In recent years, the hydrogen economy has been strongly favoured by governmental and industrial bodies worldwide. A tremendous number of papers are published every year on different aspects of protonic ceramic electrochemical cells (PCECs) due to their lower operation temperature, easier reversible operation, and brighter prospects for further development. While new progress is being made continuously, many critical challenges remain. The effort on PCEC investigation could be more aligned for greater collective impact, e.g. the academic community could devote more effort to overdue critical problems but less to incremental improvements. This review aims to provide some insightful perspectives on critical challenges facing the development of PCECs, to sort out priorities in future effort, and to suggest promising directions to pursue. In this way, it is hoped that the technical readiness level of PCECs might advance more quickly, toward field demonstrations and commercialization for a clean and sustainable energy era.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
IwaharaHEsakaTUchidaHProton conduction in sintered oxides and its application to steam electrolysis for hydrogen production. Solid State Ion. 1981;3:359–363.
2.
IwaharaH.Proton conducting ceramics and their applications. Solid State Ion. 1996;86:9–15.
3.
CherryMIslamMSGaleJDComputational studies of proton migration in perovskite oxides. Solid State Ion. 1995;77:207–209.
4.
NowickASDuYLiangKC.Some factors that determine proton conductivity in nonstoichiometric complex perovskites. Solid State Ion. 1999;125(1–4):303–311.
5.
KreuerKD.Aspects of the formation and mobility of protonic charge carriers and the stability of perovskite-type oxides. Solid State Ion. 1999;125(1–4):285–302.
6.
KimJSengodanSKimSProton conducting oxides: a review of materials and applications for renewable energy conversion and storage. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2019;109:606–618.
7.
EvansAStrezovVEvansTJ.Assessment of utility energy storage options for increased renewable energy penetration. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2012;16(6):4141–4147.
8.
BechelanyMAbou ChaayaAFrancesFNanowires with controlled porosity for hydrogen production. J Mater Chem A. 2013;1(6):2133–2138.
9.
CoelhoBOliveiraAMendesAJEConcentrated solar power for renewable electricity and hydrogen production from water – a review. Energy Environ Sci. 2010;3(10):1398–1405.
10.
BiLBoulfradSTraversaE.Steam electrolysis by solid oxide electrolysis cells (SOECs) with proton-conducting oxides. Chem Soc Rev. 2014;43(24):8255–8270.
11.
MortreuxAPetitF.Industrial applications of homogeneous catalysis.Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
12.
DingKUozumiY.Handbook of asymmetric heterogeneous catalysis.Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons; 2008.
13.
BiLBoulfradSTraversaE.Steam electrolysis by solid oxide electrolysis cells (SOECs) with proton-conducting oxides. Chem Soc Rev. 2014;43(24):8255–8270.
14.
RyuKHHaileSM.Chemical stability and proton conductivity of doped BaCeO3–BaZrO3 solid solutions. Solid State Ion. 1999;125(1–4):355–367.
15.
JingdeLLingWLihuaFChemical stability of doped BaCeO3-BaZrO3 solid solutions in different atmospheres. J Rare Earths. 2008;26(4):505–510.
16.
FabbriED'EpifanioADi BartolomeoETailoring the chemical stability of Ba (Ce0.8−xZrx)Y0.2O3−δ protonic conductors for intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells (IT-SOFCs). Solid State Ion. 2008;179(15–16):558–564.
17.
KyriakouVGaragounisIVourrosAMethane steam reforming at low temperatures in a BaZr0.7Ce0.2Y0.1O2.9 proton conducting membrane reactor. Appl Catal, B. 2016;186:1–9.
18.
SchwabeFSchwarzeLPartmannCConcept, design, and energy analysis of an integrated power-to-methanol process utilizing a tubular proton-conducting solid oxide electrolysis cell. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2019;44(25):12566–12575.
19.
MorejudoSHZanónREscolásticoSDirect conversion of methane to aromatics in a catalytic co-ionic membrane reactor. Science. 2016;353(6299):563–566.
20.
WangWCaoXGaoWAmmonia synthesis at atmospheric pressure using a reactor with thin solid electrolyte BaCe0.85Y0.15O3−α membrane. J Membr Sci. 2010;360(1–2):397–403.
21.
VasileiouEKyriakouVGaragounisIAmmonia synthesis at atmospheric pressure in a BaCe0.2Zr0.7Y0.1O2.9 solid electrolyte cell. Solid State Ion. 2015;275:110–116.
MalavasiLFisherCAIslamMS.Oxide-ion and proton conducting electrolyte materials for clean energy applications: structural and mechanistic features. Chem Soc Rev. 2010;39(11):4370–4387.
24.
KreuerK-D.Proton-conducting oxides. Annu Rev Mater Res. 2003;33(1):333–359.
25.
YamazakiYBlancFOkuyamaYProton trapping in yttrium-doped barium zirconate. Nat Mater. 2013;12(7):647–651.
26.
MarronyM.Proton-conducting ceramics: from fundamentals to applied research.Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2015.
27.
HaileSStaneffGRyuK.Non-stoichiometry, grain boundary transport and chemical stability of proton conducting perovskites. J Mater Sci. 2001;36(5):1149–1160.
28.
MedvedevDMurashkinaAPikalovaEBaCeO3 materials development, properties and application. Prog Mater Sci. 2014;60:72–129.
29.
HanDShinodaKSatoSCorrelation between electroconductive and structural properties of proton conductive acceptor-doped barium zirconate. J Mater Chem A. 2015;3(3):1243–1250.
30.
GilardiEFabbriEBiLEffect of dopant–host ionic radii mismatch on acceptor-doped barium zirconate microstructure and proton conductivity. J Phys Chem C. 2017;121(18):9739–9747.
31.
ImashukuSUdaTNoseYDependence of dopant cations on microstructure and proton conductivity of barium zirconate. J Electrochem Soc. 2008;156(1):B1.
32.
YangLWangSBlinnKEnhanced sulfur and coking tolerance of a mixed ion conductor for SOFCs: BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.2–xYbxO3–δ. Science. 2009;326(5949):126–129.
33.
DuanCTongJShangMReadily processed protonic ceramic fuel cells with high performance at low temperatures. Science. 2015;349(6254):1321–1326.
34.
HuXLiMXieYOxygen-deficient Ruddlesden–Popper-type lanthanum strontium cuprate doped with bismuth as a cathode for solid oxide fuel cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2019;11(24):21593–21602.
35.
DuanCCKeeRZhuHYHighly efficient reversible protonic ceramic electrochemical cells for power generation and fuel production. Nat Energy. 2019;4(3):230–240.
36.
BhideSVVirkarAV.Stability of BaCeO3-based proton conductors in water-containing atmospheres. J Electrochem Soc. 1999;146(6):2038.
37.
TannerCWVirkarAV.Instability of BaCeO3 in H2O-containing atmospheres. J Electrochem Soc. 1996;143(4):1386.
38.
PaigeJMChengYPepinPASurface modification of SOFC cathodes by Co, Ni, and Pd oxides. Solid State Ion. 2019;341:115051.
MurphyRZhouYZhangLA new family of proton-conducting electrolytes for reversible solid oxide cells: BaHfxCe0.8−xY0.1Yb0.1O3−δ. Adv Funct Mater. 2020;30(35):2002265.
41.
FopSMcCombieKSWildmanEJHigh oxide ion and proton conductivity in a disordered hexagonal perovskite. Nat Mater. 2020;19(7):752–757.
42.
HyodoJKitabayashiKHoshinoKFast and stable proton conduction in heavily scandium-doped polycrystalline barium zirconate at intermediate temperatures. Adv Energy Mater. 2020;10(25):2000213.
43.
ChoiSKucharczykCJLiangYExceptional power density and stability at intermediate temperatures in protonic ceramic fuel cells. Nat Energy. 2018;3(3):202–210.
GuanJDorrisSBalachandranUTransport properties of BaCe0.95Y0.05O3−δ mixed conductors for hydrogen separation. Solid State Ion. 1997;100(1–2):45–52.
46.
ZhongZ.Stability and conductivity study of the BaCe0.9−xZrxY0.1O2.95 systems. Solid State Ion. 2007;178(3–4):213–220.
47.
ZuoCDorrisSBalachandranUEffect of Zr-doping on the chemical stability and hydrogen permeation of the Ni−BaCe0.8Y0.2O3−δ mixed protonic–electronic conductor. Chem Mater. 2006;18(19):4647–4650.
48.
KimHSJangAChoiSYVacancy-induced electronic structure variation of acceptors and correlation with proton conduction in perovskite oxides. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2016;55(43):13499–13503.
49.
ZohourianRMerkleRRaimondiGMixed-conducting perovskites as cathode materials for protonic ceramic fuel cells: understanding the trends in proton uptake. Adv Funct Mater. 2018;28(35):1801241.
50.
ZhouHDaiLJiaLEffect of fluorine, chlorine and bromine doping on the properties of gadolinium doped barium cerate electrolytes. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2015;40(29):8980–8988.
51.
FabbriEPergolesiDD'EpifanioADesign and fabrication of a chemically-stable proton conductor bilayer electrolyte for intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells (IT-SOFCs). Energy Environ Sci. 2008;1(3):355–359.
52.
MaideMKorjusOVestliMComparative study of BaY0.1Zr0.9O3-δ protective layers deposited to BaY0.1Ce0.9O3-δ membrane using ultrasonic spray pyrolysis and magnetron sputtering methods. J Electrochem Soc. 2016;163(5):F443.
53.
ShimJHParkJSAnJIntermediate-temperature ceramic fuel cells with thin film yttrium-doped barium zirconate electrolytes. Chem Mater. 2009;21(14):3290–3296.
54.
ParkJSKimY-BAnJEffect of cation non-stoichiometry and crystallinity on the ionic conductivity of atomic layer deposited Y: BaZrO3 films. Thin Solid Films. 2013;539:166–169.
55.
YamazakiYHernandez-SanchezRHaileSM.High total proton conductivity in large-grained yttrium-doped barium zirconate. Chem Mater. 2009;21(13):2755–2762.
56.
LiuYYangLLiuMEnhanced sinterability of BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ by addition of nickel oxide. J Power Sources. 2011;196(23):9980–9984.
57.
TongJClarkDBernauLSolid-state reactive sintering mechanism for large-grained yttrium-doped barium zirconate proton conducting ceramics. J Mater Chem. 2010;20(30):6333–6341.
58.
TongJClarkDBernauLProton-conducting yttrium-doped barium cerate ceramics synthesized by a cost-effective solid-state reactive sintering method. Solid State Ion. 2010;181(33–34):1486–1498.
59.
YangSZhangSSunCLattice incorporation of Cu2+ into the BaCe0. 7Zr0.1Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ electrolyte on boosting its sintering and proton-conducting abilities for reversible solid oxide cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(49):42387–42396.
60.
HossainSAbdallaAMRadenahmadNHighly dense and chemically stable proton conducting electrolyte sintered at 1200 C. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2018;43(2):894–907.
61.
TsaiC-LKopczykMSmithRLow temperature sintering of Ba (Zr0. 8− xCexY0. 2) O3− δ using lithium fluoride additive. Solid State Ion. 2010;181(23–24):1083–1090.
62.
HanDUemuraSHiraiwaCDetrimental effect of sintering additives on conducting ceramics: yttrium-doped barium zirconate. ChemSusChem. 2018;11(23):4102–4113.
63.
KimEYamazakiYHaileSEffect of NiO sintering-aid on hydration kinetics and defect-chemical parameters of BaZr0.8Y0.2O3-δ. Solid State Ion. 2015;275:23–28.
64.
GaoDGuoR.Structural and electrochemical properties of yttrium-doped barium zirconate by addition of CuO. J Alloys Compd. 2010;493(1–2):288–293.
65.
TuC-SHuangC-CLeeSEffect of lithium fluoride on thermal stability of proton-conducting Ba(Zr0.8−xCexY0.2) O2.9 ceramics. Solid State Ion. 2010;181(37–38):1654–1658.
66.
KatoKHanDUdaT.Transport properties of proton conductive Y-doped BaHfO3 and Ca or Sr-substituted Y-doped BaZrO3. J Am Ceram Soc. 2019;102(3):1201–1210.
67.
CerveraRBOyamaYMiyoshiSStructural study and proton transport of bulk nanograined Y-doped BaZrO3 oxide protonics materials. Solid State Ion. 2008;179(7–8):236–242.
68.
WangCPingWBaiQA general method to synthesize and sinter bulk ceramics in seconds. Science. 2020;368(6490):521–526.
69.
Marrero-LópezDPena-MartinezJRuiz-MoralesJApplicability of La2Mo2−yWyO9 materials as solid electrolyte for SOFCs. Solid State Ion. 2007;178(23–24):1366–1378.
70.
YooYLimN.Performance and stability of proton conducting solid oxide fuel cells based on yttrium-doped barium cerate-zirconate thin-film electrolyte. J Power Sources. 2013;229:48–57.
71.
UenoKHatadaNHanDThermodynamic maximum of Y doping level in barium zirconate in co-sintering with NiO. J Mater Chem A. 2019;7(12):7232–7241.
72.
HuangYMerkleRMaierJ.Effects of NiO addition on sintering and proton uptake of Ba (Zr, Ce, Y) O3-δ. J Mater Chem A. 2021;9(26):14775–14785.
73.
HanDIiharaJUemuraSA high temperature reduction cleaning (HTRC) process: a novel method for conductivity recovery of yttrium-doped barium zirconate electrolytes. J Mater Chem A. 2016;4(27):10601–10608.
74.
KurohaTNiinaYShudoMOptimum dopant of barium zirconate electrolyte for manufacturing of protonic ceramic fuel cells. J Power Sources. 2021;506:230134.
75.
KimI-HLimD-KBaeHDetermination of partial conductivities and computational analysis of the theoretical power density of BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ (BZCYYb1711) electrolyte under various PCFC conditions. J Mater Chem A. 2019;7(37):21321–21328.
76.
ZhuHRicoteSDuanCDefect Chemistry and transport within dense BaCe0.7Zr0.1Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ(BCZYYb) proton-conducting membranes. J Electrochem Soc. 2018;165(10):F845–F853.
77.
UchidaH.Formation of protons in SrCeO3-based proton conducting oxides. Part II. Evaluation of proton concentration and mobility in Yb-doped SrCeO3. Solid State Ion. 1989;36(1–2):89–95.
78.
ZhuHRicoteSDuanCDefect incorporation and transport within dense BaZr0.8Y0.2O3−δ (BZY20) proton-conducting membranes. J Electrochem Soc. 2018;165(9):F581.
79.
NorbyT.Solid-state protonic conductors: principles, properties, progress and prospects. Solid State Ion. 1999;125(1–4):1–11.
80.
HanDUdaT.The best composition of an Y-doped BaZrO3 electrolyte: selection criteria from transport properties, microstructure, and phase behavior. J Mater Chem A. 2018;6(38):18571–18582.
81.
NomuraKKageyamaH.Transport properties of Ba (Zr0.8Y0.2)O3−δ perovskite. Solid State Ion. 2007;178(7–10):661–665.
82.
RicoteSBonanosNCabocheG.Water vapour solubility and conductivity study of the proton conductor BaCe(0.9−x)ZrxY0.1O(3−δ). Solid State Ion. 2009;180(14–16):990–997.
83.
SomekawaTMatsuzakiYTachikawaYPhysicochemical properties of proton-conductive Ba (Zr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1) O3−δ solid electrolyte in terms of electrochemical performance of solid oxide fuel cells. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2016;41(39):17539–17547.
84.
AmsifMMarrero-LópezDRuiz-MoralesJEffect of sintering aids on the conductivity of BaCe0.9Ln0.1O3−δ. J Power Sources. 2011;196(22):9154–9163.
85.
DuanCHuangJSullivanNProton-conducting oxides for energy conversion and storage. Appl Phys Rev. 2020;7(1):011314.
86.
ZhouYLiuEChenYAn active and robust air electrode for reversible protonic ceramic electrochemical cells. ACS Energy Lett. 2021;6(4):1511–1520.
87.
VøllestadEStrandbakkeRTarachMMixed proton and electron conducting double perovskite anodes for stable and efficient tubular proton ceramic electrolysers. Nat Mater. 2019;18(7):752–759.
88.
LeiLBTaoZTWangXMIntermediate-temperature solid oxide electrolysis cells with thin proton-conducting electrolyte and a robust air electrode. J Mater Chem A. 2017;5(44):22945–22951.
89.
DuanCKeeRZhuHHighly efficient reversible protonic ceramic electrochemical cells for power generation and fuel production. Nat Energy. 2019;4(3):230–240.
90.
ZhouYLiuEChenYAn active and robust air electrode for reversible protonic ceramic electrochemical cells. ACS Energy Lett. 2021;6:1511–1520.
91.
LiSYanRWuGComposite oxygen electrode LSM-BCZYZ impregnated with Co3O4 nanoparticles for steam electrolysis in a proton-conducting solid oxide electrolyzer. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2013;38(35):14943–14951.
92.
LiHChenXChenSComposite manganate oxygen electrode enhanced with iron oxide nanocatalyst for high temperature steam electrolysis in a proton-conducting solid oxide electrolyzer. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2015;40(25):7920–7931.
93.
LiWGuanBMaLSynergistic coupling of proton conductors BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ and La2Ce2O7 to create chemical stable, Interface active electrolyte for steam electrolysis cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2019;11(20):18323–18330.
94.
LeonardKOkuyamaYTakamuraYEfficient intermediate-temperature steam electrolysis with Y: SrZrO3–SrCeO3 and Y: BaZrO3–BaCeO3 proton conducting perovskites. J Mater Chem A. 2018;6(39):19113–19124.
95.
KobayashiTKurodaKJeongSAnalysis of the anode reaction of solid oxide electrolyzer cells with BaZr0.4Ce0.4Y0.2O3-δ electrolytes and Sm0.5Sr0.5CoO3-δ anodes. J Electrochem Soc. 2018;165(5):F342.
96.
BiLShafiSPTraversaE.Y-doped BaZrO( as a chemically stable electrolyte for proton-conducting solid oxide electrolysis cells (SOECs). J Mater Chem A. 2015;3(11):5815–5819.
97.
AzimovaMAMcIntoshS.On the reversibility of anode supported proton conducting solid oxide cells. Solid State Ion. 2011;203(1):57–61.
98.
HeFSongDPengRElectrode performance and analysis of reversible solid oxide fuel cells with proton conducting electrolyte of BaCe0.5Zr0.3Y0.2O3−δ. J Power Sources. 2010;195(11):3359–3364.
99.
FabbriELicocciaSTraversaEComposite cathodes for proton conducting electrolytes. Fuel Cells. 2009;9(2):128–138.
PoetzschDMerkleRMaierJ.Oxygen reduction at dense thin-film microelectrodes on a proton-conducting electrolyte: I. Considerations on reaction mechanism and electronic leakage effects. J Electrochem Soc. 2015;162(9):F939.
102.
LiWGuanBMaLHigh performing triple-conductive Pr2NiO4+δ anode for proton-conducting steam solid oxide electrolysis cell. J Mater Chem A. 2018;6(37):18057–18066.
103.
GrimaudAMauvyFBassatJHydration properties and rate determining steps of the oxygen reduction reaction of perovskite-related oxides as H+-SOFC cathodes. J Electrochem Soc2012;159(6):B683–B694.
104.
ZhouCSunarsoJSongYNew reduced-temperature ceramic fuel cells with dual-ion conducting electrolyte and triple-conducting double perovskite cathode. J Mater Chem A. 2019;7(21):13265–13274.
105.
LiWGuanBYangTLayer-structured triple-conducting electrocatalyst for water-splitting in protonic ceramic electrolysis cells: conductivities vs. activity. J Power Sources. 2021;495:229764.
106.
KimJSengodanSKwonGTriple-conducting layered perovskites as cathode materials for proton-conducting solid oxide fuel cells. ChemSusChem. 2014;7(10):2811–2815.
107.
YangSWenYZhangSPerformance and stability of BaCe0.8−xZr0.2InxO3−δ-based materials and reversible solid oxide cells working at intermediate temperature. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2017;42(47):28549–28558.
108.
HuanDShiNZhangLAnd reliable air electrode material for proton-conducting reversible solid oxide cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(2):1761–1770.
109.
YangSZhangSSunCLattice incorporation of Cu2+ into the BaCe0.7Zr0.1Y0.1Yb0.1O3-δ electrolyte on boosting its sintering and proton-conducting abilities for reversible solid oxide cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(49):42387–42396.
110.
YangSWenYZhangJElectrochemical performance and stability of cobalt-free Ln1.2Sr0.8NiO4 (Ln = La and Pr) air electrodes for proton-conducting reversible solid oxide cells. Electrochim Acta. 2018;267:269–277.
111.
HuangY-LHussainAMWachsmanED.Nanoscale cathode modification for high performance and stable low-temperature solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs). Nano Energy. 2018;49:186–192.
112.
DanilovNLyagaevaJVdovinGElectricity/hydrogen conversion by the means of a protonic ceramic electrolysis cell with Nd2NiO4+δ-based oxygen electrode. Energy Convers Manage. 2018;172:129–137.
113.
DanilovNTarutinALyagaevaJCO2-promoted hydrogen production in a protonic ceramic electrolysis cell. J Mater Chem A. 2018;6(34):16341–16346.
114.
ChoiSDavenportTCHaileSM.Protonic ceramic electrochemical cells for hydrogen production and electricity generation: exceptional reversibility, stability, and demonstrated faradaic efficiency. Energy Environ Sci. 2019;12(1):206–215.
115.
DingHWuWJiangCSelf-sustainable protonic ceramic electrochemical cells using a triple conducting electrode for hydrogen and power production. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):1–11.
116.
LyagaevaJDanilovNVdovinGA new Dy-doped BaCeO3–BaZrO3 proton-conducting material as a promising electrolyte for reversible solid oxide fuel cells. J Mater Chem A. 2016;4(40):15390–15399.
117.
KimJJunAGwonOHybrid-solid oxide electrolysis cell: a new strategy for efficient hydrogen production. Nano Energy. 2018;44:121–126.
118.
WuWDingHZhangY3D self-architectured steam electrode enabled efficient and durable hydrogen production in a proton-conducting solid oxide electrolysis cell at temperatures lower than 600oC. Adv Sci. 2018;5(11):1800360.
119.
SongYChenYWangWSelf-assembled triple-conducting nanocomposite as a superior protonic ceramic fuel cell cathode. Joule. 2019;3(11):2842–2853.
120.
ZhouCSunarsoJSongYNew reduced-temperature ceramic fuel cells with dual-ion conducting electrolyte and triple-conducting double perovskite cathode. J Mater Chem A. 2019;7(21):13265–13274.
121.
TianHLiWMaLDeconvolution of water-splitting on the triple-conducting Ruddlesden–Popper-phase anode for protonic ceramic electrolysis cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2020;12(44):49574–49585.
122.
GrimaudAMauvyFMarc BassatJHydration and transport properties of the Pr2−xSrxNiO4+δ compounds as H+-SOFC cathodes. J Mater Chem. 2012;22(31):16017–16025.
123.
DuanCCTongJHShangMReadily processed protonic ceramic fuel cells with high performance at low temperatures. Science. 2015;349(6254):1321–1326.
124.
StrandbakkeRCherepanovVAZuevAYGd- and Pr-based double perovskite cobaltites as oxygen electrodes for proton ceramic fuel cells and electrolyser cells. Solid State Ion. 2015;278:120–132.
125.
GrimaudAMauvyFMarc BassatJHydration and transport properties of the Pr2−xSrXNiO4+δ compounds as H+-SOFC cathodes. J Mater Chem2012;22(31):16017–16025.
126.
DingDLiXLaiSYEnhancing SOFC cathode performance by surface modification through infiltration. Energy Environ Sci. 2014;7(2):552–575.
127.
SaqibMLeeJ-IShinJ-SModification of oxygen-ionic transport barrier of BaCo0.4Zr0.1Fe0.4Y0.1O3 steam (air) electrode by impregnating samarium-doped ceria nanoparticles for proton-conducting reversible solid oxide cells. J Electrochem Soc. 2019;166(12):F746.
128.
ZhangZWangJChenYIn situ formation of a 3D core-shell and triple-conducting oxygen reduction reaction electrode for proton-conducting SOFCs. J Power Sources. 2018;385:76–83.
RahmanipourMChengYOnnTMModification of LSF-YSZ composite cathodes by atomic layer deposition. J Electrochem Soc. 2017;164(7):F879–F884.
131.
BanieckiJDIshiiMKuriharaKChemisorption of water and carbon dioxide on nanostructured BaTiO3–SrTiO3(001) surfaces. J Appl Phys. 2009;106(5):054109.
132.
ThomasAGMurynCAHardmanPJSoft-X-ray photon-stimulated Ion desorption from SrTiO3(100)-H2O. Surf Sci. 1994;307:355–359.
133.
BrookesNBThorntonGQuinnFM.Srtio3(100) step sites as catalytic centers for H2O dissociation. Solid State Commun. 1987;64(3):383–386.
134.
HenrichVECoxPA.The surface science of metal oxides.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996.
135.
KurtzRLStockbauerRMadeyTESynchrotron radiation studies of H2O adsorption on TiO2(110). Surf Sci. 1989;218(1):178–200.
136.
HengererRKavanLKrtilPOrientation dependence of charge-transfer processes on TiO2 (anatase) single crystals. J Electrochem Soc. 2000;147(4):1467–1472.
137.
ThorntonG.Reactions at oxide surfaces. J Phys: Condens Matter. 1989;1(SB):SB111.
138.
GrimaudAMauvyFBassatJMHydration properties and rate determining steps of the oxygen reduction reaction of perovskite-related oxides as H+-SOFC cathodes. J Electrochem Soc. 2012;159(6):B683–B694.
139.
MarronyMDaillyJ.Advanced proton conducting ceramic cell as energy storage device. J Electrochem Soc. 2017;164(9):F988.
140.
UpasenSBatocchiPMauvyFProtonation and structural/chemical stability of Ln2NiO44+δ ceramics vs. H2O/CO2: high temperature/water pressure ageing tests. J Alloys Compd. 2015;622:1074–1085.
141.
HanckeRMagrasoANorbyTHydration of lanthanum tungstate (La/W = 5.6 and 5.3) studied by TG and simultaneous TG–DSC. Solid State Ion. 2013;231:25–29.
142.
BonanosNHuijserAPoulsenFW.H/D isotope effects in high temperature proton conductors. Solid State Ionics. 2015;275:9–13.
143.
HanDOkumuraYNoseYSynthesis of La1−xSrxSc1−yFeyO3−δ (LSSF) and measurement of water content in LSSF, LSCF and LSC hydrated in wet artificial air at 300° C. Solid State Ion. 2010;181(35–36):1601–1606.
144.
LozanoTDruceHCooperJDouble perovskite cathodes for proton-conducting ceramic fuel cells: are they triple mixed ionic electronic conductors?Sci Technol Adv Mater. 2017;18(1):977–986.
145.
ZhangYKnibbeRSunarsoJRecent progress on advanced materials for solid-oxide fuel cells operating below 500oC. Adv Mater. 2017;29(48):1700132.
146.
YangGSuCShiHToward reducing the operation temperature of solid oxide fuel cells: our past 15 years of efforts in cathode development. Energy Fuels. 2020;34(12):15169–15194.
147.
WangWQuJJuliãoPSBRecent advances in the development of anode materials for solid oxide fuel cells utilizing liquid oxygenated hydrocarbon fuels: a mini review. Energy Technol. 2019;7(1):33–44.
148.
AnggiaEShinE-KNamJ-TFabrication of ceramic composite anode at low temperature for high performance protonic ceramic fuel cells. Ceram Int. 2020;46(1):236–242.
149.
WangLFanYLiJLa0.5Sr0.5Fe0.9Mo0.1O3-δ-CeO2 anode catalyst for co-producing electricity and ethylene from ethane in proton-conducting solid oxide fuel cells. Ceram Int. 2021;47(17):24106–24114.
150.
SongS-HYoonS-EChoiJA high-performance ceramic composite anode for protonic ceramic fuel cells based on lanthanum strontium vanadate. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2014;39(29):16534–16540.
151.
WachowskiSLiZPolfusJMPerformance and stability in H2S of SrFe0.75Mo0.25O3-δ as electrode in proton ceramic fuel cells. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2018;38(1):163–171.
WeiKWangXBudimanRAProgress in Ni-based anode materials for direct hydrocarbon solid oxide fuel cells. J Mater Sci. 2018;53(12):8747–8765.
154.
WangWSuCWuYProgress in solid oxide fuel cells with nickel-based anodes operating on methane and related fuels. Chem Rev. 2013;113(10):8104–8151.
155.
BoldrinPRuiz-TrejoEMermelsteinJStrategies for carbon and sulfur tolerant solid oxide fuel cell materials, incorporating lessons from heterogeneous catalysis. Chem Rev. 2016;116(22):13633–13684.
156.
NasaniNRamasamyDAntunesIElectrochemical behaviour of Ni-BZO and Ni-BZY cermet anodes for protonic ceramic fuel cells (PCFCs) – a comparative study. Electrochim Acta. 2015;154:387–396.
157.
NarendarNMatherGCDiasPANThe importance of phase purity in Ni–BaZr0.85Y0.15O3−δ cermet anodes–novel nitrate-free combustion route and electrochemical study. RSC Adv. 2013;3(3):859–869.
158.
BaeKNohH-SJangDYFabrication of NiO-Y: BaZrO3 composite anode for thin film-protonic ceramic fuel cells using tape-casting. J Korean Ceram Soc. 2015;52(5):320–324.
159.
TailladesGBatocchiPEssoumhiAEngineering of porosity, microstructure and electrical properties of Ni–BaCe0.9Y0.1O2.95 cermet fuel cell electrodes by gelled starch porogen processing. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 2011;145(1–3):26–31.
160.
MatherGCFigueiredoFMFaggDPSynthesis and characterisation of Ni–SrCe0.9Yb0.1O3−δ cermet anodes for protonic ceramic fuel cells. Solid State Ion. 2003;158(3–4):333–342.
161.
BozzaFSchafbauerWMeulenbergWACharacterization of La0.995Ca0.005NbO4/Ni anode functional layer by electrophoretic deposition in a La0.995Ca0.005NbO4 electrolyte based PCFC. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2012;37(9):8027–8032.
162.
MagrasóAFontaineM-LHaugsrudRHydrogen oxidation kinetics and performance of Ni-LaNbO4+δ cermet anodes for proton conducting SOFCs. J Electrochem Soc. 2014;161(4):F373.
163.
KimSKHwangSHNamJ-TImprovement of Ni-cermet performance of protonic ceramic fuel cells by catalyst. Ceram Int. 2021;47(15):21083–21089.
HwangSHKimSKNamJ-TFabrication of an electrolyte-supported protonic ceramic fuel cell with nano-sized powders of Ni-composite anode. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2021;46(1):1076–1084.
166.
HongKSutantoSNLeeJANi-based bimetallic nano-catalysts anchored on BaZr0.4Ce0.4Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ for internal steam reforming of methane in a low-temperature proton-conducting ceramic fuel cell. J Mater Chem A. 2021;9(10):6139–6151.
167.
HuaBYanNLiMAnode-engineered protonic ceramic fuel cell with excellent performance and fuel compatibility. Adv Mater. 2016;28(40):8922–8926.
168.
NeaguDOhT-SMillerDNNano-socketed nickel particles with enhanced coking resistance grown in situ by redox exsolution. Nat Commun. 2015;6(1):8120.
169.
SongYWangWGeLRational design of a water-storable hierarchical architecture decorated with amorphous barium oxide and nickel nanoparticles as a solid oxide fuel cell anode with excellent sulfur tolerance. Adv Sci. 2017;4(11):1700337.
170.
SongYWangWQuJRational design of perovskite-based anode with decent activity for hydrogen electro-oxidation and beneficial effect of sulfur for promoting power generation in solid oxide fuel cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(48):41257–41267.
171.
LiuZZhouMChenMA high-performance intermediate-to-low temperature protonic ceramic fuel cell with in-situ exsolved nickel nanoparticles in the anode. Ceram Int. 2020;46(12):19952–19959.
172.
HeFGaoQLiuZA new Pd doped proton conducting perovskite oxide with multiple functionalities for efficient and stable power generation from Ammonia at reduced temperatures. Adv Energy Mater. 2021;11(19):2003916.
173.
BaeKLeeSJangDYHigh-performance protonic ceramic fuel cells with thin-film yttrium-doped barium cerate–zirconate electrolytes on compositionally gradient anodes. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016;8(14):9097–9103.
174.
NienSHHsuCSChangCLPreparation of BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.2O3–δ based solid oxide fuel cells with anode functional layers by tape casting. Fuel Cells. 2011;11(2):178–183.
175.
BaeKJangDYChoiHJDemonstrating the potential of yttrium-doped barium zirconate electrolyte for high-performance fuel cells. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):14553.
176.
HuaBYanNLiMNovel layered solid oxide fuel cells with multiple-twinned Ni0.8Co0.2 nanoparticles: the key to thermally independent CO2 utilization and power-chemical cogeneration. Energy Environ Sci. 2016;9(1):207–215.
ShiNXueSXieYCo-generation of electricity and olefin via proton conducting fuel cells using (Pr0.3Sr0.7)0.9Ni0.1Ti0.9O3 catalyst layers. Appl Catal B. 2020;272:118973.
179.
KonwarDYoonHH.A methane-fueled SOFC based on a thin BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ electrolyte film and a LaNi0.6Co0.4O3 anode functional layer. J Mater Chem A. 2016;4(14):5102–5106.
180.
ChenYdeGleeBTangYA robust fuel cell operated on nearly dry methane at 500°C enabled by synergistic thermal catalysis and electrocatalysis. Nat Energy. 2018;3(12):1042–1050.
181.
WangDWongSISunarsoJA direct n-butane solid oxide fuel cell using Ba(Zr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1)0.9Ni0.05Ru0.05O3−δ perovskite as the reforming layer. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2021;13(17):20105–20113.
182.
SasakiKTeraokaY.Equilibria in fuel cell gases. J Electrochem Soc. 2003;150(7):A885.
183.
SuHHuYH.Progress in low-temperature solid oxide fuel cells with hydrocarbon fuels. Chem Eng J. 2020;402:126235.
184.
BoldrinPRuiz-TrejoEMermelsteinJStrategies for carbon and sulfur tolerant solid oxide fuel cell materials, incorporating lessons from heterogeneous catalysis. Chem Rev. 2016;116(22):13633–13684.
185.
WangJ-HLiuM.Computational study of sulfur–nickel interactions: a new S–Ni phase diagram. Electrochem Commun. 2007;9(9):2212–2217.
186.
LiuBJiaLChiBA novel PrBaCo2O5+δ -BaZr0.1Ce0.7Y0.1Yb0.1O3−δ composite cathode for proton-conducting solid oxide fuel cells. Compos Part B Eng. 2020;191:107936.
187.
LeeSParkSWeeSOne-dimensional structured La0.6Sr0.4Co0.2Fe0.8O3−δ – BaCe0.5Zr0.35Y0.15O3−δ composite cathode for protonic ceramic fuel cells. Solid State Ion. 2018;320:347–352.
188.
dos Santos-GómezLZamudio-GarcíaJPorras-VázquezJMNanostructured BaCo0.4Fe0.4Zr0.1Y0.1O3-δ cathodes with different microstructural architectures. Nanomaterials. 2020;10(6):1055.
189.
AhnMLeeJLeeW.Nanofiber-based composite cathodes for intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells. J Power Sources. 2017;353:176–182.
190.
ChenDYangGCiucciF3D core–shell architecture from infiltration and beneficial reactive sintering as highly efficient and thermally stable oxygen reduction electrode. J Mater Chem A. 2014;2(5):1284–1293.
191.
GongZSunWJinZBarium- and strontium-containing anode materials toward ceria-based solid oxide fuel cells with high open circuit voltages. ACS Appl Energy Mater. 2018;1(7):3521–3528.
192.
ShinJFXuWZanellaMSelf-assembled dynamic perovskite composite cathodes for intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells. Nat Energy. 2017;2(3):16214.
193.
GengCWuHYangYA new in situ synthetic triple-conducting core–shell electrode for protonic ceramic fuel cells. ACS Sustain Chem Eng. 2021;9(33):11070–11079.
194.
ZhaoZCuiJZouMNovel twin-perovskite nanocomposite of Ba–Ce–Fe–Co–O as a promising triple conducting cathode material for protonic ceramic fuel cells. J Power Sources. 2020;450:227609.
195.
Rioja-MonllorLBernuy-LopezCFontaineM-LProcessing of high performance composite cathodes for protonic ceramic fuel cells by exsolution. J Mater Chem A. 2019;7(14):8609–8619.
AhnMHwangSHanSPorous an hollow nanofibers for solid oxide fuel cell electrodes. Korean J Chem Eng. 2020;37(8):1371–1378.
199.
ShiNXieYHuanDControllable CO2 conversion in high performance proton conducting solid oxide electrolysis cells and the possible mechanisms. J Mater Chem A. 2019;7(9):4855–4864.
