4.6 Article

Bifunctionality of the pyrone functional group in oxidized carbon nanotubes towards oxygen reduction reaction

期刊

CATALYSIS SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 7, 期 9, 页码 1868-1879

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7cy00020k

关键词

-

资金

  1. Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme, through the European Regional Development Fund ( ERDF) [POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016422, NORTE01-0145-FEDER-000006]
  2. ERDF through Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalizacao (POCI) [POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006984]
  3. FCT Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia
  4. FCT [SFRH/BPD/108490/2015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxidised carbon nanotubes were subjected to a controlled thermal treatment at different temperatures under a N-2 atmosphere. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy confirmed the presence of acid and basic groups on the starting sample. For samples subjected to higher temperatures, only the basic oxygen functional groups remained on the surface, namely, the quinone and pyrone groups. The oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) performance of all the electrocatalysts was evaluated under alkaline medium in O-2-saturated solutions. Increasing the basic character leads to better ORR activity in terms of potential onset values (from -0.230 to -0.194 V). Two well-defined cathodic peaks associated with the reduction of oxygen are observed in the cyclic voltammograms when the acid oxygen groups are removed from the electrocatalyst surface. The computational simulations of a carbon surface functionalized with quinone and pyrone groups were a relevant tool to explain the presence of the two cathodic peaks. The quinone sites only favour the adsorption of oxygen by the associative process, while oxygen adsorption on the pyrone group may occur by dissociative and associative processes, involving high electron densities. Consequently, pyrone may require less energy to initiate the ORR mechanism, resulting in a less negative cathodic peak potential value compared with that of the peak of the quinone group.

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