journal article·2020-01-03Open access

Review—Electrochemical CO2 Reduction for CO Production: Comparison of Low- and High-Temperature Electrolysis Technologies

Rainer Küngas

Abstract

Recently, the field of CO2 electrolysis has experienced rapid scientific and technological progress. This review focuses specifically on the electrochemical conversion of CO2 into carbon monoxide (CO), an important “building block” for the chemicals industry. CO2 electrolysis technologies offer potentially carbon-neutral routes for the production of specialty and commodity chemicals. Many different technologies are actively being pursued. Electrochemical CO2 reduction from aqueous solutions stems from the success of alkaline and polymer electrolyte membrane electrolyzers for water electrolysis and uses performance metrics established within the field of aqueous electrochemistry. High-temperature CO2 electrolysis systems rely heavily on experience gained from developing molten carbonate and solid oxide fuel cells, where device performance is evaluated using very different parameters, commonly employed in solid-state electrochemistry. In this review, state-of-the-art low-temperature, molten carbonate, and solid oxide electrolyzers for the production of CO are reviewed, followed by a direct comparison of the three technologies using some of the most common figures of merit from each field. Based on the comparison, high-temperature electrolysis of CO2 in solid oxide electrolysis cells seems to be a particularly attractive method for electrochemical CO production, owing to its high efficiency and proven durability, even at commercially relevant current densities.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: CO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts · Advancements in Solid Oxide Fuel Cells · Chemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (68)

Show source-provided references
1. Fischedick · 2014 · 739
2. 2018
3. Ridjan · 2016
4. Wang · Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. · 2019 · 110 · 17410.1016/j.rser.2019.04.071 ↗
5. Global Energy and CO2 Status Report 2018
6. Sustainable progress report
7. Lee · 2017
8. Bierhals · 2002 · 679
9. Hietala · 2016
10. Bertleff · 2000
11. Hansen · 2008 · Vol. 6 · 2920
12. Küngas · ECS Trans. · 2017 · 78 · 287910.1149/07801.2879ecst ↗
13. Ebbesen · Chem. Rev. · 2014 · 114 · 1069710.1021/cr5000865 ↗
14. Hansen · Faraday Discuss. · 2015 · 182 · 910.1039/C5FD90071A ↗
15. Lim · Catal. Today · 2014 · 233 · 16910.1016/j.cattod.2013.11.037 ↗
16. 2020
17. Kharton · Solid State Ionics · 2004 · 174 · 13510.1016/j.ssi.2004.06.015 ↗
18. Kaplan · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2010 · 157 · B55210.1149/1.3308596 ↗
19. Delacourt · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2008 · 155 · B4210.1149/1.2801871 ↗
20. Burdyny · Energy Environ. Sci. · 2019 · 12 · 144210.1039/C8EE03134G ↗
21. Weekes · Acc. Chem. Res. · 2018 · 51 · 91010.1021/acs.accounts.8b00010 ↗
22. Neagu · Nature Comm. · 2015 · 6 · 812010.1038/ncomms9120 ↗
23. Gorte · Annu. Rev. Biomol. Eng. · 2011 · 2 · 910.1146/annurev-chembioeng-061010-114148 ↗
24. Kim · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2001 · 148 · A63910.1149/1.1374216 ↗
25. Bidrawn · Electrochem. Solid State Lett. · 2008 · 11 · B16710.1149/1.2943664 ↗
26. Holtappels · ECS Trans. · 2013 · 57 · 117510.1149/05701.1175ecst ↗
27. Verbraeken · Fuel Cells · 2015 · 15 · 68210.1002/fuce.201400183 ↗
28. Zheng · Chem. Soc. Rev. · 2017 · 46 · 142710.1039/C6CS00403B ↗
29. Nielsen · Electrochim. Acta · 2014 · 115 · 3110.1016/j.electacta.2013.10.053 ↗
30. Serra · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2008 · 155 · B20710.1149/1.2818766 ↗
31. Ullmann · Solid State Ionics · 2000 · 138 · 7910.1016/S0167-2738(00)00770-0 ↗
32. Vohs · Adv. Mater. · 2009 · 21 · 94310.1002/adma.200802428 ↗
33. Skinner · Int. J. Inorg. Mater. · 2001 · 3 · 11310.1016/S1466-6049(01)00004-6 ↗
34. Graves · Nature Mater. · 2014 · 14 · 23910.1038/nmat4165 ↗
35. 2017
36. Hartvigsen · ECS Trans. · 2017 · 78 · 295310.1149/07801.2953ecst ↗
37. Halmann · J. Electroanal. Chem. · 1987 · 235 · 36910.1016/0022-0728(87)85221-X ↗
38. Lorenz · Electrochim. Acta · 1970 · 15 · 102510.1016/0013-4686(70)80042-1 ↗
39. Kaplan · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2014 · 161 · F5410.1149/2.052401jes ↗
40. Lubomirsky
41. Lu · Nano Energy · 2016 · 29 · 43910.1016/j.nanoen.2016.04.009 ↗
42. Larrazábal · ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces · 2019 · 11 · 4128110.1021/acsami.9b13081 ↗
43. Verma · ACS Energy Lett. · 2018 · 3 · 19310.1021/acsenergylett.7b01096 ↗
44. Ma · J. Mater. Chem. A · 4 · 857310.1039/C6TA00427J ↗
45. She · Science · 2017 · 355 · 632110.1126/science.aad4998 ↗
46. Turek
47. Haas · Nat. Catal. · 2018 · 1 · 3210.1038/s41929-017-0005-1 ↗
48. Kutz · Energy Technol. · 2017 · 5 · 92910.1002/ente.201600636 ↗
49. Kaczur · Front. Chem. · 2018 · 6 · 26310.3389/fchem.2018.00263 ↗
50. Endrődi · ACS Energy Lett. · 2019 · 4 · 177010.1021/acsenergylett.9b01142 ↗
51. Electrochemical CO2 reduction
52. De Luna · Science · 2019 · 364 · 35010.1126/science.aav3506 ↗
53. Jhong · Curr. Opinion Chem. Eng. · 2013 · 2 · 19110.1016/j.coche.2013.03.005 ↗
54. Ebbesen · J. Power Sources · 2009 · 193 · 34910.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.02.093 ↗
55. Increasing the lifetime of stacks in CO2 electrolysis
56. Dufek · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2012 · 159 · F51410.1149/2.011209jes ↗
57. Quantitative review of degradation and lifetime of solid oxide cells and stacks
58. Shibata · IEEJ Energy Journal · 2015 · 10 · 26
59. Küngas · ECS Trans. · 2017 · 78 · 289510.1149/07801.2895ecst ↗
60. Küngas · ECS Trans. · 2019 · 91 · 21510.1149/09101.0215ecst ↗
61. Küngas · ECS Trans. · 2019 · 91 · 260110.1149/09101.2601ecst ↗
62. Xia · Nat. Energy · 2019 · 4 · 77610.1038/s41560-019-0451-x ↗
63. Jouny · Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. · 2018 · 57 · 216510.1021/acs.iecr.7b03514 ↗
64. Bushuyev · Joule · 2018 · 2 · 82510.1016/j.joule.2017.09.003 ↗
65. 2017
66. Mittal · Chemical Engineering World. · 2017 · 52 · 44
67. Scale-up of electrochemical processes
68. Jouny · Nature Cat. · 2018 · 1 · 74810.1038/s41929-018-0133-2 ↗