Electrochemistry Application — Coordination environment dependent selectivity of single-site-Cu enriched crystalline porous catalysts in CO2 reduction to CH4

8 measurement groups · 43 results

Reported values remain attached to the sample, method, conditions, extraction quality and source location that produced them.

comparative ECR testing of four single-site Cu frameworks

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

Cu-DBC, Cu-HHTP, Cu-TTCOF and Cu-PPCOF electrodes tested under same flow-cell conditions in 1 M KOH

Atmosphere: CO2
Geometry: GDL-carbon paper electrodes
Context: composite application electrodes
Measurement source: p005-p006 · ECR performances · Fig. 3b-e

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
CH4 FE at -0.9 V vs RHE for Cu-DBCMarked as a best value within this paper	80.0%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Fig. 3c
CH4 FE at -0.9 V vs RHE for Cu-HHTP	42.6%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Fig. 3c
CH4 FE at -0.9 V vs RHE for Cu-PPCOF	6.34%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Fig. 3c
CH4 FE at -0.9 V vs RHE for Cu-TTCOF	43.6%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Fig. 3c
Cu-DBC partial CH4 current density at -0.9 V vs RHEMarked as a best value within this paper	-162.3 mA cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · ECR performances · Fig. 3d
Cu-HHTP C2H4 FE at -0.9 V vs RHE	~40.9%	—	—	Text Approximate	p005 · ECR performances · Supplementary Fig. 20
Cu-HHTP total hydrocarbon FE at -0.9 V vs RHE	~83.5%	—	—	Text Approximate	p005 · ECR performances · Supplementary Fig. 20
Cu-DBC total current density at -1.0 V vs RHEMarked as a best value within this paper	-348 mA cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · ECR performances · Fig. 3b

aggregate HER/ECR/CH4 Faradaic efficiency

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

CO2 electroreduction in flow cell at -0.7 to -1.0 V vs RHE

Atmosphere: CO2
Geometry: three-electrode flow cell
Context: composite application electrode
Measurement source: source-data sheet Figure 2c · Figure source data · Fig. 2c

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
total ECR FE at -0.7 V vs RHE	0.67169 fraction (67.169%)	0.67169 fraction	1.503 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2c · Figure source data · Fig. 2c
total ECR FE at -0.8 V vs RHE	0.80649 fraction (80.649%)	0.80649 fraction	3.972 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2c · Figure source data · Fig. 2c
total ECR FE at -0.9 V vs RHEMarked as a best value within this paper	0.86948 fraction (86.948%)	0.86948 fraction	3.181 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2c · Figure source data · Fig. 2c
total ECR FE at -1.0 V vs RHE	0.72918 fraction (72.918%)	0.72918 fraction	4.744 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2c · Figure source data · Fig. 2c

online GC Faradaic efficiency product analysis

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

CO2 electroreduction in flow cell at -0.7 to -1.0 V vs RHE; products detected by online GC

Atmosphere: CO2
Geometry: three-electrode flow cell
Context: composite application electrode
Measurement source: source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Faradaic efficiency for C2H4 at -0.7 V vs RHE	0.18165 fraction (18.165%)	0.18165 fraction	4.569 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for C2H4 at -0.8 V vs RHE	0.1699 fraction (16.990%)	0.1699 fraction	1.807 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for C2H4 at -0.9 V vs RHE	0.05617 fraction (5.617%)	0.05617 fraction	1.164 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for C2H4 at -1.0 V vs RHE	0.03078 fraction (3.078%)	0.03078 fraction	0.913 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CH4 at -0.7 V vs RHE	0.30108 fraction (30.108%)	0.30108 fraction	8.213 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CH4 at -0.8 V vs RHE	0.58832 fraction (58.832%)	0.58832 fraction	3.422 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CH4 at -0.9 V vs RHEMarked as a best value within this paper	0.79954 fraction (79.954%)	0.79954 fraction	4.573 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CH4 at -1.0 V vs RHE	0.69204 fraction (69.204%)	0.69204 fraction	4.921 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CO at -0.7 V vs RHE	0.18897 fraction (18.897%)	0.18897 fraction	4.789 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CO at -0.8 V vs RHE	0.04827 fraction (4.827%)	0.04827 fraction	0.484 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CO at -0.9 V vs RHE	0.01377 fraction (1.377%)	0.01377 fraction	0.289 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for CO at -1.0 V vs RHE	0.00636 fraction (0.636%)	0.00636 fraction	0.319 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for H2 at -0.7 V vs RHE	0.29574 fraction (29.574%)	0.29574 fraction	2.096 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for H2 at -0.8 V vs RHE	0.19225 fraction (19.225%)	0.19225 fraction	3.129 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for H2 at -0.9 V vs RHE	0.14091 fraction (14.091%)	0.14091 fraction	2.625 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b
Faradaic efficiency for H2 at -1.0 V vs RHE	0.25392 fraction (25.392%)	0.25392 fraction	1.110 percentage points	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2b · Figure source data · Fig. 2b

13CO2 isotope labelling GC-MS

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

13CO2 experiment under identical conditions to 12CO2 experiment; products analysed by GC-MS

Atmosphere: 13CO2
Geometry: flow cell
Context: composite application electrode
Measurement source: p005 · ECR-to-CH4 performance · Fig. 2e; Supplementary Fig. 13

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
13CH4 mass signal	m/z = 17	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · ECR-to-CH4 performance · Fig. 2e; Supplementary Fig. 13

LSV polarization in flow cell

Voltammetry

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

1 M KOH, CO2 or Ar flowing, 5 mV s-1, 90% iR compensation; Pt counter and Ag/AgCl reference converted to RHE

Atmosphere: CO2/Ar
Geometry: three-electrode flow cell, GDL electrode
Context: composite application electrode
Measurement source: p004 · ECR-to-CH4 performance · Fig. 2a

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
partial CH4 current density at -0.9 VMarked as a best value within this paper	-162.4 mA cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p002 · Introduction
current density near -0.9 V vs RHE under CO2Marked as a best value within this paper	-203.16 mA cm-2 at -0.89962 V vs RHE	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2a · Figure source data · Fig. 2a
large catalytic current density at -0.9 V	~ -203 mA cm-2	—	—	Text Approximate	p007 · Conclusion

chronoamperometry and repeated GC during stability

Chronoamperometry

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

Constant -0.9 V vs RHE for 9000 s; GC FE measured every 1200 s

Atmosphere: CO2
Geometry: flow cell, GDL electrode
Context: composite application electrode
Measurement source: p004-p005 · ECR-to-CH4 performance · Fig. 2d

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
liquid products by 1H NMR	hardly liquid products	—	—	Text Qualitative	p005 · ECR-to-CH4 performance · Supplementary Fig. 12
initial stability-test current density	-213.82739 mA cm-2	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2d · Figure source data · Fig. 2d
chronoamperometry duration	9000 s	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · ECR-to-CH4 performance · Fig. 2d
CH4 FE at 120 s during stability	0.83066 fraction (83.066%)	0.83066 fraction	—	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2d · Figure source data · Fig. 2d
CH4 FE at 8400 s during stability	0.79429 fraction (79.429%)	0.79429 fraction	—	SI Table Exact Reported	source-data sheet Figure 2d · Figure source data · Fig. 2d

double-layer capacitance from CV for ECSA proxy

Voltammetry

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

CV curves at scan rates 10-100 mV s-1; Cdl calculated for Cu-DBC, Cu-HHTP, Cu-TTCOF and Cu-PPCOF

Atmosphere: Ar/electrolyte
Geometry: GDL-carbon paper electrodes
Context: composite application electrodes
Measurement source: p005-p006 · ECR performances · Supplementary Figs. 24-27

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Cu-DBC double-layer capacitance CdlMarked as a best value within this paper	7.72 mF cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Supplementary Figs. 24-27
Cu-HHTP double-layer capacitance Cdl	6.28 mF cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Supplementary Figs. 24-27
Cu-PPCOF double-layer capacitance Cdl	1.06 mF cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Supplementary Figs. 24-27
Cu-TTCOF double-layer capacitance Cdl	5.05 mF cm-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005-p006 · ECR performances · Supplementary Figs. 24-27

electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS)

Impedance spectroscopy

Cu-DBC modified GDL-carbon paper electrode · Electrode

Nyquist plots under -0.9 V vs RHE for Cu-DBC and Cu-HHTP

Atmosphere: CO2
Geometry: electrode/electrolyte interface
Context: composite application electrodes
Measurement source: p005 · ECR performances · Supplementary Fig. 21

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Cu-DBC charge transfer resistance RctMarked as a best value within this paper	1.73 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · ECR performances · Supplementary Fig. 21
Cu-HHTP charge transfer resistance Rct	6.89 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · ECR performances · Supplementary Fig. 21