Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2026 Jul 8;65(37):e2945600. doi: 10.1002/anie.2945600

Editable Hydrogen Bond Network Within the Electric Double Layer for CO2 Reduction

Jiahao Yang 1,2, Shiju Yu 3, Jiapeng Jiao 4, Shiqiang Liu 1, Meng Zhou 1,2, Yiyong Wang 1,2, Wenling Zhao 1,2, Yaoyu Yin 1,2, Hengan Wang 1,2, Shipeng Zhang 1,2, Zhongnan Ling 1, Huisheng Qin 1,2, Ke Li 1,2, Xueqing Xing 3, Qinggong Zhu 1,2, Yi Xu 1,2, Xiaofu Sun 1,2, Xinchen Kang 1,2,✉, Buxing Han 1,2,✉
PMCID: PMC13549047  PMID: 42417369

ABSTRACT

The hydrogen bond network (HBN) of water is dynamic and highly sensitive to electrified interfaces, where its rigidity can be significantly altered. Tuning this property is crucial, as it directly impacts electrocatalytic performance and is a key requirement for scaling these processes industrially. In this study, the rigidity of the HBN within the electrical double layer (EDL) during electrolysis was edited by introducing different quaternary ammonium cations to a 1 M KHCO3 buffer solution. CO2 electroreduction was conducted using the different electrolytes, and the results reveal that the performance is highly dependent on the rigidity of the HBN within the EDL. A HBN with high rigidity favors CO production, whereas a HBN with low rigidity increases the formation of formate and H2. Notably, the production of C2+ is maximized in an electrolyte where the HBN has moderate rigidity. By tuning the rigidity of the HBN, a Faradaic efficiency of 90.9% for C2+ products is achieved with a current density of 0.81 A cm−2 over a typical Cu electrode. In situ spectroscopic and electrochemical measurements reveal that the rigidity of the HBN governs the configuration of the reaction intermediates and the kinetics of water dissociation, thereby dictating the final product distribution.

Keywords: CO2RR, electrolyte, hydrogen bond network, interfacial water, reaction mechanism

We demonstrate that the HBN rigidity within the EDL is editable, and that this interfacial HBN rigidity governs the CO2RR pathway by modulating intermediate configurations and proton availability.

graphic file with name ANIE-65-e2945600-g002.webp

1. Introduction

The hydrogen bond network (HBN) of water, a dynamic three‐dimensional web in which each molecule can connect with up to four neighbors, is strongly perturbed by the intense interfacial electric fields within the electric double layer (EDL) during electrolysis [1, 2, 3, 4]. These fields polarize the water molecules, thereby creating a structurally and dynamically heterogeneous environment that can significantly affect electrochemical reactions [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. For example, the HBN has a significant effect on the CO2 reduction reaction (CO2RR), as the multiple proton‐coupled electron transfer (PCET) steps are highly dependent on the local hydrogen bond environment [10, 11, 12]. The HBN affects the CO2RR in two key ways. First, oxygen‐containing intermediates are integrated into the HBN of EDL, which competes with their adsorption on the electrode surface. Second, the rigidity of the network can affect the surface migration of intermediates, thereby directing the subsequent coupling or PCET steps.

The presence of cations significantly increases the complexity of the interfacial HBN by changing the local electrostatic potential, polarizing adjacent water molecules, and forcing their reorientation, which affects the hydrogen bond strength and geometry [13, 14, 15, 16]. Organic cations can participate directly in the network by forming new hydrogen bonds with water molecules, effectively reconstructing the network at the electrode surface [17, 18, 19]. Strategic selection of cations to modify the HBN offers a promising route to control the adsorption states of key intermediates in CO2RR. Therefore, the rational design of organic cations offers a powerful method to probe the relationship between the rigidity of the HBN and intermediate adsorption states, providing a fundamental principle for guiding selective CO2RR.

During the CO2RR, the accumulation of OH− near the electrode surface forms a highly alkaline local microenvironment [20, 21], which can affect the catalytic performance and mask the effects of the HBN. The use of a KHCO3‐buffered electrolyte, where a high concentration of HCO3 − stabilizes the pH and CO2 concentration [22, 23], can effectively isolate the influence of the HBN during CO2RR. Within this controlled system, we demonstrate that the interfacial HBN can be edited by introducing different quaternary ammonium cations. These structural modifications induce pronounced differences in CO2RR activity and product distribution. Subsequent in situ spectroscopic and electrochemical analyses confirm that the cations alter HBN rigidity, which directly governs reaction pathways by stabilizing key intermediates and dictating water dissociation kinetics, thus rationalizing the observed catalytic behavior.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Configuration of Quaternary Ammonium Cations on the Electrode Surface

Quaternary ammonium salts, organic cations featuring trimethyl‐substituted cationic headgroups, have a wide electrochemical window and are highly soluble in water. Their structures can be designed to allow the addition of different functional groups, which can control the HBN of water. In this study, we prepared five electrolytes by adding 50 mM of quaternary ammonium salts with different alkyl tails (Figure 1a) to a 1 M KHCO3 aqueous solution. The electrolytes containing tetramethylammonium, carbamylcholine, bethanechol, butyltrimethylammonium, and benzyltrimethylammonium cations are henceforth denoted as electrolyte (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5), respectively.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Configurations of quaternary ammonium cations in the EDL. (a) Molecular structure of quaternary ammonium cations used in this work: 1, tetramethylammonium; 2, carbamylcholine; 3, bethanechol; 4, butyltrimethylammonium; 5, benzylrimethylammonium. The anion in these quaternary ammonium salts is Cl−. (b) In situ ATR‐SEIRA spectra of (4) over Cu NPs. (c–d) Bode plots in (4) (c) and 1 M KHCO3 (d) over Cu NPs. (e) Schematic illustration of the interfacial arrangement of butyltrimethylammonium cations under a negative potential.

Cu nanoparticles (NPs) electrode was used as the cathode in this study. The Cu NPs were characterized using x‐ray diffraction (XRD), x‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), which indicate that they exhibit a dominant Cu (111) crystal plane, a Cu (0) valence state, and an average particle size of ∼20 nm (Figures S1–S4). Electrolyte (4) was selected as a model system to investigate the EDL structure under an applied potential because the methylene and methyl groups in the alkyl tail of the butyltrimethylammonium cation serve as ideal probes for tracking the structural evolution of the EDL (Figure S5 and Table S1) [24, 25, 26].

The EDL structure was first investigated at various potentials using in situ attenuated total reflection surface‐enhanced infrared absorption (ATR‐SEIRA) spectroscopy (Figure S6). A peak corresponding to C─H vibrational modes is observed at 2800–3000 cm−1, and the C─H stretching vibrations of the cationic headgroup occur at a higher wavenumber than those of the alkyl tail [24, 25, 26]. At the open‐circuit potential (OCP), the spectra are dominated by the C─H stretching signal of the alkyl tail (Figure 1b). However, when negative potentials are applied, a signal corresponding to C─H stretching of the headgroup emerges and the tail signal weakens (Figure 1b). This spectral shift corresponds to the conformational reorientation of the molecule from a tail‐contact configuration to a head‐contact configuration relative to the electrode surface [24, 25, 26].

The EDL structure was investigated further by analyzing the Bode plots obtained via electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) (Figure 1c,d). In electrolyte (4), the maximum phase angle (Øpeak) shifts from 63.5° to 36.6° as the potential changes from –0.2 to –1.0 V versus RHE (Figure 1d). This change is much more pronounced than that observed in 1 M KHCO3 (Figure 1c). This indicates a potential‐induced conformational rearrangement of the quaternary ammonium cation (Figure 1e) [24], which is consistent with the ATR‐SEIRA spectral data.

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations were performed without and with an applied potential. Representative snapshots of the simulated system before and after applying the operating potential are shown in Figures S7, S8. The simulations reveal that the positively charged headgroups of the quaternary ammonium cations preferentially accumulate near the electrode surface, whereas the hydrophobic tails are oriented away from it. This is consistent with the orientation observed in the ATR‐SEIRA spectra and Bode plots (Figure 1b–d).

2.2. Editable HBN

The addition of quaternary ammonium salts does not affect the distribution of K+ in the EDL. This is confirmed by K+ retention experiments, which show a consistent K+ concentration at the electrode surface under a negative potential (Figure S9). In addition to K+, the EDL is predominantly composed of water molecules. The properties of the EDL are the main factors that determine the degree of hydrogen bonding among the interfacial water molecules. The radial distribution function (RDF) between the Cu atoms on the cathode surface and the O atoms of the interfacial water molecules was used to compare the local structural features of the interfacial water in the different electrolytes under the applied potential (Figure 2a). The first solvation peak of Cu⋯O appears at ∼3.338 Å, and the peak intensity decreases progressively from systems (1) to (5). The coordination numbers (CNs) of Cu⋯O in systems (1) to (5) are 0.706, 0.545, 0.533, 0.501, and 0.491 (Figure 2a), respectively. The monotonic decrease in the CN indicates that the number of interfacial water molecules decreases, suggesting a gradual reduction in the interfacial water concentration from systems (1) to (5).

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

Water configuration in the EDL in different electrolytes. (a) Plot of radial distribution function g (r) and CN of H2O versus distance between water and the cathode surface. (b) MSD of H2O. (c) In situ ATR‐SEIRA spectra at −1.7 V versus RHE over Cu NPs. (d) The population of different types of interfacial water. (e) In situ Raman spectra at −1.7 V versus RHE (dotted line) and OCP (solid line) using CA (10 mM) as a probe. (f) The ratio of the CA peak area at −1.7 V versus RHE to that at OCP.

The mean square displacement (MSD) over 1000 ps is analyzed, and the diffusion coefficients of systems (1) to (5) are determined to be 0.152, 0.348, 0.351, 0.364, and 0.381 Å ps−1, respectively (Figure 2b). Water diffusivity is governed mainly by the rigidity of the HBN, and a rigid network significantly restricts water activity [11, 27, 28]. These results indicate that the substituents on the quaternary ammonium cations can modulate the characteristics of the interfacial water, resulting in a gradual decrease in the interfacial water concentration and a reduction in the rigidity of the HBN from system (1) to (5).

The OH stretching region (3000–3800 cm−1) in the ATR‐SEIRA spectra is deconvoluted using Gaussian fitting, and three distinct types of interfacial water are identified: strongly hydrogen‐bonded water (4H‐H2O), weakly hydrogen‐bonded water (2H‐H2O), and “free” or nonhydrogen‐bonded water (Free‐H2O) [10, 11, 12, 13]. The relative distribution of each species indicates the rigidity of the interfacial HBN, with a higher proportion of strongly hydrogen‐bonded water suggesting a more rigid and continuous HBN [7, 8, 11, 15]. At all the applied potentials, the population of strongly hydrogen‐bonded water decreases from system (1) to (5) (Figure 2c,d), indicating a reduction in the rigidity of the interfacial HBN.

The rigidity of the interfacial HBN was further investigated by in situ Raman spectroscopy using 4‐cyanobenzoate (CA), whose cyano group exhibits strong Raman activity, as a probe (Figure 2e) [29]. A rigid EDL often hinders the diffusion of molecules to the interface, leading to weaker spectral signals [27]. The ratio of the CA peak area at −1.7 V versus RHE to that at the OCP increases from system (1) to (5) (Figure 2f). This indicates that the diffusion of CA into the EDL increases, implying that the rigidity of the HBN decreases progressively.

These results indicate that the structure of the HBN can be modified by quaternary ammonium cations because their functional groups interact differently with water. The introduction of tetramethylammonium, whose methyl groups interact minimally with water, has the least effect on the rigidity of the HBN. By contrast, the hydrophobic benzyl substituent of benzyltrimethylammonium significantly disrupts the long‐range water structure, leading to the HBN with the lowest overall rigidity.

2.3. CO2RR Performance

The pH, conductivity, and contact angle on the surfaces of the Cu NPs are similar for all five electrolytes (Figures S10–S12). Thus, the rigidity of the HBN is the main distinguishing property. The rigidity of the HBN decreases progressively from system (1) to (5). The effect of the rigidity of the HBN on the catalytic performance is investigated via controlled potential electrolysis over the Cu NPs electrode in a flow cell using each of the electrolytes (Figures S13–S17). Since C2+ products are more readily generated at more negative potentials [30, 31], and the large size of quaternary ammonium cations requires such potentials to fully utilize their effect, the CO2RR was conducted at –1.3 to –1.8 V versus RHE. The total current density exhibits a volcano‐shaped trend across electrolytes (1) to (5), peaking in electrolyte (3), indicating electrolyte (3) has the highest CO2RR reactivity (Figure 3a). However, the product distributions vary substantially among the electrolytes. From electrolyte (1) to (5), the Faradaic efficiencies (FE) of H2 and formate increase progressively (Figure 3b,c and S13–S17), whereas the FECO gradually decreases (Figure 3d and Figures S13–S17). The FEC2+ shows a nonmonotonic trend, first increasing and then decreasing, and achieving the highest value in electrolyte (3) (Figure 3e). For example, at –1.7 V versus RHE, a FEC2+ of 71.7% with a current density of 1.01 A cm−2 is achieved in electrolyte (3), and significantly outperforms the other electrolytes. These results suggest that the rigidity of the interfacial HBN significantly affects the CO2RR performance.

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Open in a new tab

CO2RR performance in different electrolytes. (a) Plot of current density versus potential over Cu NPs. (b) Plot of FEH2 vs potential over Cu NPs. (c) Plot of FEformate versus potential over Cu NPs. (d) Plot of FECO versus potential over Cu NPs. (e) Plot of FEC2+ versus potential over Cu NPs. (f) Plot of FEC2+ at −1.7 V versus RHE over various Cu electrodes. (g) Comparison of CO2RR performance between this work and prior studies in KHCO3‐based electrolytes. (h) Plot of current density and FEC2+ versus time at −1.7 V versus RHE in (3) over Cu‐3.

The CO2RR is investigated using various electrode materials, including Cu‐1, Cu‐2, and Cu‐3, in each of the electrolytes to further verify that the rigidity of the interfacial HBN governs the product selectivity. The electrode materials are characterized using XRD, XPS, SEM, and TEM, as shown in Figures S18–S29, which confirms that they consist of crystalline Cu0. A consistent trend is observed across all the electrodes, mirroring the results for the Cu NPs, and the rigidity of the interfacial HBN is a key factor determining product selectivity. Specifically, a HBN with high rigidity favors the formation of CO, a HBN with moderate rigidity tends to yield C2+ products, and a HBN with low rigidity boosts the production of formate and H2 (Figures 3f and S30–S32). Notably, Cu‐3 delivers an unprecedented FEC2+ of 90.9% in electrolyte (3) at –1.7 V versus RHE with a current density of 0.81 A cm−2, a value that considerably exceeds those reported for other systems in KHCO3‐based electrolytes (Figure 3g) [32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44]. Moreover, this system exhibits excellent operational stability (Figure S33), with both the current density and FEC2+ remaining approximately constant a 24 h‐electrolysis at –1.7 V versus RHE (Figure 3h). Furthermore, the negligible changes in the electrolyte pH throughout the process mean that pH variations do not affect the catalytic performance (Figure S34).

2.4. In Situ Characterization of Reaction Intermediates

In situ Raman spectroscopy was used to probe the *CO‐related species in the five electrolytes (Figure 4a). *CO species are observed in atop‐bound (*COatop, ∼2030 cm−1) and bridge‐bound (*CObridge, ∼1900 cm−1) configurations. *COatop is more likely to undergo C─C coupling or desorb, whereas *CObridge is more inert and often arises from the rearrangement of *COatop, resulting in surface accumulation without further reaction [45, 46, 47, 48]. The populations of *COatop and *CObridge in the different electrolytes at −1.7 V versus RHE are quantified, and the *COatop/*CObridge ratios are 0.63, 1.23, 1.61, 2.26, and 3.07 in electrolytes (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5), respectively (Figure 4a,b). In high‐rigidity electrolytes, the *CObridge configuration is dominant, indicating that *CO is stabilized and rendered inert. Conversely, in low‐rigidity electrolytes, the *CObridge configuration is suppressed, suggesting that the *CO intermediate is less stable. These results demonstrate that the HBN stabilizes the *CO intermediate, thereby affecting its adsorption configuration and ultimately determining the reaction pathway.

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Open in a new tab

Mechanism study in different electrolytes over Cu NPs. (a) Raman spectra at −1.7 V versus RHE. (b) The population of *CObridge and *COatop from Raman spectra at −1.7 V versus RHE. (c) In situ ATR‐SEIRA spectra at −1.7 V versus RHE. (d) Schematic illustration of CO2RR pathways. (e) CO stripping curves. (f) Tafel plots. (g) FECO at −1.7 V versus RHE in D2O (nonshaded area) and H2O (shaded area). (h) KIEH2O/D2O at −1.7 V versus RHE.

In situ ATR‐SEIRA spectra were used to characterize the key intermediates during the CO2RR (Figure 4c and Table S1). The *CHO and *COH intermediates, that formed prior to the formation of *OCCHO and *OCCOH [10, 32, 49, 50, 51], exhibit much more intense signals in electrolyte (3) than in the other electrolytes. The intensity trend in the different electrolytes [(3) > (2) > (4) > (1) > (5)] matches the C2+ product activity because *CO─*CHO (or *CO─*COH) coupling to *OCCHO (or *OCCOH) is the key step for C2+ formation. *OCHO, the key intermediate in formate formation, exhibits the most intense signal in electrolyte (5). In the initial activation stage, CO2 undergoes PCET to form either *COOH (C‐terminated adsorption) or *OCHO (O‐terminated adsorption) intermediates. The *COOH intermediate is converted to *CO, which desorbs as CO or undergoes C─C coupling to form C2+ products, whereas the *OCHO pathway leads to formate (Figure 4d) [30, 31, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57]. Consequently, C2+ production is significantly higher in electrolyte (3), whereas formate production is enhanced in electrolyte (5).

Electrochemical characterization. CO stripping experiments show that the oxidation potential for *CO desorption follows the order (1) > (2) > (3) > (4) > (5), confirming that the *CO binding strength is strongest in electrolyte (1) and weakest in electrolyte (5) (Figure 4e). This trend is consistent with the *COatop/*CObridge trend obtained from the Raman spectra (Figure 4a). Tafel analysis was performed based on the partial current density of CO at different potentials (Figure 4f). At less negative potentials, where the C─C coupling is negligible, the slopes for CO formation increase as the rigidity of the HBN increases. At more negative potentials, where C─C coupling becomes dominant, the lowest slope is obtained for electrolyte (3), which indicates that the kinetics are the most favorable for C─C bond formation. Compared to the HBN of H2O, the HBN of D2O is more rigid [58], which makes dissociation more difficult. The FECO values in the electrolytes with D2O are higher than in those with H2O (Figure 4g). This suggests that a HBN with higher rigidity favors the formation of the *COOH intermediate and, consequently, CO. The measured kinetic isotope effect (KIEH2O/D2O) values for electrolytes (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) are 1.83, 1.67, 1.63, 1.36, and 1.31, respectively (Figure 4h). The KIEH2O/D2O approaches 1 as the rigidity of the HBN decreases, which indicates that a less rigid network promotes O─H bond cleavage.

2.5. Mechanism Discussion

The preceding discussion shows that the rigidity of the HBN affects the adsorption states of the key intermediates and the dissociation of water (Figure 5). When the rigidity of the HBN is moderate or high, the oxygen in the reaction intermediate is incorporated into the HBN, which causes the carbon atom to orient toward the electrode surface and favor the *COOH configuration. This *COOH intermediate then undergoes a PCET to form *CO, which can either desorb as CO or participate in C─C coupling. In electrolytes where the rigidity of the HBN is high, water molecules form a continuous long‐range structure that effectively stabilizes the *CO intermediate and limits its surface migration. This confinement increases the feasibility of *CO desorption and reduces the reactivity required for C─C coupling, increasing CO formation while suppressing C2+ production (Figure 5a). A HBN with moderate rigidity increases the FEC2+ by stabilizing the *COOH configuration to favor the formation of *CO and then allowing the resultant *CO to migrate for subsequent C─C coupling (Figure 5b). Conversely, in electrolytes where the HBN has low rigidity, the interaction between the oxygen atom of the intermediate and the water molecules is insufficient. Consequently, the electrolyte–intermediate interaction is weak relative to the electrode–intermediate interaction, which causes the oxygen atom to orient toward the Cu surface. This reorientation stabilizes the *OCHO configuration, thereby promoting the formation of formate (Figure 5c).

FIGURE 5.

FIGURE 5

Open in a new tab

Schematic illustration of the influence of HBN rigidity on CO2RR pathways.

As the rigidity of the interfacial HBN decreases, the dissociation of water increases owing to the reduction in the number of strongly hydrogen‐bonded water molecules. This enhances the CO2RR reactivity by facilitating the proton transfer required for the PCET steps. However, when the rigidity decreases significantly, water dissociation becomes overly favorable, thereby intensifying the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and suppressing the CO2RR. Consequently, the highest CO2RR reactivity is achieved in electrolyte (3), which has a HBN with moderate rigidity. In addition, compared to HBNs with high or low rigidity, a HBN with moderate rigidity can promote water dissociation and facilitate proton transfer via the Grotthuss mechanism, thereby greatly accelerating the hydrogenation kinetics.

3. Conclusion

In this study, we demonstrate that the HBN within the EDL can be edited, and its rigidity can be tailored. Incorporating different quaternary ammonium cations into 1 M KHCO3 enables continuous control over HBN rigidity. This property is shown to critically affect both the intermediate configuration and water dissociation kinetics during the CO2RR. The CO2RR selectivity is highly dependent on the rigidity of the HBN. CO is the dominant product in electrolytes where the HBN has high rigidity. By contrast, a HBN with low rigidity promotes the production of formate and H2. Notably, a HBN with moderate rigidity maximizes FEC2+ to 90.9% over Cu‐3, surpassing all previously reported values in KHCO3‐based electrolytes. The rigidity of interfacial HBN dictates the CO2RR pathway by controlling the intermediate configuration and proton availability. A HBN with high rigidity interacts strongly with intermediates, leading to a C‐terminated configuration on the electrode surface that promotes *COOH and *CO formation. However, it confines *CO, limiting its migration and suppresses C─C coupling. Conversely, a HBN with low rigidity fosters an O‐terminated configuration that favors *OCHO and further formate formation; however, water dissociation is too facile, which excessively promotes the competing HER. Ultimately, a HBN with moderate rigidity strikes an optimal balance by providing adequate *CO availability and suitable water dissociation kinetics, thereby enabling the highest C2+ selectivity and overall CO2RR reactivity. This study establishes the rigidity of the interfacial HBN as a key descriptor for steering intermediate configuration and water dissociation kinetics. We envision that this fundamental insight, using HBN rigidity as a key descriptor, will provide a guiding principle for controlling reaction pathways in a broad range of electrocatalytic reactions.

Author Contributions

Jiahao Yang: writing – original draft, formal analysis, writing – review and editing, conceptualization, data curation, resources, validation. Shiju Yu: formal analysis, data curation, validation. Jiapeng Jiao: formal analysis. Shiqiang Liu: formal analysis. Meng Zhou: formal analysis. Yiyong Wang: formal analysis. Wenling Zhao: formal analysis. Yaoyu Yin: formal analysis. Hengan Wang: formal analysis. Shipeng Zhang: formal analysis. Zhongnan Ling: formal analysis. Huisheng Qin: formal analysis. Ke Li: formal analysis. Xueqing Xing: formal analysis. Qinggong Zhu: formal analysis. Yi Xu: formal analysis. Xiaofu Sun: formal analysis. Xinchen Kang: writing – review and editing, funding acquisition, investigation, supervision. Buxing Han: writing – review and editing, funding acquisition, investigation, supervision.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Supporting File: anie73567‐sup‐0001‐SuppMat.docx.

ANIE-65-e2945600-s001.docx (6.5MB, docx)

Acknowledgments

The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (22273108, 22033009, 22293015, 22121002), CAS Project for Young Scientists in Basic Research (YSBR‐050), the Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS (Y2022017), ICCAS Carbon Neutral Chemistry program (CCNC‐202403) and National Key Research and Development Program of China (2023YFA1507400).

Contributor Information

Xinchen Kang, Email: kangxinchen@iccas.ac.cn.

Buxing Han, Email: hanbx@iccas.ac.cn.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • 1. Shi L., LaCour R. A., Qian N., et al., “Water Structure and Electric Fields at the Interface of Oil Droplets,” Nature 640 (2025): 87–93, 10.1038/s41586-025-08702-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Flór M., Wilkins D. M., de la Puente M., et al., “Dissecting the Hydrogen Bond Network of Water: Charge Transfer and Nuclear Quantum Effects,” Science 386 (2024): eads4369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Alfarano S. R., Pezzotti S., Stein C. J., et al., “Stripping Away Ion Hydration Shells in Electrical Double‐Layer Formation: Water Networks Matter,” Proceedings National Academy of Science USA 118 (2021): e2108568118, 10.1073/pnas.2108568118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Yun Y., Khaliullin R. Z., and Jung Y., “Correlated Local Fluctuations in the Hydrogen Bond Network of Liquid Water,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 144 (2022): 13127–13136, 10.1021/jacs.2c02362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Nihonyanagi S., Yamaguchi S., and Tahara T., “Counterion Effect on Interfacial Water at Charged Interfaces and Its Relevance to the Hofmeister series,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 136 (2014): 6155–6158, 10.1021/ja412952y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Zhao R., Wang Q., Yao Y., et al., “Pd Single Atoms Guided Proton Transfer Along an Interfacial Hydrogen Bond Network for Efficient Electrochemical Hydrogenation,” Science Advances 11 (2025): eadu1602, 10.1126/sciadv.adu1602. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Yuan Y., Li J., Zhu Y., et al., “Water in Electrocatalysis,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 64 (2025): e202425590, 10.1002/anie.202425590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Huang Y., Gao Y., and Zhang B., “Interfacial Water Regulation for Water‐participating Electrocatalytic Hydrogenation Reactions,” Chemistry 11 (2025): 102533, 10.1016/j.chempr.2025.102533. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Li H., Xu Z., Li J., Siria A., and Ma M., “Evolution of Interfacial Hydration Structure Induced by Ion Condensation and Correlation Effects,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 64 (2025): e202418029, 10.1002/anie.202418029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Li Z., Chen R., Ge W., et al., “Molecular Scale Interfacial Water Management Switching Reaction Pathway of Carbon Dioxide Electroreduction,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 64 (2025): e202508801, 10.1002/anie.202508801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Gomes R. J., Kumar R., Fejzić H., Sarkar B., Roy I., and Amanchukwu C. V., “Modulating Water Hydrogen Bonding Within a Non‐Aqueous Environment Controls Its Reactivity in Electrochemical Transformations,” Nature Catalysis 7 (2024): 689–701, 10.1038/s41929-024-01162-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Liu S., Yin Y., Yang J., et al., “Temperature‐Dependent Pathways in Carbon Dioxide Electroreduction,” Science Bulletin 70 (2025): 889–896, 10.1016/j.scib.2024.12.052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Zhang L.‐H., Hong Y., Guo Y., et al., “Volcano‐Shaped Relationship Between Interfacial K+‐H2O Ratio and CO2 Reduction Activity in Tandem Electrocatalysts,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 64 (2025): e202514557, 10.1002/anie.202514557. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Yu S., Yamauchi H., Wang S., et al., “CO2‐to‐Methanol Electroconversion on a Molecular Cobalt Catalyst Facilitated by Acidic Cations,” Nature Catalysis 7 (2024): 1000–1009, 10.1038/s41929-024-01197-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Zhang Z.‐M., Wang T., Cai Y.‐C., et al., “Probing Electrolyte Effects on Cation‐Enhanced CO2 Reduction on Copper in Acidic Media,” Nature Catalysis 7 (2024): 807–817, 10.1038/s41929-024-01179-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Cao X., Cha S., and Gong M., “Interfacial Electrical Double Layer in Electrocatalytic Reactions: Fundamentals, Characterizations and Applications,” Acta Physico‐Chimica Sinica 41 (2025): 100041, 10.1016/j.actphy.2024.100041. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Li J., Li X., Gunathunge C. M., and Waegele M. M., “Hydrogen Bonding Steers the Product Selectivity of Electrocatalytic CO Reduction,” Proceedings National Academy of Science USA 116 (2019): 9220–9229, 10.1073/pnas.1900761116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Coskun O. K., Bagbudar Z., Khokhar V., Dongare S., Warburton R. E., and Gurkan B., “Synergistic Effects of the Electric Field Induced by Imidazolium Rotation and Hydrogen Bonding in Electrocatalysis of CO2 ,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 146 (2024): 23775–23785, 10.1021/jacs.4c05172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Nkurunziza F., Dongare S., Chatterjee S., et al., “Alkali Cation Inhibition of Imidazolium‐Mediated Electrochemical CO2 Reduction on Silver,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 147 (2025): 7564–7577, 10.1021/jacs.4c16635. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Huang J. E., Li F., Ozden A., et al., “CO2 Electrolysis to Multicarbon Products in Strong Acid,” Science 372 (2021): 1074–1078, 10.1126/science.abg6582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Hicks M. H., Nie W., Boehme A. E., Atwater H. A., Agapie T., and Peters J. C., “Electrochemical CO2 Reduction in Acidic Electrolytes: Spectroscopic Evidence for Local pH Gradients,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 146 (2024): 25282–25289, 10.1021/jacs.4c09512. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Wuttig A., Yoon Y., Ryu J., and Surendranath Y., “Bicarbonate Is Not a General Acid in Au‐Catalyzed CO2 Electroreduction,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 139 (2017): 17109–17113, 10.1021/jacs.7b08345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Dunwell M., Lu Q., Heyes J. M., et al., “The central Role of Bicarbonate in the Electrochemical Reduction of Carbon Dioxide on Gold,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 139 (2017): 3774–3783, 10.1021/jacs.6b13287. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Ge W., Chen Y., Fan Y., et al., “Dynamically Formed Surfactant Assembly at the Electrified Electrode–Electrolyte Interface Boosting CO2 Electroreduction,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 144 (2022): 6613–6622, 10.1021/jacs.2c02486. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Viana R. B., da Silva A. B. F., and Pimentel A. S., “Infrared Spectroscopy of Anionic, Cationic, and Zwitterionic Surfactants,” Advances in Chemical Physics 2012 (2012): 903272, 10.1155/2012/903272. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Kong K., Li A.‐Z., Wang Y., et al., “Electrochemical Carbon–Carbon Coupling With Enhanced Activity and Racemate Stereoselectivity by Microenvironment Regulation,” Nature Communications 14 (2023): 6925, 10.1038/s41467-023-42724-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Hou J., Xu B., and Lu Q., “Influence of Electric Double Layer Rigidity on CO Adsorption and Electroreduction Rate,” Nature Communications 15 (2024): 1926, 10.1038/s41467-024-46318-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Li P., Jiang Y., Hu Y., et al., “Hydrogen Bond Network Connectivity in the Electric Double Layer Dominates the Kinetic pH Effect in Hydrogen Electrocatalysis on Pt,” Nature Catalysis 5 (2022): 900–911, 10.1038/s41929-022-00846-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Liu T., Chen Y., Hao Y., et al., “Hierarchical Anions at the Electrode‐Electrolyte Interface for Synergized Neutral Water Oxidation,” Chemistry 8 (2022): 2700–2714, 10.1016/j.chempr.2022.06.012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Ma W., He X., Wang W., Xie S., Zhang Q., and Wang Y., “Electrocatalytic Reduction of CO2 and CO to Multi‐Carbon Compounds Over Cu‐Based Catalysts,” Chemical Society Reviews 50 (2021): 12897–12914, 10.1039/D1CS00535A. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Wang G., Chen J., Ding Y., et al., “Electrocatalysis for CO2 Conversion: From Fundamentals to Value‐Added Products,” Chemical Society Reviews 50 (2021): 4993–5061, 10.1039/D0CS00071J. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Liu K., Shen H., Sun Z., et al., “Transient Pulsed Discharge Preparation of Graphene Aerogel Supports Asymmetric Cu Cluster Catalysts Promote CO2 Electroreduction,” Nature Communications 16 (2025): 1203, 10.1038/s41467-025-56534-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Fu J., Zhang H., Du H., et al., “Unveiling the Interfacial Species Synergy in Promoting CO2 Tandem Electrocatalysis in Near‐Neutral Electrolyte,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 146 (2024): 23625–23632, 10.1021/jacs.4c08844. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Liu H., Yang C., Bian T., Yu H., Zhou Y., and Zhang Y., “Bottom‐up Growth of Convex Sphere With Adjustable Cu(0)/Cu(I) Interfaces for Effective C2 Production From CO2 Electroreduction,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 63 (2024): e202404123, 10.1002/anie.202404123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Wang J., Sun M., Xu H., et al., “Coordination Environment Engineering of Metal Centers in Coordination Polymers for Selective Carbon Dioxide Electroreduction Toward Multicarbon Products,” ACS Nano 18 (2024): 7192–7203, 10.1021/acsnano.3c12389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Zhao Y., Zu X., Chen R., et al., “Industrial‐Current‐Density CO2‐to‐C2+ Electroreduction by Anti‐Swelling Anion‐Exchange Ionomer‐Modified Oxide‐Derived Cu Nanosheets,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 144 (2022): 10446–10454, 10.1021/jacs.2c02594. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Shi Y., Wang Y., Dong C.‐L., et al., “Localized Geometry Determined Selectivity of Iodide‐Derived Copper for Electrochemical CO2 Reduction,” Advanced Energy Materials 13 (2023): 2203896, 10.1002/aenm.202203896. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Wang Z., Li Y., Zhao X., et al., “Localized Alkaline Environment Via In Situ Electrostatic Confinement for Enhanced CO2‐to‐ethylene Conversion in Neutral Medium,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 145 (2023): 6339–6348, 10.1021/jacs.2c13384. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Xu Y. N., Li W., Fu H. Q., et al., “Tuning the Microenvironment in Monolayer MgAl Layered Double Hydroxide for CO2‐to‐ethylene Electrocatalysis in Neutral Media,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 62 (2023): e202217296, 10.1002/anie.202217296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Li F., Li Y. C., Wang Z., et al., “Cooperative CO2‐to‐ethanol Conversion Via Enriched Intermediates at Molecule–Metal Catalyst Interfaces,” Nature Catalysis 3 (2020): 75–82, 10.1038/s41929-019-0383-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Fan L., Liu C.‐Y., Zhu P., et al., “Proton Sponge Promotion of Electrochemical CO2 Reduction to Multi‐Carbon Products,” Joule 6 (2022): 205–220, 10.1016/j.joule.2021.12.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Wu Z.‐Z., Zhang X.‐L., Niu Z.‐Z., et al., “Identification of Cu(100)/Cu(111) Interfaces as Superior Active Sites for CO Dimerization During CO2 Electroreduction,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 144 (2022): 259–269, 10.1021/jacs.1c09508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Yang R., Duan J., Dong P., et al., “In Situ Halogen‐ion Leaching Regulates Multiple Sites on Tandem Catalysts for Efficient CO2 Electroreduction to C2+ Products,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 61 (2022): e202116706, 10.1002/anie.202116706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Huang X., Li X., Yan S., et al., “Strain‐Optimized Copper Dual‐Atom Sites for Selective Electroreduction of Carbon Dioxide to Ethylene,” Science Advances 11 (2025): eads0609, 10.1126/sciadv.ads0609. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Gunathunge C. M., Li J., Li X., Hong J. J., and Waegele M. M., “Revealing the Predominant Surface Facets of Rough Cu Electrodes Under Electrochemical Conditions,” ACS Catalysis 10 (2020): 6908–6923, 10.1021/acscatal.9b05532. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Liu Q., Zang J., Ye W., et al., “Universal Formation, Dynamics, and Reactivities of *CObridge Accompanying Spontaneous Reconstruction of Cu During Electrochemical CO2 or CO Reduction,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 147 (2025): 31497–31508, 10.1021/jacs.5c03886. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Yoo S., Park S., Son J., Kim J., Shin H., and Hwang Y. J., “Excess Cations Alter *CO Intermediate Configuration and Product Selectivity of Cu in Acidic Electrochemical CO2 Reduction Reaction,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 147 (2025): 12996–13007, 10.1021/jacs.5c02954. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Soodi S., Zhang J.‐J., Zhang J., et al., “Selective Electroreduction of CO2 to C2+ Products on Cobalt Decorated Copper Catalysts,” Chemical Synthesis 4 (2024): 44, 10.20517/cs.2024.11. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Ma L., Liu H., Mei B., et al., “Cu Supraparticles With Enhanced Mass Transfer and Abundant C‐C Coupling Sites Achieving Ampere‐Level CO2‐to‐C2+ Electrosynthesis,” Nature Communications 16 (2025): 3421, 10.1038/s41467-025-58755-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. He X., Lin L., Li X., et al., “Roles of Copper(I) in Water‐Promoted CO2 Electrolysis to Multi‐Carbon Compounds,” Nature Communications 15 (2024): 9923, 10.1038/s41467-024-54282-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Xiao Y., Yu F., Xia C., et al., “Asymmetric CO–CHO Coupling Over Pr Single‐Atom Alloy Enables Industrial‐Level Electrosynthesis of Ethylene,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 147 (2025): 15654–15665, 10.1021/jacs.5c02896. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Birdja Y. Y., Pérez‐Gallent E., Figueiredo M. C., Göttle A. J., Calle‐Vallejo F., and Koper M. T. M., “Advances and Challenges in Understanding the Electrocatalytic Conversion of Carbon Dioxide to Fuels,” Nature Energy 4 (2019): 732–745, 10.1038/s41560-019-0450-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Han J., Bai X., Xu X., et al., “Advances and Challenges in the Electrochemical Reduction of Carbon Dioxide,” Chemical Science 15 (2024): 7870–7907, 10.1039/D4SC01931H. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Guan Y., Li Y., Li Z., Hou Y., Lei L., and Yang B., “Promotion of C─C Coupling in the CO2 Electrochemical Reduction to Valuable C2+ Products: From Micro‐Foundation to Macro‐Application,” Advanced Materials 37 (2025): 2417567, 10.1002/adma.202417567. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Creissen C. E., Rivera de la Cruz J. G., Karapinar D., Taverna D., Schreiber M. W., and Fontecave M., “Molecular Inhibition for Selective CO2 Conversion,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 61 (2022): e202206279, 10.1002/anie.202206279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Zhang P., Zhou M., Liu S., et al., “Tuning the Surface Field by Embedding Cations Into Metals to Direct the Reaction Pathway of CO2 Electroreduction,” CCS Chemistry 6 (2024): 631–640, 10.31635/ccschem.023.202303394. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Chen S., Fang X., Hu Z., Zhang Z., Cao C., and Xie Z., “Fluorine‐Tuned of Ni Single‐Atom Catalysts for Efficient pH‐Universal CO2 Reduction via D‐orbital Modulation,” Carbon and Hydrogen 27 (2025): 507–517, 10.1002/cbh2.70034. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Katsir Y., Shapira Y., Mastai Y., Dimova R., and Ben‐Jacob E., “Entropic Effects and Slow Kinetics Revealed in Titrations of D2O−H2O Solutions With Different D/H Ratios,” Journal of Physical Chemistry B 114 (2010): 5755–5763, 10.1021/jp909657m. [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 File: anie73567‐sup‐0001‐SuppMat.docx.

ANIE-65-e2945600-s001.docx (6.5MB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Articles from Angewandte Chemie (International Ed. in English) are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES