| Literature DB >> 30713644 |
Yuebin Lian1,2, Hao Sun1,2, Xuebin Wang1,2, Pengwei Qi1,2, Qiaoqiao Mu1,2, Yujie Chen1,2, Jing Ye3, Xiaohui Zhao1,2, Zhao Deng1,2, Yang Peng1,2.
Abstract
Water electrolysis for hydrogen production has long been regarded as an ideal tactic for renewable energy conversion and storage, but is impeded by the sluggish kinetics of both the hydrogen and oxygen evolution reactions, which are therefore in urgent need for high-performance but low-cost electrocatalysts. Herein, nanoframes of transition metal phosphides (TMPs) with the 3D framework carved open have been demonstrated as highly potent bifunctional catalysts for overall water splitting, reaching the benchmark performance of the Pt/C‖RuO2 couple, and are much superior to their nanocubic counterparts. This excellent water splitting behavior can be attributed to the enlarged active surface area, less obstructed electrolyte infiltration, promoted charge transfer, and facilitated gas release. Further through in-depth activity analysis and post-electrocatalysis characterization, special attention has been paid to the fate and role of phosphorus in the electrocatalytic process, suggesting that despite the chemical instability of the TMPs (especially under OER conditions), excellent electrocatalytic stability can still be achieved through the amorphous bimetallic hydroxides/oxides formed in situ.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30713644 PMCID: PMC6334264 DOI: 10.1039/c8sc03877e
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1Schematic illustration of the preparation of the nanoframes composed of Co0.6Fe0.4P NPs coated with the carbon matrix. (i) Self-assembly of Co–Fe PBA; (ii) etching of the Co–Fe PBA to produce nanocages; (iii) phosphidation of the Co–Fe PBA nanocages to obtain subsequent Co0.6Fe0.4P NPs coated with the carbon matrix.
Fig. 2(a) Powder XRD patterns of the Co0.6Fe0.4 PBA before and after etching, and the Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 after phosphorization; high-resolution XPS (b) Co 2p, (c) Fe 2p, (d) P 2p spectra of the Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125.
Fig. 3(a1) and (a2) SEM and TEM images of the Co0.6Fe0.4 PBA nanocubes without etching; (b1) and (b2) SEM and TEM images of Co0.6Fe0.4-1.125 nanoframes before phosphorization; (c1) and (c2) SEM and TEM images of Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 nanoframes after phosphorization; (d) elemental mapping images of an individual Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 nanoframe showing the uniformly distributed Co, Fe, and P elements; (e) and (f) HR-TEM and SAD images of Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 showing polycrystalline lattice fringes.
Fig. 4(a) Polarization curves of Co0.6Fe0.4P and control samples for the HER in 1.0 M KOH (inset: the column diagram of HER activities for all Co0.6Fe0.4P catalysts); (b) the corresponding Tafel plots of all the Co0.6Fe0.4P catalysts and 20% Pt/C; (c) Nyquist plots of all Co0.6Fe0.4P catalysts at –0.15 V over the frequency range from 100 000 to 0.01 Hz.
Fig. 5(a) Polarization curves of Co0.6Fe0.4P and control samples for the OER in 1.0 M KOH (inset: the column diagram of OER activities for all Co0.6Fe0.4P catalysts); (b) the corresponding Tafel plots of all the Co0.6Fe0.4P catalysts and RuO2; (c) Nyquist plots of all Co0.6Fe0.4P catalysts at –1.53 V over the frequency range from 100 000 to 0.01 Hz.
Fig. 6(a) The overall water splitting performance of the Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 and Pt/C‖RuO2 couple in 1.0 M KOH (inset: photo of the overall water splitting reaction in a two-electrode configuration); (b) the catalytic stability of the Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 for overall water splitting in 1.0 M KOH (inset: the durability of Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 for the HER and OER after 1000 and 5000 CV cycles).
Fig. 7High-resolution (a) Co 2p, (b) Fe 2p, and (c) P 2p XPS spectra of the as-prepared, post-HER and post-OER Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 catalysts; (d) XRD patterns of the as-prepared, post-HER and post-OER Co0.6Fe0.4P-1.125 catalysts.