Cited by 391CO2 Reduction Techniques and CatalystsCatalysts for Methane ReformingElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion

Importance of Ag–Cu Biphasic Boundaries for Selective Electrochemical Reduction of CO2to Ethanol

Lee, Seunghwa, Park, Gibeom, Lee, Jaeyoung·2017·ACS Catalysis

Abstract

In recent years, electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) has received a great deal of attention due to the potential that this process can mitigate the atmospheric CO 2 concentration and produce valuable organic compounds. In particular, Cu and Cu-based catalysts have exhibited the capability of converting CO 2 into multicarbon fuels and chemicals in significant quantities. Here, we report a facile and cheap fabrication method for the development of an Ag-incorporated cuprous oxide (Ag-Cu 2 O) electrode enabling selective synthesis of ethanol via electrochemical CO 2 reduction and reveal the key factor improving the ethanol (C 2 H 5 OH) selectivity. The incorporation of Ag into Cu 2 O leads to the suppression of hydrogen (H 2 ) evolution, and furthermore, by varying the elemental arrangement (phase-separated and phase-blended) of Ag and Cu, we observe that C 2 H 5 OH selectivity can be controlled. Consequently, the Faradaic efficiency for C 2 H 5 OH on phase-blended Ag-Cu 2 O (Ag-Cu 2 O PB ) is 3 times higher than that of the Cu 2 O without Ag dopant. We propose that the electrochemical reaction behavior is not solely associated with a role of Ag dopant, carbon monoxide (CO) leading to an ethanol formation pathway over ethylene, but also the doping pattern related population of Ag-Cu biphasic boundaries relatively suppresses the H 2 evolution reaction and encourages the reaction of mobile CO generated on Ag to a residual intermediate on a Cu site.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acscatal.7b02822

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, S., Park, G., & Lee, J.
Affiliations
Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
Corresponding author
Lee, Jaeyoung
Venue
ACS Catalysis
Published
2017-11-17
Volume
7
Issue
12
Pages
8594-8604
ISSN
2155-5435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2767773590
Cited by
391
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 1
FWCI
7.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACS Catalysis (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (20153030031720)
  • Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (K07723)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › CO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Catalysis › Catalysts for Methane Reforming
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Electrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Keywords
electrochemical CO2 reduction, ethanol selectivity, cuprous oxide, silver doping, hydrogen evolution suppression, Faradaic efficiency, CO intermediate, reaction pathways

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review