4.8 Article

Active site engineering of single-atom carbonaceous electrocatalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction

期刊

CHEMICAL SCIENCE
卷 12, 期 48, 页码 15802-15820

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1sc05867c

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [819698, 881603]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (COORNETs) [SPP 1928, CRC 1415: 417590517]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article summarizes recent progress in active site engineering of single-atom carbonous electrocatalysts for enhancing ORR activity, focusing on emerging strategies for regulating the electronic structure and increasing site density. Challenges and prospects for the future development of single-atom carbonous electrocatalysts for ORR and their practical utilization are also provided.
The electrocatalytic oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) is the vital process at the cathode of next-generation electrochemical storage and conversion technologies, such as metal-air batteries and fuel cells. Single-metal-atom and nitrogen co-doped carbonaceous electrocatalysts (M-N-C) have emerged as attractive alternatives to noble-metal platinum for catalyzing the kinetically sluggish ORR due to their high electrical conductivity, large surface area, and structural tunability at the atomic level, however, their application is limited by the low intrinsic activity of the metal-nitrogen coordination sites (M-N-x) and inferior site density. In this Perspective, we summarize the recent progress and milestones relating to the active site engineering of single atom carbonous electrocatalysts for enhancing the ORR activity. Particular emphasis is placed on the emerging strategies for regulating the electronic structure of the single metal site and populating the site density. In addition, challenges and perspectives are provided regarding the future development of single atom carbonous electrocatalysts for the ORR and their utilization in practical use.

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