs. RHE, with a measured faradaic efficiency of 6.5 +/- 0.2%. Our method allows for easy comparison between the lithium-mediated system and other nitrogen reduction paradigms, including biological and homogeneous mechanisms.

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

4.2
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