There is a prevailing and widely adopted view that carbon nanotubes, which are finding considerable application in energy, healthcare, and electronics applications, are highly (electro)catalytically inert unless modified, doped, or defected. By visualizing the electrochemical reduction of oxygen (hydrogen peroxide generation) at high resolution along pristine (defect-free) regions of individual single-walled carbon nanotubes, we show that there is, in fact, significant activity comparable to that of standard gold electrocatalysts. Moreover, the activity is greatly enhanced at strained (kinked) sites and regions modified by oxidation. Single-walled carbon nanotubes are thus effective electrocatalysts in their own right and not just supports for other materials.
There is a prevailing and widely adopted view that carbon nanotubes, which are finding considerable application in energy, healthcare, and electronics applications, are highly (electro)catalytically inert unless modified, doped, or defected. By visualizing the electrochemical reduction of oxygen (hydrogen peroxide generation) at high resolution along pristine (defect-free) regions of individual single-walled carbon nanotubes, we show that there is, in fact, significant activity comparable to that of standard gold electrocatalysts. Moreover, the activity is greatly enhanced at strained (kinked) sites and regions modified by oxidation. Single-walled carbon nanotubes are thus effective electrocatalysts in their own right and not just supports for other materials.
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are
being actively explored for a wide range of applications due to their
exceptional electronic and surface properties.[1−3] The high surface
area to mass ratio makes CNTs particularly promising candidates for
applications in catalysis and energy conversion, but CNTs have, hitherto,
largely been used as support materials for catalytic nanoparticles
or molecules.[4−7] Indeed, there is a popular perception that pristine CNTs function
only as support materials to wire up more active electrocatalytic
materials, unless modified or doped.[8,9] Here, we demonstrate
that high quality pristine single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs)
actually exhibit exceptional electrocatalytic properties for hydrogen
peroxide (H2O2) generation via the oxygen reduction
reaction (ORR). This is an important reaction because electrocatalysis
is emerging as a potential route for H2O2 synthesis
(300 million tons/annum industrial), and new electrocatalysts are
actively being explored.[10] On the other
hand, H2O2 is an unwanted byproduct of the ORR
in polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells, where CNTs are being widely
considered as supports,[11] reducing the
efficiency and being detrimental to cathode stability. These disparate
applications highlight the need to better understand the ORR and H2O2 generation at SWNTs.The ORR can occur
via a direct 4-electron process (pathway 1)
or an indirect pathway, which involves two sequential
2-electron-transfer steps (pathways 2 and 3) where peroxide is produced as an intermediate.[12]For most carbon electrode
materials, the ORR
occurs via the indirect peroxide pathway.[13,14] It is well established that there is a very large overpotential
on graphite, whereas kinetic measurements on SWNTs have proved difficult
because of issues in defining electrode areas, materials properties,
and mass transport in conventional electrode setups.[3]Herein, we study the ORR at well-defined individual
SWNTs using
our recently developed multi-probe platform based on scanning electrochemical
cell microscopy (SECCM),[15] that permits
high-resolution reaction mapping of substrates to be correlated with
local structure (Supporting Information (SI), sections 1−3).[16−20] The technique provides a means of positioning a tiny meniscus electrochemical
cell on a substrate of interest that serves as a working electrode,
whose area is defined by the meniscus diameter (Figure 1a).[19,20] By coupling this approach with
complementary techniques (SEM, Raman) applied to the same area, detailed
structure–activity correlations are revealed (SI, sections 1 and 3).[20] This approach
is particularly powerful as it allows us to investigate structure–activity
relationships of individual nanoscale features. Thus, we quantitatively
capture and characterize the ORR at segments of straight and kinked
pristine SWNTs and investigate the impact of deliberately oxidizing
SWNTs.
Figure 1
(a) SECCM
setup showing a theta pipet positioned directly above
an individual SWNT creating a well-defined tiny meniscus electrochemical
cell for local electrochemical measurements and substrate mapping.
A voltage, V1, permits control of the
working electrode potential, while an ion current (IIC) between the two barrels of the pipet, generated by V2, is used for precise pipet positioning. An
electrochemical current (IEC) is measured
when the meniscus makes contact with the SWNT. Illustration (not to
scale) of the enhanced mass transport and well-defined geometry of
the SECCM setup, where dmeniscus and dSWNT correspond to meniscus and SWNT diameter,
respectively. (b) Cyclic voltammograms of the ORR at a pristine individual SWNT. Scan rate: 100 mV/s. (c) Electrochemical
map recorded at a substrate potential of −1.0 V vs Ag/AgCl
QRCE for a pristine individual SWNT. Inset contains
a line scan profile illustrating the evolution of the measured electrochemical
current as the meniscus advanced across the SWNT. All measurements
carried out in aerated PBS (pH 7.2) with 25 mM KCl.
A more detailed description of the SECCM operation can
be found
in the SI and elsewhere.[16,17] Briefly, a silanized theta pipet, that was pulled to a sub-micrometer
diameter, was filled with an aerated phosphate buffer solution (pH
7.2, Sigma-Aldrich) and 25 mM KCl. Nanoscale electrochemical imaging
was realized by translating the resulting meniscus confined electrochemical
cell, formed at the theta pipet, over the substrate in the xyz directions with nanometer control. The substrate functioned
as a working electrode whose potential was controlled using Ag/AgCl
quasi-reference counter electrodes (QRCEs). An electrochemical current
was measured when the meniscus made contact with the SWNT (Figure 1). Millimeter long flow aligned SWNTs were grown
on an insulating Si/SiO2 substrate using catalyzed chemical
vapor deposition (SI, section 1), which
allowed us to probe the electrochemical activity of individual SWNTs.
Pd metal was evaporated onto the SWNTs at one end using a shadow mask
to form an ohmic contact for electrical connection. The working electrode
dimensions were determined by the diameter of the SWNT, dSWNT, and the diameter of the meniscus, dmeniscus, as shown in Figure 1a.(a) SECCM
setup showing a theta pipet positioned directly above
an individual SWNT creating a well-defined tiny meniscus electrochemical
cell for local electrochemical measurements and substrate mapping.
A voltage, V1, permits control of the
working electrode potential, while an ion current (IIC) between the two barrels of the pipet, generated by V2, is used for precise pipet positioning. An
electrochemical current (IEC) is measured
when the meniscus makes contact with the SWNT. Illustration (not to
scale) of the enhanced mass transport and well-defined geometry of
the SECCM setup, where dmeniscus and dSWNT correspond to meniscus and SWNT diameter,
respectively. (b) Cyclic voltammograms of the ORR at a pristine individual SWNT. Scan rate: 100 mV/s. (c) Electrochemical
map recorded at a substrate potential of −1.0 V vs Ag/AgCl
QRCE for a pristine individual SWNT. Inset contains
a line scan profile illustrating the evolution of the measured electrochemical
current as the meniscus advanced across the SWNT. All measurements
carried out in aerated PBS (pH 7.2) with 25 mM KCl.Figure 1b shows a cyclic
voltammogram (CV)
of the ORR at a fixed position on an individual metallic SWNT. The
metallic nature and diameter of the SWNT were determined by Raman
spectroscopy (SI, Figure S2). Two separate
waves were observed for both the forward (cathodic-going) and reverse
(anodic-going) scans of the CV, but these were more pronounced in
the anodic scan direction. The corresponding current plateaus ca.
−1.25 and −1.70 V vs Ag/AgCl QRCE during the reverse
scan indicate a 2-electron reduction to H2O2 (pathway 2) followed by further reduction
to water (pathway 3) at SWNTs, as found in studies
of CNT ensembles.[14] Measurements under
similar conditions for highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (SI, Figure S3) revealed a much more negative
onset potential (by >0.5 V), highlighting that for these two sp2 carbon materials, the ORR is greatly facilitated on SWNTs
compared to graphite. The hysteresis between the forward and reverse
current–voltage response for SWNTs was most pronounced for
the first wave, for the reduction of oxygen to H2O2 (pathway 2). This effect was fairly
reversible, with similar behavior seen in the cathodic and anodic
scan directions during the second voltammetric cycle, with a small
increase in the limiting current. Chemical oxidation of the SWNT sidewall
by the electrochemical generation of H2O2 is
unlikely to occur to a significant extent due to its rapid flux away
from the electrode as a result of the high mass transport of SECCM
with a SWNT.[20] Permanent surface modification
of the SWNT surface during the ORR also cannot account for the reversible
nature of the hysteresis, and more likely reflects changes in the
electrochemical double layer and interfacial structure over the wide
potential range investigated.[14,21]The electrochemical
map in Figure 1c shows
the oxygen reduction activity over a 10 μm length of a pristine
metallic SWNT just at the onset potential (−1.0 V vs Ag/AgCl
QRCE) where any differences in activity along the SWNT would be expected
to be revealed. In fact, the electrochemical response is quite uniform
over this long section and represents the intrinsic activity of an
unmodified SWNT. Since the average defect spacing on SWNTs of this
type is ∼4 μm,[22] which is
much larger than the spatial resolution in the image (∼0.5
μm, Figure 1c) and in the line profiles
(data acquired every 0.5 nm in the scan direction, Figure 1c), it can be readily deduced that there is little
influence of defects in this electrochemical regime. In particular,
the line profile morphology, in which the current increases monotonically,
reaching a maximum, and then falls as the SECCM meniscus passes over
the SWNT, is consistent with uniform SWNT electroactivity at the high
spatial resolution (∼nm) of this measurement.[20,23,24]Electrochemical[8] and chemical oxidation[25] has recently been used to increase the number
of defect sites along the sidewalls of multiwalled CNTs to enhance
their electrocatalytic activity toward the ORR. Increased defect densities
at kinked regions of pristine SWNTs have also been confirmed through
selective electrochemical deposition,[22] and our technique allowed us to probe the ORR directly in such regions.
Figure 2a shows a large-scale electrochemical
map of a section of a pristine SWNT that contained a kinked region,
and Figure 2b shows a separately recorded zoom
map of the kinked region. Considerably enhanced electrochemical activity
is observed, as confirmed by the line profiles over this area (Figure 2b), highlighting the significant extent to which
the activity is enhanced, revealed here using SECCM, as a result of
the increased number of defects at these regions. Complementary maps
obtained simultaneously during all SECCM measurements[20] were used to confirm that the meniscus footprint and effective
volume were very consistent over the whole image and so the enhanced
activity in the kink region can be assigned to the SWNT architecture
and not to changes in the meniscus size. See SI, section S5, for further discussion and an example of the complementary
maps obtained.
Figure 2
(a) Electrochemical map of a pristine SWNT that contained
a kinked
region. (b) Separate zoom-in electrochemical map of (a). Line scans
of kinked region (red dashed line in (b)) and pristine site (black
dashed line in (b)) highlighted in map (b). Maps obtained at −1.0
V vs Ag/AgCl QRCE.
(a) Electrochemical map of a pristine SWNT that contained
a kinked
region. (b) Separate zoom-in electrochemical map of (a). Line scans
of kinked region (red dashed line in (b)) and pristine site (black
dashed line in (b)) highlighted in map (b). Maps obtained at −1.0
V vs Ag/AgCl QRCE.Enhancement of the ORR
by defect sites was further con-firmed by
their intentional introduction along the SWNT sidewall by electrochemical
oxidation (inset Figure 3a), which is known
to introduce defects and oxygen functionalized moieties into the sp2-hybridized carbon lattice.[26] Using
SECCM, it was possible to directly compare variations in the electrochemical
response in the same area of the SWNT before and after electrochemical
oxidation of the SWNT sidewall (Figure 3a,b).
Prior to electrochemical oxidation, a straight section of SWNT showed
essentially uniform electrochemical activity along its length (Figure 3a). Activity measurements were made at a low driving
potential of −0.75 V vs Ag/AgCl QRCE, to highlight any changes
in electrochemical activity due to local electrochemical oxidation.
With the SECCM meniscus fixed over the SWNT, the electrode potential
was then scanned from 0 to 1.30 V and back to 0 V at a scan rate of
50 mV/s, resulting in an anodic current above ∼1.1 V. Following
electrochemical oxidation, the ORR in the modified and surrounding
region was re-imaged, revealing a 5-fold increase in electrochemical
current in the modified region, and an asymmetric profile with discrete
features, consistent with a heterogeneously active surface. It is
further evident that following activation, the electrochemical response
along the sidewall remained uniform on either side of the modified
region confirming that there was no disconnection or cutting of the
SWNT in this one terminal device.
Figure 3
Electrochemical maps and line scans of
a pristine SWNT before (a)
and after (b) electrochemical oxidation; start and end potential 0
V, return potential 1.30 V at a scan rate of 50 mV/s (inset of (a)).
Maps obtained at −0.75 V vs Ag/AgCl QRCE.
Electrochemical maps and line scans of
a pristine SWNT before (a)
and after (b) electrochemical oxidation; start and end potential 0
V, return potential 1.30 V at a scan rate of 50 mV/s (inset of (a)).
Maps obtained at −0.75 V vs Ag/AgCl QRCE.It was possible to construct mass transport corrected Tafel
plots
to determine the exchange current density, j0 (at zero overpotential), by extrapolation. The area of the
cylindrical SWNT working electrode was defined by the meniscus diameter, dmeniscus, representing the length of the cylinder,
while the effective width of exposed SWNT, WSWNT, was given by (π/2)dSWNT.[24] The meniscus width was determined
accurately from a line scan of the SWNT, and was comparable with the
diameter of the pipet itself, measured from an FE-SEM micrograph of
the complementary theta pipet to that used for imaging (SI, Figure S5). The kinetic current density was
then determined by correcting for mass transport using the following
expression:where j is the current density, jk is the kinetic current density, and jd is the diffusion-limited current density.
Further details of the Tafel analysis, in which currents were further
normalized by oxygen concentration, to permit comparison with published
studies, are provided in the SI, section
S6.Tafel analysis of ORR (H2O2 generation)
voltammograms
(Figure 4) allowed comparison of the performance
of pristine (black dots) and modified (red dots) SWNT portions to
Au-polycrystalline (green dots) and Au–C (blue dots) electrodes,
as well-known standards for electrochemical H2O2 electrogeneration.[27,28] Note that the overpotential is
much higher for the SWNT system as a consequence of the ultrahigh
mass transport rates generated in the SWNT-SECCM format,[20] leading to very high current density values.
It is evident that the activity (current density) of the sidewall
of pristine SWNTs is very similar to Au-based electrodes. Moreover,
the oxidation of a SWNT provides an electrocatalyst for oxygen reduction
where the reaction kinetics is approximately 1 order of magnitude
larger than for Au-based electrodes. Thus, pristine SWNTs stand out
as effective electrocatalysts and this activity can be further enhanced
by electrochemical modification.
Figure 4
Mass transport corrected Tafel plots.
The kinetic current density
ordinates have been normalized by the oxygen concentration for each
system to permit direct comparison. Kinetic current density, electrode
potential, and experimental conditions for Au–C and Au–polycrystalline
were obtained from refs (10, 27, and 28).
Mass transport corrected Tafel plots.
The kinetic current density
ordinates have been normalized by the oxygen concentration for each
system to permit direct comparison. Kinetic current density, electrode
potential, and experimental conditions for Au–C and Au–polycrystalline
were obtained from refs (10, 27, and 28).There is increasing interest in developing catalysts for
the ORR
that selectively promote H2O2 generation and
permit decentralized production.[29] From
this perspective, SWNTs represent a powerful nonmetal electrocatalyst,
where the activity can be tailored (enhanced) by building in particular
architectures (kinks) or through surface modification (sidewall oxidation).
On the other hand, the relative ease of H2O2 production at SWNTs may limit their use as supports for the development
of stable fuel cell electrodes and in some healthcare applications
where reactive oxygen species need to be avoided. In general, pristine
SWNTs are not inert: they exhibit substantial intrinsic electrochemical
activity, which needs to be taken into account in directing their
use in the future.
Authors: Michael E Snowden; Aleix G Güell; Stanley C S Lai; Kim McKelvey; Neil Ebejer; Michael A O'Connell; Alexander W Colburn; Patrick R Unwin Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Aleix G Güell; Neil Ebejer; Michael E Snowden; Julie V Macpherson; Patrick R Unwin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2012-04-19 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Neil Ebejer; Mathias Schnippering; Alexander W Colburn; Martin A Edwards; Patrick R Unwin Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Alan Le Goff; Vincent Artero; Bruno Jousselme; Phong Dinh Tran; Nicolas Guillet; Romain Métayé; Aziz Fihri; Serge Palacin; Marc Fontecave Journal: Science Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Samira Siahrostami; Arnau Verdaguer-Casadevall; Mohammadreza Karamad; Davide Deiana; Paolo Malacrida; Björn Wickman; María Escudero-Escribano; Elisa A Paoli; Rasmus Frydendal; Thomas W Hansen; Ib Chorkendorff; Ifan E L S Stephens; Ifan E Stephens; Jan Rossmeisl Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2013-11-17 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: Tsvetan Tarnev; Harshitha Barike Aiyappa; Alexander Botz; Thomas Erichsen; Andrzej Ernst; Corina Andronescu; Wolfgang Schuhmann Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2019-08-21 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Enrico Daviddi; Viacheslav Shkirskiy; Paul M Kirkman; Mathew P Robin; Cameron L Bentley; Patrick R Unwin Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 9.825