Fabrication of binder-less metal electrodes for electrochemical water splitting – A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The escalating demand for green hydrogen (H 2 ) as a sustainable energy carrier has attracted intensive research into efficient water electrolysis methods. Promising candidates have emerged as binder-less metal electrodes, which enhance electrochemical performance and durability by reducing electron hindrance and avoiding binder degradation. Despite their potential, a comprehensive understanding of various binder-less fabrication techniques remains limited in the existing literature. As the main objective, this review paper aims to bridge this gap by providing an in-depth analysis of state-of-the-art fabrication methods for binder-less metal electrodes utilized in electrochemical water splitting. Recognizing the critical need for sustainable hydrogen production, the advantages of binder-less electrodes over conventional binder-based counterparts are elucidated, with emphasis placed on their role in promoting cost-effectiveness, improved stability, and enhanced catalytic activity. Techniques such as Hydrothermal/Solvothermal, Electrodeposition, Chemical/Vapor Deposition, and Laser-based fabrication are systematically examined, with their respective advantages, drawbacks, and comparison being highlighted. Drawing upon relevant examples from literature, insights on other aspects and recent trends are also provided, such as the performance of binder-less metal electrodes at industrial-scale current densities (0.1–1 A/cm 2 ) or their potential as photoactive catalysts. Additionally, future directions in the field of binder-less electrode fabrication and the exploration of innovative techniques are also discussed, ensuring that the trajectory of research aligns with the evolving demands of sustainable energy production. The "what's next" section highlights areas of further investigation and potential avenues for technological advancement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".