2.1. Characterizations
Al-doped Co
2Fe(CN)
6 was prepared by in-situ growth on nickel foam. The prepared catalyst was characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns. As shown in
Figure S1, three characteristic peaks appeared at 44.5°, 51.8° and 76.4°, corresponding to the (111), (200) and (220) crystal planes of Ni (PDF#04-0850), respectively. Three Bragg peaks emerge at 17.54°, 24.92°, and 35.59°, which are ascribed to (200), (220), and (400) planes of Co
2Fe(CN)
6 (PDF #14-0291). After Al doping, (200), (220), and (400) planes of Co
2Fe(CN)
6 were also observed in the patterns with slight shift. The crystal structure of Al-Co
2Fe (CN)
6/NF is similar to that of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, indicating that the doping of Al has a negligible effect on the crystal structure.
The morphological features of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF and Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF were characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). As shown in
Figure 1a, b and
Figure S2, the morphology of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF and Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF are composed of many tightly bound nanocubes, indicating that the doping of aluminum elements almost does not change the morphology. The morphology of the composite is uniformly distributed. As shown in
Figure 1c and d, a ring consisting of a large number of discrete spots can be observed in the map of constituency electron diffraction (SAED) of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, with three distinct rings corresponding to (200), (220) and (400) planes of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, which is consistent with the XRD, indicating that the composite has a polycrystalline shape. As shown in
Figure 1e, for the TEM element map of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, all Co, Fe, C, N, and Al elements are evenly distributed in the sample, from the EDX spectrum of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF in
Figure 1f, amount of doping Al atoms only 2% atom percent in the sample.
The surface chemical composition and valence state of the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF were monitored by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). As shown in
Figure 2a, the XPS survey spectra showed that Co, Fe, N, Al and Ni elements exist on the catalyst surface. In the Co 2p spectrum (
Figure 2b), two main peaks were found at 781.1 eV and 797.1 eV, corresponding to Co 2p
3/2 and Co 2p
1/2 of cobalt hydroxide [
30]. As shown in
Figure 2c, two main peaks at 708.5 eV and 721.1 eV in the Fe 2p spectrum, corresponding to characteristic bonds of Fe 2p
3/2 and Fe 2p
1/2 of iron hydroxide.
Figure 2d showed that the N 1s XPS spectrum were concentrated at 398.5 eV and 400.0 eV, indicating the presence of pyridine-N and pyrrole-N in the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6. In
Figure 2e, binding energies at 73.54 eV and 67.48 eV in Al 2p spectrum accompanied by satellite peaks were observed, which belonged to the Al 2p
1/2 and Al 2p
3/2 orbits, respectively. The high-resolution Ni 2p spectrum in
Figure 2f have two peaks at 871.97 eV and 854 eV, corresponding to Ni 2p
3/2 and Ni 2p
1/2, respectively, indicating the presence of nickel hydroxide [
31] .
2.2. Electrochemical catalytic performances
The electrocatalytic activity to UOR was performed in 1.0 M potassium hydroxide aqueous solution containing 0.5 M Urea. The synthetic parameters for the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF were optimized according to their catalytic performance by controlling the reaction times, Co
2+ and Al
3+ concentration, the type of doped elements.
Figure S3 and S4 showed that the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF exhibited best catalytic property to UOR under the optimal synthetic conditions at: 24 h of reaction time, concentration of Co
2+ and Al
3+ at 0.75 M and 1 mM, respectively, and the aluminum doping. As shown in
Figure S5, the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF composite exhibited highest current response in the 1.0 M KOH electrolyte solution consisting of 0.5 M Urea. So, the catalytic performance of the catalysts was performed in 1.0 M KOH electrolyte solution consisting of 0.5 M urea. Linear scanning voltammetry (LSV) curves of the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF and NF were shown in
Figure 3. The Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF shows high activity to UOR, which only needs a potential of 1.272 V (vs. RHE) at a current density of 100 mA, much smaller than that of NF (1.61 V vs. RHE) and Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (1.339 V vs. RHE). Moreover, the potential of UOR for Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF is obviously lower than that to OER (1.440 V vs. RHE), resulting in energy saving for hyrogen production. The UOR activity for Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF was comparable to other similar electrocatalysts in
Table S1 (Supplementary Information). The results demonstrated the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF possess a satisfactory catalytic performance to UOR.
The Tafel slope values were obtained to study the reaction kinetics according to the LSV curves. As shown in
Figure 3b, the Tafel slopes of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, NF and IrO
2 to UOR are 100 mV/dec, 231 mV/dec, 470 mV/dec and 55 mV/dec, respectively. Among these, Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF has a smallest Tafel slope value, suggesting a fast electron transport in the electrochemical urea oxidation process. The excellent kinetic property of the Al-Co
2Fe (CN)
6/N during the UOR process was further reflected by the electrochemical impedance (EIS) test in 1.0 M KOH with 0.5 M Urea. As shown in
Figure 3c, the charge transfer resistance of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF is 6.03 Ω, which is obviously lower than those of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (6.39 Ω) and NF (7.18 Ω). This result proved that Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF had higher conductivity and faster electron transfer characteristics, which can greatly promoted the UOR performance.
In order to prove the superiority of the material’s catalytic activity, the HER catalytic activity of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, NF, and the commercial Pt/C were also explored in the Ar-saturated 1.0 m KOH electrolyte. As shown in
Figure 3d, the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF demonstrated an overpotential of 169 mV (vs. RHE) at a current density of 10 mA/cm
2, which is clearly lower than those of NF (188 mV vs. RHE) and Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (184 mV vs.RHE), confirming the enhanced activity of Al-Co
2Fe (CN)
6/NF. However, the HER activity of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF is still poor than that of commercial Pt/C. The polarization curves of the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF to HER in different electrolyte solutions of 1.0 M KOH, 1.0 M KOH with 0.33 M Urea, and 1.0 M KOH with 0.5 M Urea are present in
Figure S5b. The HER activity of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF are essentially identical in 1.0 M KOH and 1.0 M KOH with 0.5 M Urea. This results confirmed the urea has negligible electrolyte effects on the HER activity of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF.
To further analyze the kinetics of the catalysts to HER, the Tafel slopes were demonstrated in
Figure 3e. The Tafel slopes of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, NF, and Pt/C for HER are 129 mV/dec, 137 mV/dec, 137 mV/dec, 173 mV/dec and 110 mV/dec, respectively. In contrast to Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF and NF, Al-Co
2Fe (CN)
6/NF has a smallest value of Tafel slope. This verified the facilitated HER kinetics of Al-Co
2Fe (CN)
6/NF, and was consistent with the Volmer-Heyrovsky mechanism in alkaline electrolyte. The electron transfer kinetics during the HER process can be reflected by the EIS of the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF in 1.0 M KOH with 0.5 M Urea. According to the
Figure 3f, the charge transfer resistance of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (15.01 Ω) is smaller than those of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (21.05 Ω) and NF (22.60 Ω). This result indicates that Al Co
2Fe (CN)
6/NF has a fast electron transfer rate and high conductivity, which contributed greatly to the HER activity. The electric double-layer capacitance (Cdl) reflects the value of electrochemical active surface area (ECSA). The CVs of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF and NF in 1.0 M KOH with 0.5 M Urea at 10-110 mV/s sweep were shown in
Figure S6a-c, respectively. Linear fitting diagrams of the current density difference (Δj) and the sweep speed were obtained for Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF, and NF, as shown in
Figure S6d. The capacitance value (Cdl) of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (6.255 mF/cm
2) is larger that of Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF (2.745 mF/cm
2) and NF electrode (0.695 mF/cm
2). This result indicated that the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF had a high ECSA, which may offer more active sites for HER.
2.3. Whole urea electrolysis
Considering the good electrocatalytic performance of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF electrode to both HER and UOR, a whole urea electrolysis system was developed using Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF as anode and cathode, respectively.
Figure 4a illustrated the coupling HER||UOR system.
Figure 4b is the optical image of HER||OER system and HER||UOR system for hydrogen generation. The generated bubbles are more obvious in HER||UOR system than those in HER||OER system, indicating that the catalyst has a better catalytic performance for the UOR. From the polarization curve in
Figure 4c, the current density of HER||OER system with Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF as electrode reached 10 mA cm
–2 at a cell voltage of 1.52 V. However, the HER||UOR system only needed a cell voltage of 1.36 V to achieve a current density of 10 mA cm
–2, as shown in
Figure 4d, which is much smaller than the traditional water electrolysis system. At the same time, under the cell voltage of 1.49 V (corresponding to the current density of 50 mA cm
–2), compared with the water electrolysis system, the current density of the water-urea system is increased by about 6.35 times. This proves that replacing OER with UOR is an energy-saving strategy for hydrogen production. In addition, in the same HER||UOR coupling system, the overall electrocatalytic performance of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF is even better than that of noble metal-based catalyst, that is, at a current density of 50 mA cm
–2, the battery voltage is 1.492 V, while the Pt/C‖RuO
2 is 1.542 V.
2.4. Stability of the catalyst
Under the current density of 10 mA cm
-2, the stability of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF to HER, UOR and whole urea electrolysis were tested respectively, as shown in
Figure 5. From
Figure 5a, the current density kept steadily for continuous 24 h electrolysis. The polarization curves also did not changed before and after 24 h electrolysis, suggesting the high HER stability of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF. It can be seen from
Figure 5b, the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF also have a good stability for UOR. As shown in
Figure 5c, the current density decreased slightly but tended to be stable. The LSV was basically the same before and after the reaction, which proved that the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF assembled into an HER||UOR cell still had good stability. According to the XRD pattern in
Figure 5d, there is no obvious change for Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF before and after urea electrolysis, indicating that the Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF possess a stable chemical structure.
Figure 6a is an XPS spectra of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF before and after 24-hour electrolysis, as shown in the figure, by observing the full spectrum of XPS, Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6/NF is mainly composed of Co, Fe, C, N and Al, which is consistent with the result of element mapping, and the peak of Ni is generated by NF substrate. As shown in
Figure 6b-d, the peaks before and after the reaction hardly changed, and during the 24 h UOR electrolysis, CoOOH, FeOOH and NiOOH peaks were not observed, indicating that Co
2+, Fe
2+ and Ni
2+ were not oxidized during the catalytic process, which is different from the mechanism of other nickel-based catalysts reported. [
32,
33] .
2.5. Catalytic Mechanisms
The UOR process has a 6e transfer reaction, which establishes a mature reaction mechanism and mature proportional relationship for each reaction intermediate. It has been reported many substitution mechanisms on the surface of NiOOH [
34]. This has been extensively validated in other multi-electron transfer reactions. The schematic diagram of Co
2Fe(CN)
6 is shown in
Figure 7a, the whole structure is a square structure composed of four small units, which is regularly distributed. The doping of Al may replace the position of partial Co
2+, so it is speculated that the structural diagram of Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6 should be shown in
Figure 7b. In this structure, the Fe atom is at the various vertices of the quartet, and the Co atom is at the center of the scaffold, and this stable structure gives it better UOR performance.
In order to further explore the reason why catalysts improve the activity of UOR, density functional theory (DFT) calculation was carried out to reveal the potential catalytic mechanism. The typical UOR reaction path is:
where attachment of
*COO intermediate is the rate determination step [
35,
36]. In this catalytic reaction, the decisive step (RDS) of the whole reaction is that the intermediate
*CON
2H
3 desorbs from the active site to form
*CON
2H
2.
As can be seen from
Figure 7c, the rate determination step (RDS) of the whole reaction without Al doping is the beginning of the *COOH form *CO
2 fast step, and the calculated ∆G is 3.445 eV. For Al-Co
2Fe(CN)
6, the required ∆G is significantly reduced to 2.107 eV, and the required energy is significantly reduced. Therefore, the electrocatalytic activity of aluminum-doped electrocatalysts is better than that of catalysts without aluminum. When Co
2Fe(CN)
6 is doped with Al, the energy changes and the overpotential decreases. The experimental and theoretical results show that Al doping is indeed beneficial to the catalytic reaction of UOR.
By calculating the DOS (Density of states) of the catalyst, we further explain the potential reasons for the improvement of the catalyst performance. As shown in
Figure 7e and d, because the electronic state near the Fermi level is mainly provided by the d orbit of Co atoms, and the DOS of the d orbit after doping Al atoms is significant near the Fermi level. The DOS of d orbit is shifted up and closer to the Fermi level. Therefore, the electronic state is more active, which is conducive to the adsorption of catalyst and intermediate and promotes the reaction.