4.8 Article

MoS2 Quantum Dots as Efficient Catalyst Materials for the Oxygen Evolution Reaction

期刊

ACS CATALYSIS
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 1683-1689

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.7b03180

关键词

MoS2; quantum dots; electrocatalysis; oxygen evolution reaction; first-principles calculations; defects

资金

  1. BRNS, Mumbai, India [2013/37P/67/BRNS]
  2. MNRE, New Delhi, India [102/87/2011-NT]
  3. CSIR, New Delhi, India [YSP-02 (P-81-113), CSC-0101]
  4. Academy of Finland [286279]
  5. U.S. Army RDECOM [W911NF-15-1-0606]
  6. Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation in the framework of Increase Competitiveness Program of NUST MISiS [K.3-2017-021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of an active, earth-abundant, and inexpensive catalyst for the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) is highly desirable but remains a great challenge. Here, by combining experiments and first-principles 60 calculations, we demonstrate that MoS2 quantum dots (MSQDs) are efficient materials for the OER We use a simple route for the synthesis of MSQDs from 4(1 a single precursor in aqueous medium, avoiding the formation of unwanted carbon quantum dots (CQDs). The as-synthesized MSQDs exhibit higher OER activity with a lower Tafel slope in comparison to that for the state of the art catalyst IrO2/C. The potential cycling of the MSQDs activates the surface and improves the OER catalytic properties. Density functional theory calculations reveal that MSQD vertices are reactive and the vacancies at the edges also promote the reaction, which indicates that the small flakes with defects at the edges are efficient for the OER. The presence of CQDs affects the adsorption of reaction intermediates and dramatically suppresses the OER performance of the MSQDs. Our theoretical and experimental findings provide important insights into the synthesis process of MSQDs and their catalytic properties and suggest promising routes to tailoring the performance of the catalysts for OER applications.

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