Among heterogeneous electrocatalysts, gold comes closest to the ideal reversible electrocatalysis of CO2 electrochemical reduction (CO2RR) to CO and, vice versa, of CO electroxidation to CO2 (COOR). The nature of the electrolyte has proven to crucially affect the electrocatalytic behavior of gold. Herein, we expand the understanding of the effect of the widely employed bicarbonate electrolytes on CO2RR using gold monocrystalline electrodes, detecting the CO evolved during CO2RR by selective anodic oxidation. First, we show that CO2RR to CO is facet dependent and that Au(110) is the most active surface. Additionally, we detect by in situ FTIR measurements the presence of adsorbed COtop only on the Au(110) surface. Second, we highlight the importance of acid-base equilibria for both CO2RR and COOR by varying the electrolyte (partial pressure of CO2 and the concentration of the bicarbonate) and voltammetric parameters. In this way, we identify different regimes of surface pH and bicarbonate speciation, as a function of the current and electrolyte conditions. We reveal the importance of the acid-base bicarbonate/carbonate couple, not only as a buffering equilibrium but also as species involved in the electrochemical reactions under study.
Among heterogeneous electrocatalysts, gold comes closest to the ideal reversible electrocatalysis of CO2 electrochemical reduction (CO2RR) to CO and, vice versa, of CO electroxidation to CO2 (COOR). The nature of the electrolyte has proven to crucially affect the electrocatalytic behavior of gold. Herein, we expand the understanding of the effect of the widely employed bicarbonate electrolytes on CO2RR using gold monocrystalline electrodes, detecting the CO evolved during CO2RR by selective anodic oxidation. First, we show that CO2RR to CO is facet dependent and that Au(110) is the most active surface. Additionally, we detect by in situ FTIR measurements the presence of adsorbed COtop only on the Au(110) surface. Second, we highlight the importance of acid-base equilibria for both CO2RR and COOR by varying the electrolyte (partial pressure of CO2 and the concentration of the bicarbonate) and voltammetric parameters. In this way, we identify different regimes of surface pH and bicarbonate speciation, as a function of the current and electrolyte conditions. We reveal the importance of the acid-basebicarbonate/carbonate couple, not only as a buffering equilibrium but also as species involved in the electrochemical reactions under study.
In the search for more
efficient energy conversion technologies,
the ultimate goal is to find a material that can catalyze an electrochemical
process reversibly. For a given Ox/Red couple, such a material exhibits
high rates for both the electrochemical reduction and oxidation with
zero overpotential. Platinum is a good example of such a reversible
catalyst, as it is able to catalyze reversibly H+/H2 conversion,[1,2] i.e., the hydrogen evolution reaction
(HER) and the hydrogen evolution oxidation (HOR). Reversible catalysts
have been predicted to exist for two-electron transfer reactions[3] since such reactions typically have only a single
catalytic intermediate, whose binding energy needs to be optimized.
In relation to the electrocatalytic CO2 reduction reaction
(CO2RR), researchers would like to find an electrocatalyst interconverting
reversibly CO2/CO, that is, the following two-electron
transfer reaction:where AH is a Brønsted acid and A– is its
conjugated base. In neutral-alkaline media,
the acid–base couple is commonly considered to be H2O/OH–. However, other acid–base couples
may be taken into account, e.g., H2CO3/HCO3–, HCO3–/ CO32–, or
H2PO4–/HPO42–.In nature there is an enzyme, the Ni-containing
carbon monoxide
dehydrogenase (Ni-CODH), which can catalyze in a quasi-reversible
fashion the interconversion between CO2/CO.[4,5] Enzymes for the reversible conversion of CO2 and formic
acid also exist.[6] For this latter conversion,
(nearly) reversible electrocatalysts have also been identified in
heterogeneous electrocatalysis[7] and molecular
electrocatalysis.[8] However, reversible
synthetic heterogeneous electrocatalysts for the CO2/CO
conversion have, to the best of our knowledge, not yet been identified.
According to a computational study by Hansen et al., this is related
to the existence of two intermediates (adsorbed CO and COOH) in the
catalytic pathway, whose binding energies have a scaling relationship.[9] The enzyme can break this scaling by the presence
of a second coordination sphere which stabilizes COOH.[9] Among the known metal electrocatalysts, gold has the highest
activity for both CO2 electrochemical reduction to CO (CO2RR)[9,10] and CO electrooxidation (COOR).[11,12] Therefore,
understanding the details of the mechanism of the CO2/CO
conversion on gold, and especially the role of the electrolyte (the
electrochemical “second coordination sphere”), is important
for developing more efficient catalysts for CO2RR to CO.Studies
of the structure dependence of CO2RR on gold low-index
monocrystalline surfaces revealed that (110) is the most active facet.[13−15] The structure sensitivity trend for CO2RR to CO on the low-index
facets points to the central role of low-coordinated surface sites
in CO2RR.[14,16,17] Analogously,
the Au(110) surface was measured to be the most active facet for COOR,
both in acidic and alkaline media.[11,18,19]Besides the electrode surface structure, various
properties of
the electrolyte (e.g., anions, cations, and pH) have been shown to
play a crucial role in the electrocatalysis of the CO2RR and COOR.
In particular, bicarbonate solution has been proven to lead to higher
CO2RR efficiency, compared to other buffered solutions.[20] Understandably, bicarbonate is the most widely
employed electrolyte in CO2RR electrocatalysis. Aside from its buffering
ability, bicarbonate can also act as a supplier of CO2 through
the solution equilibrium between CO2 and bicarbonate[21,22] and as a a proton donor for HER.[23] Nonetheless,
attempts to fully understand the multifaceted role of acid–base
bicarbonate equilibria and the role of the different species in solution
are complicated by the interconnection between surface speciation
and reaction rates.[24] Recently, numerous
studies have identified the importance of current-driven changes in
the local environment close to the electrode surface compared to the
bulk of the solution on the outcome of CO2RR.[25−27]In this
study, we assess the structure and electrolyte dependence
of CO2RR on monocrystalline Au(hkl) electrodes. Based
on the ability of the gold electrode to selectively oxidize CO, we
detect the CO produced during CO2RR by applying anodic potentials.[28] In this way, we gain insights into the selectivity-potential
trend for CO2RR in bicarbonate electrolyte through a fast semiquantitative
method. Subsequently, we extend the measurements of CO2RR on Au(110)
in a variety of electrolyte conditions, by changing the partial pressure
of CO2 and bicarbonate concentration, and voltammetric
parameters, such as the negative vertex potential and the scan rate.
These electrochemical measurements of CO2RR activity together with in situ FTIR studies help us to draw a more detailed picture
of the effect of bicarbonate surface speciation and equilibria not
only on CO2RR but also on COOR on well-defined gold surfaces.
Experimental Section
Chemicals and Materials
Electrolytes were prepared
from H2SO4 (96%, Merck Suprapur), HClO4 (70%, Merck Suprapur), KHCO3 (EmsureACS Merck), and KClO4 (99.995%, Aldrich Ultrapure) using Milli-Q water (resistivity
≥18.2 MΩ cm). Prior to experiments, the electrolytes
were purged for 20 min with Ar (6.0 purity, Linde), CO2 (4.5 purity, Linde), or CO (4.7 purity, Linde). To obtain the selected
partial pressure of CO2, the flow of CO2 and
Ar was set accordingly using two mass flow controllers (SLA5850, Brooks
Instrument).
Experimental Procedure
The glassware
was stored overnight
in a 1 g L–1 KMnO4 solution. Prior to
experiments, the residual KMnO4 was removed by addition
of a diluted Piranha solution and the glassware was boiled in Milli-Q
water for seven times. The electrochemical experiments were performed
using two electrochemical cells in a three-electrode configuration
at room temperature using a Bio-Logic VSP300 potentiostat. Both cells
contained a coiled gold counter electrode (99.99% purity). As a reference
electrode, we employed in cell 1 a homemade reversible hydrogen electrode
(RHE) and in cell 2 a Ag/AgCl electrode (KCl-saturated, Pine Research
Instrumentation). In cell 2, the pH of the electrolytes purged for
20 min with the selected gas atmosphere was determined with a pH meter
(SI Analytics Lab 855 Benchtop Meter), and thus, the potential was
calculated according to ERHE = EAgAgCl + 0.199 V + (0.059 × pH).The gold single-crystal disk electrodes (⌀ 7.0 mm, 99.999%,
aligned with an accuracy ∼0.1°, Surface Preparation Laboratory)
were prepared by carefully flame annealing them until red-hot, with
cooling in air and rinsing with Milli-Q water.[29] For all the electrochemical experiments, the single-crystal
disks were brought in contact with the electrolyte in a hanging meniscus
configuration under potential control at 0.08 V vs RHE. First, in
cell 1 we measured the cyclic voltammetry (CV) of the Au(hkl) disk between 0.08 and 1.2 V vs RHE in Ar-purged 0.1 M H2SO4 at 50 mV s–1 (see Figure S2). The measured characterization CVs in 0.1 M H2SO4 are consistent with well-ordered flame-annealed
gold single-crystal surfaces.[29−31] As Au(hkl) surfaces
present specific sulfate adsorption peaks in the double-layer region,[29] we could characterize Au(hkl) crystals without reaching the oxidizing potential, thus avoiding
surface dissolution and roughening. Transferring the crystal to cell
2, we evaluated the Ohmic resistance by electrochemical impedance
spectroscopy (EIS) at 0.1 V vs RHE, and we applied 85% Ohmic drop
compensation to all the following measurements. Next, we measured
the CV of Au(hkl) crystals in the double-layer region
in the tested bicarbonate electrolyte (see Figure S3). Finally, the catalytic activity of the Au(hkl) surfaces for CO2RR was measured by CV starting at 0.08 V vs RHE
to a selected cathodic potential value and back to the upper limit
of the double layer (1.2 V vs RHE) at 50 mVs–1,
or by chronoamperometry (CA) measurements. The disk currents were
normalized by the electrochemical active surface area (ECSA), which
was determined by integrating the reduction peak from the CV in 0.1
M H2SO4 divided by the charge corresponding
to a gold monolayer 390 (μC cm–2) (see Figure S1).[32]The in situ Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
(FTIR) measurements were performed in external reflection mode with
an incident angle of 60° using a Bruker Vertex 80v IR spectrophotometer.
A detailed description of the setup is outlined elsewhere.[33] The gold single-crystal disk (prepared and characterized
as described above) was located in a spectroelectrochemical glass
cell mounted on a 60° bevelled CaF2 prism (MaTeck).
The reference electrode was a Ag/AgCl electrode (KCl-saturated), and
the counter electrode was a gold ring surrounding the working electrode
to ensure homogeneous potential across the disk surface. The disk
electrode was pressed against the prism in a thin layer configuration
biased at the reference potential (E0 =
+0.1 V vs RHE). After stabilization of the thin layer, the background
spectrum was recorded at +0.1 V vs RHE. To minimize the disruption
of the thin layer, the spectra were recorded while the potential was
pulsed (0.02 s) in between the selected and the reference potential.
Each spectrum was obtained in reflectance mode by averaging over 100
scans with a resolution of 4 cm–1. In this fashion,
a positive (negative) band corresponds to an increase (decrease) in
the transmittance at the selected potential compared to the reference.
Hence, a positive (negative) band is associated with a decrease (increase)
in the concentration of an IR-absorbing species on the surface and/or
in the thin layer.
Results and Discussion
Structure Dependence of
CO2RR
In this section, we will
discuss the structure dependence of CO2RR to CO on the three low index
planes of gold, i.e., Au(111), Au(100), and Au(110), as determined
by cyclic voltammetry (CV) and chronoamperometry (CA) experiments
in 0.1 M KHCO3. Our way of measuring the CO2RR electrocatalytic
activity by subsequent cathodic and anodic CAs is a fast semiquantitative
way to capture the structure dependence trend for CO2RR, as well as
the selectivity to CO2RR vs HER as a function of the applied potential.
Next, we investigated the presence of possible CO2RR reaction intermediates
on Au(hkl) by means of in situ FTIR
experiments.Figure A shows the cyclic voltammograms of Au(111), Au(100), and
Au(110) in CO2-saturated 0.1 M KHCO3. First,
the potential was scanned to negative values, where CO2 is reduced to CO, and then to positive values, where the CO formed
during CO2RR is reoxidized. Under reduction conditions, the cathodic
current measured for Au(110) is one order of magnitude larger than
the current measured for Au(111) and Au(100) electrodes. However,
the cathodic current is due to the contribution of two electrochemical
processes, namely, CO2RR and HER. To unravel the contribution of CO2RR
to the total cathodic current, the potential was scanned to values
where the gold electrode is selective for CO electrooxidation over
HOR[28] with comparable catalytic activity
for all Au(hkl).[19] Still,
this method is not quantitative, as part of the CO generated at the
surface during CO2RR will diffuse away. The fraction of CO diffusing
to the bulk depends on the time of the measurement and, hence, on
the scan rate (see Figure S15). Integration
of the current due to selective CO electrooxidation provides the oxidation
charge (QOx), which will be used as a
parameter to evaluate CO2RR activity througout this work. Clearly,
the CO reoxidation current in Figure follows the trend Au(110) > Au(111) ≈ Au(100).
This result agrees with previous investigations of the structure sensitivity
of CO2RR to CO,[13,14] validating our method to estimate
CO2RR activity by in situ CO electrooxidation.
Figure 1
For the different
Au(hkl) crystals in CO2-saturated 0.1
M KHCO3: (A) Cyclic voltammetry at 50 mVs–1. (B) Number of moles of CO formed (left axis, full
square) and number of moles of CO divided the total number of moles
reduced (right axis, empty square) as a function of the applied negative
potential.
For the different
Au(hkl) crystals in CO2-saturated 0.1
M KHCO3: (A) Cyclic voltammetry at 50 mVs–1. (B) Number of moles of CO formed (left axis, full
square) and number of moles of CO divided the total number of moles
reduced (right axis, empty square) as a function of the applied negative
potential.To gain more insight on the CO2RR
activity as a function of the
applied potential,
we performed CA measurements at different cathodic potentials and,
subsequently, stepped the potential to 0.8 V vs RHE to oxidize the
CO formed (see Figure S4). Figure B illustrates the number of
moles of CO (nCO) evolved during CO2RR
at different negative applied potentials for the different Au(hkl) in CO2-saturated 0.1 M KHCO3.
The nCO were calculated by integrating
the oxidative CAs profiles, considering that the number of electrons
transferred is equal to 2 for each oxidized CO molecule. Similarly
to the voltammetric response, the CA measurements exhibit the same
structure dependence for CO2RR to CO, i.e., Au(110) > Au(111) ≈
Au(100). Notably, while for Au(111) and Au(100) nCO keeps increasing as a function of the more negative
applied potential, for Au(110), after an initial steep increase, the nCO levels out at ca. −0.6 V vs RHE and
decreases at −1.0 V vs RHE. A similar trend emerges in the
CVs in Figure for
Au(110), where the increase in the cathodic current plateaus around
−4 mA cm–2 at a potential of ca. −0.65
V vs RHE. This decrease for both nCO and
the cathodic current may be ascribed to a mass transport limitation
in CO2 and by its consumption by the homogeneous reactions,
as a response to the increase in the local alkalinity (a more detailed
discussion will be given in the next section). Figure B shows on the right axis the number of
moles of CO divided the total number of moles (nCO/ntot) converted during the CA
at cathodic potential (assuming the formation of two-electron transfer
products, CO and H2). Hence, nCO/ntot is an evaluation of the selectivity
to CO2RR over HER. In fact, it is a lower estimate because some of
the CO will diffuse away before it is oxidized. For Au(110), nCO/ntot gives a
maximum between −0.4/–0.5 V vs RHE and then decreases
for more negative applied potentials due to the increasing HER current.Discussing the observed structure dependence of
CO2RR on gold electrodes,
numerous studies have argued that the low-coordination surface sites
(step- or edge-like) are the active sites for CO2RR.[14,16,17,34] On the other hand, the potential of zero charge (pzc) of a surface also plays a central role in interfacial charge transfer
processes, as it relates directly to the interfacial electric field,[35,36] and therefore in the stabilization of adsorbed charged species.
Namely, one would expect that for CO2RR a surface with a lower pzc leads to a better stabilization of the negatively charged
first reaction intermediate (*CO2•–).[35,37,38] For the same applied potential (Eapp vs reference electrode), the absolute negative
interfacial electric field (Eapp vs E) decreases for a surface
with less positive pzc, favoring the adsorption of
negatively charged CO2. Similarly, the effect of cation
identity on CO2RR has been rationalized in terms of reduction of the
electric field at the liquid–solid interface as a function
of the size of the hydrated cation in the outer Helmholtz plane.[37] Concerning the surface structure of Au(hkl) crystals, we should consider that they undergo potential-induced
reconstruction at potentials more negative than ca. −0.4 V
vs SHE.[31,39] Hence, during CO2RR conditions the basal
planes of gold reconstruct to Au(111)-(22x), Au(100)-(hex),
and Au(110)-(1 ×
2) or -(1 × 3).[15] We attribute the
observed structure dependence of CO2RR on Au(hkl)
to the parallel effect of the (E) and of the geometry of the surface sites. Consistently, the
least active surfaces for CO2RR are the reconstructed Au(111) and
Au(100), which are both (111)-like terraces surfaces with high-coordination
surface atoms and with a similar pzc (+0.564 and
+0.544 V vs SHE).[31,40] The reconstructed Au(110), being
a stepped surface with low-coordination surface atoms and with a lower pzc (+0.204 V vs SHE), is the most active surface for CO2RR.Next, we investigated by in situ FTIR the presence
of surface intermediates under CO2RR conditions. Figure shows the p-polarized FTIR
spectra recorded in CO2-saturated 0.1 M KHCO3 at increasing negative potentials for Au(110) (Figure S5 shows the full FTIR spectra for Au(110) and Au(111)).
Although p-polarized light is more sensitive to the species adsorbed
or close to the electrode surface, we can still observe vibration
modes of species present in solution. Namely, for both Au(111) and
Au(110) spectra, we detected several bands related to species in solution
at 1310, 1361, 1400, 1620, and 2343 cm–1. Besides
the band at 1620 cm–1 due to the OH bending of water,
all the other modes are related to the bicarbonate species in the
thin layer as a function of the applied negative potential. The positive
band at 2343 cm–1 is due to CO2,, which is consumed for increasingly negative potentials. The
negative-going bands at 1361 cm–1 and at 1310 cm–1 are attributed to the stretching modes of bicarbonate
in solution.[22,41] Initially, the concentration
of bicarbonate in the thin layer increases (negative bands), but for
Au(110) at a potential of −0.5 V vs RHE, bicarbonate starts
being consumed (positive band). Simultaneously, carbonate is formed
as shown by the positive going band at 1400 cm–1 due to the asymmetric stretching of dissolved carbonate.[41] Furthermore, at −0.5 V vs RHE the very
pronounced positive water band at 1620 cm–1 indicates
the onset of water reduction.[42] Overall,
the bicarbonate surface speciation is changing as a function of the
applied potential (leading to a cathodic current), being CO2 and HCO3– at low overpotential and HCO3– and CO32– at more negative potential.
Figure 2
FTIR spectra
of Au(110) measured with p-polarized light in CO2-saturated
0.1 M KHCO3. The background was collected
at +0.1 V vs RHE, and then, the potential was gradually increased
to more negative values through pulsed (0.02 s) chronoamperometry
(0.0, −0.1, −0.2, −0.25, −0.3, −0.35,
−0.4, −0.45, and −0.5 V vs RHE).
FTIR spectra
of Au(110) measured with p-polarized light in CO2-saturated
0.1 M KHCO3. The background was collected
at +0.1 V vs RHE, and then, the potential was gradually increased
to more negative values through pulsed (0.02 s) chronoamperometry
(0.0, −0.1, −0.2, −0.25, −0.3, −0.35,
−0.4, −0.45, and −0.5 V vs RHE).Only on Au(110) at potentials more negative than −0.2
V
vs RHE did we observe a band at 2100 cm–1 related
to adsorbed CO. In the literature, this frequency has been attributed
to CO adsorbed on top, COtop.[43,44] In our study, the COtop band is a bipolar band with a
Stark tuning slope of ca. 20–26 cm–1 V–1 (see Figure S6). The Stark
tuning slope obtained in our study for COtop falls in the
range (20–40 cm–1 V–1)
measured for Au(hkl) during COOR.[43,45] Compared to COtop previously detected on polycrystalline
gold as measured in the attenuated total reflection mode (ATR),[21,44,46] our results show a slightly different
potential dependence of the COtop band. Namely, in the
ATR spectra the COtop band disappears at potentials more
negative than −0.1/–0.3 V vs RHE,[21,46] while in our study we observed the COtop mode to potentials
as negative as −0.5 V vs RHE. This different potential dependence
of COtop may originate from the variations in the experimental
conditions of this work compared to previous ones,[21,44] i.e., the infrared technique (external vs internal reflection),
reference potential (0.1 VRHE compared to ca. 1.0–1.2
VRHE), electrolyte nature (K+ compared to Na+), and electrode surface (monocrystalline compared to a high
roughness Au polycrystalline surface). Finally, the FTIR measurements
support the activity trend of CO2RR for Au(hkl) planes,
as we detected the presence of the reaction product only on the most
active surface, i.e., Au(110).
Role of Acid–Base
Equilibria in Bicarbonate Electrolyte
for CO2RR and COOR
In this section, we will investigate the
role of the various acid–base equilibria present in bicarbonate
electrolyte on the electrocatalysis of CO2RR and CO electrooxidation
on the most active surface, Au(110). Importantly, a bicarbonate solution
is a buffering system through two different acid/base equilibria.
The first acid–base couple CO2/HCO3– has
a pKa,1 = 6.3 being a good buffering agent
for pH 5.3–7.3 according toFor higher pH 9.3–11.3, the
buffering will take place through the HCO3–/CO32– equilibrium with a pKa,2 = 10.3 according toIn the bulk of the solution,
the bicarbonate speciation is dictated
by the bulk pH. In turn, the bulk pH of a bicarbonate electrolyte
depends on the partial pressure of CO2 () and on the initial bicarbonate
concentration.
However, in aqueous electrolytes the occurrence of electrochemical
processes at the electrode surface will lead to significant changes
in the pH near the electrode surface. Thus, the surface pH, and as
a result the bicarbonate surface speciation, will be determined by
the current at the electrode. In the absence of forced convection,
especially, large concentration gradients will build up between the
surface and the bulk. In this case, also the kinetics of these solution
reactions are important, and reaction 3 is several
orders of magnitude faster than reaction 2.[47] To investigate the effect of reaction 2 and 3 on CO2RR and CO re-electrooxidation,
we will systematically change the following parameters: the partial
pressure of CO2, the bulk bicarbonate concentration, and
the applied cathodic potential.Keeping the bulk concentration
of bicarbonate fixed, purging the
solution with different partial pressures of CO2 () leads to different bulk
pH, as the equilibrium
of reaction 2 shifts to the right. Specifically,
by increasing the , the
pH drops, being ca. 9.0 in Ar-saturated
and 6.8 in CO2-saturated 0.1 M KHCO3 (see Figure B).
Figure 3
(A) Cyclic voltammetry
of Au(110) in 0.1 M KHCO3 at
50 mVs–1 for different . (B) Calculated oxidation
charges obtained
by integration of the CV up to 1.2 V vs RHE, after polarization to
−1.2 V vs SHE and experimentally measured bulk pH from (A).
(A) Cyclic voltammetry
of Au(110) in 0.1 M KHCO3 at
50 mVs–1 for different . (B) Calculated oxidation
charges obtained
by integration of the CV up to 1.2 V vs RHE, after polarization to
−1.2 V vs SHE and experimentally measured bulk pH from (A).Figure A shows
the cyclic voltammograms of Au(110) in 0.1 M KHCO3 solutions
purged with different . In
general the cathodic current and, more
precisely, the quasi-plateau in the current (jlim) observed during the cathodic scan increases with the (see Figure S8). A more detailed discussion of the nature of jlim will be given later. Curiously, the anodic
part of
the CVs exhibits two oxidation waves for 0.6
atm and a single oxidation peak for 0.6
atm. According to the oxidation peak
potential, we name the peak at a potential of ca. +0.4 V vs RHE the
1st peak and the one at ca. +0.7 V vs RHE the 2nd peak. By integrating the total oxidation current (sum of the 1st and 2nd peak), we obtain the total oxidation
charge (QOx). Figure B shows QOx calculated
from the CVs in 0.1 M KHCO3 solutions purged with different . The QOx scales
linearly with the , suggesting
that both oxidation peaks (1st and 2nd) can
be attributed to a product of CO2RR.
For this reason, we investigated whether the origin of the early oxidation
wave may relate to the formation of a CO2RR products beyond CO, as
proposed by Narayanaru et al.[48] During
CO2RR on a gold electrode, formic acid (HCOOH) was generally detected
with low Faraday efficiency (<5%).[49−52] Additionally, a few reports have
claimed that at more negative potential CO2 could even
be reduced to methanol (CH3OH)[48,52] through a path involving the formation of a formaldehyde intermediate
(H2CO), as calculated by DFT.[52] We probed whether the 1st oxidation wave in the CV of
Au(110) may originate from CO2RR to any of these 1-carbon-containing
products, i.e., HCOOH, CH3OH, and H2CO, by adding
10 mM of each organic molecule to a solution of 0.2 atm of CO2 in 0.1 M KHCO3 (see Figure S9). The addition of these organic molecules did not result
in a net increase of any of the oxidation waves. Consequently, the
duality of the oxidation wave cannot be explained in terms of CO2RR
to any 1-carbon-containing molecule other than CO.To further
probe the effect of acid–base equilibria and
the nature of the two electrooxidation peaks, we performed measurements
in electrolytes of different bulk bicarbonate concentrations (i.e.,
different buffer strength). Figure displays the cyclic voltammograms of Au(110) in bicarbonate
electrolytes of different concentration (0.02, 0.1, and 0.5 M) purged
with Ar. In Ar-saturated electrolytes, the cathodic current is mainly
due to HER and increases with the bicarbonate concentration, in agreement
with bicarbonate being a viable proton donor for HER.[23] Still, as shown by the appearance of an oxidation wave
after the cathodic polarization, we measured a small COOR current.
Distinctly, in Ar-purged solutions the oxidation peak potential corresponds
to the 1st peak and its charge is proportional to the bulk
bicarbonate concentration. During in situ FTIR experiments
in Ar-saturated 0.5 M KHCO3 on Au(110), we detect the presence
of COtop at 2100 cm–1 (see Figure S7). However, no CO2 band at
2343 cm–1 was detected, suggesting that CO2 comes from acid/base equilibria in solution. Our results corroborates
the hypothesis that bicarbonate is a source of CO2, through the following solution equilibrium:[21,22,53]
Figure 4
Cyclic
voltammetry of Au(110) at 50 mV s–1 in
Ar-saturated KHCO3 solution of different concentrations
(0.02, 0.1, and 0.5 M). Dotted lines show cyclic voltammetry prior
to cathodic polarization in the given electrolyte.
Cyclic
voltammetry of Au(110) at 50 mV s–1 in
Ar-saturated KHCO3 solution of different concentrations
(0.02, 0.1, and 0.5 M). Dotted lines show cyclic voltammetry prior
to cathodic polarization in the given electrolyte.Recent first-principles molecular dynamics simulations suggest
a mechanism in which HCO3– is converted into CO2 by
exchange of a proton from a neighboring water molecule to bicarbonate.[54]Next, we investigated the effect of the
negative vertex potential
(and corresponding cathodic current) on the 1st and 2nd oxidation peaks. Figure A shows potential opening cyclic voltammograms of
Au(110) in 0.1 M KHCO3 purged with 0.2 atm of CO2. Figure B displays
the charge calculated from the integration of the anodic wave in (A),
as the total oxidation charge, and for the 1st and 2nd peaks, separately. The peaks were fitted using an asymmetric
double sigmoidal function in OriginLab. A specific potential-charge
trend was observed for the two oxidation peaks. While the 2nd peak gradually increases with more negative potential until −0.8
V vs RHE, the 1st peak only appears at a potential more
negative than −0.6 V vs RHE and keeps increasing. Interestingly,
the growth of the 1st oxidation peak initiates concomitantly
the appearance of the quasi-plateau in the cathodic current at −0.6
V vs RHE. Similarly, the decrease in the 2nd oxidation
peak occurs simultaneously with the increase in the cathodic current
after the semi-plateau at −0.8 V vs RHE, which is attributed
to an increase in HER.
Figure 5
(A) Cyclic voltammetry of Au(110) in 0.2 atm of CO2–0.1
M KHCO3 at 50 mV s–1 for increasing cathodic
potentials. (B) Calculated oxidation charges for the different limiting
applied cathodic potentials.
(A) Cyclic voltammetry of Au(110) in 0.2 atm of CO2–0.1
M KHCO3 at 50 mV s–1 for increasing cathodic
potentials. (B) Calculated oxidation charges for the different limiting
applied cathodic potentials.The trend observed for the oxidation peaks (1st and
2nd), by varying the , the
concentration of KHCO3,
and the applied cathodic potential, indicates a strong pH effect.
Specifically, the growth of the 1st oxidation peak appears
to emerge after the manifestation of the cathodic quasi-plateau. To
have a deeper insight into the nature of the species leading to the
two well-separated anodic peaks and to the quasi-plateau in the cathodic
current, we performed voltammetry at different scan rates. According
to the Randles–Sevcik equation,[55] for a diffusion limiting process the peak current varies linearly
with the square root of the scan rate (ν). From the slope of
the linear fitting it is then possible to derive the diffusion coefficient D (cm2 s–1) of the limiting
species by rearranging the Randles–Sevcik equation (see the
derivation in the Supporting Information):where s (A cm–2 V–0.5 s0.5) is the slope, n is the number of electron transferred,
and c (mol
cm–3) is the concentration.Figure A shows
chronoamperometry measurements at −0.8 V vs RHE for 60 s on
Au(110) in 0.1 M KHCO3 purged with 0.2 atm of CO2, followed by a linear-sweep voltammogram in the double layer (0.08
to 1.2 V vs RHE). The same measurement was repeated for different
scan rates of the CVs. Figure B displays the derived Randles–Sevcik plot for the
dependence of the two electrooxidation peaks on the scan rate. Clearly,
the current of both the 1st and 2nd peak scales
linearly with the square root of the scan rate, indicating that both
processes are diffusion limited. Hence, both the 1st and
2nd peak can be ascribed to CO bulk electrooxidation and
not to the oxidation of irreversibly adsorbed CO, which was not detected
during in situ FTIR experiments (see Figure ). Interestingly, the slope
of the linear fitting for the two peaks is different, suggesting a
diffusion process limited by a different species.
Figure 6
(A) Chronoamperometry
of Au(110) at −0.8 V vs RHE for 60
s in 0.1 M KHCO3 purged with 0.2 atm of CO2,
followed by linear-sweep voltammetry in the double layer region at
different scan rates. (B) Randles–Sevcik plot for the 1st and 2nd CO electrooxidation peaks as measured
in (A). (C) Voltammetry of polycrystalline Au rotating disk electrode
in CO-saturated 0.1 M KClO4 with increasing concentration
of equimolar HCO3–/CO32– at 50 mV s–1 and 1600 rpm.
(A) Chronoamperometry
of Au(110) at −0.8 V vs RHE for 60
s in 0.1 M KHCO3 purged with 0.2 atm of CO2,
followed by linear-sweep voltammetry in the double layer region at
different scan rates. (B) Randles–Sevcik plot for the 1st and 2nd CO electrooxidation peaks as measured
in (A). (C) Voltammetry of polycrystalline Au rotating disk electrode
in CO-saturated 0.1 M KClO4 with increasing concentration
of equimolar HCO3–/CO32– at 50 mV s–1 and 1600 rpm.To simplify the system, we controlled the effect
of surface concentration
gradient developing during the cathodic scan on the COOR by performing
bulk COOR measurements ([CO] = 1 mM) on a Au rotating disk electrode
(RDE). Figure C shows
voltammetry measurements of bulk COOR on Au RDE in CO-saturated 0.1
M KClO4 with increasing concentration of equimolar HCO3–/CO32– at
50 mV s–1 and 1600 rpm. We can clearly observe two
different diffusion-limiting plateaus for COOR. For increasing concentration
of HCO3–/CO32–, the 1st plateau increases while the 2nd plateau
remains constant. The increase in the 1st plateau current
mirrors the increase in HCO3–/CO32– concentration, but not the concentration
of OH– (i.e., pH). It is worth noticing that we
used equimolar solutions of HCO3–/CO32– to minimize the increase in the
bulk pH. Nonetheless, the mere addition of HCO3– does not lead to the
appearance of the 1st COOR plateau (see Figure S13). Hence, the observed rise in the 1st COOR plateau in Figure C has to be ascribed to the increasing CO32– concentration.Based on this information, we propose that the appearance of two
separated bulk CO electrooxidation peaks can be attributed to reaction
mechanisms mediated by two different oxygen donors. The marked pH
and electrolyte dependence of the two anodic peaks leads us to ascribe
the 2nd peak to COOR by H2O, while the 1st peak is due to COOR by CO32–. We base this on the observations
that the RDE experiments of bulk COOR reveal that the 1st plateau current is proportional to the CO32– concentration (and
not to OH– or HCO3– concentration), while the 2nd plateau is independent of the electrolyte nature. Therefore, in
the CO reoxidation experiments, the appearance of the 1st peak cannot be attributed to HCO3– being the oxygen donor, but to a
species generated in response to a buildup of a pH gradient, i.e.,
CO32–. Indeed, for the same bulk concentration of HCO3– (0.1 M), we measured
the 1st peak only for electrolytes with a lower buffer
capacity, caused by a lower (Figure ), and after the
development of a certain cathodic
current (Figure ).
Though preliminary, these results indicate that the early onset peak
for COOR (1st) cannot be explained as free OH– being the oxygen donor, as we showed recently for the CO oxidation
peaks on a platinum electrode in an electrolyte not containing (bi)carbonate.[56] Specifically, we suggest that CO32– does
not act as a direct oxygen donor in COOR, rather it is involved in
the generation of OH–/OHads– through its acid–base
equilibrium with H2O/HCO3– at the electrified interface. The
onset potential for COOR in the presence of CO32– is ca. 0.3 V vs RHE
and is comparable to the one observed for COOR in alkaline media,
where OH– is the oxygen donor.[57] A study of OH– adsorption on Au(111)
shows that, at a potential as low as 0.3 V vs RHE, OH– is already adsorbed on the electrode with a low surface concentration.[58] It is plausible to propose that the OH– generated from CO32– acid–base reaction results in adsorbed OH–, leading to a lower COOR overpotential. Performing
analogous COOR experiments with a RDE in a variety of electrolytes,
we observe that the role of anions as an oxygen donor “shuttle”
in COOR is a more generic feature of buffering anions, not limited
to CO32–. These experiments, together with infrared spectroscopic measurements,
will be discussed in a separate paper.Finally, we analyze the
scan rate dependence of jlim during cathodic
polarization. Figure A shows the voltammetry for Au(110) in CO2-saturated
0.1 M KHCO3 at different scan rates.
In Figure B, we constructed
a Randles–Sevcik plot with the limiting cathodic current measured
at E = −1.0 V vs SHE. In a limited scan rate
range (2–25 mV s–1), there is a linear relationship
between jlim and the square root of the
scan rate, suggesting that the current is diffusion limited. Considering
that Au(110) is highly selective for CO2RR vs HER, that jlim depends linearly on the (see Figure S8 B), and that it is comparable in electrolytes containing
different
bicarbonate concentration (see Figure C), we propose that jlim is due to CO2RR becoming mass transport limited in CO2. However, the derivation of the diffusion coefficient from the slope
of the linear fitting in Figure B gives a value that is two orders of magnitude lower
than the diffusion coefficient of CO2 (see Table S1). Most likely, the disagreement between
the calculated and the theoretical diffusion coefficient of CO2 is due to the interplay of homogeneous equilibria leading
to consumption of CO2 according to eq . Indeed, for each molecule of CO2 being reduced, two molecules of A– (i.e., OH– or CO32–) are produced according to reaction 1. Thus, CO2RR can be considered as a self-inhibiting
reaction; as CO2RR proceeds, CO2 is more and more consumed
by the product of its own reduction through solution reactions. A
similar plateau in the CO2RR current was observed for both gold[24] and silver[59] electrodes
and was ascribed to mass transport limitation in CO2. Still,
the CO2RR current exhibits an unusual scan rate dependence; it is
diffusion limited at low scan rates, but for higher scan rates, it
deviates from Randles–Sevcik behavior (see Figure B). Under the latter conditions,
the plateau in the cathodic current disappears and the current becomes
almost scan rate independent, suggesting that CO2RR is not controlled
any more by diffusion. Consistently, improving mass transport by forced
convection has a marked effect on jlim at low scan rate, while its effect is more subtle for higher scan
rate (see Figure S11). Even if at low scan
rate under stationary conditions, the current at −1.1 V vs
SHE appears to be diffusion limited, and the Koutecky–Levich
analysis displays that the current is still partially kinetically
controlled (see Figure S12). This latter
result is in agreement with a mass transport limitation in CO2RR ascribed
to an “apparent” CO2 flux, due to a convolution
of mass transport with the kinetics of homogeneous reactions. Disentanglement
of the scan rate dependence requires many more detailed experiments
and presumably also kinetic simulations, which is outside of the scope
of this work.
Figure 7
(A) Voltammetry of Au(110) crystal in CO2-saturated
0.1 M KHCO3 at different scan rates. (B) Randles–Sevcik
plot of the plateau current (jlim) as
measured in (A). (C) Voltammetry of the Au(110) crystal in CO2-saturated 0.1, 0.05, 0.005, and 0.0 M KHCO3 and
a constant concentration of K+ (0.1 M, by addition of KClO4) at 25 mV s–1.
(A) Voltammetry of Au(110) crystal in CO2-saturated
0.1 M KHCO3 at different scan rates. (B) Randles–Sevcik
plot of the plateau current (jlim) as
measured in (A). (C) Voltammetry of the Au(110) crystal in CO2-saturated 0.1, 0.05, 0.005, and 0.0 M KHCO3 and
a constant concentration of K+ (0.1 M, by addition of KClO4) at 25 mV s–1.
Conclusions
In summary, we investigated the structure dependence
of Au(hkl) for CO2RR by cyclic voltammetry, where
the cathodic
scan was directly followed by anodic polarization to detect by electrooxidation
the CO evolved. The Au(110) surface exhibits the highest activity
for CO2RR, and COtop is the only adsorbed species detected.By performing cyclic voltammetry on Au(110) in different bicarbonate
electrolyte conditions, we revealed the importance of the current-induced
changes in the surface species on CO2RR and COOR, as sketched in Figure . As the cathodic
reactions proceed, the surface pH increases, and CO2RR becomes mass-transport
limited, resulting in a current plateau. The mass transport limitation
in CO2RR exhibits an anomalous scan rate dependence, as it is the
result of the interplay of the diffusion rate of different bicarbonate-related
species and the kinetics of the homogeneous equilibria leading to
CO2 consumption. Our results suggest that close to the
surface, where the concentrations of bicarbonate-related species are
constantly changing, the kinetics of the homogeneous equilibria (2
and 3) may be more important than its thermodynamics (pKa). In the anodic scan, the change in bicarbonate surface
speciation leads to the appearance of an additional peak (1st) for COOR. We propose that the origin of this 1st peak
can be explained in terms of COOR being mediated by CO32– species,
while the 2nd peak is due to COOR by H2O.
Figure 8
Schematics
of the current-driven changes in the surface bicarbonate
speciation during cyclic voltammetry of Au(110) in CO2-containing
bicarbonate electrolytes and its effect on COOR.
Schematics
of the current-driven changes in the surface bicarbonate
speciation during cyclic voltammetry of Au(110) in CO2-containing
bicarbonate electrolytes and its effect on COOR.In conclusion, we highlighted the importance of the electrolyte
species as primary actors in the electrochemical reactions. Bicarbonate
(HCO3–) participates both in CO2RR, as a supply of CO2, and
in HER, as an available proton donor,[23] while carbonate (CO32–) acts as an oxygen donor in COOR.
As the change of species at the electrode surface compared to the
bulk may lead to the presence of new actors in the catalytic pathways,
the necessity of probing in situ the local composition
of the electrified interface becomes crucially important.
Authors: Ruud Kortlever; Jing Shen; Klaas Jan P Schouten; Federico Calle-Vallejo; Marc T M Koper Journal: J Phys Chem Lett Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 6.475
Authors: Alison Parkin; Javier Seravalli; Kylie A Vincent; Stephen W Ragsdale; Fraser A Armstrong Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-08-02 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Benjamin A Zhang; Tuncay Ozel; Joseph S Elias; Cyrille Costentin; Daniel G Nocera Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 14.553
Authors: Mariana C O Monteiro; Stefan Dieckhöfer; Tim Bobrowski; Thomas Quast; Davide Pavesi; Marc T M Koper; Wolfgang Schuhmann Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 9.825