Atomic insights into the competitive edge of nanosheets splitting water
Journal article, 2024

The oxygen evolution reaction (OER) provides the protons for many electrocatalytic power-to-X processes, such as the production of green hydrogen from water or methanol from CO2. Iridium oxo-hydroxides (IOHs) are outstanding catalysts for this reaction because they strike a unique balance between activity and stability in acidic electrolytes. Within IOHs, this balance varies with atomic structure. While amorphous IOHs perform best, they
are least stable. The opposite is true for their crystalline counterparts. These rules-of-thumb are used to reduce the loading of scarce IOH catalysts and retain performance. However, it is not fully understood how activity and stability are related on the atomic level, hampering rational design. Herein, we provide simple design-rules (Figure 12) derived from literature and various IOHs within this study. We chose crystalline IrOOH nanosheets as our lead
material because they provide excellent catalyst utilization and a predictable structure. We found that nanosheets combine the chemical stability of crystalline IOHs with the activity amorphous IOHs. Their dense bonding network of pyramidal trivalent oxygens (μ3∆–O) provides structural integrity, while allowing reversible reduction to an electronically gapped state that diminishes the destructive effect of reductive potentials. The reactivity originates
from coordinative unsaturated edge sites with radical character, i.e. μ1–O oxyls. By comparing to other IOHs and literature, we generalized our findings and synthesized a set of simple rules that allow prediction of stability and reactivity of IOHs from atomistic models. We hope that these rules will inspire atomic design strategies for future OER catalysts.

electronic structure

operando

design rules

nanosheets

stability

oxygen evolution reaction (OER)

electrochemistry

NEXAFS

Iridium oxide

XPS

in situ

polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM)

Author

Lorenz J. Falling

School of Natural Sciences, Technical University Munich

Max Planck Society

Woosun Jang

Max Planck Society

Yonsei University

Sourav Laha

Max Planck Society

National Institute of Technology, Durgapur

Thomas Götsch

Max Planck Society

Maxwell Terban

Max Planck Society

Rik Mom

Leiden University

Max Planck Society

Juan-Jesús Velasco-Vélez

ALBA Synchrotron Light Facility

Max Planck Society

Frank Girgsdies

Max Planck Society

Detre Teschner

Max Planck Society

Andrey Tarasov

Max Planck Society

Cheng-Hao Chuang

Tamkang University

Thomas Lunkenbein

Max Planck Society

Axel Knop-Gericke

Max Planck Society

Daniel Weber

Max Planck Society

Chalmers, Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Energy and Material

Robert Dinnebier

Max Planck Society

Bettina V. Lotsch

Max Planck Society

Robert Schlögl

Max Planck Society

Travis E. Jones

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Max Planck Society

Journal of the American Chemical Society

0002-7863 (ISSN) 1520-5126 (eISSN)

Vol. 146 40 27886-27902

Subject Categories (SSIF 2011)

Materials Chemistry

DOI

10.1021/jacs.4c10312

PubMed

39319770

More information

Latest update

5/21/2025