4.3 Article

Synthesis and Oxygen Electrocatalysis of Iridium Oxide Nanosheets

Journal

ELECTROCATALYSIS
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages 144-150

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12678-016-0348-4

Keywords

Iridium oxide; Nanosheet; Electrocatalyst; Oxygen evolution reaction; Oxygen reduction reaction; Durability

Funding

  1. Advanced Low Carbon Technology Research and Development Program (ALCA) of the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [16J09715]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26410235, 16J09715] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rutile-type iridium dioxide (IrO2) is a well-known electrocatalyst, and its nanoparticle form has recently attracted attention as catalysts and co-catalysts in electrolyzers and fuel cells. In this study, we have successfully synthesized single crystalline iridium dioxide (IrO2) nanosheets with thickness of less than 0.7 nm via exfoliation of layered iridic acid HxIryOz center dot nH(2)O, which was prepared via proton exchange of layered potassium iridate, KxIryOz center dot nH(2)O. The electrochemically active surface area of the IrO2 nanosheet electrode was similar to or slightly lower than that of 3-nm IrO2 nanoparticles. Despite the lower active surface area, the mass activity for oxygen evolution reaction of IrO2 nanosheets was six times higher compared to that of IrO2 nanoparticles in 0.1 MHClO4 at 1.55 V vs. the reversible hydrogen electrode (17.4 vs. 2.9 A g(-1)). When IrO2 nanosheets were added to commercial Pt/C as a co-catalyst, increased stability against high potential cycling was obtained. After potential cycling between 1.0 and 1.5 V, the composite catalyst exhibited two times higher oxygen reduction activity compared to nonmodified Pt/C. This durability enhancement is attributed to the suppression of the particle growth during the potential cycling test by the modification with IrO2 nanosheets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available