4.8 Review

Advances in electrocatalytic ammonia synthesis under mild conditions

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2020.100860

关键词

Nitrogen reduction; Electrolysis; Clean energy synthesis; Theoretical screening; Catalyst design

资金

  1. Beijing Natural Science Foundation [2182046]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21706004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ammonia plays a crucial role in food production and industrial manufacturing, and it is predicted as the ideal energy carrier in the future. Typically, it is artificially synthesized from nitrogen and hydrogen through the Haber-Bosch process, which consumes similar to 5% of the global natural gas supply and emits similar to 1.5% of the global greenhouse gas. In recent years, electrocatalytic ammonia synthesis from nitrogen and water under mild conditions utilizing renewable electricity has drawn much attention from the scientific community owing to its potential in producing ammonia through a clean and sustainable route. Numerous achievements have been made during the past few years; nevertheless, two major challenges remain. These are the low catalytic activity due to the inertness of nitrogen molecule and the low selectivity attributed to the violent hydrogen evolution side reaction. This review will discuss the fundamentals of electrocatalytic ammonia synthesis at the atomic level relying on a thorough understanding of the mechanism involved in the Haber-Bosch process. The theoretical screening of the electrocatalysts and the experimental practice of rational electrocatalyst design with different strategies are reviewed. Importantly, the relations among design strategies, the catalytic activity and selectivity of the catalyst are evaluated. Additionally, key experimental techniques to conduct an insightful and efficient study of the subject area are discussed. Finally, current challenges and the strategies for overcoming these challenges are examined. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. 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