4.7 Article

Transition metals (Co, Mn, Cu) based composites as catalyst in microbial fuel cells application: The effect of catalyst composition

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 383, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.123152

关键词

Transition metals; Microbial fuel cell; Pyridinic-N; Oxygen vacancies; Oxygen reduction reaction

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2016YFC0400702]
  2. Science and Technology Department of Guizhou Province [[2018] 4005, [2019] 2957]
  3. Science and Technology Project of Guangzhou City [201704020074]
  4. NSFC-Guangdong Joint Fund [U1501233]
  5. Research Team Project of the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province [2016A030312009]
  6. Program of the Guangdong Science and Technology Department [2017B020238002]
  7. Guizhou Academy of Sciences [[2018]19]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial fuel cell (MFC) is a novel electrochemical technique that can produce bioelectricity by electro-active bacteria, while the bioelectricity depends greatly on electrochemical activity of cathode catalyst. Here, some effective transition metal composites are synthesized by a facile hydrothermal method, and these composites are used as oxygen reduction electrocatalyst for enhancing power output in air cathode MFC. A series of structural characterizations suggest that CoN@C possesses abundant oxygen vacancies and pyridinic-N. Linear sweep voltammetry (LSV) analysis demonstrates CoN@C can take part in oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) through a 4e- transfer pathway. At a loading amounts of 5 mg cm(-2), CoN@C cathode can achieve the maximum power density (1202.3 +/- 18.6 mW m(-2)), which is 1.09 times higher than that of commercial Pt/C (1104.1 +/- 24.7 mW m(-2)). High power output of CoN@C-5 is ascribed to the introduction of pyridinic-N, abundant oxygen vacancies, and large electrochemical active area. Consequently, CoN@C composite is an effective cathode electrocatalyst to replace precious Pt/C for MFC application.

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

4.7
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