Exploring efficient and stable electrocatalysts for the bifunctional oxygen evolution reaction (OER) and oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) is vital to developing renewable energy technologies. However, due to the substantial and intricate design space associated with these bifunctional OER/ORR electrocatalysts, their development presents a formidable challenge, resulting in their cost-prohibitive nature in both experimental and computational studies. Herein, using the defect physics method, we systematically investigate the formation energies and bifunctional overpotential (ηBi) of 4d-transition-metal (4d-TM, 4d-TM = Zr, Nb, Mo, Ru, Rh, Pd, and Ag)-doped monolayer supercell g-C₃N₄ (4d-TM@C₅₄N₇₂) based on the density functional theory (DFT) calculations. Under N-rich and C-rich conditions, we find that the formation energies of RhN@C₅₄N₇₁ (Rh occupation N) and PdN@C₅₄N₇₁ (Pd occupation N) are smaller than that of other 4d-TMN@C₅₄N₇₁ (4d-TM occupation N site); for the 4d-TMint@C₅₄N₇₂ (4d-TM interstitial site occupation), the lowest-formation energy defects are Pdint@C₅₄N₇₂. These results indicate that they have better stabilities. Interestingly, for these formation energy lower systems, Pd⁰int@C₅₄N₇₂ (ηBi = 1.00 V) and Rh¹⁺N@C₅₄N₇₁ (ηBi = 0.73 V) have ultralow overpotential and can be great candidates for bifunctional OER/ORR electrocatalysts. We find the reason is that adjusting the charge states of 4d-TM@C₅₄N₇₂ can tune the interaction strength between the oxygenated intermediates and the 4d-TM@C₅₄N₇₂, which plays a crucial role in the activity of reactions. Additionally, the data obtained through machine learning (ML) application suggest that the electronegativity (Nm) and bond length of 4d-TM and coordination atoms (dTM-OOH) are primary descriptors characterizing the OER and ORR activities, respectively. The charged defect tuning of the bifunctional OER/ORR activity for 4d-TM@C₅₄N₇₂ would enable electrocatalytic performance optimization and the development of potential electrocatalysts for renewable energy applications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: