Abstract
The oxygen evolution reaction (OER) plays a key role in the determination of overall water-splitting rate. Lowering the high overpotential of the OER of transition metal oxides (TMOs), which are used as conventional OER electrocatalysts, has been the focus of many studies. The OER activity of TMOs can be tuned via the strategic formation of a heterostructure with another TMO substrate. We screened 11 rutile-type TMOs (i.e., MO2; M = V, Cr, Mn, Nb, Ru, Rh, Sn, Ta, Os, Ir, and Pt) on a rutile (110) substrate using density functional theory calculations to determine their OER activities. The conventional volcano approach based on simple binding energies of reaction intermediates was implemented; in addition, the electrochemical-step symmetry index was employed to screen heterostructures for use as electrode materials. The results show that RuO2 and IrO2 are the most promising catalysts among all candidates. The scaling results provide insights into the intrinsic properties of the heterostructure as well as materials that can be used to lower the overpotential of the OER.
Introduction
Green hydrogen production remains a challenge that must be overcome to achieve a hydrogen economy (Turner, 2004). Water electrolysis is one of the approaches toward hydrogen eco-friendliness. It is based on the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and oxygen evolution reaction (OER) as cathodic and anodic reactions, respectively. However, the slow kinetics of the OER limit the commercialization of this approach. Oxide systems based on Ir or Ru (i.e., IrOx or RuOx) are known to have the best OER performances (Lee et al., 2012; Frydendal et al., 2014; Suen et al., 2017). However, these materials are expensive. Therefore, many studies have been conducted to identify a cost-effective alternative oxide material with high activity. For example, transition-metal substitution (García-Mota et al., 2011) and the introduction of oxygen vacancies (Xiao et al., 2020) have been studied as means to control the compositions of expensive materials. However, transition-metal substitution and oxygen vacancies only locally affect the active sites.
To activate the metal oxide, support materials are mixed with the oxide to enhance the electrical conductivity and activity of the electrocatalytic reaction (Kumar et al., 2016; Qingxiang et al., 2018; Bu et al., 2019; Lu et al., 2019). In addition, research on heterostructures is conducted with the goal of activating the material on the substrate. Modifications are mainly based on the strain effect and charge transfer due to the formation of an interface between the support material and catalyst. For instance, the heterostructure of La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ and MoSe2 induces the phase transition of MoSe2 from the 2H to the 1T phase (Oh et al., 2019). In addition, the charge transfer from the Co ion to Mo ion improves the electrochemical activity. The results of another study showed that the heterostructure of IrOx and SrIrO3 outperforms iridium or ruthenium oxide systems (Seitz et al., 2016). Based on density functional theory (DFT) calculations, IrO3 or anatase IrO2 motifs are formed during strontium leaching in the outermost surface layers of SrIrO3 and contribute to the high activity. Another strength of the heterostructure is that it can possibly contribute to reducing the use of precious metals by replacing them into low-cost metals while maintaining similar intrinsic activity of each active site (Esposito et al., 2010; Zhou et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2015; Jin et al., 2016). Rutile (TiO2) is a well-known substrate material for metal oxide systems because of its high structural stability and simple structure (Hanaor et al., 2012). It is suitable for the growth of oxide films, facilitating the fabrication of heterostructures with various metal oxides. In addition, rutile affects the catalytic activity of metal oxides and has a high cost effectiveness (Seitsonen and Over, 2010; Stacchiola et al., 2013; Wei et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2016; Li et al., 2017). However, the effect of the rutile support on the activity remains unclear due to difficulties with respect to the characterization of the heterostructure during experiments (Stacchiola et al., 2013).
In this study, we performed DFT calculations to theoretically investigate the effect of the TiO2 substrate on the heterostructure and thus on the OER. We screened the OERs of heterostructures consisting of various rutile-type metal oxides (i.e., VO2, CrO2, MnO2, NbO2, RuO2, RhO2, SnO2, TaO2, OsO2, IrO2, and PtO2) and a TiO2 substrate. The results show that these rutile heterostructures follow the universal scaling relations of metals and oxides; however, the binding strengths of the O* intermediates increase due to the TiO2 substrate. The volcano plot and electrochemical-step symmetry index (ESSI) show that the RuO2 and IrO2 are the closest to an ideal catalyst. The results of our computational screening provide insights into the effects of support materials on electrocatalytic reactions.
Methods
Spin-polarized DFT calculations were performed with the projector-augmented wave (PAW) method (Blochl, 1994) and Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (VASP) (Kresse and Furthmiiller, 1996). The electron exchange–correlation energy was treated within the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) and the Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof functional (Perdew et al., 1997). To determine the trend of the OER activity, the DFT + U method within Liechtenstein’s approach (Anisimovdag et al., 1997) was used and the following correction parameters were employed: U = 4.95 eV for Ti, 2 eV for V, 7.15 eV for Cr, 6.63 eV for Mn, 3.32 eV for Nb, 6.73 eV for Ru, 5.97 eV for Rh, 5.91 eV for Ir, and 6.25 eV for Pt (Xu et al., 2015). The energy cutoff for the plane wave basis set was set at 520 eV. The geometry was optimized using the residual minimization method and the direct inversion in the iterative subspace method (RMM–DIIS) algorithm until the net force on each atom was below 0.02 eV·Å−1, and the total energy was 10–6 eV per atom. Dipole slab corrections were also applied to all slab model calculations. The k-point sampling of the Brillouin zone was done with a 4 × 4 × 1 for bulk calculations and 6 × 6 × 8 for slab calculations.
Results and Discussion
To theoretically investigate the OER activities of rutile-type heterostructures, we considered the heterostructures of 11 rutile-type oxides (i.e., MO2, where M = V, Cr, Mn, Nb, Ru, Rh, Sn, Ta, Os, Ir, and Pt) with a TiO2 substrate. To accurately illustrate the OER activity, the following magnetic structures were used for all calculations according to Xu et al.’s work: nonmagnetic (NM) for TiO2, NbO2, RuO2, RhO2, IrO2, and PtO2, and ferromagnetic (FM) for CrO2 and MnO2 (Xu et al., 2015). Furthermore, the ground state magnetic configurations of the other candidate models were identified as FM for VO2 and NM for SnO2, TaO2, and OsO2, respectively (Supplementary Figure S1). Surface models, that is, six-layer stoichiometric slabs, were built by using the 2 × 1 supercell of the optimized unit cell. The vacuum of ∼15 Å was applied in the (110) direction, which is the most stable facet of rutile-type oxides (Figure 1A; Kung, 1989). Note that a tri-layer consisting of oxygen–metal–oxygen (O–M–O) atomic layers was considered to be a single layer in our slab models. The top four layers of the slab models were allowed to fully relax. The two layers at the bottom were fixed to represent the bulk state. For heterostructures, the top three layers of the TiO2 slab model were replaced with MO2 layers while maintaining the cell dimensions of the TiO2 substrate. The coordinatively unsaturated sites (CUS) of the metal atoms at the top surface were considered to be the adsorption sites for each intermediate (i.e., OH*, O*, and OOH*) for the OER. To examine the oxygen coverage effect on the OER activity, the pristine and fully O* covered surfaces were representatively compared (i.e., denoted as 2Ob and 2Ob 2Oc, where the subscripts “b” and “c” represent the bridge sites and CUS, respectively).
FIGURE 1
The overall OER process consists of four elementary steps involving proton-coupled electron transfer (PCET; Figure 1B) (Hammes-Schiffer, 2015; Costentin and Savéant, 2017). In this study, we followed the conventional four-electron pathways with respect to the OER of rutile heterostructures, which can be described as follows:
The adsorption free energy was calculated using the following equation:where is the binding energy of each reaction intermediate; is the zero-point vibrational enthalpy; is the entropic correction at room temperature, is the energy shift by the electrode potential, where U is the electrode applied potential relative to the standard hydrogen electrode (SHE) and e is the elementary charge transferred; and is used as correction for the free energy of H+ ions, where is the activity of the proton. In this study, we considered the standard conditions for Gibbs free energy calculations (i.e., T = 298 K and pH = 0). Free energy correction values were taken from Valdes et al.’s work (Valdes et al., 2008). The binding energy for each reaction intermediate (i.e., , , and ) was calculated as follows:where , , and represent the total energies of the slab models for each adsorbate, is the total energy of the bare slab, and and represent the total energies of an isolated water molecule and hydrogen gas, respectively. The differences in the Gibbs free energy (ΔG) of each step were calculated as follows:
Finally, the theoretical overpotential of the OER can be calculated as follows:where indicates the equilibrium potential of the OER (i.e., 1.23 V vs. reversible hydrogen electrode). Eqs 1–13 assume that thermodynamics of the reaction steps is a valid descriptor for reaction kinetics based on the Brønsted–Evans–Polanyi (BEP) relations (Vojvodic et al., 2011), which refer to that a free-energy change in the transition states (kinetics) follows a change in the reaction heat (thermodynamics). Note that the connection between thermodynamics and kinetics is not always established (Kuo et al., 2017; Kuo et al., 2018), which requires further kinetic experiments or microkinetic modeling based on the activation barrier calculations for all plausible transition states.
We examined the scaling relations between the adsorption free energies of the reaction intermediates (i.e., OH*, O*, and OOH*; Supplementary Table S2) for all rutile-type catalysts of interest (Figure 2A). The binding energies of OOH* and OH* are linearly correlated, with an offset of 3.20 eV. Note that our scaling trend is similar to the “universal” scaling relation reported by Man et al. [i.e., ΔEOOH* = ΔEOH* + 3.20 (±0.20 eV)] (Man et al., 2011), implying that all rutile-type systems, including heterostructures, follow the conventional scaling relations for metals and oxide surfaces. Based on the best fit, 68% of the points are within ±0.35 eV (1σ) and 95% are within ±0.70 eV (2σ). The scaling relationship between ΔEO* and ΔEOH* exhibits a slope of 1.39 (blue solid line), that is, it is much less steep than the slope of two (blue dashed line), which is the indicator line of the double bonding nature of O* (Rossmeisl et al., 2007).
FIGURE 2
To analyze the substrate effect of TiO2 on the heterostructures, we divided the scaling relations into two groups, that is, (110) surfaces of MO2 and MO2/TiO2 heterostructures (Figure 2B,C). Notably, the binding energies of OOH* and O* on the MO2/TiO2 (110) surface are more concentrated than those of MO2. The scaling relation between OOH* and OH* of MO2/TiO2 (red solid line) shows an increased intercept by 0.18 compared with the corresponding scaling relation of MO2, implying slightly weakened interactions between OOH* and the surface. Note that the scaling relations between the binding strengths of O* and OH* species on MO2 and MO2/TiO2 (blue solid lines) apparently differ. The slopes of MO2/TiO2 (110) heterostructures are closer to 2 (i.e., double bonding nature of O*) than those of MO2 (110) surfaces (Rossmeisl et al., 2007). This is due to the intensified binding strengths of O* intermediates in heterostructures compared with MO2 surfaces (Divanis et al., 2020). This indicates that the TiO2 substrate generally stabilizes the O* intermediates, which might lead to a decrease in of rutile oxides involving weakly bound O* intermediates.
Based on the scaling relations between the binding energies of the reaction intermediates, a volcano plot was constructed, as shown in Figure 3A. We chose (denoted as ) as a descriptor, which is commonly used to predict the OER activity of the 4 e− reaction (Man et al., 2011; Krishnamurthy et al., 2018). The plot shows that the O* bonds of PtO2, OsO2, TaO2, and RhO2 on the TiO2 substrate are stronger than those without the TiO2 substrate, and the activities change along the volcano curve. In the cases of both oxygen coverages of PtO2/TiO2 and RhO2/TiO2, , which is the potential-determining step for each system, was reduced, exhibiting the improved OER activities (i.e., smaller ) compared to those of PtO2 and RhO2, respectively. In the cases of OsO2, TaO2, and NbO2, the bonds of the O* intermediates are too strong in the presence of the TiO2 substrate, resulting in a decreased OER activity.
FIGURE 3
Similar to the previous studies (Rossmeisl et al., 2007; Man et al., 2011), RuO2 and IrO2 were both identified as the active OER catalysts among the MO2 candidates (i.e., , Figure 3A). In the case of 2Ob 2Oc of RuO2, the OER activity maintains similarity in the presence of TiO2 substrate, which is located near the top of the volcano. In general, the TiO2 substrate stabilizes the adsorbates (i.e., OOH*, O*, and OH*) on 2Ob 2Oc of RuO2, which appears as stronger adsorption free energies by 0.54–0.70 eV (Supplementary Table S1). Nevertheless, is almost unchanged (i.e., ) because the free energy change in the potential determining step (i.e., ΔGOOH* − ΔGO*) remains similar (Supplementary Table S2). In addition, it is also noteworthy that for 2Ob 2Oc of IrO2 is relatively similar, still exhibiting higher activity than other candidates except RuO2.
The changes in induced by the TiO2 substrate are summarized in Figure 3B. As the value becomes more negative, the activity of MO2/TiO2 improves compared with that of MO2. Notably, 2Ob 2Oc of CrO2, MnO2, RuO2, RhO2, and PtO2 shows an enhanced activity. In addition, 2Ob of RhO2 and PtO2 also shows an improved activity on the TiO2 substrate. However, regardless of the coverage, the TiO2 substrate decreases the OER activity of VO2, OsO2, and IrO2. In particular, 2Ob 2Oc of VO2 and 2Ob of SnO2 exhibit significantly increased overpotentials ( of 0.53 and 0.57 V, respectively).
To determine the promising free-energy regime for the OER, we further analyzed the free energies of the steps in terms of the ESSI, as suggested by Calle-Vallejo and coworkers (Govindarajan et al., 2018). The ESSI is an energetic descriptor that indicates the degree of similarity with an ideal catalyst, where all OER steps are perfectly symmetric at 1.23 eV. The ESSI is defined by the following equation and is only applied to steps with (denoted as ):
Figure 4A shows of each model as a function of the ESSI, representing a good linear correlation. 2Ob of RuO2 is the closest model to the ideal catalyst, followed by 2Ob 2Oc of RuO2 and RuO2/TiO2. The 2Ob of PtO2 appears on the = ESSI (red dashed line) and has a null bar with respect to the ESSI, which means that only a single step is greater than 1.23 V (i.e., = 3.13 eV). In the presence of the TiO2 substrate, for 2Ob of PtO2 is reduced, leading to a decrease of the ESSI and . Meanwhile, 2Ob 2Oc of PtO2 lies relatively far from the line of , which has a wide bar with respect to the ESSI, and thus corresponds to a good candidate for optimization (Govindarajan et al., 2018). In practice, the TiO2 substrate on 2Ob 2Oc of PtO2 works for enhancing the OER activity with a decrease in both and ESSI.
FIGURE 4
Based on the scaling relation between the ESSIs and ’s, we determined a promising group of OER catalysts using the ESSI- activity map introduced by Exner (Exner, 2019; Figure 4B). The activity map is used to identify OER candidates by adjusting the ESSI threshold. The ESSI threshold (< 0.53 V) was determined from Supplementary Figure S2 by applying of IrO2, which is the conventional OER catalyst. The free-energy regime was set to 1.20 eV < < 2.06 eV by applying the standard deviation of 0.43 eV of the scaling relationship between and (Supplementary Figure S3) on 1.63 eV. The median value of 1.63 eV in the free-energy regime is determined by assuming the threshold electrode potential as the point where the experimental Tafel slope exceeds 59 mV/dec (i.e., > 0.4 V), accounting for kinetics (Exner and Over, 2019). The green-colored area includes 2Ob of RuO2, 2Ob 2Oc of RuO2, 2Ob 2Oc of RuO2/TiO2, 2Ob of IrO2, 2Ob 2Oc of IrO2, 2Ob 2Oc of IrO2/TiO2, and 2Ob 2Oc of RhO2, which are the most promising candidates. Particularly, a portion of promising candidates for the OER (i.e., RuO2, RuO2/TiO2, IrO2, IrO2/TiO2, and RhO2/TiO2) are more evidently classified on the ESSI- map (Figure 4B), while they are somewhat deviated from the apex in the volcano plot (Figure 3A). This implies that conventional volcano analysis does not guarantee to predict the most active OER catalyst, whereas the ESSI- activity map, which is based on the kinetic scaling relations, is a more robust descriptor for the OER (Exner, 2019; Exner and Over, 2019). The 2Ob 2Oc surface of IrO2 exhibits high symmetry of the reaction steps comparable to RuO2. On the 2Ob and 2Ob 2Oc surfaces of RhO2/TiO2, the values of decrease compared to those of RhO2. Accordingly, the free-energy differences of the other steps are adjusted to compensate for the decrease in , while maintaining as a potential-determining step with reduced (cf. Supplementary Table S2). Next, 2Ob of IrO2/TiO2 belongs to the yellow-colored region, which needs to be reconsidered for activity optimization (Govindarajan et al., 2019). The candidates in the region of ESSI > 0.53 V (i.e., red-highlighted region in Figure 4B) are classified as an inferior group, showing poor OER activities over all ranges of due to the highly asymmetric free-energy changes of the OER intermediates (Exner, 2019).
Conclusion
We screened a variety of rutile oxide heterostructures based on a TiO2 substrate using scaling relations and relevant descriptors to identify a promising OER catalyst. The scaling relations between the reaction intermediates demonstrate that the rutile-type MO2 heterostructures follow the universal scaling relationship of metal oxides. In addition, the TiO2 substrate stabilizes the O* bond on the (110) metal oxide surface. Based on the conventional volcano plot, RuO2 and IrO2 are found to be highly active OER catalysts as previously reported. Based on the ESSI descriptor, the superior activity of the RuO2 can be attributed to the high symmetry of the reaction steps. Furthermore, based on the ESSI-ΔG2 activity map, the candidates can be classified into an optimum group, a second promising group of OER catalysts with potential for optimization, and an inferior group that does not require particular attention.
The results of our computational screening using the scaling relations of rutile-type heterostructures provide valuable insights into the effect of the support material on the overpotential and thus guidelines for the design of a promising OER catalyst.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.
Author contributions
All calculations and data analyses were performed by HYL. All authors contributed to the discussion of the results and wrote and revised the manuscript. SKK and GYJ supervised the project.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (Ministry of Science and ICT) (NRF-2019M1A2A2065614) and the Global PhD Fellowship Program (NRF-2019H1A2A1076827 and NRF-2016H1A2A1908137). SKK acknowledges the UNIST grant (2.200487.01) for the support of the publication. Computational resources were provided by UNIST High Performance Computing (HPC) systems and Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI) (KSC-2019-CRE-0255).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenrg.2021.606313/full#supplementary-material.
References
1
AnisimovdagV. I.AryasetiawanF.LichtensteinA. I. (1997). First-principles calculations of the electronic structure and spectra of strongly correlated systems: the LDA + U method. J. Phys. Condens. Matter9, 767–808. 10.1088/0953-8984/9/4/002
2
BlochlP. E. (1994). Projector augmented-wave method. Phys. Rev. B50, 17953. 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.17953
3
BuY.JangH.GwonO.KimS. H.JooS. H.NamG.et al (2019). Synergistic interaction of perovskite oxides and N-doped graphene in versatile electrocatalyst. J. Mater. Chem. A7 (5), 2048–2054. 10.1039/c8ta09919g
4
CostentinC.SavéantJ.-M. (2017). Theoretical and mechanistic aspects of proton-coupled electron transfer in electrochemistry. Curr. Opin. Electrochem.1, 104–109. 10.1016/j.coelec.2016.11.001
5
DivanisS.KutlusoyT.BoyeI. M. I.ManI. C.RossmeislJ. (2020). Oxygen evolution reaction: a perspective on a decade of atomic scale simulations. Chem. Sci.11, 2943. 10.1039/c9sc05897d
6
EspositoD. V.HuntS. T.StottlemyerA. L.DobsonK. D.McCandlessB. E.BirkmireR. W.et al (2010). Low-cost hydrogen-evolution catalysts based on monolayer platinum on tungsten monocarbide substrates. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.49, 9859–9862. 10.1002/anie.201004718
7
ExnerK. S. (2019). Design criteria for oxygen evolution electrocatalysts from first principles: introduction of a unifying material-screening approach. ACS Appl. Energy Mater.2, 11. 10.1021/acsaem.9b01480
8
ExnerK. S.OverH. (2019). Beyond the rate-determining step in the oxygen evolution reaction over a single-crystalline IrO2 (110) model electrode: kinetic scaling relations. ACS Catal.9, 6755–6765. 10.1021/acscatal.9b01564
9
FrydendalR.PaoliE. A.KnudsenB. P.WickmanB.MalacridaP.StephensI. E. L.et al (2014). Benchmarking the stability of oxygen evolution reaction catalysts: the importance of monitoring mass losses. ChemElectroChem.1, 2075–2081. 10.1002/celc.201402262
10
García‐MotaM.VojvodicA.MetiuH.ManI. C.SuH.‐Y.RossmeislJ.et al (2011). Tailoring the activity for oxygen evolution electrocatalysis on rutile TiO2(110) by transition-metal substitution. ChemCatChem.3, 1607–1611. 10.1002/cctc.201100160
11
GovindarajanN.Garcia-LastraJ. M.MeijerE. A.Calle-VallejoF. (2018). Does the breaking of adsorption-energy scaling relations guarantee enhanced electrocatalysis?Curr. Opin. Electrochem.8, 110–117. 10.1016/j.coelec.2018.03.025
12
GovindarajanN.KoperM. T. M.MeijerE. J.Calle-VallejoF. (2019). Outlining the scaling-based and scaling-free optimization of electrocatalysts. ACS Catal.9, 4218–4225. 10.1021/acscatal.9b00532
13
Hammes-SchifferS. (2015). Proton-coupled electron transfer: moving together and charging forward. J. Am. Chem. Soc.137, 8860–8871. 10.1021/jacs.5b04087
14
HanaorD. A. H.XuW.FerryM.SorrellC. C. (2012). Abnormal grain growth of rutile TiO2 induced by ZrSiO4. J. Cryst. Growth359, 83–91. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2012.08.015
15
JinB.ZhouX.HuangL.LickledererM.YangM.SchmukiP. (2016). Aligned MoOx/MoS2 core–shell nanotubular structures with a high density of reactive sites based on self-ordered anodic molybdenum oxide nanotubes. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl.55, 12252. 10.1002/anie.201605551
16
KresseG.FurthmiillerJ. (1996). Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set. Comput. Mater. Sci.6, 15–50. 10.1016/0927-0256(96)00008-0
17
KrishnamurthyD.SumariaV.ViswanathanV. (2018). Maximal predictability approach for identifying the right descriptors for electrocatalytic reactions. J. Phys. Chem. Lett.9, 588–595. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02895
18
KumarK.CanaffC.RousseauJ.Arrii-ClacensS.NappornT. W.HabriouxA.et al (2016). Effect of the oxide−carbon heterointerface on the Activity of Co3O4/NRGO nanocomposites toward ORR and OER. J. Phys. Chem. C120 (15), 7949–7958. 10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b00313
19
KungH. H. (1989). Transition metal oxides: surface chemistry and catalysis. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
20
KuoD. Y.KawasakiJ. K.NelsonJ. N.KloppenburgJ.HautierG.ShenK. M.et al (2017). Influence of surface adsorption on the oxygen evolution reaction on IrO2(110). J. Am. Chem. Soc.139, 3473–3479. 10.1021/jacs.6b11932
21
KuoD. Y.PaikH.KloppenburgJ.FaethB.ShenK. M.SchlomD. G.et al (2018). Measurements of oxygen electroadsorption energies and oxygen evolution reaction on RuO2(110): a discussion of the sabatier principle and its role in electrocatalysis. J. Am. Chem. Soc.140, 17597–17605. 10.1021/jacs.8b09657
22
LeeY.SuntivichJ.MayK. J.PerryE. E.Shao-HornY. (2012). Synthesis and activities of rutile IrO2 and RuO2 nanoparticles for oxygen evolution in acid and alkaline solutions. J. Phys. Chem. Lett.3 (3), 399–404. 10.1021/jz2016507
23
LiX.SunX.XuX.LiuW.PengH.FangX.et al (2017). CO oxidation on PdO catalysts with perfect and defective rutile-TiO2 as supports: elucidating the role of oxygen vacancy in support by DFT calculations. Appl. Surf. Sci.401, 49–56. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.12.210
24
LuX. F.ChenY.WangS. B.GaoS. Y.LouX. W. (2019). Interfacing manganese oxide and cobalt in porous graphitic carbon polyhedrons boosts oxygen electrocatalysis for Zn–Air batteries. Adv. Mater.31 (39), 1902339. 10.1002/adma.201902339
25
ManI. C.SuH.‐Y.Calle‐VallejoF.HansenH. A.MartínezJ. I.InogluN. G.et al (2011). Universality in oxygen evolution electrocatalysis on oxide surfaces. ChemCatChem.3, 1159–1165. 10.1002/cctc.201000397
26
OhN. K.KimC.LeeJ.KwonO.ChoiY.JungG. Y.et al (2019). In-situ local phase-transitioned MoSe2 in La0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ heterostructure and stable overall water electrolysis over 1000 hours. Nat. Commun.10, 1723. 10.1038/s41467-019-09339-y
27
PerdewJ. P.BurkeK.ErnzerhofM. (1997). Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 3865. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865
28
QingxiangW.DastafkanK.ChuanZ. (2018). Design strategies for non-precious metal oxide electrocatalysts for oxygen evolution reactions. Curr. Opin. Electrochem.10, 16–23. 10.1016/j.coelec.2018.03.015
29
RossmeislJ.QuZ.-W.ZhuH.KroesG.-J.NørskovJ. K. (2007). Electrolysis of water on oxide surfaces. Electroanal. Chem.607, 83. 10.1016/j.jelechem.2006.11.008
30
SeitsonenA. P.OverH. (2010). Oxidation of HCl over TiO2-supported RuO2: a density functional theory study. J. Phys. Chem. C114, 22624–22629. 10.1021/jp108603a
31
SeitzL. C.DickensC. F.NishioK.HikitaY.MontoyaJ.DoyleA.et al (2016). A highly active and stable IrOx/SrIrO3 catalyst for the oxygen evolution reaction. Science353 (6303), 1011–1014. 10.1126/science.aaf5050
32
StacchiolaD. J.SenanayakeS. D.LiuP.RodriguezJ. A. (2013). Fundamental studies of well-defined surfaces of mixed-metal oxides: special properties of MOx/TiO2(110) {M = V, Ru, Ce, or W}. Chem. Rev.113, 4373–4390. 10.1021/cr300316v
33
SuenN.-T.HungS.-F.QuanQ.ZhangN.XuY.-J.ChenH. M. (2017). Electrocatalysis for the oxygen evolution reaction: recent development and future perspectives. Chem. Soc. Rev.46 (337), 337–365. 10.1039/c6cs00328a
34
SunX.PengX.XuX.JinH.WangH.WangX. (2016). H2 adsorption and dissociation on PdO(101) films supported on rutile TiO2(110) facet: elucidating the support effect by DFT calculations. J. Mol. Model.22, 204. 10.1007/s00894-016-3072-3
35
TurnerJ. A. (2004). Sustainable hydrogen production. Science305, 972–974. 10.1126/science.1103197
36
ValdesA.QuZ.-W.KroesG.-J.RossmeislJ.NorskovJ. K. (2008). Oxidation and photo-oxidation of water on TiO2 surface. J. Phys. Chem. C2, 9872–9879. 10.1021/jp711929d
37
VojvodicA.Calle-VallejoF.GuoW.WangS.ToftelundA.StudtF.et al (2011). On the behavior of Brønsted-Evans-Polanyi relations for transition metal oxides. J. Chem. Phys.134, 244509. 10.1063/1.3602323
38
WangD. Y.GongM.ChouH. L.PanC. J.ChenH. A.WuY.et al (2015). Highly active and stable hybrid catalyst of cobalt-doped FeS2 nanosheets–carbon nanotubes for hydrogen evolution reaction. J. Am. Chem. Soc.137, 1587. 10.1021/jacs.5b07788
39
WeiW.DaiY.HuangB.LiX.NageleF.OverH.et al (2015). Density functional characterization of the electronic structures and band bending of rutile RuO2/TiO2(110) heterostructures. J. Phys. Chem. C119, 12394–12399. 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b01884
40
XiaoZ.HuangY.-C.DongC.-L.XieC.LiuZ.DuS.et al (2020). Operando identification of the dynamic behavior of oxygen vacancy-rich Co3O4 for oxygen evolution reaction. J. Am. Chem. Soc.142, 12087. 10.1021/jacs.0c00257
41
XuZ.RossmeislJ.KitchinJ. R. (2015). A linear response DFT+U study of trends in the oxygen evolution activity of transition metal rutile dioxides. J. Phys. Chem. C119, 4827–4833. 10.1021/jp511426q
42
ZhouW.HouD.SangY.YaoS.ZhouJ.LiG.et al (2014). MoO2 nanobelts@nitrogen self-doped MoS2 nanosheets as effective electrocatalysts for hydrogen evolution reaction. J. Mater. Chem. A2, 11358. 10.1039/c4ta01898b
Summary
Keywords
density functional theory, oxygen evolution reaction, rutile-type oxide, heterostructure, scaling relation
Citation
Lim HY, Park SO, Kim SH, Jung GY and Kwak SK (2021) First-Principles Design of Rutile Oxide Heterostructures for Oxygen Evolution Reactions. Front. Energy Res. 9:606313. doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2021.606313
Received
14 September 2020
Accepted
05 January 2021
Published
11 February 2021
Volume
9 - 2021
Edited by
Kai S. Exner, Sofia University, Bulgaria
Reviewed by
Marko Melander, University of Jyväskylä, Finland
Herbert Over, University of Giessen, Germany
Updates
Copyright
© 2021 Lim, Park, Kim, Jung and Kwak.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Gwan Yeong Jung, gyjung@unist.ac.kr; Sang Kyu Kwak, skkwak@unist.ac.kr
This article was submitted to Electrochemical Energy Conversion and Storage, a section of the journal Frontiers in Energy Research
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.