| Literature DB >> 24817921 |
Urszula Tylus1, Qingying Jia1, Kara Strickland1, Nagappan Ramaswamy1, Alexey Serov2, Plamen Atanassov2, Sanjeev Mukerjee1.
Abstract
Detailed understanding of the nature of the active centers in non-precious-metal-based electrocatalyst, and their role inEntities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24817921 PMCID: PMC4010287 DOI: 10.1021/jp500781v
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Phys Chem C Nanomater Interfaces ISSN: 1932-7447 Impact factor: 4.126
Figure 1Electrochemical study of UNM Fe-8AAPyr, NEU PVAG-Fe, and xBPEIFe compared to BASF-ETEK 30% Pt/C in 0.1 M HClO4. (a) ORR polarization curves, with Tafel slopes in the inset, collected at 1600 rpm. (b) A typical for Fe–NC catalysts CV in O2-free (black) electrolyte with the clear Fe2+/Fe3+ redox transition between 0.7 and 0.9 V and corresponding ORR polarization curve (blue) collected with PVAG-Fe catalyst. Scan rate: 20 mV/s. Loading of FeNC catalysts: 0.6 mg/cm2 on 5.61 mm glassy carbon disk electrode. Loading of Pt/C: catalyst 25 μgPt/cm2.
Figure 2Fourier transform (FT) EXAFS of (a) LANL PANIFeCo compared with (b) PVAG-Fe and (c) UNM Fe-AAPyr catalysts collected on Fe-edge (7112 eV) in O2-saturated 0.1 M HClO4. Part b consists of in situ Fe K-edge PVAG-Fe EXAFS spectra compared with metallic Fe-foil (black) as standard. The main peak around 1.5 Å represents Fe–N form of the metal. The low intensity peaks above 2 Å and above 4 Å represent Fe–Fe bond, indicating the presence of Fe-nanoparticles in the heat-treated catalyst (green). Note: all the radial distances given in this work are without phase correction.
Figure 3(a) Potential dependent normalized Fe K-edge XANES spectra with corresponding redox peak transition shown in inset as a background-subtracted square wave voltammetry profile collected in oxygen-free 0.1 M HClO4. (b) Fourier Transform of the extended region of the XAS spectra collected in situ at Fe K-edge (7112 eV) of PVAG-Fe catalyst.
Figure 4(a) Δμ spectra of PVAG-Fe collected in situ at Fe K-edge representing changes on the Fe-surface through the range of potentials due to metal interaction with oxygenated adsorbates. (b) Experimental Δμ of fully covered active surface (in this case attained at 0.9 V) compared to (c) the theoretical model consisting of 93% FeN4C10–O and 7% O–FeNPs. Experimental Δμ signatures were obtained by subtracting the XANES signatures according to Δμ = μ(0.90 V) – μ(0.30 V). More detailed information on the methodology used to obtain the theoretical model is given in the Supporting Information (Figure S3).
Figure 5Destructive effect of peroxide treatment represented by ORR RRDE curves of the PVAG-Fe catalyst in 0.1 M HClO4 (a) and in 0.1 M KOH (b), initially (—) and after destructive treatment (- - -). Scan rate: 20 mV/s. Loading of FeNC catalysts: 0.6 mg/cm2 on 5.61 mm glassy carbon ring disk electrode. (c) FT EXAFS Fe-edge spectra of PVAG-Fe catalyst before (black) and after (blue) the treatment.
Figure 6Effect of CN– poisoning of Fe–N4 center in the xPEI-Fe catalyst: Polarization curves and ring currents in 0.1 M HClO4 (a–c) and 0.1 M KOH (b–d), respectively. RRDE: RHE ref, Au-GC 0.2472 cm2, 900 rpm, 20 mV·s and 0.6 mg/cm2 catalyst loading, at 0, 10, and 20 mM KCN. The inset in (a) shows Fe2+/Fe3+ redox with and without presence of the CN anions in cyclic voltammogram collected in O2-free 0.1 M HClO4. RDE: RHE ref, Au-GC 0.247 cm2, 20 mV·s. Introduction of the CN– results in noticeable shift of the back reduction of the Fe3+ to Fe2+ due to formation of Fe3+–CN– complexes.
Figure 7Proposed ORR mechanistic pathways on Fe–N4/C and adjacent FeNPS/C in acidic (H+) and alkaline (H2O/–OH) electrolyte.