Strengthening P–S bonding in TiO2 for enhanced fuel cell startup/shutdown durability with an N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst†
Received
20th May 2025
, Accepted 13th July 2025
First published on 14th July 2025
Abstract
Durability is crucial in polymer electrolyte fuel cells (PEFCs). The carbon supports currently employed in cathodes are oxidized during startup/shutdown, by increasing the cathode potential up to 1.5 V, causing the supported platinum–cobalt (PtCo/C) catalysts to lose activity. Therefore, system-level measures are currently used to control the potential below 1.0 V, which increases the cost of PEFCs. A recently reported S-doped TiN-supported N, P, S-tridoped TiO2 catalyst is a promising candidate to replace currently available PtCo/C catalysts because, unlike other platinum group metal (PGM)-free catalysts, it is free from carbon supports. During the startup/shutdown cycles, the doped N3− and S2− anions substituted for O2− in the TiO2 lattice were stable, but some of the P5+ cations substituted for Ti4+ were removed from the TiO2 surface, causing activity loss. Herein, P5+ dopants are stabilized by increasing the S2− doping level, resulting in excellent startup/shutdown durability and enhanced intrinsic activity. The resulting reduction of half-wave potential after 5000 cycles between 1.0 and 1.5 V is the lowest of any reported PGM-free catalysts, at only 0.02 V. The P–S bonds formed in the TiO2 lattice were found to be responsible for the durability of P5+, which provides a new strategy to accelerate the development of low-cost PGM-free catalysts with excellent durability.
1. Introduction
In efforts to ensure energy security, hydrogen is now receiving significant attention as a potential energy carrier in support of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind, which are associated with fluctuating electricity generation.1 Polymer electrolyte fuel cells (PEFCs) are key energy conversion devices that are able to utilize hydrogen energy originating from renewable energy sources via water electrolysis. In a PEFC, the hydrogen oxidation reaction (HOR) takes place at the anode, and the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) takes place at the cathode, as expressed by eqn (1) and (2), respectively. | Anode HOR: H2 → 2H+ + 2e− | (1) |
| Cathode ORR: O2 + 4H+ + 4e− → 2H2O | (2) |
As a source of emission-free clean energy, and because they display high power density, PEFCs are considered to be the next-generation power source for light duty vehicles traveling distances over 500 km and mid/heavy duty vehicles such as buses and trucks.2–4 In the latest PEFC-powered vehicles, carbon black-supported platinum (Pt/C) catalysts and platinum–cobalt nanoparticle (PtCo/C) catalysts are used at the anode and cathode, respectively.5 However, around 20 g platinum is used in latest 128 kW-passenger vehicles,5 which is more than three-times higher than the target value for the widespread use of PEFC-powered vehicles.6 Furthermore, carbon black supports at the cathode are easily oxidized to form carbon dioxide during the startup and shutdown of the cell via a so-called reverse current decay mechanism,7 briefly described as follows. After the shutdown of PEFCs, the anode becomes contaminated with O2 molecules from air or the counter cathode as they pass through the polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) between electrodes. Next, the contaminated O2 molecules are reduced to water because the anode Pt/C catalyzes the ORR (eqn (2)). The counter cathode provides protons during startup to maintain the undesired ORR at the anode, as the in-plane proton conductivity of the catalyst layers is insufficient. As a result, either the carbon oxidation reaction expressed in eqn (3) or the oxygen evolution reaction (OER; a reverse reaction of eqn (2)) takes place at the cathode. This raises the potential up to ∼1.5 V versus the reversible hydrogen electrode (RHE).7 | C + 2H2O → CO2 + 4H+ + 4e− | (3) |
The high platinum loading and instability of PtCo/C increases the cost of PEFCs markedly, and is therefore assumed to be a key barrier for the widespread adoption of PEFCs as power sources in next-generation vehicles.8 Hence, reducing platinum loading in PtCo/C without affecting the durability of the cell remains a pivotal challenge to date. The PtCo nanoparticles supported on carbon black do not catalyze the ORR after losing the carbon black supports by the oxidation process mentioned above. Therefore, system-level measures are usually undertaken to protect them; i.e., reducing the cathode air flow rate during shutdown to minimize the number of O2 molecules crossing the PEM from the cathode to the anode, and introducing a small amount of H2 gas to the anode during PEFC off-time to react with residual O2 contaminants.9 However, these measures also increase the manufacturing/operating cost of PEFCs.
As cathodes require four-times the platinum loading than their anode counterparts due to the slower kinetics of the ORR compared with the HOR,10 many studies have focused on developing catalysts for cathodes free of platinum group metals (PGMs). Most of these studies have reported so-called M/N/C catalysts;11–21i.e., graphitic carbons (C) having a large number of defects with doped nitrogen (N) and metals (M). M/N/C catalysts are sometimes referred to as M–N–C catalysts. The M used is typically Fe,11–19 Co,19,20 or Mn.18,19,21 Although many other metals have also been investigated for use in M/N/C catalysts, the highest ORR activity is achieved with Fe/N/C.19 Nevertheless, a major drawback of M/N/C catalysts is their insufficient durability, according to experts in the automotive industries.22 Carbon species occupying a substantial volume of the M/N/C catalysts are less graphitic in nature than carbon black used in commercial PtCo/C catalysts. Therefore, carbon species in M/N/C tend to be easily oxidized.19 As a result, formation of CO2 gas from carbon species in Fe/N/C (ref. 12 and 15) and Co/N/C,20 even below 1.0 V versus RHE, has been reported in several studies.12,15,20 To suppress the carbon oxidation of M/N/C catalysts, a standardized protocol has been proposed that limits the upper potential of the cathode with M/N/C catalysts at 0.925 V,17 which is lower than the value of automotive Pt(Co)/C catalysts at 1.0 V (ref. 23) or 0.95 V.24 The equilibrium potential of eqn (3) is 0.207 V versus standard hydrogen electrode, and thus the reaction rate in eqn (3) is accelerated at high potentials. Therefore, system-level measures to maintain the cathode potential below 1.0 V, as described in the previous paragraph, are necessary to protect the M/N/C catalysts.
To avoid inclusion of system-level measures and achieve low-cost PEFCs, some research groups have focused on different types of PGM-free catalysts, such as an oxide/oxynitride catalyst containing group IV or V metals. These metals have unique chemical stability in acidic media, mimicking PEFC environments.25 The drawback of this type of catalyst is its low conductivity. To date, half-cells have been used to quickly screen new catalysts as they require (1) a much lower catalyst mass and (2) less time to evaluate the ORR activity compared with a single cell.23 The thinner catalyst layer with the smaller catalyst mass in a half-cell requires a lower catalyst conductivity than the catalyst layer in a single cell. However, the conductivity of oxide/oxynitride catalysts is so low that it makes the evaluation of the ORR activity difficult, even in a half-cell.25a To address the low conductivity issue without relying on carbon supports, we recently utilized a conductive nitride, TiN, as the support for an N-doped TiO2 catalyst.26–30 Several control experiments using different Ti precursors revealed that the ORR activity and conductivity of the catalysts originated from the TiN support, and not from the carbon residues from urea.26,31 Among various Ti precursors, titanium oxysulfate was selected after the first report26 as it is stable in air, thus simplifying the synthesis of TiN-based catalysts.27–30 Among the oxide/oxynitride catalysts reported to date, P and N co-doped TiO2 catalysts on S-doped TiN (N, P–TiO2/S–TiN) displayed the highest ORR activity in a single cell.2 The ORR activity was stable during load cycles of between 0.6 and 1.0 V versus the RHE, while it deteriorated significantly after startup/shutdown cycles between 1.0 and 1.5 V owing to the removal of surface P- and N-atoms.28 Therefore, the system-level measures used to protect carbon supports in PtCo/C catalysts are still necessary for this carbon-support-free catalyst (N, P–TiO2/S–TiN). The stabilization of the surface dopants has remained a challenge for 5 years.27–30
Recently, we reported a solution to stabilize the dopants by oxidizing the catalyst before the oxidative high potential cycles to form N, P, S-tridoped TiO2 supported on S-doped TiN, in which sulfur dopants are used from the titanium oxysulfate precursor.32 The resulting catalytic durability was the highest among the PGM-free catalysts at that time.32 Among the three dopants, anionic N- and S-atoms were stable, while some cationic P-atoms were removed from the surface after the high potential cycles between 1.0 and 1.5 V. Therefore, the stabilization of P-atoms on the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst remained a critical issue in the development of durable PGM-free catalysts until now. In this study, the P-atoms were successfully stabilized by forming a new P–S bond in the TiO2 lattice by simply adding thiourea as a new sulfur source in the precursor dispersion. Because the amount of anionic S2− on the TiO2 surface was the key to produce the ORR active anatase/rutile heterophase junctions of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN,32 we selected thiourea with S2− as the new sulfur source. The valence of sulfur atoms in titanium oxysulfate precursors is 6+. Most of the S6+ in titanium oxysulfate were reduced to S2− in the surface TiO2 during the synthesis whereas the precise control of the S2− content remained a challenge.32 The S2− content in TiO2 was successfully increased by a factor of ∼1.4 after adding an optimum amount of thiourea. The intrinsic ORR activity also increased by a factor of ∼1.4 after the thiourea addition. The S2− anions strongly bond to P5+ cations in the TiO2 lattice to exhibit excellent startup/shutdown durability.
2. Results and discussion
2.1 Catalyst synthesis and bulk crystal structure
The synthesis of the new N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalysts is schematically illustrated in Fig. 1(a) and the details are described in S1, ESI.† We first converted the titanium oxysulfate powders (used as Ti and S sources) into S–TiN particles by pyrolysis after mixing with urea, hypophosphorous acid, and thiourea, which acted as sources of N, P, and S, respectively. In this instance, we included thiourea as the source of S, which is the key difference with our previously reported N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst.32 Our previous study emphasized that increasing the substitutional S2− doping level and stabilizing P5+-dopants of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN are crucial to enhance the ORR activity and durability against startup/shutdown cycles.32 Hence, we chose thiourea as an additional S source in this study, as thiourea exhibits better stability under a humid environment and its crystal structural/thermophysical properties are not affected by the moisture content in air. Next, the S–TiN particles were annealed with NH4F under N2 gas to form N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN via a reaction between TiN and HF from NH4F.32 The changes in the crystal structure during the synthesis steps 1 and 2 are displayed in Fig. 1(b). Although some unknown peaks attributed to contaminants are observed in the as-received titanium oxysulfate powders, most of them are assigned to TiOSO4·2H2O. A single TiN phase was obtained after step 1; i.e., mixing TiOSO4·2H2O with urea, hypophosphorous acid, thiourea, and pyrolysis at 1173 K. This was then oxidized to form a mixture of anatase/rutile TiO2 phases and the remaining TiN phase after step 2; i.e., annealing S–TiN with NH4F at 1223 K. When N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalysts were synthesized without using thiourea in our previous study,32 increasing the temperature to 1223 K during step 2 led to decomposition of NH4F at ∼398 K to form NH3 and HF gases,33 after which TiN partially reacted with HF to produce TiF3 at 473–573 K.34 The trace O2 molecules contaminating the N2 gas during annealing reacted with TiF3 to produce anatase/rutile TiO2. The changes in the crystal structure during steps 1 and 2 displayed in Fig. 1(b) are similar to those of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN synthesized without using thiourea (Fig. S1, ESI†).32 This indicates that thiourea did not block the formation of anatase/rutile TiO2, which is necessary to enhance the activity of the ORR, although it did affect the number of doped S-atoms. From the energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analyses, the atomic ratio of sulfur to titanium in N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) was 0.15 ± 0.00, which is nearly double that of thiourea-free N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (0.08 ± 0.00), indicating that S-atoms from thiourea were successfully doped into the bulk N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S).
 |
| Fig. 1 Synthesis and characterization of a new N, P, S-TiO2/S-TiN (S) catalyst. (a) Synthesis scheme for N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) in two steps. Step 1 includes S-doped TiN formation via pyrolysis of a mixture of titanium oxysulfate, urea, hypophosphorous acid, and thiourea as Ti/S, N, P and new S sources, respectively, at 1173 K for 2 h. Step 2 includes annealing at 1223 K for 1 h after mixing S–TiN with ammonium fluoride. (b) X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of (bottom) the titanium oxysulfate precursor and N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) before (middle) and after (top) step 2. (c) Ultraviolet (UV)-Raman spectrum, (d) transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image, and (e) X-ray photoelectron (XP) spectra of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S). The central part of the TEM image in (d)-left is enlarged in (d)-right. | |
2.2 Surface crystal structure and chemical states
The surface crystal structures were evaluated using ultraviolet (UV) Raman spectroscopy and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). It was decided to evaluate the UV-Raman spectra of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) in this study because the ORR proceeds at the surface, and UV-Raman spectroscopy excited by a 325 nm laser offers greater surface sensitivity than XRD or conventional visible Raman spectroscopy (e.g., 532 nm excitation), due to the strong UV absorption of TiO2.35Fig. 1(c) and (d) show the UV-Raman spectrum and TEM image of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S), respectively. N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) displays peaks at ∼143, 200, 395, 517 and 633 cm−1, which are assigned to Eg, Eg, B1g, B1g and Eg vibration modes of anatase TiO2, respectively.35–37 A weak peak at ∼329 cm−1 can be assigned to the second-order phonon of anatase36 or rutile.37 The other two weak peaks at ∼260 and 445 cm−1 are assigned to the second-order phonon and Eg vibration modes of rutile, respectively.37 These results indicate that the outermost surface of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) is anatase/rutile TiO2, free from TiN. Consistent with the UV-Raman spectroscopy results, several lattice fringes from different crystal planes are observed from the TEM image shown in Fig. 1(d). Clear lattice fringes with interplanar distances of 0.35 nm, corresponding to the anatase (1 0 1) plane, are observed at two different spots and are directly connected to another plane, rutile (1 1 0), at an interplanar distance of 0.32 nm via a heterophase junction as shown by the circles. Furthermore, one of the anatase (1 0 1) spots is also connected to the rutile (1 0 1) plane with an interplanar distance of 0.24 nm to display crossed fringes, as shown by the dashed circles. These heterophase junctions were shown to be necessary to enhance both the ORR activity and startup/shutdown durability of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN synthesized without using thiourea in our previous study.32
The results from X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns, Raman spectra, and TEM imaging indicate that the bulk of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst is a mixture of TiN, anatase, and rutile TiO2 phases, whereas the outermost surface is anatase/rutile TiO2. The chemical states of the surface of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst are investigated by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), as shown in Fig. 1(e). The Ti 2p level splits into Ti 2p3/2 and 2p1/2 sublevels by spin–orbit coupling to display doublets at three different binding energies. In the Ti 2p3/2 region, the dominant peak at ∼459 eV is assigned to Ti4+ in the TiO2 lattice whereas the small shoulder at ∼457 eV is assigned to Ti4+ in N-doped TiO2 and the smallest one at ∼455 eV is Ti3+ in TiN.38,39 The area fraction of TiN peaks in the Ti 2p spectra is only 0.09 ± 0.01, indicating that the surface is mostly TiO2 phase, consistent with the results of UV-Raman analyses. The N 1s spectrum displays four peaks to exhibit four different chemical states from doped N-atoms. The most dominant peak at ∼401 eV is assigned to interstitial N-atoms in TiO2 and two shoulders at ∼399 eV and ∼397 eV are assigned to substitutional N-atoms in TiO2.40–42 The smallest peak at ∼396 eV is assigned to N-atoms in TiN.38,39 Therefore, most N-atoms on the surface were doped into the TiO2 lattice. The chemical states of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst in the Ti 2p and N 1s regions are similar to our previous N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst synthesized without using thiourea,32 although slight changes are observed in the P 2p region as shown in Fig. S2, ESI.† The asymmetric peak is deconvoluted into two peaks at ∼134 eV and ∼131 eV, of which the former is assigned to P5+ (which is substituted for Ti4+ in the TiO2 lattice43) and the latter is assigned to P–S bonding in some compounds, S-doped black phosphorous–TiO2 composite,44 and PxSy.45 Thus, the 131 eV peak is assigned to a bonding between cationic phosphorus and anionic sulfur atoms in N, P, S-tridoped TiO2. In the S 2p region, two peaks at ∼164 eV and ∼166 eV are the S 2p3/2 and 2p1/2 sublevels, respectively, of S2− substituted for O-atoms in the TiO2 lattice.46,47 Two smaller peaks at ∼168 eV and ∼170 eV are the S 2p3/2 and 2p1/2 levels, respectively, of S4+ substituted for Ti-atoms in TiO2.46,47 The binding energy of the anionic sulfur species doped into TiN is less than the value depicted in Fig. 1(e), approximately 163 eV,48 indicating their absence. No clear changes in the Ti 2p peak positions have been observed for TiO2 doped with S2− and S4+,46 unlike the case of N-doped TiO2. These results indicate that anionic N, S-atoms are substituted for O-atoms and cationic P, S-atoms are substituted for Ti-atoms in surface TiO2. The chemical states on the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) developed in this study are similar to those of the previous N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN synthesized without using thiourea,32 although a slight change in the P 2p region is observed with the appearance of P–S bonding, which is critical for the durability of the phosphorus dopant, as shown in the next section. Although the chemical states of the doped sulfur species are almost the same in the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalysts synthesized with and without thiourea (Fig. S2, ESI†), the amount of sulfur was different. Because the amount of S2− is critical to startup/shutdown durability,32 the atomic ratio of S2−/Ti was evaluated from the Ti 2p and S 2p spectra as 0.62 ± 0.03 and 0.46 ± 0.03 for N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) and N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN, respectively. Thus, thiourea successfully acted as a source of S2− which was substituted for O-atoms on the TiO2 surface. The F 1s spectrum shown in Fig. 1(e) is noisy, indicating that F-atoms from NH4F were absent on the surface.
2.3 Startup/shutdown durability
The amount of thiourea was optimized to maximize the ORR activity and selectivity by maximizing the number of anatase/rutile heterophase junctions (Fig. S3, ESI†). The maximized activity was observed at a half-wave potential (E1/2) of 0.72 V versus the RHE, which is the potential at which half of the limiting current is obtained. This represents the highest value ever reported for oxide/oxynitride catalysts (Fig. S4, ESI†). Next, the startup/shutdown durability was evaluated using a protocol proposed by the Fuel Cell Commercialization Conference of Japan (FCCJ), in which the potential was cycled between 1.0 and 1.5 V versus RHE.23Fig. 2(a) shows the rotating disk electrode (RDE) voltammograms of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) and previous N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst synthesized without using thiourea before and after 5000 startup/shutdown cycles.32 The decrease in E1/2 during the 5000 cycles was successfully suppressed to only 0.02 V. It should be noted that the durability of most non-PGM catalysts has been evaluated at potentials below 1.0 V in acidic media. Moreover, startup/shutdown durability has rarely been investigated, largely due to the harsh oxidative conditions that degrade activity when carbon supports are utilized. The few available startup/shutdown durability test results for non-PGM catalysts are compared in Table 1. State-of-the-art Fe/N/C catalysts display significant E1/2 losses, and often fail to reach limiting current plateaus. The startup/shutdown durability of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) is the highest among the non-PGM catalysts reported to date. After the 5000 cycles, the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst displays (1) a slightly higher ORR activity than the previous thiourea-free N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst and (2) an increased current density at potentials below 0.6 V, relative to its initial performance. To clarify the source of the enhanced durability, UV-Raman spectroscopy and XPS analyses were performed on the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst after the 5000 cycles, as shown in Fig. 2(b) and (c). The stability of the surface crystal structure of the PGM-free catalysts after startup/shutdown cycles has never been reported, and we evaluated it using UV-Raman spectroscopy. After 5000 cycles, the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst contains a Nafion ionomer in the catalyst layer, which reduced the signal-to-noise ratio; as a result, quantitative analyses are not possible. Nevertheless, the Raman spectrum remained unchanged during the 5000 cycles, as shown in Fig. 2(b). Thus, the surface TiO2 phase displays excellent stability during cycling. The bulk crystal structure was also stable, as shown in Fig. S5, ESI.† Furthermore, no Ti 2p, N 1s, P 2p and low binding energy regions in the S 2p spectra originating from the anionic S2− dopants changed significantly, as shown in Fig. 2(c). After 5000 cycles, the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst showed a stronger peak in the high binding energy region above 166 eV, primarily due to the sulfonate group of Nafion. The stability of S4+ dopants is thus not evaluated, as the contributions of the sulfonate group of Nafion and the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst cannot be separated. In our previous study reporting the startup/shutdown durability of the thiourea-free N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalysts, all Ti 2p, N 1s and S2− species in the S 2p spectra were stable enough not to lose their initial chemical state during the 5000 cycles.32 In contrast, the P 2p spectra changed significantly through the loss of a number of P5+ dopants, mandating further efforts to enhance startup/shutdown durability.32 Removal of P5+ during the startup/shutdown cycles has also been a source of degradation in other S-free N, P–TiO2/S–TiN catalysts.27,28 In contrast, we have shown the P5+-dopants in N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) to be highly stable during startup/shutdown cycles. XP spectra were acquired at three different locations, and the average atomic ratios along with their standard deviations were calculated. The calculated atomic ratios of P to Ti (RP/Ti), before and after the 5000 cycles, are shown in Fig. 2(d). Because these two regions are not affected by Nafion, the changes in RP/Ti during the 5000 cycles arise solely from the changes on the catalyst surface. The thiourea-free N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst lost approximately one-quarter of its initial RP/Ti during the 5000 cycles, while N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) showed no reduction in RP/Ti. These results clearly demonstrate that the incorporation of an optimum amount of thiourea into the precursor dispersion enhances the startup/shutdown durability of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst, primarily by stabilizing the P5+-dopants. As reported in sections 2.1 and 2.2, EDS and XPS analyses revealed that both the bulk sulfur content and surface S2− doping level were higher in N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) than those in N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN, largely due to the presence of sulfur atoms from thiourea used for N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S). A portion of the S2− species was found to bond with cationic phosphorus, forming P–S bonds. Song et al. reported that oxidation of phosphorus was significantly suppressed by forming P–S bonding to produce a stable sulfur-doped black phosphorus–TiO2 composite in sodium ion battery anodes.44 Similarly, our results suggest that P5+ dopants in the TiO2 lattice of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) were stabilized by P–S bonding to increase resistance against oxidation at high potentials, as illustrated in Fig. 2(e). The results shown in Fig. 2(b–d) demonstrate the excellent stability of surface TiO2. Bulk TiN also displayed stability, as evidenced by the lack of change in the XRD pattern during the ORR (Fig. S5, ESI†). Consistent with these results, the amount of titanium dissolved in the electrolyte solution from the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst after 5000 startup/shutdown cycles was beneath the threshold detectable with an inductively coupled plasma (ICP) spectrometer.
 |
| Fig. 2 Startup/shutdown durability of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst and the source of the durability. (a) Rotating disk electrode (RDE) voltammograms of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) before (solid curve) and after (dashed curve) 5000 potential cycles between 1.0 and 1.5 V vs. RHE at 0.5 V s−1 in 0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4 solution. Curves for the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst before (dash-dotted curve) and after (dash double dotted curve) 5000 potential cycles are also shown for reference with permission.32 Copyright 2024, Royal Society of Chemistry. (b) UV-Raman spectra and (c) XP spectra of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) before (solid curves) and after (dashed curves) 5000 potential cycles between 1.0 and 1.5 V vs. RHE at 0.5 V s−1 in 0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4 solution. The N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) after 5000 cycles contains a Nafion ionomer used in the catalyst layer. (d) Atomic ratios of phosphorus to titanium (RP/Ti) versus the cycle number (N) curves of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) and N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN calculated from their XP spectra. (e) Schematic image of the durable active sites on N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S). RHE = reversible hydrogen electrode. | |
Table 1 Startup/shutdown durability of PGM-free catalysts in acidic media
Catalyst |
Electrolyte |
Accelerated degradation test (ADT) |
Source |
Protocol |
Cycle number |
ΔE1/2a |
Limiting current plateau after ADT |
E
1/2 difference before and after the ADT cycles, E1/2 (initial) − E1/2 (after ADT cycles).
The scan rate was not described. ADT = accelerated degradation test. |
N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S)
|
0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4
|
1.0–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1
|
5000
|
0.02 V
|
Present
|
This work
|
N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN |
0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1 |
5000 |
0.02 V |
Present |
32
|
N, P–TiO2/S–TiN |
0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1 |
5000 |
0.08 V |
Absent |
28
|
N–Ti0.8Zr0.2O2/S–TiN |
0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1 |
5000 |
0.04 V |
Absent |
29
|
Fe/N/C |
0.5 mol dm−3 H2SO4 |
1.0–1.5 Vb |
5000 |
0.042 V |
Present |
18
|
Fe/N/C |
0.1 mol dm−3 HClO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.1 V s−1 |
5000 |
0.07 V |
Absent |
19
|
Fe/N/C |
0.1 mol dm−3 HClO4 |
1.2–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1 |
5000 |
0.099 V |
Absent |
12
|
Fe/N/C |
0.1 mol dm−3 HClO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.1 V s−1 |
6200 |
0.27 V |
Absent |
13
|
Fe/N/C |
0.5 mol dm−3 H2SO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1 |
5000 |
0.035 V |
Present |
16
|
Fe/N/C |
0.5 mol dm−3 H2SO4 |
1.0–1.5 V at 0.5 V s−1 |
1110 |
0.040 V |
N/A |
14
|
It is also noted that replacing urea with thiourea significantly decreased the ORR activity (Fig. S6, ESI†); thus, urea is shown to be an indispensable nitrogen source. The combined use of urea and thiourea was found to enhance startup/shutdown stability by increasing the S2− doping level, which facilitates the formation of stable P–S bonds. The higher S2− doping level of N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) is the source of the higher intrinsic ORR activity when compared with N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (Fig. S7, ESI†). When the surface is free from S2−, the ORR activity decreases significantly and all the surface N, P, and S atoms and the bulk conductive TiN phase are necessary for this catalyst (Fig. S8, ESI†). Our next area of research will focus on increasing the S2− doping level and the number of P–S bonds in the TiO2 lattice, which will further enhance the intrinsic activity and durability of this type of catalyst.
Conclusions
In conclusion, to stabilize P5+ dopants on the recently developed N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst, thiourea was added to the precursor dispersion as a new sulfur source. After optimizing the thiourea content, both the bulk and surface sulfur concentrations increased, accompanied by the emergence of unique surface chemical states. The key findings of the study can be summarized as follows:
• The majority of surface sulfur was S2−, which substituted for O2− in the TiO2 lattice. The amount of S2− was increased to enhance the intrinsic ORR activity of the N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst by using thiourea. Furthermore, the S2− strongly bonded to P5+, which substituted for Ti4+ in TiO2, successfully stabilizing the P5+ dopant during startup/shutdown cycles.
• In the previously reported N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN catalyst synthesized without thiourea, some P5+ dopants were removed during 5000 1.0–1.5 V cycles in 0.1 mol dm−3 H2SO4. However, no loss of P5+ from the TiO2 lattice was found in the current N, P, S–TiO2/S–TiN (S) catalyst synthesized in the presence of thiourea. This catalyst exhibits the highest durability reported to date for PGM-free catalysts.
• The P–S bonds formed in TiO2 were stable against repeated startup/shutdown cycles, providing a potential new strategy for the stabilization of cations in TiO2 catalysts for use in fuel cells.
Data availability
Data discussing the results of this article are available as a part of the main text, and data supporting this article have been included as a part of the ESI.†
Author contributions
Mitsuharu Chisaka: conceptualization, investigation, data curation, formal analyses, writing – original draft, writing – review & editing, and funding acquisition. Jubair A. Shamim: investigation, validation, and writing – review & editing. Hirofumi Daiguji: investigation, validation, and writing – review & editing.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts to declare.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge Yusei Tsushima at Hirosaki University, Yuichi Kitagawa at Horiba Techno Service Co., and Daisuke Kadohama at Public Nuisance & Medical Research Institute for acquiring TEM images–ED spectra, Raman spectra and ICP spectra, respectively. This work was partially supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research, Grant Number JP23K26042, JP23H01347 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) in Japan. Some XP spectra were acquired at the University of Tokyo with the support by the Advanced Research Infrastructure for Materials and Nanotechnology in Japan (ARIM) of the MEXT, Proposal Number JPMXP1223UT0203.
Notes and references
- J. L. Liu, J. Fu, S. S. Wong and S. Bashir, Energy Fuels, 2023, 37, 3315 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chisaka, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2024, 12, 18636 RSC.
- O. Gröger, H. A. Gasteiger and J. P. Suchsland, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2015, 162, A2605 CrossRef.
- D. A. Cullen, K. C. Neyerlin, R. K. Ahluwalia, R. Mukundan, K. L. More, R. L. Borup, A. Z. Weber, D. J. Myers and A. Kusoglu, Nat. Energy, 2021, 6, 462 CrossRef CAS.
-
T. Nakamichi, Nikkei Electronics, 2022, vol. 6, p. 73 Search PubMed.
- A. Kongkanand and M. F. Mathias, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 2016, 7, 1127 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- C. A. Reiser, L. Bregoli, T. W. Patterson, J. S. Yi, J. D. Yang, M. L. Perry and T. D. Jarvi, Electrochem. Solid-State Lett., 2005, 8, A273 CrossRef CAS.
- M. M. Whiston, I. L. Azevedo, S. Litster, K. S. Whitefoot, C. Samaras and J. F. Whitacre, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2019, 116, 4899 CrossRef CAS.
- U. Eberle, B. Müller and R. von Helmolt, Energy Environ. Sci., 2012, 5, 8780 RSC.
- A. Kongkanand and M. F. Mathias, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 2016, 7, 1127 CrossRef CAS.
- E. Proietti, F. Jaouen, M. Lefèvre, N. Larouche, J. Tian, J. Herranz and J. P. Dodelet, Nat. Commun., 2011, 2, 416 CrossRef PubMed.
- C. H. Choi, C. Baldizzone, J. P. Grote, A. K. Schuppert, F. Jaouen and K. J. J. Mayrhofer, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2015, 54, 12753 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- K. Strickland, E. Miner, Q. Jia, U. Tylus, N. Ramaswamy, W. Liang, M. T. Sougrati, F. Jaouen and S. Mukerjee, Nat. Commun., 2015, 6, 7343 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- A. Muthukrishnan, Y. Nabae, T. Hayakawa, T. Okajima and T. Ohsaka, Catal. Sci. Technol., 2015, 5, 475 RSC.
- Y. Shao, J. P. Dodelet, G. Wu and P. Zelenay, Adv. Mater., 2019, 31, 1807615 CrossRef PubMed.
- X. Zhao, X. Yang, M. Wang, S. Hwang, S. Karakalos, M. Chen, Z. Qiao, L. Wang, B. Liu, Q. Ma, D. A. Cullen, D. Su, H. Yang, H. Y. Zang, Z. Feng and G. Wu, Appl. Catal., B, 2020, 279, 119400 CrossRef CAS.
- H. Zhang, L. Osmieri, J. H. Park, H. T. Chung, D. A. Cullen, K. C. Neyerlin, D. J. Myers and P. Zelenay, Nat. Catal., 2022, 5, 455 CrossRef CAS.
- J. Zhu, Z. Fang, X. Yang, M. Chen, Z. Chen, F. Qiu, M. Wang, P. Liu, Q. Xu, X. Zhuang and G. Wu, ACS Catal., 2022, 12, 6409 CrossRef CAS.
- A. Ly, E. Murphy, H. Wang, Y. Huang, G. Ferro, S. Guo, T. Asset, Y. Liu, I. V. Zenyuk and P. Atanassov, EES Catal., 2024, 2, 624 RSC.
- X. Xie, C. He, B. Li, Y. He, D. A. Cullen, E. C. Wegener, A. J. Kropf, U. Martinez, Y. Cheng, M. H. Engelhard, M. E. Bowden, M. Song, T. Lemmon, X. S. Li, Z. Nie, J. Liu, D. J. Myers, P. Zelenay, G. Wang, G. Wu, V. Ramani and Y. Shao, Nat. Catal., 2020, 3, 1044 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chen, X. Li, F. Yang, B. Li, T. Stracensky, S. Karakalos, S. Mukerjee, Q. Jia, D. Su, G. Wang, G. Wu and H. Xu, ACS Catal., 2020, 10, 10523 CrossRef CAS.
- K. Kodama, T. Nagai, A. Kuwaki, R. Jinnouchi and Y. Morimoto, Nat. Nanotechnol., 2021, 16, 140 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- A. Ohma, K. Shinohara, A. Iiyama, T. Yoshida and A. Daimaru, ECS Trans., 2011, 41, 775 CrossRef CAS.
- U.S. Department of Energy and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Office, Fuel Cell Technologies Office Multi-year Research, Development, and Demonstration Plan, updated in 2016, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/10/f33/fcto_myrdd_fuel_cells.pdf, last accessed on Jan. 9, 2025.
-
(a)
M. Chisaka, in Electrocatalysts for Low Temperature Fuel Cells: Fundamentals and Recent Trends, ed. T. Maiyalagan and V. S. Saji, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany, 2017, ch. 14 Search PubMed;
(b) A. Ishihara, S. Tominaka, S. Mitsushima, H. Imai, O. Sugino and K. Ota, Curr. Opin. Electrochem., 2020, 21, 234 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chisaka, Y. Yamamoto, N. Itagaki and Y. Hattori, ACS Appl. Energy Mater., 2018, 1, 211 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chisaka and H. Morioka, Catal. Sci. Technol., 2019, 9, 611 RSC.
- M. Chisaka, R. Xiang, S. Maruyama and H. Daiguji, ACS Appl. Energy Mater., 2020, 3, 9866 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chisaka, R. Xiang, S. Maruyama and H. Daiguji, Energy Fuels, 2022, 36, 539 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chisaka, T. Abe, R. Xiang, S. Maruyama and H. Daiguji, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2022, 24, 29328 RSC.
- M. Chisaka, Y. Ando, Y. Yamamoto and N. Itagaki, Electrochim. Acta, 2016, 214, 165 CrossRef CAS.
- M. Chisaka, J. A. Shamim, W. L. Hsu and H. Daiguji, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2024, 12, 11277 RSC.
- J. S. Sanghera, P. Hart, M. G. Sachon, K. J. Ewing and I. Aggarwal, J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 1990, 73, 1339 CrossRef CAS.
- Y. Lee, C. Huffman and S. M. George, Chem. Mater., 2016, 28, 7657 CrossRef CAS.
- J. Zhang, M. Li, Z. Feng, J. Chen and C. Li, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2006, 110, 927 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- R. J. Capwell, F. Spagnolo and M. A. DeSesa, Appl. Spectrosc., 1972, 26, 537 CrossRef CAS.
- R. J. Capwell, F. Spagnolo and M. A. DeSesa, J. Solid State Chem., 1982, 42, 276 CrossRef.
- K. S. Robinson and P. M. A. Sherwood, Surf. Interface Anal., 1984, 6, 261 CrossRef CAS.
- N. C. Saha and H. G. Tompkins, J. Appl. Phys., 1992, 72, 3072 CrossRef CAS.
- C. D. Valentin, G. Pcchioni, A. Selloni, S. Livraghi and E. Giamello, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2005, 109, 11414 CrossRef PubMed.
- J. Wang, W. Zhu, Y. Zhang and S. Liu, J. Phys. Chem. C, 2007, 111, 1010 CrossRef CAS.
- G. Wang, Z. Jiang, H. Shi, T. Xiao and Z. Yan, J. Mater. Chem., 2010, 20, 5301 RSC.
- S. P. Madhusudanan, B. Gangaja, A. G. Shyla, A. S. Nair, S. V. Nair and D. Santhanagopalan, ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., 2017, 5, 2393 CrossRef CAS.
- T. Song, H. Chen, Z. Li, Q. Xu, H. Liu, Y. Wang and Y. Xia, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2019, 29, 1900535 CrossRef.
- T. K. Paul and D. N. Bose, J. Appl. Phys., 1991, 70, 7387 CrossRef CAS.
- J. Ni, S. Fu, C. Wu, J. Maier, Y. Yu and L. Li, Adv. Mater., 2016, 28, 2259 CrossRef CAS.
- W. Jiao, N. Li, L. Wang, F. Li, G. Liu and H. M. Cheng, Chem. Commun., 2013, 49, 3461 RSC.
- C. Li, J. Shi, L. Zhu, Y. Zhao, J. Lu and L. Xu, Nano Res., 2018, 11, 4302 CrossRef CAS.
Footnote |
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: Experimental details, XRD patterns, XP spectra, and R(R)DE voltammograms. See DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d5cy00601e |
|
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2025 |
Click here to see how this site uses Cookies. View our privacy policy here.