journal article·2024-04-01Open access

Simulated Start-Stop and the Impact of Catalyst Layer Redox on Degradation and Performance Loss in Low-Temperature Electrolysis

Shaun M. Alia, Kimberly S. Reeves, David A. Cullen, Haoran Yu, A. Jeremy Kropf, Nancy Kariuki, Jae Hyung Park, Deborah J. Myers

Abstract

Stress tests are developed that focus on anode catalyst layer degradation in proton exchange membrane electrolysis due to simulated start-stop operation. Ex situ testing indicates that repeated redox cycling accelerates catalyst dissolution, due to near-surface reduction and the higher dissolution kinetics of metals when cycling to high potentials. Similar results occur in situ, where a large decrease in cell kinetics (>70%) is found along with iridium migrating from the anode catalyst layer into the membrane. Additional processes are observed, however, including changes in iridium oxidation, the formation of thinner and denser catalyst layers, and platinum migration from the transport layer. Increased interfacial weakening is also found, adding to both ohmic and kinetic loss by adding contact resistances and isolating portions of the catalyst layer. Repeated shutoffs of the water flow further accelerate performance loss and increase the frequency of tearing and delamination at interfaces and within catalyst layers. These tests were applied to several commercial catalysts, where higher loss rates were observed for catalysts that contained ruthenium or high metal content. These results demonstrate the need to understand how operational stops occur, to identify how loss mechanisms are accelerated, and to develop strategies to limit performance loss.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Electrocatalysts for Energy Conversion · Fuel Cells and Related Materials · Advanced battery technologies research

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

References (58)

Show source-provided references
1. Pivovar · The Electrochemical Society Interface · 2018 · 27 · 4710.1149/2.F04181if ↗
2. Ayers · Current Opinion in Electrochemistry · 2019 · 18 · 910.1016/j.coelec.2019.08.008 ↗
3. Ayers · Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering · 2019 · 10 · 21910.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030241 ↗
4. IRENA · 2020
5. Production cost modeling for high levels of photovoltaics penetration10.2172/924642 ↗
6. Alia · 2019
7. Xu · 2017
8. Ayers · 2018
9. Danilovic · The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · 2014 · 5 · 247410.1021/jz501061n ↗
10. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · F28210.1149/2.0731904jes ↗
11. Reier · ACS Catal. · 2012 · 2 · 176510.1021/cs3003098 ↗
12. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2016 · 163 · F310510.1149/2.0151611jes ↗
13. Rakousky · Electrochim. Acta · 2019 · 302 · 47210.1016/j.electacta.2018.11.141 ↗
14. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · F124310.1149/2.0771915jes ↗
15. Ayers · 2019
16. Lewinski · ECS Trans. · 2015 · 69 · 89310.1149/06917.0893ecst ↗
17. Siracusano · Renewable Energy · 2018 · 123 · 5210.1016/j.renene.2018.02.024 ↗
18. Ayers · ECS Trans. · 2019 · 33 · 310.1149/1.3484496 ↗
19. Rakousky · J. Power Sources · 2016 · 326 · 12010.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.06.082 ↗
20. Lettenmeier · Sci. Rep. · 2017 · 710.1038/srep44035 ↗
21. Babic · J. Power Sources · 2020 · 45110.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.227778 ↗
22. Grigoriev · Int. J. Hydrogen Energy · 2014 · 39 · 2044010.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.05.043 ↗
23. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · F116410.1149/2.0231915jes ↗
24. Xu · 2015
25. Weiß · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · F48710.1149/2.0421908jes ↗
26. Ayers · ECS Trans. · 2010 · 33 · 310.1149/1.3484496 ↗
27. Bessarabov · ECS Trans. · 2016 · 75 · 116510.1149/07514.1165ecst ↗
28. Hamdan · 2017
29. Reier · Advanced Energy Materials · 2017 · 7 · 110.1002/aenm.201601275 ↗
30. Ayers · 2020
31. Carmo · Int. J. Hydrogen Energy · 2013 · 38 · 490110.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.01.151 ↗
32. Naito · Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers · 2021 · 8 · 290010.1039/D0QI01465F ↗
33. Ha · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2021 · 16810.1149/1945-7111/abdeea ↗
34. Rakousky · Electrochim. Acta · 2018 · 278 · 32410.1016/j.electacta.2018.04.154 ↗
35. Liu · Adv. Energy Mater. · 2021 · 11 · 110.1002/aenm.202002926 ↗
36. Schuler · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2019 · 166 · F55510.1149/2.1241908jes ↗
37. Liu · Electrochem. Commun. · 2018 · 97 · 9610.1016/j.elecom.2018.10.021 ↗
38. Kang · Nano Energy · 2018 · 47 · 43410.1016/j.nanoen.2018.03.015 ↗
39. Kang · Electrochim. Acta · 2019 · 316 · 4310.1016/j.electacta.2019.05.096 ↗
40. Satjaritanun · iScience · 2020 · 2310.1016/j.isci.2020.101783 ↗
41. Zlobinski · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2021 · 16810.1149/1945-7111/abcf19 ↗
42. Bühler · J. Mater. Chem. A · 2019 · 710.1039/C9TA08396K ↗
43. Lickert · Int. J. Hydrogen Energy · 2020 · 45 · 604710.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.12.204 ↗
44. Chandesris · Int. J. Hydrogen Energy · 2015 · 40 · 135310.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.11.111 ↗
45. Trinke · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2018 · 165 · F50210.1149/2.0541807jes ↗
46. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2020 · 16710.1149/1945-7111/abc746 ↗
47. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2016 · 163 · F305110.1149/2.0071611jes ↗
48. Ilavsky · J. Appl. Crystallogr. · 2009 · 42 · 46910.1107/S0021889809008802 ↗
49. Ilavsky · J. Appl. Crystallogr. · 2009 · 42 · 34710.1107/S0021889809002222 ↗
50. Ilavsky · J. Appl. Crystallogr. · 2012 · 45 · 32410.1107/S0021889812004037 ↗
51. Jemian · Acta Metall. Mater. · 1991 · 39 · 247710.1016/0956-7151(91)90062-6 ↗
52. Ravel · J. Synchrotron Radiat. · 2005 · 12 · 53710.1107/S0909049505012719 ↗
53. Pavlovic · ACS Catal. · 2016 · 6 · 809810.1021/acscatal.6b02343 ↗
54. Pourbaix · 1974
55. Alia · Frontiers in Energy Research · 2022 · 10 · 110.3389/fenrg.2022.857663 ↗
56. Alia · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2021 · 16810.1149/1945-7111/ac28c5 ↗
57. Cherevko · Catal. Today · 2016 · 262 · 17010.1016/j.cattod.2015.08.014 ↗
58. Padgett · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 2023 · 17010.1149/1945-7111/acee25 ↗