Structural evolution and strain generation of derived-Cu catalysts during CO2 electroreduction

Lei, Qiong; Huang, Liang; Yin, Jun; Davaasuren, Bambar; Yuan, Youyou; Dong, Xinglong; Wu, Zhi-Peng; Wang, Xiaoqian; Yao, Ke Xin; Lu, Xu; Han, Yu

doi:10.1038/s41467-022-32601-9

Download PDF

Article
Open access
Published: 18 August 2022

Structural evolution and strain generation of derived-Cu catalysts during CO₂ electroreduction

Nature Communications volume 13, Article number: 4857 (2022) Cite this article

12k Accesses
57 Citations
14 Altmetric
Metrics details

Subjects

Abstract

Copper (Cu)-based catalysts generally exhibit high C₂₊ selectivity during the electrochemical CO₂ reduction reaction (CO₂RR). However, the origin of this selectivity and the influence of catalyst precursors on it are not fully understood. We combine operando X-ray diffraction and operando Raman spectroscopy to monitor the structural and compositional evolution of three Cu precursors during the CO₂RR. The results indicate that despite different kinetics, all three precursors are completely reduced to Cu(0) with similar grain sizes (~11 nm), and that oxidized Cu species are not involved in the CO₂RR. Furthermore, Cu(OH)₂- and Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃-derived Cu exhibit considerable tensile strain (0.43%~0.55%), whereas CuO-derived Cu does not. Theoretical calculations suggest that the tensile strain in Cu lattice is conducive to promoting CO₂RR, which is consistent with experimental observations. The high CO₂RR performance of some derived Cu catalysts is attributed to the combined effect of the small grain size and lattice strain, both originating from the in situ electroreduction of precursors. These findings establish correlations between Cu precursors, lattice strains, and catalytic behaviors, demonstrating the unique ability of operando characterization in studying electrochemical processes.

Operando studies reveal active Cu nanograins for CO2 electroreduction

Article 08 February 2023

Yao Yang, Sheena Louisia, … Peidong Yang

The role of in situ generated morphological motifs and Cu(i) species in C2+ product selectivity during CO2 pulsed electroreduction

Article 30 March 2020

Rosa M. Arán-Ais, Fabian Scholten, … Beatriz Roldan Cuenya

Atomic-scale surface restructuring of copper electrodes under CO2 electroreduction conditions

Article Open access 17 August 2023

Reihaneh Amirbeigiarab, Jing Tian, … Olaf M. Magnussen

Introduction

Electrocatalytic CO₂ reduction reaction (CO₂RR) provides a versatile means of storing energy in chemical bonds while closing the anthropogenic carbon cycle¹. Although significant progress has been made in the generation of single-carbon (C₁) products (e.g., carbon monoxide, formate, methane, and methanol), in which a product selectivity of above 80% and an industrial-level current density have been achieved^2,3,4,5, the production of valuable multicarbon (C₂₊) products (e.g., ethylene, ethanol, and n-propanol) using CO₂RR has remained a challenge⁶.

To date, Cu-based catalysts are the main force for the production of C₂₊ products, owing to the *CO adsorption energy on Cu that favors the C–C coupling. Derived Cu catalysts, formed from the in situ reactions of oxides, hydroxides, or other oxidized Cu precursors under the reducing potentials of CO₂RR, have attracted significant attention because they typically exhibit high selectivities toward C₂₊ products^7,8,9. Although the Pourbaix diagram of Cu indicates that oxidized Cu precursors should be readily reduced to Cu(0) at negative potentials¹⁰, some experimental and theoretical studies have stated that Cu⁺ species or mixed oxidation states of Cu (e.g., Cu²⁺, Cu⁺, and Cu) are present in oxide- or hydroxide-derived Cu electrodes and are responsible for their high C₂₊ selectivity^{8,11,12,13,14,15,16}. For example, Nilsson et al. combined spectroscopy and microscopy techniques to unravel the presence of residual oxygen in oxide-derived Cu electrocatalysts under CO₂RR conditions^17,18,19. In contrast, many other studies have demonstrated the full reduction of oxidized Cu precursors to Cu(0) and attributed the enhanced C₂₊ selectivity to structural and morphological effects^20,21, specific crystal facet exposure^7,22, or grain boundary and low-coordinated sites^23,24. These inconsistent conclusions indicate that identifying the active species of derived Cu catalysts and the origin of their high C₂₊ selectivity remains controversial.

Lattice strain can modulate the activity and selectivity of electrocatalysts by breaking the linear scaling relationship²⁵. Using density functional theory (DFT), Mavrikakis et al. first correlated metal lattice strain, d-band center shift, and adsorption energy to explain catalytic behaviors²⁶. Various approaches have been employed to induce strain in Cu catalysts, including the formation of bimetallic nanoparticles^27,28, epitaxial growth of thin films^29,30, and crystal morphology engineering³¹. However, few studies have investigated strain effects in derived Cu catalysts for CO₂RR. Li et al. observed microstrains in oxide-derived Cu, but they did not correlate them with CO₂RR activity or selectivity³². Moreover, the influence of precursor materials on the catalytic performance of derived Cu catalysts has not been investigated. A better understanding of these aspects would facilitate the rational design of catalysts to achieve higher C₂₊ product selectivity.

Owing to the high sensitivity of Cu species to O₂ and their immediate re-oxidation when the reducing potential is lifted³³, operando characterizations are essential for probing the active species and dynamic evolution of Cu-based catalysts during CO₂RR³⁴. Particularly, some operando techniques, such as Raman spectroscopy, can detect the intermediates and products of CO₂RR in real time, which has significantly facilitated the investigation of the reaction mechanism and catalyst optimization^35,36. However, using operando characterization techniques that are relying on high energy beamlines (e.g., X-ray diffraction (XRD) and X-ray absorption spectroscopy) has been restricted by the limited access to synchrotron radiation facilities. The feasibility of using in-house laboratory XRD for an operando investigation of CO₂RR has not been fully explored.

In this study, we investigate the structural and compositional evolution of three Cu-based catalysts derived from Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂ and CuO during CO₂RR with an operando XRD platform that uses a laboratory-scale X-ray to analyze the phase transformation of the catalyst crystals (Fig. 1a) and operando Raman spectroscopy to detect the surface species (Fig. 1b). It is revealed that the three oxidized Cu precursors are all completely reduced to Cu(0) when delivering their maximum Faradaic efficiencies (FE) for C₂₊ products (${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$), whereas CuO shows faster electroreduction kinetics than Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂. The three derived Cu catalysts exhibit significantly higher ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ compared to bulk Cu, which is attributed to their small grain sizes (~11 nm). Operando XRD discovers that Cu(OH)₂- and Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃-derived Cu exhibit obvious tensile strains, while CuO-derived Cu is almost strain-free. This finding offers a method to induce lattice strain in Cu nanocrystals by using the appropriate precursor and explains the difference in CO₂RR activity relative to hydrogen evolution among the three derived Cu catalysts. Therefore, lattice strain has been identified as another factor promoting the CO₂RR activity of derived Cu catalysts in addition to grain boundaries and high-index facets associated with the small grain size. These important insights cannot be gained by ex situ characterization because Cu nanocrystals undergo rapid surface oxidation and strain relaxation once electroreduction conditions are lifted. This study highlights the importance and necessity of operando characterizations in probing the evolution of electrocatalysts, and provides a technical solution for achieving this goal in ordinary laboratories.

**Fig. 1: Schematic illustration of the *operando* characterization platforms.**

Results

Precursor characterization

The XRD characterization revealed that the three synthesized precursors, Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂, and CuO, are all phase pure (Supplementary Fig. 1a), and their Raman spectra were perfectly matched with the reported standard spectra (Supplementary Fig. 2a, b)^36,37,38,39. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) revealed that Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ consisted of agglomerated nano-sized square rods (Supplementary Fig. 3a), whereas Cu(OH)₂ exhibited a flower-like morphology, formed by the radial stacking of rectangular nanosheet bundles (Supplementary Fig. 3b). As the CuO sample was synthesized by heating the as-prepared Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, it retained the morphology of the parent material (Supplementary Fig. 3c) but had smaller grains, which could be attributed to the 60% atomic loss during conversion. The mean crystallite (grain) sizes of the Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂, and CuO nanocrystals estimated from the XRD data using the Scherrer equation were 24.7 ± 3.5, 19 ± 0.5, and 10 ± 0.5 nm, respectively (Supplementary Table 1).

CO₂RR performance

We evaluated the CO₂RR performance of the three Cu based catalysts with an H-type cell by analyzing the gas and liquid products at different applied potentials in CO₂-saturated 0.1 M KHCO₃ aqueous solution in ambient conditions. The maximum ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃-, Cu(OH)₂-, and CuO-derived Cu catalysts were 73.0, 71.9, and 68.6% at −1.05, −1.08, and −1.16 V_RHE, respectively, substantially higher than the ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ obtained on electropolished Cu foil (13% at −1.12 V_RHE; Fig. 2a). The main C₂₊ products of the systems included C₂H₄, C₂H₅OH, n-C₃H₇OH, C₂H₅CHO, CH₃CHO, and C₂H₆ (sequenced by decreasing FE, see Supplementary Fig. 4a–c for the detailed product distribution). The three catalysts exhibited similar C₂₊ partial current densities (${{j}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$) within the tested potential window, reaching −20 to −30 mA cm⁻² at ~−1.2 V_RHE. In contrast, the maximum ${{j}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ value obtained on the Cu foil was −4.1 mA cm⁻² at ~−1.12 V_RHE (Fig. 2b). The observed high C₂₊ selectivities and activities of Cu(OH)₂- and CuO-derived Cu are consistent with findings in previous studies^7,8,40, whereas this is the first report on the high selectivity and activity of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃-derived Cu toward C₂₊ production during CO₂RR.

The overall FEs for CO₂RR (${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{CO}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{RR}}}}}$) of the three catalysts followed the order of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ ≈ Cu(OH)₂ > CuO (Fig. 2c). Specifically, Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃- and Cu(OH)₂-derived Cu exhibited ~75% ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{CO}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{RR}}}}}$ at a relatively low potential of ~−0.83 V_RHE, whereas the ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{CO}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{RR}}}}}$ of CuO was only ~47% at this potential. Correspondingly, the competing hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) occurred to a significantly higher degree on CuO-derived Cu than on the other two catalysts over the tested potential range. The three catalysts exhibited a similar trend: as the potential became more negative, the FE for hydrogen (${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{2}}$) first decreased and then increased. The minimum ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{2}}$ (i.e., the maximum ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{CO}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{RR}}}}}$) was reached at ~−1.1 V_RHE, where the difference in CO₂RR activity (or HER activity) between CuO and the other two catalysts became less significant but still discernible (Fig. 2c).

Redox behaviors

To further examine the catalyst evolution during CO₂RR, we first investigated the redox behaviors of the three oxidized Cu precursors by performing Cyclic Voltammetry (CV) in 0.1 M KOH aqueous solution and Linear Sweep Voltammetry (LSV) in Ar-saturated 0.1 M of KHCO₃ aqueous solution. The results revealed that, in both KOH and KHCO₃ environments, the three samples undergo the same electroreduction pathway (i.e., complete reduction to Cu via the formation of Cu₂O); however, more negative potentials are required for the electroreduction of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂ compared to CuO (see Supplementary Note and Supplementary Fig. 5 for the detailed analysis).

Operando XRD

We then performed time-resolved operando XRD in a customized flow cell to investigate the structural transitions of the three oxidized Cu precursors during CO₂RR (Supplementary Figs. 6 and 7). When Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ was at its optimal C₂₊ production potential (−1.05 V_RHE), its characteristic (20-1) peak at 31.3° gradually faded during the first 45 min of the reaction, while the fingerprint (111) and (200) peaks of metallic Cu emerged with increasing intensity after the first 15 min (Fig. 3a). No diffraction peaks related to Cu hydroxides or oxides were detected during the entire process, suggesting that these species, if present, did not form crystalline phases. Further analysis of operando XRD data collected at different potentials revealed the potential-dependent electroreduction kinetics of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃: the required reduction time from Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ to Cu decreased with an increase in the negativity of the applied potential (Supplementary Fig. 8a, b). Similar to Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂ underwent a relatively slow process before the complete reduction to metallic Cu, during which no crystalline CuO or Cu₂O phase was detected. At its optimal potential for ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ (−1.08 V_RHE), the strongest (130) peak at 39.8° vanished completely after 60 min of CO₂RR, even though metallic Cu emerged in the first 15 min (Fig. 3b). In contrast, CuO was rapidly and completely converted to metallic Cu within the first 15 min of CO₂RR (Fig. 3c), implying faster electroreduction kinetics compared to Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂. On the other hand, although the grain sizes of the starting materials were different (Supplementary Table 1), the Cu derived from the three precursors had similar grain sizes (~11 nm; estimated from the XRD data; Supplementary Table 1). The smaller mean grain sizes of the derived Cu relative to those of the parent materials could be attributed to the combined effect of the volume shrinkage of the unit-cell and crystal fragmentation⁷. We therefore concluded that the three oxidized Cu precursors, despite the differences in their chemical components and electroreduction kinetics, were completely reduced to metallic Cu with similarly small grain sizes while (or before) delivering enhanced C₂₊ selectivity under the CO₂RR conditions.

**Fig. 3: The *operando* X-ray diffraction (XRD) characterizations.**

Interestingly, Cu nanocrystals derived from Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ exhibited shifted XRD peaks relative to the Cu foil as a standard sample, implying the presence of lattice strain. Specifically, at −1.05 V_RHE, the Cu(111) and Cu(200) diffraction peaks were shifted by ~0.25° and ~0.39° to the low-angle direction (Fig. 3d), corresponding to the tensile strains of 0.55% and 0.72%, respectively (Supplementary Table 2). This phenomenon was reproduced in measurements at different potentials, whereas the degree of strain slightly varied with the potential (Supplementary Table 2). Similarly, Cu nanocrystals derived from Cu(OH)₂ possessed significant (0.42%−0.47%) tensile strains under CO₂RR conditions, according to the shift in the Cu(111) diffraction peak (Fig. 3d and Supplementary Table 2). In contrast, Cu derived from CuO displayed negligible peak shifts relative to the standard regardless of the applied potential, although it had a grain size similar to the other two derived Cu samples (Fig. 3d and Supplementary Table 2). The operando XRD data were all corrected based on the results of a standard sample to eliminate liquid-induced peak shift effects (Supplementary Fig. 9).

Operando Raman spectroscopy

Time-resolved operando Raman spectroscopy was performed in a customized flow cell to explore the oxidation state evolution of the catalyst surface during CO₂RR (Supplementary Figs. 10 and 11). When the measurement of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ was conducted at −0.84 V_RHE, some areas of the electrode surface gradually changed from the initial turquoise color (the color of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ nanocrystals) to brown after 90 min of CO₂RR (Fig. 4a, right panel). Three types of Raman spectra were observed in different regions of the electrode surface, including the characteristic spectrum of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ from the remaining shiny crystals and two distinct spectra from the newly formed brown area (Fig. 4a, left panel). Further analysis revealed that the red-circled region corresponded to Cu₂O, as evidenced by the fingerprint Raman bands at 149, 528, and 620 cm⁻¹^36,41. The spectrum acquired from the blue-circled region revealed three intense bands at 283, 368, and 530 cm⁻¹ and a shoulder band at 498 cm⁻¹. According to recent studies, the bands at 283 and 368 cm⁻¹ correspond to the frustrated rotational mode of *CO (P1) and the Cu(0)–CO stretching vibration (P2), respectively^35,41, and the bands at 498 and 530 cm⁻¹ originate from C-containing adsorbates^42,43,44. Interestingly, once the negative potential of CO₂RR was lifted, these four bands disappeared, whereas the fingerprint pattern of Cu₂O emerged (Supplementary Fig. 12a), confirming their association with the binding intermediates to the Cu surface. These results taken together indicate that the catalyst in the blue-circled region was fully reduced to Cu(0), and the Raman bands at 283, 368, 498 (shoulder), and 530 cm⁻¹ can be regarded as indicators for the formation of Cu(0) and its participation in the CO₂RR process.

Given that the shiny crystals were confirmed to be unreduced Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, subsequent analyses were performed on the brown region of the electrode. At a more negative potential (e.g., −1.05 V_RHE in Fig. 4b, and −1.2 V_RHE in Supplementary Fig. 13), the color change of the electrode surface was faster, and few shiny crystals remained on the electrode after 30 min. Moreover, most acquired Raman spectra exhibited a similar pattern (283, 368, 498 (shoulder), and 530 cm⁻¹), suggesting the predominance of Cu(0) during CO₂RR at such negative potentials. Slight deviations within 280 to 284 and 368 to 388 cm⁻¹ for the Cu(0)–CO signals can be attributed to the dynamic change in the Cu surface during CO₂RR⁴⁵. The other two characteristic Raman bands also shifted within 486 to 500 and 526 to 536 cm⁻¹, presumably due to the variation in the C-containing species binding to the Cu surface.

Operando Raman measurements indicated that, similar to Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂ also underwent gradual and uneven electroreduction under CO₂RR conditions (Fig. 4c). In contrast, CuO exhibited a much faster electroreduction rate. The original black electrode surface turned completely brown within the first 5 min. The Raman bands of CuO vanished within 15 min, while Cu(0) dominated the electrode surface (Fig. 4d). These observations are consistent with the bulk behaviors of the three precursors revealed through operando XRD.

In summary, the operando Raman spectroscopy echoes and complements the operando XRD analysis. Both methods demonstrate that the three oxidized Cu precursors (bulk and surface) are fully reduced to metallic Cu when delivering their maximum ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ and that CuO exhibits faster reduction kinetics than the other two. Another interesting finding is that Raman signals associated with the CO₂RR intermediates and signals of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂, CuO, or Cu₂O do not appear in the same region simultaneously. Given that XRD can only detect crystalline phases and Raman effect is weak and localized, the present data cannot completely rule out the possible presence of metastable, short-lived, amorphous oxidized Cu species in the derived Cu catalysts^16,46.

Discussion

Importance and necessity of Operando characterizations

Operando characterizations provide otherwise unavailable information on the inherent states of catalysts and intermediates under reaction conditions and are particularly important for systems involving susceptible species, such as Cu. In this study, the Raman bands, which are relevant to the binding of CO₂RR intermediates to Cu(0) (i.e., 283, 368, 498 (shoulder), and 530 cm⁻¹), could not be observed through ex situ measurements due to the inevitable rapid surface oxidation of Cu (Supplementary Fig. 12a). In other words, without operando Raman spectroscopy, we would not have been able to determine the lack of co-occurrence of CO₂RR intermediates and oxidized Cu species, which is crucial for determining the catalytic active species (ubi infra).

Likewise, significant tensile strains in Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂-derived Cu could only be probed using operando XRD. When the electrodes containing derived Cu nanocrystals were removed from the electrochemical systems and characterized using conventional (ex situ) XRD, the Cu(111) and Cu(200) diffraction peaks appeared at their standard positions without a shift (Supplementary Fig. 12b). Moreover, a broad peak emerged at ~36.62°, which could be assigned to Cu₂O formed through surface oxidation. We surmise that the surface oxidation of Cu nanocrystals leads to the relaxation of the lattice strain. These results demonstrate the unique ability of operando characterization to capture the true states of catalysts under reaction conditions.

In addition, the time-resolved operando characterizations revealed that the electroreduction kinetics of CuO are faster than those of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂. We note that the electroreduction behaviors of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂ under the CO₂RR conditions have not been previously investigated using operando techniques, while the conclusions of several earlier studies on Cu oxides^41,47 are consistent with the observations of the CuO sample in this work.

Determination of active species in derived Cu catalysts

The operando XRD and operando Raman spectroscopy results collectively suggest that, despite the difference in chemical components and electroreduction kinetics, the three oxidized Cu precursors were reduced to metallic Cu while (or before) delivering enhanced C₂₊ selectivity under CO₂RR conditions. For Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂ with slow electroreduction kinetics, the temporary presence of mixed Cu oxidation states (Cu²⁺ from Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ or Cu(OH)₂, Cu⁺ from Cu₂O, and metallic Cu) was observed; however, Raman signals related to CO₂RR intermediates (283, 368, 498 (shoulder), and 530 cm⁻¹) were only observed in regions without Raman fingerprints of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂, CuO, or Cu₂O. These results rule out the participation of these oxidized Cu species in CO₂RR; thus, we conclude that Cu(0) is the catalytic active site responsible for enhanced C₂₊ selectivity.

Based on this understanding, we speculate that, at the initial stage of the reaction, CuO is more selective for C₂₊ products than Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ because CuO can be reduced to Cu(0) in a shorter time. To verify this speculation, we re-examined the Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and CuO systems by monitoring the C₂₊ production rate during the CO₂RR at optimal potentials. Because C₂H₄ was the main component among the C₂₊ products in these systems, we used ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{4}}$ as the indicator for C₂₊ selectivity. The results revealed that the ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{4}}$ plateau was achieved faster in the CuO system than in the Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ system, although the final ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{4}}$ values of the two systems were similar. At sampling points of 10, 15, and 20 min, CuO exhibited a higher ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{4}}$ than Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ (Supplementary Fig. 14). This result agrees with the expectation, confirming that Cu(0) plays a key role in enhancing C₂₊ selectivity.

If Cu(0) is indeed the origin of high C₂₊ selectivity and oxidized Cu precursors are reduced to metallic Cu during CO₂RR, the marked variation in the performance of various Cu catalysts reported in the literature need to be understood. For instance, why do hydroxide- or oxide-derived Cu catalysts generally exhibit higher C₂₊ selectivity than bulk Cu catalysts (e.g., Cu foil)? In a previous study, we demonstrated that an oxidation–reduction cycle resulted in the fragmentation of original Cu material into smaller irregular grains⁷, leading to the exposure of a variety of grain boundaries and high-index facets promoting C–C couplings for high ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$^{32,48,49,50,51,52,53}. We therefore postulate that the C₂₊ selectivity is roughly related to the mean grain (crystallite) size of the Cu catalyst, and is benefited from grains that are more irregular with a decreased size.

In this study, the three derived Cu catalysts with similar grain sizes (~11 nm) indeed exhibited similar ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ (68%–73%). To further verify the correlation between the Cu grain size and C₂₊ selectivity, two additional Cu samples were prepared: Cu nanowires and electropolished polycrystalline Cu foil (Supplementary Figs. 1b and 3d–f). The mean grain size of the Cu nanowires estimated by XRD was ~29 nm, and the transmission electron microscopy revealed that the Cu foil comprised micron-sized grains (Supplementary Fig. 3e). The CO₂RR performance of Cu nanowires and electropolished polycrystalline Cu foil was also evaluated (Supplementary Fig. 4d–e). Comparisons of the maximum ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ and the mean grain sizes of the five tested catalysts confirmed a negative correlation between these two factors; that is, the C₂₊ selectivity increased with a decreasing Cu grain size (Fig. 5a). Another consequence of reducing the Cu grain size is an increase in the electrochemically active surface area of the electrode (Supplementary Table 1), which typically results in enhanced apparent activity in terms of current density per unit electrode area⁵⁴.

Strain effects

Although the three derived Cu catalysts exhibited similar C₂₊ selectivity, a discernible difference exists in the overall Faradaic efficiency for CO₂RR (${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{CO}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{RR}}}}}$) between CuO and the other two catalysts (CuO < Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ ≈ Cu(OH)₂; Fig. 2c). Moreover, CuO-derived Cu is strain-free, whereas the other two derived Cu samples show significant tensile strains under CO₂RR conditions (Fig. 3d). This coincidence led to wondering whether lattice strain is another factor affecting the catalytic performance of Cu in addition to grain boundaries and high-index facets associated with the small grain size.

According to the d-band theory, lattice strain can trigger a shift of the d-band center of the metal and tailor its catalytic activity^25,26,29,30. We performed DFT calculations to investigate how tensile strain affects the d-band center of Cu and the consequent binding energy (E_binding) of *CO on its surface, using Cu(111) and Cu(100) with different strain values as model structures (see the computational details in the Methods). The calculations revealed that for both structures, the d-band center shifts up toward the Fermi Level with increasing tensile strain, thus leading to a continuous increase in the E_binding of *CO. This conclusion holds for both low (Fig. 6a–d) and high (Supplementary Fig. 15a–c) *CO surface coverages. These results imply that strained Cu has a greater promoting effect on *CO adsorption than unstrained Cu, which has been experimentally verified using a recently reported method based on Raman band analysis (Supplementary Fig. 16a–d)⁵⁵.

**Fig. 6: The DFT calculation results.**

According to the widely accepted CO₂RR mechanism^56,57,58,59, *CHO/*COH and *COCO/*COCOH are the primary intermediates for the formation of CH₄ and C₂₊ products, respectively (Fig. 6e), while the Gibbs free energies of formation (ΔG_formation) of these intermediates are indicators of the ease of the corresponding pathways. The introduction of 0.5% tensile strain slightly reduces the ΔG_formation of *CHO, *COH, *COCO, and *COCOH on Cu(111) by 0.02, 0.02, 0.04, and 0.03 eV, respectively; further increases in strain do not monotonically decrease their ΔG_formation on Cu(111) but lead to fluctuations (Fig. 6f and Supplementary Fig. 17). Introducing 0.5−1.0% tensile strain leads to a decrease in ΔG_formation for *CHO, *COH, and *COCO on Cu(100), and further increasing the strain causes their ΔG_formation to first increase and then decrease. For *COCOH on Cu(100), the ΔG_formation slightly increases when the tensile strain increases from 0.0% to 1.5%, followed by a sudden drop at 2.0% strain (Fig. 6g and Supplementary Fig. 17).

Moreover, we explored the strain effect on the HER by calculating the adsorption free energy of *H (ΔG_*H) and water dissociation activation barriers. Regardless of strain degree and surface type, the ΔG_*H is uphill whereas the H₂ removal is downhill, implying that the HER on Cu is limited by the *H formation (Supplementary Fig. 18a, b). For Cu(111), although the ΔG_*H decreases with increasing tensile strain, it remains considerably positive at large strain values (e.g., 0.07 eV at 2.0% strain). For Cu(100), tensile strain does not affect the ΔG_*H. The influence of tensile strain on the water dissociation activation barrier is marginal for both surfaces (Supplementary Fig. 18c, d).

In summary, the calculations indicate that the introduction of tensile strain in Cu significantly promotes the adsorption of *CO and also slightly facilitates the subsequent hydrogenation and C–C coupling, while hardly affecting the HER. Therefore, Cu with tensile strain is expected to exhibit higher overall CO₂RR selectivity and suppressed HER, compared to unstrained Cu. Figure 5b displays the product distributions on the three catalysts at ~−1.1 V_RHE, in which the differences in the production of H₂, CH₄, and C₁ compounds between strained (Cu(OH)₂- and Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃-derived) and unstrained (CuO-derived) Cu are clearly illustrated. In comparison with the unstrained Cu, the strained Cu exhibited higher ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{CO}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{RR}}}}}$, primarily contributed by the enhanced production of C₁ compounds (e.g., CH₄), and lower ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{2}}$. This result is consistent with expectations from DFT calculations, corroborating the important role that lattice strain in Cu may play in CO₂RR.

It is not fully understood why Cu nanocrystals derived from Cu(OH)₂ or Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ have greater tensile strain than Cu nanocrystals derived from CuO. One possible reason is that the former nanocrystals undergo more drastic shrinkage in unit-cell volume (74% for Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, 71% for Cu(OH)₂, and 42% for CuO; Supplementary Table 3) and more pronounced elimination of components than the latter nanocrystals during the phase transition. With this hypothesis, the degree of lattice strain in Cu crystals can be tuned by the precursors, offering an effective strategy for strain engineering.

Although the promoting effect of tensile strain on C-C coupling and suppression on the competing HER have been demonstrated theoretically^60,61, a controversy exists in the literature on how the tensile strain in Cu affects the C₁ products during the CO₂RR. For instance, a recent study reported that tensile strain in Cu is unfavorable for the formation of C₁ products²⁹, which is inconsistent with our observations and the conclusions of other studies^31,61. Another study concluded that tensile strain has different effects on the production of CH₄, depending on the thickness of the Cu layer³⁰. These discrepancies imply that the lattice strain is not the primary factor determining CO₂RR selectivity, and its effect may be overwhelmed by other coexisting factors, such as crystal size, grain boundary, and alloying effect. In this study, the high C₂₊ selectivity of derived Cu catalysts is primarily attributed to the grain boundaries and high-index facets due to the size effect, while the overall CO₂RR selectivity (influenced by the competition between C₁ production and HER) can be further improved by introducing tensile strain through the choice of precursors.

In summary, the as-prepared Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃, Cu(OH)₂, and CuO nanocrystals delivered an ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2+}}$ of 73.0%, 71.9%, and 68.6%, respectively, at approximately −1.1 V_RHE during the CO₂RR. The time-resolved operando XRD, which uses a laboratory-scale X-ray source for characterizing CO₂RR electrocatalysts, and operando Raman spectroscopy confirmed the full reduction of the precursors to Cu(0) while (or before) delivering enhanced C₂₊ selectivity under CO₂RR conditions, and revealed that the electroreduction kinetics of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and Cu(OH)₂ were significantly slower than those of CuO. The results collectively demonstrated that the active species responsible for the enhanced C₂₊ selectivity of the derived Cu electrodes was Cu(0), rather than oxidized Cu species. This conclusion was further verified by the faster reduction of CuO to Cu and the corresponding higher ${{{\mathrm{FE}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{C}}}}_{2}{{{\mathrm{H}}}}_{4}}$ at the initial stage of CO₂RR compared to that of Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃. However, it is worth noting that the possible presence of dynamic amorphous oxidized Cu species in the catalyst cannot be completely excluded due to the inherent limitations of XRD and Raman characterization.

A negative correlation between the Cu grain size and C₂₊ selectivity was established and the small grain size of the derived Cu (~11 nm), which resulted in an increased exposure of grain boundaries and high-index facets to facilitate the C–C coupling reaction, was considered as the primary factor for achieving high C₂₊ selectivity. Operando XRD revealed remarkable tensile strains in Cu nanocrystals derived from Cu(OH)₂ and Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ but not in Cu nanocrystals derived from CuO. Theoretical calculations indicate that tensile strain in the Cu lattice helps promote the hydrogenation of *CO and C–C coupling, enhancing the overall CO₂RR selectivity and suppressing HER, which explains the diverse performance of the three derived Cu catalysts. Reducing crystallite size and inducing lattice strain were therefore identified as two effective approaches to enhancing the performance of Cu catalysts for CO₂RR.

The findings of this study highlight the significant role of operando characterization techniques in probing catalyst evolution during CO₂RR, and the customized operando platforms can be readily adapted to other important electrochemical reactions, including but not limited to hydrogen/oxygen evolution, nitrogen reduction, and methane oxidation.

Methods

Precursor preparation

Cu ₂ (OH) ₂ CO ₃ nanocrystals and CuO nanocrystals

First, aqueous solutions of 10 mL of 0.5 M CuSO₄ (Sigma–Aldrich, 98%) and 12 mL of 0.5 M Na₂CO₃ (Sigma–Aldrich, ≥ 99.0%) were prepared at room temperature using Milli-Q water (18.2 MΩ·cm⁻¹). Subsequently, the Na⁺ solution was added to the Cu²⁺ solution, and the mixture was continuously stirred. After 15 min, the mixture was heated at 60 °C and stirred for another 15 min. Afterward, the mixture was allowed to stand until fully precipitated. Then, the Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ nanocrystals were obtained via vacuum filtration. The final product was dried in a vacuum oven overnight at 30 °C. The as-prepared Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ nanocrystals were heated in a vacuum oven for 4 days at 250 °C to synthesize CuO nanocrystals.

Cu(OH) ₂ nanocrystals

First, 50 mL of 0.05 M aqueous solution of Cu(NO₃)₂ was prepared at room temperature. Subsequently, 1 mL of 25% ammonia solution was slowly added into the solution, followed by 1 mL of 0.01 M NaOH aqueous solution under stirring. The mixture was heated to 60 °C for 15 min and then cooled to room temperature. Then, the mixture was subjected to centrifugation and copious washing with water to a neutral pH to obtain the resulting bluish Cu(OH)₂ nanocrystals. The final product was dried in a vacuum oven overnight at 30 °C.

Cu nanowires and electropolished Cu foil

The Cu nanowires were sequentially prepared by mixing 20 mL of 15 M NaOH, 1 mL of 0.1 M Cu(NO₃)₂, 0.15 mL of ethylenediamine, and 0.025 mL of 35 wt% hydrazine under continuous stirring. Subsequently, the mixture was heated to 80 °C for 60 min, and the product was collected by centrifugation and washed with a 3 wt% aqueous hydrazine solution. The Cu nanowires were dried in a vacuum oven overnight at 30 °C and stored under an Ar atmosphere to minimize oxidation. Polycrystalline Cu foil was electropolished in 85% phosphoric acid (Scharlau, 85% in water) at 3.0 V vs. another Cu foil for 5 min.

Ex situ material characterization

The chemical compositions of the precursors were investigated using powder XRD (Bruker, D8 Advance) with a Cu Kα radiation wavelength of 0.154184 nm. The obtained peaks were indexed using standard patterns (PDF#00-004-0836 for Cu, PDF#00-048-1548 for CuO, PDF#04-009-4366 for Cu(OH)₂, and PDF#00-002-0345 for Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃). The mean crystallite sizes of the precursors were estimated using the Scherrer equation ($\tau=K\lambda /\beta {\cos }\theta$, where τ is the mean size of the crystalline domains, K is the dimensionless shape factor (0.89), λ is the X-ray wavelength, β is the line broadening at half the maximum intensity (full width at half maximum), and θ is the Bragg angle). Ex situ Raman spectra of the samples were recorded using a WITec apyron system equipped with a 633 nm laser. Considering that the three compounds were easily reduced to Cu₂O under the Raman laser (Supplementary Fig. 19)³⁶, a low magnification objective lens (Zeiss EC Epiplan–Neofluar Dic 10X/0.25) was used and the laser power was set to 20 mW to prevent the laser-induced thermo-reduction of the samples. The surface morphologies of the samples were characterized using SEM (FEI, Magellan) at a working distance of 4 mm. All samples were coated with a layer of 3 nm of Ir prior to SEM imaging to eliminate charging caused by their poor conductivity.

Electrode preparation

First, 20 mg of the as-prepared precursor powder was mixed with 50 µL of Nafion solution and 3 mL of ethanol. Subsequently, the mixture was sonicated for at least 30 min to obtain a homogenous ink. Next, the electrodes were prepared by airbrushing the precursor ink onto a glassy carbon substrate with an area of 1.0 × 0.5 cm². For operando characterizations, carbon paper (Freudenberg H14C9, Fuel Cell Store) was used as the substrate. The mass loading of the precursor was approximately 0.6 mg cm⁻².

Electroreduction of CO₂

The electrochemistry experiments were performed in a gas-tight H-type cell using a CHI 760e workstation. The cathode and anode compartments were separated using a Nafion 117 membrane (Fuel Cell Store). A Pt foil was used as the counter electrode, and an Ag/AgCl electrode filled with saturated KCl solution (CHI, 111) was used as the reference electrode. All potentials measured against Ag/AgCl were converted to the reversible hydrogen electrode (RHE) scale using E_RHE = E_Ag/AgCl + 0.197 V + 0.0591 × pH. The cell resistance was determined using a current-interrupt method, and the potential was manually corrected after each measurement. In addition, a 0.1 M KHCO₃ (Honeywell, 99.5% to 101.0% (acidimetric)) aqueous solution was used as the electrolyte and was saturated with CO₂ prior to each CO₂RR experiment. The pH value of the cell measured using an Orion 5 star benchtop multiparameter (Thermo Scientific) was 6.8. During the CO₂RR experiment, 5.0 sccm of CO₂ was continuously purged into the cell, and the gaseous products were routed into an online gas chromatography (GC) system (Kechuang GC2002).

Product analysis

Gaseous products were detected using the online GC equipped with three detectors: one thermal conductivity detector for detecting H₂, one flame ionization detector for detecting hydrocarbons, and another flame ionization detector coupled with a methanizer (Kechuang) for detecting CO. Quantitative determination was conducted using calibration curves from standard gases.

Liquid products were analyzed using proton nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR, Bruker, 600 MHz) with a presaturation sequence for suppressing the water peak. Calibration curves were developed using commercial chemicals with 1.67 ppm dimethyl sulfoxide (Sigma–Aldrich, 99.9%) as the internal standard. In addition, FE was calculated using ${FE}=([A]\cdot V\cdot ({nF}))/Q$, where [A] is the analyte concentration determined using quantitative NMR, V represents the NMR sample volume (typically, 600 μL), n denotes the molar ratio of the transferred electrons, F indicates the Faraday constant, and Q denotes the total charge passed.

Operando XRD

Operando XRD measurements were performed using a Bruker D8 Discover XRD spectrometer equipped with an IµS microfocus X-ray source and Eiger 2D detector. A 2 mm collimator was used to enhance the X-ray intensity on a small spot on the electrode. The 2D detector was vertically positioned to enable the coverage of 21.7° (2θ) in the still scan mode to cover the desired diffraction angle range at a high resolution (Supplementary Fig. 20). In addition, an optical laser-video camera system was incorporated to enable easy and accurate sample positioning and system alignment. A customized electrochemical cell (Supplementary Fig. 6) was used with a Pt wire and an Ag/AgCl electrode (CHI 111; saturated KCl solution) as the counter and reference electrodes, respectively. The cathode and anode compartments were separated using a Fumasep FKB-PK-130 membrane (Fuel Cell Store). The precursors were airbrushed onto one side of the carbon paper and positioned close to the glassy carbon on the cell to function as the working electrode. The electrolyte (50 mL of 0.1 M KHCO₃) was saturated with CO₂ while circulating through the cell at 1 mL min⁻¹. During the measurements, the cell was fastened on the stage using psi tilted to 30° for the better release of in situ formed bubbles from the electrode surface. For the Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ nanocrystals, the measurements were conducted at −0.84, −1.05, and −1.2 V_RHE. For Cu(OH)₂ and CuO nanocrystals, the potential was set to −1.08 and −1.16 V_RHE, respectively. The 2D diffraction patterns were collected in the still scan mode at an integration time of 900 s. The raw data were integrated using DIFFRAC.EVA software, and the background was removed for improved peak identification.

Strain determination

The tensile strain values of derived Cu samples were calculated using the equation:

$${{{{{\rm{Tensile}}}}}}\,{{{{{\rm{strain}}}}}}\;(\%)=\frac{d-{d}_{0}}{{d}_{0}}\times 100\%$$

(1)

where d is the d-spacing of a given reflection (e.g., Cu(111) or Cu(100)) determined from the XRD pattern and d₀ is the corresponding d-spacing in the standard Cu sample.

For the operando XRD experiments, the theta angle was set to 20.28° for still scan mode to achieve the desired diffraction angle range (30°−51.7°, 2θ) at a high resolution. Under such conditions, the illuminated area on the electrode is an ellipse of ~4.7 mm². The obtained strain value is the average result of the illuminated area.

Operando Raman spectroscopy

Operando Raman spectra were recorded using a WITec apyron system with a water-immersion objective lens (Zeiss W Plan-Apochromat 63X/1) and a 633 nm laser beam. A low laser power of 0.8 mW was used to prevent the irradiation-induced modification on the precursor surface. The measurements were conducted in a customized electrochemical cell (Supplementary Fig. 10) with a Pt wire and an Ag/AgCl electrode (CHI 111; saturated KCl solution) as the counter and reference electrode, respectively. The cathode and anode compartments were separated using a Fumasep FKB-PK-130 membrane (Fuel Cell Store). The electrolyte (50 mL of 0.1 M KHCO₃) was saturated with CO₂ while circulating at 1 mL min⁻¹ above the electrode surface to remove bubbles produced in situ. The Raman signals were collected in a back-scattering geometry every 15 min along the CO₂RR process. The raw data were recorded and processed using WITec Control Five software, and the background was removed to enable improved peak identification.

Computational methods

The DFT calculations were conducted using the projector-augmented wave method, as implemented in Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package code^62,63. The generalized gradient approximation with the Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof exchange-correlation functional was used. A uniform 6 × 6 × 6 k-mesh grid in the Brillouin zone was employed to optimize the crystal structure of bulk Cu, and the resulting lattice parameter was a = 3.635 Å. The Cu slab model with five atomic layers had a (2 × 2) and a (3 × 3) lateral periodicity with (111) and (100) exposed surfaces, respectively, and the slab replica was separated by ∼20 Å of vacuum. The lattice parameters were set to a = 3.653 Å, 3.671 Å, 3.690 Å, and 3.708 Å for Cu(111) and Cu(100) slabs to mimic 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, and 2.0% tensile strain, respectively. A 2 × 2 × 1 k-mesh was used for all Cu(111) and Cu(100) slab structures. The plane-wave basis set cutoffs of the wave functions were set at 500 eV for the bulk and 450 eV for slab structures without and with molecular adsorption. The atomic positions of all structures were fully relaxed until the forces on each atom were less than 0.01 eV/Å.

The Gibbs free energy values were calculated using the following equations:

$$G={E}_{{{{{{\rm{DFT}}}}}}}+{E}_{{{{{{\rm{ZPE}}}}}}}+{\int }_{0}^{298.15}{C}_{v}{dT}-{TS}$$

(2)

$${E}_{ZPE}=\frac{1}{2}\sum \;h\nu$$

(3)

$${\int }_{0}^{298.15}{C}_{v}dT={k}_{B}\sum {\left(\frac{h\nu }{{k}_{B}T}\right)}^{2}\frac{\exp \left(\frac{h\nu }{{k}_{B}T}\right)}{{\left[\exp \left(\frac{h\nu }{{k}_{B}T}\right)-1\right]}^{2}}$$

(4)

where ${E}_{{DFT}}$ denotes the energy calculated by DFT, ${E}_{{ZPE}}$ represents the vibrational zero-point energy, ${\int }_{0}^{298.15}{C}_{v}{dT}$ indicates the heat capacity, and S is the entropy, respectively. In addition, ℎ is the Planck constant, k_B denotes the Boltzmann constant, and v represents the vibrational frequency. Only vibrational modes were considered for calculating the entropy due to the scarce contribution from translational and rotational modes. The Gibbs free energy of formation (ΔG_formation) for *COCOH is calculated as ΔG_formation(*COCOH) = G_*COCOH – (G_*CO+*CO + G_H2/2). In addition, ΔG_formation for *COH is calculated as ΔG_formation(*COH) = G_*COH – (G_*CO + G_H2/2), ΔG_formation for *CHO is calculated as ΔG_formation(*CHO) = G_*CHO – (G_*CO + G_H2/2), and ΔG_formation for *COCO is calculated as ΔG_formation(*COCO) = G_*COCO – (G_*CO + G_CO). The thermodynamic parameters for calculating Gibbs free energies are given in Supplementary Tables S4–S13.

The hydrogen adsorption free energy G_*H is calculated as G_*H = E (slab + H) – E(slab) – E(H₂)/2 + ΔE_ZPE – TΔS, where E (slab + H) and E(slab) are the total energies of the Cu(111) or Cu(100) slab with and without H adsorption; E(H₂) is the total energy of a H₂ molecule; ΔE_ZPE is the difference in the zero-point energy between gas phase of H₂ and the adsorbed H atom; and ΔS is the difference in entropy. To determine the transition state (TS) for the water dissociation on the Cu(111) and Cu(100) surfaces, the climbing image nudged elastic band (NEB) method was employed, and the force convergence tolerance on each atom was set to be 0.05 eV/Å during the search of the minimum energy path.

Data availability

The data supporting the findings of this study are provided in the Supplementary Information/Source Data file. The input and output files for the DFT calculations are available in the IoChem-BD database (https://iochem-bd.bsc.es/browse/review-collection/100/215881/6ca411524a36a3f2c1194679). Additional data are available from the corresponding authors on request. Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

Vienna ab initio simulation package (VASP) for the DFT calculations is available at https://www.vasp.at/.

References

Gao, D. F., Arán-Ais, R. M., Jeon, H. S. & Roldan Cuenya, B. Rational catalyst and electrolyte design for CO₂ electroreduction towards multicarbon products. Nat. Catal. 2, 198–210 (2019).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Xia, C. et al. Continuous production of pure liquid fuel solutions via electrocatalytic CO₂ reduction using solid-electrolyte devices. Nat. Energy 4, 776–785 (2019).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Zheng, T. T. et al. Large-scale and highly selective CO₂ electrocatalytic reduction on nickel single-atom catalyst. Joule 3, 265–278 (2019).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Lu, L. et al. Highly efficient electroreduction of CO₂ to methanol on palladium-copper bimetallic aerogels. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 57, 14149–14153 (2018).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Wang, Y. S., Chen, J. X., Wang, G. X., Li, Y. & Wen, Z. H. Perfluorinated covalent triazine framework derived hybrids for the highly selective electroconversion of carbon dioxide into methane. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 57, 13120–13124 (2018).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Fan, L. et al. Strategies in catalysts and electrolyzer design for electrochemical CO₂ reduction toward C₂₊ products. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay3111 (2020).
Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Lei, Q. et al. Investigating the Origin of Enhanced C₂₊ Selectivity in Oxide-/Hydroxide-Derived Copper Electrodes during CO₂ Electroreduction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 4213–4222 (2020).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Lee, S. Y. et al. Mixed copper states in anodized Cu electrocatalyst for stable and selective ethylene production from CO₂ reduction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 140, 8681–8689 (2018).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Liang, Z. Q. et al. Copper-on-nitride enhances the stable electrosynthesis of multi-carbon products from CO₂. Nat. Commun. 9, 3828 (2018).
Article ADS PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Van Muylder, J. Electrochemical Materials Science Ch. 1 (Springer US: Boston, MA, 1981).
Mistry, H. et al. Highly selective plasma-activated copper catalysts for carbon dioxide reduction to ethylene. Nat. Commun. 7, 12123 (2016).
Article ADS PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Fan, Q. K. et al. Manipulating Cu nanoparticle surface oxidation states tunes catalytic selectivity toward CH₄ or C₂₊ products in CO₂ electroreduction. Adv. Energy Mater. 11, 2101424 (2021).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Yang, P. P. et al. Protecting copper oxidation state via intermediate confinement for selective CO₂ electroreduction to C₂₊ Fuels. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 6400–6408 (2020).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Liu, C. et al. Stability and effects of subsurface oxygen in oxide-derived Cu catalyst for CO₂ reduction. J. Phys. Chem. C. 121, 25010–25017 (2017).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Favaro, M. et al. Subsurface oxide plays a critical role in CO₂ activation by Cu(111) surfaces to form chemisorbed CO₂, the first step in reduction of CO₂. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 6706–6711 (2017).
Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Dattila, F., García-Muelas, R. & López, N. Active and selective ensembles in oxide-derived copper catalysts for CO₂ reduction. ACS Energy Lett. 5, 3176–3184 (2020).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Eilert, A. et al. Subsurface oxygen in oxide-derived copper electrocatalysts for carbon dioxide reduction. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 8, 285–290 (2017).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Cavalca, F. et al. Nature and distribution of stable subsurface oxygen in copper electrodes during electrochemical CO₂ reduction. J. Phys. Chem. C. 121, 25003–25009 (2017).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Wang, H. Y. et al. Direct evidence of subsurface oxygen formation in oxide-derived Cu by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 61, e202111021 (2022).
CAS Google Scholar
Scholten, F., Nguyen, K. C., Bruce, J. P., Heyde, M. & Roldan Cuenya, B. Identifying structure-selectivity correlations in the electrochemical reduction of CO₂: A comparison of well-ordered atomically clean and chemically etched copper single-crystal surfaces. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 60, 19169–19175 (2021).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kim, T. et al. Enhancing C₂–C₃ production from CO₂ on copper electrocatalysts via a potential-dependent mesostructure. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 1, 1965–1972 (2018).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Jiang, K. et al. Metal ion cycling of Cu foil for selective C-C coupling in electrochemical CO₂ reduction. Nat. Catal. 1, 111–119 (2018).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Möller, T. et al. Electrocatalytic CO₂ reduction on CuO_x Nanocubes: Tracking the evolution of chemical state, geometric structure, and catalytic selectivity using Operando spectroscopy. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 59, 17974–17983 (2020).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Velasco-Velez, J. J. et al. Revealing the active phase of copper during the electroreduction of CO₂ in aqueous electrolyte by correlating in situ X-ray spectroscopy and in situ electron microscopy. ACS Energy Lett. 5, 2106–2111 (2020).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Jansonius, R. P., Reid, L. M., Virca, C. N. & Berlinguette, C. P. Strain engineering electrocatalysts for selective CO₂ reduction. ACS Energy Lett. 4, 980–986 (2019).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Mavrikakis, M., Hammer, B. & Nørskov, J. K. Effect of strain on the reactivity of metal surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2819–2822 (1998).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Liu, F. Z., Wu, C. & Yang, S. C. Strain and Ligand Effects on CO₂ Reduction Reactions over Cu-Metal Heterostructure Catalysts. J. Phys. Chem. C. 121, 22139–22146 (2017).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Monzó, J. et al. Enhanced electrocatalytic activity of Au@Cu core@shell nanoparticles towards CO₂ reduction. J. Mater. Chem. A 3, 23690–23698 (2015).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Kim, T., Kumar, R. E., Brock, J. A., Fullerton, E. E. & Fenning, D. P. How Strain Alters CO₂ Electroreduction on Model Cu(001) Surfaces. ACS Catal. 11, 6662–6671 (2021).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Du, M. S., Zhao, X., Zhu, G., Hsu, H. Y. & Liu, F. Elastic strain controlling the activity and selectivity of CO₂ electroreduction on Cu overlayers. J. Mater. Chem. A 9, 4933–4944 (2021).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Liu, S. G. & Huang, S. P. Structure engineering of Cu-based nanoparticles for electrochemical reduction of CO₂. J. Catal. 375, 234–241 (2019).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Li, C. W., Ciston, J. & Kanan, M. W. Electroreduction of carbon monoxide to liquid fuel on oxide-derived nanocrystalline copper. Nature 508, 504–507 (2014).
Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Chen, C. J. et al. The in situ study of surface species and structures of oxide-derived copper catalysts for electrochemical CO₂ reduction dagger. Chem. Sci. 12, 5938–5943 (2021).
Article ADS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Li, X., Wang, S., Li, L., Sun, Y. & Xie, Y. Progress and perspective for in situ studies of CO₂ reduction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 9567–9581 (2020).
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Jiang, S., Klingan, K., Pasquini, C. & Dau, H. New aspects of operando Raman spectroscopy applied to electrochemical CO₂ reduction on Cu foams. J. Chem. Phys. 150, 041718 (2019).
Article ADS PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Deng, Y. L., Handoko, A. D., Du, Y. H., Xi, S. B. & Yeo, B. S. In situ Raman spectroscopy of copper and copper oxide surfaces during electrochemical oxygen evolution reaction: Identification of Cu^III oxides as catalytically active species. ACS Catal. 6, 2473–2481 (2016).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Marucci, G., Beeby, A., Parker, A. W. & Nicholson, C. E. Raman spectroscopic library of medieval pigments collected with five different wavelengths for investigation of illuminated manuscripts. Anal. Methods-UK 10, 1219–1236 (2018).
Article Google Scholar
Frost, R. L., Martens, W. N., Rintoul, L., Mahmutagic, E. & Kloprogge, J. T. Raman spectroscopic study of azurite and malachite at 298 and 77 K. J. Raman Spectrosc. 33, 252–259 (2002).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Wang, W. et al. A simple wet-chemical synthesis and characterization of CuO nanorods. Appl. Phys. A 76, 417–420 (2003).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Cheng, D. et al. The nature of active sites for carbon dioxide electroreduction over oxide-derived copper catalysts. Nat. Commun. 12, 395 (2021).
Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Dutta, A. et al. CO₂ electrolysis - Complementary operando XRD, XAS and Raman spectroscopy study on the stability of Cu_xO foam catalysts. J. Catal. 389, 592–603 (2020).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Ren, D., Gao, J., Zakeeruddin, S. M. & Grätzel, M. New insights into the interface of electrochemical flow cells for carbon dioxide reduction to ethylene. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 12, 7583–7589 (2021).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Moradzaman, M. & Mul, G. In situ Raman study of potential-dependent surface adsorbed carbonate, CO, OH, and C species on Cu electrodes during electrochemical reduction of CO₂. Chemelectrochemistry 8, 1478–1485 (2021).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Shan, W. et al. In situ surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopic evidence on the origin of selectivity in CO₂ electrocatalytic reduction. ACS Nano 14, 11363–11372 (2020).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Schmitt, K. G. & Gewirth, A. A. In situ surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy of the electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide on silver with 3,5-Diamino-1,2,4-Triazole. J. Phys. Chem. C. 118, 17567–17576 (2014).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Liu, G. et al. CO₂ reduction on pure Cu produces only H₂ after subsurface O is depleted: Theory and experiment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2012649118 (2021).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Scott, S. B. et al. Absence of Oxidized Phases in Cu under CO Reduction Conditions. ACS Energy Lett. 4, 803–804 (2019).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Feng, X., Jiang, K., Fan, S. & Kanan, M. W. A direct grain-boundary-activity correlation for CO electroreduction on Cu nanoparticles. ACS Cent. Sci. 2, 169–174 (2016).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Handoko, A. D. et al. Mechanistic Insights into the selective electroreduction of carbon dioxide to ethylene on Cu₂O-derived copper catalysts. J. Phys. Chem. C. 120, 20058–20067 (2016).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Jung, H. et al. Electrochemical fragmentation of Cu₂O nanoparticles enhancing selective C-C coupling from CO₂ reduction reaction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 141, 4624–4633 (2019).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Velasco-Vélez, J. J. et al. On the activity/selectivity and phase stability of thermally grown copper oxides during the electrocatalytic reduction of CO₂. ACS Catal. 10, 11510–11518 (2020).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Lum, Y. W., Yue, B. B., Lobaccaro, P., Bell, A. T. & Ager, J. W. Optimizing C-C Coupling on Oxide-Derived Copper Catalysts for Electrochemical CO₂ Reduction. J. Phys. Chem. C. 121, 14191–14203 (2017).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Chen, Z. Q. et al. Grain-Boundary-rich copper for efficient solar-driven electrochemical CO₂ reduction to ethylene and ethanol. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 6878–6883 (2020).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Nitopi, S. et al. Progress and Perspectives of Electrochemical CO₂ Reduction on Copper in Aqueous Electrolyte. Chem. Rev. 119, 7610–7672 (2019).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Zhan, C. et al. Revealing the CO Coverage-Driven C-C Coupling Mechanism for Electrochemical CO₂ Reduction on Cu₂O Nanocubes via Operando Raman Spectroscopy. ACS Catal. 11, 7694–7701 (2021).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Zheng, Y. et al. Understanding the Roadmap for Electrochemical Reduction of CO₂ to Multi-Carbon Oxygenates and Hydrocarbons on Copper-Based Catalysts. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 141, 7646–7659 (2019).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
De Luna, P. et al. Catalyst electro-redeposition controls morphology and oxidation state for selective carbon dioxide reduction. Nat. Catal. 1, 103–110 (2018).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Kortlever, R., Shen, J., Schouten, K. J. P., Calle-Vallejo, F. & Koper, M. T. M. Catalysts and Reaction Pathways for the Electrochemical Reduction of Carbon Dioxide. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 6, 4073–4082 (2015).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Birdja, Y. Y. et al. Advances and challenges in understanding the electrocatalytic conversion of carbon dioxide to fuels. Nat. Energy 4, 732–745 (2019).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Sandberg, R. B., Montoya, J. H., Chan, K. & Nørskov, J. K. CO-CO coupling on Cu facets: Coverage, strain and field effects. Surf. Sci. 654, 56–62 (2016).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Chen, Z. Z., Zhang, X. & Lu, G. Overpotential for CO₂ electroreduction lowered on strained penta-twinned Cu nanowires. Chem. Sci. 6, 6829–6835 (2015).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kresse, G. & Hafner, J. Ab-Initio Molecular-Dynamics for Open-Shell Transition-Metals. Phys. Rev. B 48, 13115–13118 (1993).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169–11186 (1996).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

The financial support for this work was provided by KAUST Catalysis Center CCF Fund (FCC/1/1974-16-01) to Y.H. and Baseline Funds (BAS/1/1413-01-01) to X.L. from King Abdullah University of Science and Technology. This work is partially supported by National Key Research and Development Project of China (2022YFE0113800). This research used resources from the Core Laboratories of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology. J.Y. acknowledges financial support from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (grant P0042930).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Advanced Membranes and Porous Materials Center, Physical Sciences and Engineering Division, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia
Qiong Lei, Jun Yin, Xinglong Dong, Zhi-Peng Wu, Xiaoqian Wang & Yu Han
Clean Combustion Research Center, KAUST, Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia
Liang Huang & Xu Lu
KAUST Solar Center, KAUST, Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia
Liang Huang & Xu Lu
Department of Applied Physics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, 999077, Hong Kong, PR China
Jun Yin
Imaging and Characterization Core Lab, KAUST, Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia
Bambar Davaasuren & Youyou Yuan
KAUST Catalysis Center, KAUST, Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia
Xinglong Dong & Yu Han
Multi-scale Porous Materials Center, Institute of Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies, & School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400044, PR China
Ke Xin Yao

Authors

Qiong Lei
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Liang Huang
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Jun Yin
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Bambar Davaasuren
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Youyou Yuan
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Xinglong Dong
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Zhi-Peng Wu
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Xiaoqian Wang
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Ke Xin Yao
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Xu Lu
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Yu Han
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Q.L. and Y.H. crafted the experimental plan and analyzed all the data. Q.L. performed the precursor synthesis, CO₂RR performance evaluation, and the operando XRD. Q.L., L.H., K.X.Y., X.W., Z.W., and Y.H. analyzed the CO₂RR results. Q.L., B.D., and Y.Y. designed and implemented the operando XRD characterization platform. Q.L. and L.H. implemented and performed the operando Raman spectroscopy characterization under the guidance of X.L. J.Y. performed the theoretical calculations and analyzed the computational data. X.D. implemented the online gas chromatography system. Y.H. guided the research. Q.L., Y.H., and X.L. wrote the manuscript. All the authors discussed the results and reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jun Yin, Xu Lu or Yu Han.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Communications thanks the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Source data

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lei, Q., Huang, L., Yin, J. et al. Structural evolution and strain generation of derived-Cu catalysts during CO₂ electroreduction. Nat Commun 13, 4857 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32601-9

Download citation

Received: 04 March 2022
Accepted: 09 August 2022
Published: 18 August 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32601-9

This article is cited by

Superexchange-stabilized long-distance Cu sites in rock-salt-ordered double perovskite oxides for CO2 electromethanation
- Jiawei Zhu
- Yu Zhang
- Heqing Jiang
Nature Communications (2024)
Dynamics of bulk and surface oxide evolution in copper foams for electrochemical CO2 reduction
- Fan Yang
- Shan Jiang
- Holger Dau
Communications Chemistry (2024)
Combined effects of sea urchin-like structure and mixed Cu+/Cu0 states on promoting C2 formation in electrocatalytic CO2 reduction
- Mengqing Shan
- Dongsheng Lu
- Hua Wang
Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering (2024)
Unraveling the synergistic effects of Cu-Ag tandem catalysts during electrochemical CO2 reduction using nanofocused X-ray probes
- Marvin L. Frisch
- Longfei Wu
- Peter Strasser
Nature Communications (2023)
Stabilizing ruthenium dioxide with cation-anchored sulfate for durable oxygen evolution in proton-exchange membrane water electrolyzers
- Yanrong Xue
- Jiwu Zhao
- Xu Lu
Nature Communications (2023)

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Subjects

Abstract

Similar content being viewed by others

Introduction

Results

Precursor characterization

CO2RR performance

Redox behaviors

Operando XRD

Operando Raman spectroscopy

Discussion

Importance and necessity of Operando characterizations

Determination of active species in derived Cu catalysts

Strain effects

Methods

Precursor preparation

Cu 2 (OH) 2 CO 3 nanocrystals and CuO nanocrystals

Cu(OH) 2 nanocrystals

Cu nanowires and electropolished Cu foil

Ex situ material characterization

Electrode preparation

Electroreduction of CO2

Product analysis

Operando XRD

Strain determination

Operando Raman spectroscopy

Computational methods

Data availability

Code availability

References

Acknowledgements

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Contributions

Corresponding authors

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Peer review

Peer review information

Additional information

Supplementary information

Source data

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Share this article

This article is cited by

Comments

Search

Quick links

CO₂RR performance

Cu ₂ (OH) ₂ CO ₃ nanocrystals and CuO nanocrystals

Cu(OH) ₂ nanocrystals

Electroreduction of CO₂