| Literature DB >> 35683662 |
Xupeng Qin1, Oluwafunmilola Ola2, Jianyong Zhao1, Zanhe Yang1, Santosh K Tiwari3, Nannan Wang1, Yanqiu Zhu1.
Abstract
Hydrogen is regarded as a key renewable energy source to meet future energy demands. Moreover, graphene and its derivatives have many advantages, including high electronic conductivity, controllable morphology, and eco-friendliness, etc., which show great promise for electrocatalytic splitting of water to produce hydrogen. This review article highlights recent advances in the synthesis and the applications of graphene-based supported electrocatalysts in hydrogen evolution reaction (HER). Herein, powder-based and self-supporting three-dimensional (3D) electrocatalysts with doped or undoped heteroatom graphene are highlighted. Quantum dot catalysts such as carbon quantum dots, graphene quantum dots, and fullerenes are also included. Different strategies to tune and improve the structural properties and performance of HER electrocatalysts by defect engineering through synthetic approaches are discussed. The relationship between each graphene-based HER electrocatalyst is highlighted. Apart from HER electrocatalysis, the latest advances in water electrolysis by bifunctional oxygen evolution reaction (OER) and HER performed by multi-doped graphene-based electrocatalysts are also considered. This comprehensive review identifies rational strategies to direct the design and synthesis of high-performance graphene-based electrocatalysts for green and sustainable applications.Entities:
Keywords: 3D structure; electrocatalysis; graphene; heteroatom-doped graphene; hydrogen evolution reaction
Year: 2022 PMID: 35683662 PMCID: PMC9182338 DOI: 10.3390/nano12111806
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.719
Scheme 1Schematic diagram of graphene electrocatalysts for HER and graphene preparation method.
Figure 1Schematic representation of the graphene transfer procedure and the key processes involved in metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) for growing AlGaN nanorod LEDs. (I) spin coating of poly methyl methacrylate (PMMA) on graphene on Cu foil; (II) the transfer of graphene with PMMA to Si substrate; (III) dissolution of PMMA; and (IV) MOCVD growing of AlGaN nanorod LEDs. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [52]. Copyright 1996–2022 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland).
Figure 2There are two key steps in this preparation process: intercalation-oxidation (IO) and oxidation-exfoliation (OE). In the IO step, concentrated sulfuric acid and oxidant are intercalated into the graphite layer to form intercalated graphite oxide (GIO). During the intercalation process, the oxidizer breaks the π-π conjugate structure of graphite, creating negatively charged functional groups and increasing the interlayer spacing. In the next OE stage, the oxidizing agent further oxidizes the carbon basal plane of GIO, producing more functional groups and expanding the interlayer space. After recovery of sulfuric acid and cleaning with water, 100% slGO was attained (Blue and green balls are O and H, respectively). Reprinted with permission from Ref. [55]. Copyright 2022 Springer Nature Limited.
Figure 3FE-SEM and TEM images of the synthesized NSG/Fe3O4 composites: (a) FE-SEM images reveal Fe3O4 nanoparticles encapsulated in N, S co-doped graphene nanosheets; (b) FE-SEM images; (c) TEM images show that there are many Fe3O4 nanoparticles distributed and encapsulated in N, S co-doped graphene nanosheets; (d) high-magnification TEM images showing that Fe3O4 nanoparticles are contained in N, S co-doped graphene nanosheets effectively. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [65]. Copyright 2022 Springer Nature Limited.
Figure 4Preparation method of GO-PANi-FP tri-functional electrocatalyst material. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [72]. Copyright 2016 John Wiley and Sons.
Summary of HER performance of graphene-based electrocatalysts.
| Electrocatalyst | Electrolyte | Onset Potential/Overpotential | Tafel Slope | Stability | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ReSe2 nanoflakes/rGO | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 145.3 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 40.7 | 24 h | Yan et al. [ |
| Ni0.85Se nanospheres/rGO | 1 M KOH | 128 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 91 | 18 h, 1000 CV | Zhu et al. [ |
| Conducting scaffold-supported 3D rGO-CNT/MoS2 nanostructure | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 123.75 (vs. REH) at 100 mA cm−2 | 31 | Bolar et al. [ | |
| 1 M KOH | 217.61 (vs. REH) at 50 mA cm−2 | 52 | |||
| 3D Pd nanosponge-shaped networks wrapped by graphene dots | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 32 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 33 | 15 h, 3000 CV | Nguyen et al. [ |
| 3D graphene hollow nanospheres supported ruthenium phosphides | 1.0 M KOH | 25.5 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 34.4 | 10 h, 1000 CV | Li et al. [ |
| Ru Nanoclusters/N-graphene | 1.0 M KOH | 25.9 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 32.6 | 2000 CV | Li et al. [ |
| FeCoNiB@Boron-doped vertically aligned graphene arrays | 1.0 M KOH | 31 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 30 | 10 h | Jiang et al. [ |
| Plasma-etched, S-doped graphene | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 178 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 86 | 20 h, 3000 CV | Tian et al. [ |
| 3D porous NG derivative-integrated MoS2 nanosheet | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 157 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 45.8 | 10 h, 1000 CV | Zang et al. [ |
| 3D FeP NT/PG | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 69 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 52.4 | 40 h, 1000 CV | Yu et al. [ |
| A self-supporting P–Fe3O4@3DG bulk composite | 1.0 M KOH | 123 (vs. REH) at 10 mA cm−2 | 65 | 50 h | Li et al. [ |
| Ni2P nanoparticles/N,B-graphene | 1.0 M KOH | 92 mV (vs. RHE) at 10 mA cm−2 | 48.3 | 20 h, 3000 CV | Sun et al. [ |
| Dispersed tungsten (W)-optimized MoP nanoparticles on N,P-doped graphene oxide | 1.0 M KOH | 70 mV (vs. RHE) at 10 mA cm−2 | 60.3 | 16 h | Chen et al. [ |
| Ni-Ni3P@NPC/rGO | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 113 mV (vs. RHE) at 20 mA cm−2 | 57.93 mV dec−1 | 25 h | Li et al. [ |
| Cobalt phosphide decorated/N,B-3D-graphene | 0.5 M H2SO4 | 118 mV (vs. RHE) at 10 mA cm−2 | 50 | 50 h, 1000 CV | Karaman et al. [ |
Figure 5TEM (a) and HRTEM (b,c) images of EG/Co0.85Se/NiFe−LDH. (d) High-resolution Co 2p XPS spectra of EG/Co0.85Se and EG/Co0.85Se/NiFe−LDH. (e) N2 adsorption isotherm and the corresponding pore size distribution (inset) of EG/Co0.85Se/NiFe−LDH. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [98]. Copyright 2016 The Royal Society of Chemistry.
Figure 6HER polarization curves and respective Tafel plots of N− and/or P−doped graphene electrocatalysts in (a,b) 0.5 M H2SO4 (pH = 0) and (c,d) 0.1 M KOH (pH = 13). (e) The calculated values of i0 for N and/or P−doped graphene in 0.5 M H2SO4 (patterned bars) and 0.1 M KOH (solid bars) solutions are compared (*100 is 100 times than original data). (f) Relationship between exchange current density (I0) and free energy (ΔGH*) of N− and/or P−doped graphene. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [131]. Copyright 2014 American Chemical Society.
Figure 7Description of the fabrication process of CoP/rGO-T nanocomposites. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [147]. Copyright 2016 The Royal Society of Chemistry.