Optimizing the nickel boride layer thickness in a spectroelectrochemical ATR-FTIR thin-film flow cell applied in glycerol oxidation

doi:10.1016/S1872-2067(20)63766-4

Abstract

Abstract:

The influence of the drop-casted nickel boride catalyst loading on glassy carbon electrodes was investigated in a spectroelectrochemical ATR-FTIR thin-film flow cell applied in alkaline glycerol electrooxidation. The continuously operated radial flow cell consisted of a borehole electrode positioned 50 µm above an internal reflection element enabling operando FTIR spectroscopy. It is identified as a suitable tool for facile and reproducible screening of electrocatalysts under well-defined conditions, additionally providing access to the selectivities in complex reaction networks such as glycerol oxidation. The fast product identification by ATR-IR spectroscopy was validated by the more time-consuming quantitative HPLC analysis of the pumped electrolyte. High degrees of glycerol conversion were achieved under the applied laminar flow conditions using 0.1 M glycerol and 1 M KOH in water and a flow rate of 5 µL min^-1. Conversion and selectivity were found to depend on the catalyst loading, which determined the catalyst layer thickness and roughness. The highest loading of 210 µg cm^-2 resulted in 73% conversion and a higher formate selectivity of almost 80%, which is ascribed to longer residence times in rougher films favoring readsorption and C-C bond scission. The lowest loading of 13 µg cm^-2 was sufficient to reach 63% conversion, a lower formate selectivity of 60%, and, correspondingly, higher selectivities of C₂ species such as glycolate amounting to 8%. Thus, only low catalyst loadings resulting in very thin films in the few μm thickness range are suitable for reliable catalyst screening.

Key words: Catalyst layer thicknes, Electrocatalyst, Nickel boride, Operando ATR-IR, High performance liquid chromatography, Flow cell, Thin film, Anodic glycerol oxidation

Steffen Cychy, Sebastian Lechler, Zijian Huang, Michael Braun, Ann Cathrin Brix, Peter Blümler, Corina Andronescu, Friederike Schmid, Wolfgang Schuhmann, Martin Muhler. Optimizing the nickel boride layer thickness in a spectroelectrochemical ATR-FTIR thin-film flow cell applied in glycerol oxidation[J]. Chinese Journal of Catalysis, 2021, 42(12): 2206-2215.

×
share this article

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.cjcatal.com/EN/10.1016/S1872-2067(20)63766-4

https://www.cjcatal.com/EN/Y2021/V42/I12/2206

Figures/Tables 11

Fig. 1. (a) Photograph of the used setup with the homemade lid which enables tilt correction of the BHE over the IRE. (b) Scheme of the BHE placed above the Ge-IRE. By pumping electrolyte through the middle of the BHE, a radial flow profile is obtained between BHE and IRE. The catalyst is immobilized on a glassy carbon ring (black). Formed products and depleted reactants are detected in the evanescent wave above the IRE. In this configuration, a cylindric volume element is formed under the BHE. The relative distance between BHE and IRE is exaggerated for clarity.

Fig. 2. Simulation of the flow conditions in the 50 µm thin electrolyte layer underneath the BHE at a flow rate of 5 µL min-1 calculated with finite elements using COMSOL Multiphysics 5.5. (a) 2D simulation through one half of the BHE. (b) Magnification of the flow profile close to the borehole. The yellow curve indicates the velocity profile in radial direction at a height of 25 µm.

Fig. 3. LSM images of the different loadings on glassy carbon disks with a diameter of 8 mm. The magnified images correspond to areas of 1063 µm times 1418 µm.

Fig. 4. CVs as a function of the different NixB loadings (210, 52, 13 µg cm-2) in 1 M KOH (a) and b)) as well as 0.1 M glycerol/1 M KOH (c) and (d)). (a) 10 cycles recorded as conditioning with 100 mV s-1 between 1.04 to 1.64 V vs. RHE. The following CVs were obtained at lower scan rates of 10 mV s-1 ranging to a higher upper potential of 1.84 V vs. RHE. One scan was recorded in (b), five in (c) and one in (d). The CVs (a) to (c) were recorded at 1600 rpm; (d) was recorded under static conditions.

Fig. 5. Current density response as a function of time to the potential profile where 100 mV potential steps (10 min each) ranging from 1.3 V to 1.8 V vs. RHE were applied intermitted by a 4 min rinsing step at 1.0 V where no GOR is expected. The distance between BHE and IRE was set to 50 µm and a flow rate of 5 µL min-1 was applied. Corresponding spectra are shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. Spectra recorded during the potential step profile shown in Fig. 5. (a) Recorded spectra from 1.3 to 1.8 V vs. RHE for a catalyst loading of 210 µg cm-2, (b) of 52 µg cm-2 and (c) of 13 µg cm-2. Solid lines represent the last spectra during each step (recorded from 8 to 9.5 min during each step) and dashed lines the last spectrum during the rinsing step after the respective elevated potential step (recorded from 2 to 3.5 min during each rinsing step). Positive (upwards pointing) bands are caused by formed species and consumed species (glycerol) are represented by negative bands due to the log(R-1) scale. F is formate, GCol is glycolate, C is carbonate, Ox is oxalate and G is glycerol.

Table 1 Sum of the selectivities for samples 1 and 2 of the different catalyst loadings and difference to 100%.

Sample	Loading µg cm^-1	ΣS_i/%	Δ/%
First	210	96.91	3.09
	52	94.15	5.85
	13	90.26	9.74
Second	210	95.47	4.53
	52	92.82	7.18
	13	88.72	11.27

Fig. 7. Chronoamperometric data obtained for HPLC analysis of electrolyzed 0.1 M glycerol in 1 M KOH electrolyte over NixB at 1.8 V for 2 h. The insert shows a zoom of the first 10 min.

Fig. 8. Conversion of glycerol determined via HPLC analysis of the pumped electrolyte during the chronoamperometric measurements for catalyst loadings of 210, 52 and 13 µg cm-2 shown in Fig. 7 of two different samples obtained for 30 min each. Acquisition started after 1 h pumping time.

Fig. 9. Selectivities for different catalyst loadings in the first and second sample. The inset is a magnification excluding formate.

Fig. 10. Simplified reaction scheme of the GOR representing the complex and interwoven pathway from C3 to C1 species.

References

[1]	S. E. Hosseini, M. A. Wahid, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev., 2016, 57, 850-866.
[2]	H. B. Tao, Y. Xu, X. Huang, J. Chen, L. Pei, J. Zhang, J. G. Chen, B. Liu, Joule, 2019, 3, 1498-1509.
[3]	M. Ayoub, A. Z. Abdullah, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 2671-2686.
[4]	M. Pagliaro, R. Ciriminna, H. Kimura, M. Rossi, C. Della Pina, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2007, 46, 4434-4440.
[5]	Y. Zhou, Y. Shen, J. Piao, ChemElectroChem, 2018, 5, 1636-1643.
[6]	C. Coutanceau, S. Baranton, WIREs: Energy Environ., 2016, 5, 388-400.
[7]	M. S. E Houache, K. Hughes, E. A. Baranova, Sustain. Energy Fuels, 2019, 3, 1892-1915.
[8]	M. S. Faber, S. Jin, Energy Environ. Sci., 2014, 7, 3519-3542.
[9]	L. Cui, W. Zhang, R. Zheng, J. Liu, Chem. Eur. J., 2020, 26, 11661-11672.
[10]	L. Han, S. Dong, E. Wang, Adv. Mater., 2016, 28, 9266-9291.
[11]	B. Habibi, N. Delnavaz, RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 31797-31806.
[12]	M. T. Bender, X. Yuan, K.-S. Choi, Nat. Commun., 2020, 11, 4594.
[13]	Y. Kwon, Y. Y. Birdja, I. Spanos, P. Rodriguez, M. T. M. Koper, ACS Catal., 2012, 2, 759-764.
[14]	Y. Kwon, T. J. P Hersbach, M. T. M. Koper, Top. Catal., 2014, 57, 1272-1276.
[15]	V. L. Oliveira, C. Morais, K. Servat, T. W. Napporn, G. Tremiliosi-Filho, K. B. Kokoh, J. Electroanal. Chem., 2013, 703, 56-62.
[16]	R. M. Sandrini, J. R. Sempionatto, E. Herrero, J. M. Feliu, J. Souza-Garcia, C. A. Angelucci, Electrochem. Commun., 2018, 86, 149-152.
[17]	J. Schnaidt, M. Heinen, D. Denot, Z. Jusys, R. J. Behm, J. Electroanal. Chem., 2011, 661, 250-264.
[18]	M. Simões, S. Baranton, C. Coutanceau, Appl. Catal. B, 2010, 93, 354-362.
[19]	L. Huang, J.-Y. Sun, S.-H. Cao, M. Zhan, Z.-R. Ni, H.-J. Sun, Z. Chen, Z.-Y. Zhou, E. G. Sorte, Y. J. Tong, S. G. Sun, ACS Catal., 2016, 6, 7686-7695.
[20]	C. Dai, L. Sun, H. Liao, B. Khezri, R. D. Webster, A. C. Fisher, Z. J. Xu, J. Catal., 2017, 356, 14-21.
[21]	Y. Kwon, K. J. P Schouten, M. T. M. Koper, ChemCatChem, 2011, 3, 1176-1185.
[22]	Y. Kwon, M. T. M. Koper, Anal. Chem., 2010, 82, 5420-5424.
[23]	S. Sun, L. Sun, S. Xi, Y. Du, M. U Anu Prathap, Z. Wang, Q. Zhang, A. Fisher, Z. J. Xu, Electrochim. Acta, 2017, 228, 183-194.
[24]	C. Zhu, B. Lan, R.-L. Wei, C.-N. Wang, Y.-Y. Yang, ACS Catal., 2019, 9, 4046-4053.
[25]	J.-T. Li, Z.-Y. Zhou, I. Broadwell, S.-G. Sun, Acc. Chem. Res., 2012, 45, 485-494.
[26]	M. Osawa, in: Handbook of Vibrational Spectroscopy, J. M. Chalmers, P. R. Griffiths, Eds., Wiley, Chichester, 2002.
[27]	Y.-Y. Yang, J. Ren, H.-X. Zhang, Z.-Y. Zhou, S.-G. Sun, W.-B. Cai, Langmuir, 2013, 29, 1709-1716.
[28]	C. Korzeniewski, in: Advances in Electrochemical Sciences and Engineering, R. C. Alkire, D. M. Kolb, J. Lipkowski, P. N. Ross, Eds., Wiley, 2006, 233-268.
[29]	D. Hiltrop, J. Masa, A. J. R Botz, A. Lindner, W. Schuhmann, M. Muhler, Anal. Chem., 2017, 89, 4367-4372.
[30]	S. Cychy, D. Hiltrop, C. Andronescu, M. Muhler, W. Schuhmann, Anal. Chem., 2019, 91, 14323-14331.
[31]	M. Heinen, Y. X. Chen, Z. Jusys, R. J. Behm, Electrochim. Acta, 2007, 52, 5634-5643.
[32]	Y. X. Chen, M. Heinen, Z. Jusys, R. J. Behm, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2006, 45, 981-985.
[33]	V. K. Puthiyapura, W.-F. Lin, A. E. Russell, D. J. L. Brett, C. Hardacre, Top. Catal., 2018, 61, 240-253.
[34]	J. Masa, I. Sinev, H. Mistry, E. Ventosa, M. de La Mata, J. Arbiol, M. Muhler, B. Roldan Cuenya, W. Schuhmann, Adv. Energy Mater., 2017, 7, 1700381.
[35]	N. E. de Souza, J. F. Gomes, G. Tremiliosi-Filho, J. Electroanal. Chem., 2017, 800, 106-113.
[36]	D. Mellmann, P. Sponholz, H. Junge, M. Beller, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2016, 45, 3954-3988.