Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials
In reading the ever expanding literature on electrocatalysts, we have become startled by the weakness of the electrochemistry often presented, which in some (many?) cases entirely negates the value of the work. In particular, we have been stimulated to consider the topic of this article by an Editor...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2019
|
| _version_ | 1797099542716350464 |
|---|---|
| author | Li, D Batchelor-Mcauley, C Compton, RG |
| author_facet | Li, D Batchelor-Mcauley, C Compton, RG |
| author_sort | Li, D |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | In reading the ever expanding literature on electrocatalysts, we have become startled by the weakness of the electrochemistry often presented, which in some (many?) cases entirely negates the value of the work. In particular, we have been stimulated to consider the topic of this article by an Editorial (D. Voiry et al., 2018) in ACS Nano which recently provided ‘guidance’ on the ‘best practices’ for the measuring and reporting the activity of new electrocatalytic materials. From an electrochemical perspective, at least, contrasting views need to be presented since the suggestions provided are, in places, at odds with conventional wisdom or, more bluntly stated, simply wrong! In the following we do not seek to provide an alternative set of ‘best practice guidelines’ nor a ‘set of materials characterisation requisites’ – this is likely ultimately an appropriate activity for an IUPAC committee – but rather correct, amplify and develop the discussion provided by the editors of ACS Nano highlighting areas where we believe additional input is desirable and helpful. We focus on six topics that relate to recommendations made. In each section we start by making a brief statement that we believe is correct but different to that made by D. Voiry et al. This statement is then followed by a more in depth discussion and exploration of the issue at hand. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:25:15Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:e051e015-6760-4e47-a26c-af1a4e1cd107 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:25:15Z |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:e051e015-6760-4e47-a26c-af1a4e1cd1072022-03-27T09:46:24ZSome thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterialsJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:e051e015-6760-4e47-a26c-af1a4e1cd107EnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordElsevier2019Li, DBatchelor-Mcauley, CCompton, RGIn reading the ever expanding literature on electrocatalysts, we have become startled by the weakness of the electrochemistry often presented, which in some (many?) cases entirely negates the value of the work. In particular, we have been stimulated to consider the topic of this article by an Editorial (D. Voiry et al., 2018) in ACS Nano which recently provided ‘guidance’ on the ‘best practices’ for the measuring and reporting the activity of new electrocatalytic materials. From an electrochemical perspective, at least, contrasting views need to be presented since the suggestions provided are, in places, at odds with conventional wisdom or, more bluntly stated, simply wrong! In the following we do not seek to provide an alternative set of ‘best practice guidelines’ nor a ‘set of materials characterisation requisites’ – this is likely ultimately an appropriate activity for an IUPAC committee – but rather correct, amplify and develop the discussion provided by the editors of ACS Nano highlighting areas where we believe additional input is desirable and helpful. We focus on six topics that relate to recommendations made. In each section we start by making a brief statement that we believe is correct but different to that made by D. Voiry et al. This statement is then followed by a more in depth discussion and exploration of the issue at hand. |
| spellingShingle | Li, D Batchelor-Mcauley, C Compton, RG Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| title | Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| title_full | Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| title_fullStr | Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| title_full_unstemmed | Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| title_short | Some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| title_sort | some thoughts about reporting the electrocatalytic performance of nanomaterials |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lid somethoughtsaboutreportingtheelectrocatalyticperformanceofnanomaterials AT batchelormcauleyc somethoughtsaboutreportingtheelectrocatalyticperformanceofnanomaterials AT comptonrg somethoughtsaboutreportingtheelectrocatalyticperformanceofnanomaterials |