MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025351601 · doi:10.1149/ma2020-01522915mtgabs

Ptni/C Catalysts for Improved Selectivity and Performance in Ethanol Fuel Cells

2020· article· en· W3025351601 on OpenAlexaff
Diala A. Alqdeimat, Peter G. Pickup

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirect-ethanol fuel cellCatalysisBiofuelEthanol fuelMethanolRenewable energyChemistryAnodeHydrogenWaste managementBiomass (ecology)NickelEthanolFossil fuelProton exchange membrane fuel cellOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fossil fuels are currently the primary source of energy, producing a huge amount of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In general, greenhouse gases contribute to environmental problems like global warming. For this reason, it is necessary to improve and increase the use of renewable and clean energy sources with low CO2 production. In recent years, the direct ethanol fuel cell (DEFC) has been considered as an attractive power source with high potential for vehicles and electronic devices. Ethanol is used as a renewable energy resource because it is easy to handle and store, has low toxicity, and is produced in large quantities from agricultural waste and biomass. Moreover, ethanol has advantages over methanol and hydrogen. Its theoretical energy density is around (8.0 kWh kg-1), which is higher than methanol (6.1 kWh kg-1) and its volumetric density is 6.28 kWh L-1, which is higher than hydrogen (0.18 kWh L-1) and methanol (4.82 kWh L-1) [1, 2]. In spite of that, many problems have impeded DEFC uses, including low current densities, incomplete ethanol oxidation, low faradic efficiencies, and crossover through the membrane. To overcome these problems, many anode catalysts have been developed to increase the activity, selectivity, and efficiency of DEFCs. Studying the effects of alloying Pt catalysts with nickel on the oxidation of ethanol has gained interest. Nickel, is a more electropositive metal than Pt, and has been found to enhance its activity toward the ethanol oxidation reaction. A bifunctional, Langmuir–Hinshelwood mechanism, in which a more electropositive metal provides more OH- species on the surface of the catalyst and drives the oxidation of the adsorbed CO (COads) intermediate to produce CO2, was used to explain the behavior of the PtNi catalyst’s activity [3]. Sulaiman et al studied the effects of shape-controlled octahedral PtNi/C nanoparticles on the activity of ethanol oxidation. Activities of commercial Pt/C, conventional Pt2Ni/C alloy, and octahedral Pt2.3Ni/C nanoparticles toward ethanol oxidation were measured by cyclic voltammetry. The results showed that the octahedral PtNi/C nanocatalyst was 4.6 and 7.7 times more active than conventional PtNi/C and commercial Pt/C catalysts, respectively [4]. Furthermore, Altarawneh et al evaluated the octahedral PtNi/C for use in DEFCs by measuring its selectivity and performance. The selectivity of this catalyst was significantly higher than commercial Pt/C at low potential. At 0.20 V, the faradaic yield of CO2 at PtNi/C was 73%, while at Pt/C it was 55%. [5]. The primary objective of our research is to understand the effects of PtNi/C catalyst composition, structure, and shape on the activity, performance, and selectivity for the complete oxidation of ethanol to carbon dioxide in DEFCs. PtNi/C catalysts were synthesized in various solvents by using a polyol method. The prepared catalysts were characterized by X-ray powder diffraction (XRD), thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA), and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) to investigate the composition, metal loading, and crystal structure. Electrochemical analysis was carried out by cyclic voltammetry and chronoamperometry in order to study the activity of these catalysts toward the oxidation of ethanol. Moreover, a commercial PtNi/C catalyst was evaluated using the same methods and its results were compared with our catalysts’ results. Furthermore, the product distribution, selectivity for CO2 formation, and efficiency were investigated for some of our PtNi/C catalysts and the commercial PtNi/C in 5 cm2 fuel cell. 1. An, T.S. Zhao, and Y.S. Li, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews., 50, 1462–1468 (2015). 2. Wang, S. Zou, and W. B. Cai, Journal of Catalysts., 5, 1507-1534 (2015). 3. Soundararajan, J. Park, K. Kim, and J. Ko, Current Applied Physics., 12, 854−859 (2012). 4. E. Sulaiman, S.Q. Zhu, Z.L. Xiang, Q.W. Chang, and M.H, Shao. ACS Catalysis., 7, 5134–5141 (2017). 5. R. Altarawneh, T. Brueckner, B. Chen, and P. Pickup, Journal of Power Sources., 400, 369–376 (2018).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207