4.6 Article

The effect of temperature on ionic liquid modified Fe-N-C catalysts for alkaline oxygen reduction reaction

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENERGY CHEMISTRY
卷 68, 期 -, 页码 324-329

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jechem.2021.11.042

关键词

Oxygen reduction reaction; Non-precious metal catalyst; Ionic liquid; Fe-N-C catalyst; Temperature effect

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union [681719]
  2. German Research Foundation [GSC1070]
  3. European Research Council (ERC) [681719] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Modifying catalysts with an ionic liquid layer can enhance the electrocatalytic activity of alkaline oxygen reduction reaction. This effect can be maintained and even strengthened at elevated temperatures.
Modifying solid catalysts with an ionic liquid layer is an effective approach for boosting the performance of both Pt-based and non-precious metal catalysts toward the oxygen reduction reaction. While most studies operated at room temperature it remains unclear whether the IL-associated boosting effect can be maintained at elevated temperature, which is of high relevance for practical applications in low temperature fuel cells. Herein, Fe-N-C catalysts were modified by introducing small amounts of hydrophobic ionic liquid, resulting in boosted electrocatalytic activity towards the alkaline oxygen reduction reaction at room temperature. It is demonstrated that the boosting effect can be maintained and even strengthened when increasing the electrolyte temperature up to 70 degrees C. These findings show for the first time that the incorporation of ionic liquid is a suited method to obtain advanced noble metal-free electrocatalysts that can be applied at operating temperature condition.CO 2021 Science Press and Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. and Science Press. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

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

4.6
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