| Literature DB >> 25189141 |
Wei Wei1, Ying Tao1, Wei Lv2, Fang-Yuan Su3, Lei Ke3, Jia Li3, Da-Wei Wang4, Baohua Li3, Feiyu Kang3, Quan-Hong Yang5.
Abstract
Carbon-based electrocatalystsEntities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25189141 PMCID: PMC4164027 DOI: 10.1038/srep06289
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Scheme of fabrication process for the G-CNT material and its ORR catalysis.
Figure 2Structure and morphology of G-CNT 100/20.
(a) SEM image; (b) low magnification and (c) high magnification TEM images; (d) Nitrogen adsorption/desorption isotherm and pore size distribution (inset), demonstrating the hierarchical pore structure.
Figure 3Performance of G-CNT 100/20 as an all-carbon catalyst.
(a, b) CV curves of G-CNT 100/20, a commercial Pt/C catalyst and some reference samples including a graphene monolith and a simple mixture of graphene and CNT in N2-saturated (dashed line) and O2-saturated (solid line) electrolytes (Note that the loading density of catalyst materials is the same in these tests); (c) LSV curves of G-CNT 100/20 in O2-saturated electrolytes at different rotation rates (in rpm), The inset shows the corresponding Koutecky-Levich plot of G-CNT 100/20 and Pt/C derived from the RDE curves at −0.35 V; (d) Electron transfer number of CNT, graphene monolith and G-CNTs; (e) RRDE voltammogram of G-CNT 100/20 in an O2-saturated electrolyte; (f) Percentage of H2O2 and the electron transfer number of G-CNT 100/20 at various potentials, based on the corresponding RRDE data in e; The CV curves of catalyst loaded electrode of G-CNT 100/20 in O2-saturated 0.1 M KOH solution (g) and 1M LiCF3SO3 in TEGDME (h); (i) comparison of ORR performance for some typical all-carbon materials, doped graphenes and graphene-supported metals or metal oxides.
Figure 4RDE polarization curves of (a) G-CNT 100/20 and (b) Pt/C after the 1st, 1000th, 3000th, 5000th and 8000th in an O2-saturated 0.1 M KOH solution; RDE polarization curves of (c) G-CNT 100/20 and (d) Pt/C in an O2-saturated 0.1 M KOH solution with or without 0.5 M methanol.
G-CNT 100/20 exhibits a dramatically improved tolerance to methanol poisoning compared with Pt/C.
Figure 5Evidence for the charge separation at the interface of the graphene and carbon nanotube.
(a) AFM image and (c) corresponding height profile of G-CNT; (b) Surface potential image and (d) corresponding potential distribution of G-CNT; (e) Raman spectra of G-CNTs and some reference samples including CNT and graphene monolith; (f) Oxygen adsorption/desorption isotherm of G-CNT 100/20; (g) The oxygen adsorption amount at the relative pressure of 0.95 for G-CNTs; (h) DSC curves of G-CNT100/20, G-CNT100/5 and graphene monolith.
Figure 6Scheme of the charge separation at the interface between the graphene and carbon nanotube.