4.7 Article

Utilization of room temperature ionic liquids in the synthesis of Pt-based catalysts toward oxygen reduction reaction

期刊

APL MATERIALS
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0035999

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2018R1C1B6004272, 2019R1A6A3A13091706]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2019R1A6A3A13091706] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) are considered as an interesting alternative in stabilizing platinum (Pt) nanoparticle synthesis, preventing agglomeration and serving as a reaction medium. They remain in a liquid state over a wide temperature range, eliminating the need for certain processing steps. Research focuses on improving catalyst performance and efficiency through RTILs, controlling catalyst structure and composition.
Room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) have been considered an interesting alternative to stabilizers in platinum (Pt) nanoparticle synthesis because they can prevent agglomeration of nanoparticles and act as a reaction medium. In addition, since RTILs remain in a liquid state over a wide range of temperatures, Pt catalyst processing steps, such as heat treatments and surface cleaning, can be omitted, and the Pt nanoparticles are uniformly dispersed under fuel cell operating conditions. Herein, we summarize the significant works on recent advances and developments using RTILs to prepare Pt-based catalysts related to the application in oxygen reduction reaction (ORR). Moreover, peculiar attention has been paid to the role of RTILs in improving the performance and efficiency of the RTILs and their effects on catalyst structure- and composition-control, detailed by examining several aspects. Finally, we outlook the challenges and opportunities of the research in the relevant fields for the development of ORR catalysts. (c) 2021 Author(s).

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