超低铂用量质子交换膜燃料电池

doi:10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009094

物理化学学报 >> 2021, Vol. 37 >> Issue (9): 2009094.doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009094

所属专题：燃料电池

超低铂用量质子交换膜燃料电池

王健, 丁炜(), 魏子栋()

重庆大学化学化工学院，清洁能源与资源利用化学过程重庆市重点实验室，重庆 400044

收稿日期:2020-09-29 录用日期:2020-10-30 发布日期:2020-11-06
通讯作者: 丁炜,魏子栋 E-mail:dingwei128@cqu.edu.cn;zdwei@cqu.edu.cn
作者简介:丁炜，1986年生，国家优秀青年基金获得者，重庆市杰青基金获得者，重庆市青年拔尖人才，博导。2014年于重庆大学获得博士学位。主要从事电化学催化，燃料电池，新能源技术方面的研究
魏子栋，1963年生，教育部长江学者特聘教授，博导，重庆大学化学化工学院院长。1994年于天津大学获得博士学位。主要从事电化学催化，燃料电池，新能源技术方面的研究
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(22022502);国家自然科学基金(21776024);重庆市青年拔尖(02200011130003)

Performance of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells at Ultra-Low Platinum Loadings

Jian Wang, Wei Ding(), Zidong Wei()

Chongqing Key Laboratory of Chemical Process for Clean Energy and Resource Utilization, School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China

Received:2020-09-29 Accepted:2020-10-30 Published:2020-11-06
Contact: Wei Ding,Zidong Wei E-mail:dingwei128@cqu.edu.cn;zdwei@cqu.edu.cn
About author:Emails: zdwei@cqu.edu.cn (Z.W.)
Emails: dingwei128@cqu.edu.cn (W.D.)
Supported by:
the National Natural Science Foundation of China(22022502);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(21776024);the Program for the Top Young Innovative Talents of Chongqing(02200011130003)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

质子交换膜燃料电池(PEMFCs)作为一种清洁、高效的能源转换装置，被认为是未来能源转换的重要技术之一，是取代现有汽车内燃机的重要途径之一。目前，PEMFCs广泛使用铂基电催化剂，电堆组装的技术水平已降低到0.2 g·kW^-1。然而，按照汽车行业铂全球用量(约90 t铂，生产9500万辆)，大规模应用需要将系统铂用量将至0.01 g·kW^-1，挑战巨大。实现铂利用率数量级的提升，当前研究主要集中在开发高活性、高利用率、高稳定的、抗溺水的新型铂基催化剂；开发高透氧率、疏水性新型离聚物，制备超薄质子膜；合理设计高传质性能、高利用率的催化层。本文主要针对上述的问题进行了综述，分析了其催化活性增强的机理，讨论了膜电极组成设计和影响因素。

关键词: 质子交换膜燃料电池, 铂基催化剂, 质子膜, 催化层

Abstract:

Proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) generate electricity from hydrogen, powering a range of applications while emitting nothing but water. Therefore, PEMFCs are regarded as an environmentally friendly alternative to internal combustion engines for the future. Nevertheless, the high cost and scarcity of platinum (Pt) sources prevent the widespread adoption of fuel cells. With the development of fuel cell manufacturing technology, current Pt utilization has increased to a relatively high level of 0.2 g·kW^-1 in PEMFCs. However, according to the PGM market report from Johnson Matthey (2020), current Pt utilization in fuel cells is still too low to meet the need for its large-scale application in the automotive industry, unless the Pt utilization can be further reduced to an ultra-low level (0.01 g·kW^-1). Therefore, higher Pt mass activity and higher Pt utilization must be realized in membrane electrode assemblies (MEA) to achieve ultra-low Pt loadings and a reduced Pt usage. Many key variables affect the performance of MEA, such as the activity of electrocatalysts, conductivity and distribution of ionomers, gas diffusion in carbon papers, and the thickness of the proton exchange membrane. For example, a wide variety of highly promising catalysts have been developed, such as shape-controlled Pt nanocrystals, Pt alloy/de-alloys, core-shells, the synergetic effect of active supports, single atom/single-atom layer catalysts for improving the utilization of Pt, and anti-poisoning catalysts. However, the super-high activity of a Pt catalyst is elusive in a real fuel cell because of the lack of a fundamental understanding of the reaction interface structure and mass transfer properties in real cells. For instance, the recently developed Pt-Ni nanoframes that exhibited an extremely high mass activity of 5.7 A·mg^-1 for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in a liquid half-cell only showed about one-tenth the activity in a real fuel cell (0.76 A·mg^-1 Pt at 0.90 V). To achieve widespread adoption of Pt in fuel cells, we urgently need to explore new combinations of electrocatalysts, ionomers, gas diffusion layers, and proton exchange membranes. Taking into account all these factors, recent advances have enhanced the performance of MEA, such as a neural-network-like catalyst structure for higher Pt utilization, a highly order-structured with vertically aligned carbon nanotubes as a highly ordered catalyst layer that exhibits higher mass transfer efficiency, a novel anti-flooding electrode, a higher oxygen permeability and ionic conductivity ionomer, and an ultrathin MEA with low Pt loading that exhibits higher fuel cell output efficiency. This review mainly focuses on the recent progress in fuel cell cathode performance at ultra-low Pt loadings. To achieve the ultimate goal of Pt utilization (0.01 g·kW^-1), further efforts to accelerate this progress are urgently needed, including improving catalytic performance by using highly active and stable supports, decreasing the gas diffusion resistance, enhancing the water management in the catalytic layer, improving the anti-poisoning property, and establishing an integrated ultra-thin and low platinum film electrode.

Key words: Proton exchange membrane fuel cell, Pt-based electrocatalyst, Proton Membrane, Catalyst layer

王健, 丁炜, 魏子栋. 超低铂用量质子交换膜燃料电池[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(9), 2009094. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009094

Jian Wang, Wei Ding, Zidong Wei. Performance of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells at Ultra-Low Platinum Loadings[J]. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2021, 37(9), 2009094. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009094

链接本文: https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009094

https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/Y2021/V37/I9/2009094

图/表 29

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

图11

图12

图13

图14

图15

图16

图17

图18

图19

图20

图21

图22

图23

图24

图25

图26

图27

图28

表1

参考文献 85

1	Gong, Y. Synthesis, Characterization and Performance Testing of Pt-Based Electrocatalysts for Low Temperature Pem Fuel Cells. In Chemical Engineering, Energy; ProQuest Dissertations Publishing: Ann Arbor, 2008; p. 0176.
2	Nie Y. ; Li L. ; Wei Z. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2015, 44, 2168. doi: 10.1002/chin.201525299
3	Stephens I. E. L. ; Rossmeisl J. ; Chorkendorff I. Science 2016, 354, 1378. doi: 10.1126/science.aal3303
4	Gasteiger H. A. ; Marković N. M. Science 2009, 324, 48. doi: 10.1126/science.1172083
5	Middelman E. Fuel Cells Bull. 2002, 2002, 9. doi: 10.1016/S1464-2859(02)11028-5
6	Lin R. ; Cai X. ; Zeng H. ; Yu Z. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, e1705332. doi: 10.1002/adma.201705332
7	Sui S. ; Wang X. ; Zhou X. ; Su Y. ; Riffat S. ; Liu C. J. J. Mater. Chem. A 2017, 5, 1808d. doi: 10.1039/C6TA08580F
8	Markovic N. ; Adžic R. R. ; Cahan B. D. ; Yeager E. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1994, 377, 249. doi: 10.1016/0022-0728(94)03467-2
9	Markovic N. M. ; Gasteiger H. A. ; Ross P. N. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 6715. doi: 10.1021/j100011a001
10	Markovic N. M. ; Gasteiger H. A. ; Ross P. N. J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 3411. doi: 10.1021/j100011a001
11	Wu J. ; Yang H. Nano Res. 2010, 4, 72. doi: 10.1007/s12274-010-0049-x
12	Wu J. ; Qi L. ; You H. ; Gross A. ; Li J. ; Yang H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 11880. doi: 10.1021/ja303950v
13	Tian N. ; Zhou Z. ; Sun S. ; Ding Y. ; Wang Z. L. Science 2007, 316, 732. doi: 10.1126/science.1140484
14	Lee S. W. ; Chen S. ; Sheng W. ; Yabuuchi N. ; Kim Y. ; Mitani T. ; Vescovo E. ; Shaohorn Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 15669. doi: 10.1021/ja9025648
15	Zhou Z. ; Huang Z. ; Chen D. ; Wang Q. ; Tian N. ; Sun S. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 411d. doi: 10.1002/ange.200905413
16	Han N. ; Zhou Z. Y. ; Sun S. G. ; Ding Y. ; Wang Z. L. Science 2007, doi: 10.1126/science.1140484
17	Liu S. ; Tian N. ; Xie A. Y. ; Du J. H. ; Xiao J. ; Liu L. ; Sun H. Y. ; Cheng Z. Y. ; Zhou Z. Y. ; Sun S. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 5753. doi: 10.1021/jacs.5b13473
18	Yu T. ; Kim D. Y. ; Zhang H. ; Xia Y. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 2773. doi: 10.1002/anie.201007859
19	Landsman, D. A.; Luczak, F. J., Noble Metal-Chromium Alloy Catalysts and Electrochemical Cell. US Patent, US06/160517, 1982.
20	Jia Q. ; Liang W. ; Bates M. K. ; Mani P. ; Lee W. ; Mukerjee S. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 387. doi: 10.1021/nn506721f
21	Stephens I. E. L. ; Bondarenko A. S. ; Grønbjerg U. ; Rossmeisl J. ; Chorkendorff I. Energ. Environ. Sci. 2012, 5, 6744. doi: 10.1039/C2EE03590A
22	Kugler E. ; Boudart M. J. Catal. 1979, 59, 201. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9517(79)80025-1
23	Lim J. ; Shin H. ; Kim M. ; Lee H. ; Lee K. S. ; Kwon Y. ; Song D. ; Oh S. ; Kim H. ; Cho E. Nano Lett. 2018, 18, 2450. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b00028
24	Huang X. ; Zhao Z. ; Cao L. ; Chen Y. ; Zhu E. ; Lin Z. ; Li M. ; Yan A. ; Zettl A. ; Wang Y. M. Science 2015, 348, 1230. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa8765
25	Koh S. ; Strasser P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 42. doi: 10.1021/ja0742784
26	Wang H. ; Xu S. ; Tsai C. ; Li Y. ; Liu C. ; Zhao J. ; Liu Y. ; Yuan H. ; Abild-Pedersen F. ; Prinz F. B. Science 2016, 354, 1031. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf7680
27	Bu L. ; Zhang N. ; Guo S. ; Zhang X. ; Li J. ; Yao J. ; Wu T. ; Lu G. ; Ma J. Y. ; Su D. Science 2016, 354, 1410. doi: 10.1126/science.aah6133
28	Wang X. X. ; Hwang S. ; Pan Y. T. ; Chen K. ; He Y. ; Karakalos S. ; Zhang H. ; Spendelow J. S. ; Su D. ; Wu G. Nano Lett. 2018, 18, 4163. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b00978
29	Wang Q. ; Wang Q. ; Chen S. ; Shi F. ; Chen K. ; Nie Y. ; Wang Y. ; Wu R. ; Li J. ; Zhang Y. ; Ding W. ; Li Y. ; Li L. ; Wei Z. Adv. Mater. 2016, 28, 10673. doi: 10.1002/adma.201603509
30	Feng Y. ; Huang B. ; Yang C. ; Shao Q. ; Huang X. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2019, 29, 1904429. doi: 10.1002/adfm.201904429
31	Tian X. ; Zhao X. ; Su Y. Q. ; Wang L. ; Wang H. ; Dang D. ; Chi B. ; Liu H. ; Hensen E. J. M. ; Lou X. W. Science. 2019, 366, 850. doi: 10.1126/science.aaw7493
32	Chen C. ; Kang Y. ; Huo Z. ; Zhu Z. ; Huang W. ; Xin H. L. ; Snyder J. ; Li D. ; Herron J. A. ; Mavrikakis M. Science 2014, 343, 1339. doi: 10.1126/science.1249061
33	Li M. ; Zhao Z. ; Cheng T. ; Fortunelli A. ; Chen C. ; Yu R. ; Zhang Q. ; Gu L. ; Merinov B. V. ; Lin Z. Science 2016, 354, 1414. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf9050
34	Zeng X. ; Shui J. ; Liu X. ; Liu Q. ; Li Y. ; Shang J. ; Zheng L. ; Yu R. Adv. Energy Mater. 2018, 8, 1701345. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201701345
35	Cui L. ; Li Z. ; Wang H. ; Cui L. ; Zhang J. ; Lu S. ; Xiang Y. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2020, 3, 3807. doi: 10.1021/acsaem.0c00255
36	Chong L. ; Wen J. ; Kubal J. ; Sen F. ; Zou J. ; Greeley J. P. ; Chan M. K. Y. ; Barkholtz H. M. ; Ding W. ; Liu D. Science 2018, 362, 1276. doi: 10.1126/science.aau0630
37	Ao X. ; Zhang W. ; Zhao B. ; Ding Y. ; Nam G. ; Soule L. ; Abdelhafiz A. ; Wang C. ; Liu M. Energ. Environ. Sci. 2020, doi: 10.1039/D0EE00832J
38	Chen Y. ; Ji S. ; Wang Y. ; Dong J. ; Chen W. ; Li Z. ; Shen R. ; Zheng L. ; Zhuang Z. ; Wang D. ; Li Y. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 6937. doi: 10.1002/ange.201702473
39	Yin P. ; Yao T. ; Wu Y. ; Zheng L. ; Lin Y. ; Liu W. ; Ju H. ; Zhu J. ; Hong X. ; Deng Z. ; Zhou G. ; Wei S. ; Li Y. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 10800. doi: 10.1002/anie.201604802
40	Qu Y. ; Li Z. ; Chen W. ; Lin Y. ; Yuan T. ; Yang Z. ; Zhao C. ; Wang J. ; Zhao C. ; Wang X. ; Zhou F. ; Zhuang Z. ; Wu Y. ; Li Y. Nat. Catal. 2018, 1, 781. doi: 10.1038/s41929-018-0146-x
41	Wan C. ; Duan X. ; Huang Y. Adv. Energy Mater. 2020, 10, 1903815. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201903815
42	Wei S. J. ; Li A. ; Liu J. C. ; Li Z. ; Chen W. X. ; Gong Y. ; Zhang Q.H. ; Cheong W. C. ; Wang Y. ; Zheng L. R. ; Xiao H. ; Chen C. ; Wang D. S. ; Peng Q. ; Gu L. ; Han X. D. ; Li J. ; Li Y. D. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2018, 13, 856. doi: 10.1038/s41565-018-0197-9
43	Fu Q. ; Saltsburg H. ; Flytzani-tephanopoulos M. Science 2003, 301, 935. doi: 10.1126/science.1085721
44	Liu J. ; Jiao M. ; Lu L. ; Barkholtz H. M. ; Li Y. ; Wang Y. ; Jiang L. ; Wu Z. ; Liu D. ; Zhuang L. ; Ma C. ; Zeng J. ; Zhang B. ; Su D. ; Song P. ; Xing W. ; Xu W. ; Wang Y. ; Jiang Z. ; Sun G. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 15938. doi: 10.1038/ncomms16160
45	Liu J. ; Jiao M. ; Mei B. ; Tong Y. ; Li Y. ; Ruan M. ; Song P. ; Sun G. ; Jiang L. ; Wang Y. ; Jiang Z. ; Gu L. ; Zhou Z. ; Xu W. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2019, 58, 1163. doi: 10.1002/anie.201812423
46	Zhao J. ; Deng Q. ; Bachmatiuk A. ; Sandeep G. ; Popov A. A. ; Eckert J. ; Rummeli M. H. Science 2014, 343, 1228. doi: 10.1126/science.1245273
47	Huang X. ; Tang S. ; Mu X. ; Dai Y. ; Chen G. ; Zhou Z. ; Ruan F. ; Yang Z. ; Zheng N. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2011, 6, 28. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2010.235
48	Duan H. ; Yan N. ; Yu R. ; Chang C. ; Zhou G. ; Hu H. ; Rong H. ; Niu Z. ; Mao J. ; Asakura H. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 3093. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4093
49	Niu J. ; Wang D. ; Qin H. ; Xiong X. ; Tan P. ; Li Y. ; Liu R. ; Lu X. ; Wu J. ; Zhang T. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 3313. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4313
50	Jang K. ; Kim H. J. ; Son S. U. Chem. Mater. 2010, 22, 1273. doi: 10.1021/cm902948v
51	Jiang J. ; Ding W. ; Li W. ; Wei Z. Chem 2020, 6, 431. doi: 10.1016/j.chempr.2019.11.003
52	Lang X. Y. ; Han G. F. ; Xiao B. B. ; Gu L. ; Yang Z. Z. ; Wen Z. ; Zhu Y. F. ; Zhao M. ; Li J. C. ; Jiang Q. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2015, 25, 230. doi: 10.1002/adfm.201401868
53	Liu X. ; Wang H. ; Chen S. ; Qi X. ; Gao H. ; Hui Y. ; Bai Y. ; Guo L. ; Ding W. ; Wei Z. J. Energy Chem. 2014, 23, 358. doi: 10.1016/S2095-4956(14)60158-3
54	Najam T. ; Shah S. S. A. ; Ding W. ; Jiang J. ; Jia L. ; Yao W. ; Li L. ; Wei Z. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2018, 57, 15101. doi: 10.1002/anie.201808383
55	Harzer G. S. ; SchwMmlein J. N. ; Damjanovi A. M. ; Ghosh S. ; Gasteiger H. A. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2018, 165, F3118. doi: 10.1149/2.0161806jes
56	Wang J. ; Wu G. ; Wang W. ; Xuan W. ; Jiang J. ; Wang J. ; Li L. ; Lin W. F. ; Ding W. ; Wei Z. J. Mater. Chem. A 2019, 7, 19786. doi: 10.1039/C9TA06712D
57	Yarlagadda V. ; Carpenter M. K. ; Moylan T. E. ; Kukreja R. S. ; Koestner R. ; Gu W. ; Thompson L. ; Kongkanand A. ACS Energy Lett. 2018, 3, 618d. doi: 10.1021/acsenergylett.8b00186
58	Muzaffar T. ; Kadyk T. ; Eikerling M. Sustain. Energy Fuels 2018, 2, 1189. doi: 10.1039/C8SE00026C
59	Wang J. ; Wu G. ; Xuan W. ; Wang W. ; Ding W. ; Wei Z. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 2020, 45, 22649. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.06.047
60	Chen S. ; Wei Z. ; Li H. ; Li L. Chem. Commun. 2010, 46, 8782. doi: 10.1039/c0cc02802a
61	Wang M. ; Rome G. ; Medina S. ; Pfeilsticker J. R. ; Kang Z. ; Pylypenko S. ; Ulsh M. ; Bender G. J. Power Sources 2020, 466, 228344. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.228344
62	Wang Q. ; Eikerling M. ; Song D. ; Liu Z. ; Navessin T. ; Zhong X. ; Holdcroft S. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2005, 151, A1171. doi: 10.1149/1.1753580
63	Yu H. ; Baricci A. ; Casalegno A. ; Guetaz L. ; Bonville L. ; Maric R. Electrochim. Acta 2017, 247, 1169. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2017.06.145
64	Yu H. ; Baricci A. ; Bisello A. ; Casalegno A. ; Guetaz L. ; Bonville L. ; Maric R. Electrochim. Acta 2017, 247, 1155. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2017.07.093
65	Zheng Z. ; Yang F. ; Lin C. ; Zhu F. ; Shen S. ; Wei G. ; Zhang J. J. Power Sources 2020, 451, 227729. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.227729
66	Tian Z. Q. ; Lim S. ; Poh C. ; Tang z. ; Xia Z. ; Luo Z. ; Shen P. ; Chua Y. ; Feng Y. ; Shen Z. ; Lin J. Adv. Energy Mater. 2011, 1, 1205. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201100371
67	Murata S. ; Imanishi M. ; Hasegawa S. ; Namba R. J. Power Sources 2014, 253, 104. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.11.073
68	Debe M. K. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2013, 160, F522. doi: 10.1149/2.049306jes
69	Zeng Y. ; Shao Z. ; Zhang H. ; Wang Z. ; Hong S. ; Yu H. ; Yi B. Nano Energy 2017, 34, 344. doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2017.02.038
70	Ji M. B. ; Wei Z. D. ; Chen S. G. ; Li L. J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 765. doi: 10.1021/jp807773m
71	Wang M. J. ; Zhao T. ; Luo W. ; Mao Z. X. ; Chen S. ; Ding W. ; Deng Y. ; Li W. ; Li J. ; Wei Z. AIChE J. 2018, 64, 2881. doi: 10.1002/aic.16140
72	Chen W. H. ; Chen S. L. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2018, 35, 517.
	陈雯慧; 陈胜利. 物理化学学报, 2018, 35, 517. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201806011
73	Passos R. R. ; Paganin V. A. ; Ticianelli E. A. Electrochim. Acta 2006, 51, 5239. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2006.01.044
74	Suzuki A. ; Sen U. ; Hattori T. ; Mima R. ; Nagumo R. ; Tsuboi H. ; Hatakeyama N. ; Endou A. ; Takab H. ; Williams M. ; Miyamoto A. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 2011, 36, 2221. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.11.076
75	Lee D. ; Hwang S. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 2008, 33, 2790. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.03.046
76	Zhao X. ; Li W. ; Fu Y. ; Manthiram A. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 2012, 37, 9845. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.03.107
77	Passalacqua E. ; Lufrano F. ; Squadrito G. ; Patti A. ; Giorgi L. Electrochim. Acta 2002, 46, 799. doi: 10.1016/S0013-4686(00)00679-4
78	Liu F. ; Yi B. ; Xing D. ; Yu J. ; Zhang H. J. Membrane Sci. 2003, 212, 213. doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(02)00503-3
79	Adachi M. ; Navessin T. ; Xie Z. ; Li F. H. ; Tanaka S. ; Holdcroft S. J. Membrane Sci. 2010, 364, 183. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2010.08.011
80	Klingele M. ; Breitwieser M. ; Zengerle R. ; Thiele S. J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3, 11239. doi: 10.1039/C5TA01341K
81	Breitwieser M. ; Klingele M. ; Britton B. ; Holdcroft S. ; Zengerle R. ; Thiele S. Electrochem. Commun. 2015, 60, 168. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2015.09.006
82	Omosebi A. ; Besser R. S. J. Power Sources 2013, 228, 151. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.11.076
83	Chi W. S. ; Jeon Y. ; Park S. J. ; Kim J. H. ; Shul Y. G. ChemPlusChem 2014, 79, 1109. doi: 10.1002/cplu.201402083
84	Paul M. T. Y. ; Saha M. S. ; Qi W. L. ; Stumper J. ; Gates B. D. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 2020, 45, 1304. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.05.186
85	Omosebi A. ; Besser R. S. Fuel Cells 2017, 17, 762. doi: 10.1002/fuce.201600183

Catalysts	MA (A·mg^-1)(vs. 0.9 V. RDE)	MA (A·mg^-1)(vs. 0.9 V. Fuel Cell)	Current density (A/cm²) @0.67 V	Power density (W/cm²)@0.67 V	Pt utilization (g/kW @peak power density)	Operation Condition	Ref.
Pt₁-N/BP	–	–	0.5	0.335	0.13	H₂/O₂ 200 kPa 80 ℃ Nafion 212	⁴⁴
Pt_1.1/BP_defect	–	–	0.3	0.201	0.09	H₂/O₂ 200 kPa 80 ℃ Nafion 212	⁴⁵
J-PtNWs	13.6	–	–	–	–	–	³²
PtTe₂ NSs	2.07	–	–	–	–	–	³⁰
H-PtFe/C@NC	0.993	–	–	–	–	–	²⁹
Pt/40Co-NC-900	0.255		0.9	0.603	0.18@Cathode	H₂/Air 150 kPa 80 ℃	⁴⁶
PtPb/Pt	4.3		–	–	–	–	²⁷
Pt₃Ni	5.7	0.76	–	–	–	–	³²
PtNi	3.52	0.72	–	–	0.27	H₂/Air 30 206 kPa 80 ℃	⁵¹
Ga-PtNi/C	1.24	–	0.4	0.268	0.545@0.6 V	H₂/Air 100 kPa 65 ℃	²⁴
LP@PF-2	12.36	1.77 (H₂/O₂)	1	0.67	0.034@Cathode	H₂/Air 100 kPa 80 ℃ Nafion-211	³⁶
Pt/Cu-SAC	–	–	0.22	0.15	0.047@Cathode	H₂/O₂ 70 ℃ Nafion 211	³⁵
Pt_A@Fe_SA-N-C	–	–	1.15	0.77	0.099@Cathode	H₂/O₂ 100 kPa 65 ℃	³⁷
PtCo@CNTs-MOF	0.85	–	1.16	0.78	0.098	H₂/O₂ 200 kPa 80 ℃ Nafion HP	⁵⁶
JM-Pt/C	–	–	0.52	0.35	0.22	H₂/O₂ 100 kPa 80 ℃ Nafion-117	⁷²
Pt/C-DMD	–	–	1.25	0.837	0.023	H₂/O₂ 300 kPa Nafion 211	⁸¹
VACNTs@Pt	–	–	0.86	0.576	0.034@Cathode	H₂/O₂ 206 kPa	⁶⁶
PtCo NTAs-400	–	–	0.9	0.603	0.069@Cathode	H₂/O₂ 200 kPa 80 ℃ Nafion 212	⁶⁹

[1]	李萌, 杨甫林, 常进法, Schechter Alex, 冯立纲. MoP-NC纳米球负载Pt纳米粒子用于高效甲醇电解[J]. 物理化学学报, 2023, 39(9): 2301005 -0 .
[2]	兰畅, 楚宇逸, 王烁, 刘长鹏, 葛君杰, 邢巍. 质子交换膜燃料电池阴极非贵金属M-N_x/C型氧还原催化剂研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2023, 39(8): 2210036 -0 .
[3]	韩爱娣, 闫晓晖, 陈俊任, 程晓静, 章俊良. 分散溶剂对PEMFC催化层中超薄Nafion离聚物质子传导的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38(3): 1912052 - .
[4]	罗芳, 潘书媛, 杨泽惠. 中高温质子交换膜燃料电池催化剂研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(9): 2009087 - .
[5]	丁亮, 唐堂, 胡劲松. 基于金属-氮-碳结构催化剂的质子交换膜燃料电池研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(9): 2010048 - .
[6]	梁嘉顺, 刘轩, 李箐. 提升燃料电池铂基催化剂稳定性的原理、策略与方法[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(9): 2010072 - .
[7]	张巨佳, 张劲, 王海宁, 相艳, 卢善富. 高温聚合物电解质膜燃料电池膜电极中磷酸分布及调控策略研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(9): 2010071 - .
[8]	方波, 冯立纲. Pt纳米颗粒结合ZIF-67衍生的PtCo-NC催化剂用于醇类燃料电氧化[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(7): 1905023 -0 .
[9]	陈雯慧,陈胜利. 墨水溶剂对低铂含量质子交换膜燃料电池性能的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(5): 517 -522 .
[10]	吕洋,宋玉江,刘会园,李焕巧. 内核含Pd的Pt基核壳结构电催化剂[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(2): 283 -294 .
[11]	常乔婉,肖菲,徐源,邵敏华. 核-壳结构氧还原反应电催化剂[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(1): 9 -17 .
[12]	孟优权,王超,张卿雷,沈水云,朱凤鹃,杨宏,章俊良. 阴极Pt负载量和背压对PEMFC性能的协同影响规律[J]. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32(6): 1460 -1466 .
[13]	杨翼,罗来明,杜娟娟,张荣华,代忠旭,周新文. 电位置换反应在空心结构Pt基燃料电池纳米催化剂中的研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32(4): 834 -847 .
[14]	朱红,骆明川,蔡业政,孙照楠. 核壳结构催化剂应用于质子交换膜燃料电池氧还原的研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32(10): 2462 -2474 .
[15]	尚明丰,段佩权,赵天天,唐文超,林瑞,黄宇营,王建强. 用于质子交换膜燃料电池催化剂结构研究的原位XAFS实验方法[J]. 物理化学学报, 2015, 31(8): 1609 -1614 .

超低铂用量质子交换膜燃料电池

Performance of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells at Ultra-Low Platinum Loadings

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 29

参考文献 85

相关文章 15

Metrics

推荐阅读 0