Page 1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONARTICLE NUMBER: 16130 | DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 1
Activity Origin and Catalyst Design Principles for Electrocatalytic Hydrogen-
Evolution on Heteroatom-Doped Graphene
Yan Jiao,# Yao Zheng,# Kenneth Davey, Shi-Zhang Qiao*
School of Chemical Engineering, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
* Correspondence to: [email protected]
# These authors contributed equally to this work.
This PDF file includes:
Supplementary Figures 1-15
Supplementary Table 1
Supplementary Notes 1-5
Supplementary References 1-7
Activity origin and catalyst design principles for electrocatalytic hydrogen evolution on heteroatom-doped graphene
Page 2
2 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Figures
280 285 290 295 300 305
B-G
G
P-G
S-G
O-G
Nor
mal
ized
inte
nsity
(a.u
.)
Photon energy (eV)
N-G
Carbon K edge
Supplementary Fig. 1 Carbon K-edge NEXAFS on various graphene-based samples. The
carbons in five (5) doped-samples maintained the graphitic framework.
Page 3
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 3
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 2 (a) Graphene sheet model; (b, c) graphene ribbon model with armchair
and zigzag edge.
Page 4
4 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 3 Investigated sites and corresponding adsorption energy on (a) B-3C, (c)
B-2C-O and (e) B-C-2O in boron-doped graphene model. The possible active sites are circled
whilst the most active are indicated by a red circle (This labelling method is repeated in
Supplementary Fig. 4-7). The configuration and distance between hydrogen and carbon are
shown as insert. For models (c) and (e), the carbons adjacent the functional group were evaluated
also. The final structures however were found to be unreasonable, because the graphene framework
did not keep its original configuration, therefore they are not shown here. The corresponding DOS
for the configuration with strongest H* adsorption on each of the models was plotted in panels (b),
(d), and (f). To facilitate the next step DOS analysis, the total DOS and projected DOS on the active
carbon site and that for hydrogen were included.
Page 5
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 5
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 4 Investigated sites and corresponding adsorption energy on (a) g-N, (c)
py-N, (e) N-O and (g) pr-N in nitrogen doped graphene model. (b) (d) (f) (h) are DOS and local
atomic configuration with the strongest hydrogen adsorption. For model c, the carbon adjacent
the functional group was evaluated. However the hydrogen atom moved spontaneously to the edge
site during geometry optimization.
Page 6
6 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 5 Investigated sites and corresponding adsorption energy on (a) C-O-C, (c)
py-O, (e) C=O, and (g) C-OH in oxygen doped graphene model. (b) (d) (f) (h) are DOS and local
atomic configuration with the strongest hydrogen adsorption on these models.
Page 7
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 7
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 6 Investigated sites and corresponding adsorption energy on (a) P-3C-(O)
and (c) P-2C-(2O) in phosphorus doped graphene model. (b) (d) are DOS and local atomic
configuration with the strongest hydrogen adsorption on these models.
Page 8
8 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 7 Investigated sites and corresponding adsorption energy on (a) S-2O and
(c) th-S in sulfur doped graphene model (c). (b) (d) are DOS and local atomic configuration
with the strongest hydrogen adsorption for these models.
Page 9
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 9
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 8 Atomic configuration of reaction intermediate states on the edge carbon
(a) state (M′-2H) + H+ and (b) state (M′-H2) + H+. The corresponding configurations for state
(M′-2H) + H+ on non-edge carbon is shown as (c). Green is carbon, blue is nitrogen, pink is
hydrogen, and the hydrogen atoms involved in the HER is highlighted by yellow. The inclusion
of state (M′-H2) + H+ for the edge carbon site is due to this carbon being connected by a hydrogen for
the purpose of saturating the dangling bond. Because the distance between two hydrogen atoms
(highlighted by yellow) connecting to the edge carbon is just 1.75 Å (panel a), the next step of the
reaction is the combination of these two hydrogen atoms to form an H2 (panel b). Whilst, for the non-
edge site (panel c), due to the longer distance between the two highlighted hydrogen atoms, a diffusion
course exists that leads to a high energy barrier (~1.3 eV for H hopping to the adjacent carbon, and
therefore the diffusion is limited).1,2 Therefore for this model, similar configurations as in panel b are
not energetically probable and are not shown on Fig. 2b; otherwise, the reaction on the non-edge site
should be followed by Heyrovsky route.
Page 10
10 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
(M'-H)+H2
(M'-H2)+H+
(M'-2H)+H+
(M'-H)+2H+
non-edge site edge site
Free
Ene
rgy
(eV
)
Reaction Pathway
bN-O
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
(M'-H)+H2
(M'-H2)+H+
(M'-2H)+H+
(M'-H)+2H+
non-edge site edge site
Free
Ene
rgy
(eV
)
Reaction Pathway
a Pr-N
Supplementary Fig. 9 Reaction pathways on edge (marked by blue circles) and non-edge
carbons (marked by red circles) in (a) pr-N and (b) N-O models. The overall free energy change
on the edge carbon is higher than the non-edge carbon. This indicates that the former site is less active
than the latter. The substrate is labelled M' to denote a standard substrate mode M less one hydrogen
atom adsorbed on the investigated adsorption centre i.e. M = M' - H.
Page 11
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0
Den
sity
of S
tate
s (a
.u.)
Energy (eV)
I II III IV V
b
-2 -1 0 1 2
Den
sity
of S
tate
s (a
.u.)
Energy (eV)
I II III IV V
a
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
PD
OS
Pea
k (e
V)
Activite carbon's distance to dopants
GH
*(eV
)
II
III
I
IV
V
Gc
IIIIII IV
V
Supplementary Fig. 10 (a) PDOS for sites I to V on py-N model. (b) Enlarged dotted zone in
panel a near the Fermi level. The model and proposed adsorption sites are shown as insert. (c)
Comparison of PDOS peak value with that of the adsorption strength. The adsorption energy
value on pristine graphene (G) is considered as a reference for the carbon atom that is located
at an infinitely large distance to the edge. The value of ΔGH* on various active carbons was
oscillatory, increasing with the distance to the dopant. When the carbon site is sufficiently far from
the dopant, ΔGH* should be the same value as that for pristine graphene. The oscillating trend in the
ΔGH value could be related to different electronic structures of each investigated site. Because of the
postulated bond formation scheme, with a higher PDOS peak value (for example site I), the bonding
between the adsorption site and the hydrogen is stronger, leading to a lower ΔGH value.
Page 12
12 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
-0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Initial After 1,000 cycles
Cur
rent
Den
sity
(mA/
cm2 )
Potential vs. RHE (V)
B-G
-0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Cur
rent
Den
sity
(mA/
cm2 )
Potential vs. RHE (V)
O-G Initial After 1,000 cycles
-0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Cur
rent
Den
sity
(mA/
cm2 )
Potential vs. RHE (V)
N-G Initial After 1,000 cycles
-0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Cur
rent
Den
sity
(mA/
cm2 )
Potential vs. RHE (V)
S-G Initial After 1,000 cycles
-0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Cur
rent
Den
sity
(mA/
cm2 )
Potential vs. RHE (V)
P-G Initial After 1,000 cycles
Supplementary Fig. 11 Polarization curves recorded for various doped graphene samples
before and after 1,000 potential sweeps (+0.2 to -0.6 V versus reversible hydrogen electrode)
under 0.5 M H2SO4.
Page 13
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 13
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 12 HER activity (expressed by i0/site) trend calculated from the kinetic
model plotted as a function of free energy for hydrogen adsorption at various α and kg0 values.
Based on the experimentally measured i0 per active site (square symbols), several computationally
derived i0/site lines are plotted with different α values. Among which, the line with α = 0.125 and kg0
= 0.01 s-1site-1 shows the best fit to the experimental data. Therefore this volcano plot was selected in
this study.
-0.9 -0.6 -0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2
10-22
10-20
10-18
10-16
10-14
Nor
mal
ized
i 0 (A/s
ite)
GH* (eV)
Page 14
14 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
-0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
Plane catalyst
DO
S activ
e ca
rbon
(eV)
GH* (eV)
b
-15 -10 -5 0 5
DOS6
DOS5
DOS3
Plane catalyst Adsorption with H
DO
S (a
.u.)
EFa
Energy (eV)
DOS1
DOS4
DOS2
-0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2-5.5
-5.0
-4.5
-4.0
-3.5
-3.0
-2.5
Plane catalyst
Wei
ghte
d ce
ntre
of t
otal
DO
S (e
V)
GH* (eV)
c
-0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2-10
-9
-8
-7
GH* (eV)
d
Plane catalystWei
ghte
d ce
ntre
of t
otal
DO
S (e
V)
-0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2-5
-4
-3
-2W
eigh
ted
cent
re o
f tot
al D
OS
(eV)
GH* (eV)
e
Adsorption with H
-0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2-10.0
-9.5
-9.0
-8.5
-8.0
GH* (eV)
f
Adsorption with H
Wei
ghte
d ce
ntre
of t
otal
DO
S (e
V)
Supplementary Fig. 13 Analyses of key electronic structure indicator with that of ∆GH* on the
various graphene models. (a) Definition diagram of each indicator using g-N as an example. (b)
Active centre highest peak position vs ∆GH*; (c) total DOS without H* vs ∆GH*; (d) DOS below
Fermi level without H* vs ∆GH*; (e) total DOS with H* vs ∆GH*; (f) DOS below Fermi level with
H* vs ∆GH*.
Page 15
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 15
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Fig. 14 Investigated sites and corresponding adsorption energies on dual-doped
models.
Page 16
16 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5
DO
S activ
e ca
rbon
(a.u
.)
Energy (eV)
N,S-grahpene th-S-grahpene
EFa
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5
DO
S activ
e ca
rbon
(eV)
Energy (eV)
N,B-graphene B-3C-graphene
EF
c
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5
DO
Sac
tive
carb
on (e
V)
Energy (eV)
N,P-graphene P-3C(-O) -graphene
EF
b
Supplementary Fig. 15 (a) DOS analysis of the most active carbon on N-S-graphene of
Supplementary Fig. 14b (orange line), that of th-S-graphene is included as comparison (black
line). (b) DOS analysis of the most active carbon on N-P-graphene of Supplementary Fig. 14e
(green line), that of P-3C(-O)-graphene is included as comparison (black line). (c) DOS analysis
of the most active carbon on N-B-graphene of Supplementary Fig. 14i (pink line), that of B-3C-
graphene is included as comparison (black line). The DOS analysis for the dual-doped graphene
follows the trend identified in Fig. 5. On N-S-graphene, the DOS of the active carbon moves toward
the Fermi level. This indicates a stronger adsorption of the hydrogen atom on this substrate and
therefore enhanced HER activity. Similarly, on N,P-graphene, a DOS peak appears near the Fermi
level. To the contrary, for N,B-graphene, a peak appears around -8 eV, and the overall DOS
distribution moves further away from the Fermi level. It is concluded H* adsorption is weaker than
that for boron doped graphene.
Page 17
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 17
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Table 1 Summary of physicochemical characterization, electrochemical
measurement, and calculation results on various samples/models.
* data obtained from ref. 3
Sample Tafel (mV/dec)
Measured i0 (A)
Surface area*
(m2/ g) Dopant*
(%) Active species in
Dopants* (%) i0/site
exp (A /site)
∆GH* (eV)
B-G 112.3 7.5×10-8 113.7 5.4 9.0 9.0×10-
23 0.61
N-G 115.5 1.1×10-7 108.8 6.4 24.3 4.3×10-
23 0.81
O-G 113.0 4.8×10-8 124.6 6.3 18.0 2.2×10-
23 0.97
S-G 112.8 5.6×10-8 154.6 2.4 76.6 1.3×10-
23 1.01
P-G 120.6 4.2×10-8 103.1 1.9 50.2 2.9×10-
23 0.71
Page 18
18 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Note 1
Contribution to activity as determined by different activation energy
According to the Arrhenius Equation, the reaction rate, k, is related to the activation energy, Ea, via
k = A' exp(-Ea/(kBT)) (1)
where kB is the Boltzmann constant, T is the reaction temperature (300 K to represent room-
temperature), and A' is a uniform pre-factor for the particular reaction. Consequently, for two
reactions to give k1/k2 > 10, the relationship between their activation energies Ea1 and Ea2 should
follow Ea2 – Ea1 > 0.06 eV. In other words, only when the difference between ΔGH* (see the definition
in the following text) on two atoms is smaller than 0.06 eV, will the reaction rate (expressed as i0 in
electrocatalysis) for these two sites be of the same order. In the present study, the difference between
ΔGH* on the most active sites and all other sites exceeds this threshold. Other sites therefore are
viewed as not contributing to the overall reaction.
Page 19
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 19
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Note 2
Reaction Mechanism.
Generally, in the acidic solution, the overall HER pathway is:4
H+ + e– → H* (Volmer step), followed by
H* + H+ + e– → H2 (Heyrovsky step)
or
H* + H* → H2 (Tafel step)
where * refers to a potential active site. The free energy diagram for the overall HER process is
normally a three-state one, comprising by an initial-state (H+ + e–), an intermediate-state of H
adsorbed on the catalyst surface (H*), and a final-state product represented by ½H2.5 In the present
study, extra states of H2* or 2H* adsorption were also considered to take Heyrovsky or Tafel steps
into consideration. Beside these, additional energy barriers might exist but the values are negligible
and therefore were not considered on the free diagram.6
Page 20
20 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Note 3
Normalization of i0
The normalization process from measured i0 to the activity per active site (i0/siteexp) for all samples
follows the same method that considers samples physical surface area and the most active doping
type percentage. Taking N-G as an example: i0 measured from Tafel plot is 1.1×10-7 A. The mass
loading of powder sample on working electrode is 40 μg, which yields the surface area of 40 × 10-6 ×
108.8 = 4.35 ×10-3 m2 (Supplementary Table 1). According to the geometric area of single carbon
atom, the number of total carbons contained in this area is 4.35×10-3 / 2.64×10-20 =1.65×1017.
Therefore, exact number of “active” carbon sites can be calculated based on the dopant’s
concentration and active species in dopant as 1.65 ×1017 × 6.4 % × 24.3 % = 2.57×1015
(Supplementary Table 1). Afterwards, the i0 on per active site is calculated as 1.1×10-7 / 2.57×1015 =
4.27 × 10-23 A.
Page 21
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 21
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Note 4
DOS analysis
To evaluate the relationship between electronic structure and H* adsorption energy, a schema of six
(6) descriptors was introduced. This schema is shown in Supplementary Fig. 13a. The six are: the
position of highest peak of active site DOS without hydrogen adsorption (DOS1); weighted DOS
centre for graphene models without hydrogen adsorption – below Fermi level (DOS2); weighted DOS
centre for graphene models without hydrogen adsorption – overall range (DOS3); the position of
highest peak of active site’s DOS with hydrogen adsorption (DOS4); weighted DOS centre for
graphene models with hydrogen adsorption – below Fermi level (DOS5); and, weighted DOS centre
for graphene models with hydrogen adsorption – overall range (DOS6). The definition of weighted
DOS centre is
𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1∑ 𝜀𝜀𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
∑ 𝜀𝜀𝑖𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 (2)
where ri is the DOS for each model at energy εi.
Page 22
22 NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary Note 5
Electrode Current Calculation
According to the Butler-Volmer Equation, assuming the exchange current for an active site is i0/site,
the electrode current per site i/site under electrode potential U is7
i/site(U) = – i0/site × 10(-(U-U0)/b) (3)
where U0 = 0 vs RHE and b is the Tafel slope selected as 120 mV/dec. The current density, j, therefore
on an electrode under U is computed from
j(U) = i/site(U) × (Ssurface_area × mloading ÷ Scarbon) × ζdoping ÷ Selectrode (4)
where Ssurface_area is the surface area per mass loading (in m2 g-1), mloading is the loading amount of
catalyst material (g), Scarbon is the area per carbon atom (in 2.64×10-20 m2), ζdoping is the doping
percentage of active heteroatoms, and; Selectrode is the geometric area of the electrode (0.196 cm2).
Page 23
NATURE ENERGY | www.nature.com/natureenergy 23
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONDOI: 10.1038/NENERGY.2016.130
Supplementary References
1 Ferro, Y., Marinelli, F. & Allouche, A., Density functional theory investigation of the diffusion
and recombination of H on a graphite surface. Chem. Phys. Lett. 368, 609-615 (2003).
2 Borodin, V. A., Vehviläinen, T. T., Ganchenkova, M. G. & Nieminen, R. M., Phys. Rev. B 84,
075486 (2011).
3 Jiao, Y., Zheng, Y., Jaroniec, M. & Qiao, S. Z. Origin of the electrocatalytic oxygen reduction
activity of graphene-based catalysts: a roadmap to achieve the best performance. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
136, 4394-4403 (2014).
4 Zheng, Y., Jiao, Y., Jaroniec, M. & Qiao, S. Z. Advancing the electrochemistry of the hydrogen-
evolution reaction through combining experiment and theory. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54, 52-65
(2014).
5 Nørskov, J. K. et al. Trends in the exchange current for hydrogen evolution. J. Electrochem. Soc.
152, J23-J26 (2005).
6 Skulason, E. et al. Density functional theory calculations for the hydrogen evolution reaction in
an electrochemical double layer on the Pt(111) electrode. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 9, 3241-3250
(2007).
7 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).