Hinogami R., Yotsuhashi S., Deguchi M. et al. · ECS Electrochemistry Letters · 2012
Open a family to keep every result attached to its sample, method and conditions.
Paraphrased for this database from the authors’ stated interpretations — never quoted verbatim — and kept separate from reported measurements.
CR-MOF acts as a catalyst for CO2 reduction and has better catalytic activity than Cu metal based on a more positive onset potential.
Caveat: Onset shifts are reported as approximate comparative values, not absolute onset potentials.
H18 · Results and Discussion · Figure 2 · Linked to 2 structured results
At -1.2 V vs SHE, the CR-MOF electrode forms substantially more HCOOH than the Cu metal control.
Caveat: Rate is normalised to apparent electrode area and reported for a composite CR-MOF/carbon-paper electrode.
H19 · Results and Discussion · Figure 3 · Linked to 3 structured results
The paper cites electronic and proton conductivity as motivating characteristics of copper rubeanate MOFs, but it reports no first-hand electrical-transport or proton-conductivity measurement.
Caveat: Conductivity evidence in this article is contextual/literature-based, not extracted as a first-hand result.
H17 · Abstract and Introduction
The authors had not established a nano-pore effect because the synthesized CR-MOF pore size was not well controlled and was somewhat large.
H19 · Results and Discussion
CR-MOF gives highly selective HCOOH formation, while Cu metal gives a mixture of CO2 reduction products.
Caveat: Selectivity is reported for the tested potentiostatic conditions; detailed Faradaic efficiencies for all products are not tabulated.
H19 · Results and Discussion · Figure 3 · Linked to 2 structured results
The authors propose that weak CO2 adsorption at ionic CR-MOF metal sites contributes to selective HCOOH formation.
Caveat: This is a mechanistic interpretation rather than a directly measured adsorption or electronic-structure result in this paper.
H19 · Results and Discussion · Linked to 1 structured result
Names and aliases are kept exactly within the paper’s own identity model.
| Material | Composition | Structure context | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| conductive carbon paper | carbon papernone · none | unknown · UnknownCommercial conductive carbon paper substrate/control. | H17 · Experimental |
| copper rubeanate metal organic framework | not explicitly stated; copper rubeanate polymer/MOFCu sites / Cu(II) ions in copper rubeanate framework · rubeanic acid / rubeanate ligand | unknown · PristineStoichiometric crystalline polymer compound assigned from elemental analysis, broad powder XRD peaks, and IR spectra; authors describe the material as CR-MOF with nanopores. | H17 · Abstract and Experimental |
| copper metal electrode | Cumetallic Cu · none | unknown · UnknownMetal electrode control. | H18 · Results and Discussion · Figure 2 |
Sample form, processing state and composition status define the context for measurements.
| Sample | Form and role | Processing and geometry | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| bare conductive carbon paper electroderesearch_0282__mat__carbon_paper | Electrode · Pristine Control · Unknown | bare CP control electrodeToray TGP-H-120 conductive carbon paper · 0.36 mm | H18 · Results and Discussion · Figure 2 |
| CR-MOF deposited on conductive carbon paperresearch_0282__mat__cr_mof | Electrode · Composite Sample · Composite | 100 uL CR-MOF/isopropanol slurry drop-cast onto carbon paper, air-dried, and gripped with a gold-plated electrode holderToray TGP-H-120 conductive carbon paper, 0.36 mm thick, 18 mm square · carbon paper thickness 0.36 mm; deposited CR-MOF layer thickness not reported | H17 · Experimental |
| air-dried CR-MOF particlesresearch_0282__mat__cr_mof | Powder · Target Sample · Pristine Framework | precipitated from rubeanic acid and CuSO4 solutions, washed, centrifuged, and air-driednone · not applicable | H17 · Experimental |
| Cu metal electroderesearch_0282__mat__cu_metal | Electrode · Pristine Control · Unknown | metal electrode used as control for CO2 electroreductionnone · not reported | H18 · Results and Discussion · Figure 2 and Figure 3 |