Hubbry Logo
Exchange current densityExchange current densityMain
Open search
Exchange current density
Community hub
Exchange current density
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Exchange current density
Exchange current density
Exchange current density
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In electrochemistry, exchange current density is a parameter used in the Tafel equation, Butler–Volmer equation and other electrochemical kinetics expressions. The Tafel equation describes the dependence of current for an electrolytic process to overpotential.

The exchange current density is the current in the absence of net electrolysis and at zero overpotential. The exchange current can be thought of as a background current to which the net current observed at various overpotentials is normalized. For a redox reaction written as a reduction at the equilibrium potential, electron transfer processes continue at electrode/solution interface in both directions. The cathodic current is balanced by the anodic current. This ongoing current in both directions is called the exchange current density. When the potential is set more negative than the formal potential, the cathodic current is greater than the anodic current. Written as a reduction, cathodic current is positive. The net current density is the difference between the cathodic and anodic current density.

Exchange current densities reflect intrinsic rates of electron transfer between an analyte and the electrode. Such rates provide insights into the structure and bonding in the analyte and the electrode. For example, the exchange current densities for platinum and mercury electrodes for reduction of protons differ by a factor of 1010, indicative of the excellent catalytic properties of platinum. Owing to this difference, mercury is the preferred electrode material at reducing (cathodic) potentials in aqueous solution.[1]

Parameters affecting exchange current density

[edit]

The exchange current density depends critically on the nature of the electrode, not only its structure, but also physical parameters such as surface roughness. Of course, factors that change the composition of the electrode, including passivating oxides and adsorbed species on the surface, also influence the electron transfer. The nature of the electroactive species (the analyte) in the solution also critically affects the exchange current densities, both the reduced and oxidized form.

Less important but still relevant are the environment of the solution including the solvent, nature of other electrolytes, and temperature. For the concentration dependence of the exchange current density, the following expression is given for a one-electron reaction:[2]

where:

  • : the concentration of the oxidized species
  • : the concentration of the reduced species
  • : a symmetry factor
  • : Faraday constant
  • : reaction rate constant

Example values

[edit]
Comparison of exchange current density for proton reduction reaction in 1 mol/kg H2SO4[1]
Electrode material Exchange
current
density
−log10(A/cm2)
Palladium 3.0
Platinum 3.1
Rhodium 3.6
Iridium 3.7
Nickel 5.2
Gold 5.4
Tungsten 5.9
Niobium 6.8
Titanium 8.2
Cadmium 10.8
Manganese 10.9
Lead 12.0
Mercury 12.3

References

[edit]

See also

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Exchange current density

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Exchange current density, denoted as j0j_0 or i0i_0, is a key parameter in representing the magnitude of the at which the forward and reverse rates of an reaction are equal under equilibrium conditions, resulting in zero net current but ongoing microscopic exchange of charge. It is formally defined as j0=I0/Aj_0 = I_0 / A, where I0I_0 is the exchange current and AA is the geometric surface area of the . This quantity serves as a measure of the intrinsic kinetics of the process, with values spanning many orders of magnitude depending on the reaction, material, and conditions—for instance, evolution on exhibits a relatively high j0j_0 compared to other metals. In electrochemical kinetics, exchange current density plays a central role in the Butler-Volmer equation, which describes the relationship between applied overpotential η\eta and net current density ii: i=j0[exp⁡(αfη)−exp⁡(−(1−α)fη)]i = j_0 \left[ \exp\left( \alpha f \eta \right) - \exp\left( -(1-\alpha) f \eta \right) \right], where α\alpha is the transfer coefficient (typically 0 to 1), and f=F/RTf = F / RT with FF the Faraday constant, RR the gas constant, and TT temperature. A higher j0j_0 indicates faster intrinsic reaction rates, requiring less overpotential to achieve a desired current, which is crucial for applications such as batteries, fuel cells, and corrosion processes. It can be experimentally determined from Tafel plots, where the y-intercept of the extrapolated linear region at high overpotentials yields log⁡j0\log j_0, often alongside the transfer coefficient derived from the slope. Factors influencing j0j_0 include the standard heterogeneous rate constant, reactant concentrations, and the reaction mechanism, such as the number of electrons transferred.

Fundamentals

Definition

Exchange current density, denoted as j0j_0, is defined as the magnitude of the anodic or cathodic current density at the equilibrium potential of an electrochemical reaction, where the net current is zero but the rates of the forward (oxidation) and reverse (reduction) processes are equal and non-zero. This parameter physically represents the intrinsic kinetic rate of across the electrode-electrolyte interface for a given couple under equilibrium conditions, reflecting the balance of charge transfer without any net faradaic process occurring. It serves as a key indicator of the reaction's reversibility, with higher values signifying faster intrinsic kinetics and more reversible behavior. The use of current density rather than total current normalizes the measurement to the electrode surface area, allowing for comparable assessments across different electrode geometries and sizes; it is typically expressed in amperes per square centimeter (A/cm²). The empirical Tafel equation, relating overpotential to the logarithm of current density, was developed by Julius Tafel in 1905. The theoretical concept of exchange current density was introduced by John Alfred Valentine Butler in 1924 and independently by Max Volmer in 1930, formalized in the Butler-Volmer equation.

Theoretical Basis

The Butler-Volmer equation provides the foundational mathematical description of electrode kinetics, relating the net current density jj to the overpotential η\eta through the exchange current density j0j_0, which represents the intrinsic rate of the electron transfer reaction at equilibrium. The equation is given by j=j0[exp⁡(αaFηRT)−exp⁡(−αcFηRT)],j = j_0 \left[ \exp\left( \frac{\alpha_a F \eta}{RT} \right) - \exp\left( -\frac{\alpha_c F \eta}{RT} \right) \right], where αa\alpha_a and αc\alpha_c are the anodic and cathodic transfer coefficients (typically summing to 1 for a single electron transfer), FF is the Faraday constant, RR is the gas constant, and TT is the absolute temperature. At equilibrium (η=0\eta = 0), the forward and reverse currents balance, yielding j=0j = 0, which underscores j0j_0 as the magnitude of this bidirectional exchange current. This form assumes a concerted single-step electron transfer process without significant concentration polarization. The exchange current density j0j_0 emerges from applied to electrochemical kinetics, where the rate constants for the forward (anodic) and backward (cathodic) reactions are derived from the free energy of . In this framework, the standard heterogeneous rate constant k0k^0 governs the at the standard potential, and j0j_0 is expressed as j0=Fk0cOαacRαc,j_0 = F k^0 c_O^{\alpha_a} c_R^{\alpha_c}, with cOc_O and cRc_R denoting the surface concentrations of the oxidized and reduced species, respectively. The derivation begins with the for the rate constant, k=kBThexp⁡(−ΔG‡RT)k = \frac{k_B T}{h} \exp\left( -\frac{\Delta G^\ddagger}{RT} \right), where the free energy ΔG‡\Delta G^\ddagger is modulated by the electrode potential; the overpotential shifts the intersection of reactant and product parabolas, yielding the exponential terms in the Butler-Volmer . This approach assumes a linear response of the barrier to the applied potential, consistent with classical activated-complex theory. The transfer coefficients αa\alpha_a and αc\alpha_c (often denoted collectively as α\alpha with αc=1−αa\alpha_c = 1 - \alpha_a) are symmetry factors that quantify how the applied potential differentially affects the forward and reverse activation barriers. For many outer-sphere electron transfers with symmetric energy barriers, α=0.5\alpha = 0.5, implying equal partitioning of the potential drop across the , which simplifies the Butler-Volmer equation and maximizes j0j_0 for a given k0k^0. Deviations from 0.5 arise in inner-sphere reactions or asymmetric barriers, influencing the curvature of Tafel plots and the overall kinetics; for instance, α<0.5\alpha < 0.5 favors the cathodic direction at low overpotentials. These theoretical constructs rely on key assumptions, including a single elementary step for the electron transfer and negligible mass transport limitations, which confine the analysis to charge-transfer control rather than mixed or diffusion control. Violations, such as multi-step mechanisms or significant concentration gradients, invalidate the simple form of j0j_0 and require more advanced models like those incorporating Frumkin corrections.

Influencing Factors

Temperature Effects

The exchange current density j0j_0 follows an Arrhenius-type dependence on temperature, expressed as j0∝exp⁡(−EaRT)j_0 \propto \exp\left( -\frac{E_a}{RT} \right), where EaE_a represents the activation energy of the charge transfer step, RR is the gas constant, and TT is the absolute temperature. This exponential relationship underscores the kinetic control of the electron transfer process, where higher temperatures provide sufficient thermal energy to surmount the activation barrier more frequently. The activation energy EaE_a corresponds to the energy barrier for electron transfer, involving molecular reorganization and solvent dynamics without direct bond breaking in outer-sphere mechanisms. For typical outer-sphere reactions, EaE_a values range from 20 to 100 kJ/mol, varying with the specific redox couple and electrolyte environment; for example, the oxygen evolution reaction on NiFeOOH exhibits Ea≈75E_a \approx 75 kJ/mol, while hydrogen oxidation/evolution on Pt shows around 20-30 kJ/mol, depending on electrolyte pH. Experimental studies confirm that j0j_0 typically doubles for every 10-20°C temperature increase in many systems, a consequence of the Arrhenius form with EaE_a in the 30-80 kJ/mol range; this is evident in the hydrogen evolution reaction, where elevated temperatures enhance j0j_0 via reduced overpotential barriers. Temperature also affects the pre-exponential factor thermodynamically, as rising TT boosts diffusion coefficients and lowers solution viscosity, increasing the collision frequency between reactants and the electrode surface. The Butler-Volmer equation reflects this by embedding temperature dependence within j0j_0, linking it to overall reaction kinetics.

Concentration and Composition

The exchange current density j0j_0 for an elementary electron transfer reaction depends on the concentrations of the oxidized (O) and reduced (R) species, as derived from the Butler-Volmer framework. Specifically, for a one-electron process, it is expressed as j0=Fk0[O]αc[R]αa,j_0 = F k^0 [\mathrm{O}]^{\alpha_c} [\mathrm{R}]^{\alpha_a}, where FF is the , k0k^0 is the standard heterogeneous rate constant, and αc\alpha_c and αa\alpha_a are the cathodic and anodic transfer coefficients, respectively, satisfying αc+αa=1\alpha_c + \alpha_a = 1. This concentration dependence arises because the forward and reverse reaction rates at equilibrium are proportional to the respective species concentrations raised to the symmetry factors of the activated complex. The composition of the electrolyte influences j0j_0 primarily through the role of supporting electrolytes, which maintain high ionic strength to minimize ohmic drop and migration effects during measurements, ensuring accurate kinetic determination. Additionally, supporting electrolytes affect the activity coefficients of electroactive species via changes in ionic strength, thereby modulating the effective concentrations in the rate expression for j0j_0. In reactions involving protons, such as the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER), j0j_0 exhibits a strong dependence on pH due to the variation in H⁺ concentration. For Pt electrodes, j0j_0 decreases by approximately two orders of magnitude as pH increases from 0 to 13, reflecting the lower availability of protons in alkaline media. Solvent effects further modulate this, as protic solvents like water facilitate proton transfer, while aprotic ones may alter solvation and thus the rate constant k0k^0. Specific ions in the electrolyte can adsorb at the electrode interface, either blocking active sites to reduce j0j_0 or promoting them through stabilization of intermediates. For instance, in HER, alkali metal cations influence j0j_0 by altering water dissociation rates via adsorption, with Li⁺ enhancing activity more than Cs⁺ in alkaline conditions.

Electrode Surface Properties

The exchange current density j0j_0 exhibits a pronounced dependence on the electrode material, stemming from differences in electronic structure and adsorption properties that influence the activation energy for electron transfer. For the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER), transition metals like platinum display exceptionally high j0j_0 values, often exceeding 1 mA/cm², due to the optimal positioning of the d-band center near the Fermi level, which balances hydrogen adsorption and desorption energies. This correlation, established through density functional theory calculations, explains the volcano-shaped activity trend across metals, with Pt at the peak owing to its moderate binding energy for hydrogen intermediates. In contrast, metals like mercury or zinc show much lower j0j_0, on the order of 10^{-12} A/cm² for HER, reflecting weaker catalytic interactions. Surface area and roughness significantly impact the observed j0j_0, as the intrinsic exchange current density is defined per real microscopic surface area, while practical measurements often use the geometric area. The roughness factor β\beta, defined as the ratio of real to geometric surface area, directly scales the apparent j0j_0 such that j0,geometric=j0,real×βj_{0,\text{geometric}} = j_{0,\text{real}} \times \beta. For instance, nanostructured or polycrystalline electrodes with high roughness (e.g., β>10\beta > 10) can yield measured j0j_0 values orders of magnitude higher than smooth single , enhancing overall reaction rates without altering the intrinsic kinetics. This distinction is critical in catalyst design, where increasing β\beta through texturing or morphology amplifies performance metrics. Alloys and surface modifiers play a key role in tuning j0j_0 by altering the landscape for specific reactions. In methanol oxidation, Pt-Ru bimetallic catalysts exhibit significantly higher j0j_0 compared to monometallic counterparts, as Ru sites promote the adsorption of oxygenated species that facilitate CO intermediate oxidation, thereby reducing the and activation barrier. This bifunctional enhancement lowers the energy for rate-determining steps. Coatings or dopants, such as nitrogen-modified carbon supports, further boost j0j_0 by improving metal dispersion and electronic interactions. Crystal facet orientation on single-crystal electrodes modulates j0j_0 through variations in atomic coordination and geometry. On surfaces, for the HER, the (111) facet typically yields higher j0j_0 values than the (100) facet due to denser packing and more favorable adsorption configurations for , leading to lower Tafel slopes and enhanced kinetics. This orientation-dependent behavior arises from differences in and electronic , with (111) planes often showing up to twofold higher activity in acidic media. Such effects underscore the importance of facet control in nanostructured catalysts for optimizing exchange current densities.

Determination Methods

Polarization Measurements

Polarization measurements involve applying a controlled potential to an and recording the resulting as a function of , allowing extraction of the exchange current density j0j_0 through approximations to the Butler-Volmer equation. These (DC) techniques provide kinetic information by relating the net current to the η\eta, where deviations from equilibrium reveal the rate of charge transfer. Tafel polarization is a widely used method for determining j0j_0 at higher s, typically above 50-100 mV, where the Butler-Volmer equation simplifies to a linear relationship between overpotential and the logarithm of . In this approach, a logarithmic plot of the absolute ∣log⁡j∣|\log j| versus η\eta is constructed from steady-state or quasi-steady-state measurements obtained via potentiodynamic polarization. The linear region of the Tafel plot has a slope related to the charge transfer coefficient α\alpha, and j0j_0 is extrapolated as the intercept at η=0\eta = 0. The underlying relation is given by: η=2.3RTαFlog⁡(jj0)\eta = \frac{2.3 RT}{\alpha F} \log \left( \frac{j}{j_0} \right) for the cathodic branch (with analogous form for anodic), where RR is the gas constant, TT is temperature, and FF is the Faraday constant. For low overpotentials (typically ∣η∣<10−20|\eta| < 10-20 mV), linear sweep voltammetry (LSV) enables determination of j0j_0 by exploiting the linear approximation of the Butler-Volmer equation, where the current density is directly proportional to η\eta. In LSV, the potential is swept slowly (e.g., 1 mV/s) near the equilibrium potential, and the resulting jj-η\eta curve is fitted to obtain j0j_0 from the slope. The approximation is: j≈j0FRTηj \approx j_0 \frac{F}{RT} \eta assuming symmetric electron transfer or averaging for asymmetric cases, which yields j0j_0 as the ratio of the slope to F/RTF/RT. Microelectrode methods enhance the accuracy of these measurements by employing electrodes with dimensions on the order of micrometers, which establish steady-state diffusion layers and minimize convective mass transport interference. Steady-state voltammetry at microelectrodes allows collection of current-potential data under conditions where kinetic control dominates, facilitating reliable fitting of Tafel or linear regions to extract j0j_0 without significant contributions from diffusion-limited currents. This approach is particularly useful for fast electron transfer reactions where conventional macroelectrodes suffer from uncompensated ohmic effects or mixed control regimes. Accurate determination of j0j_0 requires careful correction for error sources, notably ohmic drop (iR compensation) arising from solution resistance between the working and reference electrodes. Uncompensated iR drop distorts the applied potential, leading to underestimated overpotentials and erroneous j0j_0 values; techniques such as current-interrupt or positive feedback are employed to measure and subtract this effect in real-time during polarization scans. Proper iR compensation is essential, as even small resistances (e.g., 10-50 Ω) can introduce errors exceeding 20% in kinetic parameters for typical current densities.

Spectroscopic Techniques

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) serves as a primary spectroscopic method for indirectly determining exchange current density by probing the electrode-electrolyte interface through frequency-dependent impedance measurements. A small alternating current or potential perturbation is superimposed on a direct current bias, and the response is analyzed to isolate kinetic parameters. In Nyquist plots of EIS data, the high-frequency intercept with the real axis represents the solution resistance, while the diameter of the subsequent semicircle corresponds to the charge transfer resistance RctR_{ct}, which is inversely proportional to the exchange current density j0j_0. This relationship is given by Rct=RTFj0A,R_{ct} = \frac{RT}{F j_0 A}, where RR is the gas constant, TT is the absolute temperature, FF is Faraday's constant, and AA is the electrode area; j0j_0 is thus extracted by fitting the semicircle to an equivalent circuit model, often the Randles circuit, assuming low overpotentials where linear approximations hold. For semiconductor electrodes, Mott-Schottky analysis extends EIS principles to characterize space charge layer capacitance as a function of applied potential, enabling indirect extraction of j0j_0 through its dependence on band bending and carrier concentrations. At high frequencies (typically 1–10 kHz), the measured capacitance CC reflects the semiconductor depletion layer, plotted as 1/C21/C^2 versus electrode potential to yield a linear Mott-Schottky relation: 1C2=2eϵϵ0ND(V−Vfb−kTe),\frac{1}{C^2} = \frac{2}{e \epsilon \epsilon_0 N_D} \left( V - V_{fb} - \frac{kT}{e} \right), where ee is the elementary charge, ϵ\epsilon and ϵ0\epsilon_0 are the permittivities of the semiconductor and vacuum, NDN_D is the donor density, VfbV_{fb} is the flat-band potential, kk is Boltzmann's constant, and TT is temperature; the slope provides NDN_D, and the intercept gives VfbV_{fb}, both of which modulate the interfacial energetics influencing j0j_0 for charge transfer, particularly in photoelectrochemical systems where recombination and transfer resistances are deconvoluted. In situ vibrational spectroscopies, such as Raman and , complement impedance methods by identifying transient surface species and correlating their coverages with kinetic parameters like j0j_0 via rate equation fitting. These operando techniques capture molecular vibrations of adsorbates under electrochemical conditions, revealing how intermediates (e.g., adsorbed hydrogen or oxygen species) alter activation barriers and exchange rates. For instance, in situ detects characteristic bands of undercoordinated sites or adsorbed reactants on catalysts, allowing quantitative linking of surface speciation to Butler-Volmer-derived j0j_0 values through time-resolved kinetic models that account for coverage-dependent rate constants. A major advantage of these spectroscopic approaches, especially EIS and its variants, lies in their capacity to decouple charge transfer kinetics from diffusive mass transport by exploiting distinct time scales—charge transfer occurs at higher frequencies (ms to μs), while diffusion dominates at lower ones (s)—thus providing j0j_0 without confounding ohmic or concentration effects. However, limitations arise in multi-step reactions involving adsorbed intermediates, where complex impedance responses (e.g., additional semicircles or inductive loops) obscure RctR_{ct} assignment, necessitating advanced modeling that may introduce fitting ambiguities and reduce accuracy for j0j_0 determination.

Practical Examples

Values for Redox Systems

The ferrocene/ferrocenium (Fc/Fc⁺) redox couple exemplifies a fast outer-sphere electron transfer process, characterized by heterogeneous rate constants k0k^0 on the order of 1–10 cm/s at platinum electrodes in non-aqueous media such as acetonitrile. These high kinetics translate to exchange current densities j0j_0 typically ranging from 1 to 10 A/cm² under standard conditions (e.g., 1 mM concentration), making it a benchmark for reversible, diffusion-controlled reactions with minimal electrode interaction. The hydrogen evolution reaction (HER), an inner-sphere process involving proton adsorption and bond breaking, displays exchange current densities that vary dramatically with electrode material. On polycrystalline platinum, j0≈10−3j_0 \approx 10^{-3} A/cm² in acidic media at 25°C, reflecting Pt's optimal hydrogen binding energy near the volcano peak. In contrast, on mercury, j0≈10−12j_0 \approx 10^{-12} A/cm² due to weak adsorption and high overpotential, underscoring Hg's inertness for catalysis. For the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR), another inner-sphere process with multiple electron transfers and intermediates, exchange current densities are inherently low owing to sluggish kinetics. On carbon supports like glassy carbon or Vulcan XC-72, j0≈10−9j_0 \approx 10^{-9} A/cm² in alkaline or acidic media, limited by poor O₂ adsorption and peroxide formation. Platinum alloys, such as Pt₃Co or Pt₃Ni, enhance activity with j0j_0 values 10–100 times higher (up to ~10^{-7} A/cm²), attributed to ligand and strain effects that weaken O-binding and suppress side reactions. Recent advances include Rh nanocrystals on graphdiyne achieving j_0 ≈ 10^{-3} A/cm² for HER in 2022, highlighting progress in non-Pt catalysts. Exchange current densities reveal key trends between inner-sphere and outer-sphere reactions: outer-sphere processes like Fc/Fc⁺ show high, relatively electrode-independent j0j_0 due to reliance on solvent reorganization without surface bonding, whereas inner-sphere reactions like HER and ORR exhibit j0j_0 spanning 6–9 orders of magnitude across metals, governed by adsorption energetics and surface properties. The following table summarizes representative j0j_0 values for HER (an inner-sphere benchmark) on various metals in 1 M acid at 25°C, illustrating the volcano-type dependence on hydrogen adsorption free energy.
Metalj0j_0 (A/cm²)Notes
Pt10−310^{-3}Optimal adsorption; polycrystalline.
Pd10−310^{-3}Similar to Pt; high activity.
Rh10−3.610^{-3.6}High activity near volcano peak; polycrystalline.
Ni10−510^{-5}Moderate activity; edge of volcano.
Hg10−1210^{-12}Negligible activity; no adsorption.

Applications in Devices

In lithium-ion batteries, a high exchange current density for Li⁺ intercalation and deintercalation at the electrode interfaces minimizes activation polarization losses, enabling efficient charge transfer and reducing overall cell overpotential during operation. Conversely, low exchange current density values, often on the order of 10⁻³ A/cm² or below for certain electrode materials, increase polarization, which limits the battery's rate capability and hinders high-power discharge or fast-charging performance. This kinetic constraint is particularly evident in graphite anodes, where sluggish intercalation kinetics degrade energy efficiency under demanding conditions. In proton exchange membrane fuel cells, the exchange current density for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) on cathode catalysts serves as a key indicator of intrinsic activity, directly influencing cell efficiency by dictating the overpotential required for oxygen activation at operating voltages. Low ORR exchange current densities, typically around 10⁻⁶ A/cm² for platinum-based catalysts, contribute to significant kinetic losses, reducing power output and overall fuel utilization. Strategies to enhance this parameter include incorporating Fe/Fe₃C nanoparticles into Fe-N-C frameworks, which increase active site density and boost ORR activity, achieving mass activities up to 1.74 A/mg_Pt while meeting durability targets for commercial deployment. For corrosion processes, the exchange current density associated with anodic metal dissolution reactions, such as Fe → Fe²⁺ + 2e⁻, provides a fundamental measure of dissolution kinetics and is used to predict corrosion rates in various environments through . In Evans diagrams, the intersection of anodic and cathodic curves at the corrosion potential yields the corrosion current density, which correlates directly with the exchange current density of the dissolution reaction, enabling quantitative forecasts of material degradation in aggressive media like acidic solutions or seawater. Higher exchange current densities for dissolution accelerate uniform corrosion, while environmental factors like pH and inhibitors can modulate this parameter to extend service life in pipelines or marine structures. In applications, such as CO₂ reduction to value-added products like CO or formate, the exchange current density governs the charge transfer kinetics at the electrode-electrolyte interface, thereby influencing the applied overpotential needed to drive selective faradaic reactions. Elevated exchange current densities lower the overpotential for CO₂ activation, facilitating operation at industrially relevant current densities (e.g., >200 mA/cm²) while suppressing competing evolution, which enhances product selectivity and energy efficiency. For instance, in silver-based electrodes for CO production, optimizing this parameter through catalyst design reduces overpotentials to around 1.3 V, promoting scalable in flow cells.

References

  1. https://www.chem.uci.edu/~ardo/echem/UCI-CHEM248-2023F_lecture19.pdf
  2. https://goldbook.iupac.org/terms/view/M03777
  3. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/10-626-electrochemical-energy-systems-spring-2014/56cfa6e0f28bc8fc1a647cbe679384d1_MIT10_626S14_S11lec13.pdf
  4. https://vlab.amrita.edu/index.php?sub=2&brch=190&sim=605&cnt=1
  5. https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Analytical_Chemistry/Physical_Methods_in_Chemistry_and_Nano_Science_(Barron)/02%3A_Physical_and_Thermal_Analysis/2.07%3A_Electrochemistry
  6. https://www.corrosionpedia.com/definition/477/exchange-current-density
  7. https://chemistry-europe.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/elsa.202400003
  8. https://www.smbstcollege.com/uploads/department/Electrochemical_methods_2ed_2001_-_Bard_Faulkner.pdf
  9. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.5c01387
  10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/exchange-current-density
  11. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266615744_Hydrogen_Oxidation_and_Evolution_Reaction_HORHER_on_Pt_Electrodes_in_Acid_vs_Alkaline_Electrolytes_Mechanism_Activity_and_Particle_Size_Effects
  12. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/244094366_Calculations_of_the_exchange_current_density_for_hydrogen_electrode_reactions_A_short_review_and_a_new_equation
  13. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2015/ee/c5ee01721a
  14. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1501602
  15. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/4/4/49
  16. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aenm.202300628
  17. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2021/cy/d1cy01170g
  18. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.8b07700
  19. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266639170_Kinetic_Analysis_of_Methanol_Oxidation_on_PtC_and_PtRuC_Catalysts_Under_Different_Temperatures
  20. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2015/nr/c4nr05244g
  21. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2451910318300486
  22. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-47994-y
  23. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.4c00266
  24. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11837-023-05931-2
  25. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1388248123000449
  26. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.3c00366
  27. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2022/ta/d2ta01393b
  28. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsmeasuresciau.2c00070
  29. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022072891853967
  30. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscatal.3c01687
  31. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpca.4c04923
  32. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/MA2021-01461864mtgabs
  33. https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/files/4378376/Kehlet.pdf
  34. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscatal.2c05222
  35. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-51605-1
  36. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-32937-2
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775324008085
  38. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/3/1150
  39. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1378&context=eche_facpub
  40. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1122/ML11229A047.pdf
  41. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-50521-8
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.