4.6 Review

Strategies to improve electrocatalytic performance of MoS2-based catalysts for hydrogen evolution reactions

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 12, 期 28, 页码 17959-17983

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d2ra03066g

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science and Technology Major Project [2020YFB1506001]
  2. Department of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province [2021YFG0231]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrocatalytic hydrogen evolution reactions (HERs) play a vital role in hydrogen production for clean energy applications, and molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) has attracted extensive attention as a potential catalyst due to its high activity. However, the HER performance of MoS2 needs improvement to compete with conventional Pt-based catalysts. In this review, three strategies (defect engineering, heterostructure formation, and heteroatom doping) for enhancing the HER performance of MoS2 are summarized, as well as the computational density functional theory (DFT) methods used to gain insights for material design. The challenges and prospects of MoS2-based catalysts for HER are also discussed.
Electrocatalytic hydrogen evolution reactions (HERs) are a key process for hydrogen production for clean energy applications. HERs have unique advantages in terms of energy efficiency and product separation compared to other methods. Molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) has attracted extensive attention as a potential HER catalyst because of its high electrocatalytic activity. However, the HER performance of MoS2 needs to be improved to make it competitive with conventional Pt-based catalysts. Herein, we summarize three typical strategies for promoting the HER performance, i.e., defect engineering, heterostructure formation, and heteroatom doping. We also summarize the computational density functional theory (DFT) methods used to obtain insight that can guide the construction of MoS2-based materials. Additionally, the challenges and prospects of MoS2-based catalysts for the HER have also been discussed.

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