4.7 Article

Nitrogen-doped porous carbon nanofiber based oxygen reduction reaction electrocatalysts with high activity and durability

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 41, 期 26, 页码 11174-11184

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.04.235

关键词

N-doped porous carbon nanofiber (N-PCNF); Electrospinning; Pt supported on nitrogen-doped porous carbon nanofiber (Pt/N-PCNF); Oxygen reduction reaction (ORR); Electrocatalysts

资金

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [16D310608]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sluggish oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) is one of the critical challenges in polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) technologies. Carbon materials doped with various heteroatoms have been exactly proved as promising alternative catalysts and even the catalyst supports for the ORR in fuel cells. In this work, we have developed nitrogen-doped porous carbon nanofibers (N-PCNF) as novel ORR catalysts. The obtained N-PCNF shows excellent electrocatalytic performance and durability for ORR both in basic and acid solutions. Furthermore, the N-PCNF acted as support to deposited platinum (Pt) nano particles, the Pt nanoparticles with uniform size were well dispersed not only on the surface but also the cross-section of N-PCNF. The electrocatalytic activity and stability of the resultant Pt/N-PCNF along with the commercial one (JM20) were investigated. As a result, the Pt/N-PCNF exhibited enhanced ORR activity when compared with Pt supported on PCNF (Pt/PCNF) as well as the state-of-the-art JM20. In addition, enhanced stability of Pt/N-PCNF, coupled with ORR activity and electrochemical surface area (ECSA) retention after accelerated durability test (ADT) in acid media was observed. These results indicated that the N-PCNF can not only work as the non-precious electrocatalysts toward ORR, but also a promising candidate as catalyst supports. (c) 2016 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by 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

4.7
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