Abstract
Cascade reaction strategies integrating electrochemistry with chemical transformations offer routes for the synthesis of value‐added chemicals. However, the efficiencies of such integrated processes get compromised due to competitive electrochemical reactions and incompatibility between electrochemical and chemical transformations. We report an integrated electrochemical–chemical coupling of anodic H2O2 generation with ammoximation for oxime synthesis. An FTO/Sb2WO6 anode was designed and optimized to anodically produce H2O2 with a maximum Faradaic efficiency (FE) of 87%. H2O2 from the anode oxidizes NH3 to NH2OH, which subsequently reacts with cyclohexanone to yield cyclohexanone oxime with 99% selectivity and a maximum electron efficiency (EE) of 81%. Continuous and adjustable H2O2 input ensures synchronization with the ammonia oxidation reaction while minimizing over‐oxidation of the reaction intermediates. Operando scanning electrochemical microscopy (SECM) revealed local pH shifts caused by the proton‐coupled electron transfer and its effect on the FE of H2O2 synthesis and competing NH3 oxidation, providing mechanistic insights for optimizing the reaction microenvironment. By regulating the electrolyte composition to modulate the interfacial pH, side reactions were suppressed and H2O2 generation was promoted, thereby enhancing cascade selectivity. This work highlights local pH regulation as a tool to improve reaction compatibility and efficiency in cascade electrosynthesis.
Keywords: Ammonia oxidation, Anodic hydrogen peroxide, Hydroxylamine, Local pH, Oxime
This work integrates anodic H2O2 generation with ammoximation for efficient oxime synthesis. By regulating the local pH through electrolyte engineering, the system achieves 81% electron efficiency (EE) and 98% H2O2 utilization, offering a generalizable strategy for cascade electrochemical–chemical processes.

Introduction
The synthesis of valuable precursors for important chemicals often involves complex reaction sequences.[ 1 , 2 ] In general, achieving the activation of multiple reactants and the formation of new chemical bonds in a single step remains challenging. Cascade reactions, which enable sequential chemical bond transformations toward final products, offer an intensified approach for synthesizing numerous precursors, particularly valuable ring molecules.[ 3 , 4 , 5 ] These reactions can be achieved via spatial integration of active sites on a heterogeneous catalyst or by temporal coupling of electrochemical steps with chemical reactions in the bulk solution.[ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ] Integrating electrocatalysis with subsequent chemical conversions, or vice versa, has emerged as a promising route for synthesizing chemical commodities that are difficult to access via single‐step electrocatalysis or that rely heavily on stringent catalyst design or noble metals. For example, direct electrochemical oxidation of ethylene to ethylene oxide suffers from uncontrolled over‐oxidation and by‐product formation. Leow et al. addressed this by using Cl2 generated at the anode as a diffusional redox mediator, leading to hypochloride mediated partial oxidation with an overall Faradaic efficiency (FE) of ∼70%.[ 10 ] Similarly, direct electrochemical generation of propylene oxide (PO) from propylene suffers from poor FE and dependence on Pd/Pt‐based catalysts.[ 11 ] Chi et al. developed a cascade method involving electrolysis for bromine generation followed by chemical conversion of propylene to PO with an FE as high as 91%.[ 12 ]
Cyclohexanone oxime is a crucial intermediate for producing caprolactam, a key monomer for nylon‐6 production. The global market for nylon‐6 is projected to reach USD 26040 million by 2032, expanding at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.9%. Conventionally, cyclohexanone oxime is synthesized via the reaction of cyclohexanone with costly hydroxylamine sulfate under harsh conditions using explosive H2 and a noble metal catalyst at high temperatures, raising safety and cost concerns (Scheme 1a).[ 13 ] Alternatively, hydroxylamine (NH2OH), the essential intermediate for cyclohexanone ammoximation, can be generated either by electrochemical reduction of NOx species (NO, NO2 −, and NO3 −)[ 5 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ] or by oxidation of NH3 by means of H2O2.[ 18 ] The NOx reduction route (Scheme 1d) suffers from poor selectivity due to over‐reduction of NH2OH to NH3.[ 15 , 19 ] In contrast, oxidizing NH3 with the green oxidant H2O2 holds high potential for highly selective production of NH2OH (Scheme 1b,c).[ 7 , 18 ] Lewis et al. have demonstrated in situ H2O2 generation from H2 and O2 over titanium silicalite‐1 (TS‐1) supported Au‐Pd nanoparticles for cyclohexanone ammoximation (Scheme 1b).[ 7 ]
Scheme 1.

Strategies for cyclohexanone oxime synthesis by integrating thermocatalysis/electrocatalysis with chemical reactions. a) Cyclohexanone‐hydroxylamine method using hydroxylamine sulfate. b) Cyclohexanone ammoximation by in situ generated H2O2 from H2 and O2. c) Cyclohexanone ammoximation by in situ generated H2O2 from electrochemical O2 reduction. d) Electrosynthesis of NH2OH by NOx reduction. e) Proposed anodic H2O2 generation and the integration with cyclohexanone ammoximation.
Anodic H2O2 generation offers a safe, green alternative that can be seamlessly integrated with ammoximation. In this approach, H2O2 produced at the anode oxidizes NH3 to NH2OH on TS‐1, which subsequently reacts with cyclohexanone to yield cyclohexanone oxime. The advantage lies in avoiding gaseous reactant handling, explosive oxidants, and toxic chemicals. Additionally, in situ H2O2 generation ensures a continuous and tunable H2O2 supply to match the ammonia oxidation rate while minimizing the over‐oxidation of the intermediate, NH2OH.
Nevertheless, integrating anodic H2O2 generation with the ammoximation reaction leads to unforeseen complications. On the one hand, the competitive oxygen evolution reaction (OER), shown in Equation (1) below, and the oxidation of NH3/NH4 + (Equations (2), (3), (4)) are thermodynamically more favorable than anodic H2O2 formation, which can limit the overall efficiency for H2O2/NH2OH generation. On the other hand, the compatibilities of the catalysts involved in cascade reactions and their respective reaction conditions are critical requirements for high overall efficiency of the integrated process. (Please refer to Equation 2, ref[ 20 ]; Equation 3 and 4, ref[ 21 ] for further details)
| (1) |
| (2) |
| (3) |
| (4) |
| (5) |
Here, we report an integrated strategy for anodic H2O2 generation‐assisted cyclohexanone ammoximation, achieving ∼99% selectivity for cyclohexanone oxime and an overall electron efficiency (EE) of 81%. The FTO‐supported Sb2WO6 film was developed and optimized as the anode, providing a maximum FE of 87% for H2O2 generation in a KHCO3/K2CO3 mixture, while exhibiting low selectivity toward the oxidation of NH3/NH4 +. The incompatibility between highly efficient H2O2 formation at the anode and subsequent ammoximation presents a key challenge in integrating these reactions into a cascade. This was addressed by electrolyte engineering guided by operando scanning electrochemical microscopy (SECM). SECM‐based local pH investigations revealed the H2O2 generation mechanism and were used to optimize the H2O2 generation rate. Moreover, oxidation of NH3/NH4 + was effectively suppressed by tuning the anolyte pH, the buffer capacity, and the NH4 + concentration. Furthermore, this strategy enabled efficient ammoximation of various ketones beyond cyclohexanone, demonstrating broad substrate applicability and providing a scalable platform for integrated green synthesis. This method avoids the high H2O2 concentration, transportation, and storage but still relies on H2 and expensive noble metals. This highlights the need for safer and more cost‐effective alternatives.
Results and Discussion
Anode Material Characterizations
Sb2WO6 crystallizes in a layered Aurivillius‐type structure, consisting of perovskite‐like [WO4]2− sheets alternately stacked with [Sb2O2]2+ layers. In this framework, W centers are tetrahedrally coordinated, and the [WO4]2− layers in Sb2WO6 are reported to induce a more distorted lattice compared to other members of Aurivillius oxides.[ 22 ] This suggests the presence of more unsaturated surface sites favorable for interfacial catalytic reactions. The basis for choosing Sb2WO6 can be found in the Experimental Section in the Supporting Information. The X‐ray diffraction (XRD) pattern of the catalyst film matches well with the reference pattern of Sb2WO6 (PDF#47–1680) (Figure 1a),[ 22 ] confirming the successful synthesis of phase‐pure Sb2WO6 grown on FTO via a hydrothermal method. The SEM image (Figure 1b) reveals a clustered columnar morphology of the film. Energy‐dispersive X‐ray (EDX) mapping of the front side of the anode film confirms the homogeneous distribution of the W, Sb, and O (Figure 1c). Cross‐sectional SEM images clearly distinguish the catalyst layer and the underlying FTO substrate. The thickness of the Sb2WO6 layer is approximately 340 nm (Figure 1d). High‐resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM) images (Figure 1e) show two sets of lattice fringes with inter‐planar spacing of 0.332 and 0.298 nm, which can be indexed to the (11) and (1) facets of Sb2WO6, respectively. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was employed to analyze the valence states of the freshly prepared anode and the anode after performance evaluation (Figure 1f). The high‐resolution Sb 3d spectrum of the fresh sample can be deconvoluted into two main peaks at 539.8 and 530.5 eV, with a spin‐orbit splitting of 9.3 eV, corresponding to Sb3+ 3d 3/2 and Sb3+ 3d 5/2, respectively.[ 23 , 24 ] After electrolysis, the Sb 3d spectrum exhibits a negligible change in the Sb oxidation state. The additional peak at 532.7 eV in the O 1s region is attributed to adsorbed bicarbonate anions on the anode surface. The high‐resolution W 4f spectra (Figure S1) of both samples show the presence of mixed W5+ and W6+ valence states, with a W6+/W5+ ratio of approximately 6:4 in both cases, indicating that the valence state of W remains stable under electrolysis at high potentials. The stability of Sb2WO6 at harsh oxidation conditions was further evaluated by quantifying the concentration of leached metal(s) in the anolyte. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP‐MS) analysis revealed that after 3 h of electrolysis at 2.83 V versus RHE, the concentration of leached Sb and W in the anolyte was at trace levels (around 300 ppb), indicating a good stability of the catalyst under operational conditions.
Figure 1.

Catalyst characterization: a) The XRD pattern of the prepared FTO‐supported Sb2WO6 film (FTO/Sb2WO6). b) SEM images of the Sb2WO6 film. c) EDX images showing the distribution of Sb, W, and O on FTO. d) EDX images showing the distribution of Si, Sn, and W at the cross‐section of FTO/Sb2WO6. e) High‐resolution TEM image of Sb2WO6 scraped from FTO/Sb2WO6. f) High‐resolution XPS spectra of the Sb 3d region before and after electrolysis.
Anodic H2O2 Generation Performance
The pH influences multiple steps involved in cyclohexanone oxime production, including the H2O2 production rate, ammonia speciation, NH2OH reactivity, and ammoximation kinetics. To systematically investigate the pH effect, we first examined the H2O2 generation performance at FTO/Sb2WO6 anode. Previous studies have demonstrated that the anolyte composition critically influences the FE of anodic H2O2 generation,[ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ] and the H2O2 formation may proceed through various reaction pathways, and intermediates, including hydroxyl radical, HCO3 −, or CO3 2−‐mediated mechanisms.[ 25 , 30 , 31 , 32 ] To eliminate the influence of competitive ammonia oxidation, we used KHCO3/K2CO3 mixtures as anolytes to elucidate the interplay between anolyte components and H2O2 generation efficiency at FTO/Sb2WO6 anode. The H2O2 generation performance of FTO/Sb2WO6 was evaluated in electrolytes containing the same total concentration of HCO3 −/CO3 2− but at different pH values (Figure 2a–c). For comparison, the performance of bare FTO was also assessed as a reference. The results show that the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode consistently exhibited higher H2O2 FE than bare FTO in all tested anolytes, demonstrating the intrinsic high selectivity of the Sb2WO6 film toward H2O2 formation. Specifically, in 2.0 M KHCO3, the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode achieved an H2O2 FE of 40%–50% within the potential range of 2.50 to 2.90 V versus RHE. In a mixture of KHCO3/K2CO3 with a pH of 10 (Figure 2b), the anode exhibits even higher H2O2 FE, exceeding 60% over a broad potential range (2.65 to 3.10 V versus RHE). Switching to a pure K2CO3 anolyte (Figure 2c) did not result in a further increase in H2O2 FE. Instead, a steady increase was observed, with FE rising from 30% at 2.60 V to 60% at 2.92 V versus RHE. These results clearly demonstrate that carbonate‐based electrolytes at pH 10 promote H2O2 generation at FTO/Sb2WO6 anode.
Figure 2.

H2O2 FE of FTO/Sb2WO6 anode and local distribution of carbonate species. a)–c) Comparison of H2O2 FE of FTO and FTO/Sb2WO6 anodes in different anolytes. The FE toward H2O2 generation of FTO/Sb2WO6 anodes and operando changes in the equilibrium mole fractions of HCO3 −/CO3 2− anions as a function of substrate potential (E sub) in d) 2.0 M KHCO3, e) a mixture of 2.0 M KHCO3 and 2.0 M K2CO3 with a pH value of 10, and f) 2.0 M K2CO3. The total concentration of carbonate‐based species for the three solutions is 2.0 M. g)–i) The H2O2 FE as a function of current density in carbonate‐based solution at pH 10 with different buffer capacity.
Investigation of Local pH Variations During H2O2 Generation
It is expected that the intrinsic layered structure of Sb2WO6, through its distinct surface terminations, along with the electrolyte composition and the turnover frequency of the electrochemical reactions, collectively regulate the local pH. In our experiments, we used the same catalyst to investigate the effects of electrolyte composition and applied potential on H2O2 selectivity. Therefore, the influence of the catalyst structure is not supposed to interfere with the absolute changes in local pH. During H2O2 generation, the oxidation of H2O, OH−, or HCO3 −/CO3 2− species at the anode surface releases protons, resulting in a shift in the acid–base equilibrium in the anode microenvironment. Consequently, the distribution of anionic species in the vicinity of an operating anode deviates from that in the bulk anolyte. Operando local pH investigation provides critical insights into identifying the dominant species at the reaction interface under conditions favoring H2O2 formation at the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode and elucidating the associated reaction pathways. To this end, operando local pH measurements were performed using an Au microelectrode positioned in close proximity to an operating FTO/Sb2WO6 anode in carbonate‐buffered solutions of different pH values (for further details, see Experimental Section, Supporting Information). The local pH variation as a function of applied anode potentials, i.e., substrate potentials (E sub), was systematically studied in three anolytes.
As shown in Figure S2, a distinct anodic shift in the reduction peak potential of the Au tip (E(Au‐OxRed)) was observed for all cases as the anode potential was stepped from 1.5 to 3.0 V versus RHE, indicating progressive acidification within the anode microenvironment (for detailed descriptions, see Note S1). The decrease in local pH leads to the protonation of CO3 2− and HCO3 −, forming HCO3 − and H2CO3, respectively, in accordance with the second (pK a = 10.3) and first (pK a = 6.3) dissociation constants of carbonic acid.
The molar fraction variations of carbonate species as a function of E sub were calculated based on the local pH measurements. For each anolyte, the interfacial molar fractions of HCO3 − and CO3 2− were correlated with the H2O2 FE at varying E sub, as shown in Figure 2d–f. In 2.0 M KHCO3 solution (Figure 2d), the local molar fraction of HCO3 − starts decreasing at 2.83 V versus RHE, while the fraction of CO3 2− remains consistently low. Notably, the H2O2 FE reaches a maximum at 2.8 V versus RHE, after which it follows the decline trend of interfacial HCO3 − concentration, confirming a strong correlation between H2O2 FE and the availability of HCO3 − species at the anode surface as previously discussed.[ 32 ] In a carbonate‐buffered anolyte at pH 10 (Figure 2e), the molar fraction of HCO3 − increases, while CO3 2− decreases over the potential range from 2.0 to 3.2 V versus RHE, indicating the progressive transformation of CO3 2− to HCO3 − at the reaction interface. Correspondingly, the H2O2 FE exhibits an increasing trend, rising from 58% at 2.65 V to 76% at 3.0 V versus RHE. In 2.0 M K2CO3 solution (Figure 2f), distinct changes in the molar fractions of HCO3 − and CO3 2− were observed, again reflecting the transformation of CO3 2− to HCO3 − at the interface. Correspondingly, the H2O2 FE increases, confirming the key role of HCO3 − in promoting H2O2 formation. The H2O2 FE at FTO/Sb2WO6 strongly depends on local HCO3 − concentration rather than CO3 2−. Therefore, it is proposed that H2O2 formation on FTO/Sb2WO6 proceeds via a HCO3 −‐mediated reaction pathway, in which HCO3 − is first oxidized to HCO4 −, followed by its hydrolysis to yield H2O2.[ 27 ]
Based on the findings shown in Figure 2d–f, maintaining a high molar fraction of HCO3 − at the anode surface is critical for facilitating anodic H2O2 formation. To further improve H2O2 FE over a wide potential window, a pH 10 carbonate electrolyte was selected, and its buffer capacity was increased to mitigate the rapid depletion of local HCO3 − anions during electrolysis. As shown in Figure 2g–i, the H2O2 FE at the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode in pH 10 anolytes with varying carbonate concentrations was plotted against the current densities. It is found that increasing the total carbonate concentration from 2.0 M (Figure 2g) to 2.4 M (Figure 2i) leads to a significant enhancement in H2O2 FE. Further increasing the total carbonate concentration to 2.95 M (comprising 1.37 M HCO3 − and 1.58 M CO3 2−) results in an additional improvement, achieving H2O2 FE of more than 80% over a current density range of 20 to 45 mA cm−2.
Exploring NH2OH Production via NH3 Oxidation by H2O2
To evaluate hydroxylamine (NH2OH) production through NH3 oxidation using anodically in situ generated H2O2, NH4HCO3 was chosen to replace KHCO3 and serve as the nitrogen source. Cyclohexanone oxime formation was investigated in a custom‐designed H‐type cell (Figure S3) filled with an anolyte containing 10 mM cyclohexanone, first in the absence of the catalyst TS‐1 in four different anolytes containing varying NH3/NH4 + concentrations and different HCO3 −/CO3 2− molar ratios (the exact cation and anion concentrations for anolytes 1–4 are listed in Table S1). Linear sweep voltammetry (LSV) recorded with and without cyclohexanone shows negligible differences, indicating that cyclohexanone is unlikely to undergo direct oxidation at the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode (Figure S4). After electrolysis for 60 min, the anolyte was analyzed by 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (1H NMR). The NMR spectra (Figure S5) exhibited no detectable signals corresponding to cyclohexanone oxime, indicating that the critical intermediate, NH2OH, was not generated in the four anolyte conditions. These findings suggest that neither direct NH3 oxidation at the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode nor the presence of H2O2 alone is sufficient for the generation of NH2OH and cyclohexanone oxime.
In subsequent experiments, TS‐1 was introduced into the anolyte to catalyze NH3 oxidation to NH2OH using anodically generated H2O2. As shown in Figure 3a, after electrolysis at 2.78 V versus RHE for 60 min, the oxime yield reaches 54% in anolyte 1 and 75% in anolyte 2, indicating that increasing the pH from 8.3 to 9.6 results in a 21% increase in oxime yield. Notably, the yield reaches 100% when the total HCO3 −/CO3 2− concentration is increased from 2.0 M (anolytes 1 and 2) to above 3.3 M (anolytes 3 and 4). This improvement is attributed to the increased H2O2 generation rate in anolyte with higher buffer capacity, as discussed in Figure 2. Next, the selectivity of the oxidation reactions occurring at the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode was investigated (Figure 3b). The H2O2 FE reaches 31%, 41%, 67%, and 73% at 2.78 V versus RHE in anolytes 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The missing FE is mainly due to the OER and the competing NH3/NH4 + oxidation, with the latter not only lowering the H2O2 selectivity but also reducing the availability of NH3 for the ammoximation reaction.
Figure 3.

Cyclohexanone oxime synthesis in the anodic H2O2 system. a) Yield of cyclohexanone oxime after 60 min electrolysis at 2.78 V versus RHE in anolyte 1 to 4. The composition details of the electrolytes can be found in Table S1. b) FE and H2O2 generation rate of FTO/Sb2WO6 anodes at 2.78 V versus RHE in anolytes 1, 2, 3, and 4. c) FE of NO2 − and NO3 − at the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode at 2.78 V versus RHE in anolytes 3 and 4. d) Current density‐dependent cyclohexanone oxime yield and selectivity. e) 1H NMR of cyclohexanone oxime standard and the anolyte before and after electrolysis. f) Current density‐dependent cyclohexanone oxime yield rate in anolyte 4 using FTO/Sb2WO6 as the anode. g) The molar ratio of HCO3 −/CO3 2−/H2CO3 and NH3/NH4 + as a function of pH. h) Local pH changes as a function of anode potential in anolyte 4. i) The local concentrations of HCO3 − and NH3 as a function of the anode potential.
Investigation of Ammonia Oxidation at the Anode
To further investigate direct ammonia oxidation at the anode, the FE for ammonia oxidation was examined using anolytes 3 and 4, as they exhibited a high FE of H2O2. As previously reported, NH3 tends to be oxidized to NO, NO2 −, or NO3 − on transition metal‐based catalysts at high overpotentials.[ 33 ] The amount of formed NO2 − and NO3 − was quantified by means of ion chromatography. After electrolysis at 2.78 V versus RHE, no NO3 − was detected in any of the anolytes (Figure 3c). When the NH3/NH4 + concentration decreases from 1.0 M (in anolyte 3) to 0.56 M (anolyte 4), the FE for NO2 − correspondingly decreases from 15% to 4.5%. The relatively low FE for NO2 − across the anolytes indicates that FTO/Sb2WO6 exhibits low activity toward NH3/NH4 + oxidation. The pH of the anolyte primarily governs the speciation of ammonia. NH4 + is generally considered electrochemically inert,[ 34 ] whereas NH3 with the lone‐pair electrons is more readily adsorbed onto the catalyst surface at more alkaline conditions, thereby facilitating the NH3 oxidation reaction.
Based on these results, anolyte 4 was selected for subsequent studies on cyclohexanone oxime formation. After 60 min of electrolysis (Figure 3d), the oxime yield reaches 6%, 15%, and 53% at current densities of 1.4, 4.5, and 9.9 mA cm−2, respectively. Further increasing the current density leads to a complete conversion, achieving 100% oxime yield. As evidenced by the 1H NMR spectra, cyclohexanone oxime was identified as the sole product in the reaction system (Figures 3e and S6), demonstrating 100% product selectivity. Subsequently, the yield rate of cyclohexanone oxime was quantified (Figure 3f), and interestingly, a strong correlation was observed between the cyclohexanone oxime yield (Figure 3f) and the H2O2 generation rate (Figure S7), suggesting that the H2O2 production is the rate‐determining step in the overall oxime formation process.
Operando Investigation of Local Anolyte Composition and its Impact on Anode Reactions
Changes in the local anolyte composition can significantly affect the H2O2 FE of FTO/Sb2WO6 anode, as revealed in Figure 2. Meanwhile, direct NH3 oxidation is highly pH‐sensitive. Therefore, operando monitoring of the local anolyte composition is essential for understanding the competitive reactions occurring at the anode. As shown in Figure 3g, the speciation of NH3/NH4 + and HCO3 −/CO3 2− is highly pH‐dependent, indicating that their concentrations dynamically change during electrolysis. To evaluate these variations, operando measurements of local pH in the vicinity of FTO/Sb2WO6 anode were conducted in anolyte 4 (details provided in Figure S8). As the anode potential stepped to higher potentials, the increasing oxidation current caused a more pronounced pH decrease (Figure 3h), with a shift in local pH from 10.6 at 2.2 V to 8.2 at 2.85 V versus RHE. Correspondingly, the local concentrations of NH3 and HCO3 − were calculated, as shown in Figure 3i. It reveals that the local concentration of HCO3 − reaches its maximum near 2.85 V versus RHE, while the NH3 concentration decreases to less than 0.05 M. In parallel, the H2O2 FE reaches its maximum, attributed to the high interfacial coverage of HCO3 − and the conversion of NH3 to NH4 +. The increasing acidification of the anode microenvironment suppresses NH3 oxidation since NH4 + cannot be directly oxidized.[ 35 ] At neutral and acidic conditions, the hydration shell of NH4 + hinders its adsorption onto the catalyst surface, thereby reducing catalytic activity. Additionally, NH4 + oxidation requires prior deprotonation, which introduces an additional kinetic barrier, resulting in sluggish kinetics. Furthermore, the lower FE for NO2 − observed in anolyte 4 compared to anolyte 3 could be ascribed to the low local concentration of NH3.[ 36 ] These findings collectively indicate that the inhibition of NH3 oxidation and the promotion of H2O2 generation can be achieved simultaneously through interfacial pH regulation, governed by bulk pH, NH4 + concentration, and buffer capacity of the anolyte.
Efficiency Analysis of H2O2 Utilization for NH2OH Formation and Cyclohexanone Ammoximation
Furthermore, the atom utilization efficiency of H2O2 for NH2OH formation was evaluated. The critical intermediate NH2OH was detected and quantified by its oxidation at an Au microelectrode owing to the high electrocatalytic activity of Au toward NH2OH oxidation.[ 37 , 38 ] Details of the calibration procedure are provided in Figures S9 and S10; Note S2. Next, the Au tip was dipped in anolyte 4. As shown in Figure 4a, the NH2OH concentration increases linearly as a function of electrolysis time. Meanwhile, the H2O2 concentration was also quantified (Figure 4b). Note that for H2O2 quantification, the analysis was performed in the absence of the TS‐1 catalyst. The H2O2 utilization efficiency for NH2OH formation reaches approximately 98% in the presence of TS‐1, indicating the excellent compatibility between anodic H2O2 generation and the subsequent oxidation of NH3 to NH2OH. The non‐catalytic reaction between NH2OH and cyclohexanone was investigated by monitoring the remaining NH2OH concentration in the presence of cyclohexanone by means of the Au tip response.
Figure 4.

Overall EE and the applicability of the integrated system. a) Concentration of NH2OH in anolyte 4 as a function of electrolysis time. The inset shows the CVs recorded at the Au tip, indicating the increasing amount of NH2OH with electrolysis time. b) H2O2 concentration in anolyte 4 and the utilization efficiency of H2O2 for NH2OH formation. c) Time‐dependent NH2OH concentration in anolyte 4 in the absence or presence of 10 mM cyclohexanone. (a–c) FTO/Sb2WO6 anode polarized at 2.78 V versus RHE. d) EE for cyclohexanone oxime synthesis at different current densities. e) Schematic diagram for the coupled anodic H2O2 generation at the anode surface and the ammoximation reaction in the bulk solution. f) Synthesis of various ketone oximes through the anodic H2O2‐coupled cascade ammoximation.
As shown in Figures S11 and 4c, NH2OH undergoes slow self‐decomposition in anolyte 4, with a 10% loss after 60 min at room temperature. In contrast, the addition of cyclohexanone led to rapid NH2OH consumption, indicating the high reactivity of NH2OH with cyclohexanone under the studied conditions. Kinetic analysis of the reaction between cyclohexanone and NH2OH revealed first‐order kinetics with respect to NH2OH concentration (Figure S12). This finding is consistent with the generally accepted reaction mechanism, wherein NH2OH acts as the nucleophile and attacks the electrophilic carbonyl carbon of cyclohexanone to form a transient intermediate, followed by dehydration to yield the corresponding oxime. Under the used conditions, the nucleophilic addition step is presumed to be the rate‐determining step, suggesting that the reaction rate is governed by the NH2OH concentration, which is ultimately determined by the H2O2 generation rate in the presence of a non‐limiting NH3 supply. The integrated system achieves a maximum EE of 81% for cyclohexanone oxime formation at 28 mA cm−2 current density, as shown in Figure 4d (details of the calculation are provided in the Supporting Information). This high EE is primarily attributed to the optimized electrolyte and the local acidification near the anode, which collectively suppress the OER and NH3 oxidation while simultaneously enhancing both formation and utilization of H2O2. The pH gradient across the diffusion layer was also investigated using the SECM‐positioned Au tip. Without forced convection, the diffusion layer thickness in anolyte 4 was derived to be about 3 mm (Figure S13), likely due to the high buffer capacity. The pH gradient across the diffusion layer from the anode surface to the bulk solution is shown in Figure S13, reflecting the concentration gradients of NH3 and HCO3 −/CO3 2− species. We propose that the integrated system operates through spatial coupling of H2O2 generation at the anode surface, the oxidation of NH3 to NH2OH predominantly within the diffusion layer, and the subsequent ammoximation in the bulk solution. The high H2O2 utilization efficiency within the diffusion layer, where the pH remains in the optimal range of 9–10, is critical to the overall EE. Otherwise, at pH values exceeding 10, both H2O2 and NH2OH are susceptible to decomposition, reducing overall efficiency.[ 26 ]
Next, the durability of the FTO/Sb2WO6 anode was examined by performing consecutive cycling tests for the conversion of cyclohexanone to cyclohexanone oxime. As shown in Figure S14, the oxime yield remains above 90% throughout 10 consecutive cycles, confirming substantial stability of the Sb2WO6 film under operating conditions. The surface morphology and the LSV curves of the anode after the above cycles were examined. No obvious morphological changes were found compared to the as‐prepared Sb2WO6 film (Figures S15 and 1b), and the LSV curves (Figure S16) show only a slight decrease in the current density of the spent FTO/Sb2WO6 anode compared to the fresh one. To further assess the applicability of the H2O2 generation‐assisted ammoximation strategy, a variety of other substrates, including cyclooctanone, cyclopentanone, benzaldehyde, hydroxymethylfurfural, and pyruvic acid, was individually added to the anolyte. Remarkably, all the ketones and aldehydes were efficiently converted to their corresponding oximes with high yield (88%–100%) and excellent selectivity (>98%), as summarized in Figures 4f and S17.
Conclusions
We have developed an integrated electrochemical–chemical strategy coupling anodic in situ H2O2 generation with TS‐1 catalyzed NH2OH formation, enabling direct ammoximation of cyclohexanone under mild conditions. An FTO/Sb2WO6 anode was developed and optimized, achieving a selectivity for H2O2 production as high as 87%. Operando SECM investigations revealed that regulating the NH4 + concentration, anolyte pH, and buffer capacity effectively suppresses the competing NH3 oxidation while enhancing H2O2 selectivity via microenvironment control. Guided by these insights, cyclohexanone oxime was produced with up to 100% yield and selectivity and a maximum EE of 81%. The system exhibits durability over ten consecutive cycles and broad applicability to various ketones and aldehydes, as confirmed by transforming various ketones and aldehydes into their corresponding oximes with high yields (88%–100%). This work not only provides new insights into the rational coupling of anodic H2O2 generation with fine chemical synthesis but also highlights the critical role of local pH regulation in maximizing cascade reaction efficiency by promoting target transformations and suppressing side reactions.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Supporting information
Supporting Information
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge financial support from the Bundesministerium für Forschung, Technology und Raumfahrt (BMFTR) in the framework of the project “DERIEL” [03HY122H] and from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) in the framework of the Research Unit 2982 [413163866] and the CRC 1625 [506711657], subproject C01. The design and 3D printing of measuring cells by Dr. Thomas Quast was instrumental for the success.
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Dedicated to Prof. Alexander Kuhn, University of Bordeaux, on the occasion of his 60th birthday
Li L., Zhang J., Santana Santos C., Zerdoumi R., Seisel S., Chandra S., Schuhmann W., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2025, 64, e202515867. 10.1002/anie.202515867
Contributor Information
Dr. Shubhadeep Chandra, Email: shubhadeep.chandra@rub.de.
Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schuhmann, Email: wolfgang.schuhmann@rub.de.
Data Availability Statement
All data associated with this article are available from the authors with reasonable request.
References
- 1. Mokaya R., Poliakoff M., Nature 2005, 437, 1243–1244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Wang Y., Zhao H., Catalysts 2016, 6, 194. [Google Scholar]
- 3. Grondal C., Jeanty M., Enders D., Nat. Chem. 2010, 2, 167–178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Nicolaou K. C., Edmonds D. J., Bulger P. G., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 7134–7186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Kong X., Ni J., Song Z., Yang Z., Zheng J., Xu Z., Qin L., Li H., Geng Z., Zeng J., Nat. Sustain. 2024, 7, 652–660. [Google Scholar]
- 6. Zhang J., He W., Quast T., Junqueira J. R. C., Saddeler S., Schulz S., Schuhmann W., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2023, 62, e202214830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Lewis R. J., Ueura K., Liu X., Fukuta Y., Davies T. E., Morgan D. J., Chen L., Qi J., Singleton J., Edwards J. K., Freakley S. J., Kiely C. J., Yamamoto Y., Hutchings G. J., Science 2022, 376, 615–620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Wu J., Xu L., Kong Z., Gu K., Lu Y., Wu X., Zou Y., Wang S., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2023, 62, e202311196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Li M., Wu Y., Zhao B.‐H., Cheng C., Zhao J., Liu C., Zhang B., Nat. Catal. 2023, 6, 906–915. [Google Scholar]
- 10. Leow W. R.u, Lum Y., Ozden A., Wang Y., Nam D.‐H., Chen B., Wicks J., Zhuang T.‐T., Li F., Sinton D., Sargent E. H., Science 2020, 368, 1228–1233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Iguchi S., Kataoka M., Hoshino R., Yamanaka I., Catal. Sci. Technol. 2022, 12, 469–473. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Chi M., Ke J., Liu Y., Wei M., Li H., Zhao J., Zhou Y., Gu Z., Geng Z., Zeng J., Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 3646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Dahlhoff G., Niederer J. P. M., Hoelderich W. F., Catal. Rev. 2001, 43, 381–441. [Google Scholar]
- 14. Kim D. H., Ringe S., Kim H., Kim S., Kim B., Bae G., Oh H. S., Jaouen F., Kim W., Kim H., Choi C. H., Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 1856. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Wu Y., Zhao J., Wang C., Li T., Zhao B. H., Song Z., Liu C., Zhang B., Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 3057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Luo L., Li L., Xu L., Yan Y., Zhang S., Zhou H., Li Z., Shao M., Duan X., CCS Chem. 2025, 7, 266–278. [Google Scholar]
- 17. Zhao R., Wang Y., Fu J., Zhang F., Wen L., Zhao Y., Guan B., Han B., Liu Z., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2024, 146, 27956–27963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Yuan Y., Chen L., Wan Z., Shi K., Teng X., Xu H., Wu P., Shi J., Sci. Adv. 2024, 10, eado1755. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Lan X., Cheng C., Guo C., Guo M., Li T., Wu Y., Yu Y., Zhang B., Sci. China Chem. 2023, 66, 1758–1762. [Google Scholar]
- 20. Choi J., Suryanto B. H. R., Wang D., Du H. L., Hodgetts R. Y., Ferrero Vallana F. M., MacFarlane D. R., Simonov A. N., Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 5546. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Moon Y. H., Kim N. Y., Kim S. M., Jang Y. J., Catalysts 2022, 12, 1015. [Google Scholar]
- 22. Ramirez A., Enjalbert R., Rojo J. M., Castro A., J. Solid State Chem. 1997, 128, 30–37. [Google Scholar]
- 23. Shiel H., Hobson T. D. C., Hutter O. S., Phillips L. J., Smiles M. J., Jones L. A. H., Featherstone T. J., Swallow J. E. N., Thakur P. K., Lee T.‐L., Major J. D., Durose K., Veal T. D., J. Appl. Phys. 2021, 129, 235301. [Google Scholar]
- 24. Karikalan N., Elavarasan M., Yang T. C. K., Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 64, 105012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Mavrikis S., Göltz M., Rosiwal S., Wang L., Ponce De León C., ChemSusChem 2022, 15, e202102137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Pangotra D., Csepei L.‐I., Roth A., Ponce de León C., Sieber V., Vieira L., Appl. Catal. B 2022, 303, 120848. [Google Scholar]
- 27. Li L., Hu Z., Kang Y., Cao S., Xu L., Yu L., Zhang L., Yu J. C., Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 1890. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Mavrikis S., Göltz M., Perry S. C., Bogdan F., Leung P. K., Rosiwal S., Wang L., Ponce de León C., ACS Energy Lett. 2021, 6, 2369–2377. [Google Scholar]
- 29. Pangotra D., Roth A., Sieber V., Vieira L., ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 2680–2685. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Zhu H., Lv X., Wu Y., Wang W., Wu Y., Yan S., Chen Y., Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 8846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Wang R., Luo H., Duan C., Liu H., Sun M., Zhou Q., Ou Z., Lu Y., Luo G., Yu J. C., Hu Z., Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 10456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Li L., Antony R. P., Santos C. S., Limani N., Dieckhöfer S., Schuhmann W., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2024, 63, e202406543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Jang J. H., Park S. Y., Youn D. H., Jang Y. J., Catalysts 2023, 13, 803. [Google Scholar]
- 34. Kapałka A., Fierro S., Frontistis Z., Katsaounis A., Neodo S., Frey O., de Rooij N., Udert K. M., Comninellis C., Electrochim. Acta 2011, 56, 1361–1365. [Google Scholar]
- 35. Zöllig H., Morgenroth E., Udert K. M., Electrochim. Acta 2015, 165, 348–355. [Google Scholar]
- 36. Liu H.‐Y., Lant H. M. C., Decavoli C., Crabtree R. H., Brudvig G. W., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2025, 147, 1624–1630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Li J., Lin X., Sens. Actuators, B 2007, 126, 527–535. [Google Scholar]
- 38. Kannan P., John S. A., Anal. Chim. Acta 2010, 663, 158–164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supporting Information
Data Availability Statement
All data associated with this article are available from the authors with reasonable request.
