Combining computational and experimental methods is a powerful approach to understand the variables that govern catalyst performance and ultimately design improved materials. However, the effectiveness of this approach rests on the strength of the relationships between calculated parameters and experimental measurements. These relationships are complicated by the intricacy and dynamic behaviour of catalytic active sites, and by the non-trivial relationship between calculated reaction energetics and observed rates. In this Perspective, we highlight opportunities to enhance the connection between computation and experiment in electrocatalysis. These include measuring the intrinsic kinetic behaviour of catalysts, creating precise models for the active site and its environment, and forming clear relationships between calculated reaction energetics and observed rates. As experimental and computational methods continue to become more powerful, clear connections between the two will maximize their utility to guide the design of efficient and selective electrocatalysts.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to Nature and 55 other Nature journal
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $9.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Thomas, J. M. & Thomas, W. J. Principles and Practice of Heterogeneous Catalysis (John Wiley & Sons, 2014).
Friend, C. M. & Xu, B. Heterogeneous catalysis: a central science for a sustainable future. Acc. Chem. Res. 50, 517–521 (2017).
Seh, Z. W. et al. Combining theory and experiment in electrocatalysis: insights into materials design. Science 355, 6321 (2017).
Nørskov, J. K., Abild-Pedersen, F., Studt, F. & Bligaard, T. Density functional theory in surface chemistry and catalysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 937–943 (2011).
Nørskov, J. K. et al. Universality in heterogeneous catalysis. J. Catal. 209, 275–278 (2002).
Sutton, J. E., Guo, W., Katsoulakis, M. A. & Vlachos, D. G. Effects of correlated parameters and uncertainty in electronic-structure-based chemical kinetic modelling. Nat. Chem. 8, 331 (2016).
Medford, A. J. et al. From the Sabatier principle to a predictive theory of transition-metal heterogeneous catalysis. J. Catal. 328, 36–42 (2015).
Hammer, B. & Nørskov, J. K. Electronic factors determining the reactivity of metal surfaces. Surf. Sci. 343, 211–220 (1995).
Madon, R. J. & Boudart, M. Experimental criterion for the absence of artifacts in the measurement of rates of heterogeneous catalytic reactions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 21, 438–447 (1982).
Boudart, M. Turnover rates in heterogeneous catalysis. Chem. Rev. 95, 661–666 (1995).
Benck, J. D., Hellstern, T. R., Kibsgaard, J., Chakthranont, P. & Jaramillo, T. F. Catalyzing the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) with molybdenum sulfide nanomaterials. ACS Catal. 4, 3957–3971 (2014).
Kibsgaard, J. et al. Designing an improved transition metal phosphide catalyst for hydrogen evolution using experimental and theoretical trends. Energy Environ. Sci. 8, 3022–3029 (2015).
Hansen, J. N. et al. Is there anything better than Pt for HER? ACS Energy Lett. 6, 1175–1180 (2021).
Kibsgaard, J. & Chorkendorff, I. Considerations for the scaling-up of water splitting catalysts. Nat. Energy 4, 430–433 (2019).
Nitopi, S. et al. Progress and perspectives of electrochemical CO2 reduction on copper in aqueous electrolyte. Chem. Rev. 119, 7610–7672 (2019).
Resasco, J. & Bell, A. T. Electrocatalytic CO2 reduction to fuels: progress and opportunities. Trends Chem. 2, 825–836 (2020).
Clark, E. L. et al. Standards and protocols for data acquisition and reporting for studies of the electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide. ACS Catal. 8, 6560–6570 (2018).
Govindarajan, N., Kastlunger, G., Heenen, H. H. & Chan, K. Improving the intrinsic activity of electrocatalysts for sustainable energy conversion: where are we and where can we go? Chem. Sci. 13, 14–26 (2022).
Kas, R. et al. Electrochemical CO2 reduction on nanostructured metal electrodes: fact or defect? Chem. Sci. 11, 1738–1749 (2020).
Bui, J. C., Kim, C., Weber, A. Z. & Bell, A. T. Dynamic boundary layer simulation of pulsed CO2 electrolysis on a copper catalyst. ACS Energy Lett. 6, 1181–1188 (2021).
Singh, M. R., Clark, E. L. & Bell, A. T. Effects of electrolyte, catalyst, and membrane composition and operating conditions on the performance of solar-driven electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 17, 18924–18936 (2015).
Christopher, P. Surface-mediated processes for energy production and conversion: critical considerations in model system design for DFT calculations. ACS Energy Lett. 3, 3015–3016 (2018).
Medford, A. J. et al. Assessing the reliability of calculated catalytic ammonia synthesis rates. Science 345, 197–200 (2014).
Wellendorff, J. et al. A benchmark database for adsorption bond energies to transition metal surfaces and comparison to selected DFT functionals. Surf. Sci. 640, 36–44 (2015).
Calle-Vallejo, F., Loffreda, D., Koper, M. T. & Sautet, P. Introducing structural sensitivity into adsorption-energy scaling relations by means of coordination numbers. Nat. Chem. 7, 403–410 (2015).
Dahl, S. et al. Role of steps in N2 activation on Ru(0001). Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1814 (1999).
Ulissi, Z. W. et al. Machine-learning methods enable exhaustive searches for active bimetallic facets and reveal active site motifs for CO2 reduction. ACS Catal. 7, 6600–6608 (2017).
Jin, S. Are metal chalcogenides, nitrides, and phosphides oxygen evolution catalysts or bifunctional catalysts? ACS Energy Lett. 2, 1937–1938 (2017).
Avanesian, T. et al. Quantitative and atomic-scale view of CO-induced Pt nanoparticle surface reconstruction at saturation coverage via DFT calculations coupled with in situ TEM and IR. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139, 4551–4558 (2017).
Steininger, H., Lehwald, S. & Ibach, H. On the adsorption of CO on Pt(111). Surf. Sci. 123, 264–282 (1982).
Guo, X. & Yates, J. T. Jr Dependence of effective desorption kinetic parameters on surface coverage and adsorption temperature: CO on Pd(111). J. Chem. Phys. 90, 6761–6766 (1989).
Nørskov, J. K. et al. Origin of the overpotential for oxygen reduction at a fuel-cell cathode. J. Phys. Chem. B 108, 17886–17892 (2004).
Göttle, A. J. & Koper, M. T. Proton-coupled electron transfer in the electrocatalysis of CO2 reduction: prediction of sequential vs concerted pathways using DFT. Chem. Sci. 8, 458–465 (2017).
Chan, K. & Nørskov, J. K. Electrochemical barriers made simple. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 6, 2663–2668 (2015).
Chan, K. & Nørskov, J. K. Potential dependence of electrochemical barriers from ab initio calculations. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 7, 1686–1690 (2016).
Akhade, S. A., Bernstein, N. J., Esopi, M. R., Regula, M. J. & Janik, M. J. A simple method to approximate electrode potential-dependent activation energies using density functional theory. Catal. Today 288, 63–73 (2017).
Li, J., Stenlid, J. H., Ludwig, T., Lamoureux, P. S. & Abild-Pedersen, F. Modeling potential-dependent electrochemical activation barriers: revisiting the alkaline hydrogen evolution reaction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 143, 19341–19355 (2021).
Sundararaman, R., Goddard, W. A. III & Arias, T. A. Grand canonical electronic density-functional theory: algorithms and applications to electrochemistry. J. Chem. Phys. 146, 114104 (2017).
Strmcnik, D. et al. The role of non-covalent interactions in electrocatalytic fuel-cell reactions on platinum. Nat. Chem. 1, 466–472 (2009).
Resasco, J. et al. Promoter effects of alkali metal cations on the electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139, 11277–11287 (2017).
Ringe, S. et al. Understanding cation effects in electrochemical CO2 reduction. Energy Environ. Sci. 12, 3001–3014 (2019).
Resasco, J., Lum, Y., Clark, E., Zeledon, J. Z. & Bell, A. T. Effects of anion identity and concentration on electrochemical reduction of CO2. ChemElectroChem 5, 1064–1072 (2018).
Huang, Y., Ong, C. W. & Yeo, B. S. Effects of electrolyte anions on the reduction of carbon dioxide to ethylene and ethanol on copper(100) and (111) surfaces. ChemSusChem 11, 3299–3306 (2018).
Ledezma-Yanez, I. et al. Interfacial water reorganization as a pH-dependent descriptor of the hydrogen evolution rate on platinum electrodes. Nat. Energy 2, 1–7 (2017).
McCrum, I. T. & Koper, M. T. The role of adsorbed hydroxide in hydrogen evolution reaction kinetics on modified platinum. Nat. Energy 5, 891–899 (2020).
Maheshwari, S., Li, Y., Agrawal, N. & Janik, M. J. Density functional theory models for electrocatalytic reactions. Adv. Catal. 63, 117–167 (2018).
Ringe, S., Hormann, N. G., Oberhofer, H. & Reuter, K. Implicit solvation methods for catalysis at electrified interfaces. Chem. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00675 (2021).
Gauthier, J. A. et al. Challenges in modeling electrochemical reaction energetics with polarizable continuum models. ACS Catal. 9, 920–931 (2019).
Marković, N. & Ross, P. Jr Surface science studies of model fuel cell electrocatalysts. Surf. Sci. Rep. 45, 117–229 (2002).
Scott, S. L. The burden of disproof. ACS Catal. 9, 4706–4708 (2019).
Baz, A. & Holewinski, A. Predicting macro-kinetic observables in electrocatalysis using the generalized degree of rate control. J. Catal. 397, 233–244 (2021).
Stegelmann, C., Andreasen, A. & Campbell, C. T. Degree of rate control: how much the energies of intermediates and transition states control rates. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 8077–8082 (2009).
Liu, X. et al. Understanding trends in electrochemical carbon dioxide reduction rates. Nat. Commun. 8, 15438 (2017).
Neurock, M., Pallassana, V. & Van Santen, R. A. The importance of transient states at higher coverages in catalytic reactions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 122, 1150–1153 (2000).
Akinola, J., Campbell, C. T. & Singh, N. Effects of solvents on adsorption energies: a general bond-additivity model. J. Phys. Chem. C 125, 24371–24380 (2021).
Sheng, W., Gasteiger, H. A. & Shao-Horn, Y. Hydrogen oxidation and evolution reaction kinetics on platinum: acid vs alkaline electrolytes. J. Electrochem. Soc. 157, 1529–1536 (2010).
Marković, N., Grgur, B. & Ross, P. N. Temperature-dependent hydrogen electrochemistry on platinum low-index single-crystal surfaces in acid solutions. J. Phys. Chem. B 101, 5405–5413 (1997).
Bond, G. C., Keane, M. A., Kral, H. & Lercher, J. A. Compensation phenomena in heterogeneous catalysis: general principles and a possible explanation. Catal. Rev. 42, 323–383 (2000).
Bligaard, T. et al. On the compensation effect in heterogeneous catalysis. J. Phys. Chem. B 107, 9325–9331 (2003).
Jørgensen, M. & Gronbeck, H. Adsorbate entropies with complete potential energy sampling in microkinetic modeling. J. Phys. Chem. C. 121, 7199–7207 (2017).
Shinagawa, T., Garcia-Esparza, A. T. & Takanabe, K. Insight on Tafel slopes from a microkinetic analysis of aqueous electrocatalysis for energy conversion. Sci. Rep. 5, 13801 (2015).
Holewinski, A. & Linic, S. Elementary mechanisms in electrocatalysis: revisiting the ORR Tafel slope. J. Electrochem. Soc. 159, 864–870 (2012).
Wang, J. X., Uribe, F. A., Springer, T. E., Zhang, J. & Adzic, R. R. Intrinsic kinetic equation for oxygen reduction reaction in acidic media: the double Tafel slope and fuel cell applications. Faraday Discuss. 140, 347–362 (2009).
Fang, Y. H. & Liu, Z. P. Tafel kinetics of electrocatalytic reactions: from experiment to first-principles. ACS Catal. 4, 4364–4376 (2014).
Limaye, A. M., Zeng, J. S., Willard, A. P. & Manthiram, K. Bayesian data analysis reveals no preference for cardinal Tafel slopes in CO2 reduction electrocatalysis. Nat. Commun. 12, 703 (2021).
Prats, H. & Chan, K. The determination of the HOR/HER reaction mechanism from experimental kinetic data. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 23, 27150–27158 (2021).
Motagamwala, A. H. & Dumesic, J. A. Microkinetic modeling: a tool for rational catalyst design. Chem. Rev. 121, 1049–1076 (2020).
Bhandari, S., Rangarajan, S. & Mavrikakis, M. Combining computational modeling with reaction kinetics experiments for elucidating the in situ nature of the active site in catalysis. Acc. Chem. Res. 53, 1893–1904 (2020).
Baz, A., Dix, S. T., Holewinski, A. & Linic, S. Microkinetic modeling in electrocatalysis: applications, limitations, and recommendations for reliable mechanistic insights. J. Catal. 404, 864–872 (2021).
Dix, S. T. & Linic, S. In-operando surface-sensitive probing of electrochemical reactions on nanoparticle electrocatalysts: spectroscopic characterization of reaction intermediates and elementary steps of oxygen reduction reaction on Pt. J. Catal. 396, 32–39 (2021).
Bigeleisen, J. The relative reaction velocities of isotopic molecules. J. Chem. Phys. 17, 675–678 (1949).
Schouten, K. J. P., Kwon, Y., van der Ham, C. J. M., Qin, Z. & Koper, M. T. M. A new mechanism for the selectivity to C1 and C2 species in the electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide on copper electrodes. Chem. Sci. 2, 1902–1909 (2011).
Hansen, H. A., Viswanathan, V. & Nørskov, J. K. Unifying kinetic and thermodynamic analysis of 2e– and 4e– reduction of oxygen on metal surfaces. J. Phys. Chem. C. 118, 6706–6718 (2014).
Dickens, C. F., Kirk, C. & Nørskov, J. K. Insights into the electrochemical oxygen evolution reaction with ab initio calculations and microkinetic modeling: beyond the limiting potential volcano. J. Phys. Chem. C 123, 18960–18977 (2019).
Rostamikia, G., Mendoza, A. J., Hickner, M. A. & Janik, M. J. First-principles based microkinetic modeling of borohydride oxidation on a Au(111) electrode. J. Power Sources 196, 9228–9237 (2011).
Stephens, I. E. et al. Tuning the activity of Pt(111) for oxygen electroreduction by subsurface alloying. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133, 5485–5491 (2011).
Strmcnik, D. et al. Improving the hydrogen oxidation reaction rate by promotion of hydroxyl adsorption. Nat. Chem. 5, 300–306 (2013).
Danilovic, N. et al. Enhancing the alkaline hydrogen evolution reaction activity through the bifunctionality of Ni(OH)2/metal catalysts. Angew. Chem. 124, 12663–12666 (2012).
Zheng, J., Sheng, W., Zhuang, Z., Xu, B. & Yan, Y. Universal dependence of hydrogen oxidation and evolution reaction activity of platinum-group metals on pH and hydrogen binding energy. Sci. Adv. 2, 1501602 (2016).
Rossmeisl, J., Chan, K., Skulason, E., Björketun, M. E. & Tripkovic, V. On the pH dependence of electrochemical proton transfer barriers. Catal. Today 262, 36–40 (2016).
Jaramillo, T. et al. Identification of active edge sites for electrochemical H2 evolution from MoS2 nanocatalysts. Science 317, 100–102 (2007).
Kibsgaard, J. & Jaramillo, T. Molybdenum phosphosulfide: an active, acid-stable, Earth-abundant catalyst for the hydrogen evolution reaction. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 14433–14437 (2014).
Hellstern, T. R., Benck, J. D., Kibsgaard, J., Hahn, C. & Jaramillo, T. Engineering cobalt phosphide (CoP) thin film catalysts for enhanced hydrogen evolution activity on silicon photocathodes. Adv. Energy Mater. 6, 1501758 (2016).
J.R. acknowledges support from the Welch Foundation through grant no. F-1436. F.A.-P., Z.B. and T.F.J. acknowledge support from the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Chemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Biosciences Division, Catalysis Science Program to the SUNCAT Center for Interface Science and Catalysis. C.H. contributed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy under contract DE-AC52-07-NA27344, and was supported by the LLNL-LDRD programme under project no. 22-LW-033. The authors acknowledge P. Christopher and D. E. Resasco for useful discussions.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information
Nature Catalysis thanks Rodrigo García-Muelas and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Resasco, J., Abild-Pedersen, F., Hahn, C. et al. Enhancing the connection between computation and experiments in electrocatalysis. Nat Catal 5, 374–381 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41929-022-00789-0
This article is cited by
Nature Reviews Methods Primers (2022)