4.6 Article

Preparation of high performance Pd catalysts supported on untreated multi-walled carbon nanotubes for formic acid oxidation

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 55, 期 20, 页码 6036-6041

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2010.05.063

关键词

Palladium; Glutamate; Untreated-MWCNTs; Formic acid oxidation

资金

  1. National Key Basic Research and Development Program of China [2009CB626610]
  2. National Science Foundation of China [20771036, 20871042]
  3. National Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China [20070476001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to the inherent inertness of carbon nanotubes (CNTs), one of the most significant challenges in the preparation of CNT-supported catalysts is achieving a uniform deposition of nanoparticles on the surface of the nanotubes. In this paper, we report on the preparation and characterization of Pd nanopartides supported on untreated multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), synthesized in the presence of glutamate. The results of Raman spectroscopy revealed that this synthetic procedure does not have a detrimental effect on the surface structure of MWCNTs. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) measurements indicated that the dispersion of Pd nanoparticles on untreated-MWCNTs in the presence of glutamate were uniform, and a narrow particle size was observed. X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns indicated that the Pd/MWCNT catalyst possessed a face-centered cubic crystal structure. Cyclic voltammetry and chronoamperometry tests demonstrated that the obtained Pd/MWCNT catalyst displayed superior electrocatalytic activity and stability in formic acid oxidation, as compared to both a Pd/MWCNT catalyst synthesized without glutamate and a Pd catalyst on acid-oxidized MWCNTs. under otherwise identical experimental conditions. These results indicate that the catalyst developed in this study is a superior candidate for direct formic acid fuel cells (DFAFCs). (C) 2010 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

4.6
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