In the pursuit of innovative molecular catalysts for the electrocatalytic reduction of CO 2 , we employed computational methodologies to investigate six Cu‐based expanded porphyrin dual‐atom catalysts (DACs). Our study revealed both large and small variations among the different DACs. Despite metal center substitutions, the highly delocalized nature of the π orbitals in the expanded porphyrin complexes led to minimal differences between the frontier orbitals. Conversely, pronounced differences emerged during hydrogen reduction. Notably, the formation of H 2 exhibited low limiting potentials ranging from 0.13 to 0.43 eV, attributable to the ligand‐centered activity of the expanded porphyrin. Similar limiting potentials (<0.31 eV) for CO 2 reduction indicate competition between the two reduction processes. This can be attributed to the emergence of highly favorable bridging μ 2 intermediates, exemplified by *OCHO and *OH. The preference for these intermediates is expected to lead to the formation of only 2e − and 4e − products, namely H 2 , HCOOH and H 2 CO. Specifically, CuFe and CuMn DACs are poised to favor CO 2 reduction to produce HCOOH and H 2 CO, while CuCo, CuCu, and CuZn DACs are anticipated to favor the production of H 2 .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McCarver et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: