Components for PEM fuel cells: An overview

Fuel cells, as devices for direct conversion of the chemical energy of a fuel into electricity by electrochemical reactions, are among the key enabling technologies for the transition to a hydrogen-based economy. Among the various types of fuel cells, polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) are considered to be at the forefront for commercialization for portable and transportation applications because of their high energy conversion efficiency and low pollutant emission. Cost and durability of PEMFCs are the two major challenges that need to be addressed to facilitate their commercialization. The properties of the membrane electrode assembly (MEA) have a direct impact on both cost and durability of a PEMFC. An overview is presented on the key components of the PEMFC MEA. The success of the MEA and thereby PEMFC technology is believed to depend largely on two key materials: the membrane and the electro-catalyst. These two key materials are directly linked to the major challenges faced in PEMFC, namely, the performance, and cost. Concerted efforts are conducted globally for the past couple of decades to address these challenges. This chapter aims to provide the reader an overview of the major research findings to date on the key components of a PEMFC MEA

Synthesis and optimisation of IrO2 electrocatalysts by Adams fusion method for solid polymer electrolyte electrolysers

IrO2 as an anodic electrocatalyst for the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) in solid polymer electrolyte (SPE) electrolysers was synthesised by adapting the Adams fusion method. Optimisation of the IrO2 electrocatalyst was achieved by varying the synthesis duration (0.5 – 4 hours) and temperature (250 - 500°C). The physical properties of the electrocatalysts were characterised by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and x-ray diffraction (XRD). Electrochemical characterisation of the electrocatalysts toward the OER was evaluated by chronoamperometry (CA). CA analysis revealed the best electrocatalytic activity towards the OER for IrO2 synthesised for 2 hours at 350oC which displayed a better electrocatalytic activity than the commercial IrO2 electrocatalyst used in this study. XRD and TEM analyses revealed an increase in crystallinity and average particle size with increasing synthesis duration and temperature which accounted for the decreasing electrocatalytic activity. At 250°C the formation of an active IrO2 electrocatalyst was not favoured

Synthesis, characterisation and evaluation of IrO2 based binary metal oxide electrocatalysts for oxygen evolution reaction

IrO2, IrxRu1-xO2, IrxSnx-1O2 and IrxTax-1O2 (1 ≥ x ≥ 0.7) were synthesized, characterised and evaluated as electrocatalysts for the oxygen evolution reaction in solid polymer electrolyte electrolysers. The electrocatalysts were synthesised by adapting the Adams fusion method. The physical properties of the electrocatalysts were characterised by scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy and x-ray diffraction. Electrochemical activity of the electrocatalysts toward the oxygen evolution reaction was evaluated by cyclic voltammetry and chronoamperometry. X-ray diffraction revealed no phase separation when RuO2 or SnO2 was introduced into the IrO2 lattice suggesting that solid solutions were formed. Transmission electron microscope analysis revealed nanosize particles for all synthesised metal oxides. Crystallinity increased with the addition of RuO2 and SnO2 while a suppression of crystal growth was observed with the addition of Ta2O5 to IrO2. Chronoamperometry revealed that the addition of all the secondary metal oxides to IrO2 resulted in improved catalytic performance. Ir0.7Ru0.3O2 was identified as the most promising electrocatalyst for the oxygen evolution reaction. Keywords:Web of Scienc

1-(3,5-Dimethyl-1H-pyrazol-1-yl)-3-phenyl­isoquinoline

The mol­ecular conformation of the title compound, C20H17N3, is stabilized by an intramolecular C—H⋯N inter­action. The crystal structure shows inter­molecular C—H⋯π inter­actions. The dihedral angle between the isoquinoline unit and the phenyl ring is 11.42 (1)° whereas the isoquinoline unit and the pendent dimethyl pryrazole unit form a dihedral angle of 50.1 (4)°. Furthermore, the angle between the mean plane of the phenyl ring and the dimethyl pyrazole unit is 47.3 (6)°

1-(4-Chloro-3-fluoro­phen­yl)-2-[(3-phenyl­isoquinolin-1-yl)sulfan­yl]ethanone

In the title compound, C23H15ClFNOS, the isoquinoline system and the 4-chloro-3-fluoro­phenyl ring are aligned at 80.4 (1)°. The dihedral angle between the isoquinoline system and the pendant (unsubstituted) phenyl ring is 19.91 (1)°

Methyl 2-methyl-2H-1,2,3-triazole-4-carboxyl­ate

In the title compound, C5H7N3O2, all non-H atoms lie in a common plane, with a maximum deviation of 0.061 (2)° for the ester methyl C atom. The structure is stabilized by inter­molecular C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds

3-(4-Methoxy­phen­yl)-1H-isochromen-1-one

The asymmetric unit of the title compound, C16H12O3, contains two crystallographically independent mol­ecules. The isochromene ring system is planar (maximum deviation 0.024 Å) and is oriented at dihedral angles of 2.63 (3) and 0.79 (3)° with respect to the methoxy­benzene rings in the two independent mol­ecules

1,3-Dimethyl-2,6-diphenyl­piperidin-4-one

In the title moleclue, C19H21NO, the 4-piperidone ring adopts a chair conformation in which the two benzene rings and the methyl group attached to C atoms all have equatorial orientations. In the crystal structure, centrosymmetric dimers are formed through weak inter­molecular C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds [the dihedral angle between the aromatic rings is 58.51 (5)°]