Correlation and Improvement of Bimetallic Electronegativity on Metal–Organic Frameworks for Electrocatalytic Water Oxidation

Abstract

Development of efficient energy conversion and storage devices such as electrolyzers, regenerative fuel cells, and rechargeable fuel cells is vital to solve the deteriorating environmental issue caused by the consumption of fossil fuels. [1][2][3] However, the overall performance of these devices are still hindered, due to the sluggish kinetics of oxygen evolution reaction (OER) which is a complex four-electron transfer reaction. [4][5][6][7] To promote OER in the electrocatalytic overall water splitting, electrocatalysts based on noble metals and/or noble metal oxides are required. However, the large-scale production and commerical applications has been impeded by the high cost and poor stability of noble metal catalysts. [8][9][10] Therefore, it is highly desirable to exploit the readily available and cost-effective OER electrocatalysts that can replace the noble-metal-based catalysts.Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) formed by coordination bonds between metal atom nodes and organic ligands with periodic structural units have a larger surface area (up to more than 10 000 m 2 g À1 ), more catalytic sites, and easier adjustment of structure (the metal sites and/or the organic linkers). [11] Altogether, MOFs combine the benefits of homogeneous catalysts (e.g., well-defined structure and/or ligand environment) and the heterogeneous catalysts (e.g., site isolation and/or recyclability). [12][13][14] Hence, MOFs have become promising candidates for electrocatalysts. [15,16] However, due to the poor charge transport and inappropriate intermediates absorption energy, the electrocatalytic performance of MOF materials has long been unsatisfactory. [13,17,18] To overcome these obstacles,

Promoting Oxygen Evolution Reaction Induced by Synergetic Geometric and Electronic Effects of IrCo Thin-Film Electrocatalysts

“…, number of low coordination sites generated in the nanostructure) should be considered when designing active and stable OER electrocatalysts. Various approaches have not yet overcome the limitations in the volcano relationships. − …”

Enhanced Oxygen Evolution Catalytic Activity of Ni3Mo3N-MoO2-NiO Nanoparticles via Synergistic Effect

“…Currently, the research on a non-noble-metal electrocatalyst has made great progress; transition metal nitrides (TMNs) are regarded as one of the appropriate OER electrocatalysts, due to the fact that the introduction of N atoms can change the d-band electron state density of the transition metal and accelerates the electron transfer, − such as Fe x N, Co 4 N, and Ni 3 N. , Recently, bimetallic nitrides have attracted widespread attention, because the introduction of additional metal atoms can provide a synergistic effect that obviously enhances the OER electrocatalytic activity. − Ni 3 Mo 3 N is formed by the insertion of N atoms into Ni–Mo bonds, and due to this unique structure, it has great research value in catalysis, , such as water splitting, CO 2 (dry) methane reforming reaction (DRM), and ammonia decomposition reaction . Su and co-workers reported that Ni 3 Mo 3 N was synthesized by calcining the dried and calcined NiMoO 4 precursor in three stages and passivated by 0.1% O 2 /N 2 , but the products contained impurity Ni 0.2 Mo 0.8 N .…”

Interfacial Heterojunction-Engineered Fe2O3/CoFe-Layered Double Hydroxide Catalyst for the Electrocatalytic Oxygen Evolution Reaction

“…The Nyquist plots for all catalysts and the equivalent circuit were displayed in Figure and Figure S7 of the Supporting Information. The R s , R ct /CPE ct , and CPE ads referred to the solution resistance, carrier transfer component in series, and constant phase elements to solve the unevenness of the catalyst surface . The detailed fitting constants were listed in Table S2 of the Supporting Information.…”

“…The R s , R ct /CPE ct , and CPE ads referred to the solution resistance, carrier transfer component in series, and constant phase elements to solve the unevenness of the catalyst surface. 55 The detailed fitting constants were listed in Table S2 of…”