| Literature DB >> 31816230 |
Hathaichanok Seelajaroen1, Aristides Bakandritsos2, Michal Otyepka2, Radek Zbořil2, Niyazi Serdar Sariciftci1.
Abstract
Using enzymes as bioelectrocatalysts is an important step toward the next level of biotechnology for energy production. In such biocatalysts, a sacrificial cofactor as an electron and proton source is needed. This is a great obstacle for upscaling, due to cofactor instability and product separation issues, which increase the costs. Here, we report a cofactor-free electroreduction of CO2 to a high energy density chemical (methanol) catalyzed by enzyme-graphene hybrids. The biocatalyst consists of dehydrogenases covalently bound on a well-defined carboxyl graphene derivative, serving the role of a conductive nanoplatform. This nanobiocatalyst achieves reduction of CO2 to methanol at high current densities, which remain unchanged for at least 20 h of operation, without production of other soluble byproducts. It is thus shown that critical improvements on the stability and rate of methanol production at a high Faradaic efficiency of 12% are possible, due to the effective electrochemical process from the electrode to the enzymes via the graphene platform.Entities:
Keywords: bioelectrocatalysis; carbon dioxide reduction; enzyme catalysis; enzyme immobilization; graphene; methanol
Year: 2019 PMID: 31816230 PMCID: PMC6953471 DOI: 10.1021/acsami.9b17777
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces ISSN: 1944-8244 Impact factor: 9.229
Scheme 1Schematic Synthesis of G-COOH and Immobilization of Dehydrogenase (DH) Enzyme onto Graphene
Figure 1Schematic depiction of the reduction of CO2 to methanol catalyzed by FateDH, FaldDH, and ADH (a) using NADH as a sacrificial cofactor and (b) via a direct electron transfer through a functionalized graphene support and without any cofactors.
Figure 2FT-IR (a,b) and C 1s HR-XPS (c) spectra of the starting G-COOH (red solid line), the hybrid after conjugation of G-COOH with ADH (G-ADH, green solid line), and the pristine enzyme (ADH, blue solid line).
Chemical Conversion Efficiencies toward the Reduction of Acetaldehyde to Ethanol Using NADH as Cofactor during 2 h Reaction
| entry | sample | ethanol/×10–7 mol | conversion efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | G-ADH (homogeneous) | 6.4 | 64 |
| 2 | blank | 0.2 | 2 |
| 3 | G-COOH (homogeneous) | 0.6 | 6 |
| 4 | G-COOH/ADH (homogeneous) | 2.0 | 20 |
| 5 | free ADH (homogeneous) | 9.2 | 92 |
| 6 | G-ADH immobilized in alginate beads (heterogeneous) | 7.8 | 78 |
Figure 3Cyclic voltammograms of a bare carbon felt (black square line), an alginate matrix coated on carbon felt electrode (green triangle line), and a carbon felt modified with alginate hydrogel (red circle line) containing (a) G-ADH and (c) G-DHs were recorded at the potentials between 0 to −1.20 V vs Ag/AgCl (3 M KCl) with a scan rate of 10 mV·s–1 in 0.1 M TRIS-HCl solution pH 7.4 containing 1 M acetaldehyde under N2-saturated condition and in 0.1 M TRIS-HCl solution pH 7.0 under CO2-saturated condition, respectively. Gas chromatograms for (b) ethanol and (d) methanol analysis of samples collected before electrolysis, after 5 h electrolysis, and after 20 h electrolysis. The inset shows a transient curve of constant-potential electrolysis at −1.20 V vs Ag/AgCl (3 M KCl) from 5 to 20 h of the modified carbon felt electrode containing G-DHs.
State-of-the-Art Electrochemical Reduction of CO2 to Methanol
| catalysts | electrolyte | electrode/substrate | applied potential | overpotential | %FEMeOH | other CO2RR product(s) | ref | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cu2O/Zn2O | 0.5 M KHCO3 | GDE | –1.16 V vs Ag/AgCl | 0.54 | 10 | 27.5 (17.7 | C2H6O | Albo et al.[ |
| Pd/SnO2 nanosheet | 0.1 M NaHCO3 | carbon paper | –0.24 V vs RHE | 0.27 | 1.45 | 54.8 | formate | Zhang et al.[ |
| copper selenide (Cu1.63Se) nanoparticle | [Bmim]PF6 | carbon paper | –2.1 V vs Ag/Ag+ (−1.175 V vs RHE) | 1.2 | 41.5 | 77.6 | formate, CO | Yang et al.[ |
| PYD@Cu–Pt alloy | 0.5 M KCl | free standing electrode | –0.6 V vs SCE | 0.07 | 22 | 37 | formate | Yang et al.[ |
| Cu2O-MWCNTs | 0.5 M KHCO3 | Cu foil | –0.8 V vs Ag/AgCl | 6 | 38 | not reported | Irfan Malik et al.[ | |
| Cu nanocluster/ZnO | 0.1 M KHCO3 | single crystal ZnO | –1.4 V vs Ag/AgCl | 0.83 | 12 | 2.8 | CO, CH4, C2H4, C2H6O, methyl formate | Andrews et al.[ |
| Ni | 0.1 M KHCO3 | Ni foil | –1.0 V vs RHE | 1.03 | 5 | 2.3 | CH4, C2H4, formate | Kuhl et al.[ |
| BDD | 1 M NH3 | Si wafer | –1.3 V vs Ag/AgCl | 0.67 | 24.3 | CO, CH4 | Jiwanti et al.[ | |
| dehydrogenases | 0.05 M phosphate buffer pH 7.6 | carbon felt | –1.2 V vs Ag/AgCl | 0.58 | 0.08 | 10 | not observed | Schlager et al.[ |
| dehydrogenases modified graphene | 0.1 M TRIS-HCl buffer pH 7.0 | carbon felt | –1.2 V vs Ag/AgCl (−0.58 V vs RHE) | 0.61 | 1 | 12 | not observed | This work |
Overpotential is compared with the thermodynamic potential for the conversion of CO2 to methanol of 0.03 V vs RHE[86] where E (V vs RHE) is calculated from E(V vs Ag/AgCl) + 0.205 V + 0.0591*pH or E(V vs SCE) + 0.244 V + 0.0591*pH.
GDE: gas diffusion electrode.
The experiment was performed without supplying CO2 to GDE.
[Bmim]PF6:1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate.
PYD: 4-(3-phenoxy-2,2-bis(phenoxymethyl)propoxy)pyridine.
The information was not given.
Multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) impregnated with Cu2O.
Boron-doped diamond electrode.