Half-Wave Potential or Mass Activity? Characterizing Platinum Group Metal-Free Fuel Cell Catalysts by Rotating Disk Electrodes
Source abstract
Abstract
There are challenges in comparing catalyst performance. The most common method is to compare half-wave potentials (E1/2). This metric has been helpful since it has allowed the platinum-group metal-free (PGM-free) catalyst community to show that the half-wave potential of PGM-free catalysts can compete with platinum catalysts. However, the issue with this metric can be observed in that E1/2 increases as the rotating disk electrode (RDE) catalyst loading increases. Furthermore, comparisons between catalysts by half-wave potential are biased towards studies that used higher loading, and loading dependence complicates comparing studies of different loadings. Hence, we propose a shift to focusing on mass activity for PGM-free catalysts.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electrocatalysts for Energy Conversion · Fuel Cells and Related Materials · Electrochemical Analysis and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, United States
Funding
US Dept. of Energy
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.05.07810.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.05.078 ↗
2. 10.1021/am900219g10.1021/am900219g ↗
3. 10.1038/ncomms961810.1038/ncomms9618 ↗
4. 10.1021/ja405149m10.1021/ja405149m ↗
5. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.07.02810.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.07.028 ↗
6. 10.1016/S0022-0728(98)00390-810.1016/S0022-0728(98)00390-8 ↗
7. 10.1038/ncomms1328510.1038/ncomms13285 ↗
8. 10.1021/acscatal.7b0399110.1021/acscatal.7b03991 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.apcatb.2012.08.04010.1016/j.apcatb.2012.08.040 ↗
10. 10.1002/aenm.20130173510.1002/aenm.201301735 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.elecom.2012.04.02910.1016/j.elecom.2012.04.029 ↗
12. 10.1126/science.aan225510.1126/science.aan2255 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.nanoen.2016.04.04210.1016/j.nanoen.2016.04.042 ↗
14. 10.1039/c0jm03613g10.1039/c0jm03613g ↗
15. Zelenay, P.; Myers, D., ElectroCat (Electrocatalysis Consortium). 2017 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting; U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program, 2017.
16. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.02.06710.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.02.067 ↗
17. 10.1021/acscatal.6b0064310.1021/acscatal.6b00643 ↗
18. 10.1002/anie.20150490310.1002/anie.201504903 ↗
19. 10.1021/jacs.7b0651410.1021/jacs.7b06514 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.04.01910.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.04.019 ↗
21. Litster S. · 2018
22. 10.1016/j.nanoen.2016.02.03810.1016/j.nanoen.2016.02.038 ↗
23. 10.1002/adma.20170675810.1002/adma.201706758 ↗
24. 10.1002/celc.20160016310.1002/celc.201600163 ↗
25. 10.1039/c2sc20657a10.1039/c2sc20657a ↗
26. 10.1038/ncomms834310.1038/ncomms8343 ↗
27. 10.1039/C4TA01656D10.1039/C4TA01656D ↗
28. 10.1038/nmat436710.1038/nmat4367 ↗
29. 10.1149/2.075304jes10.1149/2.075304jes ↗
30. 10.1149/1.345663010.1149/1.3456630 ↗