4.7 Article

3D amorphous NiFe LDH nanosheets electrodeposited on in situ grown NiCoP@NC on nickel foam for remarkably enhanced OER electrocatalytic performance

期刊

DALTON TRANSACTIONS
卷 49, 期 15, 页码 4896-4903

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c9dt04888j

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSFC [21727810, 21475035, 21235002]
  2. Foundation for Innovative Research Groups of NSFC [21521063]
  3. Hunan Provincial Key RD Program [2018SK2036/2018SK2030]
  4. China Scholarship Council [201606130011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

NiFe LDH (layered double hydroxide) is currently attracting increasing attention as a type of promising electrocatalyst for oxygen evolution reaction (OERs); however, the biggest obstacle to its large-scale practical application is its poor conductivity and limited active sites. Herein, we report a three-dimensional NiFe LDH with high conductivity and dense active sites, where amorphous NiFe LDH nanosheets are directly electrodeposited on the surface of a hierarchical porous NiCoP@NC derived from the calcination and phosphorization of metal-organic frameworks (ZIF-67) in situ grown on nickel foam. Based on the 3D porous structure, abundant exposed active sites, fast electron and mass transfer rates and strong synergetic effects between NiCoP@NC and NiFe LDH, the resultant NiFe LDH/NiCoP@NC/NF catalysts exhibited significantly enhanced OER catalytic performances compared with NiFe LDH on nickel foam and most of the reported NiFe LDH-based catalysts: a low overpotential of 210 mV for yielding a current density of 10 mA cm(-2), an extremely small Tafel slope (35 mV dec(-1)) and excellent durability. For overall water splitting, with NiFe LDH/NiCoP@NC/NF as the anode and NiCoP@NC/NF as the cathode, the assembled two-electrode system only required 1.54 V to obtain a stable current density of 10 mA cm(-2) in 1 M KOH for at least 40 h. This research provided a simple and facile way to develop non-noble-metal oxygen evolution catalysts for replacing high-cost noble metal catalysts.

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

4.7
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