| Literature DB >> 32128404 |
Lei Fan1,2, Chuan Xia2,3, Fangqi Yang4, Jun Wang4, Haotian Wang2,5, Yingying Lu1.
Abstract
In light of environmental concerns and energy tranEntities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32128404 PMCID: PMC7034982 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aay3111
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Schematic illustration of sustainable energy cycling based on ECR.
Fuels and chemicals could be achieved from ECR with closed carbon cycle powered by renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydro. Cell engineering and catalyst engineering play key roles to promote the selectivity, activity, and efficiency for CO2 conversion into value-added C2+ products with high energy density.
Half electrochemical thermodynamic reactions of the main ECR production, together with their corresponding standard redox potentials [V versus reversible hydrogen electrode (RHE)].
| Hydrogen | 2H+ + 2 | 0.000 | 2H2O + 2 | −0.828 |
| Carbon monoxide | CO2 + 2H+ + 2 | −0.104 | CO2 + H2O + 2 | −0.932 |
| Methane | CO2 + 8H+ + 8 | 0.169 | CO2 + 6H2O + 8 | −0.659 |
| Methanol | CO2 + 6H+ + 6 | 0.016 | CO2 + 5H2O + 6 | −0.812 |
| Formic acid/formate | CO2 + 2H+ + 2 | −0.171 | CO2 + H2O + 2 | −0.639 |
| Ethylene | 2CO2 + 12H+ + 12 | 0.085 | 2CO2 + 8H2O + 12 | −0.743 |
| Ethane | 2CO2 + 14H+ + 14 | 0.144 | 2CO2 + 10H2O + 14 | −0.685 |
| Ethanol | 2CO2 + 12H+ + 12 | 0.084 | 2CO2 + 9H2O + 12 | −0.744 |
| Acetic acid/acetate | 2CO2 + 8H+ + 8 | 0.098 | 2CO2 + 5H2O + 8 | −0.653 |
| 3CO2 + 18H+ + 18 | 0.095 | 3CO2 + 13H2O + 18 | −0.733 | |
Fig. 2Summary of the state-of-the-art ECR performance and the C─C coupling mechanisms.
(A) The FE under different production rates (current density) for the reported ECR electrocatalysts (–, ). (B) Most possible C2+ pathways during ECR. Reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society ().
Fig. 3Alloy effects of ECR catalyst toward C2+ hydrocarbons.
(A to C) Cu-Ag bimetallic catalysts fabricated by additive-controlled electrodeposition: (A) scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of Cu wire, Cu-Ag poly, and Cu-Ag wire and (B) corresponding C2H4 FE. (C) EXAFS showed that Cu-Ag wire was homogeneously mixed and Cu(I) oxide was presented. (A) to (C) are reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society (). (D and E) Cu-Pd catalysts with different mixing patterns: (D) Illustration, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images, and energy-dispersive spectroscopy element maps of ordered, disordered, and phase-separated Cu-Pd alloys and (E) surface valence band photoemission spectra and d-band center (the vertical line) of Cu-Pd alloys relative to Fermi level. (D) and (E) are reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society (). a.u., arbitrary units.
Fig. 4Oxidation states changing induced effects for C2+ hydrocarbon production.
(A) Summary of the C2H4 selectivity of different plasma-activated copper catalysts. Reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). Scale bars, 500 nm. (B) Ratio of Cu oxidation states relative to the reaction time at −1.2 V versus RHE in electroredeposited copper. Reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (C) Ratio of Cu+ species with a function of reaction time at −0.95 V versus RHE in Cu-on-Cu3N or Cu-on-Cu2O. Reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (D) Boron doping was able to change the average adsorption energy of CO in the copper surface and lower the CO─CO dimerization energy. 1[B], 2[B], 3[B], 4[B], and 8[B] refer to the concentration of subsurface boron doping in the copper catalysts, which were 1/16, 1/8, 3/16, 1/4, and 1/2, respectively. (E) The relationship between the oxidation state and FE of C2 or C1 products in boron-doped copper catalysts. (D) and (E) are reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (F) SEM images of copper foils with different thicknesses of Cu2O films before (top) and after (bottom) ECR. Reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society ().
Fig. 5Morphology or structure and ligand effects for ECR toward C2+ hydrocarbons.
(A to C) Morphology or structure effects. (A) Density of atoms (left axis) and the ratio of atoms at the edge sites (Nedge) to atoms on the (100) plane (N100) (right axis) in relevance to the edge length (d). Reproduced with permission from John Wiley and Sons (). (B) Scheme of morphology caused pH changing. Reproduced with permission from John Wiley and Sons (). (C) Product selectivity of mesopore copper with different pore sizes and depths. Reproduced with permission from John Wiley and Sons (). (D to H) Ligand effects. (D and E) ECR on copper nanowire (Cu NW) with different kinds of amino acids (D) or modifiers (E) at −1.9 V. Reproduced with permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry (). (F) Production rates of C2H4 in different halide electrolytes with different adsorption potentials on Cu(35). Reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society (). NHE, normal hydrogen electrode. (G) FE of C2H4 and CO in different concentrations of KOH electrolytes and (H) Tafel slope of C2H4 in different concentrations of KOH electrolytes. (G) and (H) are reproduced from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) ().
Fig. 6Alloy, morphology, and structure effects on ECR catalysts for efficient C2+ oxygenate production.
(A to C) Alloy effects. (A) Maximum FE of ethanol and C2H4 and the FE ratio of ethanol and ethylene on various Cu-Zn alloys. (B) Partial current density of ethanol on various Cu-Zn alloys. (A) and (B) are reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society (). (C) CO2 reduction and CO evolution rates on gold, copper, and the Au-Cu bimetallic system. Reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (D to L) Morphology or structure effects. (D) Schematic illustration of metal ion cycling method. (E and F) SEM images of 100-cycle Cu before (E) and after (F) the prereduction under ECR conditions. (G) TEM and selected-area electron diffraction suggested that Cu(100) were exposed and (H) free energy for *OCCO and *OCCHO formation on Cu(100), Cu(111), and Cu(211) facets. (D) to (G) are reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (I) Ratio of oxygenates and hydrocarbons as a function of potential on Cu(111), Cu(751), and Cu(100). (J) Coordination numbers for Cu(111), Cu(100), and Cu(751). (I) and (J) are reproduced with permission from the National Academy of Sciences (). (K) Scheme of the transformation process from Cu NPs to cubic-like copper. Reproduced with permission from the National Academy of Sciences (). (L) SEM images of nanodendritic copper before and after ECR. Reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society ().
Fig. 7Defect engineering for C2+ oxygenate production.
(A to C) Gibbs free energy from *C2H3O to ethylene and ethanol for copper, copper with vacancy, and copper with copper vacancy and subsurface sulfur. (D) Schematic illustration of the Cu2S-Cu-V catalyst. (E) FE of C2+ alcohols and ethylene, as well as the FE ratio of alcohols to alkenes. (A) to (E) are reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (F) SEM image of NDD. (G) Production rates of acetate and formate on NDD with different nitrogen contents. at %, atomic %. (F) and (G) are reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society (). (H) FEs for NDD, BDD, and BNDs at −1.0 V. Reproduced with permission from John Wiley and Sons (). (I) Schematic illustration of the active sites for C─C coupling in NGQDs. (I) is reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society (). (J) TEM image of NGQDs. Scale bars, 1 nm. (K) Partial current densities for various products using NGQDs. (J) and (K) are reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group ().
Fig. 8Electrolyzer and electrode engineering for C2+ production.
(A) A diagram of the flow electrolyzer with a zoomed-in schematic of the electrode-electrolyte interface. (A) is reproduced with permission from John Wiley and Sons (). (B to E) Comparison of ECR performance using H-type cell and flow cell. (B) to (E) are reproduced with permission from the Nature Publishing Group (). (F to H) Different electrolytes applied in flow cells versus the ECR performance. (F) to (H) are reproduced with permission from John Wiley and Sons (). (I to K) Structure and stability performance of the polymer-based gas diffusion electrode. (I) to (K) are reproduced with permission from AAAS ().