Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 29;5(1):1700275. doi: 10.1002/advs.201700275

Table 2.

The representative examples of electrochemical CO2 reduction with different electrocatalysts, reaction conditions and selectivities

Electrocatalyst Electrolyte Applied potential [V] Major products [Faradaic efficiency, %] Current density/mass activity Ref.
1. Selective production of HCOO/HCOOH
[Cu(cyclam)](ClO4)2 complex DMF/H2O (97:3 v/v) −2.0 (vs Fc/Fc+) HCOOH (90%) 1 mA cm−2 41
Gas‐diffusion layer/CNT/Ir complex/polyethylene glycol 0.5 m LiClO4/0.1 m NaHCO3/1% v/v MeCN −1.40 (vs RHE) HCOO (83%) 15.6 mA cm−2 54
Pd‐polyaniline/CNTs 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.80 (vs SCE) HCOO (83%) 57
SnOx/Sn 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.36 (vs RHE) HCOO (71.6%) 17.1 mA cm−2 71
Nanostructured Sn 0.1 m NaHCO3 −1.80 (vs SCE) HCOO (93.6%) 10.2 mA cm−2 72
Sn Ion liquids/H2O/MeCN −2.30 (vs Ag/AgCl) HCOOH (92.0%) 32.1 mA cm−2 77
Pb HCOOH (91.6%) 37.6 mA cm−2
Pd NPs 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.35 (vs RHE) HCOO (88%) 3.45 mA cm−2 93
Bi nanoflakes 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.40 (vs RHE) HCOO (79.5%) 101
Bi/BiOCl 0.5 m KHCO3 −1.50 (vs SCE) HCOO (≈92%) 3.7 mA mg−1 161
Cu pillars 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.50 (vs RHE) HCOOH (28.7%) ≈1.3 mA cm−2 107
Cu nanofoam 0.5 m KHCO3 −1.50 (vs Ag/AgCl) HCOOH (37%) 162
Ag–Sn alloy 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.80 (vs RHE) HCOOH (≈80%) ≈16 mA cm−2 165
PdxPt(100− x )/C 0.1 m KH2PO4/0.1 m K2HPO4 −0.40 (vs RHE) HCOOH (88%) ≈5 mA cm−2 120
SnO2 porous nanowires 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.80 (vs RHE) HCOO (80%) (−1.0 V) 10 mA cm−2 163
Mesoporous SnO2 nanosheets/carbon paper 0.5 m NaHCO3 −1.60 (vs Ag/AgCl) HCOO (≈87%) 50 mA cm−2 164
Pb2O 0.5 m KHCO3/NaHCO3 −2.0 (vs Co3O4) HCOOH (60%/50%) 128
Co3O4 atomic layers 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.88 (vs SCE) HCOO (64.3%) 0.68 mA cm−2 130
Partially oxidized Co atomic layers 0.1 m Na2SO4 −0.85 (vs RHE) HCOO (90.1%) 10.59 mA cm−2 131
PEI‐NCNTs/glassy carbon 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.80 (vs SCE) HCOO (85%) 7.2 mA cm−2 146
N‐doped graphene/carbon paper 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.84 (vs RHE) HCOO (73%) 7.5 mA cm−2 148
Boron‐doped graphene 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.40 (vs SCE) HCOO (66%) 2 mA cm−2 151
N‐doped nanodiamond/Si 0.5 m NaHCO3 −1.0 (vs RHE) HCOO (13.6%)
CH3COO (77.6%)
0.75 mA cm−2 155
2. Selective production of CO
Fe TDHPP DMF/2 m H2O −1.16 (vs RHE) CO (94%) 0.31 mA cm−2 39
Co protoporphyrin–pyrolytic graphite Perchlorate solution (pH = 3) −0.60 (vs RHE) CO (60%) 0.08 mA cm−2 40
COF‐366‐Co 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.67 (vs RHE) CO (90%) 80 mA mg−1 (Co) 201
[Ru(‐6,6′‐dimesityl‐2,2′‐bipyridine)(CO)2Cl]0 0.1 m TBAPF6/MeCN ≈−2.2 V (vs Fc/Fc+) CO (95%) 51
Au‐1,3‐bis(2,4,6‐trimethylphenyl)imidazol‐2‐ylidene complex 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.57 (vs RHE) CO (83%) ≈2 mA cm−2 56
Au NPs 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.67 (vs RHE) CO (90%) 79
Au rhombic dodecahedrons 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.57 (vs RHE) CO (93%) 81
Au/CNTs 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.50 (vs RHE) CO (≈94%) ≈15 A g−1 (Au) 82
Au nanowires 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.35 (vs RHE) CO (94%) 1.84 A g−1 (Au) 198
Oxide‐derived Au 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.35 (vs RHE) CO (>96%) 2–4 mA cm−2 199
6 µm thick highly porous Ag 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.50 (vs RHE) CO (82%) 10.5 mA cm−2 85
Ag NPs 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.75 (vs RHE) CO (79.2%) 1 mA cm−2 86
Nanoporous Ag 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.60 (vs RHE) CO (≈92%) ≈18 mA cm−2 87
Ag nanocorals 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.60 (vs RHE) CO (95%) 6.62 mA cm−2 89
Oxide‐derived Ag 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.80 (vs RHE) CO (89%) 1.15 mA cm−2 200
Pd NPs 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.89 (vs RHE) CO (91.2%) 23.9 A g−1 (Pd) 94
Pd icosahedra/C 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.80 (vs RHE) CO (91.1%) 166
Zn dendrites 0.5 m NaHCO3 −1.10 (vs RHE) CO (79%) 97
Zn foil 0.5 m NaCl −1.60 (vs SCE) CO (93%) 98
Hexagonal Zn 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.95 (vs RHE) CO (85.4%) 9.5 mA cm−2 99
Surface activated Bi NPs MeCN/[bmim][OTf] −2.0 (vs Ag/AgCl) CO (96.1%) 15.6 mA mg−1 (Bi) 100
Cu fibers 0.3 m KHCO3 −0.40 (vs RHE) CO (75%) ≈9 mA cm−2 108
Cu nanowires 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.40 (vs RHE) CO (61.8%) 1 mA cm−2 109
Au3Cu alloy 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.73 (vs RHE) CO (64.7%) 3 mA cm−2 121
Ordered AuCu NPs 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.77 (vs RHE) CO (80%) 167
Cu–In alloy 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.60 (vs RHE) CO (85%) ≈0.75 mA cm−2 122
Cu–Sn alloy 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.60 (vs RHE) CO (>90%) 1 mA cm−2 123
Oxide‐derived Cu CO (63%) 2.1 mA cm−2
TiO2 film MeCN/0.1 m TEAP −1.8 (vs Ag/AgCl) CO (90%) 133
rGO–PEI–MoSx 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.65 (vs RHE) CO (85.1%) 55 mA cm−2 136
WSe2 nanoflakes 50 vol%/50 vol% EMIMBF4/H2O −0.164 (vs RHE) CO (24%) 18.95 mA cm−2 139
MoSeS alloy monolayers 4 mol%/96 mol% EMIMBF4/H2O −1.15 (vs RHE) CO (45.2%) 43 mA cm−2 168
NCNTs 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.05 (vs RHE) CO (80%) 144
N‐doped graphene foam 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.58 (vs RHE) CO (≈85%) ≈1.8 mA cm−2 150
3. Selective production of HCHO
Boron‐doped diamond MeOH electrolyte −1.70 (vs Ag/AgCl) HCHO (74%) 97.5 µA cm−2 157
Cu NPs/boron‐doped diamond (10 × 10−6 m) H2O/bmim‐PF6 −1.3 (vs RHE) HCOOH and HCHO (>80%) 5.1 mA cm−2 158
4. Selective production of methane and ethylene
Cu–porphyrin complex 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.976 (vs RHE) CH4 and C2H4 (44%) 13.2 mA cm−2 (CH4) 176
8.4 mA cm−2 (C2H4)
Cu NPs supported on glassy carbon 0.1 m NaHCO3 −1.25 (vs RHE) CH4 (80%) ≈9 mA cm−2 110
Cu nanowires 0.1 m KClO4 −1.10 (vs RHE) C2H6 (20.3%) 4–5 mA cm−2 113
0.1 m KHCO3 C2H6 (17.4%)
0.1 m K2HPO4 C2H6 (10%)
Plasma‐treated Cu foil 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.90 (vs RHE) C2H4 (60%) 114
Cu foam 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.80 (vs RHE) C2H4, C2H6 (55%) 115
Glycine/Cu nanowires 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.90 (vs Ag/AgCl) C2H4, C2H6, C3H6 (34.1%) ≈11 mA cm−2 116
Cu nanocubes [44 nm] 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.1 (vs RHE) C2H4 (41%) ≈5.5 mA cm−2 119
Cu NPs 0.1 m KHCO3 −1.1 (vs RHE) CH4 (57%) 23 mA cm−2 174
C2H4 (<20%)
CO (<5%)
HCOOH (<5%)
Pd–Au alloy 0.1 m KH2PO4/0.1 m K2HPO4 −0.60 (vs RHE) CO (30.9%) 203
−1.40 (vs RHE) CH4 (2%)
−1.40 (vs RHE) C2 hydrocarbons (0.7%)
−1.40 (vs RHE) C3 hydrocarbons (0.3%)
−1.30 (vs RHE) 1‐Butene (0.16%)
Cu2Pd alloy 0.1 m TBAPF6/CH3CN/1 m H2O −1.8 (vs Ag/AgNO3) CH4 (51%) ≈6 mA cm−2 177
NixGay alloy 0.1 m NaHCO3 −0.48 (vs RHE) CH4 (>2%) (−1.18 V) 140 µA cm−2 124
C2H4 (1.3%) (−1.18 V) 100 µA cm−2
Cu2O/Cu 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.98 (vs RHE) C2H4 (42.6%) 13.3 mA cm−2 179
C2H5OH (11.8%) 3.7 mA cm−2
C3H7OH (5.4%) 1.7 mA cm−2
Mo2C 0.1 m KHCO3 –1.10 (vs RHE) CH4 (29%) >30 mA cm−2 141
H2 (≈39%)
N‐doped carbon [bmim]BF4/H2O −1.4 (vs RHE) CH4 (93.5%) 1.42 mA cm−2 149
Pyridinic‐N rich graphene/Cu 0.5 m KHCO3 −0.90 (vs RHE) C2H4 (19%) 7.7 A g−1 202
5. Selective production of alcohols
Enzymes Phosphate buffer solution −1.20 (vs Ag/AgCl) CH3OH (≈10%) 180
[4‐(3‐Phenoxy‐2,2‐bis(phenoxymethyl)propoxy)pyridine]@Cu–Pd 0.5 m KCl −0.04 (vs RHE) CH3OH (26%) 21 mA cm−2 204
−0.64 (vs RHE) C2H5OH (12%)
Cu nanocrystals 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.95 (vs RHE) C3H7OH 1.74 mA cm−2 111
Mo–Bi alloy 0.5 m [bmim]BF4/MeCN −0.70 (vs RHE) CH3OH (71.2%) 12.1 mA cm−2 126
Cu2O 0.1 m KHCO3 −0.99 (vs RHE) C2H4 (34–39%) 30–35 mA cm−2 178
C2H5OH (9–16%)
Cu2O 0.5 m KHCO3 −2.0 (vs Co3O4) C2H5OH (96.2%) 4.5 mA cm−2 185
Cu2O/multiwalled CNT 0.5 m NaHCO3 −0.80 (vs RHE) CH3OH (38.0%) 7.5 mA cm−2 188
Oxidized Cu 0.5 m KHCO3 −1.10 (vs SCE) CH3OH (38.0%) 189