Interface Vol. 29, No. 2, Summer 2020

VOL. 29, NO. 2, S u m m e r 2 0 2 0

PHYSICAL AND ANALYTICAL ELECTROCHEMISTRY

8

Nobel Laureates at ECS Meetings – Part 2

12

ECS Weathers the Storms

16

2020 Society Election Coverage

FutuRE ECS MEEtingS PRiME 2020 Honolulu, HI october 4-9, 2020

Hawaii Convention Center & Hilton Hawaiian Village While our goal remains for the PRiME 2020 Meeting to take place as scheduled in Honolulu, given the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are also working to incorporate digital presentations and remote participation into the event. Therefore, regardless of what format PRiME ultimately takes—in person, virtual, or a hybrid of both—we hope you will join us for this vital technical meeting.

2020

239th ECS Meeting with the 18th international Meeting on Chemical Sensors cHIcago, Il May 30-June 3, 2021 Hilton Chicago

2021

240th ECS Meeting orlando, Fl october 10-14, 2021

Orange County Convention Center

2021

241st ECS Meeting VancouVer, Bc, canada May 29-June 2, 2022 Vancouver Convention Center

2022

www.electrochem.org/meetings

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

1

Tailor-made for energy applications

VSP-3e.

With space for eight channels, built-in EIS and ± 1 A (expandable up to ± 800 A with boosters) the VSP-3e stands out as the perfect electrochemical workstation for all battery and power-based applications.

Powerful

Fast/easy access to data of interest

Suits battery pack/cell stack

Smart C-rate management

Quality Indicators

Saves space

1 A expandable to 800 A

20 V control and “stack” mode to follow individual elements

Validate your measurements with BioLogic’s proprietary Quality Indicators (THD/NSD/NSR)

Automatic plotting for coulombic efficiency

Automatically update applied current in line with battery capacity

Compact, upright design

For more information, please visit our new website at

www.biologic.net Shaping the future. Together.

2

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

FROM THE EDITOR

H

It’s About Others

opefully by the time you read this the COVID-19 pandemic will be in the world’s rearview mirror, although its echoes are sure to impact us for a long time I fear. The stay-at-home orders and lockdowns have surely saved countless lives. The costs in jobs and the damage to the world economy are manifest and required leaders to truly put the good of the many first. In many if not most cases, leaders stepped up at all levels of government, business, professional societies, and academia, with the exemplary work of some making the failures of others all the more glaring.

Staying at home the past month or so has been an odd experience for me, to say the least.

Heather and I went from being empty nesters to having three college-aged kids at the house: our son, our daughter, and our daughter’s boyfriend. Curiously, virtually simultaneously with their arrival, the WiFi speeds at home have been approaching those of dial-up, and the food bill has increased astronomically. In trying to find a bright side, we have really enjoyed having them living at home for ostensibly the last time, although I am mildly worried that our son seems to be enjoying living in the finished basement a little too much, if you get my drift.

Eating meals together has been great with lots of laughs and spirited debate, and it is good to see the kind of people our kids have become despite my influence. It has been good to have extra hands around in helping our boy Whippet recover from the dog equivalent of ACL surgery. Finally, I have an excuse to buy new tech toys, like a widescreen monitor for my home office known in a previous life as our dining room table.

All that said, the level of human tragedy that has unfolded has been horrific. The number of deaths is staggering and truly hard to conceive or place in context. It is sometimes easy to become numb and almost forget that each increment in the total represents the loss of a person that someone holds dear, but then I hear individual stories on the news and my heart breaks.

I feel for all of you who have been touched in one way or another by the pandemic–whether it be by being sick yourself or feeling the powerlessness of not being able to help those you care about who have contracted it, or worst of all, succumbed to it. It is almost irresistible to surrender to the dark thoughts that all of us experience and to feel defeated, emotionally exhausted.

Then I watch the first responders and medical personnel all over the world run towards rather than away from the danger, and I can’t help but be inspired and humbled. I see so many others sacrificing and serving others, giving time, supplies, money, and expertise across all the boundaries that are often used to define people: nationality, race, religion, and political affiliation, to name but a few. The selfless giving of all this love reminds me that, when push comes to shove, life is about others and what we do for and with them.

At one point during the lockdown, Jerry Frankel of Ohio State emailed a large group of corrosion folks to celebrate the 110th birthday of one of the giants in our field, Mars Fontana.

Fontana not only established the world-class corrosion center at Ohio State, but he also educated the next generation of leaders who educated the next, and so on. What struck me at first about the email trail was the way Fontana’s landmark text tied together so many people across all of the boundaries mentioned above. Those reminiscences were only the segue to the most heartwarming aspect of the Reply Alls (which can often lead to embarrassing situations): the universal expressions of concern for everyone else and how much we missed seeing each other. The isolation inherent in the worldwide fight against this pandemic reminds us of our need to be in the lives of others and to have them in ours. The physical remoteness can lead to a loss of the interpersonal networks that nourish our souls, whether we realize it or not. So, if you have not already, reach out to a colleague, friend, or family member who needs that thread of contact–even if it is still virtual. Hopefully we will all be able to reconnect in person soon.

Until next time, be safe and happy.

Rob Kelly Editor rgk6y@virginia.edu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7354-0978

Published by: The Electrochemical Society (ECS) 65 South Main Street Pennington, NJ 08534-2839, USA Tel 609.737.1902, Fax 609.737.2743 www.electrochem.org Editor: Rob Kelly, rgk6y@virginia.edu Guest Editor: Alice Suroviec, asuroviec@berry.edu Contributing Editors: Donald Pile, Donald.Pile@gmail. com; Alice Suroviec, asuroviec@berry.edu Director of Publications: Beth Craanen, Beth.Craanen@electrochem.org Production Editor: Mary Beth Schwartz, MaryBeth.Schwartz@electrochem.org Print Production Manager: Dinia Agrawala, interface@electrochem.org Staff Contributors: Frances Chaves, Beth Craanen, Genevieve Goldy, Mary Hojlo, Christopher J. Jannuzzi, John Lewis, Jennifer Ortiz, Shannon Reed, Mary Beth Schwartz, Keerthana Varadhan Advisory Board: Brett Lucht (Battery), Dev Chidambaram (Corrosion), Durga Misra (Dielectric Science and Technology), Philippe Vereecken (Electrodeposition), Jennifer Hite (Electronics and Photonics), Mani Manivannan (Energy Technology), Cortney Kreller (High-Temperature Energy, Materials, & Processes), John Weidner (Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering), Jakoah Brgoch (Luminescence and Display Materials), Hiroshi Imahori (Nanocarbons), Jim Burgess (Organic and Biological Electrochemistry), Andrew Hillier (Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry), Ajit Khosla (Sensor) Publications Subcommittee Chair: Turgut Gür Society Officers: Stefan De Gendt, President; Eric Wachsman, Senior Vice President; Turgut Gür, 2nd Vice President; Gerardine Gabriela Botte, 3rd Vice President; Marca Doeff, Secretary; Gessie Brisard, Treasurer; Christopher J. Jannuzzi, Executive Director & CEO Statements and opinions given in The Electrochemical Society Interface are those of the contributors, and ECS assumes no responsibility for them.

Authorization to photocopy any article for internal or personal use beyond the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976 is granted by The Electrochemical Society to libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC). Copying for other than internal or personal use without express permission of ECS is prohibited. The CCC Code for The Electrochemical Society Interface is 1064-8208/92.

Canada Post: Publications Mail Agreement #40612608 Canada Returns to be sent to: Pitney Bowes International, P.O. Box 25542, London, ON N6C 6B2 ISSN : Print: 1064-8208

Online: 1944-8783

The Electrochemical Society Interface is published quarterly

by The Electrochemical Society (ECS), at 65 South Main Street, Pennington, NJ 08534-2839 USA. Subscription to members is part of membership service; subscription to nonmembers is available; see the ECS website. Single copies $10.00 to members; $19.00 to nonmembers. © Copyright 2020 by The Electrochemical Society. Periodicals postage paid at Pennington, New Jersey, and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Electrochemical Society, 65 South Main Street, Pennington, NJ 08534-2839.

The Electrochemical Society is an educational, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization with more than 8,500 scientists and engineers in over 75 countries worldwide who hold individual membership. Founded in 1902, the Society has a long tradition in advancing the theory and practice of electrochemical and solid state science by dissemination of information through its publications and international meetings.

Cummings Printing uses 100% recyclable low-density polyethylene (#4) film in the production of Interface.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

3 All recycled paper. Printed in USA.

4

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

61

Recent Developments in Electrocatalysis

by Alice Suroviec

63

Computational Quantum Chemical Explorations of Chemical/ Material Space for Efficient Electrocatalysts

by John A. Keith

67

Strategies for Electrocatalytic Reduction and Photoelectrochemical Conversion of Carbon Dioxide to Fuels and Utility Chemicals

by Pawel J. Kulesza and Iwona A. Rutkowska

73

Electrochemical Destruction of ‘Forever Chemicals’: The Right Solution at the Right Time

by Suzanne Witt, Nick Rancis, Mary Ensch, and Vanessa Maldonado

Vol. 29, No. 2 Summer 2020

the Editor: 3 From It’s About Others the President: 7 From Life as Usual in a Globally Changed World

Laureates 8 Nobel at ECS Meetings – Part 2

12 ECS Weathers the Storms 16 Meet the New Officers 19 Society News 34 Free Radicals 36 People News 43 Book Review the Capital 44 Estimating Costs of Electrowinning Processes

51 Looking at Patent Law 59 Tech Highlights 77 Section News 78 Awards Program 80 New Members 84 Student News for Papers: 89 Call 239th ECS Meeting Chicago, IL

Cover design by Dinia Agrawala.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

5

Plays Well With Others

Battery Cyclers, Fuel Cell Test Stands, AFM, TEM, & More

There’s a reason people want to partner with us - Gamry provides the highest possible isolation from Earth ground, ensuring accurate EIS results while coupled to other devices.

www.gamry.com 6

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

FROM T HE PRESIDENT

Life as Usual in a Globally Changed World

W

hat else is there to talk about? Sure, I did anticipate my transition into the role of ECS President differently. At the time of writing this editorial, the worldwide pandemic is still raging, with positive indications on the horizon and prospects for medicine or a vaccine by the fall. The optimists are hoping that society may look forward to resuming life as usual, as we see fewer casualties, reduced pressure on healthcare, and businesses starting up again. The pessimists or maybe the realists among us however understand that irrespective, COVID-19 will have a lasting impact on all aspects of societal behavior in a changed world. I hope that when you are reading this article the optimists are proven right.

The past time period had an earthquake-like effect on society and many things taken for granted for many generations were suddenly not that guaranteed anymore.

In Europe, starting in early March, countrywide restrictions were imposed—restaurants, bars, companies, shops for non-essential goods were closed and all leisure events were cancelled. The former did have a huge economic impact— companies had to adapt their work policies almost overnight, or worse, cancel all activities for indefinite periods of time.

Then again, it also demonstrated our remarkable flexibility of adapting and it for sure accelerated work at home practices, boosted e-commerce, and forced many companies to improve efficiency of operations to the maximum. I strongly believe we will see future positive outcomes of this past period—not the least the (temporary) reduction on the environmental impact of our global society. The educational system also trembled on its foundation—schools and universities shut down and had to transition to digital learning. I am still not sure if the biggest adaption to this was with the teachers or with the students.

The ban on leisure activities affected soccer (big in Europe), cycling (the single day stages in the spring, as well as Tour de

France in summer), the Olympics (postponed), and even my golf club (weekend leisure) had to close. Initially one does not realize it, but I think that the biggest concern apart from the economic aspect is that COVID-19 leads to social isolation.

For sure, there are other things to talk about. As the incoming president, I would like to reflect on the mission of The Electrochemical Society, which is to encourage research, discussion, critical assessment, and dissemination of knowledge in electrochemical and solid state science and technology fields. For this, the Society holds meetings, publishes scientific papers, fosters training and education of scientists and engineers, and cooperates with other organizations to promote science and technology in the public interest. I would like to comfort the members of The Electrochemical Society.

Our Pennington office and all the employees and volunteers have acted diligently in the last few months. Working from home, our staff had to deal with an unfortunate but necessary cancellation of our Montreal meeting and the aftermath.

They continue to maintain our publications and community engagement efforts as they prepare for our premier meeting, PRiME, taking place in October. With the level of engagement and professionalism I observed, I am confident that ECS is more than ever ready for future challenges, and hopefully life as usual in a changed world.

Stefan De Gendt ECS President president@electrochem.org https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3775-3578

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

7

Copyright © The Nobel Foundation.

NOBEL LAUREATES

AT ECS MEETINGS – PART 2

by John Lewis

E

CS has been privileged over its 118-year history to have 30 Nobel Laureates (representing 14 Chemistry and eight Physics Nobel Prizes) participate at Society meetings. Their involvement ranges from giving plenary, keynote, and invited talks, to serving on panels, addressing ECS leadership groups, co-authoring innumerable presentations, and giving tours of their labs.

Even more notable is that many of these distinguished minds shared their research with ECS before they won, illustrating the importance of the electrochemical and solid state sciences to the scientific community over the past 100 plus years.

The Modern Era

In 1967, future Nobel Laureate Isamu Akasaki co-authored two papers for the spring meeting in Dallas, TX. He returned, with coauthored contributions, to Miami Beach, FL, in fall 1972, and Toronto, Canada, in spring 1975. Building off this research, Akasaki and future co-Laureate, Hiroshi Amano, presented their first work on blue LEDs “Pure-Blue Electroluminescence from Mg-Doped GaN Grown by MOVPE” at the 1989 spring meeting in Los Angeles, CA. They also presented “Widegap Nitride Semiconductors for UV-Blue Light Emitting Devices” at the 1993 spring meeting in Honolulu, HI. Their work in this area paved the way for sharing the 2014 Physics Nobel with Shuji Nakamura for the invention of efficient blue lightemitting diodes (LED). In 1999, Akasaki received the ECS Solid State Science and Technology Award (now the Gordon E. Moore Medal) and presented his award address, “Renaissance and Progress in Nitride Semiconductors-Seeking Blue Light Emissions,” at the spring meeting in Seattle, WA. Amano went on to co-author three other presentations at meetings between 2004 and 2018.

The next Nobel Laureate to appear was M. Stanley Whittingham, who co-authored “Transport Properties of Silver Beta Aluminum” with Robert Huggins at the fall 1970 meeting in Atlantic City, NJ. Later, after developing the first rechargeable battery, Whittingham’s

Shuji Nakamura delivered The ECS Lecture, entitled “Current and Future Status of Nitride-Based Solid State Lighting,” at the 218th ECS Meeting in Las Vegas in 2010.

8

seminal research on intercalation would be key to developing modern lithium-ion batteries.

In recognition of these contributions, he received the 2019 Chemistry Nobel with John Goodenough and Akira Yoshino.

Ironically, Whittingham was notified of his Nobel one week before the fall meeting in Atlanta, GA, where, at a symposium in Richard E. Smalley, co-winner of the honor of Dr. Huggins, he 1996 Chemistry Nobel for the discovery of fullerenes. presented a retrospective of their original 1970 silver beta aluminum paper.

When Whittingham’s award was announced at the Atlanta meeting’s plenary session, the entire audience rose to their feet, applauding enthusiastically for several minutes. This was no surprise; Whittingham is a familiar presence at ECS meetings. A long-term Society member and Fellow, he received the 1971 ECS Young Author Award. Whittingham has been involved with some 50 presentations between 1970 and 2019. Notable lectures include one of his first talks on intercalation (spring 1977 meeting, Philadelphia, PA); his 2002 ECS Battery Research Award address (fall meeting, Salt Lake City, UT); and lecture for the 25th anniversary symposium celebrating the commercialization of the Li-ion battery (fall 2016 meeting, Honolulu, HI), an event that also featured his future co-winner, John Goodenough.

At the fall 1977 meeting in Atlanta, GA, future Laureates Alan G. MacDiarmid, Alan J. Heeger, and Hideki Shirakawa presented “Electrically Conducting Covalent Polymers: Halogen Derivatives of (SN)X and (CH)X.” These three received the 2000 Chemistry Nobel for their research on conductive polymers. While this was Shirakawa’s only ECS meeting paper, MacDiarmid and Heeger returned to deliver 15 other presentations from 1977 to 1989, including four direct collaborations on polyacetylene and its conductive properties. Their work spurred further research and discovery in the field of conductive and semi-conductive plastics, contributing to advancements in areas such as battery materials, chemical and biosensors, display materials, energy conversion, semiconductors, and much more.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

John Goodenough, another co-recipient of the 2019 Chemistry Nobel, gave his first talk at the New Orleans, LA, meeting in the fall of 1984. His contributions on metallic oxide cathodes represented the next major step in the development of Li-ion batteries. Like Whittingham, Goodenough is an ECS member and Isamu Akasaki shared the 2014 Nobel Fellow. He made about Physics Prize for the invention of efficient 45 meeting presentations blue light-emitting diodes (LED). between 1984 and 2019, many in collaboration with students from his research group. At the fall 1999 Honolulu, HI, meeting, he received the ECS Olin Palladium Award—one of the Society’s highest honors—and gave an address on “Electrochemistry and Energy Conversion.” In 2016, he joined Whittingham at the 25th anniversary Li-ion symposium and delivered a talk on “Solid Electrolytes and Metallic Lithium Anodes.”

Like his fellow 2014 Physics co-winner Akasaki, Shuji Nakamura’s first involvement with an ECS meeting was as a co-author at the fall 1988 meeting in Chicago, IL. He gave the plenary ECS Lecture at the fall 2010 meeting in Las Vegas, NV, joining Richard Smalley, Rudolph Marcus, and William Shockley in the ranks of ECS plenary speakers to later receive Nobel Prizes. Speaking on “Current and Future Status of Nitride–based Solid State Lighting,” Nakamura discussed Group III nitrides and their significant cost and energy savings. Their potential to replace less efficient existing systems and bring more stable sources to underdeveloped parts of the world highlighted the significance of LEDs and solid state lighting in matters of global concern.

The work of Richard E. Smalley—co-winner of the 1996 Chemistry Nobel for the discovery of fullerenes—would have a large impact on the Society. After the initial synthesis of C60 in 1985, the new discovery’s fascinating possibilities became clear. At the 1991 fall meeting in Phoenix, AZ, ECS held its first symposium on the topic, Fullerenes: Chemistry, Physics and New Directions. Smalley gave

Stanley Whittingham received a standing ovation when his 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry was announced at the 2019 Atlanta, GA, meeting.

the opening talk. It was titled “Doping Bucky”1 as C60 had been named Buckminsterfullerene in honor of Buckminster Fuller’s geodesic spheres.

Following the excitement of the initial symposium, in 1993 the Society’s efforts John Goodenough delivered the ECS in fullerenes resulted in Olin Palladium Award address at the 1999 the formation of a new Honolulu, HI, meeting. group, now called the ECS Nanocarbons Division. At that year’s fall meeting in New Orleans, LA, Smalley gave the plenary ECS Lecture, “From Buckeyballs to Bucky Tubes: New Possibilities in Nano–Technology.” Between 1996 and 2003, he co-authored eight ECS presentations at the ever expanding fullerenes symposium. In honor of his influence and achievements, the Nanocarbons Division established the Richard E. Smalley Research Award to encourage excellence in fullerenes, nanotubes, and carbon nanostructures research. Winners present award talks at ECS meetings.

The 1997 fall meeting, held jointly with the International Society of Electrochemistry (ISE), took place in Paris, France. This was the first ECS meeting outside the U.S. or Canada. To mark the occasion, JeanMarie Lehn, co-recipient of the 1987 Chemistry Nobel, delivered the plenary ECS Lecture on “Building Molecular and Supramolecular Devices.” His work in the new area of supramolecular chemistry proved influential for next level research in areas, such as molecular self-assembly, catalysts and catalysis, biomaterials and therapeutics, and molecular switches.

The 1999 ECS Battery Technology Award was given to Akira Yoshino, the third recipient of the 2019 Nobel in Chemistry.

Yoshino’s contribution of a carbon anode was the final piece of the puzzle, enabling the creation of a safe and commercially viable Li-ion battery. Interestingly, while pursuing some of his earliest work investigating polyacetylene (see MacDiarmid, Heeger, and Shirakawa, above) as a possible anode, information in a 1980 paper

by Goodenough2 inspired Yoshino to use the polymer as the negative electrode missing in Goodenough’s battery. At the 1999 fall meeting in Honolulu, HI, Yoshino’s award address, “Development of Lithium Ion Battery,” covered his work with polyacetylene and carbonaceous materials in pursuit of a commercially feasible rechargeable battery.

By many accounts, the ECS Lecture at the 2001 spring meeting in Washington, DC, was one of the most entertaining ever. “With copious use of liquid nitrogen, flipping of flattened frozen exploding balloons into the audience, and levitation of spinning magnets, Nobel Laureate William Phillips made sure that no one dozed off during his early morning lecture on laser cooling. It’s against the laws of thermodynamics to reach Absolute Zero, but Phillips showed that you could get ridiculously close.”3 His talk on “Almost Absolute Zero: The Story of Laser Cooling and Trapping” raised the bar for future ECS Lectures! The (shared) 1997 Nobel Physics Prize recognized Phillips’ work on laser cooling and developing the Zeeman decelerator.

Gerd Binnig, co-recipient of the 1986 Physics Nobel, delivered the plenary ECS Lecture, “Nanotechnology: The Path to Handling Complexity?” when ECS returned to Paris in the fall of 2003. He discussed nanotechnology’s potential for advancing next generation processor chips, a topic that resonated with many meeting attendees.

Binnig’s work on the design and development of the scanning tunneling microscope (STM), and later, the atomic force microscope (ATM), allowed for precise and stable studies on the structure of matter.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

(continued on next page) 9

Copyright © The Nobel Foundation.

APPENDIX

6

● Gerd Binnig received the 1986 Nobel Prize in Physics “for the design of the scanning tunneling microscope.” He later delivered “Nanotechnology: The Path to Handling Complexity?” as the 2003 plenary ECS Lecture in Paris, France. ● Jean–Marie Lehn presented “Building Molecular and Supramolecular Devices” as the 1997 plenary ECS Lecture in Paris, France. He was awarded the 1987 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for the development and use of molecules with structure-specific interactions of high selectivity.” ● Richard Smalley delivered the keynote address, “Doping Bucky,” in Phoenix, AZ, in 1991. His topic for the plenary ECS Lecture at the 1993 meeting in New Orleans, LA, was “From Buckeyballs to Bucky Tubes: New Possibilities in Nano–Technology.” Between 1996 and 2003, he coauthored eight presentations at ECS meetings. Smalley was awarded the 1996 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for the discovery of fullerenes.” ● Steven Chu received the 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics “for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light.” That year, he delivered the plenary ECS Lecture, “The Role of Electrochemistry in our Transition to Sustainable Energy,” at the ECS meeting in National Harbor, MD. He was also the keynote speaker at that meeting’s Leadership Luncheon. ● William D. Phillips’ 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics was “for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light.” He presented “Almost Absolute Zero: the Story of Laser Cooling and Trapping” as the plenary ECS Lecture at the 2001 Washington, DC. ● Alan G. MacDiarmid gave numerous talks at ECS meetings before winning the Nobel. He spoke at the 1977 Atlanta, GA, meeting on a paper co-written with A. J. Heeger and H. Shirakawa, “Electrically Conducting Covalent Polymers: Halogen Derivatives of (SN)X and (CH)X”and in 1980 in St. Louis, MO, on a paper co-written with Heeger, “Organic Metals and Semiconductors: Polyacetylene, (CH)X and its Derivatives.”

In 1982 in Detroit, he presented three papers co-written with Heeger, “Electrochemical Characteristics of the Partly Reduced Polyacetylene (CH+Y)X, Electrode;” “Polarization Study of the Partly Oxidized Polyacetylene (CH+Y)X, Cathode;” and “Electrochemical Characteristics of the Partly Oxidized Polyacetylene (CH+Y)X, Electrode.” MacDiarmid was a speaker at two meetings in 1983, delivering “The Electrochemistry of Polyacetylene: Application in High Power Density Rechargeable Batteries” in San Francisco, CA, and “Polyacetylene, (CH)X, Electrodes in Batteries and Fuel Cells Using Aqueous Electrolytes” in Washington, D.C. “Polyaniline: A Cathode-Active Material for Rechargeable Aqueous Batteries” was his topic in New Orleans in 1984. The next year he delivered “Polyaniline: Application as an Anode and Cathode Material in Rechargeable Batteries Employing Aqueous Electrolytes” in Toronto, Canada. “Polyaniline: Use of Emeraldine Base Form as a Cathode Active Material in Rechargeable Batteries” was his subject in San Diego, CA, in 1986. MacDiarmid co-authored four other presentations between 1977-1989, before receiving the 2000 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for the discovery and development of conductive polymers.” ● Alan J. Heeger was co-author with A. G. MacDiarmid and H. Shirakawa of “Electrically Conducting Covalent Polymers: Halogen Derivatives of (SN)X and (CH)X” presented at the 1977 Atlanta, GA, meeting. In St. Louis, MO, in 1980, “Organic Metals and Semiconductors: Polyacetylene, (CH)X and its Derivatives” was co-authored by MacDiarmid as were three papers he presented in 1982 in Detroit, MI: “Electrochemical Characteristics of the Partly Reduced Polyacetylene (CH+Y)X, Electrode,” “Polarization Study of the Partly Oxidized Polyacetylene (CH+Y)X, Cathode,” and “Electrochemical Characteristics of the Partly Oxidized Polyacetylene (CH+Y)X, Electrode.” He spoke at the 1984 New Orleans, LA, meeting on “Fundamental Electrochemical Studies of Conducting Polymers.” Heeger was co-author on one other presentation in 1977 before receiving the 2000 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, “for the discovery and development of conductive polymers.”

(continued from previous page)

The first Graphene and Emerging Material for Post-CMOS Applications symposium took place at the spring 2009 meeting in San Francisco, C A. As with fullerenes, the scientific possibilities of graphene quickly and William Phillips presented the Society’s profoundly impacted plenary Lecture at the 2001 spring meeting in Washington, DC, on the subject of laser many areas of research. cooling and trapping.

The symposium kicked off with Konstantin (aka “Kostya”) Novoselov’s keynote talk, “Graphene: The Magic of Flat Carbon.” Novoselov went on to share the 2010 Physics Nobel Prize for his groundbreaking experiments with graphene. As the world’s thinnest, strongest, and most conductive material, graphene opened up new frontiers in many areas of electrochemical and solid state research. Novoselov co-authored three ECS meeting presentations between 2014 and 2019. The abstract and proceedings paper from his 2009 talk were later expanded into a full Interface magazine article.4 Steven Chu, co-winner with Phillips of the 1997 Nobel Physics Prize, gave the plenary ECS Lecture at the 2017 fall meeting in National Harbor, MD. Known not only for his work on laser cooling, Chu was the U.S. Secretary of Energy from 2009 to 2013. His talk on “The Role of Electrochemistry in our Transition to Sustainable Energy” combined his experience as a physicist and government official to give a unique perspective on the future of energy and sustainability. A firm believer in electrochemistry’s role in helping solve global challenges, Chu’s talk was music to the audience’s ears. He also gave a more intimate talk on this subject at the ECS Leadership Luncheon (now the Fellows Luncheon) in National Harbor.

So that’s it…or is it?

In this series of articles (Nobel Laureates at ECS Meetings – Part 1 and Part 2), you saw how electrochemistry and solid state science ensnared some of the greatest minds of the last 100 plus years. This should not surprise regular Interface readers as our community tackles critical global issues such as energy, water, agriculture, human health, sustainability, climate change, and access to technology, on a daily basis. As with all science, the work of one generation stands on the shoulders of the previous ones. So we look forward to updating this article in a decade or two. Then you may say to yourself, “Hey, I saw those Nobel Laureates at ECS meetings!”

● Hideki Shirakawa was co-author of “Electrically Conducting Covalent Polymers: Halogen Derivatives of (SN)X and (CH)X” with Heeger and MacDiarmid in the 1977 Atlanta, GA, meeting. He was awarded the 2000 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for the discovery and development of conductive polymers.”

Jean-Marie Lehn delivered the plenary ECS Lecture at the 1997 meeting in Paris, France. From left to right: Katsumi Niki, president of ISE; JeanMarie Lehn, plenary lecturer; Laurence M. Peter, ISE Pergamon Medal lecturer; Barry Miller, president of ECS. 10

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

APPENDIX APPENDIX

6 6

● Konstantin (aka “Kostya”) Novoselov, keynote speaker at the 2009 San Francisco, CA, meeting, presented “Graphene: The Magic of Flat Carbon.” From 2014 to 2019, he co-authored three other ECS meeting presentations. Novoselov accepted the 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics “for groundbreaking experiments regarding the two-dimensional material graphene.”

Steven Chu gave the plenary ECS Lecture at the 2017 fall meeting in National Harbor, MD.

NOTE: Many of the talks described in this article occurred at meetings in Honolulu. This series of meetings, now called PRiME (Pacific Rim International Meeting on Electrochemistry), began in 1987 as a joint meeting of ECS and The Electrochemical Society of Japan (ECSJ). Now they take place every four years, with The Korean Electrochemical Society (KECS) as an additional partner.

The next PRiME is scheduled for October 4-9, 2020. Two symposia honor M. Stanley Whittingham and Isamu Akasaki, with co-authored contributions from John Goodenough and Hiroshi Amano. We are also planning a special event honoring ECS associated Nobel Laureates. © The Electrochemical Society. 10.1149.2/2.F01202IF.

About the Series

Nobel Laureates at ECS Meetings – Part 15 concluded with Rudolph A. Marcus, who presented at his first ECS meeting in 1959, received notification of his 1992 Nobel Chemistry award at an ECS meeting, and returned to give a plenary ECS Lecture in 1996.

About the Author John Lewis is Director of Meetings at ECS and has been with the Society since 2005.

Readers who would like to comment on this article, share their recollections of a Nobel Laureate at an ECS meeting, or fund the digitization of our meeting archives, are welcome to email him at john.lewis@ electrochem.org.

REFERENCES 1. J. Electrochem. Soc., 138, 467C (1991).

2. https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/Nobel-laureateYoshino-created-the-rechargeable-world-we-live-in 3. F. Trumbore and D. Turner, The Electrochemical Society 19022002: A Centennial History, The Electrochemical Society, Pennington, NJ (2002).

4. K. Novoselov, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 20(1), 45 (2011).

5. J. Lewis, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 29(1), 8 (2020).

6. Details regarding ECS meeting appearances are from the following publications: Transactions of the American Electrochemical Society, Transactions of the Electrochemical Society, Extended Abstracts, Meeting Abstracts, ECS Proceedings Volumes, ECS Transactions, Interface, and printed meeting programs.

● Isamu Akasaki spoke at the the 1989 spring meeting in Los Angeles, CA, with H. Amano on “Pure-Blue Electroluminescence from MgDoped GaN Grown by MOVPE” and at the 1993 meeting in Honolulu, HI, with H. Amano, on “Widegap Nitride Semiconductors for UV -Blue Light Emitting Devices.” “Renaissance and Progress in Nitride Semiconductors-Seeking Blue Light Emissions” was the topic of his ECS Solid State Science & Technology Award Address at the 1999 Seattle, WA, meeting. Co-author on four other presentations from 1967 to 1975, Akasaki received the 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics “for the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes which has enabled bright and energysaving white light sources.” ● Hiroshi Amano co-authored “Pure-Blue Electroluminescence from MgDoped GaN Grown by MOVPE” with I. Akasaki at the at the 1989 spring meeting in Los Angeles, CA and also “Widegap Nitride Semiconductors for UV-Blue Light Emitting Devices” with I. Akasaki at the 1993 Honolulu, HI, meeting. From 2004 to 2018, he co-authored three other presentations. The 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Amano “for the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes which has enabled bright and energy-saving white light sources.” ● Shuji Nakamura was co-author on two presentations in 1988 and 2009, before delivering “Current and Future Status of Nitride–based Solid State Lighting” as plenary ECS lecturer at the 2010 Las Vegas, NV, meeting.

He received the 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics “for the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes which has enabled bright and energy-saving white light sources.” ● M. Stanley Whittingham spoke at the 1970 Atlantic City, NJ, meeting on “Transport Properties of Silver Beta Aluminum.” He presented at two meetings in 1975; in Toronto, Canada, he delivered “The Role of Nonstoichiometry in Cathode Reactions” and “A Non-Electrochemical Test for Cathode Activity in Lithium Cells” in Dallas, TX. At the 1977 Philadelphia, PA, meeting, his topic was “Mechanism of Electrodes Based upon Inorganic Intercalation Compounds.” As recipient of the ECS Battery Research Award at the 2002 Salt Lake City, UT, meeting, Whittingham’s address was “Intercalation Chemistry and Battery Materials.” He was invited to speak twice at the 2011 Montreal, Canada, meeting, delivering “Energy Storage Materials: Past and Future―Beyond Li–Ion,” and “The Holy Grail of Batteries – Lithium–Air: Reality vs Hype.” His invited talk at the 2012 Honolulu, HI, meeting was “Metal–Air Batteries: A Reality Check;” in Phoenix, AZ, in 2015, “Northeast Center for Chemical Energy Storage (NECCES);” and in San Diego, CA, in 2016, “Grand Challenge: Attaining the Limits of Intercalation Reactions.” Whittingham delivered two keynote addresses: “The Introduction of Intercalation into Battery Science: 1968–1990” at the 2016 Honolulu, HI, meeting; and “Beta Alumina – Prelude to a Revolution in Solid State Electrochemistry” in Atlanta, GA, in 2019. From 1979 to 2019, Whittingham co-authored 39 other presentations. He shared the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for the development of lithium-ion batteries.” ● John Goodenough spoke at a number of ECS meetings. “Manganese Oxides as Battery Cathodes” was his topic at the 1984 New Orleans, LA, meeting. In 1994, he delivered “Oxide-Ion Solid Electrolytes” in Miami Beach, FL. His subject at the 1997 Paris, France, meeting was “Mapping of Redox Energies in Structures Containing Polyanions.” Goodenough delivered two talks at the 1999 Honolulu, HI, meeting. The first, as a speaker, was “Oxide Engineering for Advanced Power Sources.” When he received the ECS Olin Palladium Award, Goodenough’s address was “Electrochemistry and Energy Conversion.” He returned to Honolulu, HI, in 2016, to deliver the keynote address, “Solid Electrolytes and Metallic Lithium Anodes.” From 1986 to 2019, Goodenough was co-author on 41 other presentations. Goodenough shared the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for the development of lithium-ion batteries.” ● Akira Yoshino gave the ECS Battery Division Technology Award Address, “Development of Lithium Ion Battery,” at the 1999 Honolulu, HI, meeting. He was co-author on another presentation in 2011. Yoshino shared the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, “for the development of lithium-ion batteries.”

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

11

ECS WEATHERS THE STORMS

by Frances Chaves

T

o ensure that our community experienced the best possible meetings, throughout its 118-year history, ECS confronted—and overcame—major national and global challenges. Much of the maneuvering required to meet these challenges happens behind the scenes, as staff, board, and volunteers work together so that nothing interrupts ECS’s critical mission of advancing electrochemistry and solid state science and technology. Here is a partial look at some of those challenges, and how the storms were weathered.

“ECS is a truly international organization with members residing in 70 countries around the world. Therefore, global crises profoundly impact the ECS community. As it prevented us from coming together at our biannual meeting, the COVID-19 pandemic was particularly challenging. Meetings are a foundational element of what makes ECS what it is. The Society’s leadership canceled Chris Jannuzzi, the 237th ECS Meeting as a last resort to ECS Executive protect our members, volunteers, attendees, Director and Chief Executive Officer. and staff. Fortunately, we are a resourceful and resilient organization that throughout history has adapted, and will continue to adapt, as circumstances require, to ensure that our community can safely convene, engage, and collaborate,” said Christopher Jannuzzi, ECS Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer.

Former ECS Executive Director Roque Calvo, who championed the success of 75 consecutive biannual meetings during his 37 years with the Society,1 said, “The opportunity to advance our world changing electrochemistry research is the driving force behind the Society’s resilience in contending with challenges and tragedies that jeopardize ECS meetings. Even with new presentation Former ECS technologies, I doubt that destination Executive Director meetings will change. Face-to-face interaction Roque Calvo. between our close international constituencies is just too important. It is now possible to present technical papers virtually—but critical collaborations and the exchange of ideas do not occur on the Internet…they happen in the hotel lobbies, bars, and hallways at our great meeting destinations around the world.”

Special thanks to Roque Calvo for sharing his memories of ECS overcoming meeting challenges.

The Winds of War ECS—then called the American Electrochemical Society— was only 12 years old when World War I was declared in Europe on July 28, 1914.2 ECS continued meeting through the war; once in 1914 (Niagara Falls, Canada); twice in 1915 (Atlantic City, NJ, and San Francisco, CA); and twice in 1916 (Washington, D.C., and New York, NY). A record 497 people attended the fall 1916 ECS meeting. When the U.S. entered the war on April 6, 1917, the government requested the Society’s assistance in determining the U.S. Navy’s war preparedness. Meetings were held through 1918 to support the war effort and help solve technical problems.

12

The Society continued meeting after the U.S. entered World War II on December 7, 1941—until 1945 when meetings were cancelled because of government travel restrictions. However, satellite regional meetings were held instead.

In the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, OPEC (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) instituted an oil embargo against At the 1917 the U.S. and countries supporting Israel. At spring meeting in Detroit, Lawrence the 143rd ECS Meeting (Chicago, spring Addicks (ECS 1973), and the 144th ECS Meeting (New President for the York, NY, fall 1974), electrochemists began 1915-1916 term) the revolution that would lead to electric was appointed vehicles and reducing global dependence on as Society fossil fuels. The topic of Arthur M. Bueche’s representative 1973 ECS Lecture was “Energy Options.” on a U.S. Naval The ECS Battery Division’s membership Advisory Board. expanded greatly during the 1970s. The ECS Energy Technology Group (now Division) was founded in 1976 “to encourage education, training, research, and publication in energy-related science and technology.”3 Calvo recalls how the Persian Gulf War impacted the 179th ECS Meeting, scheduled for the spring of 1991 in Washington, D.C. In order to secure the best rates for guests and ensure optimal meeting locations, the Society books meeting hotels and facilities up to four years in advance. Meeting information is published far in advance of meeting dates. During the war, which lasted from August 1990 through February 1991, visits to the nation’s capital dropped dramatically. The D.C. meeting venue slashed ECS meeting spaces and undercut member room rates, offering what they called “panda-monium specials.” (The hotel, on Connecticut Avenue, was near the zoo.) Thankfully, the war ended before the spring meeting, room rates returned to normal, and ECS’s meeting spaces were restored.

ECS fall meetings always take place in October—except in 2001. The second joint meeting with The International Society of Electrochemistry (ISE) was originally planned for October of 2001 in San Francisco, CA. However, to better accommodate ISE’s European members’ academic calendars—and take advantage of the U.S. Labor Day holiday—the meeting was moved to September 2-7. One week later, on September 11, 2001, the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil in U.S. history occurred—after meeting attendees were safely home after an excellent meeting. As Calvo said, “Thanks to its size, ECS has always been more flexible than larger organizations. The 200th ECS Meeting is an example of flexibility fortuitously benefitting our members.”

Not the First Pandemic In 1918, soldiers brought the Spanish flu home from the battlefields of World War I. The deadliest pandemic since the Black Plague infected an estimated 500 million people worldwide.4 Pandemic waves extended from 1918 into 1919.

During that period, the Society met four times. The 1918 spring meeting was in the Appalachian South and the fall meeting in The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

203rd ECS Meeting from April 27-May 3, 2003, in Paris, France.

Ralph Brodd, 1981-1982 ECS President, and Shiro Yoshizawa, then president of The Electrochemical Society of Japan.

Atlantic City, NJ. In 1919, the spring meeting was in New York, NY, the fall in Chicago, IL. Fast forward to the 203rd ECS Meeting from April 27-May 3, 2003, in Paris, France. In November 2002, the first cases of a novel virus were seen in southeastern China. Over the next months, 9,096 people became ill and 774 died in 26 countries from SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome).5 Many of the Paris meeting’s programmed speakers and attendees were coming from SARS hotspots. Input from the U.S. State Department and rigorous screening at French airports (all incoming travelers were monitored for fever) reassured meeting attendees and a great meeting was held.

Meeting was scheduled for the fall of 2006.7 The first joint meeting with the Sociedad Mexicana de Electroquímica (SMEQ) was planned years ahead. Cancelling was hardly an option. “Luckily, we had chosen a hotel on the bay, not the ocean,” said Calvo. “Although 30 percent of our hotel was out of commission, the hotel management worked very hard to accommodate us and they did a great job. We could see hotels on the ocean, not more than a mile away, were wiped out. The devastation was total.”

ECS missed a second disastrous hurricane by mere days. PRiME 2012 took place in Honolulu, HI, from October 4-12, 2012. Ten days later, Hurricane Sandy devastated the Caribbean and U.S. East Coast.

In 2010, a different natural disaster almost blew up a meeting. The 217th ECS Meeting was planned for April 25-30 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. On April 14, Eyjafjallajökull, a volcano in Iceland, erupted, spewing volcanic ash miles into the atmosphere through the next week. Some 95,000 flights to and from Europe were grounded.8 Planes began flying again around April 20, and the meeting proceeded.

Gordon Moore, President of Intel, A massive 9.0 earthquake joined ECS in 1965. shook northeast Japan on March 11, 2011. The ensuing 33-foot-tall tsunami wave precipitated the second worst nuclear accident in history at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant.9 A year later, The Japan Electrochemical Society celebrated its 80th anniversary in Sendai, 60 miles north of Fukushima.

Then ECS President Fernando Garzon and ECS Executive Director Roque Calvo attended and gave presentations. “We were pleased to participate,” said Calvo. “It was the culmination of decades of research exchange between the two societies. Mutual assistance is at the heart of ECS. Japan asked for our help with the clean-up. They needed a 1975 ECS Corrosion Division paper on an investigation (funded by the Office of Naval Research) into the impact of saltwater on nuclear reactors.”

The weather forecast for Atlanta, GA, was fine for the week of October 13-17, 2019, when the 236th ECS Meeting was taking place there. But the week before, Typhoon Hagibis battered Japan with record-breaking torrential rains and flooding. Airports closed and over 90 percent of flights were cancelled,10 making it impossible for Japanese presenters and attendees to arrive in time for the meeting’s beginning. “Our Japanese members are very important contributors to Society meetings,” said John Lewis, ECS Director of Meetings. “We did something exceptional. To give time for the Japanese airports to reopen and our members to arrive in Atlanta, the Sunday and Monday presentations were switched with Wednesday and Thursday’s.

Everyone was happy to accommodate these changes.”

The Buck Stops Here Stock market swings also effected ECS. Attendance was low for the two meetings ECS held in 1929 (the fall 55th ECS Meeting in Toronto, CA, and the spring 56th ECS Meeting in Pittsburgh, PA), the year the market crashed. From the Great Depression through the end of World War II (1929-1945), the Society sponsored two meetings a year.

On October 19, 1987, the first major stock market disruption since 1929 occurred. Black Monday was the first Monday of the 172nd ECS Meeting and first PRiME meeting with The Japan Electrochemical Society. Roque recalls that although some attendees left Honolulu, HI, immediately, it was a strong meeting with many important symposia.

The next major market disruption affected the 218th ECS Meeting in Las Vegas, NV. The Great Recession, which lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, was the worst U.S. financial crisis since the 1929 Depression. While the meeting was not scheduled to take place until the fall of 2010, the collapse of the Vegas real estate market impacted the meeting venue. Six months before the meeting, the vintage Riviera Hotel and Casino filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy, shut down half the hotel, and laid off much of the staff. “To change hotels at this point would have been almost impossible,” said Calvo. “Our attorney was forced to negotiate with the hotel’s owners. The Riviera was the site for the film Casino; the owners might have been part of that history! We settled on a very low room rate, which boosted attendance and meeting satisfaction!”

The Show Must Go On ECS meetings have not been immune to natural disasters. The magnitude 6.9 earthquake which shook the San Francisco Bay Area on October 17, 1989, caused almost 70 deaths and $5 billion worth of damage.6 That same week, the 176th ECS Meeting took place in Hollywood, FL. “Semiconductors were a major focus of the meeting,” said Calvo. ”Many attendees were from the Bay Area. People tried desperately to leave the meeting and get home, but phone lines were down and many California airports were closed.” Staff and volunteers did everything possible to assist Bay Area attendees—and run a successful meeting with nearly 1,400 attendees.

Hurricane Wilma slammed into Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula in October 2005. Record high winds, torrential rains, and flooding caused an estimated $1.5 billion in losses in Cancun—where the 210th ECS

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

(continued on next page) 13

(continued from previous page)

References

Murder and Mayhem The 159th ECS Meeting in Minneapolis, MN, in 1981 was Calvo’s first Society meeting. Gordon Moore, Intel Corporation’s founder,11 was the featured speaker as the meeting focused on semiconductors.

“Naturally, we all wanted the meeting to be flawless,” said Calvo.

“Little did we know that the hotel decided to do major renovations at the last moment. Fifty percent of the meeting spaces were no longer available! Then a storage area flooded and damaged the books we sold at the meeting. Book sales were a major source of revenue then.

Somehow we pulled it together and the meeting went off without a hitch—and we fulfilled all the book orders!” It must have gone well, as Moore has been an ECS member for over 60 years!

The Fontainebleau is one of Miami’s most iconic hotels—and seemed like an ideal spot to host the 186th ECS Meeting in 1994. The hotel was booked in 1990 and planning was proceeding apace. Then, in the winter of 1992 and the spring of 1993, seven tourists were killed in Miami. One German tourist, the mother of two small children, was murdered only five miles from Miami International Airport.12 These high profile murders spooked travelers. Would the Miami meeting have to be relocated? “That would have been ruinously expensive,” said Calvo. “So we found ways to calm meeting participants’ fears.

The hotel set up aggressive security around the hotel. We discouraged attendees from leaving the site. And we highlighted safety precautions on the program cover. The meeting went off without a hitch and we didn’t lose anyone!”

Storms Weathered As an organization, ECS reflects its members’ critical thinking, resilience, and creativity problem solving. For almost 125 years, the Society has brought scientists, educators, industry, and government together to address some of the world’s most pressing problems. Staff, volunteers, leadership, and members have collaborated in overcoming obstacles—some man-made and some natural—to accomplish this. As the Society’s Joseph W. Richards was the first president, Joseph W. Richards, said in 1902, “Such a society… being, therefore, a necessity, first president of ECS, then known a pressing need, its formation was inevitable. It as the American came… The results having justified the insight of Electrochemical the projectors of the society, the first meeting has Society. been an enthusiastic success, the organization now exists, its future assured of usefulness. With confidence we stand out to sea.”13 The Electrochemical Society has weathered the storms since 1902, and will weather the COVID-19 storm. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F02202IF.

1. https://www.electrochem.org/calvo 2. All ECS historical information is from Forrest A. Trumbore and Dennis R. Turner, The Electrochemical Society 1902 – 2002: A Centennial History, The Electrochemical Society, Inc., 2002.

3. Ibid. p. 110.

4. h t t p s : / / w w w. c d c . g o v / f l u / p a n d e m i c - r e s o u r c e s / 1 9 1 8 commemoration/pandemic-timeline-1918.htm 5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15018125 6. https://www.history.com/topics/natural-disasters-andenvironment/1989-san-francisco-earthquake 7. http://www.hurricanescience.org/history/storms/2000s/wilma/ 8. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/world/europe/21europe. html 9. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Japans-Deadly-Earthquakeand-Tsunami-1797786 10. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/3032424/ japan-travel-chaos-expected-flight-cancellations-set-hit-tokyo 11. https://www.electrochem.org/moores-law-the-beginnings/ 12. https://www.lotsofessays.com/viewpaper/1690227.html 13. Forrest A. Trumbore and Dennis R. Turner, p. xv

It has been difficult to focus on future events with the world concentrating PRiME 2020 on returning and COVID-19 to normal. The Electrochemical Society, The Electrochemical Society of Japan, and The Korean Electrochemical Society are actively monitoring the pandemic while preparing for PRiME 2020. Though these past months have been extremely difficult, we eagerly anticipate gathering again to share research, break bread, and enjoy the fellowship of our amazing community.

!

Visit www.electrochem.org/prime2020 for the most up-to-date information.

ECS—LED BY SCIENTISTS, FOR SCIENTISTS

Renew Your Membership

• Publish the latest science • Save with generous discounts • Get involved • Network and engage • Enhance your career/research

www.electrochem.org/individual-membership

14

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

BluRev RDE, SP300

Total Control.

Physical and analytical electrochemistry could not be easier with the SP-300 & BluRev RDE. Control both devices via EC-Lab, simply and efficiently, while simultaneously exploiting the myriad of functions and techniques that makes our control software the favored interface of leading scientists around the globe.

The perfect combination of precision engineering and control

SP-300

BluRev RDE

Up to 2 channels

From 1 000 to 10 000 rpm (accuracy +/-1 rpm).

Low current down to 1 pA with Ultra Low Current Option

Fits standard setup Determination of kinetic parameters:

EIS: up to 7 MHz (3%; 3°) EIS Quality Indicators Analog Ramp Generator add on (up to 1 MV/s & sampling of 1 µs)

• from LSV technique (Levich, Koutecký-Levich) • from EIS techniques with the unique Winf element (Z Fit).

Shaping the future. Together. www.biologic.net

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

15

Meet the New ECS Officers

O

n May 16th, the newly elected officers of The Electrochemical Society assumed their posts. Joining executive committee members Gessie Brisard (Treasurer), Turgut Gur (2nd VP), and Eric Wachsman (Senior VP), we are pleased to welcome Stefan De Gendt as President, Marca Doeff as Secretary, and Gerardine Botte as 3rd VP.

2020-2021 Stefan De Gendt

Stefan De Gendt, ECS President (Photo: Cathy Fromont)

Stefan De Gendt obtained his doctoral degree from the University of Antwerp, Belgium. Currently, he is a scientific director at IMEC, also in Belgium, where he is responsible for research on the chemistry and physics of exploratory materials for CMOS and memory technology. Since 2003, has also been a professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in the department of chemistry, where he has coached more than 15 postdocs, Phd students (20+ graduated since 2006, 10 currently in progress), and research students. He has co-authored more than 400 technical papers in revered journals and is co-inventor of cleaning and gate stack process steps and nanotechnology, resulting in several patent applications.

A longstanding and active member of ECS, Stefan has held numerous posts with the Society, including serving as a member of ECS DS&T and E&P executive committees and has been technical editor for the Journal of Solid State Science and Technology from October 2011 until he took up the role of Society Vice President in 2017. Stefan has long believed that advancing science and technology is not just the mission of The Electrochemical Society—it should be the goal of every scientifically educated individual. His tenure as president of ECS will no doubt afford him ample opportunities to further his commitment to the vital goal.

Of course, it’s not all work with Stefan—in fact, it is quite the opposite. In his spare time, Stefan is an avid golfer and loves nothing more than to travel the world with his wife Cathy and their daughter Caitlin, making time to see the sights and enjoy local fare, especially the wine.

Always up for a fine wine and dine experience!

(Photo: Cathy Fromont)

Putting for birdie?

(Photo: Cathy Fromont)

The De Gendt Family (Stefan, Caitlin, and Cathy) enjoying the Christmas Holiday in Muricia, Spain. (Photo: Cathy Fromont) 16

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Gerardine (Gerri) Botte

Gerardine Botte, 3rd Vice President (Photo: Gerri Botte)

Gerri Botte is a professor and the Whitacre Department Chair in chemical engineering at Texas Tech University. Previous to Texas Tech, Botte was a university distinguished professor and Russ Professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at Ohio University, the founder and director of the Center for Electrochemical Engineering Research, and the founder and director of the National Science Foundation Consortium for Electrochemical Processes and Technology. She has authored 189 publications, including 58 granted patents. She received her PhD in 2000 (under the direction of Ralph White) and ME in 1998, both in chemical engineering, from the University of South Carolina. Botte received her BS in chemical engineering from Universidad de Carabobo (Venezuela) in 1994.

An active member of the ECS since 1998, Gerri has served in several leadership roles, including board member and chair of the Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering (IEEE) Division. What excites her most about electrochemical and solid state science and technology is that they are core platforms with important applications in different aspects of our life. Though she admits there is still a lag in education about what electrochemical technologies can do and believes that ECS, being the premier solid state and electrochemical science and technology society in the world, will lead a paradigm change mitigating such an educational gap while enabling sustainable education in the field.

In her personal life, Gerri loves to spend time with her daughters Geri and Andrea and her husband Matt, cooking cuisine from her Italian and Venezuelan heritage, and being together with her family outdoors. Whether it is a day at the beach, boating on the high seas, or hitting the links with hot pink golf balls, Gerri brings that same passion and enthusiasm to play as well as work!

With her family: Geri, Matt, and Andrea.

(Photo: Gerri Botte)

Forget about the birdie putt, here’s proof of an eagle!

(Photo: Matthew Bedell).

Cooking the day’s catch!

(Photo: Matthew Bedell) The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

17

Meet the New ECS Officers 2020-2021 (continued from previous page)

Marca Doeff

Marca Doeff, ECS Secretary (Photo: Marca Doeff)

Marca Doeff was born in Leiden, the Netherlands, the eldest daughter of Jan and Annick Doeff.

When she was three years old, the family, which by then included her baby sister, Tessa, emigrated to the United States. She grew up near Philadelphia and attended Swarthmore College. After graduate school at Brown University, she moved to Santa Barbara, CA, where she completed her post-doctorate work with Ralph Pearson. There she met Doug Taube, a fellow chemist, whom she later married.

This turned what had been intended as a temporary stopover on the West Coast into a permanent California residency. After some time in Santa Barbara and San Diego, the couple finally settled in the San Francisco Bay Area, and Marca began her career at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). Doug and Marca enjoy cats, travel, and the outdoors. Marca takes yoga and dance classes, and occasionally drags Doug to see the San Francisco Ballet when they are in season.

According to Marca, electrochemistry has never been more relevant in terms of solving the world’s grand challenges, such as global climate change and water scarcity, than it is today. She believes this presents a wonderful opportunity for ECS to reach out to the increasing numbers of researchers around the world interested in solving these problems. While ECS has been her intellectual home since 1991, and ECS meetings and publications the first resources she taps into to keep up with the field, Doeff realizes researchers may not be aware of all that the Society has to offer. It is her stated goal to help ECS reach out to electrochemists of every stripe—young and old, those in industry, academia, and national labs, everywhere around the world.

Marca and husband Doug Taube travelling in Arizona, USA. (Photo: Marca Doeff)

Marca in Cusco, Peru in 2010, before a multi-day hike along the Salkantay trail to Machu Picchu.

(Photo: Marca Doeff)

Marca with members of her research group in 2014: Dhruv Seshadri (center), Feng Lin (now at Virginia Tech) on the right, and Mona Shirpour (now at Apple) in the back. (Photo: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) 18

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE T Y NE WS

Governance Meeting Update In what seems like another time’s forgotten space, the ECS Executive Committee (ExCom) held its annual Winter Meeting Series at the Society’s Headquarters in Pennington, NJ on February 27-28, 2020.

Although just weeks before the office was shut down to COVID-19, the executive committee, along with senior ECS staff, met for two days of in-person meetings, program updates, and critical strategic planning of the Society’s activities. In addition to a thorough review of the Society’s performance in 2019, including significant growth in our membership and record-breaking submissions to ECS journals and conferences, the committee discussed the impact of the then-impending pandemic on the Society. The ExCom drafted contingency plans for how to approach the Montreal meeting in light of COVID-19.

In addition, the committee discussed ways of improving collaboration between ECS divisions, especially with respect to symposia planning, as well as how the Society can more effectively engage with our sister Societies, such as the International Society for Electrochemistry (ISE), and the Mexican Society of Electrochemistry (SMEQ).

As in previous years, the Winter ExCom meeting was shortly followed by a teleconference of the entire ECS Board of Directors.

However, by the time this meeting occurred, the ECS office was closed and the staff had already transitioned to 100% remote operations.

Undeterred, the Board met in late March, with the main goal of taking decisive action regarding the Montreal Meeting. For only the second time in our near 120-year history, the ECS Board voted unanimously to cancel a biannual meeting, and thus seal the fate of the 237th Meeting of the ECS. Thankfully, not all of the Board’s business was

Robert Savinell, JES Editor-in-Chief

so fraught, with the Board happily approving a new award for the Battery Division, the Battery Division Early Career Award Sponsored by Neware Corporation, as well extending the term for Robert Savinell as editor-in-chief of the Journal of The Electrochemical Society, JES. Congratulations to the Battery Division on their new award and to Bob on this important term extension…thanks so much Bob, you do ECS proud!

The ECS Executive Committee and Society staff gather for a group photo.

WEEK October 19-26, 2020

Visit www.ecsdl.org.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

19

ECS Journals Current and Upcoming Focus Issues Journal of The Electrochemical Society (JES)

READ ONLINE

NOW IN PRODUCTION

Heterogeneous Functional Materials for Energy Conversion and Storage

Battery Reliability and Safety, Design, and Mitigation

Former Technical Editor: Thomas Fuller Technical Editors: Doron Aurbach, David Cliffel Guest Editors: Wilson Chiu, Vito Di Noto, Srikanth Gopalan, Nian Liu, Alice Suroviec

Challenges in Novel Electrolytes, Organic Materials, and Innovative Chemistries for Batteries in Honor of Michel Armand

Technical Editor: Doron Aurbach Guest Editors: Bor Yann Liaw, Thomas Barrera

2D Layered Materials: From Fundamental Science to Applications Technical Editor: David Cliffel Guest Editors: Wolfram Jaegermann, Zia Karim, Yaw Obeng, Colm O’Dwyer

Technical Editor: Doron Aurbach Associate Editor/Guest Editor: Brett Lucht Lead Guest Editor: Dominique Guyomard Guest Editors: Vito Di Noto, Maria Forsyth, Philippe Poizot, Teofilo Rojo, Karim Zaghib

ACCEPTING SUBMISSIONS Organic and Inorganic Molecular Electrochemistry Technical Editor: Janine Mauzeroll Collaborating Technical Editor: John Harb Jean-Paul Lumb, Song Lin, Sylvain Canesi, Matthew Graaf Deadline: July 8, 2020

UPCOMING International Meeting on Lithium Batteries (IMLB) 2020 Technical Editor: Doron Aurbach Submissions Open: Summer 2020

Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell & Proton Exchange Membrane Water Electrolyzer Durability Technical Editor: Xiao-Dong Zhou Guest Editors: Jean St-Pierre, Deborah Myers, Rodney Borup, Katherine Ayers Submissions Open: August 20, 2020 Deadline: December 18, 2020

International Meeting on Chemical Sensors (IMCS) 2020

Technical Editor: Ajit Khosla Guest Editors: Peter Hesketh, Steve Semancik, Udo Weimar, Yasuhiro Shimizu, Joseph Stetter, Gary Hunter, Jospeh Wang, Xiangqun Zeng, Sheikh Akbar, Muthukumaran Packirisamy, Rudra Pratap Deadline: August 12, 2020

Characterization of Corrosion Processes in Honor of Philippe Marcus Technical Editor: Gerald S. Frankel Guest Editors: Dev Chidambaram, Koji Fushimi, Vincent Maurice, Vincent Vivier Submissions Open: September 17, 2020 Deadline: January 6, 2021

Molten Salts and Ionic Liquids II

Technical Editor: David Cliffel Guest Editors: David P. Durkin, Paul C. Trulove, Robert A. Mantz Submissions Open: October 15, 2020 Deadline: January 13, 2021

Recent Advances in Chemical and Biological Sensors & Micro-Nanofabricated Sensors and Systems Technical Editor: Ajit Khosla Associate Editors: Michael Adachi, Thomas Thundat, Netz Arroyo Submissions Open: November 19, 2020 Deadline: February 17, 2021

20

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

ECS Journals Current and Upcoming Focus Issues ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology (JSS)

NOW IN PRODUCTION Gallium Oxide Based Materials and Devices II Technical Editor: Fan Ren Guest Editors: Steve Pearton, Jihyun Kim, Alexander Polyakov, Holger von Wenckstern, Rajendra Singh, Xing Lu

2D Layered Materials: From Fundamental Science to Applications Technical Editor: Peter Mascher Guest Editors: Wolfram Jaegermann, Zia Karim, Yaw Obeng, Colm O’Dwyer

Porphyrins, Phthalocyanines, and Supramolecular Assemblies in Honor of Karl M. Kadish Technical Editor: Francis D’Souza Guest Editors: Dirk Guldi, Robert Paolesse, Tomas Torres

ACCEPTING SUBMISSIONS Solid State Materials and Devices for Biological and Medical Applications II Technical Editor: Fan Ren Guest Editors: Yu-Lin Wang, Toshiya Sakata, Zong-Hong Lin, Wenzhuo Wu Deadline: July 1, 2020

Solid State Reviews

UPCOMING Photovoltaics for the 21st Century

Technical Editor: Fan Ren Associate Editor: Meng Tao Guest Editors: Hiroki Hamada, Thad Druffel, Jae-Joon Lee Submissions Open: July 16, 2020 Deadline: October 14, 2020

Technical Editors: Ajit Khosla, Jennifer Bardwell, Francis D’Souza, Peter Mascher, Kailash C. Mishra, Fan Ren Associate Editor: Netz Arroyo, Michael Adachi, Meng Tao Guest Editors: S. J. Young Submissions Open: October 1, 2020 Deadline: December 30, 2020

4D Materials and Systems + Soft Robotics

Technical Editor: Ajit Khosla Associate Editors: Netz Arroyo, Michael Adachi Guest Editors: S. J. Young, Yoon Hwa, Hidetmisu Furukawa Submissions Open: November 5, 2020 Deadline: February 3, 2021

Visit

Visit

www.electrochem.org/submit

www.electrochem.org/focusissues

• JES manuscript submissions • JSS manuscript submissions

• Calls for upcoming JES and JSS focus issue papers • Links to published issues • Future focus issue proposals

www.electrochem.org/focusissues The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

21

WHAT’S ON THE SOCIE T Y NE WSECS BLOG?

1

THE ECS BLOG - HOMEPAGE A source of information

The ECS Blog homepage itself is one of the most visited pages! That’s because it offers all the latest news—from what’s going on at ECS and around the world—including breakthroughs in the field, interviews with notable researchers, ECS biannual meeting information, ECS grant and award winners and deadlines, and more!

3

PUBLICATION ANNOUNCEMENTS ECS now accepts sensor submissions to JSS

2

2019 CLASS OF HIGHLY CITED RESEARCHERS The world’s most influential scientific minds

ECS members are among the most influential scientific minds of 2019, including 2019 Nobel Chemistry Prize Laureates John B. Goodenough, M. Stanley Whittingham, and Akira Yoshino, who also made the 2019 list of most highly cited researchers.

4

See who else is shaping the future of science!

THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY AND COVID-19 Updates, staying in touch, and resources

Research in the topical interest area of sensors is expanding and, with it, the gradual blurring of lines between solid state and electrochemical sensing strategies. In recognition of this, ECS has decided to accept sensor TIA submissions in both the ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology (JSS) and now, the Journal of The Electrochemical Society (JES)!

COVID-19 has touched every area of our lives, forcing us to rethink how we work and connect.

Follow the tag “COVID-19” on the ECS Blog (electrochem.org/ecs-blog/tag/covid-19/) to learn how the ECS community is dealing with COVID-19 and to receive updates on deadlines, meetings, and more affected by COVID-19!

Stay on top of the latest updates in ECS publications, only on the ECS Blog!

5

MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS IMCS 18 rescheduled The 18th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors has been rescheduled to May 30-June 3, 2021, at the Hilton Chicago in Chicago, IL, to be co-located with the 239th ECS Meeting. Learn about other big meeting announcements on the ECS Blog, including call for paper deadlines, travel grant deadlines, sponsorship opportunities, and more!

6

MOST-READ ARTICLES OF 2019 Top downloads in JES and JSS

ECS is proud to announce the most read articles from the Journal of The Electrochemical Society (JES) and the ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology (JSS). See what’s trending in your field of interest! www.electrochem.org/ecs-blog/most-read-articles-of-2019

www.electrochem.org/ecs-blog/imcs-18-rescheduled

www.electrochem.org/ecsblog The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

22

SOCIE T Y NE WS

Editorial Board Appointments for ECS Journals Journal of The Electrochemical Society Editor-in-Chief Robert F. Savinell had his term as editor-inchief for the Journal of The Electrochemical Society extended through July 15, 2021.

Savinell was appointed editor of the Journal of The Electrochemical Society in 2013. He was elected Fellow of The Electrochemical Society in 2000. Savinell is on the Faculty of Engineering at Case Western Reserve University, where he teaches chemical engineering and universitywide seminar courses at both the undergraduate and graduate level.

His research interest has been directed at fundamental engineering

and mechanistic issues of electrochemical systems/device design, development, and optimization. He applies mathematical and experimental techniques to achieve an understanding of the interactions among kinetics, thermodynamics, and transport processes at interfaces within electrochemical systems. The technologies he has worked on include batteries, sensors, chlor-alkali synthesis, bromine recovery, wastewater treatment, high surface area electrode electrolysis, fuel cells of several types, electrochemical capacitors, and electrolysis cells of various types. In recent years he has focused his efforts on chemistries, materials and designs for flow batteries for large scale energy storage.

Journal of The Electrochemical Society Associate Editor Charles L. Hussey has been reappointed as an associate editor for the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. Hussey handles manuscripts submitted to the area of electrochemical/ electroless deposition. He is the associate dean for research and graduate education in the College of Liberal Arts and distinguished professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of Mississippi.

Hussey’s research is directed at electrochemistry and spectroscopy in molten salts and ionic liquids. Hussey’s three-year reappointment is from January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2022.

Alice H. Suroviec has been reappointed as an associate editor for the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. Suroviec handles manuscripts submitted to the area of physical and analytical electrochemistry, electrocatalysis, and photoelectrochemistry. She is a professor of bioanalytical chemistry and chair of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Berry College. Her research focuses on enzymatically modified electrodes for use as biosensors.

Suroviec’s three-year reappointment is from February 1, 2020 through January 31, 2023.

Stephen N. Maldonado has been reappointed as an associate editor for the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. Maldonado handles manuscripts submitted to the area of physical and analytical electrochemistry, electrocatalysis, and photoelectrochemistry. He is Professor of Chemistry, Program in Applied Physics, at the University of Michigan. The Maldonado Group studies electrochemical charge transfer processes related to electronics, synthesis, and energy conversion/storage technologies. Maldonado’s three-year reappointment is from June 1, 2020 through May 31, 2023.

UPCOMING ECS SPONSORED MEETINGS In addition to the ECS biannual meetings and ECS satellite conferences, ECS, its divisions, and sections, sponsor meetings and symposia of interest to the technical audience ECS serves. The following is a partial list of upcoming sponsored meetings. Please visit the ECS website (http://www.electrochem.org/upcoming-meetings/) for a list of all sponsored meetings.

2020 • 20th IEEE International Conference on Nanotechnology; July 29-31, 2020; Montréal, Canada; https://2020.ieeenano.org • 27th International Workshop on Active Matrix Flat Panel Displays and Devices (AM-FPD 20); September 1-4, 2020; Kyoto, Japan; http://www.amfpd.jp • 11th International Frumkin Symposium; October 1923, 2020; Moscow, Russia; http://www.frumkinsymp.ru

2021

• 1 8th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors with the 239th ECS Meeting; May 30-June 3, 2021; Chicago, IL; https://imcs2020.gatech.edu • Solid Oxide Fuel Cells 17 (SOFC-XVII) July 18-23, 2021; Stockholm, Sweden The Brewery Conference Center To learn more about what an ECS sponsorship could do for your meeting, including information on publishing proceeding volumes for sponsored meetings, or to request an ECS sponsorship of your technical event, please contact ecs@electrochem.org.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

23

SOCIE T Y NE WS

ECS Now Accepts Sensor Submissions to JSS ECS recognizes the importance of expanding opportunities for publishing in ECS journals as the science continues to evolve. The Society recently made changes to the sensors topical interest area (TIA). Submissions to the ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology (JSS) are now accepted along with the Journal of The Electrochemical Society (JES).

Both aspects of the TIA are supported by the ECS Sensor Division.

Sensors (Electrochemical)

Sensors (Solid State)

Areas of interest include sensors for the detection and discrimination Areas of interest include sensors or devices based on physical and of chemical and biological species, as well as sensor advances and quantum transduction principles, as well as sensor advances focused new methods of measurements based on electrochemical principles. on solid state principles. Specific areas of interest include novel Specific areas include novel development, implementation, development, characterization, implementation, fundamentals, and characterization, fundamentals, applications of physical and quantum and applications of chemical and sensors. Transduction mechanisms biological sensors, sensor arrays and of interest include, but are not sensor networks, including those limited to, quantum, mechanical, With the rapid growth experienced based on inorganic, organic, and mass sensitive, optoelectronic, biological materials and their relevant optical, radiation, thermal, acoustic, by the sensor community, and the gradual interfaces. Transduction mechanisms piezoelectric, resistive, microwave, blurring of boundaries between solid state include, but are not limited to, and magnetic. Specific topics include electrochemical, impedance, resistive, wearable devices, implantable and electrochemical sensing strategies, it and capacitive. Specific topics include devices, brain-computer interface, makes eminent sense to have a single TIA wearable devices, implantable agricultural sensors, environmental for this topic for both journals. devices, brain-computer interface, sensors, robotic sensors, sensors agricultural sensors, environmental for healthcare, microfluidics, sensors, robotic sensors, sensors nanofluidics, device fabrication, —Krishnan Rajeshwar, JSS Editor-in-Chief, and for healthcare, microfluidics, materials characterization, nanoRobert Savinell, JES Editor-in-Chief. nanofluidics, device fabrication, materials and nanostructures, materials characterization, sensing mechanisms, sensor nanomaterials and nanostructures, arrays, wireless sensors, and sensing mechanisms, sensor arrays, miniature chemical analysis internet of things, artificial intelligence, and machine learning for systems, lab-on-a-chip, artificial intelligence, and machine learning sensor networks. Also of interest are applications of 3D and 4D for sensor networks. printing, microelectromechanical or nanoelectromechanical system technologies including micro/nanomachining, fabrication processes, nanocomposites, hybrid materials, packaging, and the use of these structures and processes for the miniaturization of physical sensors and other devices.

“

”

To submit to the journals, visit

www.electrochem.org/whypublish.

In the

• The fall 2020 issue of Interface will feature the special topic, “Sustainability in Electrochemistry.” Paul Kenis will be the guest editor. An ECS Fellow, Kenis is the Elio E. Tarika Endowed Chair and a professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). He is also an investigator of the International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research, a world premier institute between Kyushu University in Japan and UIUC.

24

issue of

• PRiME Preview. Don’t miss exclusive news coverage for PRiME 2020, October 4-9, 2020, in Honolulu, HI. • Pennington Corner. In this column, Christopher J. Jannuzzi, ECS Executive Director/CEO, will share some thoughts and wisdom about the Society and its enduring impact on its members and constituents.

• The special focus issue also will highlight news about people, students, and the Society, along with technical column favorites Looking at Patent Law and Tech Highlights.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE T Y NE WS

Free the Science Week 2020 ECS held its fourth annual Free the Science Week from March 30-April 5 by taking down the paywall to the entire ECS Digital Library on IOPscience, making over 160,000 scientific articles and abstracts free and accessible to everyone.

Started in 2017, the week supports ECS’s long-term vision of Free the Science by providing access to all in order to further

advance the research. The research published in ECS’s publications directly addresses the sustainability of the planet. Electrochemistry and solid state science continue to hold the keys to innovation in renewable energy, biomedical applications, water and sanitation, communications, transportation, technology, infrastructure, and beyond.

Overall downloads for JES, JSS, and ECST for April 2020 –

Downloads by Publication Type

3% 1% 13%

330,269

This was a 4% growth over April 2019.

Journals (Journal of The Electrochemical Society, ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology, ECS Electrochemistry Letters, ECS Solid State Letters, Electrochemical and Solid-State Letters)

ECS saw a total of

112,150

Conference Proceedings (ECS Transactions, ECS Proceedings Volumes)

83%

downloads for the week of March 30-April 5, 2020.

Meeting Abstracts (ECS Meeting Abstracts) Magazine Articles (Interface)

Top Downloading Countries

TOP 5

1. China 2. U.S. 3. Republic of Korea 4. Japan 5. Germany

Results of the 2020 Election of Officers and Slate of Officers for 2021

Stefan De Gendt President

Gerardine Gabriela Botte 3rd Vice President

Marca Doeff Secretary

The Electrochemical Society has announced the results of the 2020 Society election with the following persons elected: President—Stefan De Gendt, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; 3rd Vice President—Gerardine Gabriela Botte, Texas Tech University; and Secretary—Marca Doeff, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The terms of Eric Wachsman (2nd Vice President) and Gessie Brisard (Treasurer) were unaffected by this election.

At the Board of Directors meeting on May 14, 2020, members voted to approve the slate of candidates recommended by the ECS Nominating Committee. The slate of candidates for the next election of ECS Officers, to be held from January to March 2021, include: President—Eric Wachsman, University of Maryland; 3rd Vice President—Colm O’Dwyer, University College Cork; and Peter Mascher, McMaster University. Full biographies and candidate statements will appear in the winter 2020 issue of Interface.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

25

SOCIE T Y NE WS

2020-2021 ECS Committees Executive Committee of the Board of Directors

Stefan De Gendt, Chair.......................................................................................President, Spring 2021 Eric Wachsman...............................................................................Senior Vice President, Spring 2022 Turgut Gur..................................................................................... Second Vice President, Spring 2023 Gerardine Botte.................................................................................Third Vice President, Spring 2024 Marca Doeff.......................................................................................................Secretary, Spring 2024 Gessie Brisard ...................................................................................................Treasurer, Spring 2022 Christopher Jannuzzi................................................................................... Term as Executive Director

Audit Committee

Christina Bock, Chair................................................................Immediate Past President, Spring 2021 Stefan De Gendt.................................................................................................President, Spring 2021 Eric Wachsman...............................................................................Senior Vice President, Spring 2021 Gessie Brisard.................................................................................................... Treasurer, Spring 2022 Robb Micek....................................................................Nonprofit Financial Professional, Spring 2022

Education Committee

James Nöel, Chair.............................................................................................................. Spring 2021 Svitlana Pylypenko............................................................................................................. Spring 2024 Paul Gannon...................................................................................................................... Spring 2024 Keryn Lian.......................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 David Hall.......................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Vimal Chaitanya................................................................................................................. Spring 2022 Takayuki Homma................................................................................................................ Spring 2022 Walter Van Schalkwijk........................................................................................................ Spring 2023 Tobias Glossman................................................................................................................ Spring 2023 Amin Rabieri...................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Fen Zhang.......................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Marca Doeff.......................................................................................................Secretary, Spring 2024 William Mustain...............................................Chair, Individual Membership Committee, Spring 2023

Ethical Standards Committee

Christina Bock, Chair ...............................................................Immediate Past President, Spring 2021 Johna Leddy.................................................................................................. Past Officer, Spring 2023 Paul Natishan ................................................................................................ Past Officer, Spring 2021 Marca Doeff.......................................................................................................Secretary, Spring 2024 Gessie Brisard....................................................................................................Treasurer, Spring 2022

Finance Committee

Gessie Brisard, Chair ........................................................................................Treasurer, Spring 2022 E. J. Taylor......................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Bruce Weisman.................................................................................................................. Spring 2023 Peter Foller........................................................................................................................ Spring 2022 Robert Micek...................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Marca Doeff.......................................................................................................Secretary, Spring 2024 Tim Gamberzky............................................................................Chief Operating Officer, Term as COO

Honors and Awards Committee

Shelley Minteer, Chair ....................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Vimal Chaitanya................................................................................................................. Spring 2024 Mikhail Brik....................................................................................................................... Spring 2024 Diane Smith....................................................................................................................... Spring 2024 Viola Birss......................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Francis d’Souza.................................................................................................................. Spring 2021 Scott Calabrese Barton....................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Junichi Murota................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Dev Chidambaram............................................................................................................. Spring 2022 Wei Tong............................................................................................................................ Spring 2022 Nianqiang Wu.................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 John Flake......................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Fernando Garzon................................................................................................................ Spring 2023 Stefan De Gendt.................................................................................................President, Spring 2021

Individual Membership Committee

William Mustain, Chair ..................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Alice Suroviec.................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Neal Golovin...................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Toshiyuki Nohira................................................................................................................ Spring 2021 Chi-Chang Hu.................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 James Burgess................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Luis A. Diaz Aldana............................................................................................................ Spring 2022 Mohammadreza Nazemi..................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Seyyedamirhossein Hosseini............................................................................................. Spring 2021 Marion Jones................................................................... Chair, Sponsorship Committee, Spring 2022 Marca Doeff.......................................................................................................Secretary, Spring 2024

Nominating Committee

Christina Bock, Chair................................................................Immediate Past President, Spring 2021 Colin O’Dwyer.................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 James Fenton..................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Graham Cheek................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Gerardine Botte.................................................................................Third Vice President, Spring 2021

Sponsorship Committee

Marion Jones, Chair.......................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Hemanth Jagannathan........................................................................................................ Spring 2023 Thomas Barrera.................................................................................................................. Spring 2023

26

David Carey....................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Jie Xiao.............................................................................................................................. Spring 2021 Christopher Beasley........................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Mark Glick......................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Alex Peroff......................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Alok Srivastava.................................................................................................................. Spring 2022 Craig Owen........................................................................................................................ Spring 2022 William Mustain...............................................Chair, Individual Membership Committee, Spring 2023 Gessie Brisard....................................................................................................Treasurer, Spring 2022

Technical Affairs Committee

Eric Wachsman, Chair.....................................................................Senior Vice President, Spring 2021 Stefan De Gendt.................................................................................................President, Spring 2021 Christina Bock..........................................................................Immediate Past President, Spring 2021 Yue Kuo.......................................................................Second Immediate Past President, Spring 2021 Gerardine Botte................................................................ Chair, Meetings Subcommittee, Spring 2021 Turgut Gur................................................................... Chair, Publications Subcommittee, Spring 2021 E. J. Taylor................................................................................ Chair, IST Subcommittee, Spring 2021 Christopher Jannuzzi.............................................................................Executive Director, Term as ED

Publications Subcommittee of the Technical Affairs Committee

Turgut Gur, Chair........................................................................... Second Vice President, Spring 2021 Gerardine Botte, Vice Chair...............................................................Third Vice President, Spring 2021 Krishnan Rajeshwar............................................................................JSS Editor-in-Chief, 12/31/2021 Robert Savinell...................................................................................... JES Editor-in-Chief, 7/15/2021 Jeffrey Fergus..............................................................................ECS Transactions Editor, 12/31/2020 Robert Kelly.................................................................................................Interface Editor, 5/31/2022 Kang Xu............................................................................................................................. Spring 2022 Cortney Kreller................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Christina Roth.................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Hui Xu................................................................................................................................ Spring 2021

Meetings Subcommittee of the Technical Affairs Committee

Gerardine Botte, Chair.......................................................................Third Vice President, Spring 2021 Turgut Gur, Vice Chair................................................................... Second Vice President, Spring 2021 Jianlin Li............................................................................................................................ Spring 2023 Thomas Schmidt................................................................................................................ Spring 2021 Paul Truelove..................................................................................................................... Spring 2022

Interdisciplinary Science and Technology Subcommittee of the Technical Affairs Committee

E. J. Taylor, Chair............................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Alice Suroviec ................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Uros Cvelbar...................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Jennifer Hite....................................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Scott Calabrese Barton....................................................................................................... Spring 2023 Alok Srivastava.................................................................................................................. Spring 2021 Diane Smith....................................................................................................................... Spring 2021 Jessica Koehne.................................................................................................................. Spring 2021 Juan Peralta Hernandez...................................................................................................... Spring 2021 John Vaughey.................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Nick Birbilis....................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Sean Bishop....................................................................................................................... Spring 2022 Jeff L. Blackburn................................................................................................................ Spring 2022 Natasa Vasiljek................................................................................................................... Spring 2022

Symposium Planning Advisory Board of the Technical Affairs Committee

Gerardine Botte, Chair.......................................................................Third Vice President, Spring 2021 Y. Shirley Meng......................................................Acting Chair/Vice Chair, Battery Division, Fall 2020 Masayuki Itagaki...........................................................................Chair, Corrosion Division, Fall 2020 Ajit Khosla ........................................................................................Chair, Sensor Division, Fall 2020 Junichi Murota ............................................... Chair, Electronics and Photonics Division, Spring 2021 Vaidyanathan Ravi Subramanian.................................Chair, Energy Technology Division, Spring 2021 Diane Smith ............................. Chair, Organic and Biological Electrochemistry Division, Spring 2021 Peter Vanysek ...........................Chair, Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry Division, Spring 2021 Phillipe Vereecken............................................................. Chair, Electrodeposition Division, Fall 2021 Paul Gannon..................................................... Chair, High Temperature Materials Division, Fall 2021 Jakoah Brgoch.................................... Chair, Luminescence and Display Materials Division, Fall 2021 Peter Mascher.................................... Chair, Dielectric Science and Technology Division, Spring 2022 Hiroshi Imahori .................................................................. Chair, Nanocarbons Division, Spring 2022 Shrisudersan Jayaraman............................................................. Chair, Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering Division, Spring 2022 E. J. Taylor..................... Chair, Interdisciplinary Science and Technology Subcommittee, Spring 2022

Other Representatives

Society Historian Roque Calvo.................................................................................................................. Spring 2021 American Association for the Advancement of Science Christopher Jannuzzi................................................................................ Term as Executive Director Science History Institute Yury Gogotski.................................................................................Heritage Councilor, Spring 2021 National Inventors Hall of Fame Shelley Minteer.................................................... Chair, Honors & Awards Committee, Spring 2023

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE T Y NE WS

ECS Division Contacts Battery

Y. Shirley Meng, Acting Chair/Vice Chair University of California San Diego shirleymeng@ucsd.edu • 858.822.4247 (US) Brett Lucht, Secretary Jie Xiao, Treasurer Doron Aurbach, Journals Editorial Board Representative Corrosion

Masayuki Itagaki, Chair Tokyo University of Science itagaki@rs.noda.tus.ac.jp • +81.47.122.9492 (JP) James Noël, Vice Chair Dev Chidambaram, Secretary/Treasurer Gerald Frankel, Journals Editorial Board Representative Dielectric Science and Technology

Peter Mascher, Chair McMaster University mascher@mcmaster.ca • 905.525.9140 (ext. 24963) (US) Uros Cvelbar, Vice Chair Sreeran Vaddiraju, Secretary Zhi David Chen, Treasurer Peter Mascher, Journals Editorial Board Representative Electrodeposition

Philippe Vereecken, Chair IMEC philippe.vereecken@imec.be • +32.4.741.73.110 (BE) Vasiljevic Natasa R., Vice Chair Luca Magagnin, Secretary Andreas Bund, Treasurer Takayuki Homma, Journals Editorial Board Representative Electronics and Photonics

Junichi Murota, Chair Tohoku University murota@riec.tohoku.ac.jp • +81.22.217.3913 (JP) Yu-Lin Wang, Vice Chair Jennifer Hite, 2nd Vice Chair Qiliang Li, Secretary Robert Lynch, Treasurer Fan Ren, Journals Editorial Board Representative Jennifer Bardwell, Journals Editorial Board Representative Energy Technology

Vaidyanathan Subramanian, Chair University of Nevada Reno ravisv@unr.edu • 775.784.4686 (US) William Mustain, Vice Chair Katherine Ayers, Secretary Minhua Shao, Treasurer Xiao-Dong Zhou, Journals Editorial Board Representative

Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering

Shrisudersan Jayaraman, Chair Corning Incorporated jayaramas@corning.com • 607.974.9643 (US) Maria Inman, Vice Chair Paul Kenis, Secretary/Treasurer John Harb, Journals Editorial Board Representative Luminescence and Display Materials

Jakoah Brgoch, Chair University of Houston jbrgoch@central.uh.edu • 713.743.6233 (US) Rong-Jun Xie, Vice Chair Eugeniusz Zych, Secretary/Treasurer Kailash Mishra, Journals Editorial Board Representative Nanocarbons

Hiroshi Imahori, Chair Kyoto University imahori@scl.kyoto-u.ac.jp • +81.75.383.2566 (JP) Jeffrey Blackburn, Vice Chair Ardemis Boghossian, Secretary Slava V. Rotkin, Treasurer Francis D’Souza, Journals Editorial Board Representative Organic and Biological Electrochemistry

Diane Smith, Chair San Diego State University dksmith@mail.sdsu.edu • 619.594.4839 (US) Sadagopan Krishnan, Vice Chair Song Lin, Secretary/Treasurer Janine Mauzeroll, Journals Editorial Board Representative Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry

Petr Vanýsek, Chair Northern Illinois University pvanysek@gmail.com • 815.753.1131 (US) Andrew Hillier, Vice Chair Stephen Paddison, Secretary Anne Co, Treasurer David Cliffel, Journals Editorial Board Representative Sensor

Ajit Khosla, Chair Yamagata University khosla@gmail.com • 080.907.44765 (JP) Jessica Koehne, Vice Chair Larry Nagahara, Secretary Praveen Sekhar, Treasurer Ajit Khosla, Journals Editorial Board Representative

High-Temperature Energy, Materials, & Processes

Paul Gannon, Chair Montana State University pgannon@montana.edu • 406.994.7380 (US) Sean Bishop, Jr., Sr. Vice Chair Cortney Kreller, Jr. Vice Chair Xingbo Liu, Secretary/Treasurer Raymond Gorte, Journals Editorial Board Representative The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

27

SOCIE T Y NE WS

Division News H-TEMP Honors Friedrich B. Prinz The High-Temperature Energy, Materials, and Processes (H-TEMP) division is proud to announce a special one-day session to honor Friedrich B. Prinz of Stanford University for his seminal contributions to the general area of thin film solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). The session will be held during the 13th Solid State Ionic Devices (SSID13) symposium at the PRiME meeting of The Electrochemical Society in Honolulu, HI, October

4-9, 2020.

This special session, sponsored by QuantumScape Corporation, will feature exciting talks by invited speakers on innovative electrochemical cell architectures and materials. Session organizers, Profs. T. M. Gür of Stanford University, USA, and Y. Fukunaka of Waseda University, Japan, cordially invite all interested researchers to attend and celebrate this special occasion in honor of Prof. Prinz.

A solid state physicist by training (PhD, University of Vienna, Austria), Prof. Prinz has made impactful contributions in advancing our understanding of electrochemical energy conversion processes at the nanoscale. In particular, he has been instrumental in elucidating interfacial and grain boundary processes in SOFCs and extending

planar thin film SOFC structures into 3D architectures. He has devised doping and compositional grading methodologies for the design and atomically controlled engineering of surfaces and interfaces for improved activity using atomic layer deposition (ALD), and has made significant contributions in drastically lowering the operating temperature of protonic and oxide-ion conducting SOFCs without loss of cell performance.

Prof. Prinz is the Leonardo Professor in the School of Engineering at Stanford University, professor of materials science and engineering, professor of mechanical engineering, and Senior Fellow at the Precourt Institute for Energy. He also is the director of the Nanoscale Prototyping Laboratory (NPL) and faculty co-director of the NPLAffiliate Program. Before moving to Stanford in 1994, he was on the faculty at Carnegie Mellon University.

Prof. Prinz has earned numerous awards and many prestigious lectureship prizes recognizing his long distinguished career. He is a corresponding member of the Austrian Academy Science. He also is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). He has published more than 260 papers, presented numerous invited talks and colloquia, and issued 15 patents.

Battery Division Highlights Meng Awarded 2020 Faraday Medal

Wang Named NAI Fellow

Congratulations to Y. Shirley Meng, who recently received the 2020 Faraday Medal from the Royal Society of Chemistry. The Faraday Medal is awarded annually by the Electrochemistry Group of the Royal Society of Chemistry to an electrochemist working outside the UK and Ireland in recognition of their outstanding original contributions and innovation as a mid-career researcher in any field of electrochemistry.

Prof. Meng is an ECS fellow and lifetime member. She serves as Acting Chair/Vice Chair of the Battery Division and the Singapore Section of ECS. She is scheduled to deliver the Faraday Medal lecture at Electrochem 2020 in Nottingham, UK, in September.

ECS Member Dr. Chao-Yang Wang has been inducted into the 2019 National Academy of Inventors (NAI) Fellows Program.

The NAI highlights academic inventors who have demonstrated a spirit of innovation in creating or facilitating outstanding inventions that have made a tangible impact on quality of life, economic development, and the welfare of society.

Election to NAI fellow is the highest professional distinction accorded solely to academic inventors.

Dr. Wang is William E. Diefenderfer Chair in mechanical engineering and professor of chemical engineering and materials science & engineering at Pennsylvania State University. He was founding director of the Penn State Electrochemical Engine Center (ECEC) and Battery and Energy Storage Technology (BEST) center.

He has published over 220 journal publications, as well as two books. In addition, Dr. Wang has over 31,000 citations, an h-index of 99 (Google Scholar), and is one of the highly cited researchers in engineering according to Thomson Reuters. He holds over 50 patents.

His recent work on an all-climate battery (ACB) was published in the journal Nature, later selected by the 2022 Winter Olympic Games to power electric vehicles serving the Games, as well as adopted by several carmakers. His latest inventions on fast charging batteries (FCB) and safe, energy dense batteries (SEB) have been covered extensively in the media. Dr. Wang’s research interests cover the transport, materials, manufacturing, and modeling of batteries and fuel cells.

ECS Members Receive IBA Awards The Battery Division of ECS is proud to announce that two of its members have recently received awards from the International Battery Materials Association (IBA).

Arumugam Manthiram received the IBA Research Award for outstanding contributions to advances in electrochemical energy conversion and storage research.

Bor Yann Liaw received the IBA Technology Award for outstanding contributions to advances in electrochemical energy conversion and storage technology.

Each year, the IBA recognizes those who have done outstanding research and engagement that have impacted the advancement of electrochemical energy storage through various awards.

28

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Electrochemical Systems

SOCIE T Y NE WS

4th Edition John Newman and Nitash P. Balsara, University of California, Berkeley

ECS MEMBERS Receive a Discount! Visit us at www.electrochem.org ISBN: 978-1-119-51460-2 978-1-119-51460-2 Cloth | October 2019 ||704pp 704pp Cloth | Summer 2020 This book is a cornerstone in understanding a wide range of systems and topics in electrochemistry, and it is noted by reviewers of the third edition as being vital to the community of interest. The book results in a comprehensive coverage of electrochemical theories as they pertain to the understanding of electrochemical systems. It describes the foundations of thermodynamics; chemical kinetics; and transport phenomena including the electrical potential and charged species. This book also shows how to apply electrochemical principles to systems analysis and mathematical modeling. Using these tools, the reader will be able to model mathematically any system of interest and realize quantitative descriptions of the processes involved.

The latest edition updates chapters, adds content on lithium battery electrolyte characterization and polymer electrolytes, and includes a new chapter on impedance spectroscopy.

Electrochemical Systems Fourth Edition

John Newman Nitash P. Balsara

“… useful to anyone involved in the practice of electrochemistry…highly recommended.”

(CHOICE, November 2004)

Visit us at www.ecsdl.org to see more titles and for your membership discount.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

“...a solid, well-rounded discussion of the principal aspects of electrochemistry and is well suited for use as a graduate-level textbook.”

(Corrosion, December 2005)

29

19–CD1479

REVIEWS FROM PREVIOUS EDITIONS

SOCIE T Y NE WS

ECS 2020 Summer Fellowships 2020 Edward G. Weston Fellowship Recipient

2020 F. M. Becket Fellowship Recipient

Andrew D. Pendergast received his BS in chemistry with highest honors from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2020. Over the last three years, in the lab of Prof. Jeffrey E. Dick, he explored fundamental electrochemistry at nanoscale, primarily using aqueous nanodroplets as sub-femtoliter reactors for nanoparticle synthesis and characterization.

He authored and co-authored several manuscripts, including an ACS Editor’s Choice and a Nature Communications Editor’s Highlight. Pendergast received a National Science Foundation (NSF) Research Experiences for Undergraduates Fellowship, Barry Goldwater Scholarship, American Chemical Society Undergraduate Award in Analytical Chemistry, and NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Honorable Mention. As a visiting scholar, he studied the dynamics of single nanoparticle collisions with Dr. Christophe Renault at Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, France.

With Prof. Henry S. White at the University of Utah, he explored interfacial electrogenerated chemiluminescence. As an ECS Summer Fellowship recipient, Pendergast will travel to the University of Utah to begin his graduate studies with Prof. Henry S. White. His research there focuses on probing the electrochemically driven formation of new phases at nanointerfaces in the context of single metallic nanoparticles, small metal clusters, and gaseous nanobubbles.

Lalit Sharma received his undergraduate degree in chemistry from St. Stephens College, Delhi University, India, in 2014 before pursuing an Integrated PhD at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India. He is currently a final year PhD student at Faraday Materials Laboratory, under the supervision of Prof.

Prabeer Barpanda. Sharma’s research focuses on structural and electrochemical investigation of fluoro (hydroxy) phosphate-based polyanionic cathode materials for metal ion and metal air batteries. He co-authored eight journal articles and received the European Materials Research Society Young Scientist Award in 2017. With the help of an ECS Summer Fellowship, he aspires to complete in-depth electrochemical analyses of fluorophosphate cathode materials.

2020 Joseph W. Richards Fellowship Recipient McLain Leonard received his BS in chemical engineering with a minor in economics from Montana State University in Bozeman, MT, where he was recognized as a Goldwater Scholar. Leonard is currently a final year PhD candidate in chemical engineering working with Prof. Fikile Brushett at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His research focuses on gas diffusion electrodes for electrochemical carbon dioxide (CO2) reduction. Leonard is interested in evaluating and improving the properties of porous electrodes, and identifying electrolyzer operating modes that could ultimately support stable, selective, high-current CO2 conversion to platform chemicals, solvents, and fuels. With the support of the ECS Summer Fellowship, he plans to use computational continuum models of CO2 electrolysis to understand the effects of high current operation on electrode interfacial stability and device efficiency.

2020 H. H. Uhlig Fellowship Recipient Kody Wolfe completed his bachelor degree in chemical engineering at Ohio University in 2017. He then continued his education at Vanderbilt University, pursuing a PhD in materials science and engineering under the supervision of Drs. G. Kane Jennings and David E. Cliffel. Wolfe’s research involves studying electron transfer pathways within biohybrid technologies. His thesis research includes studies of electron transfer between a photoactive protein complex, Photosystem I, which can be derived from plants and various electrode materials to develop biohybrid photovoltaics. Wolfe recently began collaborating with Dr. Yannick Bomble, staff scientist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), on a project focused on the electrochemical regeneration of NADH (Nicotinamide Adenine Dinucleotide) as an enzymatic cofactor. Efficient regeneration of NADH from NAD+ would make NADH dependent enzymatic bioreactors being developed at NREL more economically feasible. The ultimate goal of developing these bioreactors is to produce commodity chemicals, which are typically derived from the petroleum refining process, through a renewable process based on biological feedstock. The ECS Summer Fellowship makes it possible for Wolfe to study alternative electrode materials for NADH regeneration. His project focuses on recovering biologically active NADH (as opposed to commonly produced inactive byproducts) and integrating his research with the work of his NREL collaborators.

2020 Summer Fellowship Committee ECS thanks the 2020 Summer Fellowship Committee for its time and effort in selecting this year’s recipients: Vimal Chaitanya, Committee Chair Director, Energy Research Lab New Mexico State University, USA Peter Mascher Professor and William Sinclair Chair in Optoelectronics McMaster University, Canada David Hall Postdoctoral Researcher Dalhousie University, Canada

30

Kalpathy Sundaram Professor & Graduate Coordinator University of Central Florida, USA

2021 Summer Fellowship Dates Application opens: September 2020 Application deadline: January 15, 2021

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE T Y NE WS

Staff News Keerthana Varadhan joined The Electrochemical Society in February 2020 as a program specialist with the department of community engagement. In this role, she is responsible for ECS section and student chapter growth and development, the ECS Summer Fellowship Program, coordinating biannual meeting travel grants, and various constituent programs.

“We are excited to have Keerthana join the ECS team. As we begin programming for the future, her enthusiasm for STEM education and program development is an exciting addition,” said Shannon Reed, ECS Director of Community Engagement.

Prior to ECS, Keerthana worked with the Hopewell Valley Regional School District as their program coordinator. She was instrumental in introducing many new and innovative programs to the district. Keerthana launched the STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) after-school program for all of the district’s elementary schools.

Keerthana holds a bachelor’s degree in commerce and accounting from the University of Delhi in New Delhi, India. She is currently pursuing graduate studies in human resources at the Welingkar Institute of Management Development & Research in Mumbai, India.

When not involved with programming, she loves spending time with her family, travelling to new places, and trying new cuisines.

May 30-June 3, 2021

Silver/Silver Chloride Reference Electrode Stable Reference 0.047 Volts vs. SCE Widely used Non-toxic Custom glass available Always in stock. Made in USA.

www.koslow.com “Fine electrochemical probes since 1966”

18th CHICAGO, IL Hilton Chicago

SAVE THE DATE: IMCS 18 RESCHEDULED

The 18th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors will be co-located with the 239th ECS Meeting at the Hilton Chicago in Chicago, IL. Attend the Meeting: The IMCS is the world’s largest interdisciplinary forum for all aspects of chemical sensors. IMCS 18 is the latest in a series of successful meetings for researchers, professionals, and business leaders showcasing state of the art sensors for gases, liquids, biologicals, applications in health and environment, wearables and fixed infrastructure, as well as wired and wireless.

Some of the topics to be covered include: • Artificial intelligence, machine learning, chemometrics, and sensor arrays • Chemical and biosensors, medical/health, and wearables • Electrochemical and metal oxide sensors • Sensors for agricultural and environmental applications • Recent advances and future directions in chemical and bio sensor technology • Internet of things, infrastructure, and signal processing for sensors

• MEMS/NEMS, FET sensors, and resonators • Microfluidic devices and sensors • Optical sensors, plasmonics, chemiluminescent, and electrochemiluminescent sensors • Sensors for breath analysis, biomimetic taste, and olfaction sensing • Chemical and biosensing materials and sensing interface design

Get Published: All Montreal meeting IMCS authors are strongly encouraged to resubmit when abstract submission for this meeting opens in August of 2020.

We look forward to seeing you in Chicago next year!

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

31

SOCIE T Y NE WS

Workshop on Electroorganic Chemistry: From Synthesis to Chemical Manufacturing The electrification of chemical transformations is gaining momentum in the organic chemistry, electrochemistry, and electrochemical engineering communities. While research in these communities has, so far, followed separate tracks, it is increasingly clear that concerted efforts involving synthetic chemists, computational scientists, and engineers are needed to bridge knowledge gaps, develop this technology, push its implementation in industry, and create new value chains. In this context, the Workshop on Electroorganic Chemistry: From Synthesis to Chemical Manufacturing was held on February 13-14, 2020, in Alexandria, VA. The workshop brought together 55 international experts from academia, industry, and funding agencies to identify areas of possible collaborations, and outline a roadmap for future research in this field. Jean-Philippe Tessonnier (Iowa State University), Gerardine Botte (Texas Tech University), Song Lin (Cornell University), and Shelley Minteer (University of Utah) organized the workshop. The event was sponsored by the National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Energy, and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).

The workshop focused on three main research needs: new chemistries, experimental and computational techniques, and translation from lab to industry. Two short presentations introduced each topic and set the stage for discussions between workshop participants. The presentations were followed immediately by two-hour breakout sessions during which participants discussed opportunities and research needs in the subject area. A perspective article summarizing these discussions will be disseminated in late 2020 or early 2021.

The organizers would like to thank all participants as well as the funding agencies for their contribution to this successful event.

Considering the enthusiasm of the participants, additional workshops on this topic will be organized together with the ECS.

Workshop Organizers Jean-Philippe Tessonnier, Iowa State University Shelley Minteer, University of Utah

Gerri Botte, Texas Tech University Song Lin, Cornell University

Attendees of this year’s Workshop on Electroorganic Chemistry: From Synthesis to Chemical Manufacturing.

ANNUAL

REPORT 2019

Now available online!

Visit www.electrochem.org/finances 32

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE T Y NE WS

APP CORNER Suggested for you by Alice Suroviec.

Evernote

LastPass

Devices: Web, Android, iOS compatible Cost: $7.99/month (premium version)

Devices: Web, Android, iOS compatible Cost: $4.00 small team; $3.00 personal plan

Evernote is a notetaking and document scanning app. This app allows you to save anything and access it from any device. The free version allows you to capture information as well as share with others. The premium version allows you to integrate with other applications like Outlook and Slack. This is a great app that allows the frequent traveler to manage their workload.

LastPass is both a Web browser plug-in and an app. Using one master password you will have access to all of your other usernames and passwords. The app and browser will both fill in logins when you arrive at the sign in page or will save sites as you log in for the first time. This app also can produce new passwords for you. Your data is encrypted and decrypted at the device level and kept secret even from LastPass.

ResearchGate

Trello

Devices: Web, iOS compatible Cost: Free

Devices: Android, iOS compatible Cost: Free

ResearchGate is a professional network for scientists and researchers. Over 16 million members from all over the world use it to share, discover, and discuss research. You are able to share your research, ask questions of other researchers, and get stats on who is interacting with your work.

Trello is a project management app/software that allows groups to collaborate on projects as well as manage their own lists. It also has functions of checklist and due dates and allows notifications to go to all the users on your team. Trello integrates with Slack, Google Drive, Evernote, and Dropbox.

© The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F03202IF. (Please note that certain apps might not be available depending on the end user’s region or country. The features of some apps also can vary.)

Alice Suroviec is professor of bioanalytical chemistry and chair of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Berry College. She earned a BS in chemistry from Allegheny College in 2000.

She received her PhD from Virginia Tech in 2005 under the direction of Dr. Mark R. Anderson.

Her research focuses on enzymatically modified electrodes for use as biosensors. She is currently associate editor of the PAE Technical Division for the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. She can be reached at asuroviec@berry.edu and is always looking for new app suggestions. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9252-2468

About the Author The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

33

A

half-century-long The three cathode marriage between classes identified in solid state science the 1980s have served and electrochemas a foundation for istry has led to decades of research and many wonders, impactdevelopment efforts in ing our lifestyle and the academia and industry. well-being of people and They are also the basic the planet. For example, foundation for the future

by Arumugam Manthiram the birth of lithium ion developments of not battery (LIB) technoloonly LIB electrodes, but gy has touched all of our also sodium-ion battery lives. We are inspired by electrodes (layered and our heroes, 2019 Nobel polyanion).

Prize in Chemistry recipAs we move eeients Profs. Stanley Whitforward, health and tingham and John Goodclimate change are two E enough, and Dr. Akira major interconnected eeYoshino. Their pioneering challenges facing work brought the global society. The solid state C: 2p battery community to new and electrochemical E heights. A close interacscience and engineering tion between solid state community has a critical eeV chemists/physicists and role to play in addressing LiC6 electrochemists, involvthese challenges. As Co3+/4+: 3d N(E) ing the design and develthe marriage between opment of new materials, solid state science 2O : 2p and an in-depth underand electrochemistry Li+ standing of their electrocontinues to thrive, there chemical behavior, made is hope to leave these N(E) Li0.5CoO2 LIB technology possible. challenges behind, and The most expensive comsustain a healthier and ponent in a LIB is the Fig. 1: Operation of a lithium ion battery, illustrating the flow of electrons from a cleaner world. cathode, which also limits higher energy state in the graphite anode to a lower energy state in Li0.5CoO2 cathode, © The Electrochemical the energy density (user accompanied by a flow of Li+ ions through the electrolyte.

Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2. time). The 1980s discovF04202IF. ery of oxide cathodes by Goodenough’s group at the University of Oxford (England) and the University of Texas at Austin (U.S.) made possible a reasonable user time between charges in the present-day LIB. A recent Nature Communications (https://www. nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15355-0) article illustrates how Arumugam Manthiram is currently bringing young and experienced minds together in basic science the Cockrell Family Regents Chair in 1 work can transform society. Three classes of oxide cathodes were Engineering and Director of the Texas discovered in the 1980s through Prof. Goodenough’s collaboration Materials Institute and the Materials with three visiting scientists from different parts of the world.

Science and Engineering Program The oxide cathodes enabled a significant increase in energy at the University of Texas at Austin density due to an increase in cell voltage to ~4 V—compared to < (UT-Austin). He received his PhD in 2.5 V with sulfide cathodes (e.g. TiS2) employed in the 1970s by chemistry from the Indian Institute of Prof. Whittingham to demonstrate the rechargeable lithium battery Technology Madras in 1981. After working as a postdoctoral 2 concept. The increase in energy density with an oxide cathode is researcher at the University of Oxford and at UT-Austin due to the ability to access lower lying energy bands with higher with Prof. John Goodenough, he became a faculty member 3+/4+ 2oxidation states like Co , as the top of the O :2p lies at a lower in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at UT-Austin 2energy compared to the top of the S :3p band, thereby increasing in 1991. Dr. Manthiram’s research is focused on batteries the cell voltage (Fig. 1). The three classes of oxide cathodes Prof. and fuel cells. He has authored around 800 journal articles Goodenough’s group developed are (i) layered LiCoO2 involving with 64,000 citations and an h-index of 126. He directs a 3 Koichi Mizushima from Japan; (ii) spinel LiMn2O4 by Michael large research group with about 30 graduate students and 4 Thackeray from South Africa; and (iii) polyanion LixFe(XO4)3 postdoctoral fellows. He has provided research training to 5,6 (X = Mo, W, and S) by Arumugam Manthiram from India. In more than 250 students and postdoctoral fellows, including addition to increasing the cell voltage upon going from a sulfide the graduation of 61 PhD students and 26 MS students. He is to an oxide, the polyanion oxides illustrated yet another way to the regional (USA) editor of Solid State Ionics, co-editor of 2+/3+ further increase the cell voltage—through a lowering of the Fe Ceramics in Modern Technologies, and an associate editor of redox energy because of a decrease in the Fe-O bond covalence Energy and Environmental Materials. caused by the more covalent X-O bonds (inductive effect).

A Marriage of Solid State Science and Electrochemistry

About the Author

34

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Dr. Manthiram is a fellow of six professional societies: The Electrochemical Society, Materials Research Society, American Ceramic Society, Royal Society of Chemistry, American Association for the Advancement of Science, and World Academy of Materials and Manufacturing Engineering.

He is an elected member of the World Academy of Ceramics.

He received the university-wide (one per year) Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award in 2012, The Electrochemical Society Battery Division Research Award in 2014, Indian Institute of Technology Madras Distinguished Alumnus Award in 2015, Billy and Claude R. Hocott Distinguished Centennial Engineering Research Award in 2016, Da Vinci Award in 2017, Honorary Mechanical Engineer of the ME Academy of Distinguished Alumni Award in 2019, The Electrochemical Society Henry B. Linford Award for Distinguished Teaching in 2020, and International Battery Association Research Award in 2020. He is a Web of Science Highly Cited Researcher in 2017, 2018, and 2019. He delivered the 2019 Chemistry Nobel Prize Lecture on behalf of Prof. John Goodenough in Stockholm. Dr. Manthiram may be reached at manth@austin.utexas.edu. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0237-9563

References 1. A. Manthiram, Nat. Commun. 11, 1550 (2020).

2. M. S. Whittingham, Science 192, 1126 (1976).

3. K. Mizushima, P. C. Jones, P. J. Wiseman, and J. B. Goodenough, Mater. Res. Bull. 15, 783 (1980).

4. M. M. Thackeray, W. I. F. David, and J. B. Goodenough, Mater.

Res. Bull. 17, 785 (1982).

5. A. Manthiram, and J. B. Goodenough, J. Solid State Chem. 71, 349 (1987).

6. A. Manthiram, and J. B. Goodenough, J. Power Sources 26, 403 (1989).

If you would like to submit a book review for an upcoming issue of Interface, please send an email to: marybeth.schwartz@electrochem.org.

We can run your tests.

The EL-CELL electrochemical laboratory offers a variety of testing services and capabilities.

Our services Manufacturing of electrodes from client materials Formulation of electrolytes Cycle life and impedance tests on half and full cells with our advanced 3-electrode PAT series test cells Testing of battery materials using the whole range of EL-CELL products e.g. electrochemical dilatometers, pressure or optical test cells Our equipment Newest EL-CELL PAT-Tester-i-16 multichannel potentiostats All kind of EL-CELL battery test cells All necessary tools and handling equipment to prepare and perform electrochemical experiments

More information at www.el-cell.com

The Electrochemical Society Interface â&#x20AC;˘ Summer 2020 â&#x20AC;˘ www.electrochem.org

35

SOCIE PEOPLE T Y NE WS

Jason Keleher: How a Small Institution Makes a Big Impact

H

ow does a small academic institution make an outsized contribution to the field of electrochemistry? Dr. Jason Keleher1, professor and chair of the department of chemistry at Lewis University, has a lot to say on the subject.

Lewis, a private Catholic institution in Romeoville, IL (a suburb of Chicago), was founded in 1932.2 Today, total enrollment is 4,351 undergraduates plus just over 1,000 graduate students.3 Lewis ranks twentieth overall, and fourteenth in undergraduate teaching in the 2020 edition of U.S. News & World Report’s guide to best Midwestern colleges and regional universities.4 The faculty/student ratio is 13/1— and that, according to Keleher, makes all the difference.

Keleher’s students have published papers in leading journals, presented at major conferences, and developed novel solutions to pernicious problems. The ECS Lewis University Student Chapter received the ECS Student Chapter of Excellence award in 2018 and 2019.5 With Daniel Maurer, a Lewis undergrad, Keleher integrated a nanocomposite liquid crystal containing layer into existing windshield designs to minimize laser lights distracting airplane pilots.6 His research team works in the area of chemical-mechanical polishing, helping to grow the semiconductor industry, speeding up devices, and creating new architectures.7 They also address the problem of clean drinking water.8 An article by Keleher’s research group (KRG) was one of the most downloaded open source papers in the Society’s Journal of Solid State Science and Technology in January 2019.9 Keleher brings an entrepreneurial spirit to the task of teaching.

He came to Lewis in 2009 from Cabot Microelectronics—and immediately set out to engage a small group of students in research.

He initiated projects with industry—something that was new to Lewis. KRG includes more than 30 graduate and undergraduate students, interested faculty, and industry representatives.10 “The number one thing that allows us to make an outsized contribution is that we make the projects live, local, and latebreaking,” says Keleher. “We connect (research) to things that students hear about on the news, on TV, things that are relevant to society: solar energy, wind, alternative energy sources, electrochemistry, wound management, wound healing, and semiconductors.” Students collaborate on projects with scientists working in companies like Applied Materials, Inc. “Learning what it’s like to work in that kind of a setting, on projects with fixed deadlines and real world implications, can have a massive impact on a student’s career,” he says.

Being in a smaller institution allows the faculty to really know their students. Keleher has focused on creating a specific culture

Dr. Jason Keleher with May 2018 graduating seniors.

Photo: Courtesy KRG 36

Dr. Jason Keleher with the Keleher Research Group after receiving the 2017 American Chemical Society Stanley C. Israel Award for promoting and advancing the chemical sciences.

Photo: Courtesy KRG

in his group, “one of teamwork, camaraderie, tangible skills, and excitement around just being with a group of people who are solving cool problems.” His students are passionate about the science. He tells them, “With every single experiment—whether it’s this titration, where you just make colors change, or whether it’s making a polymer that you’re going to grow skin cells with or apply voltage to—I want you to realize that you may be the only person in the entire world at that moment who has that result to that experiment. You’re sharing new knowledge that people may not have.”

Community engagement is an important component of Keleher’s program. Student-run activities bring the community in to the school—and the school out to the community. The Lewis chemistry labs are transformed into a Halloween haunted house that brings in locals and hundreds of Girl Scouts. An annual bike-a-thon raises money for charity. Two years ago, Pedal for Preemies benefited a local hospital’s neonatal unit. The American Cancer Society was this year’s beneficiary. Keleher’s team participate in local schools science fairs. A year-long competition challenged area students to develop clean water projects, then display their designs at Lewis.11

Dr. Jason Keleher lectures on research mechanisms to the Keleher Research Group.

Photo: Courtesy KRG The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE PEOPLE T Y NE WS There are many benefits to community activism, says Keleher. “It creates greater scientific literacy across the community. When you spend an entire day at a library doing demos for young kids who get really excited, you’re changing the way things are done. The students connect with science. It makes them think about their careers, their lives, and what they want to do. Our students get the chance to mentor and be in a leadership role. This experience is a tangible skill that they use in the future.”

Communication is key, especially in this period of pandemic.

Keleher’s usual channels of phone, Twitter,12 texting, Slack, and email, are augmented most nights with Zoom meetings. On Twitter, students’ birthdays are regularly acknowledged, as well as accomplishments in their varied areas of interest. Now Keleher also posts inspirational content to keep team members’ spirits up. Students have access to instructors on a daily basis. Research and personal well-being are discussed at regular team meetings called “huddles.”

While labs are closed, KRG works on articles to submit, and revisits past experiments, brainstorming new areas of exploration.

“We’ve really tried to stay positive during this time. We’re not together running experiments, but we’re looking at data from the past, pulling up old results, plotting things a different way, finding new findings. We just submitted a paper to an international conference.

I think we have two manuscripts ready for the ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology. So, we haven’t shut down in terms of the thinking part. This KRG ‘think tank’ is really going to shape how we do things when we come back,” said Keleher.

Keleher’s team keeps busy! They have not lost sight of “keeping it real” and connecting to the community. KRG, the chemistry department, and Lewis University Chem Club recently donated gloves and goggles to the local healthcare community.

When asked if his program resulted in better scientists, Keleher responded, “I would say better community-focused, worldlythinking scientists, where they don’t just think about the research.

They think about the impact that the research has on the universe, the environment, their peers, friends, and family, and how disseminating that information can only make people more knowledgeable and literate in science.”

Can other small institutions replicate Keleher’s model?

“Absolutely,” he says.

Keleher Research Group holiday party. KRG supports several community families during the holiday season.

Photo: Courtesy KRG

References 1. https://www.lewisu.edu/experts/wordpress/index.php/facultyexperts/dr-jason-keleher/ 2. https://www.lewisu.edu/portals/currentportal.htm 3. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regionaluniversities-midwest 4. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/lewis-university-1707 5. https://www.electrochem.org/ecs-blog/lewis-universitystudent-chapter-connecting-knowledge-and-passion/ 6. https://www.electrochem.org/ecs-blog/jason-keleher-shining-alight-on-laser-airplane-attacks/ 7. https://ecs.confex.com/ecs/235/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/121236 8. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/MA2019-01/45/2225/ meta 9. “Unraveling Slurry Chemistry/Nanoparticle/Polymeric Membrane Adsorption Relevant to Cu Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP) Filtration Application” 10. https://www.dklabinnovation.com/meet-the-group 11. https://www.dklabinnovation.com/dklab-community-outreach 12. https://twitter.com/DKLab_LewisU

ECS Fellow Dr. Jamal Deen Honored by the Chinese Academy of Sciences ECS Fellow and long-time ECS volunteer, Dr. Jamal Deen, has been elected to the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) Academician echelon. According to China Daily, the CAS “has added 64 Chinese nationals and 20 foreign experts, including three Nobel laureates, to the group of academicians it has awarded the nation’s highest academic title. Scientists are awarded the lifelong honor once every two years.”

Foreign Academicians are “internationally recognized scientists who have made distinguished contributions to supporting science and technology in China.” Dr. Deen becomes the second Canadian and first Caribbean national to be elected Academician of the CAS. “I am truly humbled and sincerely thankful to receive such a high, prestigious honor. More importantly, it is a great recognition of the unwavering support of my family, and the exceptional work of numerous talented and dedicated students, colleagues, and collaborators I was so lucky to work with over my career. Without them, this tremendous honor, being elected an Academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (Foreign Member), would not be possible. It means a lot to me to be able to acknowledge their exceptional contributions and to thank my nominator and co-nominators. In addition, being part of the ECS allowed me to organize timely, important, and appreciated symposia and to meet exceptional researchers, scholars, and staff who are part of the ECS family,” Deen said.

Dr. Deen has been a member of the ECS for over three decades and a fellow for 16 years.

He has served in many capacities with the DST Division, EPD Division, OBE Division, and the Board of Directors.

Dr. Jamal Deen and Dr. Bai Chunli, Through the Society, President of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, he has received the at the CAS headquarters in Beijing.

ECS Thomas D. Callinan Award and the ECS Electronics and Photonics Award. He is a Distinguished University Professor, Senior Canada Research Chair in Information Technology, and Director of the Microand Nano-Systems Laboratory at McMaster University. As a scholar, Dr. Deen has made research contributions in engineering science and technology. His research record includes more than 600 peer reviewed articles, two textbooks, and 20+ paper/poster presentations.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

37

SOCIE PEOPLE T Y NE WS

In Memoriam memoriam Thomas Springer (1933 - 2020)

D

r. Thomas Springer, long time ECS member and electrochemical modeler, passed away on February 15, 2020, after a short illness. He was born in Fairmont, WV, on May 5, 1933, the son of Thomas Edgar Springer and Louise Showalter Springer. He was 86.

He is survived by his wife Cynthia (Jones), of Los Alamos, NM; his brother Hugh Springer (Candy) of Roanoke, VA; his children Dr. Kendall Springer (Dr. Melanie Mitchell) of Portland, OR; Dr. Paul Springer (Dr. Carol Bloodworth) of Livermore, CA; Marie Walczak (Mark) of Parma, OH; and Lydia Springer (Patrick) of Uppsala, Sweden.

He had 10 grandchildren and five great-grandchildren. His family requests donations be made to the American Lung Association and COPD Foundation.

From Prof. Fernando Garzon (UNM, Sandia National Laboratories) For over 30 years, if you entered the northeast door of the physics complex at LANL and looked into the office on the right, you probably saw a tall, white-haired man working in front of a computer. The computers changed, but Tom did not. Always eager to develop a mathematical model for better characterization of a physical process, Tom provided steady, thoughtful computational support to many projects and made important contributions to the field of electrochemical modeling. We liked to joke that Tom spoke two languages, English and Mathematics, the latter he spoke fluently.

Tom came to the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory in 1957, after attending Andover, the College of Wooster (Phi Beta Kappa), and Yale University, where he earned his doctorate in nuclear physics. At LASL, he studied nuclear propulsion. He was a pioneer in the early use of computer based numerical methods for solving complex problems.

Within the N-4 division, he worked on Project Rover, developing neutronic kinetic equations to estimate fission products. He was always passionate about all aspects of physics, working at the Lab for more than five decades. LASL became part of the DOE in the 1970s and changed its name to Los Alamos National Laboratory. During this time, Tom worked on non-nuclear energy projects, creating thermal models for solar heating, hot dry rock geothermal energy, and gas diffusion in fractured shale. He performed seminal work on fuel cell and electrochemical modeling, and his ECS publications have been cited over 10,000 times. I worked with Tom and Ian Raistrick on the development of first principle models of the AC impedance response of porous electrodes, and later on modeling how a variety of impurities inhibit polymer membrane fuel cell electrode reaction kinetics. My former LANL colleagues who frequently collaborated with him can give a better summary of his work in developing the first quantitative fuel cell models.

Tom was active in the community, serving for many years as a volunteer ham radio operator for NM civil defense, and search and rescue operations. He provided critical communications support during the massive Cerro Grande fire even when the old fire station he was working from was threatened by the conflagration. As a volunteer member of NM search and rescue, I worked with Tom on many missions and his efforts contributed to saving a number of lives. He was also on a task force to bring public transportation to Los Alamos and even drove the public bus.

38

Tom was a great outdoorsman, who loved canoeing, kayaking, skiing, biking, and hiking in the beautiful mountains and deserts of northern NM, CO, and UT. I personally enjoyed cycling, skiing, and boating with Tom. He was in excellent physical shape for the vast majority of his life, cycling to work almost every day. When I was a young postdoc at LANL, I was invited by Tom to go for the lunch bike ride. This ride consisted of a 20-mile ride with a > 2,000 ft. elevation gain in the Jemez Mountains. At more than twice my age, he easily embarrassed me, and I was a former collegiate cycle racer. Lastly, Tom was inherently a frugal soul, having been born during the Great Depression, but this never hindered his generosity towards others whether it be charitable donations, his expertise, or volunteering time.

From Dr. Mahlon Wilson (Los Alamos National Laboratory) Tom was the first to explain the excessive “mass transfer” losses then observed with the thick membrane fuel cells. By modeling and measuring the increase in membrane resistance with current in an operating fuel cell, he demonstrated that the “mass transfer” losses were actually an increase in membrane resistance due to water drag.

Then, with this new understanding in cell water management, he developed the first physics-based (i.e., not phenomenological) 1D fuel cell model that was able to accurately replicate fuel cell behavior using only experimentally derived physical parameters. This 1D model became the core of future modelling efforts throughout the international fuel cell community.

From Prof. Thomas Zawodzinski (University of Tennessee Knoxville/ Oak Ridge National Laboratory) From the time I arrived at LANL in late 1988 until I left, Tom Springer was a constant in my work and a strong influence on me, helping me to think in modeling terms about measurements I developed and did. Most importantly, he was emblematic of the sheer joy of our profession. He was as eager as a puppy when a new problem came up. In one instance, I enlisted his help in developing a model to rationalize some NMR imaging data I had acquired. We worked through the (relatively simple) math and got to the physics of the situation, resulting in a paper that we were able to submit within three weeks of conception of the problem.

The key to Tom was that it always began with the physical aspects, and then was reflected in math. As noted above, he spoke math but had his own special way of parameterizing a problem. This often led to humorous (to us geeks) results such as his reinvention of the equilibrium constant as an inverse. Many conversations started with Tom asking a question from the middle of his thought process and posed in terms of whatever symbol for a variable he assigned in his own Springerese language. We would have to dial him back: ‟Wait, wait, what’s beta?ˮ These models always started with the physical principles and filled pages of his paper blotter, the most valuable notebook in LANL. After he worked through the physics with us, he would then turn to the electrochemists for a discussion of values of parameters to start the computations. The insight that we gained from those discussions was invaluable. Tom’s enthusiasm for the problem and the discussion knew only one bound: the meeting ended for him when it was time to drive the bus.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE PEOPLE T Y NE WS Tom was also a great traveling companion. He brought the same enthusiasm to every adventure. I often thought that traveling with the group was a release from some of his at-home constraints, especially dietary. On our first trip to the ECS meeting in Seattle, he awoke early in the morning and immediately started asking where we could get huevos rancheros. Not the first dish that comes to mind in the Pacific Northwest!

From Prof. Shimshon Gottesfeld (University of Delaware) As the fuel cell team at Los Alamos was nucleating in the mid1980s, we were very fortunate to have Tom Springer join us. His new assignment followed the ending of a previous project he was involved with, devoted to aerospace power sources based on a nuclear reactor, a subject not too closely related to electrochemical power sources. I am not sure that the move to the fuel cell team was made fully by his own choice, but, irrespective, this was certainly the “beginning of a great friendship” between Tom and the electrochemists in the fuel cell team and, moreover, between Tom and the field of electrochemistry.

As an expert in modeling of physical systems, with a PhD from Yale (1957) in nuclear engineering, Tom’s great versatility facilitated fast transformation to become an electrochemist of deep understanding and insight. He acquired, over just a few months, deep knowledge of the field, including electrocatalysis, transport processes in porous media, physics of ionomer-water systems, and more, from reading of some advanced textbooks and informal discussions he had with team electrochemists.

Tom then started making highly significant contributions to the nascent field of polymer electrolyte fuel cells, serving as modelerin-chief for the LANL fuel cell team. It became quickly clear that his in-depth modeling of the PEM fuel cell provided an important foundation for the significant advancements made by the fuel cell technical team at LANL, and by teams elsewhere, at an early stage

of development of PEMFC technology. This was, first and foremost, the result of the demand he applied in his own work, of complete understanding and full quantification of all processes in the cell.

This demand of in-depth understanding had a profound effect on all experimentalists with whom he very actively communicated.

The seminal papers with Tom Springer as first author, published in JES starting in 1991, maintain their great clarity and technical value 30 years later. They are also unique, in having carefully compared at the outset, the projections of the models—for the water profile in the PEMFC membrane (1991), the J-V characteristic of the cell (1993), and the impedance spectrum of the PEMFC (1996)—with detailed experimental data. Tom never felt he created a model of sufficient quality unless all quantitative projections could be verified.

One remarkable example was an apparent shortcoming of a model he developed at LANL for deactivation of the HOR catalyst in the PEMFC by traces of CO. That shortcoming continued to concern him for years, until the work done later at BNL, with Tom’s participation, that revealed the limited number of Pt-Hads sites active in the HOR, thereby proving that the degree of HOR deactivation seen experimentally was accurately predicted by Tom’s model. I could realize from the e-mail message I received from him how delighted he was following that development, as expected for those who deeply care about the quality of their technical contribution.

At the personal level, Tom was a very good friend indeed, serving in a gentle manner as a responsible adult—he was the oldest member of the FC Team. In spite of his higher age, his physical capability was, however, very hard to match, as I best realized during some joint hikes in the Jemez Mountains. I was deeply saddened to learn about Tom’s departure.

This notice was contributed by Fernando Garzon, Mahlon Wilson, Thomas Zawodzinski, Shimson Gottesfeld, Piotr Zelenay, and Rangachary Mukundan.

In Memoriam memoriam Rolf Muller (1929 - 2020)

R

olf Muller passed away peacefully at his Kensington, CA, home on March 2, 2020, with his children, Alice and Will, and beloved dog Trevor, by his side. Born on August 6, 1929, in Aarau, Switzerland, Rolf joined the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in 1960, where he eventually worked as Associate Division Director. He retired from the Lab in 1991.

Rolf Muller was one of the pioneers in the application of optical methods to the study of mass-transport in electrochemical technologies. He used interferometry to measure concentration profiles at electrodes under current flow with natural or forced convention of electrolyte. These results played an essential role in the development of the mathematical models of mass transport in porous electrodes in batteries and fuel cells by his colleague UC Berkeley Prof. John Newman and in electroplating systems by his colleague UC Berkeley Prof. Charles Tobias. Some 50 years later, his demonstration of a stable meniscus on a metal surface partially immersed in electrolyte was utilized by a team of investigators at beamline 9.3.1 at the ALS to observe photoemission from an electrode surface in-situ.

Muller expanded his scientific/engineering vision to the use of spectroscopic (i.e., wavelength dependent) ellipsometry to study the

composition and thickness of the passive film on metallic lithium in lithium primary batteries. He designed and constructed his ellipsometer before any were commercially available, and designed some of the first electrochemical cells to utilize optical spectroscopies like ellipsometry and electroreflectance. Lithium primary batteries were commercialized after ca. 1960 based on seminal work by Prof.

Tobias and his students and Rolf’s follow-up studies were essential to understand their functioning and stability. Metallic lithium anodes for rechargeable lithium batteries are now in vogue as part of “Beyond Lithium Ion” chemistries, and his pioneering papers will hopefully be revisited by some meticulous researchers.

Muller held the position of adjunct professor in the UC Berkeley Chemical Engineering Department, and mentored a number of graduate students, as well as supervising numerous postdoctoral researchers and hosting visiting scholars at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Reflective of their experience under his guidance, these individuals have gone on to make truly significant contributions to electrochemical technologies like super-capacitors and the now billion-dollar industry of damascene copper plating.

A member of the ECS San Francisco Section, Rolf Muller was involved primarily with the PAED Division. He joined The

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

(continued on next page) 39

SOCIE PEOPLE T Y NE WS (continued from previous page)

Electrochemical Society in 1962. In 1993, he was recognized as an ECS Fellow. Muller enjoyed participating in electrochemistry seminars from 2001 to 2010.

ECS Secretary Marca Doeff reflected on Rolf, “I had fond memories of him attending our local section meetings in the 90s, and also presentations we made at LBNL. I really appreciated his wisdom. Someone once said to me, ‘when we lose an old person, we lose a library,’ and this is really true in Rolf’s case.”

Muller had many interests. Starting at a young age, he was physically active, biking and hiking with his brother in Switzerland, and then later taking a weekly exercise class for seniors in Albany, CA. He was an avid gardener with a particular interest in growing

fruits and vegetables. He also painted landscapes and was an active member of a local painting group, which traveled to various local spots to paint. One of his favorite trips was to Napa Valley in the fall as the grape leaves transformed from green to a beautiful orange and yellow.

Rolf will be interred at Sunset View Cemetery in El Cerrito, CA. His memorial service is postponed due to COVID-19. He was preceded in death by his wife of 42 years, Dorothy, in 2005, and his brother, Jorg, in 2007. He is survived by his children, Will and Alice Muller. In lieu of flowers, donations can be made in Rolf Muller’s name to Vitas Hospice. The family was given amazing support through Vitas out of their Walnut Creek office.

In Memoriam memoriam Dennis Peters (1937 - 2020)

D

ennis G. Peters was born in 1937 in highest standards of quantitative accuracy and precision. Equally Eagle Rock, CA. Just four days before his important, his papers provide an invaluable source of experimental 83rd birthday, he succumbed to the COVID-19 ideas and extremely useful electroanalytical procedures. True to his outbreak on April 13, 2020, following a brief legendary reputation as a mentor, many of these talks were given by hospitalization for other issues. his students and reflected his attention to experimental details and Dennis started his career studying chemistry clear, orderly presentations. In recent years, his research projects at Caltech, receiving a BS in 1958. He then turned to electrochemical remediation of organohalogen pesticides, attended Harvard University, where he obtained illustrating his concern for larger issues than the fundamental aspects his doctorate. He immediately began his of his work. In recognition of his outstanding contributions to the academic career at Indiana University Bloomington. The following field of organic electrochemistry, he was honored with two ECS is a dedication from the Organic and awards—the Henry B. Linford Award and Biological Electrochemistry (OBE) the OBE Manuel Baizer Award. As Division of The Electrochemical Society. tremendous as his contributions to The OBE Division has the sad task organic electrochemistry were, his earlier of reporting the recent passing of Prof. work in analytical chemistry must also Dennis was the epitome of Dennis Peters of Indiana University. be mentioned. Dennis truly dedicated his a teacher-scholar and was as likely Starting as an instructor in 1962, he taught life to his students and to electrochemical to spend his attention on a first and conducted research for 58 years at research. His love for teaching was year chemistry student as a visiting Indiana University and was honored inspirational and never waned, and he in 1975 by being named the Herman was teaching freshman chemistry up dignitary. He lived for working with T. Briscoe Professor of Chemistry, until the quarantine. His kindness to his students, where his enthusiasm and among many other honors. He taught students and other faculty members, sincerity for teaching chemistry electrochemistry, analytical chemistry, even extending to help with purchases of shined brightest. He will be missed and other chemistry and biochemistry laboratory supplies and conference travel sorely at Indiana University, but his courses to more than 15,000 students as expenses for his students, is consistently a legendary teacher at Indiana University. mentioned by his friends and colleagues. impact will not be forgotten.

Those of us in the OBE Division Indeed, Prof. Peters cared as much about fondly remember Dennis as a valuable the quality of his students’ lives as he did colleague and prolific contributor to our about their undergraduate training. Those —Lane A. Baker, James L. Jackson discipline. He was an internationally colleagues who visited Dennis at Indiana Professor of Chemistry, Indiana University well-known electrochemist. He presented University were always assured of a warm Bloomington his work and scientific achievements welcome to his home. in countless scientific meetings and Dennis also made valuable university seminars, and published 219 contributions to the governance of the papers, mostly in organic electrochemistry, and five textbooks Organic and Biological Electrochemistry Division. He first joined in analytical chemistry. His research covered various aspects of the ECS in 1985. Over the years, he served as the OBE Secretarymolecular organic electrochemistry and the detection of very reactive Treasurer in 1998-2000, Vice Chair from 2001 to 2003, and Chair intermediates. He will be probably particularly remembered for from 2003 to 2006. In these roles, he provided his insights into both his research on the electroreduction of organic halides, in which the technical and financial operations of the division. Even in his later he gave equal attention to mechanistic aspects and electrosynthetic years, while not actively serving on the OBE Division Executive outcomes. His research efforts on organohalogen compounds Committee, he still attended planning meetings. His in-depth constituted a long-term feature of many OBE symposia over several comments reflected his long years of experience in OBE Division decades, and his papers and talks were always characterized by the affairs in particular and in The Electrochemical Society operations in

“

”

40

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SOCIE PEOPLE T Y NE WS general. Dennis was actively involved in many prestigious scientific societies, such as The Electrochemical Society, the American Chemical Society, the International Society of Electrochemistry, and the Society for Electroanalytical Chemistry. His efforts resulted in his being named a fellow of the American Chemical Society (2017), a fellow of The Electrochemical Society (2007), a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (2012), and a fellow of the Indiana Academy of Science.

It is not often that we are privileged to observe the rare combination of outstanding technical achievement, teaching excellence, administrative abilities, and personal humility and graciousness in

a colleague. We were indeed fortunate to have had this experience with our late colleague, Dennis Peters. Besides his long career in molecular electroanalytical chemistry, we need to celebrate and remember his continuous contribution to forge generations of highly skilled molecular electrochemists, and the role he had in inspiring younger researchers to follow his steps with a similar degree of enthusiasm and dedication toward this discipline. All of the many who knew him will miss him greatly, but we were all beneficiaries of his expertise and personal charm.

This notice was contributed by Graham Cheek and Flavio Maran.

In Memoriam memoriam Dolf Landheer (1947 - 2020)

D

olf Landheer passed away peacefully on May 1, 2020, in Ottawa, Canada. An ECS member for 20 years, Dr. Landheer became an active member of the Dielectric Science and Technology Division and co-organized several symposia on SiN/SiO2 Thin Insulating Films (2001, 2003, 2005), High-k Dielectrics (20052009), Dielectrics and Engineered Interfaces in Biological and Biomedical Applications (2009). He was the lead organizer for Biosensors, Bioelectronics, and Biomedical Engineering (2005-2006). He reviewed every single submission to the symposium proceedings diligently. He became a fellow of ECS in 2009, subsequently became the chair of the division from 2014-2016, and served on the ECS Board of Directors. He was a member of the Canada Section of ECS. He also served as an associate editor of the Journal of The Electrochemical Society and became a life member of ECS. Many colleagues think he gave his best to ECS and always thought about the well-being of ECS. Dolf received his BSc in chemistry and physics from the University of Waterloo (1969) and his MSc and PhD degrees at the University of Toronto (1976), working in the area of molecular and solid state physics and laser spectroscopy. After a NATO postdoctoral fellowship at Imperial College (Univ. of London, UK), he worked on electrographic printing with microplasmas at Xerox Research Centre of Canada and nearby Delphax Printing Systems. In 1983, he pursued his interest in plasma processing and the effect of plasmas

on materials by moving to the Institute for Microstructural Sciences at the National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, where he became Principal Research Officer before retiring after 37 years.

He established the first plasma processing facilities at the Institute for early work on the fabrication of solid state waveguide lasers and detectors based on III-V (GaAs, InP, etc.) and Si-Ge multilayers. He contributed to understanding plasma processing damage on III-V laser facets and the interfaces of Si, GaAs, and InP with silicon nitride and silicon dioxide. Later he studied high-k dielectric layers produced by chemical vapor deposition (CVD) using electron-cyclotron plasma sources, pulsed metal-organic CVD, and atomic layer deposition (Hf and Gd oxide and silicate). Subsequently he started working on the fabrication, analysis, and modeling of bio-affinity sensor microarrays based on floating-gate field-effect transistors fabricated using CMOS. One of Dolf’s Canadian colleagues and the incoming chair of the Dielectric Science and Technology Division, Prof. Peter Mascher, says, “Dolf was a towering presence in the Canadian semiconductor community, both literally and figuratively. One of his greatest legacies will be the series of Canadian Semiconductor Technology Conferences of which he was a key organizer.” Dolf could speak Dutch, French, and German fluently and was always smiling. Besides science, he was a “great guy” and the ECS community will miss him dearly. He is survived by his wife, Carolyn Clarke, and sons, Alex and Karl Landheer.

This notice was contributed by Durgamadhab Misra.

Research is meant to be shared.

Visit freethescience.org The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

41

Early Registration Deadline

AUGUST 31, 2020

While our goal remains for the PRiME 2020 Meeting to take place as scheduled in Honolulu, given the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are also working to incorporate digital presentations and remote participation into the event. Therefore, regardless of what format PRiME ultimately takes—in person, virtual, or a hybrid of both—we hope you will join us for this vital technical meeting.

2020 The joint international meeting of:

PRiME 2020 Honolulu, HI

October 4-9, 2020

Hawaii Convention Center & Hilton Hawaiian Village The joint international meeting of: 2020 Fall Meeting of The Electrochemical Society of Japan (ECSJ) 2020 Fall Meeting of The Korean Electrochemical Society (KECS) 238th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society (ECS) with the Technical Co-Sponsorship of: Japan Society of Applied Physics (JSAP) Chinese Society of Electrochemistry (CSE) Semiconductor Division, Korean Physical Society (KPS)

Society of Polymer Science, Japan (SPSJ) Korea Photovoltaic Society (KPVS) Korean Institute of Chemical Engineers (KICHE) Electrochemical Society of Taiwan (ECSTw)

www.electrochem.org/prime2020

42

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Book Review Theoretical Spectroscopy of Transition Metal and Rare Earth Ions: From Free State to Crystal Field Written by Mikhail G. Brik and Chong-Geng Ma

O

ptical materials, which are defined here as the materials applied for light absorbing and/or emitting devices, have been extensively studied for many years not only in academia but also in industry, because of their importance for the human life, science, and technology. There are a wide variety of optical materials and devices, such as light emitting diodes, phosphors, and solar cells, etc. In order to develop such optical materials, fundamental understandings of light absorption and emission processes (which eventually can be explained from the quantummechanical point of view by the electronic transitions between the atomic discrete energy levels) form the necessary prerequisite.

However, most of the textbooks of quantum mechanics do not include a description of real applications of the quantum-mechanical theories to the existing optical materials. Hence, the people, who start learning the mechanisms governing light absorption and emission in optical materials, must consult several books in addition to quantum mechanics, e.g., quantum chemistry, solid state physics, crystal field theory, and group theory. The book reviewed here is designed to finally combine all of the basic understanding controlling light absorption and emission from free atom to ions in a crystal field to a material in a single book. Especially considering the recent trends in the phosphor materials, a large portion of the book is targeted to explain the spectroscopic behavior of both 3D transition and lanthanide ions incorporated systems and systematic trends in the variation of their spectroscopic features.

The book consists of 10 chapters starting from a background of optical materials in the first chapter, which continues to the basics of the quantum mechanics, basic spectroscopic concepts related to the d- and f-electron systems, group theory, crystal field theory, manifestations of the vibrational effects in the optical spectra, and the cutting-edge theoretical interpretation of the spectroscopic results by employing various theoretical models.

In the first chapter, the background and history of the research on optical materials is introduced, especially the importance of dand f-electrons as the emission and absorption centers in the optical materials is emphasized.

The second chapter provides “Basic Processes of Interaction of Radiation with Matter,” in which the basic concepts of light emission and absorption are explained at the undergraduate physics The third chapter, “The Theory of Atom of Hydrogen,” is a first step to understand the electronic structure of atoms using quantum mechanics. In this chapter, the essence of the quantum mechanics for light emission and absorption is concisely well represented for the people who are not familiar with quantum mechanics.

In the fourth chapter, “Multielectron Atoms,” the method of treating more realistic atoms with more than two electrons is outlined. At first, the difference between the hydrogen-like atom, i.e., atoms consisting of only one electron plus nucleus and multielectron atoms, is given and the necessary approach to solve such complicated systems is briefly explained.

Chapters 5 and 6 explain “Basic Spectroscopic Properties of the Ions with Unfilled d- and f-Electron Shells,” respectively, which are one of the major topics in this book. Most of the recent phosphor materials are prepared by doping techniques, in which the atoms with unfilled d- or f-electron shells such as 3D transition metal and lanthanide ions, respectively, are employed as emission center. At the first step, it is quite important to understand how to treat such ions as free atoms, because this is the origin of the impurity ions energy levels in crystals. This is well explained in these chapters.

In the seventh chapter, “The Group Theory,” the foundation of this theory, which is quite important to understand the symmetry of

Reviewed by Tomoyuki Yamamoto

the host materials, impurity ions wave functions, are presented.

This theory is also highly efficient in understanding the crystal field theory and the probability of light emission and absorption.

Although there are some good Theoretical Spectroscopy of books for the group theory, the Transition Metal and Rare Earth essence and applications of the Ions: From Free State to Crystal group theory are concisely written Field, by Mikhail G. Brik and Chong-Geng Ma. 400 pages, in this chapter.

Chapter 8 is devoted to “Basic $134.95 (Amazon), hardcover, ISBN 978-981-4800-56-3. Published by Postulates of Crystal Field Jenny Stanford Publishing Theory.” In the optical materials (www.jennystanford.com). doped with 3D transition or Photo: Jenny Stanford Publishing lanthanide ions, doped ions are Pte Ltd. not free atoms any more, but are surrounded by ligands. Such a situation can be expressed by using crystal field theory. In this chapter, starting from the basics of the crystal field theory, applications of the theory to the optical materials are given.

In Chapter 9 titled “Electron-Vibrational Interaction and Its Manifestation in the Experimental Absorption and Emission Spectra of Impurity Ions in Crystals,” influence of electron-phonon coupling on the light emission and absorption spectra are explained. Spectral change due to the distortion, such as Jahn-Teller effect, is also explained concisely.

In the final chapter, “Combination of the First-Principles and Semi-Empirical Models for a Complete Description of the Electronic Properties of the Doped Crystals,” the cutting-edge analytical method for the analysis of the light emission and absorption spectra is demonstrated. This combination of the analytical method is very powerful in understanding the mechanism of light emission and absorption in the optical materials.

The book also includes an appendix on “Angular Parts of Wave Functions of the d2 and f2 Electron Configurations” and “Symmetrized Wave Functions of the S, P, D, F, G, H Terms in the Cubic Crystal Field.”

This book is highly recommended not only for young researchers including students, who start learning the mechanism of light emission and absorption phenomena in optical materials but also for the senior scientists and engineers, who shift toward the research in optical materials. As written above, it can be also considered as a state-of-the-art survey of the analytical method of light emission and absorption in the optical materials. This book is excellent not only for self-instruction or as an undergraduate textbook, but also for teachers in graduate school to organize their lectures in the field of optical materials. To my knowledge, there is no such useful book like this, which covers the basics of understanding the mechanism of light emission and absorption in optical materials. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F05202IF.

About the Authors Theoretical Spectroscopy of Transition Metal and Rare Earth Ions: From Free State to Crystal Field was recently published by ChongGeng Ma and Mikhail Brik, ECS member, and past chair of the Luminescence and Display Materials Division. Tomoyuki Yamamoto is a professor in the Department of Materials Science and a director of the Institute of Condensed Matter Science at Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

43

Estimating the Capital Costs of Electrowinning Processes

A

Introduction

drive towards industrial sustainability, coupled with rapidly evolving markets, motivates the recent reassessment of metallurgical extraction and metal recycling technologies. Challenges pertaining to the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from metallurgical processes, along with a desire to minimize the use of toxic or expensive reagents from leaching and solvent extraction technologies, have led to significant research on more environmentally-benign electrochemical processing methods1–3.

Currently, electrochemical technologies are employed at an industrial scale for the production of metals, including aluminum, beryllium, calcium, chromium, copper, lithium, magnesium, manganese, nickel, platinum group metals, rare earth metals, sodium, titanium, and zinc4. Other commodities produced via electrochemical methods include caustic sodium hydroxide (soda) and chlorine4. In recent years, innovative electrowinning processes have been proposed and reimagined for the primary extraction and production of metals, such as copper 5, iron6, titanium7, molybdenum8, rhenium8, rare earth metals9, and aluminum master alloys, such as those of scandium10.

Meanwhile, electrochemical approaches have been the focus of many new recycling and recovery technologies for strategic metals such as indium11, cobalt12, and lithium13.

While contemporary electrochemical research shows significant technological promise, any new, potentially disruptive processing technology will be in competition with existing and established processing facilities, some of them constructed less than a decade ago.

Presently-employed metallurgical processes benefit from previously invested capital and ongoing projects, existing know-how, and have been deployed as state-of-the-art facilities in the last decade, for example in China. Furthermore, due to the inherent risk of new technology, current industrial best-practice embodies a significant degree of technological and economic inertia that new processing routes can only overcome through the promise of substantial technoeconomic improvements. For a new electrochemical process to replace an existing method, the reward must be worth the risk. In the current industrial climate, to ensure adoption, the technological progress must result in a step change in relevant technoeconomic metrics, such as cost, product purity, efficiency, sustainability, etc.

In order to ascertain the ability of a new electrochemical process to be technoeconomically feasible and competitive, an understanding of the capital and operating costs is necessary. Often, the relative effects of electrochemical metrics on cost are fairly apparent—for instance high current efficiency leads to lower electricity usage per unit of products, and therefore lower electricity costs. However, for comparison of electrochemical methods in very different operating conditions, such as temperature or electrolytes, or comparison of electrowinning to solvent extraction or pyrometallurgical methods, a relative cost direction is not enough to ascertain improvement or motivate a new investment—the economic benefits of new 44

by Caspar Stinn and Antoine Allanore

electrochemical processes must be determined and presented quantitatively, an exercise presently undertaken in few academic papers.

In contrast, when current industrial electrolytic processes, such as the chlor-alkali process for production of chlorine and caustic soda, were optimized in the early to mid-twentieth century, a dedicated research effort was put forth to quantify the effect on operating and capital costs of key process parameters such as cell size and geometry14,15, as well as supporting electrolyzer infrastructure such as bus bars16 and rectifiers17. In the latter half of the twentieth century, researchers attempted to establish a framework for the economic analysis of electrochemical methods. For example, Hine studied electrowinning metrics, such as the optimal number of cells to minimize cost18, eventually establishing a basis to study a broad range of technoeconomic aspects for electrochemical processes19,20.

Others such as Schmidt and Alkire et al. explored electrowinning optimization by attempting to maximize the profit of a bank of cells21,22. The efforts of these and others3 show that operating costs for electrochemical processes are amenable to quantification and analysis. Meanwhile, the means to quantitatively estimate the capital cost (CAPEX) for an electrochemical facility are far less developed, and will be the emphasis of this article.

This work focuses on estimation of the direct capital cost component of electrochemical processes. For our purposes, we define the direct capital cost to be the installed cost of a facility, ignoring site or geographic specific costs23,24. Our cost analysis does not include operating expenses such as electricity, labor, chemical feedstocks, water, or maintenance; methodologies for these costs are well-documented elsewhere19. We also do not attempt to amortize the capital cost to determine a yearly payback, depreciation, or capital contribution to the overall product cost. Indeed, the manner in which the capital investment of a chemical facility is paid off is largely geography and market dependent, as well as affected by the financial structure and practices of the company or country undertaking the project. Such analysis is beyond the scope of this work. In this paper, we present frameworks and scaling relations for quantitative order of magnitude estimates for direct capital cost, and demonstrate that this framework accurately describes the capital costs of existing electrochemical processes. Such order of magnitude estimates cannot replace detailed design analysis however, yet they remain useful for comparison of technologies.

Methodology of Capital Cost Estimation In determining the economic feasibility of a process, different levels of detail are explored throughout the design period, with varying levels of stated accuracy. The American Association of Chemical Engineering (AACE) International defines five levels of cost detail: Class 5 – Order of Magnitude (within ±50-100 %), Class 4 – Preliminary (within ± 30-50 %), Class 3 – Definitive (within ±1015 %), Class 2 – Detailed (within ± 5-10 %), and Class 1 – As Bid (within ± 5-10 %)23. Early Class 5 and Class 4 cost estimates focus on determining whether or not a product is economically tenable to produce, and by which method. This would be used to compare various processing routes, such as direct electrochemical versus hydrometallurgical versus pyrometallurgical. Later Class 3-1 cost estimates utilize detailed process flow diagrams, piping and instrument The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

diagrams, and interactions with contractors to further define the construction costs of a process. The correlations and scaling relations described and fitted in this work contribute to Class 5 and 4 estimates.

To consider the effects of inflation and evolving manufacturing techniques, a yearly index called the Chemical Engineering Index (CEI) is tabulated by Chemical Engineering Magazine25. While direct comparison of capital costs across different years and construction locations is often dubious, the CEI and similar indices are often the only available tools to assess the magnitudes of previous investments for the purposes of estimating new facility costs23,24. For reported scaling laws in this paper, the CEI has been applied to convert all values to 2018 US dollars.

Application of Conventional Chemical Engineering Capital Cost Models to Electrochemical Processes Class 5 and Class 4 cost estimates utilize scaling relations to estimate the cost of a new facility from that of similar facilities constructed in the past. Such relations typically take the form of an exponential expression, as shown in Eq. 1, where C is the direct capital cost (CAPEX) (excluding off-site costs) ι is a pre-exponential factor, x is a relevant process parameter (often the production capacity or the power utilized), and β is an exponent.

C x

(1)

Exponent values less than one suggest that the process is more economical at larger scales, whereas exponent values of greater than 1 suggest that the process is more economical at smaller scales23,24.

For a given process, ι and β are fitted using data for installed capacity and total direct capital investment. For most chemical processes, an exponent of 0.6 is observed, which is called the conventional chemical scaling law23,24. Utilization of an overall process scaling relation like Eq. 1 is characteristic of a Class 5 cost estimate. Class 4 cost estimates require scaling laws for each of the major unit operations within a process, with each law often following the form of Eq. 1.

Despite the use of electrolysis to produce numerous products at very large but different scales, limited literature exists for estimating the capital costs associated with these electrowinning processes. To the authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s knowledge, a comprehensive study of existing industrial scale electrowinning processes with the goal of establishing predictive capability for capital cost has not been undertaken. Nevertheless, total capital costs can be found for individual electrowinning facilities for aluminum26 , copper26â&#x20AC;&#x201C;35, magnesium26,36, sodium36, zinc36â&#x20AC;&#x201C;38,38,39 and chlorine40,41, as presented in Table I. Equation 1 can be fitted to the capital cost of electrochemical processes, where installed capacity (P) is taken to be the relevant operating parameter, x. Other logical choices for the relevant operating parameter could include current or power, however these metrics are often proprietary or difficult to determine. Fittings for the capital cost are reported in Table II for aluminum molten salt electrolysis, copper and zinc aqueous electrowinning, and the chlor-alkali process, along with upper and lower bounds for fit validity. These fittings, normalized by tonne of installed capacity, are also presented in Fig. 1, extrapolated beyond their applicable capacity bounds to evaluate the broad range of operating scales for electrochemical processes.

Comparison of the extrapolations for the capital cost shows that there is no single model to compare and extrapolate electrowinning economics. The cost curve for aluminum production via molten salt electrolysis drastically over-predicts the capital cost for sodium and magnesium electrolyzer facilities. Proposing aluminum electrolysis as a model system for the capital cost of molten salt processes using a fit to Eq. 1 would suggest that lower tonnage metals could never be produced economically by such a method, a claim that is disputed by the industrial reality of sodium and magnesium production.

Meanwhile for aqueous electrowinning processes, the scaling behavior of copper is very different from both zinc and chlor-alkali processing, again highlighting that any one metal aqueous electrowinning process cannot be used to predict the economics of another.

Two shortcomings of the conventional scaling law are therefore apparent: 1) the conventional chemical engineering scaling relation is misleading for estimating the economics of one electrochemical process from another, and 2) a single model electrolytic metal extraction or recovery process does not exist for estimating the capital cost of other electrolytic processes. This finding is not a surprise; indeed, electrochemical reactor productivity scales with the electrode areas (a horizontal surface for aluminum electrolysis in molten salts and a vertical surface for copper electrowinning), as opposed to volume for reactors, furnaces, autoclaves, or other more conventional chemical processing equipment. Furthermore, the operating conditions of the electrochemical process have a significant effect on the upstream and downstream processing that is required in addition to the electrolysis step, as well as the construction of individual electrolysis cells. Relevant conditions such as current density, cell voltage, and temperature have a significant effect on electrochemical process economics that are not captured via conventional chemical engineering scaling laws. We therefore present in the next section an attempt to include those parameters in a model scaling law.

Development of an Electrochemical Engineering Capital Cost Model We herein develop a model to describe the capital cost of electrolysis processes by considering the relevant operating parameters related to the cathode surface (e.g., current density), as well as available capital cost breakdowns for aluminum, magnesium, copper, and chloralkali production. As presented in Table III, each process has its own operating features that cover a wide range of temperature, electrolytes and electrolysis parameters. This survey shows three main categories of capital investments: front end processing (F), electrolysis and product handling (E), and rectifier (R)26,40,41. Their variation with temperature across chlor-alkali, magnesium, and aluminum production is reported in Fig. 2. The total capital investment for an electrochemical process (C) is then described following:

C F E R (2) The front-end processing capital costs scale in a similar way as chemical processes and Eq. 1, based on installed capacity (P) and electrolysis temperature (T), where Îą1(T) and x1 are fitted parameters, with x1 taken to be 0.8 in accordance with correlations for crushers, driers, heaters, and mixers23,24:

F 1 T P x1 (3)

Capital costs associated with the electrolytic and metal recovery (e.g., stripping of metal or casting) process steps (E) scale with production capacity via the number of electrolyzers required31. The number of electrolyzers required is a function of the total production rate (p), product molar mass (M), current density (j), number of electrons per mole of product (z), current efficiency (Îľ), and electrode (for metals, cathode) area (A)19, where F is the magnitude of electric charge per mole of electrons. The number of cells is multiplied by a temperature-dependent proportionality constant Îą2(T) and raised to some power x2 expected to fall between x1 and 1 since reactor production capacity scales by area instead of volume, with less economy of scale due to having many smaller reactors23,24,31. A value of 0.9 for x2 is proposed, leading to Eq. 4: x2

pzF

E 2 T (4)

jA M Previously, Hine described19 the capital cost of a single rectifier, which is expanded here to account for multiple rectifier lines at a given facility. The capital cost of the rectifier (R) is considered a function of installed power capacity in (Q) and cell operating voltage (V), where x3 is approximately equal to 0.15 and Îą3 is a proportionality constant.

N is the number of rectifier lines, and x4 is equal to 0.5: R 3 T QV x3 N x 4 (5)

The following scaling law is then proposed for the overall capital cost estimates for electrochemical processes: x2

pzF x3 x4 C 1 T P x1 2 T (6) 3 T QV N jA M (continued on next page)

The Electrochemical Society Interface â&#x20AC;˘ Summer 2020 â&#x20AC;˘ www.electrochem.org

45

Stinn and Allanore

(continued from previous page)

Using operating conditions for chlor-alkali, magnesium, and aluminum production such as those presented in Table III, the proportionality constants for Eq. 3-6 α1, α2, and α3 can be fitted as a function of electrolysis operating temperature (Fig. 3). Electrolysis operating temperature is chosen as the key parameter for the preexponential for two reasons; pre-electrolysis processing for aqueous electrolysis predominantly involves fluids whereas high temperature electrolysis requires upstream solids handling, and low temperature electrolysis uses standard engineering materials (polymers, metals, etc.) whereas high temperature electrolysis utilizes refractory materials. Therefore, for front end processing (α1) and electrolysis / product handling (α2), distinct low temperature and high temperature

regimes exist, with the magnitudes of the proportionality constants increasing with temperature. However, the nature of the transition region from low to high temperature remains unclear. A logistic fit is hypothesized to describe the trends of α1 and α2 with increasing temperature, as low temperature processes are more similar to each other than high temperature processes, and vice versa. However, to verify the functional nature of this relation (logistic, stepwise, linear, etc.), technoeconomic analysis of additional intermediate temperature processes will be necessary; however, such information is often proprietary, hindering more in-depth analysis at this time.

For rectifiers α3 is not expected to show temperature dependence, as the nature of rectifiers is dominated by operating power and voltage, not the temperature at which the energy is utilized. Indeed no clear temperature dependence in α3 is observed for chlor-alkali,

Table I. Reported total capital costs (2018 USD, using CEI).

Capacity (kta)

Al

Mg

Investment (USD)

USD / tonne

Year

415

$2,937,550,460

$7,070

2008

Year CEI 2018 CEI 2018 Investment USD / tonne Cell Count 576

607

$3,095,647,794

$7,451

517

1 line Rectifier

415

$2,920,930,656

$7,030

2008

576

607

$3,078,133,521

$7,408

517

1 line Rectifier

588

$3,691,655,708

$6,275

2008

576

607

$3,890,338,568

$6,613

732

1 line Rectifier

588

$3,753,428,433

$6,380

2008

576

607

$3,955,435,866

$6,723

732

1 line Rectifier

735

$4,894,017,677

$6,655

2008

576

607

$5,157,410,990

$7,013

915

1 line Rectifier

735

$4,360,860,229

$5,930

2008

576

607

$4,595,559,304

$6,249

915

2 line Rectifier

882

$4,994,766,050

$5,660

2008

576

607

$5,263,581,584

$5,965

1098

2 line Rectifier

882

$5,599,256,288

$6,345

2008

576

607

$5,900,605,150

$6,686

1098

1 line Rectifier

1177

$6,712,636,117

$5,705

2008

576

607

$7,073,906,463

$6,012

1465

2 line Rectifier

1177

$6,518,493,267

$5,540

2008

576

607

$6,869,314,953

$5,838

1465

2 line Rectifier

1691

$8,676,861,694

$5,130

2008

576

607

$9,143,845,570

$5,406

2105

2 line Rectifier

500

$3,250,000,000

$6,500

2001

394

607

$5,006,979,695

$10,014

622

2 line Rectifier

353

$1,899,846,000

$5,382

2008

576

608

$2,005,393,000

$5,681

439

1 line Rectifier

50

$400,000,000

$8,000

2001

394

607

$616,243,655

$12,325

41

IG Cell

109

$359,700,000

$3,300

1979

239

607

$913,547,699

$8,381

88

IG Cell

22

$72,600,000

$3,300

1979

239

607

$184,385,774

$8,381

18

IG Cell

4.5

$14,850,000

$3,300

1979

239

607

$37,715,272

$8,381

4

IG Cell

22.5

$74,250,000

$3,300

1979

239

607

$188,576,360

$8,381

18

IG Cell Downs Cell

Na

50

$82,500,000

$1,650

1979

239

607

$209,529,289

$4,191

14

Zn

100

$250,000,000

$2,500

2006

500

607

$303,500,000

$3,035

766

Cu

Cl2

Notes

100

$60,000,000

$600

1974

164.4

607

$221,532,847

$2,215

766

120

$508,500,000

$4,238

2011

590

607

$523,151,695

$4,360

919

1.1

$2,600,000

$2,398

1980

261

607

$6,046,743

$5,577

15

SX-EW

1.7

$3,700,000

$2,239

1980

261

607

$8,604,981

$5,207

23

SX-EW

5

$12,400,000

$2,481

1980

261

607

$28,838,314

$5,770

70

SX-EW

4.6

$9,800,000

$2,140

1980

261

607

$22,791,571

$4,977

64

SX-EW

15.1

$26,000,000

$1,727

1980

261

607

$60,467,433

$4,016

210

SX-EW

22.7

$32,700,000

$1,441

1980

261

607

$76,049,425

$3,351

316

SX-EW

21.2

$33,500,000

$1,579

1980

261

607

$77,909,962

$3,672

296

SX-EW

27

$100,000,000

$3,703

1998

390

607

$155,641,026

$5,764

377

SX-EW

1.3

$3,000,000

$2,253

1980

390

607

$4,669,231

$3,507

19

SX-EW

14.6

$25,300,000

$1,728

1980

390

607

$39,377,179

$2,689

204

SX-EW

50

$268,500,000

$5,370

2014

580

607

$280,999,138

$5,620

697

SX-EW

60

$298,000,000

$4,966

2007

530

607

$341,294,340

$5,688

837

SX-EW

200

$106,000,000

$530

1980

261

607

$246,521,073

$1,233

126

diaphragm

200

$111,500,000

$558

1980

261

607

$259,312,261

$1,297

126

200

$112,800,000

$564

1980

261

607

$262,335,632

$1,312

126

membrane membrane + inert anodes

166

$111,000,000

$669

1990

358

607

$188,203,911

$1,134

105

880

$194,868,534

$221

1980

261

607

$453,200,000

$515

554

46

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

magnesium, and aluminum production. Utilizing the fitted values for the proportionality constants Îą1, Îą2, and Îą3, altogether the proposed equation for capital costs reads:

peak between aqueous and molten salt operating temperatures, with aqueous and molten salt electrochemical regimes demonstrating cost competitiveness. This is not a surprise since both aqueous and molten salt process regimes are utilized in industry, with 0.9 utilization of one regime over the other chosen based

51010 5634000 pz F 0.8 0.15 0.5 (7) on chemistry and thermodynamic considerations.

C P

750000 QV N

3 3

3.823*10 * T 631 7.813*10 * T 349 1 e 1 e jA M Novel molten sulfide5,8,42 and oxide2 systems operating above 1,000°C have the potential to show even lower As shown in Fig. 4, Eq. 7 is able to predict the production-capacitynet electrolyzer costs for a given productivity than existing molten normalized capital cost of electrolytic processes from their relevant salt methods. This assumes that the materials cost for the relevant electrochemical operating parameters. The results of Eq. 7 fall within temperature does not increase linearly with temperature. If such the error bars for Class 5 (50-100%) and Class 4 (30-50%) capital conditions (and materials choices) are found, the continual increase cost for all current electrolytic processes for which data is available, in current densities anticipated with temperature suggests high suggesting that Eq. 7 is a valuable tool for estimating the capital cost of temperature electrolysis as a promising candidate for metallurgical new electrochemical processes from their operating conditions. This processes from the perspective of capital cost. is especially important for estimating the economic tenability of new (continued on next page) lab-scale processes where target operating parameters are relativelywell known from basic operating costs estimates. However, those new electrolytic processes are likely to exist outside the framework of existing industrial reality. This means they may have a very different front-end processing compared to existing electrochemical processes, necessitating an understanding of the key unit operation for electrolytic processes: the electrolyzer.

Temperature is chosen as the relevant parameter to estimate the cost of electrolyzers for two reasons; both the material cost to build the cell (refractory versus room temperature materials and cell geometry) and the supported current density (moving from aqueous to molten salt electrolytes) are related to the operating temperature.

From the data in Table III, hypothetical installed amperage cost can be derived as a function of temperature (Fig. 5), and is predicted to Table II. Scaling law (Eq. 1) parameters for CAPEX estimation of aluminum, copper, zinc, and chloralkali electrowinning.

Al

Zn

Cu

Cl2

Îą

110,100

340,100

5980

374,100

β

0.787

0.597

0.971

0.521

Capacity lower bound (metric tonnes)

340,000

80,000

1,000

150,000

Capacity upper bound (metric tonnes)

2,000,000

130,000

70,000

1,050,000

Fig. 1. Extrapolation of the conventional chemical engineering scaling law to the electrochemical processes from Table I. Eq. 1 well-describes the individual process it is fitted to. However, fittings of Eq. 1 for one product fails to describe the capital cost for another product, demonstrating that a single model for electrolytic process CAPEX estimates does not exist.

Fig. 2. Capital cost breakdown for current industrial electrolytic production of chlor-alkali, magnesium, and aluminum. Front end processing and rectifier cost percentages are shown to decrease with temperature, while electrolyzer and product handling capital cost percentages increase with temperature.

Fig. 3. Temperature dependence of the three proportionality constants for capital cost estimates of electrolysis processes. For front end processing and electrolytic/product handling, the proportionality constants show a low and high temperature regime. The proportionality constant for rectifier capital cost is temperature independent.

The Electrochemical Society Interface â&#x20AC;˘ Summer 2020 â&#x20AC;˘ www.electrochem.org

47

Stinn and Allanore

(continued from previous page) Table III. Reported Operating Conditions for Electrolysis Processes Al Temperature (°C) Current density (A/m2) Current efficiency Operating potential (V) Electrode area / cell (m2)

Mg

Na

Zn

1000

750

600

10000

6000

10000

0.95

0.90

0.85

4.18

6.0

5.7

30

60

60

Cu 50

Cl2 40

90

300

300

2700

0.85

0.80

0.96

3.5

3.5

3.79

50

30

55

Current / cell (kA)

300

360

600

15

9

149

Power / cell (MW) Electrons per product Product molar mass (kg) Yearly productivity / cell (kta)

1.25

2.16

3.42

0.053

0.032

0.563

3

2

1

2

2

2

0.027

0.024

0.023

0.065

0.064

0.071

0.85

1.23

3.67

0.13

0.07

1.59

Concluding Remarks We present a model for estimating the direct capital cost of electrolysis processes. Herein, capital cost refers to the direct cost to build the electrolysis facility, ignoring offsite or location-specific costs. We do not consider operating costs in this work such as the cost of water, electricity, or maintenance, as these are previously described elsewhere. In practice, a balance must be struck between capital and operating costs. For example, a process that has a higher capital cost may be economically superior to one with a lower capital cost once operating costs and amortization are taken into effect. The opposite can also be true—just because a process has a low operating cost, it does not guarantee that the process will be economically feasible. A process with a low operating cost can prove untenable if the amortized capital cost is prohibitively expensive. With this tradeoff in mind, we address the capital cost side of this equation.

We fit conventional chemical engineering capital cost scaling laws to aluminum, copper, zinc, and chlor-alkali electrowinning processes and demonstrate that no single, representative electrolytic process

Fig. 4. Electrochemical engineering capital cost model applied to current industrial processes. Using relevant electrochemical operating parameters, a single capital cost model, presented in Eq. 7, well-describes the capital cost of electrochemical processes.

48

Fig. 5. Capital cost per amperage of electrolyzers. Both aqueous and molten salt cells are shown to be cost competitive when trends in current density are accounted for. Therefore, the choice between aqueous and molten salt methods is first and foremost dependent on system chemistry.

exists for predicting electrolytic capital costs of novel processes.

Therefore, we develop a new, electrochemical engineering scaling law to predict the capital cost of electrochemical facilities based on relevant operating parameters such as current density, voltage, and electrolysis temperature. We also derive a cost per amperage for estimation of the cost of an individual electrolyzer. This understanding of capital cost allows for the comparison of different electrowinning technologies, as well as the comparison of electrochemical to hydrometallurgical and pyrometallurgical processes. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F06202IF.

About the Authors

Caspar Stinn received his bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA) in 2018, where he was awarded the 2018 Robert T. Haslam Cup for outstanding professional promise in chemical engineering. He is currently a graduate student in the department of materials science and engineering in the same institution, and member of Prof. Allanore’s research group since 2015.

Stinn’s research interests include sustainable metallurgical processing and experimental thermodynamics. He may be reached at stinn@mit.edu. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0084-249X Antoine Allanore’s research applies to sustainable materials extraction and manufacturing processes, in particular using electrochemistry. As a faculty member in the department of materials science and engineering at MIT, he has developed numerous alternative approaches for metals and minerals extraction and processing. With an emphasis on electrochemical methods for both analytical and processing purposes, his group combines experimental and modeling approaches to investigate minerals and metals processing. Allanore has been a member of ECS since 2006, and can be reached at allanore@mit.edu. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2594-0264

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Symbol List References 1. A. Allanore, JOM, 65, 130–135 (2012) http://link.springer. com/10.1007/s11837-012-0538-3.

2. A. Allanore, J. Electrochem. Soc., 162, 13–22 (2014) http://jes. ecsdl.org/cgi/doi/10.1149/2.0451501jes.

3. A. Allanore, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 63–68 (2017).

4. L. Lipp and W. An, J. Electrochem. Soc., 152 (2005).

5. S. Sokhanvaran, S.-K. Lee, G. Lambotte, and A. Allanore, J. Electrochem. Soc., 163, D115–D120 (2016) http://jes.ecsdl.org/ lookup/doi/10.1149/2.0821603jes.

6. A. Allanore, L. Yin, and D. R. Sadoway, Nature, 497, 353–6 (2013) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23657254.

7. G. M. Haarberg et al., ECS Trans., 33, 167–173 (2010).

8. S. K. Sahu, B. Chmielowiec, A. Allanore, and I. Member, Electrochim. Acta, 382–389 (2017) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. electacta.2017.04.071.

9. B. R. Nakanishi and A. Allanore, J. Electrochem. Soc., 166, 420– 428 (2019).

10. A. Y. Nikolaev, A. V. Suzdaltsev, and Y. P. Zaikov, J. Electrochem.

Soc., 166, D252–D257 (2019).

11. P. Cui, B. Qin, A. M. Martinez, and G. M. Haarberg, J. Electrochem. Soc., 166, 810–815 (2019).

12. W.-Y. Wang, C. H. Yen, J.-L. Lin, and R.-B. Xu, J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag., 21, 300–307 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10163-018-0790-x.

13. O. Takeda et al., J. Electrochem. Soc., 161, D820–D823 (2014).

14. L. P. Wenzell, P. J. Stuber, and S. Cottrell, Trans. Electrochem.

Soc., 86, 107–120 (1944).

15. L. P. Wenzell, P. J. Stuber, and S. Cottrell, Trans. Electrochem.

Soc., 89, 455–465 (1946).​ 16. L. C. Pan, Trans. Electrochem. Soc., 66, 369–380 (1934).

17. F. L. Kaestle, Trans. Electrochem. Soc., 76, 453 (1939).

18. F. Hine, J. Electrochem. Soc., 117, 139–142 (1970).

19. F. Hine, Electrode Processes and Electrochemical Engineering, Plenum Press, New York and London, (1985).

20. F. Hine, ECS Trans., 16, 69–80 (2008).

21. A. Schmidt, J. Electrochem. Soc., 118, 2046–2055 (1971).

22. R. C. Alkire, G. D. Cera, and M. A. Stadtherr, J. Electrochem.

Soc., 129, 1225–1231 (1982).

23. G. Towler and R. Sinnott, Chemical Engineering Design, 2nd ed., p. 307–354, Elsevier, Waltham, (2013).

24. D. W. Green and R. H. Perry, Perry’s Chemical Engineer’s Handbook, 8th ed., Mc, (2008).

25. S. Jenkins, Plant Cost Index Arch. - Chem. Eng. (2019) https:// www.chemengonline.com/site/plant-cost-index/.

26. U. B. Pal, D. E. Woolley, and G. B. Kenney, J. Mater., 32–35 (2001) https://link.springer.com/content/ pdf/10.1007%2Fs11837-001-0053-4.pdf.

27. Anvil Mining, Delivering and Building Value, (2007).

28. C. Huss, H. Welhener, T. Drielick, R. Roman, and P. Lenton, Gunnison Copper Project Technical Report Prefeasibility Study, (2014).

29. A. G. Survey, A. F. Budge Mining Ltd. Mining Collection, (2009).

30. AZGS, Arizona’s Mineral Industry – 1997 and 1998, (1998) http://repository.azgs.az.gov/sites/default/files/dlio/files/ nid1596/mining_update1998.pdf.

31. S. Srinivasan, Fuel Cells: From Fundamentals to Applications, p. 133, (2006).

32. V. A. Ettel, A. S. Gendron, and B. V Tilak, Met. Trans. B, 6B, 31–36 (1975) https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/ BF02825675.pdf.

33. N. T. Beukes and J. Badenhorst, in Hydrometallurgy Conference 2009,, p. 213–240 (2009) https://www.saimm.co.za/Conferences/ Hydro2009/213-240_Beukes.pdf.

34. D. Michaud, SX EW Cap. Oper. Cost Solvent Extr. Electrowinning (2018) https://www.911metallurgist.com/sx-ew-capital-operatingcost/#Total-SX-EW-Capital-Costs.

A Electrode (for metals, cathode) area, m2 C Total direct capital cost, 2018 US dollars E Electrolysis and product handling contribution to total direct capital cost, 2018 US dollars F Front-end processing contribution to total direct capital cost, 2018 US dollars F Magnitude of electric charge per mole of electrons j Current density, A/m2 M Electrolysis product molar mass, kg/mol N Number of rectifier lines P Installed yearly production capacity, metric tonnes p Total installed production rate, kg/s Q Installed power capacity, MW R Power rectifying contribution to total direct capital cost, 2018 US dollars T Electrolysis temperature, °C V Cell operating voltage, V x Relevant process parameter for the conventional chemical engineering scaling law x1 Exponent for front-end processing x2 Exponent for number of electrolysis cells x3 Exponent for cell voltage x4 Exponent for number of rectifier lines z Moles of electrons reacting to produce a mole of product α Proportionality constant for the conventional chemical engineering scaling law α1 Temperature-dependent proportionality constant for front-end processing α2 Temperature-dependent proportionality constant for electrolysis and product processing α3 Proportionality constant for power rectifying β Exponent for the conventional chemical engineering scaling law ε Current efficiency

35. W. H. Dresher, Technological Innovation and Forces for Change in the Mineral Industry, Washington D.C., (1978) https://www. nap.edu/catalog/19950.

36. Batelle (Columbus Laboratories), A Survey of Electrochemical Metal Winning Processes, (1979) https://www.osti.gov/servlets/ purl/6063735.

37. Bateman, M6036 Ironbark Zinc Limited Desktop Study Report Citronen Zinc Project – Greenland, (2011) http://ironbark.gl/ wp-content/uploads/2015/08/M6034-1700-001-Rev-0-CitronenZinc-Desktop-Study-Report.pdf.

38. M. Mahon, S. Peng, and A. Alfantazi, Can. J. Chem. Eng., 92, 633–642 (2014) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ cjce.21880.

39. OUTOTEC-OYJ, OUTOTEC OYJ Press Release Novemb.

30, 2017 (2017) https://www.outotec.com/company/media/ news/2017/outotec-to-deliver-zinc-electrowinning-technologyto-zgh-boleslaw-in-poland/.

40. C. A. Mansfield, B. M. Depro, and V. A. Perry, The Chlorine Industry: A Profile Draft Report, Research Triangle Park, (2000) https://www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/regdata/EIAs/chlorine profile. pdf.

41. I. Abam Engineers, Final Report on Process Engineering and Economic Evaluations of Diaphragm and Membrane Chloride Cell Technologies, Federal Way, (1980) https://www.osti.gov/ servlets/purl/6540048/.

42. C. Stinn, K. Nose, T. Okabe, and A. Allanore, Met. Trans. B, (2017) http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11663-017-1107-5.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

49

Publish with us THE MOST TRUSTED RESOURCES IN ELECTROCHEMISTRY The Electrochemical Society Book Series provides authoritative, detailed accounts on specific topics in electrochemistry and solid state science and technology. These titles are sponsored by ECS and published in cooperation with Wiley.

Through our partnership with Wiley, ECS’s books program is able to: Provide you with a world-class support network of publishing professionals to help you develop and publish your best work Ensure that your work reaches the widest possible audience, through ECS’s network of over 8,000 members worldwide, coupled with Wiley’s more than 200 years of expertise in delivering high-quality content to global markets From the moment your book is brought on board to long after it hits shelves, we’re with you every step of the way to ensure you feel supported, nurtured, and heard as an author.

UHLIG’S CORROSION HANDBOOK THIRD EDITION Edited by

Intergranular corrosion

Pitting

Stress corrosion cracking Transgranular

Fatigue

Intergranular

19–CD17519

General corrosion

R . WINSTON REVIE

Interested in publishing with us?

Learn more at www.electrochem.org/books 50

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Looking at Patent Law: Defining the Meaning and Scope of Claims through Claim Construction; Insights from the Lithium Battery Patent Infringement Case

by E. Jennings Taylor and Maria Inman

+

-

I

n this installment of the “Looking at Patent Law” articles, we discuss “claim construction.” Claim construction is the process employed in patent infringement cases whereby the courts interpret the meaning and scope of the claims of a patent.

Recall, Giles S. Rich, former Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC, i.e., the patent court) from 1982 until his passing in 1999, noted1

“The name of the game is the claim.”

As discussed previously,2 patents are a type of “intellectual property,” the others being copyrights, trade secrets, and trademarks.

U.S. Patent Law stipulates that patents3 “…shall have the attributes of personal property…”

While the “scope” of tangible property is defined by precise boundaries in a deed, the scope of a patent is defined more imprecisely by the claims. Consequently, the intellectual property “boundaries” defined by the claims are often referred to as the “metes and bounds” of the patent. The “metes and bounds” description is derived from an early system of surveying real property where the boundaries were described by the local geography of the parcel of land and are therefore somewhat imprecise.4 The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) guidance on claim grammar stipulates that each claim shall be only one sentence no matter how complicated or many lines are required to describe the claim5 “Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period.”

Regarding the claim format, CAFC Circuit Justice S. Jay Plager notes6 “[The claim format]…presents one of the most bizarre sentence structures in the English language.”

Justice Plager continues to humorously note, using the language of Yoda from Star Wars “The writing of English this is not.”

Claim construction is the process where the meaning and scope of the claims are defined. To paraphrase former CAFC Circuit Justice Paul Michel and his coauthor, claim construction impacts virtually every aspect of patent law and litigation.7 The “stages” of claim construction begin with the inventor’s disclosure of the invention to his or her patent attorney. Subsequently, the USPTO patent examiner plays a pivotal role in claim construction during the prosecution of the patent application. Finally, it is against this backdrop that claim construction is addressed by the courts in patent infringement cases.

In patent infringement cases, claim construction is a critical step in the proceedings to determine the meaning and scope of a patent.

Once the meaning and scope of the claims of the relevant patent are established, the plaintiff and defendant generally understand which party will prevail and the case is often settled out of court.

Prior to reviewing the “stages” of claim construction, we provide a brief historical perspective on the development of claims in the U.S. patent system. We conclude with an example of claim construction during a lithium battery patent infringement case.

Historical Development of Patent Claims A concise history of the development of patent claims is provided

by Clause 8 Publishing,8 a publishing company inspired by the patent clause in the U.S. Constitution.9 Initially, U.S. patent law did not require claims to be part of the patent specification. Robert Fulton is credited as being the first inventor to use a claim in his steamboat patent.10 Fulton’s 1811 patent claimed “Having been the first to demonstrate the superior advantages of a water wheel or wheels, I claim as my exclusive right, the use of two wheels, one over each side of the boat to take the purchase of the water…”

The Patent Act of 1836 required the inventor to include claims in the patent application. The claiming style used during the period

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

(continued on next page) 51

Taylor and Inman

(continued from previous page)

from 1836 to 1870 was predominately in the form of central claiming.

In central claiming, the inventor identifies the central features of the invention in an analogous manner to a “No Trespass” sign. With central claiming, the courts, as well as other inventors, were left to interpret the breadth and scope of the patent boundaries around this “No Trespass” sign.11 In effect, central claiming allowed the patent examiner to determine novelty,12 but was ineffective in contributing to claim construction since the breadth of coverage was highly subjective.

The Patent Act of 1870 required the inventor to claim the invention in terms of its boundaries. In contrast to the “No Trespass” sign of central claiming, the peripheral claiming approach is analogous to a fence with “No Trespass” signs. As suggested by a former intellectual property strategist for a large corporate R&D enterprise, the inventor attempts to strategically define an exclusive region in a technology area with the fenced boundary of peripheral claiming.13 The purpose of peripheral claiming was to provide the courts as well as other inventors with a better understanding of the breadth and scope of the patent rights “defined” by the fenced boundary.

Current patent statutes continue to require peripheral claiming14,15 “The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.”

Initial Inventor-Patent Attorney Claim Construction The first stage of establishing the potential meaning and scope of the claims of an invention begins when the inventor prepares an internal Invention Disclosure (ID) document for review by company management or by the university’s Technology Transfer Office (TTO). Once the decision to file a patent application is affirmed, the inventor generally works with a patent practitioner (attorney or agent) to prepare the patent application for submission to the USPTO. While the patent attorney is required to have a technical background generally equivalent to a bachelor’s degree, the inventors are often communicating in scientific or highly specialized technical language, which is generally challenging to patent practitioners. In addition, patent attorneys are communicating in the highly specialized legal language required for the patent application, which is generally challenging to inventors. Inventors and patent attorneys alike have recognized the difficulties in writing the patent application and claims for the subject invention. Similarly, the courts have acknowledged this challenge16 “…the nature of language makes it impossible to capture the essence of a thing in a patent application [claim].”

As described previously in a plating cell invention case study resulting in four U.S. patents at Faraday Technology, Inc., we begin the ID with a problem-solution statement17,18 “The problem(s) of _______ is (are) solved by _______.”

The problem-solution statement requires the inventor to succinctly capture the essence of the invention and communicates the same to the patent attorney. More specifically, the …problem of… begins to define the specific failings of the prior art and the …is solved by… begins to define the key attributes of the invention. As suggested by a former in-house counsel for Bell Labs, the patent attorney translates the problem-solution statement into claim form using three steps19 1. Remove the problem related language but retain the languageproviding context for the problem.

2. Stitch the remaining verbiage into one or more claims.

3. Compare the resulting claim(s) to the problem-solution statement to insure accurate translation.

52

The inventor desires a broad claim scope to cover the actual invention as well as future potential infringing variations suggested by competitors. In addition to broad scope, the patent attorney also recognizes that a broad claim scope potentially encompasses more prior art20,21 and is consequently easier to invalidate. Therefore, the patent practitioner drafts claims with a broad scope and claims with a narrow scope in order to survive invalidity charges in a potential future infringement hearing. As explained by CAFC Judge Giles S. Rich22 “…a patent that is strong in that it contains broad claims which adequately protect the invention so that they are hard to design around is weak in that it may be easier to invalidate in court…a patent with narrow claims…is weak as protection and as incentive to invest but strong in that a court will not likely invalidate.”

Consequently, the claims in the patent application are written in both broad independent form and narrower dependent form.23 The independent claims have the broadest scope, while the dependent claims add limitations resulting in narrower scope.

Claim Construction by the USPTO Examiner Once the patent application is submitted to the USPTO, the examiner reviews the patent specification and pending claims for written description requirements and enablement of the patent claims.24 The patent examiner is required by statute to give the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation based on the specification.25 The process flow the examiner currently uses to determine the meaning of the claims is summarized in Fig. 1.26 The process begins with a determination of support in the specification for the given claim term. The first question is: Does the term have a “plain meaning” to one of ordinary skill in the art?27 If the answer is YES, the next question is: Is the plain meaning contradicted by the specification? If the answer is NO, then the plain meaning is used for the term in question. If the answer is YES, then the special meaning in the specification is used to interpret the term as the applicant can be their own lexicographer.28 If the term does not have a “plain meaning” to one of ordinary skill in the art, then the next question is: Does the specification provide a meaning for the term? If the answer is YES, the meaning in the specification is used to interpret the term. If the answer is NO, then the examiner applies the broadest reasonable interpretation and the claim is rejected for failing to14 “…distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or joint inventor regards as the invention.”

This forces the inventor to amend and better define the indefinite term and facilitates claim interpretation by the examiner.

After establishing support for the claims in the specification and determining the meaning of the claim terms, the examiner reviews the patent application for patentability in terms of subject matter29 as well as novelty30 and non-obviousness31 in view of the prior art.

In summary, the patent examination process consists of the inventor advocating for independent claims with a broad scope whereas the patent examiner advocates for the public interest by limiting the breadth of the independent claims in view of the specification and prior art. The arguments/counter-arguments during the examination of a patent application is publicly available in the prosecution history (file wrapper) on the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system.32 We have illustrated the examination process for a number of electrochemical inventions, including a lithium metal phosphate battery,33 an enzyme based glucose sensor,34 fullerenes,35 and a regenerative fuel cell.36

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

FIG. 1. Claim interpretation flow for USPTO examiners.

IDENTIFY THE CLAIM TERM AND DETERMINE WHETHER AND WHERE THERE IS SUPPORT IN THE SPECIFICATION TO SATISFY ENABLEMENT REQUIREMENT.

“[claim construction is] exclusively within the province of the court.”

The rationale behind the Supreme Court and CAFC rulings was to remove the uncertainty associated with claim construction by juries by having judges determine the meaning and scope of claims based on their legal training and experience DOES THE TERM IS THERE AN DOES THE YES NO NO YES in interpreting legal documents such as statutes and HAVE AN ORDINARY EXPRESS INTENT IN SPECIFICATION & CUSTOMARY THE SPECIFICATION contracts.40 PROVIDE A MEANING MEANING TO ONE OF TO PROVIDE A FOR THE TERM? The CAFC and Supreme Court Markman ORDINARY SKILL IN SPECIAL MEANING THE ART? TO THE TERM? decisions ushered in the era of pretrial “Markman hearings” to establish the meaning and scope of NO YES the claims in patent infringement cases. While the Markman decisions established that claim construction is a matter of law for the courts to USE THE APPLY THE USE THE decide, clear guidance from the CAFC on the USE THE SPECIAL MEANING BROADEST ORDINARY & DEFINITION – procedure, sources, and hierarchy of sources for PROVIDED IN THE REASONABLE CUSTOMARY ACKNOWLEDGE & SPECIFICATION. INTERPRETATION – MEANING. determination of the meaning and scope of claim IDENTIFY SPECIAL REJECT AS DEFINITION IN THE terms was lacking.

INDEFINITE. OFFICE ACTION. For example, when patent infringement cases were appealed to the CAFC, the cases were decided Fig 1. Claim interpretation flow for USPTO examiners. by a subset of the 12 CAFC justices consisting of three judge panels. These panels reviewed the claim construction de novo (anew or from the beginning) without deference Claim Construction by the Courts to the District Court claim construction. Based on their approaches to claim construction, the CAFC judges could be generally designated Patent infringement cases begin in the District Courts and as “proceduralist” jurists or “holistic” jurists. almost always involve a patent validity challenge in addition to the The “proceduralist” justices emphasized the ordinary meaning of infringement charge. The evaluation of both infringement and validity terms in the claim language and often relied on extrinsic sources, hinge on the determination of the meaning and scope of the claims, such as dictionaries, treatises, and expert testimony. The “holistic” i.e., claim construction. Defendants in most patent infringement cases justices emphasized intrinsic sources, such as the claim language in elect a jury trial. In these cases (prior to 1995), claim construction light of the specification and prosecution history. The outcome of a occurred during jury deliberations and was not a part of the court’s patent infringement appeal to the CAFC was highly dependent on the public record. Consequently, appeals to the CAFC were challenging composition of the three-judge panel.41 Since the composition of the since there was no documentation of the juries’ claim construction. three-judge CAFC panel was not known until the litigants appeared As noted by CAFC Circuit Judge Paul Michel37 in court, a considerable amount of uncertainty regarding the patent rights remained.

“In the jury verdict appeals I have reviewed, I cannot recall This issue was addressed in an en banc review by the CAFC in even one in which the trial judge defined the literal scope of Phillips v. AWH Corp.42 In this ruling, the CAFC established the the claim for the jury in clear, comprehensive, and mandatory sources and hierarchy of sources in interpreting claims: instructions...”

1. The asserted claim itself.

Justice Michel goes on to state: 2. Specification.

3. Other related claims.

“When the court delegates both [claim] construction and 4. Prosecution/examination history of the patent in question. infringement to the jury’s discretion, the jury is free to do 5. Prosecution/examination history of related “family” patent almost anything it wishes.” applications.

6. Cited prior art and prior art incorporated by reference.

Claim construction by juries added considerable uncertainty 7. Dictionaries, learned treatises, expert witnesses appointed by regarding the meaning and scope of patent rights. the court.

In an attempt to lessen this uncertainty, the CAFC conducted an 8. Inventor testimony and expert witnesses on behalf of the en banc review of a patent infringement case. An en banc (before plaintiff or defendant. the bench) hearing is a review and ruling by all twelve judges of the Federal Circuit for the purpose of providing clarity to a specific The preference is given to intrinsic evidence (items 1 to 6); judicial issue. In 1995 in Markman v. Westview Instruments the followed by unbiased extrinsic evidence, such as dictionaries, learned 38 CAFC ruled that treatises, court appointed expert witnesses; followed by biased extrinsic evidence, such as inventor and expert witness testimony for “…the interpretation and construction of patent claims, the plaintiff or defendant. The intrinsic evidence is the primary source which define the scope of the patentee’s rights under the for claim construction and the use of extrinsic sources are permitted patent, is a matter of law exclusively for the courts.” as long as they do not contradict the intrinsic evidence.43 The CAFC further ruled “…the construction given the claims is reviewed de novo [anew or from the beginning] on appeal.”

In 1996, the case was appealed to the Supreme Court based on the argument of the patentee’s 7th Amendment right to a jury trial. The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the CAFC ruling stating39

Lithium Battery Infringement Case – Markman Hearing In 2005 and 2006, A123 Systems, Inc. received communications from Hydro-Quebec (HQ) alleging that the cathode materials used in A123 batteries infringed U.S. Patents 5,910,38244 and 6,514,64045 directed towards secondary lithium batteries. Both patents were (continued on next page)

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

53

Taylor and Inman

(continued from previous page)

invented by Prof. John B. Goodenough and his research team at the University of Texas and assigned to the Board of Regents, The University of Texas System. Prof. Goodenough is a recipient of many awards from The Electrochemical Society and a corecipient of the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his groundbreaking rechargeable lithium battery work.46 The University of Texas had licensed both patents, as well as related pending patent applications to HydroQuebec.

On April 7, 2006, A123 filed suit in the U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts seeking a declaratory judgement that the A123 products do not infringe the ‘382 and ‘640 patents and that the patents are invalid.

On September 11, 2006, the University of Texas with HydroQuebec (UT/HQ) sued A123 Systems, Inc., Black & Decker Corp., and Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. (Defendants) for infringement of the ‘382 and ‘640 patents in U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas (District Court).

The Defendants successfully petitioned the USPTO to conduct a reexamination proceeding to determine if the ‘382 and ‘640 patents were valid in view of new prior art.47 During reexamination, the USPTO rejected all of the original claims of the ‘382 and ‘640 patents. UT then narrowed their claims in the ‘382 and ‘640 patents to overcome certain prior art and validity challenges. The ex parte reexamination certificate was issued April 15, 2008. Exemplary reexamined independent claims 1, 3, and 6 of the ‘382 patent with deleted text in [brackets] and inserted text in italics are reproduced herein: Claim 1. A cathode [material for] in a rechargeable electrochemical cell, said cell also comprising, an anode and an electrolyte, the cathode comprising [a] an ordered olivine compound having the formula LiMPO4, where M is [at least one] a first-row transition-metal cation selected from the group consisting of Fe, Mn, Ni, and Ti. Claim 3. [The] A cathode [material of claim 1] in a rechargeable electrochemical cell, said cell also comprising, an anode and an electrolyte, the cathode comprising an ordered olivine compound having the formula LiMPO4, where M is [further defined as being] a combination of first-row transition-metal cations[, at least one of which is] selected from the group consisting of Mn, Fe, [Co] Ti, and Ni. Claim 6. A secondary battery comprising, an anode, a cathode and an electrolyte, said cathode comprising an ordered olivine compound having the formula LiMPO4, where M is [at least one] a first-row transition-metal cation selected from the group consisting of Fe, Mn, Ni, and Ti. Note independent claims 1/3 and 6 of the ‘382 patent are claiming a cathode and a battery, respectively. Further note, original dependent claim 3 became independent claim 3 after reexamination by removal of the reference to claim 1, i.e., “material of claim 1.” In addition, claim 1 claims a cathode where M is a first-row transition-metal cation. Claim 3 claims a cathode where M is a combination of first row transition-metal cations.

Independent claim 1 from the ‘640 patent, after reexamination is presented herein:

54

Claim 1. A cathode [material for] in a rechargeable electrochemical cell, said cell also comprising an anode and an electrolyte, the cathode [material] comprising a compound of the modified olivine structure having the formula: LixM1-(d+t+q+r)DdTtQqRrXO4 wherein: [N] M is a cation of a metal selected from the group consisting of Fe, Mn, [Co,] Ti, Ni or mixtures thereof; D is a metal having a +2oxidation state selected from the group consisting of Mg2+, Ni2+, [Co2+,] Zn2+, Cu2+, and Ti2+; T is a metal having a +3 oxidation state selected from the group consisting of Al3+, Ti3+, Cr3+, Fe3+, Mn3+, Ga3+, Zn3+, and V3+; Q is a metal having a +4 oxidation state selected from the group consisting of Ti4+; Ge4+; Sn4+, and V4+; R is a metal having a +5 oxidation state elected from the group consisting of V5+; Nb5+, and Ta5+; X comprises Si, S, P, V or mixtures thereof; and 0≤x≤1; and 0≤d, t, q, r≤1, where at least one of d, t, q, and r is not 0.

Independent claim 1 of the ‘640 patent claims a cathode.

After four years of wrangling over intricate legal issues and reexamination of the ‘382 and ‘640 patents, a Markman hearing was convened on December 2, 2010. The District Court’s “Memorandum Opinion and Order on Claim Construction” was issued on March 29, 2011.48 We illustrate the Markman hearing by summarizing the highlights.

The District Court cited the CAFC ruling in Phillips v. AWH Corp.42 as a “bedrock principle” of patent law that the “claims of a patent define the invention to which the patentee is entitled the right to exclude.” The District Court further stated that the determination of patent infringement is a two-step analysis: Step I: Claim construction to determine their true meaning and scope.

Step II: Compare the properly construed claims to the device accused of infringing.

The District Court cited the CAFC ruling in Embrex. V. Serv.

Eng’g. Corp.,49 and cautioned that “Claim construction is simply a way of elaborating the normally terse claim language in order to understand and explain, but not to change, the scope of the claims.”

Citing the CAFC ruling in Vitronics Corp. v. Conceptronic, Inc.,50 the District Court stated that after the claims themselves, the specification is “…the single best guide to the meaning of a disputed term…”

The District Court acknowledged the hierarchy of the various intrinsic sources followed by extrinsic sources as described above and noted that extrinsic sources should not be used if the intrinsic sources unambiguously describe the scope of the patented invention.

More specifically, the District Court emphasized that consideration of the specification is typically dispositive for claim construction.

For this case, the District Court found that the intrinsic evidence was sufficient to construe the disputed claim language and did not rely on the extrinsic evidence provided by the plaintiff or defendant.

Interestingly during the Markman proceedings, UT/HQ suggested the Defendants were “dictionary shopping”, applying different dictionaries to different claim terms/phrases. The District Court pointed out this challenge with extrinsic sources “Which one does one select as authoritative?”

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Table I. Construction of Agreed Terms

TERM/PHRASE.

AGREED CONSTRUCTION

“ordered olivine compound”

A repeating arrangement of atoms in an olivine crystal form with a plurality of planes defined by zigzag chains and linear chains, where a first metal (M1) occupies the linear chains of octahedral sites and a second metal (M2) occupies the zigzag chains of octahedral sites, with generally no mixing between the two types of sites.

“ordered olivine structure” “modified olivine compound”

A repeating arrangement of atoms in the olivine crystal form that is modified by substitution of one or more elements, with ions of the same or different charges, at either or both the catatonic (M2) or anionic (XO4) site.

“modified olivine structure” “cation” “cations”

Ion(s) having a positive charge.

“a cathode in a rechargeable electrochemical cell, said cell A positive electrode (cathode) in a rechargeable electrochemical cell, which cell also contains, but is also comprising an anode and an electrolyte” not limited to, one or more anodes (negative electrodes) and one or more electrolytes. “cathode comprising”

The cathode must contain the ordered olivine compound recited, but may contain other things as well, such as other cathode materials.

“selected from the group consisting of” “M is Fe”

One member selected from (and only from) the identified group individually.

M is Fe and only Fe.

“secondary battery comprising an anode, a cathode, and an electrolyte”

“one or more…selected from the group consisting of” “selected from the group consisting of… or mixtures thereof”

A rechargeable battery containing, but not limited to, one or more negative electrodes (anodes), one or more positive electrodes (cathodes), and one or more electrolytes.

One member selected from (and only from) the identified group individually, or a combination of members selected from (and only from) the identified group.

The reexamined patents with the narrowed claims, i.e., not the original claims, were the subject of the Markman hearing. The reexamined claims contained sixteen terms/phrases critical to the determination of the meaning and scope of the claims. UT/HQ and the Defendants independently submitted claim construction charts for the claim terms/phrases at issue. The meaning and scope of nine terms/phrases were agreed to by the parties and seven terms/phrases were disputed by the parties. The agreed terms were accepted by the Court and are presented in Table I. Regarding the disputed claim terms/phrases, the Defendants strategy was for the District Court to conclude that the claims of the ‘382 and “640 patent do not cover a cathode or secondary battery containing cobalt. The alleged infringing battery/cathode contained elements clearly within the scope of the ‘382 and ‘640 patents as well as cobalt. If the claim construction permits cobalt, then the Defendant’s battery would likely “read on” the ‘382 and ‘640 patents and hence infringe. While we will not review all the disputed claim terms/phrases, we will highlight the most relevant to the key issue of claim construction permitting cobalt.

In Table II, we present the disputed claim phrase “ordered olivine compound having the formula LiMPO4 where M is a first-row transition metal cation selected from the group consisting of…“ with the suggested construction of UT/HQ and that of the Defendants.

The parties basically disagree whether or not to construe the claim as permitting “something else” such as dopants or impurities, e.g. cobalt.

Table II. Plaintiff/Defendant Construction of Disputed Term “ordered olivine compound having the formula LiMPO4 where M is a firstrow transition metal cation selected from the group consisting of…”

UT/HQ CONSTRUCTION An ordered olivine compound constituting lithium (Li), one metal selected from the group: Fe, Mn, Ni, or Ti, and phosphate (PO4), in generally equal proportions.

A123 CONSTRUCTION An ordered olivine compound composed of atoms in the following relationship: only one lithium (Li), one and only one metal M (Fe, Mn, Ni, or Ti), and only one phosphate (PO4) (and nothing else).

UT/HQ generally argued that “no compounds, especially crystals, are pure and have exact and precise formulas.” The Defendants argued that the claim language, the specification and prosecution history all require a specific 1:1:1 stoichiometric ratio and do not mention the presence of dopants/impurities. The Court generally agreed with the Defendant’s construction for the stoichiometry.

Regarding the dopant/impurity issue, the District Court stated that the parties were essentially seeking resolution of the underlying dispute; whether or not the ‘382 and ‘640 patents cover doping or impurities to improve performance by the addition of cobalt. More specifically, the impurity/doping issue would be dispositive to the issue of whether or not the inclusion of additional components such as cobalt would be covered by the ‘382 and ‘640 patents. The District Court explained its Markman hearing role as limited to construing only the claim language itself.51 In essence, the District Court stated that the matter of doping and/or impurities and hence the inclusion of cobalt would have to be resolved in the Step II trial phase of the infringement proceeding.

In Table III, we present the disputed claim phrase “X comprises” from claim 1 of the ‘640 patent with the suggested construction of UT/HQ and that of the Defendants. The parties devoted the largest amount of their briefs to the construction of this phrase with the question being: Should “X comprises” be interpreted as “open” or “closed”? If the term is open, than the phrase would read as “X includes but is not limited to” the listed elements “and an infringer could not escape liability merely by adding something to the claim.” (continued on next page) Table III. Plaintiff/Defendant Construction of Disputed Term “X comprises…”

UT/HQ CONSTRUCTION

A123 CONSTRUCTION

X includes, but is not limited to, Si, X contains one or more of the S, P, or V. elements listed (Si, S, P, V, or mixtures thereof).

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

55

Taylor and Inman

(continued from previous page)

If the term is closed, then the phrase would read as “X includes the listed elements and nothing in addition.” To reiterate, the Defendant’s strategy is to ensure that the ‘382 and ‘640 patents do not cover additional components such as cobalt.

Both parties acknowledged that the term “comprises” is generally understood to be open, as is the guidance to patent examiners.52 The District Court further noted from precedent that “comprises” is presumed almost always open unless the Defendants could demonstrate that UT/HQ meant for the term to be closed.53 The Defendants argued based on the prosecution history of the reexamined patents that UT/HQ disclaims cobalt in the context of “X”. While the District Court acknowledged that UT/HQ removed cobalt from its reexamined claims, cobalt was only removed in the context of “M” and “M, D, T, Q” (see claims 1/6 and claim 1) of the ‘382 and ‘640 patents, respectively. UT/HQ did not remove cobalt in the context of “X” during reexamination.

In addition, the District Court noted that in many of the agreed to terms/phrases the parties defined “comprising” as open and “consisting of” as closed per convention.52 The District Court reasoned if UT/HQ meant for “X comprises” to be closed, they would have used “consists of” as they did with other claim terms/phrases (see Table I). Citing CAFC precedent, the District Court noted that different words in a patent are presumed to have different meanings.54 The District Court reasoned that to impart the same meaning to “comprising” and “consisting of” would “…eviscerate the patentee’s purpose of using different terminology and…[lead to] an untenable result for this claim construction.”

The District Court concluded that “X comprises” is to be interpreted as open.

After hearing the arguments from the parties as summarized above, the District Court generated a summary claim chart with its construction of the disputed terms/phrases in the ‘382 and ‘640 patents. This claim construction of disputed terms/phrases combined with the claim construction of terms/phrases agreed to by the parties concluded the District Court’s work in the Markman hearing. Step I (claim construction) of the patent infringement proceeding was concluded on March 29, 2011.

In summary, the Defendants were not able to achieve their objective that the ‘382 and ‘640 patents did not cover additions of cobalt. At the risk of oversimplifying, the critical claim construction did not revolve around complex technical issues. Rather, the critical claim construction permitting the coverage of cobalt by the ‘382 and ‘640 patents was the legal interpretation of “X comprises” as an open-ended term/phrase. This case emphasizes that patents are legal documents and the need for the combined expertise of the inventor and patent practitioner.

On June 7, 2011, UT/HQ filed a new complaint in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas alleging infringement on newly issued U.S. Patent Nos. 7,960,058; 7,964,308; and 7,972,728.

On June 27, 2011, UT/HQ and A123 entered into a court ordered mediation session. On October 31, 2011, A123 entered into a Settlement Agreement and a License Agreement with HQ/UT. The terms of the license were not disclosed.55 The A123 decision to settle with UT/HQ was presumably influenced by the fact that they were not successful in obtaining a favorable claim construction excluding cobalt from coverage in the ‘382 and ‘640 patents as well as the issuance of more patents providing additional fence posts to the UT/ HQ intellectual property. As in most Markman hearings, the claim construction was dispositive.

56

Summary In this installment of our “Looking at Patent Law” series, we note that the first patent claim is generally attributed to Robert Fulton, although claims were not required by the Patent Statute at the time.

After reviewing the historical origin and onset of peripheral patent claims with 1870 Patent Statute, we suggest that patent claims define the “metes and bounds” of the property right. The key challenge with the property analogy is that the patent claim is a fuzzy boundary due to the difficulty in capturing the essence of an invention in the claim language.

We address the initial definition of the meaning and scope of patent claims arising from the interaction of the inventor and patent practitioner and suggest a way to begin this process with a problem/ solution statement in the Invention Disclosure. We also discuss the claim construction occurring between the inventor/patent practitioner and the USPTO examiner and illustrate the examiner’s flow chart for determining the meaning and scope of the claims.

After reviewing the historical development of the use and hierarchy of intrinsic and extrinsic sources for claim construction by the courts, we review the Markman hearing associated with the patent infringement case associated with the lithium battery cathode material. Interestingly, the infringement matter hinged on the legal interpretation of the term “comprising.” Furthermore, as evident in the examiner’s review, legal proceeding and Markman hearing, the specification is of paramount importance in claim construction.

Since the specification begins with the preparation of the patent application, the inventor is urged to work diligently with their patent practitioner, who has considerable expertise in the preparation of this legal document. With this article, we hope to demystify the patent claiming and interpretation process and better prepare electrochemical and solid state scientists, engineers, and technologists to interact with their patent practitioner regarding their inventions. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F07202IF.

About the Authors E. Jennings Taylor is the founder of Faraday Technology, Inc., a small business focused on developing innovative electrochemical processes and technologies based on pulse and pulse reverse electrolytic principles. Taylor leads Faraday’s patent and commercialization strategy and has negotiated numerous via field of use licenses as well as patent sales. In addition to technical publications and presentations, Taylor is an inventor on 40 patents. Taylor is admitted to practice before the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) in patent cases as a patent agent (Registration No. 53,676) and is a member of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA). Taylor has been a member of ECS for 38 years and is a fellow of ECS. He may be reached at jenningstaylor@faradaytechnology.com. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3410-0267 Maria Inman is the research director of Faraday Technology, Inc., where she serves as principal investigator on numerous project development activities, and manages the company’s pulse and pulse reverse research project portfolio. In addition to technical publications and presentations, she is competent in patent drafting and patent drawing preparation and is an inventor on seven patents. Inman is a member of ASTM and has been a member of ECS for 21 years.

Inman serves ECS as a member of numerous committees. She may be reached at mariainman@faradaytechnology.com. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2560-8410

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

References 1. G. S. Rich, Int’l Rev. Indus. Prop. & Copyright L., 21, 497 (1990).

2. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 26(1), 41 (2017).

3. 35 U.S.C. §261 Ownership; assignment.

4. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 26(4), 57 (2017).

5. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §608.01(m) Form of Claims.

6. S. J. Plager “Challenges for Intellectual Property Law in the Twenty-First Century: Indeterminacy and Other Problems” U. IL L. Rev. 69-81 (2001).

7. P. Michel and J. Battaglia “Predictability and Patent Law Consistency: The Federal Circuit Needs to Vote En Banc” IPWatchdog (www.ipwatchdog.com) Feb. 3, 2020. (accessed March 9, 2020) 8. P. S. Menell, M. A Lemley, and R. P. Merges, Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age: 2018, Clause 8 Publishing, Berkley, CA (2018).

9. United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8.

10. K. B. Lutz, J. Pat. Off. Soc’y, 20, 134 (1938).

11. D. L. Burk and M. A. Lemley, U. Penn. L. Rev., 157: 1743 (2009).

12. M. Fisher, in Patent Law in Global Perspective, R. Okediji and M. Bagley, Editors, Oxford University Press New York, NY (2014).

13. H. J. Knight, Patent Strategy for Researchers and Research Managers, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. West Sussex, England (1996).

14. 35 U.S.C. §112(b) Conclusion.

15. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 26(3), 39 (2017).

16. Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., 535 U.S. 722 (2002).

17. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 27(1), 37 (2018).

18. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 27(2), 47 (2018).

19. R. Slusky, Invention Analysis and Claiming: A Patent Lawyer’s Guide, American Bar Association Washington, DC (2013).

20. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 27(3), 33 (2018).

21. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 27(4), 35 (2018).

22. G. S. Rich, Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 35, 641 (1967).

23. 35 U.S.C. §112(c) Form.

24. 35 U.S.C. §112(a) In General.

25. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §2111 Claim Interpretation; Broadest Reasonable Interpretation.

26. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §2111.01(V) Summary of Determining the Meaning of a Claim Term that Does Not Invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f).

27. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §2111.01(III) “Plain Meaning” Refers to the Ordinary and Customary Meaning Given to the Term by Those of Ordinary Skill in the Art. 28. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §2111.01(IV) Applicant may be Own Lexicographer and/or may Disavow Claim Scope.

29. 35 U.S.C. §101 Inventions Patentable.

30. 35 U.S.C. §102 Conditions for Patentability; Novelty.

31. 35 U.S.C. §103 Conditions for Patentability; Non-obvious Subject Matter.

32. USPTO Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair

33. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 28(2), 39 (2019).

34. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 28(3), 37 (2019).

35. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 28(4), 43 (2019).

36. E. J. Taylor and M. Inman, Electrochem. Soc. Interface, 29(1), 43 (2020).

37. P. R. Michel Am. U. L. Rev., 43, 1231 (1994).

38. Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967, 970 (Fed. Cir. 1995) 39. Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 (1996).

40. A. T. Zidel, Seton Hall L. Rev. 33: 711 (2003).

41. R. P. Wagner and L. Petherbridge, U. PA L. Rev., 152, 1105 (2004).

42. Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

43. P. S. Menell, M. D. Powers, and S. C. Carlson, Berkley Technology Law Journal, 25, 713 (2011).

44. J. B. Goodenough, A. K. Padhi, K. S. Nanjundaswamy, and C. Masqueller, Pat. No. 5,910,382 Jun. 8, 1999.

45. M. Armand, J. B. Goodenough, A. K. Padhi, K. S. Nanjundaswamy, and C. Masqueller, Pat. No. 6,514,640 Feb. 4, 2003.

46. M. M. Doeff, Electrochem. Soc. Interface 28(1), 8 (2020).

47. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §2210 Request for Ex Parte Reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 302.

48. The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System and Hydro-Quebec v A123 Systems, Inc., Black & Decker Corp., and Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Civil Action No. 3:06-CV1655-B March 29, 2011.

49. Embrex, Inc. v. Serv. Eng’g Corp. 216 F.3d 1343, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2000).

50. Vitronics Corp. v Conceptronic, Inc. 90 F.3d 1576, 1581-82 (Fed. Cir. 1996).

51. Johnson Worldwide Assoc. v. Zebco Corp. 175 F.3d 990 (Fed. Cir. 1999).

52. Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) §2111.03 Transitional Phrases.

53. Dippin’ Dots, Inc. v. Mosey, 476 F.3d 1337, 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2007).

54. Innova/Pure Water, Inc. v. Safari Water Filtration Sys., Inc., 381 F.3d 1111, 1119-20 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

55. A123 Systems, Inc. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Annual Report Form 10-K for Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2011.

Have you missed any of these educational articles

by Taylor and Inman?

Visit the complete collection!

www.iopscience.iop.org/ journal/1944-8783/page/looking-atpatent-law-collection

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

57

Join a Powerful Partnership!

The ECS institutional membership program provides content access, member related discounts, as well as advertising, exhibit, and sponsorship opportunities.

Memberships are available for all types of organizations.

Institutional membership packages start as low as $1,250 per year!

STANDARD PACKAGE BENEFITS • Profile on the ECS website, featured on the institutional members webpage, and in the ECS Organizational Member Directory

• Listing in quarterly Interface and biannual meeting publications

• Eligible for annual Leadership Circle Awards recognition • Customizable options

MEMBERShIP TIERS

Visionary

Benefactor

Cultivating

Patron

Contact Anna Olsen at sponsorship@electrochem.org 58

Endorsing

Sponsoring

Sustaining

to customize a packageSociety to meet your organization’s needs!

The Electrochemical Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

T ECH HIGHLIGH T S Studies on Oxygen Recombination at the Rechargeable Iron Electrode in an Alkaline Battery Alkaline nickel-iron (NiFe) batteries could provide a safe and inexpensive option for energy storage from renewables. However, commercial NiFe cells currently have a vented design, meaning hydrogen and oxygen generated in the cell are vented, and cells must be maintained by adding water. Researchers at the University of Southern California have addressed the engineering challenges required for a sealed “maintenance-free” NiFe battery in which hydrogen and oxygen recombination occurs within the cell. They focused on oxygen reduction on the charged Fe electrode, finding it to be a four-electron mechanism that is mass transport limited and coupled to the reversible oxidation of Fe active material.

However, the rate of oxygen reduction that can be accommodated is highly dependent on the cell design, particularly the amount of electrolyte in the cell. A semi-flooded design was able to reduce oxygen at a C/16 rate, as opposed to a flooded design at C/125. The next challenge lies in the fact that a semi-flooded design, while allowing ample recombination, also results in high cell resistance and a drop in capacity.

Further design refinements will be needed to achieve the oxygen transport required for recombination while also maintaining cell performance.

From: A. S. Rajan, D. Mitra, A. Irshad, et al., J. Electrochem. Soc., 167, 040502 (2020).

Modeling Overcharge at Graphite Electrodes: Plating and Dissolution of Lithium Lithium plating over the graphite anode instead of intercalation is a common problem for an electric vehicle (EV) lithium ion battery during fast charging.

There have been several modeling approaches to simulate lithium plating and electrodissolution processes: one method is to use the conventional Butler-Volmer (B-V) equation, which is only valid when bulk lithium with unit activity covers the anode surface and wrongly describes electrodissolution in the absence of plated Li. Another method utilizes a cathodic Tafel expression for lithium plating; however, it does not allow for electrodissolution.

Baker and Verbrugge developed a modeling approach to overcome the aforementioned mathematical limitation: they developed a new expression of open-circuit voltage (OCV), such that it is a function of surface coverage Γ_ref () when the surface coverage of plated Li is small and is equal to zero (vs.

Li/Li+) when the coverage is large enough.

This new form of OCV was incorporated in the B-V equation to account for both Li plating and electrodissolution, enabling the direct interaction between plated Li and vacant sites in the graphite anode.

This improved approach was demonstrated through a simplified single particle model and showed good approximation when the system was charged/discharged at a 1C rate.

From: D. R. Baker, M. W. Verbrugge, J. Electrochem. Soc., 167, 013504 (2020).

Electrochemical Investigation of Caffeine

by Cerium Oxide Nanoparticle Modified Carbon Paste Electrode Caffeine helps to keep the world working and is present in many commonly consumed drinks, including coffee, tea, and cola.

Caffeine is also used in the pharmaceutical industry as an active ingredient in drugs such as analgesics and cold and flu medicines. Consequently, the development of a sensitive, cost-effective means to detect and assess the quality of caffeine is of great interest. Traditionally used methods, such as liquid chromatography, gas chromatography, and UV-spectrophotometric detection, require expensive instrumentation and can be quite time-consuming. In an attempt to overcome these issues, researchers from three educational institutes in India have reported on a simple and highly sensitive electroanalytical method for the determination of caffeine using a cerium oxide nanoparticle modified carbon paste electrode (CMCPE). The properties of the modified electrode were investigated by cyclic voltammetry (CV) and differential pulse voltammetry (DPV). The CMCPE demonstrated high sensitivity, stability, and electroanalytic activity for the detection and quantification of caffeine. The fast, inexpensive method for the detection of caffeine reported in this study will be of benefit to food and pharmaceutical industries.

From: Santhosh B. M., Manjunatha S., Shivakumar M., et al., J. Electrochem. Soc., 167, 047503 (2020).

Supercritically-Dried Membranes and Powders of >90% Porosity Silicon with Pore Volumes Exceeding 4 cm3 g-1 Porous silicon structures are a suitable drug delivery vehicle because they can be impregnated with select drugs via melt intrusion techniques and can fully biodegrade. The ability to deliver a therapeutic drug at an appropriate dosing rate is a prime guiding requirement in developing such materials and processes.

The potential for greater drug payload rises with the dramatic increase in pore volume for porosities greater than 90%.

Researchers in the United Kingdom have advanced the capability of creating highporosity nanostructured mesoporous silicon by employing supercritical drying (SCD).

Porous films were created via anodization followed by elevated current pulses to lift them off the substrate wafer. In this study, membrane flakes were stored in ethanol, then, for comparison, dried either by air or by SCD after exchanging the ethanol

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

with liquid CO2. These membranes were characterized by gas adsorption/desorption analysis and electron microscopy imaging of faces and cross-sections. A combination of process parameters resulted in SCD-formed membranes having porosities in the 89-92% range accompanied by pore volumes in the 3.52-5.13 cm3 g-1 range (much greater than those formed by air drying). The authors are presently extending their study of these “silicon aerocrystals” by developing microand nano-particle-based drug delivery formulations.

From: E. Nekovic, C. J. Storey, A. Kaplan, et al., ECS J. Solid State Sci. Technol., 9, 024016 (2020).

Highly-Conductive, Transparent GaDoped ZnO Nanoneedles for Improving the Efficiencies of GaN Light-Emitting Diode and Si Solar Cell Improving efficiencies of LEDs and solar cells can play a key role in increasing market penetration through further cost reduction. Researchers from National Taiwan University reported their findings related to this in the Focus Issue honoring Nobel laureate Isamu Akasaki and his work on GaN LEDs. With a combination of silver nanoparticles, gallium-doped zinc oxidebased thin film, and nanoneedles, the team investigated the interplay of light extraction, current spreading effect, and surface plasmon coupling on the performance of GaN LEDs. With the right combination of these factors, an LED configuration with 100% increase in energy conversion efficiency was identified.

The group also examined the behavior of these structures in the case of solar cells.

The quantification of light extraction was done through the study of anti-reflection properties; GaZnO nanoneedles were identified as helping improve the antireflection property. In the case of solar cells, optimum configuration led to an efficiency improvement of 27.5% over the baseline cell. The conductive nature of the deposited GaZnO film and the nanoneedles facilitates direct deposit of current collection lines, thus reducing manufacturing complexity and consequently the cost.

From: Yu-Feng Yao, Chun-Han Lin, Chia-Ying Su, et al., ECS J. Solid State Sci. Technol., 9, 015002, (2020).

Tech Highlights was prepared by Joshua Gallaway of Northeastern University; David McNulty of Paul Scherrer Institute; Chao (Gilbert) Liu of Shell; Chock Karuppaiah of Vetri Labs; and Donald Pile of Rolled-Ribbon Battery Company. Each article highlighted here is available free online. Go to the online version of Tech Highlights in each issue of Interface, and click on the article summary to take you to the full-text version of the article.

59

Discoveries need discoverability.

Find out more about how ECS Author Choice Open Access can accelerate the impact of your research. www.electrochem.org/oa

Recent Developments in Electrocatalysis

by Alice Suroviec

E

lectrocatalysis is the catalytic process involving oxidation and reduction reactions through the direct transfer of electrons between species at the electrochemical interface.

An electrocatalyst specifically reduces the overpotential needed to allow the thermodynamically possible reaction to occur faster. These catalysts can be homogeneous, heterogeneous, or microbial in nature. Electrocatalysts are used in a wide range of fields, including corrosion, wastewater treatment, and energy storage.

These promising applications will all be critical to a more sustainable energy future. The articles in the current issue of Interface look at this question of designing and using novel electrocatalysts from several different angles.

This issue is comprised of three articles from leading experts in the area looking at these different research aspects. The first article, Computational Quantum Chemical Explorations of Chemical/ Material Space for Efficient Electrocatalysts, written by John Keith from the University of Pittsburgh, provides insight into the role of computational quantum chemistry into atomic scale design of electrocatalysts. He emphasizes how modern computational quantum chemistry methods can be used to search for new electrocatalysts for many processes. New electrocatalysts that are can be active yet cost-effective to use on a large scale will be needed to advance sustainability. Use of Kohn-Sham Density Functional Theory (DFT) has allowed researchers to model reaction energies with high accuracy, but can reach a bottleneck when used to systematically study large numbers of hypothetical molecules. The Keith group has been using alchemical perturbation density functional theory to overcome some of the computational challenges in the more traditional method.

The second article, Strategies for Electrocatalytic Reduction and Photoelectrochemical Conversion of Carbon Dioxide to Fuels and Utility Chemicals, written by Pawel Kulesza and Iwona Rutkowska from the University of Warsaw, gives an overview of a variety of strategies currently employed to covert carbon dioxide to fuels and utility chemicals. They examine the common approaches used to develop and study electrocatalytic materials. Conventional approaches to this problem include the use of catalytic metals and metal oxides where the reactivity of the electrocatalytic system is mainly determined by the adsorptive interaction between the CO2 and the catalytic material. Visible-light-induced photoelectrochemical

approaches for converting CO2 to organic fuels is another possible option that would use efficient and stable semi-conductor–based systems. They also discuss the use of CO2 for industrial production using water-splitting type electrolysis.

The third article, Electrochemical Destruction of ‘Forever Chemicals’: The Right Solution at the Right Time, written by Suzanne Witt, Nick Rancis, Mary Ensch and Vanessa Maldonado from Fraunhofer USA Center for Coatings and Diamond Technologies CCD and Michigan State University, explores the use of electrochemical oxidation for water treatment for the elimination of polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS are surfactants used in many industrial processes and have been found in ground and surface waterways.

The elimination of PFAS from waterways is a public health concern and electrocatalysis using boron–doped diamond (BDD) seems to be a promising technology. BDD has been demonstrated to destroy PFAS in complex landfill leachate mixtures as well as other complex systems. This work is ongoing and will continue to examine how to scale up this process while reducing cost and risk.

With the continuing push for more a more sustainable society, continued research into novel electrocatalysts to solve these problems is needed. Numerous research directions are necessary to continue to develop these new electrocatalysts and this issue provides an outstanding overview to some of these trends. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F08202IF.

About the Editor Alice Suroviec is professor of bioanalytical chemistry and chair of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Berry College.

She earned a BS in chemistry from Allegheny College in 2000. She received her PhD from Virginia Tech in 2005 under the direction of Dr. Mark R. Anderson. Her research focuses on enzymatically modified electrodes for use as biosensors. She is currently associate editor of the PAE Technical Division for the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. She can be reached at asuroviec@berry.edu. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9252-2468

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

61

Benefits of Renewing YouR eCs MeMBeRship

VisiBilitY Involved members get noticed!

Join a committee and enhance your leadership skills.

It’s not just who you know, it’s who others know!

Networking is powerful!

$

DisCounts

gRowth

Members receive exclusive pricing on meeting registrations, publications, and professional development opportunities.

Educational programming is growing to support our membership.

CReDiBilitY Formed in 1902 – become a part of this highly respected community.

netwoRk

CaReeR Utilize the ECS network to advance your career!

“Our community is more than just academics and subject matter. It’s family.”

– Jim Fenton, Secretary of The Electrochemical Society

Renew online: www.electrochem.org/renew The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

62

Computational Quantum Chemical Explorations of Chemical/Material Space for Efficient Electrocatalysts

by John A. Keith

A

chieving sustainability for society requires understanding how to renewably generate fuels and chemicals.1 Figure 1 illustrates several fundamental electrochemical reactions that are of interest for advancing sustainability—H2O oxidation2 and carbon dioxide,3 proton,4 oxygen,5 and nitrogen6 reduction. Unfortunately, most if not all of these reactions are currently unfeasible to implement on large scales. The most active and stable electrocatalysts are usually too expensive for wide use because they are based on precious metals (e.g., platinum for proton and oxygen reduction), or their syntheses are too complicated and/or separations costs are too high (e.g., many homogeneous catalysis processes). Less expensive catalysts exist, but many exhibit undesirable stabilities or toxicities, or unsatisfactory kinetics (too high overpotentials) or poor selectivity (too low conversion efficiencies) to be economically competitive with alternative processes.

However, in the future, novel electrocatalysts will address these issues. They will be nanostructured7 and/or made from synergistic material composites comprised of elements from the entire periodic table. They will be borne from highly tunable materials, such as metalorganic frameworks (MOFs8), covalent organic frameworks (COFs9), single atom catalysts,10 and 2D early transition metal carbides (MXenes11) that embody optimal structure/property relationships across wide regions of chemical and materials space. Some will also be biomimetic and take critical design principles from nature.12 Today, we are in a rapidly changing epoch of electrocatalyst discovery with atomic resolution.

Computational quantum chemistry, the subfield of physical chemistry that involves computationally-driven numerical analyses of quantum mechanics, is also in an exciting era. Simulations modeling high-quality electronic structures and dynamics of systems of several hundred atoms at a time are possible. Open-source codes are enabling advanced electronic structure calculations for molecules and/or materials13,14 and state-of-theart treatments of continuum (i.e., implicit) solvation models15 for unprecedented accuracy modeling realistic solvating environments. Advances in computational quantum chemistry are also now being coupled with the most recent renaissance of machine-learning methods,16 and signs point toward a major paradigm shift in the near future with how computational modeling can be used. This perspective summarizes our research group’s continuously developing ideas concerning simple, general, and guiding principles for how computational modeling will be able to steer the design of new electrocatalysts atom-by-atom.

the more tortuous the reaction mechanism for going from point A to point B, and thus the higher chance for a higher overpotential and/or lower selectivity.17 Experts in electrocatalysis have tools such as cyclic voltammetry18 and/or impedance spectroscopy19 to elucidate and deduce mechanisms as elementary chemical ‘C’ or electrochemical ‘E’ steps. Modern computational theory now allows for even more precise classifications.

Let’s first consider a generic molecule A that will undergo a multistep reaction involving four proton and electron transfers to form an electrochemically reduced or hydrogenated state, AH4.

(We could also just as easily started from AH4 that undergoes four proton and electron transfers to form an electrochemically oxidized or dehydrogenated state, A.) To exhaustively consider all possible mechanisms, we can use an array of ‘square-schemes’20 that show elementary steps involving a proton transfers are denoted with horizontal lines, electron transfers are vertical lines, and protoncoupled electron transfers* as diagonal lines. This is useful for discerning different mechanisms on paper, and it allows us to draw a few cute but useful analogies to the game of chess (see Fig. 2). If we limited ourselves to just one proton transfer (p), or one electron transfer (e), or one coupled proton-electron transfer (pe) step at a time, the full sequence of moves would be related to the algebraic notation used to record moves in a chess game. For example, the hypothetical sequence of “pe, pe, pe, pe” could indicate a relatively simple mechanism of four consecutive proton coupled hydrogen transfers. Another hypothetical sequence could be “pe, e, p, e, p, e, p,” where a proton coupled hydrogen transfer is followed by three sets of sequential but separate electron and proton transfers. One could also use this picture to make another kind of move that involves a concerted transfer of two electrons and one proton that represents (continued on next page)

Accounting for Hypothetical Electrocatalytic Reaction Paths Electrocatalytic reactions typically involve electrons and protons that serve as either reactants or products. The larger the number of electrons and protons transferred, *S. Hammes-Schiffer, Energy Environ. Sci., 5, 7696 (2012).

Fig. 1. A summary schematic of fundamental electrochemical processes. Numbers represent how many pairs of electrons and protons must be transferred for a given process.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

63

Keith

(continued from previous page)

a hydride (H–) transfer as occurs in many enzymatic or biomimetic processes. This would also be depicted as an L-shaped jump that a knight piece can do in chess. Thus, another hypothetical mechanism to reach the same final state could be “pe, H–, p, pe.”

Computational quantum chemistry can be used to reliably predict the thermodynamic driving force of any of these steps. The computational hydrogen electrode model22 is a simple scheme to predict thermodynamic energies of coupled proton and electron transfers (i.e., the ‘pe’ steps mentioned above) at a given pH and applied potential.

Predicting thermodynamic quantities such as Brønsted acidity constants, standard redox potentials, and thermodynamic hydricities are significantly more challenging because they generally require thermodynamic cycles that involve solvation energies for neutral and charged species. Still, computational protocols have been established to reasonably model reaction energies for proton, electron, and hydride transfers.23,24 Thus, any hypothetical elementary step in the square-scheme shown in Fig. 2 can be straightforwardly calculated and then assessed whether it may be feasible or not.

reacting along the central diagonal line shown in Fig. 2. To ascertain whether multi-proton and electron transfer process might take place, all feasible intermediates of any relevant charge and protonation state should also be accounted for. These data can then be distilled into a computationally-predicted Pourbaix diagram that shows the thermodynamically preferred state for any system at a given pH and applied potential. Figure 3 (b-d) shows how a Pourbaix diagram for CO2 in aqueous solution (Fig. 3b) can be overlaid on a Pourbaix diagram for a hypothetical catalyst that can accommodate different electron and proton transfer states (Fig. 3c). The result of overlaying these figures gives a new figure (Fig. 3d) that allows one to easily see when Pourbaix diagram boundaries are close to one another.

Overlapping (or at least close boundaries) indicate combination of systems and conditions that would be well-suited for shuttling protons, electrons, and/or hydrides. Once thermodynamically viable states are found, kinetic barriers for these processes can be calculated to further assess whether they would result in optimal catalysis.

Identifying Theoretically Ideal Electrochemical Environments for Catalysis A central task of computational electrocatalysis studies is to identify a socalled ‘Sabatier relationship’ or a ‘volcano’ curve (Fig. 3a), and that entails finding a thermodynamically stable site that binds key intermediates strongly enough (but not too strongly) to result in the lowest energy barriers. (Alternatively, one could also invert this general problem to identify materials that bind adsorbates so strongly that they would suppress undesired electrochemical reactions such those that cause corrosion.25) Electrocatalytic reaction thermodynamics can be determined simply by using the computational hydrogen electrode model22 or more thorough analyses for modeling electrochemical kinetics can also be done.26,27,28,29 However, a limitation to standard quantum chemistry modeling is that the procedures Fig. 2. A square-scheme showing hypothetical elementary steps for an electrocatalytic process. (Figure u s u a l l y only account for neutral species adapted from Ref. 21.)

Fig. 3. a) A schematic of a Sabatier ‘Volcano’ Plot.30 Pourbaix diagrams: b) showing thermodynamically preferred states for aqueous CO2, c) showing states for a hypothetical and electrochemically active catalyst, and d) the previous two Pourbaix diagrams now overlaid so that boundaries between the two systems can be analyzed and evaluated to see if the thermodynamics would be appropriate for energetically efficient catalysis in accordance with the Sabatier principle.

64

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Our earliest work in this area was originally inspired by intriguing photoelectrochemical experimental results with pyridinium catalysts,31 and we focused on theoretically understanding how CO2 reduction might occur.32 That work showed justification for dihydropyridine molecules forming transiently in these systems, and our group has since carried out computational analyses to assess the feasibility of hydride transfers for other hypothetical aromatic N-heterocycles,33 homogeneous inorganic complexes,34 N-doped sites on zig-zag edges of graphene,35 and Sn-oxide catalysts for CO2 electroreduction.36 It was later noted by other electrochemists that the pyridinium system on Pt electrodes is both rather controversial37 and complicated38 and thus one could think that quantum chemistry modeling generally might not serve a constructive purpose. For that system we agree, but on the other hand, we note that our results may be interpreted as predicting that dihydropyridines may form under reaction conditions, and if formed, they would be effective reductants for CO2 (as was later experimentally reported in Ref. 39). Additionally, our studies on inorganic complexes34 suggested that some “non-innocent” ligands may be involved with hydride transfers, and later experimental work showed that ligands on the [Ir(tpy) (bpy)Cl] complex could undergo hydride transfers that facilitated CO2 reduction into formic acid.40 We are not aware of any experimental verification of heterogeneous systems we have modeled, but we would be happy to collaborate with experimentalists willing to test hypotheses. Either way, this kind of Pourbaix-diagram driven approach appears to be useful for predicting hypothetical reaction mechanisms and thus should be able to drive the rational design of new electrocatalysts.

Our group has explored the use of APDFT to study binding energies for adsorbates on metals42 and carbides, nitrides, and oxides.43 Three reasons make APDFT approximations extremely interesting to our group. First, simple approximations to first order do a surprisingly accurate job predicting binding energies of adsorbates on skin alloys and single atom alloy sites. Second, errors in APDFT calculations seem to be highly systematic and therefore correctable by machine learning algorithms or even simple linear corrections. Third, once a DFT reference calculation is done, the computational cost for subsequent APDFT predictions based on that reference is effectively zero since APDFT only involves simple arithmetic operations on existing DFT outputs. It is exciting to imagine very thorough computational efforts where a handful of DFT reference calculations can seed hundreds of thousands of APDFT approximations to offer insights into how to navigate chemical/materials space to search for optimal ensembles of catalytic sites for a specific electrocatalytic reactions.

In conclusion, I have provided an overview of how modern computational quantum chemistry methods can be used for explorations of new, efficient, and highly active electrocatalysts for any process, especially those that are needed to improve the sustainability of society. Computational quantum chemistry allows one to characterize (continued on next page)

High-Throughput Screening with Alchemical Perturbation Density Functional Theory and Machine Learning Quantum mechanics methods, such as Kohn-Sham Density Functional Theory (DFT), are the standard method for computational catalysis studies. They provide an acceptable balance of high enough accuracy and only a moderate computational expense that is usually affordable for systems of O(103-104) atoms. Depending on system size and the complexity of the DFT approximations used, calculations needed for a reaction energy or an acidity constant might may take anywhere from minutes to weeks to complete. Thus, quantum mechanics calculations will become a bottleneck in systematic studies of large numbers of hypothetical molecules and/or materials that would be hypothetical active sites for catalysis. For example, if one considers hypothetical binary alloys that are comprised of two out 14 different coinage metals, that would result in 91 possible binary alloys, each capable of having a different stoichiometry of AxB1-x.

Furthermore, each alloy would also have a large configuration space.

For instance, if one was screening for the best 40-atom nanoparticle for a given alloy, there would be as many as 240 ≈ 1×1012 different nanostructure configurations for each alloy if one were thoroughly considering every possibility withinone single structural template.

Putting this together, exploring the materials space of such binary alloy nanoparticles having 40 atoms would require 9×1013 DFT calculations, and if we optimistically assume only 10 minutes per calculation, this results in (9×1013 DFT calculations) × (10 minutes/calculation) = more than a billion cpu years to carry out each alloy study.

Many have tackled this challenge by developing atomistic potentials that are many orders of magnitude faster than DFT, but an exciting albeit undertested alternative is to consider using “gradientsupported” alchemical perturbation (AP)DFT approximations.41 The idea here is to avoid exploring trends in property/composition space by using many brute force calculations (e.g., Fig. 4a, which could also serve as an analog to the volcano plot shown in Fig. 3a). Instead, one can use APDFT as a physically grounded way to understand how changing a property reflecting the composition of the system (e.g., the electrostatic potentials of all atoms) would then result in a change to a property being explicitly studied (e.g., a binding energy or a barrier height). The blue ovals in Fig. 4b are meant to describe APDFTpredicted trends across composition space.

Fig. 4. a) An illustration of a “brute force” computational effort to identify an atomic scale property/composition relationship (black line) using computationally demanding quantum mechanics (QM) calculations (red dots). b) An illustration of much less demanding computational efforts that leverage alchemical perturbation density functional theory (APDFT) approximations that bring no extra computational cost (blue ovals). This figure was adapted from Fig. 1 in Ref. 44.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

65

Keith

(continued from previous page)

and distinguish hypothetical reaction steps, to reliably predict reaction thermodynamics and kinetics of electrochemical reactions, and to explore predict which electrochemical conditions would be needed to minimize overpotentials for a given reaction. Physicallygrounded alchemical perturbation approximations augmented with machine learning techniques make computational modeling poised to dramatically increase the exploration range of chemical/materials we can make to design new electrocatalysts. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F09202IF.

About the Author John A. Keith is an associate professor and R. K. Mellon Faculty Fellow in Energy in the Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh. He obtained a BA degree from Wesleyan University (2001) and a PhD from Caltech (2007). Keith then was an Alexander von Humboldt postdoctoral fellow at the University of Ulm (2007-2010), and then an associate research scholar at Princeton University (2010-2013).

Keith is an expert in applying a wide range of computational quantum chemistry methods to elucidate chemical reactions and molecular and material design principles across broad areas of science and engineering. He has more than 60 research publications and was the recipient of an NSF-CAREER award. From 2019-2020, he was a visiting researcher at the University of Luxembourg, studying chemical physics and atomistic machine learning methods. He may be reached at jakeith@pitt.edu. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6583-6322

References 1. For an editorial for special issue of recent reviews, see Nat. Rev. Chem., 2, 0125 (2018).

2. J. Li, R. Güttinger, R. Moré, F. Song, W. Wan, and G. R. Patzke, Chem. Soc. Rev., 46, 6124 (2017) 3. J. Qiao, Y. Liu, F. Hong, and J. Zhang, Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 63 (2014).

4. A. Eftekhari, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 42, 11053 (2017).

5. J. Stacy, Y. N. Regmi, B. Leonard, and M. Fan, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 69, 401 (2017).

6. S. D. Minteer, P. Christopher, and S. Linic, ACS Energy Lett., 4, 163 (2019).

7. H. Mistry, A. S. Varela, S. Kühl, P. Strasser, and B. R. Cuenya, Nat. Rev. Mater., 1, 16009 (2016).

8. L. Li, R. Güttinger, R. Moré, F. Song, W. Wan, and G. R. Patzke, J. Mater. Chem. A, 7, 1964 (2019).

9. C.-Y. Lin, D. Zhang, Z. Zhao, and Z. Xia, Adv. Mater., 30, 1703646 (2018).

10. C. Zhu, S. Fu, Q. Shi, D. Du, and Y. Lin, Angew. Chemie Int. Ed., 56, 13944 (2017).

11. S. Zhou, X. Yang, W. Pei, N. Liu, and J. Zhao, Nanoscale, 10, 10876 (2018).

12. D. P. Hickey and S. D. Minteer, Joule, 3, 1819 (2019).

13. J. Hutter, M. Iannuzzi, F. Schiffmann, and J. VandeVondele, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Comput. Mol. Sci., 4, 15 (2014).

66

14. M. Valiev, E. J. Bylaska, N. Govind, K. Kowalski, T. P. Straatsma, H. J .J. Van Dam, D. Wang, J. Nieplocha, E. Apra, T. L. Windus, and W. A. de Jong, Comput. Phys. Commun., 181, 1477 (2010).

15. R. Sundararaman, K. Letchworth-Weaver, K. A. Schwarz, D. Gunceler, Y. Ozhabes, and T. A. Arias, SoftwareX, 6, 278 (2017).

16. K. T. Butler, D. W. Davies, H. Cartwright, O. Isayev, and A. Walsh, Nature, 559, 547 (2018).

17. M. T. M. Koper, J. Electroanal. Chem., 660, 254 (2011).

18. N. Elgrishi, K. J. Rountree, B. D. McCarthy, E. S. Rountree, T. T. Eisenhart, J. L. Dempsey, J. Chem. Educ., 95, 197 (2018).

19. D. A. Harrington and P. van den Driessche, Electrochim. Acta, 56, 800ww5 (2011).

20. J. Jacq, J. Electroanal. Chem. Interfacial Electrochem., 29, 149 (1971).

21. Y. Basdogan, A. M. Maldonado, and J. A. Keith, WIREs Comput.

Mol. Sci., 10 (2020).

22. J. K. Nørskov, J. Rossmeisl, A. Logadottir, L. Lindqvist, J. R. Kitchin, T. Bligaard, and H. Jónsson, J. Phys. Chem. B, 108, 17886 (2004).

23. A. V. Marenich, J. Ho, M. L. Coote, C. J. Cramer, and D. G. Truhlar, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 16, 15068 (2014).

24. A. Marjolin and J. A. Keith, ACS Catal., 5, 1123 (2015).

25. M. C. Groenenboom, R. M. Anderson, D. J. Horton, Y. Basdogan, D. F. Roeper, S. A. Policastro, and J. A. Keith, J. Phys. Chem. C, 121, 16825 (2017).

26. X. Nie, M. R. Esopi, M. J. Janik, and A. Asthagiri, Angew.

Chemie Int. Ed., 52, 2459 (2013).

27. K. S. Exner and H. Over, Acc. Chem. Res., 50, 1240 (2017).

28. G. Kastlunger, P. Lindgren, and A. A. Peterson, J. Phys. Chem.

C, 122, 12771 (2018).

29. K. Chan and J. K. Nørskov, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 7, 1686 (2016).

30. h t t p s : / / c o m m o n s . w i k i m e d i a . o r g / w / i n d e x . p h p ? t i t l e = F i l e : Vo l c a n o _ p l o t . p n g & o l d i d = 1 5 9 3 4 5 1 0 7 (accessed March 30, 2020).

31. E. E. Barton, D. M. Rampulla, and A. B. Bocarsly, J. Am. Chem.

Soc., 130, 6342 (2008).

32. J. A. Keith and E. A. Carter, Chem. Sci., 4, 1490 (2013).

33. M. C. Groenenboom, K. Saravanan, Y. Zhu, J. M. Carr, A. Marjolin, G. G. Faura, E. C. Yu, R., N. Dominey, and J. A. Keith, J. Phys. Chem. A, 120, 6888 (2016).

34. K. Saravanan and J. A. Keith, Dalton Trans., 45, 15336 (2016).

35. K. Saravanan, E. Gottlieb, and J. A. Keith, Carbon, 111, 859 (2017).

36. K. Saravanan, Y. Basdogan, J. Dean, and J. A. Keith, J. Mater.

Chem. A, 5, 11756 (2017).

37. C. Costentin, J.-M. Savéant, and C. Tard, ACS Energy Lett., 3, 695 (2018).

38. H. Dridi, C. Comminges, C. Morais, J.-C. Meledje, K. B. Kokoh, C. Costentin, and J.-M. Savéant, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 139, 13922 (2017).

39. P. K. Giesbrecht and D. E. Herbert, ACS Energy Lett., 2, 549 (2017).

40. S. Sato and T. Morikawa, ChemPhotoChem, 2, 207 (2018).

41. G. F. von Rudorff and O. A. von Lilienfeld, J. Phys. Chem. B, 123, 10073 (2019).

42. K. Saravanan, J. R. Kitchin, O. A. von Lilienfeld, and J. A. Keith, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 8, 5002 (2017).

43. C. D. Griego, K. Saravanan, and J. A. Keith, Adv. Theory Simul., 2, 1800142 (2019).

44. M. to Baben, J. O. Achenbach, and O. A. von Lilienfeld, J. Chem. Phys., 144, 104103 (2016).

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Strategies for Electrocatalytic Reduction and Photoelectrochemical Conversion of Carbon Dioxide to Fuels and Utility Chemicals

by Pawel J. Kulesza and Iwona A. Rutkowska

T

he problem of continuously rising levels of carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas released through burning of fossil fuels in the atmosphere, becomes a critical environmental issue and concern over climate change. Consequently, there has been growing recent interest in the development of approaches to effectively sequester, capture, or convert carbon dioxide to useful chemical feedstocks that include syngas (CO + H2), an intermediate for further Fischer–Tropsch processes, carbonbased simple organic fuels, or utility chemicals. In principle, lowtemperature electrochemical and photoelectrochemical approaches to reduction of CO2 show promise as important conversion methods owing to their environmental compatibility and feasibility to combine with renewable energy sources, particularly when the reaction is driven under ambient conditions in aqueous or water-containing media. It should be remembered, however, that electrochemical and photoelectrochemical reductions of CO2 are multi-electron and multi-proton processes (up to eight electrons for the conversion to methane) with considerable kinetic barriers requiring development of the carefully designed electrode materials.

Generally, and under electrochemical conditions as well, carbon dioxide is a very stable linear molecule with two short (ca. 116 pm) C=O bonds. Thus, reduction of CO2 (CO2RR), which requires breaking strong double bonds, is a very sluggish process proceeding with large overpotentials.

Although dioxygen (O2) also has a double bond (length, ca.

120.8 pm), the shorter bonds holding the atoms together in CO2 make its reduction much more sluggish. But even when electrochemical transformation of CO2 into other carbon compounds becomes operative, a common feature is the appearance of the poisoning or passivating CO-type intermediates. Furthermore, when the CO2-reduction is performed in aqueous solutions, the competitive hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) is a complicating side-reaction.

Thus, efficient CO2RR should be, in principle, facilitated at the protondepleted electrochemical interfaces. On the other hand, although water can act as a source for protons, typical electroreduction mechanisms are truly multi-proton processes. There is a need to improve the reaction dynamics and selectivity against hydrogen evolution and toward specific products. The appearance of both hydrogen and CO or simple CxHyOz–type oxo-hydrocarbons (e.g., formic acid, methanol) could permit us to pursue the Fischer-Tropsch-type syntheses under low-temperature conditions. The reduction (selective conversion) of CO2 can be addressed by both conventional-electrochemical and visible-light-induced photoelectrochemical means. Among important issues are the development of robust, specific electrocatalytic systems and stable, functionalized semiconducting photocatalytic materials, as well as better understanding of structure-activity relationships that include their morphology, composition, and operating conditions, such as temperature, solvent, electrolyte, CO2-pressure, pH, etc.

In practical electrolysis cells, the CO2-reduction (at cathode) is accompanied by water oxidation (at anode or photoanode).

Overview of Conventional Electrocatalytic Approaches Numerous catalytic materials (both heterogenous and homogenous) have been historically proposed for CO2RR.1-20 Representative systems include such catalytic metals as Cu, Au, Ag, Bi, Pb or Pd, bimetallic (e.g., PdRu, CuAu, or AuAg) nanoparticles, nanostructures of certain metal oxides that include Cu2O, TiO2, ZnO, and ZrO2, as well as functionalized (e.g., with iron) carbons, metalorganic complexes, coordination compounds of transition metals, or nitrogencontaining ligands, such as pyridine, bipyridine, and benzoimidazole.

It is commonly accepted that while Sn, In, and Pb are formic acidproducing metals, Pt, Fe, and Ni induce hydrogen evolution, whereas Au, Ag, and Pd are carbon-monoxide-producing metals. There have also been numerous reports showing the ability of redox enzymes, typically containing molybdenum, nickel, or tungsten dithiolene, to induce mutual conversions of carbon dioxide and formate, or other CO2-reduction products under bioelectrochemical condictions.21 Reactivity of the electrocatalytic systems is largely determined by the adsorptive interactions between the carbon dioxide molecule and the catalytic material as well as on the availability of electrons and protons at the electrocatalytic interface. Following adsorption or activation of CO2, the C=O double bond is significantly perturbed and weakened, and the neutral hydrated CO2 molecule is converted into CO2- or protonated to form HCO2–.20 The first activation step is energetically demanding and, consequently, implies the necessity of application of large overpotentials. Selectivity of the reaction is controlled by the affinity of catalytic centers to adsorbed carbon monoxide intermediate,22 including its protonation or hydrogenation.

For example, contrary to CO2-, which is strongly adsorbed on gold catalysts, the CO2-reduction intermediate, CO, tends to desorb relatively easily from gold surfaces, thus supporting the metal’s selectivity toward formation of carbon monoxide. Also depending on the applied potential, a choice of electrolyte, ionic strength, acidity (pH), temperature, or CO2 concentration, various products of CO2RR, such as carbon monoxide, oxalate, formate, carboxylic acids, formaldehyde, acetone, and methanol or hydrocarbons (e.g., methane, ethane, and ethylene), can be obtained. If the reduction of CO2 is pursued in solvents of low (lower than in H2O) proton availability (e.g., in dimethylformamide, DMF), the scope of reaction products is more limited (in comparison to aqueous media), and typically oxalates, in addition to CO and formates, are expected.20 The gaseous reaction products are identified and quantified using gas chromatography (GC), whereas the liquid products can be analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC-MS), or they need to vaporized to be determined

by GC-MS. Recently, it has been demonstrated that certain reaction products can be identified, monitored, and even correlated with the CO2- electroreduction potentials using rotating ring-disk voltammetry methodology.11,23,24 (continued on next page)

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

67

Kulesza and Rutkowska

(continued from previous page)

Copper-based catalysts have drawn much attention because they can induce direct reduction of CO2 to alcohols and hydrocarbons.2,15,20,25-27 Obviously, such features as morphology, pretreatment, and the chemical nature of copper catalytic surfaces (e.g., presence of Cu(I)-oxo species)28, affect efficiency and selectivity of CO2RR. Nevertheless, the CO2RR at copper catalysts still suffers from large overpotentials required for CO2-reduction to outcompete proton discharge or water reduction leading to the hydrogen evolution side reaction.9,10,22,29,30 Recent studies have demonstrated that nanostructured copper catalysts in a form of nanoparticles,31-36 nanocubes,37,38 nanofoams,39 and nanowires40 tend to exhibit higher activity (higher CO2RR-current densities) and better selectivity relative to the performance of the systems of conventional sizes.28,41 Furthermore, Cu-nanostructures generated upon reduction of copper oxides, particularly Cu2O, have shown improved CO2RR efficiency at lower overpotentials.28,42-44 In this respect, the unique surface active centers have been correlated to grain boundaries existing in the oxidederived Cu sites at the electrocatalytic interface.28,45,46 Alternative explanations take into account the catalyst nanostructuring, an increase of the electrochemically active surface area and a possibility of the appearance of low-coordinated atoms as active sites following the oxide reduction.31,47-51 To minimize interference originating from the competitive hydrogen evolution reaction (HER), the efficient CO2RR would be, in principle, facilitated at the proton-depleted electrochemical interfaces. But the CO2-electroreduction stoichiometric reactions do involve protons.20,27,52 Most significantly, care must be exercised to control both the activity of a catalyst toward hydrogen evolution (proton discharge or water reduction)53 and the system’s interfacial ability to generate active sites for adsorption (activation) of CO2 together with a sufficient population of H atoms interacting with the CO2-reduction-adsorbates as the reaction intermediates.54 For example, Cu electrocatalysts tend to drive CO2RR to multi-carbon products,9,15,16 but Pd systems produce mainly CO and H2 as well as some formate.13,17,55-57 Depending on strength of adsorption, pH, and availability of H atoms at the catalytic interface, the CO intermediate may be protonated or hydrogenated to form CHO or COH adsorbates.23,58 Although, depending on the applied potential, the C-C coupling could occur after the formation of the CHO adsorbate, the reaction paths through the COH species (e.g., to CH4) are typically more favored kinetically during CO2RR.20 Recent results show that at lower potentials copper catalytic surfaces covered with OH and CO species tend to induce formation of methanol.59 A common feature, also in the case of copper-based catalysts, is the decrease of the CO2RR efficiency due to poisoning of the catalytic active sites during the reduction of CO2. Fig. 1A illustrates

a typical pattern observed during voltammetric reduction of carbon dioxide at Cu nanoparticles: electroreduction currents are lower in presence (red curve) than in absence (blue curve) of CO2 owing to the formation of poisoning CO-type products or intermediates inhibiting further activity of a catalyst also toward hydrogen evolution.23 Recent electrocatalytic results with copper-substituted polytungstates (or polyoxometallate-network- stabilized copper oxo assemblies)60 and with copper nanostructures over-coated with WO3 nanowires61 imply improved selectivity toward CO2RR relative to the competitive hydrogen evolution as well as lower tendency of copper sites to undergo poisoning. It is apparent from the data of Fig. 1B that contrary to the performance of the bare copper catalyst (Fig. 1A), the hierarchically deposited system, in which the copper layer is overcoated with tungsten oxide, yields higher voltammetric currents in the presence (red curve) rather than in the absence (blue curve) of CO2. It has been postulated that in addition to physical protection and stabilizing interactions with copper centers, the partially reduced tungsten oxides are capable of sorption of hydrogen, or shifting the proton discharge toward more negative potentials, rather than inducing hydrogen evolution.61

Visible-Light-Induced Photoelectrochemical Conversion of CO2 Electrochemical generation of valuable chemicals and fuels necessitates direct or indirect use of energy, and the use of renewable energy sources could be envisioned. The ideal photoassisted CO2RR would utilize stable and highly efficient semiconductor-based systems capable of generating organic fuels simply by solar energy.

In particular, photoelectrochemical approaches utilizing long-lived charge carriers photogenerated at the semiconductor-electrolyte interfaces have the ability to initiate and drive chemical reactions.

Most commonly, p-type semiconductors (e.g., Si, GaP, GaAs, InP, and certain binary and ternary metal oxides) are considered as photocathodes to carry out the solar-light-driven CO2RR. It is expected that the semiconductor’s bandgap overlaps the visible solar spectrum (i.e., is in the range 1.75 to 3.0 eV), as well as the position of the conduction band edge is equivalent to the potential being more negative than that the thermodynamic value characteristic of the CO2reduction process. Regarding kinetic limitations, the conduction band gap edge would have to positioned at a sufficiently negative potential to overcome the CO2RR overpotential and drive the process readily.62 Electron transfers at the semiconductor–electrolyte interfaces are affected by various surface states, including those originating from the termination of crystal lattices and the dangling bonds present in grain boundaries as free radicals.63 To increase the systems’ activity and selectivity, as well as to improve their stability, surfaces of

Fig. 1A, 1B. Background-subtracted voltammetric responses recorded in absence (blue line) and presence (red line) of carbon dioxide (CO2-saturated solution) at (A) the pristine copper nanoparticles (diameter, ca. 100 nm), and at (B) the bilayer film of copper nanoparticles over-coated with WO3 nanowires.

Electrolyte, 0.1 mol dm–3 KHCO3. Scan rate, 10 mV s–1. Electrode substrate, glassy carbon. Solutions were deoxygenated with argon.

68

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

semiconductors are often modified with catalysts (e.g., molecular, metallic, etc.).64-66 By analogy to conventional electrochemical and chemical approaches, the presence of co-catalysts could permit by passing or inducing the initial high-energy-barrier step of the reduction of CO2 to CO2-. In addition to improving the performance and controlling the selectivity, the co-catalysts can provide trapping sites for electrons, thus enhancing charge separation at the photoelectrochemical interface. There have been reports of modification of p-type Si photocathodes with nanoparticles such as Cu, Au, or Ag capable of enhancing CO2RR toward CO, CH4, and C2H2.63,67 Among important issues is to effectively use catalytic nanoparticles and the need to control the size and morphology as well as their nanostructuring on the semiconductor surface with the primary goal of decreasing surface charge recombination.

In principle, p-type semiconducting copper-containing transition metal oxides (e.g., Cu-based binary and ternary oxides, such as Cu2O, CuFeO2, CuBi2O4, CuNb2O6, and Cu/Cu2O) are good candidates for photocathodes.68-72 In a case of metal oxide semiconductors, the interfacial oxygen vacancies have been suggested to function as the active sites for CO2 adsorption and activation. Unfortunately, many p-type semiconductors are susceptible to reductive decomposition or photocorrosion. Various nitrogen-containing polymers can be considered for immobilization or stabilization of materials active toward the CO2-reduction under photoelectrochemical conditions.

Copper(I) oxide is a p-type semiconductor characterized by a direct band gap around 2 eV and, therefore, photoelectrochemical experiments induced by illumination with solar light are feasible.

Copper oxides are non-toxic, inexpensive, and environmentally acceptable. But the instability of Cu2O due to its photoelectrochemical corrosion largely limits the scope of the system’s practical applications. Furthermore, the p-type semiconductor photocathodes are generally characterized by fairly low interfacial electron densities what translates to rather weak catalytic properties during electroreductions.

The population of electrons in the conduction band can be increased by considering the mixed systems with the p-type–n-type semiconductor junctions, provided that the position of the conduction band edge of the n-type semiconductor is lower than that of the p-type semiconductor, thus permitting capture of the photogenerated electrons. To achieve a higher light-to-energy conversion efficiency and have better control of selectivity, chemical, and physical properties of distinct semiconductors can be combined into a single integrated system.63,73 For example, a p-type–n-type semiconductor heterojunction can be fabricated by combining the p-type system (e.g., Cu2O) with such n-type semiconductors as TiO2, SrTiO3, or KTaO3.74-76 Formation of the heterojunction should also stabilize the p-type component against photocorrosion or decomposition caused by the reduction by photogenerated electrons. In another example, selectivity has been achieved through application of nickelcontaining carbon-monoxide-dehydrogenase enzymes capable of accepting electrons from the TiO2 conduction band and driving CO2RR according the two-electron pathway.77 The requirements for practical photocathodes are pretty demanding: they include the ability to absorb (preferably visible) light effectively, stability, and fast interfacial electron transfers.

A reasonable strategy toward the efficient photoelectrochemical reduction of CO2 explores the use of a junction formed by a copper(I) oxide semiconductor with the outer-layer of n-type sub-stoichiometric TiO2-x,78 non-stoichiometric tungsten oxide nanowires,61 or organic polymeric (oligoaniline) over-layer.79 The hybrid systems mentioned above have been effectively stabilized without decreasing the oxide photoelectrochemical activity toward CO2 reduction upon illumination with visible light.

Figure 2 illustrates the limiting photocurrents recorded for the system composed of Cu2O (deposited on FTO conducting glass electrode) subsequently over-coated with WO3 (nanowires) layer in the absence (blue-line) and presence (red-line) of carbon dioxide (saturation has been achieved following the initial deoxygenation step with argon). The pulsed patterns refer to the results obtained after the repetitively choped illumination correlated with the potential polarizations. The current density spikes observed in each chopping

cycle result most likely either from electron accumulation at the interface or from capacitive currents. It is noteworthy that a reasonably high background-subtracted net-current-density of ca. 0.35 mA cm-2 can be obtained for the photoelectrochemical reduction of CO2 upon application of 0.1 V (vs. RHE).61 Unlike bare cuprous oxides, which are prone to photocorrosion, the present data indicate good stability of the bilayer Cu2O/WO3 photocathode. The fact that currents tend to increase at more negative potentials (0 V vs. RHE) in the absence of CO2 (namely under nitrogen atmosphere) may point to a danger of the parallel electroreduction of water (hydrogen evolution).

To improve charge distribution, the addition of carbon nanotubes and reduced-graphene-oxide-based composite materials has been considered.80-82 For example, the photoelectrochemical system utilizing copper(I) oxide and reduced-graphene-oxide83 has been characterized not only by unimpeded charge transfers, but also by the suppressed electron-hole recombination as well. Carbon nanotubes have been demonstrated to act as a scaffold for Cu2O nanocrystals to enhance the conversion of CO2 to alcohols and formic acid.84 The over-coating of semiconductors with nanostructured or derivatized carbons85,86 may exhibit stabilizing and co-catalytic properties.

Here the capacitive or stabilizing charge storage properties of functionalized carbon architectures should be mentioned, in addition to the increased electrochemically active surface area, electrical conductivity, and charge carrier mobility, and improved adsorptive activating (catalytic) features.

Electrochemical Reactors: Water-Splitting Type Electrolysis Electrochemical conversion of carbon dioxide for industrial production would require application of electrolyzers and the preparation of electrodes and catalysts on large scale. Because highperformance catalysts are nanostructured and their fabrication is expensive, there is a need to optimize structures and electrochemically active surface areas of working electrodes as well as to reduce their cost. The practical electrolysis systems would have to operate in continuous flow mode to increase the CO2 conversion efficiency and to overcome mass-transport limitations.87 By analogy to water electrolyzers (in which H2O undergoes splitting to O2 and H2), a typical CO2-electrolysis cell utilizes the anode (or photoanaode), where the oxygen evolution reaction occurs, whereas CO2 is supplied in the cathode compartment where it is electrochemically (rarely photoelectrochemically) reduced (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4). (continued on next page)

Fig. 2. Dependencies of photocurrent on applied potential recorded in absence (blue line) and presence (red line) of carbon dioxide (CO2-saturated solution) at the film of copper(I) oxide semiconductor over-coated with WO3 nanowires. Electrolyte, 0.1 mol dm–3 Na2SO4. Electrode substrate, the fluorine-doped tin oxide (FTO) conducting glass. Solutions were deoxygenated with argon. Illumination with solar-light simulator (AM 1.5).

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

69

Kulesza and Rutkowska

Regardless of the cell design, water will be electrolyzed at the anode (photoanode) to form oxygen and protons; and the latter ions are transferred across the membrane to the cathodic catalyst to react with carbon dioxide (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4). A fundamentally ideal photoelectrolytic system (Fig. 4) would operate under illumination with visible light and utilize both the n-type semiconducting photoanode (for water oxidation) and p-type semiconducting cathode (for CO2reduction). Such system would act like an “artificial leaf” with two light absorbers.91 Practical examples are limited in this respect, but further research can be expected along this line.

(continued from previous page)

Due to low solubility of CO2 in aqueous electrolyte solutions (ca. 0.03 mol dm-3 at atmospheric pressure), large current densities cannot be obtained in electrolyzers (therefore often high pressures are needed). In a practical electrolytic unit, which utilizes an anode where water oxidation (to oxygen; at the potential higher than the standard value of 1.23 V) proceeds, the cathodic reaction (the lowcurrent-density CO2-reduction) becomes the limiting factor (Fig. 3).

Having in mind the kinetic over-potentials for both reactions and the electrolyte resistances, fairly large cell potentials would have to be applied to effectively drive the electrolysis. It is now accepted that Conclusions and Perspectives on the basis of efficiencies calculated for PEM electrolyzers, CO and HCOO are the CO2-reduction products generated at the lowest Research into electrocatalytic and photoelectrochemical overpotentials, as opposed to C2H4 and CH4.88 At present, it is believed conversion of CO2 is a highly active area. Recent developments that efficient reactors would require the use of noble (e.g., Pt) metal are focused on the preparation of stable nanostructured catalysts catalysts possibly in combination with less precious metals. exhibiting high activity and selectivity toward a single specific 62,63 Recent advances in photoelectrochemical water splitting, product. In this respect, there is a need to better understand the namely new approaches based on semiconducting photoanodes influence of the morphology of catalytic centers on their reactivity (typically n-type semiconducting metal oxides), combined either during CO2RR. Their sizes and possibly shapes should determine the with a metallic cathode (e.g., Pt) or with a p-type semiconductor availability of certain active facets or low coordinated sites at the as a photocathode, should be mentioned here in a context of the interface and thus influence the binding strength (chemisorption) of development of the CO2-electrolyzers exploring photoelectrocatalytic properties and operating under illumination. The use of photoanodes to power the electrolytic carbon dioxide conversion has been successfully demonstrated with n-type CdS and n-type TiO2 semiconductors.63 Although there are many advantages to the use of TiO2 photoanodes,89 such as excellent stability, low cost, and reasonable conversion efficiency, an important drawback is the fact that titanium dioxide (having fairly large energy band gap of 3.2 eV) utilizes only 3% of solar irradiation. Representative examples of other metal oxides with n-type semiconducting and promising photoelectrocatalytic properties, tungsten oxide (WO3), and hematite (Fe2O3) should be mentioned.90,91 The WO3-based semiconductors are highly stable in acid media, and they are characterized by an energy band gap of 2.5-2.7 eV, thus allowing absorption of a reasonable fraction of the solar spectrum up to ca. 500 nm. The onset potential for photooxidation of water (in acid medium) is as low as 0.45 V (vs. RHE), which is of practical importance to the energy efficient photoelectrolysis. Utilization of such systems in the CO2-electrolyzers would require, however, development of practical cathodes (CO2-reduction) operating in more acidic media.

Coupling of the two processes in a single unit leading Fig. 3. Scheme of the electrolysis cell for CO2 reduction. to one-step photoelectrochemical/ electrocatalytic approach should be possible but, in practice, physical separation of the two reactions in photoanodic (photoelectrochemical water oxidation) and cathodic (carbon dioxide electroreduction) compartments is necessary to increase efficiency and to limit charge recombination. Indeed, none of the oxide semiconductor photoanodes produces appreciable photocurrents at onset potentials sufficiently negative to allow direct water splitting and carbon dioxide reduction simultaneously. An alternative solution uses the application of the tandem system in which the photoelectrolytic cell, consisting of the semiconducting photoanode and the conventional electrocatalytic cathode, will be associated with the conventional silicon photovoltaic cell capable of providing the bias voltage sufficient to Fig. 4. Scheme of the electrolysis cell in which both anode and cathode are photoactive (idealized situation). drive the reactions mentioned above. Typical photoelectrochemically assisted electrolysis is based on photoanode (O2-evolution) and conventional cathode (CO2-reduction).

70

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

reactants (CO2) and the reaction intermediates (e.g., CO and CHO) and, indirectly, activity and selectivity of the reaction. Obviously, the size control can be more readily achieved than the shape control, particularly for nanostructures below 10 nm.92,93 Among important issues are studies focusing on reliable synthetic approaches to produce structurally well-defined systems, including size- and shapeselected nanostructures. In addition to better understanding the reaction mechanisms (also under industrially-relevant conditions), there is a need to better combine experimental data and theoretical consideration with the ultimate goal of improving designs of catalytic electrodes and compositions of electrolytes. Furthermore, progress in the development of an in-situ diagnostic methodology that would simultaneously couple spectroscopic characterization of materials with measurement of their electrocatalytic activity and selectivity is crucial to creating new improved systems operating under realistic reaction conditions, e.g., in the flow-cell type configurations (electrolyzers) operating under high- current loads, or at elevated pHs, as well as upon illumination with visible light. Concepts referring to bioelectrochemical catalysis, conversion of carbon dioxide with use of redox enzymes, and cascade systems can also be rationally explored. In practical terms, development of systems capable of preconcentrating atmospheric carbon dioxide with high selectivity for reversible CO2-binding is also needed. In this respect, recent studies with amines and the amino-groups-containing metalorganic-frameworks investigated as reversible capture agents should be mentioned here.94 © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F10202IF.

Acknowledgment This work was supported by the National Science Center (NCN, Poland) under Opus Project 2018/29/B/ST5/02627.

About the Authors Pawel J. Kulesza is a professor of chemistry at the University of Warsaw. His recent interests concern development and characterization of hierarchical and functionalized inorganic nanomaterials and interfaces of importance to electrocatalysis, photoelectrochemistry, analytical chemistry, energy conversion, and storage. He is a member of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Kulesza is a fellow of The Electrochemical Society. He has served on many ECS committees and organized symposia at ECS meetings. He also has served as chair of the Physical Analytical Electrochemistry Division and chair of the Europe Section. Kulesza is a member of the editorial boards for the Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry, Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry, Electrocatalysis, Russian Journal of Electrochemistry (Springer), and Catalysts (MDPI). He is an associate editor of Electrochimica Acta (Springer), (Elsevier).

Kulesza may be reached at pkulesza@chem.uw.edu.pl. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6150-8049 Iwona A. Rutkowska is a faculty member in chemistry at the University of Warsaw. Her current research focuses on materials chemistry and electrochemistry of nanostructured metal oxides, noble metal nanoparticles and functionalized carbons, organic and inorganic polymers with emphasis on electrocatalytic processes for energy conversion and storage, as well as on mechanisms of charge propagation.

Rutkowska’s recent activities have concentrated on oxidation of small organic fuels, oxygen reduction reaction, and carbon dioxide reduction at various experimental conditions. She is a member of The Electrochemical Society and International Society of Electrochemistry. For ECS, she has served on many committees and co-organized numerous symposia. Presently, she is a member-at-

large of the Physical Analytical Electrochemistry Division and Member of the Executive Committee of the Europe Section. She may be reached at ilinek@chem.uw.edu.pl. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8785-8733

References 1. G. Centi and S. Perathoner, Green Carbon Dioxide, Advances in CO2 Utilization, Wiley (2014).

2. Y. Hori, in Modern Aspects of Electrochemistry, C. G. Vayenas, R. E. White, and M. E. Gamboa-Aldeco, Editors, Vol. 42, P. 89, Springer, New York (2008).

3. V. Balzani, A. Credi, and M. Venturi, ChemSusChem, 1, 26 (2008).

4. G. Centi and R. A. van Santen, Catalysis for Renewables, Wiley VCH, Weinheim (2007).

5. D. L. Dubois, in Encyclopedia of Electrochemistry, A. J. Bard and M. Stratmann, Editors, p. 202, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim (2006).

6. J. K. W. Frese, in Electrochemical and Electrocatalytic Reactions of Carbon Dioxide, B. P. Sullivan and K. Krist, Editors, p. 145, Guard H. E., Elsevier, Amsterdam (1993).

7. M. M. Halmann and M. Steinberg, in Greenhouse Gas Carbon Dioxide Mitigation: Science and Technology, M. M. Halmann and M. Steinberg, Editors, p. 411, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL (1999).

8. I. Taniguchi, in Modern Aspects of Electrochemistry, J. M. Bockris, B. E. Conway, and R. E. White, Editors, Vol. 20, p.

327, Springer, New York (1989).

9. Y. Hori, A. Murata, and R. Takahashi, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans.1, 85, 2309 (1989).

10. A. A. Peterson, F. Abild-Pedersen, F. Studt, J. Prossmeisl, and J. K. Nørskov, Energy Environ. Sci., 3, 1311 (2010).

11. B. Dembinska, W. Kicinski, A. Januszewska, A. Dobrzeniecka, and P. J. Kulesza, J. Electrochem. Soc., 164, H484 (2017).

12. J. Durst, A. Rudnev, A. Dutta, Y. Fu, J. Herranz, V. Kaliginedi, A. Kuzume, A. A. Permyakova, Y. Paratcha, P. Broekmann, and T. J. Schmidt, Chimia, 69,769 (2015).

13. A. Wadas, I. A. Rutkowska, A. Gorczynski, M. Kubicki, V. Patroniak, and P. J. Kulesza, Electrocatalysis, 5, 229 (2014).

14. J. Ma, N. Sun, X. Zhang, N. Zhao, F. Xiao, W. Wei, and Y. Sun, Catal. Today, 148, 221 (2009).

15. K. P. Kuhl, E. R. Cave, D. N. Abram, and T. F. Jaramillo, Energy Environ. Sci., 5, 7050 (2012).

16. R. Reske, H. Mistry, F. Behafarid, B. Roldan, Cuenya, and P. Strasser, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 136, 6978 (2014).

17. A. Januszewska, R. Jurczakowski, and P. J. Kulesza, Langmuir, 30, 14314 (2014).

18. S. Ma, R. Luo, J. I. Gold, A. Z. Yu, B. Kim, and P. J. A. Kenis, J. Mater. Chem. A, 4, 8573 (2016).

19. S. Verma, X. Lu, S. Ma, R. I. Masel, and P. J. A. Kenis, Phys.

Chem. Chem. Phys., 18, 7075 (2015).

20. L. Zhang, Z.-J. Zhao, and J. Gong, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 36, 11326 (2017).

21. T. Reda, C. M. Plugge, N. J. Abram, and J. Hirst, Proc. Natl.

Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 105, 10654 (2008).

22. H. A. Hansen, J. B. Varley, A. A Peterson, and J. K. Nørskov, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 4, 388 (2013).

23. A. Wadas, I. A. Rutkowska, M. Bartel, S. Zoladek, K. Rajeshwar, and P. J. Kulesza, Russ. J. Electrochem., 53, 1194 (2017).

24. F. Zhang and A. C. Co, J. Electrochem. Soc., 167, 046517 (2020).

25. Y. Hori, K. Kikuchi, and S. Suzuki, Chem. Lett., 4, 1695 (1985).

26. R. Kortlever, J. Shen, K. J. P. Schouten, F. Calle-Vallejo, and M. T. M. Koper, J. Phys.Chem. Lett., 6, 4073 (2015).

27. S. Nitopi, E. Bertheussen, S. B. Scott, X. Liu, A. K. Engstfeld, S. Horch, B. Seger, I. E. L. Stephens, K. Chan, C. Hahn, J. K. Nørskov, T. F. Jaramillo, and I. Chorkendorff, Chem. Rev., 119, 7610 (2019).

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

(continued on next page) 71

Kulesza and Rutkowska

(continued from previous page)

28. C. W. Li and M. W. Kanan, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 134, 7231 (2012).

29. A. A. Peterson and J. K. Norskov, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 3, 251 (2012).

30. Y.-J. Zhang, V. Sethuraman, R. Michalsky, and A. A. Peterson, ACS Catal., 4, 3742 (2014).

31. A. S. Varela, M. Kroschel, T. Reier, and P. Strasser, Catal. Today, 260, 8 (2016).

32. H. Mistry, R. Reske, Z. Zeng, Z.-J. Zhao, J. Greeley, P. Strasser, and B. Roldan Cuenya, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 136, 16473 (2014).

33. H. Mistry, F. Behafarid, R. Reske, A. S. Varela, P. Strasser, and B. Roldan Cuenya, ACS Catal., 6, 1075 (2015).

34. W. Tang, A. A. Peterson, A. S. Varela, Z. P. Jovanov, L. Bech, W. J. Durand, S. Dahl, J. K. Nørskov, and I. Chorkendorff, Phys.

Chem. Chem. Phys., 14, 76 (2012).

35. O. A. Baturina, Q. Lu, M. A. Padila, L. Xin, W. Li, A. Serov, K. Artyushkova, P. Atanassov, F. Xu, A. Epshteyn, T. Brintlinger, M. Schuette, and G. E. Collins, ACS Catal., 4, 3682 (2014).

36. K. Manthiram, B. J. Beberwyck, and A. P. Alivisatos, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 136, 13319 (2014).

37. C. S. Chen, A. D. Handoko, J. H. Wan, L. Ma, D. Ren, and B. S. Yeo, Catal. Sci. Technol., 5, 161 (2015).

38. F. S. Roberts, K. P. Kuhl, and A. Nilsson, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl., 127, 5268 (2015).

39. S. Sen, D. Liu, and G. T. R. Palmore, ACS Catal., 4, 3091 (2014).

40. W. Zhu, Y.-J. Zhang, H. Zhang, H. Lv, Q. Li, R. Michalsky, A. A. Peterson, and S. Sun, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 136, 16132 (2014).

41. Q. Lu, J. Rosen, and F. Jiao, ChemCatChem, 7, 38 (2015).

42. D. Ren, Y. Deng, A. D. Handoko, C. S. Chen, S. Malkhandi, and B. S. Yeo, ACS Catal., 5, 2814 (2015).

43. D. Kim, S. Lee, J. D. Ocon, B. Jeong, J. K. Lee, and J. Lee, Phys.

Chem. Chem. Phys., 17, 824 (2015).

44. R. Kas, R. Kortlever, A. Milbrat, M. T. M. Koper, G. Mul, and J. Baltrusaitis, Phys. Chem.Chem. Phys., 16, 12194 (2014).

45. A. Verdaguer-Casadevall, C. W. Li, T. P. Johansson, S. B. Scott, J. T. McKeown, M. Kumar, I. E. L. Stephens, M. W. Kanan, and I. Chorkendorff, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 137, 9808 (2015).

46. C. W. Li, J. Ciston, and M. W. Kanan, Nature, 508, 504 (2014).

47. S. Lee and J. Lee, ChemSusChem, 9, 333 (2015).

48. H. Shibata, J. A. Moulijn, and G. Mul, Catal. Lett., 123, 186 (2008).

49. Y.-J. Zhang and A. A. Peterson, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 17, 4505 (2015).

50. X. Nie, G. L. Griffin, M. J. Janik, and A. Asthagiri, Catal.

Commun., 52, 88 (2014).

51. M. Le, M. Ren, Z. Zhang, P. T. Sprunger, R. L. Kurtz, and J. C. Flake, J. Electrochem. Soc., 158, E45 (2011).

52. P. J. Kulesza, I. A. Rutkowska, and A. Wadas, in Encyclopedia of Interfacial Chemistry: Surface Science and Electrochemistry, K. Wandelt, Editor, Vol. 5, p. 521, Elsevier, New York (2018).

53. H. Ooka, M. C. Figueiredo, and M. T. M. Koper, Langmuir, 33, 9307 (2017).

54. E. Kecsenovity, B. Endrödi, P. S. Tóth, Y. Zou, R. A. W. Dryfe, K. Rajeshwar, and C. Janáky, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 139, 6682 (2017).

55. R. P. S. Chaplin and A. A. Wragg, J. Appl. Electrochem., 33, 1107 (2003).

56. M. Azuma, K. Hashimoto, M. Watanabe, and T. Sakata, J. Electroanal. Chem., 294, 299 (1990).

57. M. Azuma, K. Hashimoto, M. Hiramoto, M. Watanabe, and T. Sakata, J. Electrochem. Soc., 137, 1772 (1990).

58. M. Grden, M. Lukaszewski, G. Jerkiewicz, and A. Czerwinski, Electrochim. Acta, 53, 7585 (2008).

59. Y.-I. Zhang and A. A. Peterson, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 17, 4505 (2015).

60. B. S. Bassil, A. Haider, M. Ibrahim, A. Mougharbel, S. Bhattacharya, J. H. Christian, J. K. Bindra, N. S. Dalal, M. Wang, G. Zhang, B. Keita, I. A. Rutkowska, P. J. Kulesza, and U. Kortz, Dalton Trans., 47,12439 (2018).

72

61. I. A. Rutkowska, E. Szaniawska, J. Taniewicz, A. Wadas, E. Seta, D. Kowalski, and P. J. Kulesza, J. Electrochem. Soc., 166, H3271 (2019).

62. J. Li and N. Wu, Catal. Sci. Technol., 5, 1360 (2015).

63. J. L. White, M. F. Baruch, J. E. Pander III, Y. Hu, I. C. Fortmeyer, J. E. Park, T. Zhang, K. Liao, J. Gu, Y. Yan, T. W. Shaw, E. Abelev, and A. B. Bocarsly, Chem. Rev., 115, 12888 (2015).

64. K. Rajeshwar, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 2, 1301 (2011).

65. A. J. Cowan and J. R. Durrant, Chem. Soc. Rev., 42, 2281 (2013).

66. G. Centi and S. Perathoner, ChemSusChem, 3, 195 (2010).

67. R. Hinogami, Y. Nakamura, S. Yae, and Y. Nakato, J. Phys.

Chem. B, 102, 974 (1998).

68. G. Ghadimkhani, N. R. Tacconi, W. Chanmanee, C. Janaky, and K. Rajeshwar, Chem. Commun., 49, 1297 (2013).

69. C. Janaky, D. Hursán, B. Endrodi, W. Chanmanee, D. Roy, D. Liu, N. R. Tacconi, B. H. Dennis, and K. Rajeshwar, ACS Energy Lett., 1, 332 (2016).

70. J. Gu, A. Wuttig, J. W. Krizan, Y. Hu, Z. M. Detweiler, R. J. Cava, and A. B. Bocarsly, J. Phys. Chem. C, 117, 12415 (2013).

71. J. Ferreira de Brito, A. R. Araujo, K. Rajeshwar, and M. V. Boldrin Zanoni, Chem. Eng. J., 264, 302 (2015).

72. J. Ferreira de Brito, A. Alves da Silva, A. J. Cavalheiro, and M. V. Boldrin Zanoni, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci., 9, 5961 (2014).

73. K. Rajeshwar, M. Kabir Hossain, R. T. Macaluso, C. Janáky, A. Varga, and P. J. Kulesza, J. Electrochem. Soc., 165, H3192 (2018).

74. D. Chen, X. Zhang, and A. F. Lee, J. Mater. Chem. A, 3, 14487 (2015).

75. W. Siripala, A. Ivanovskaya, T. F. Jaramillo, S.-H. Baeck, and E. W. McFarland, Sol. Energ. Mat. Sol. C, 77, 229 (2003).

76. D. Sui, X. Yin, H. Dong, S. Qin, J. Chen, and W. Jiang, Catal.

Lett., 142, 1202 (2012).

77. T. W. Woolerton, S. Sheard, E. Reisner, E. Pierce, S. W. Ragsdale, and F. A. Armstrong, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 132, 2132 (2010).

78. E. Szaniawska, K. Bienkowski, I. A. Rutkowska, P. J. Kulesza, and R. Solarska, Catal. Today, 300, 145 (2018).

79. E. Szaniawska, I. A. Rutkowska, M. Frik, A. Wadas, E. Seta, A. Krogul-Sobczak, K. Rajeshwar, and P. J. Kulesza, Electrochim.

Acta, 265, 400 (2018).

80. F. Meng, J. Li, S. K. Cushing, J. Bright, M. Zhi, J. D. Rowley, Z. Hong, A. Manivannan, A. D. Bristow, and N. Wu, ACS Catal., 3, 746 (2013).

81. F. Meng, S. K. Cushing, J. Li, S. Hao, and N. Wu, ACS Catal., 5, 1949 (2015).

82. Q. Xiang, J. Yu, and M. Jaroniec, Chem. Soc. Rev., 41, 782 (2012).

83. Y. T. Liang, B. K. Vijayan, K. A. Gray, and M. C. Hersam, Nano Lett., 11, 2865 (2011).

84. J. Young Kim, J.-W. Jang, D. Hyun Youn, J. Yul Kim, E. Sun Kim, and J. Sung Lee, RSC Adv., 2, 9415 (2012).

85. L. Yu, G. Li, X. Zhang, X. Ba, G. Shi, Y. Li, P. K. Wong, J. C. Yu, and Y. Yu, ACS Catal., 6, 6444 (2016).

86. E. Szaniawska , I. A. Rutkowska, E. Seta, I. Tallo, E. Lust, and P. J. Kulesza, Electrochim. Acta, 341, 136054 (2020).

87. B. Endrődi, G. Bencsik, F. Darvas, R. Jones, K. Rajeshwar, and C. Janáky, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci, 62, 133 (2017).

88. J. Durst, A. Rudnev, A. Dutta, Y. Fu, J. Herranz, V. Kaliginedi, A. Kuzume, A. A. Permyakova, Y. Paratcha, P. Broekmann, and T. J. Schmidt, Chimia, 69, 769 (2015).

89. B. D. Alexander, P. J. Kulesza, I. A. Rutkowska, R. Solarska, and J. Augustynski, J. Mater. Chem., 18, 2298 (2008).

90. K. Miecznikowski, A. Ramírez, S. Fiechter, P. Bogdanoff, E. Szaniawska, A. Wadas, and P. J. Kulesza, Electrochim. Acta, 179, 379 (2015).

91. V. Andrei, B. Reuillard, and E. Reisne, Nat. Mater., 19, 189 (2020).

92. B. Roldan Cuenya, Accounts Chem. Res., 46, 1682 (2012).

93. F. Zaera, Chem. Soc. Rev., 42, 2746 (2013).

94. W. D. Jones, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 142, 4955 (2020).

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Electrochemical Destruction of ‘Forever Chemicals’: The Right Solution at the Right Time

by Suzanne Witt, Nick Rancis, Mary Ensch, and Vanessa Maldonado

P

er- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are surfactants that are used in many consumer and industrial products, such as cookware, food packaging, and fire-fighting foams.1–7 Due to their widespread use, large quantities of PFAS have leached into water streams, contaminating ground, surface, and wastewater. This is of major concern to human health, as these compounds do not degrade in the body, and their exposure can lead to many adverse health effects. Cancer, immunotoxicity, metabolic diseases, and neurodevelopmental disorders have possible links to PFAS exposure.8 Several adsorption and filtration techniques have been employed to remove PFAS from drinking water with some success.1, 9 However, these processes do not destroy these contaminants, and concentrated solutions are often disposed of in landfills where PFAS can re-enter the water stream. Therefore, a technology to permanently destroy these toxic chemicals is of vital importance. Developing such a method has been a major challenge, as PFAS molecules are highly stable under many conditions. Recently, electrochemical oxidation (EO) has emerged as a promising strategy for the complete destruction of PFAS. By applying a current through a solution, EO can directly and indirectly oxidize organic pollutants in water, leading to their degradation into environmentally-benign byproducts (see scheme in Fig. 1).10, 11 Direct oxidation involves removing electrons from the contaminant at the electrode surface and breaking bonds within the molecule. Indirect oxidation results from the initial formation of highly reactive radical species in water, which can then migrate through the solution and chemically oxidize other species.10, 11 For PFAS, the complete oxidation of carbon-fluorine bonds results in a mixture of carbon dioxide and fluoride ions.3, 6, 12–18 The main advantages of EO compared to other remediation processes are that it permanently destroys PFAS rather than simply removing it, and generally does not require additional chemicals or other modifications to the sample prior to treatment. Complete destruction of PFAS provides an immediate and highly impactful solution, whereas other current off the shelf methodologies for PFAS treatment merely involve concentrating and/or depositing back into landfills, thus continuing the contamination cycle.

For EO to be effective, high current densities and voltages must be applied to the sample. This requirement is due to the stability of PFAS molecules and the high amounts of energy required to break their carbon-fluorine bonds. As such, the judicious choice of materials to serve as electrodes is necessary. Potential electrode materials must be highly stable and inert in these harsh environments. One material that meets these requirements is boron-doped diamond (BDD).

utility of multiple lab and pilot-scale electrochemical water treatment systems equipped with BDD electrode cells of varying configurations and geometries (Fig. 2). Our team has successfully employed BDD for the destruction of PFAS in complex landfill leachate mixtures, as well as other concentrated PFAS solutions from different sources of waste. Varying form factors, surface areas, and flow conditions can increase the efficiency of electron transfer in both laminar and turbulent conditions. The broad-spectrum nature of BDD allows for the potential for near-complete mineralization of many organic compounds found in wastewater in a smaller footprint than many other types of EO systems as well as easily tailor the treatment solutions to specific effluent requirements.

We have experimented with different cathode materials, and found that BDD has excellent resistance to fouling under high current density conditions. Fouling is of considerable interest to service companies and manufacturers of water treatment systems aimed to prolong system performance over time, lowering associated ongoing costs and maintenance. By manufacturing, testing, and optimizing a variety of electrode materials and substrates, long-term cell longevity, operational costs, and treatment efficiencies are well characterized, even when exposed to real-world wastewater with extremely high background matrices. Figure 2 shows a comparison between stainless (continued on next page)

BDD for PFAS Destruction BDD is a strong candidate as an electrode material for EO because it can accept high current densities over a wide potential range and is a weak adsorber of hydroxyl ions that participate in indirect oxidation reactions away from the electrode.5, 12, 14, 17–26 The BDD material provides a combination of rigidity, high oxygen over-potential, and overall electrode lifetime, which makes it an attractive option for an electrochemical treatment system. Furthermore, BDD allows for limitless configurations of cell design, surface area, and flexibility in current and versatility in flow design. We have demonstrated the

Fig. 1. General scheme for the EO of PFAS molecules.

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

73

Witt et al.

(continued from previous page)

Fig. 2. Top: parallel plate BDD cell (A) flow through BDD cell (B) and 20 L pilot electrochemical water treatment system (C) at Fraunhofer USA Inc. CCD. Bottom: stainless steel (left) and BDD (right) cathodes after treatment of landfill leachate samples at 50 mA/cm2 for 20 hours.

steel and BDD cathodes, in which the former exhibited a high degree of fouling after exposure to 50 mA/cm2 for several hours, while the BDD cathode remained pristine.

PFAS-containing water samples for treatment are obtained through partnerships with industry and municipalities. In many cases, BDD systems can leverage the physical and chemical benefits of other types of water treatment systems in a ‘treatment-train’ scenario. To increase the versatility and economic case for EO, tandem preconcentration of PFAS material in leachate or industrial wastewater using existing technologies, such as both Reverse Osmosis (RO) or Ion Exchange (IX) plus electrooxidation, could be especially advantageous for full PFAS removal with large volume throughput.1, 3, 4, 9, 27–34 Furthermore, treatment of streams of waste with low concentrations of PFAS (such as groundwater or drinking water) could be feasible in this treatment-train approach given low (parts-per-trillion) influent PFAS concentrations. Our choice of samples for testing has included both untreated landfill leachates and concentrated PFAS solutions

Fig. 4. PFOA and PFOS destruction over time for the EO of simulated ion exchange regenerate solutions with BDD.

Fig. 5. EO of pentafluorobenzoic acid (PFBA) in landfill leachate using various current densities.

Fig. 3. Destruction of PFOA in a 10 L water sample over time using the BDD reactor system. The applied current density was 200 mA/cm2, and 50 mM NaSO4 was used as the electrolyte. The inset shows the concentrations of shorter chain PFAS molecules over time.

74

that mimic that which is obtained from preconcentration steps. We have subjected these samples to a variety of reaction conditions to optimize PFAS destruction. We have focused our efforts on the removal of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), two of the most common and widely studied PFAS molecules.9, 35 Figure 3 shows the results of an initial study in which a 10 L water sample containing PFOA was subjected to EO in our BDD reactor at 200 mA/cm2 for 8 hours. Over the course of the experiment, the concentration of PFOA gradually decreased from 1.19 parts-per-million (ppm) to 2.80 parts-per-billion (ppb), a 98 % reduction. However, some shorter chain PFAS molecules, including perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA), perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), and perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA), were detected throughout the experiment using liquid chromatography mass spectroscopy (LC/ MS) (Fig. 3, inset). The concentration of shorter chain compounds The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

increased for the first 30 minutes to one hour, then decreased until the four-hour mark, after which the concentrations of PFHpA and PFPeA increased again. The formation of shorter chain PFAS is commonly observed in PFAS destruction, as longer chains (such as PFOA) can be broken down to form these new species.4, 6, 9, 12 Over time, however, EO can destroy the newly formed shorter chains, resulting in the decrease in their concentrations. The increase in PFHpA and PFPeA between four and eight hours indicates that EO is a dynamic process, as PFAS chains of various lengths are created and destroyed when applying high current densities for long periods of time.

The experiment (in Fig. 3) showed promising results for the destruction of PFOA at a high current density, but this destruction comes with the cost of high-energy consumption. One goal of this work is to optimize treatment conditions, including applied current density, to reduce the amount of energy required. We have experimented with applying lower, constant current densities as well as a combined current density approach, in which an initial, high current density is applied for a short time, followed by a lower current density for the remaining time. For these experiments, we expanded our work to include solutions of PFAS in more complex matrices.

PFAS may be retrieved from ion exchange resins using mixtures comprising various concentrations of methanol (CH3OH), sodium chloride (NaCl), sodium hydroxide (NaOH), ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH), and ammonium chloride (NH4Cl), also known as ion exchange regenerate solutions.28–30, 32, 34 We have created simulated mixtures based on these salts and solvents to test the efficacy of our BDD EO system for treatment of ion exchange regenerate solutions.

Figure 4 shows the reduction of PFOA and PFOS over time in two different simulated ion exchange regenerate solutions: 6.25 % NH4OH / 2.00 % CH3OH and 0.55 % NH4OH / 0.55 % NH4Cl. The 6.25 % NH4OH / 2.00 % CH3OH solution was treated at a constant current density of 50 mA/cm2 as well as 50&5 mA/cm2 (where 50 mA/cm2 was applied for the first hour and 5 mA/cm2 was applied for the remaining time). After five hours, PFOA reduction between the two treatments is very similar, while the constant current treatment resulted in ≈ 11 % greater PFOS removal compared to the combined current density approach. However, by reducing the current density after the first hour, the total energy consumption was reduced by ≈ 32 %, demonstrating the effectiveness of using a combined current density approach for reducing energy usage. The 0.50 % NH4OH / 0.50 % NH4Cl solution treated with 50&5 mA/ cm2 achieved slightly greater reduction of both PFOA and PFOS at a lower energy consumption compared to the 6.25 % NH4OH / 2.00 % CH3OH solution treated with the same current densities. These results indicate that PFAS destruction is dependent on the solution matrix, and perhaps that specific treatments may need to be tailored to individual sample compositions. Furthermore, the formation of byproducts during treatment of these complex matrices is of concern, and we have observed the formation of perchlorate or formaldehyde in solutions containing chloride ions or CH3OH, respectively.

Approach to Partnerships We acknowledge the critical importance of collaborating with the right public and private partners to ensure long-term commercial success of the processes described above at the lowest possible risk.

Given the public health concern, we also drive the output from our work to inform policymakers in truly what is possible for early-stage technologies as they become available to the market. Specifically, in our work with PFAS destruction, much of our industry-relevant approach focuses on the need to: 1. Scale up water treatment systems and processes to industry relevant volumes critical in understanding and extrapolating meaningful technical economics specific to a variety of raw or pre-treated wastewater sources.

2. Reduce risk when deploying new systems. It is both prudent and critical to identify, measure and validate key risk byproducts created, both aqueous and gaseous, of keen interest to customers while also providing key data to decision-making regulators.

3. Reduce cost in both capital and operating parameters by means of identifying end-of-pipe requirements and developing strategies to reduce such costs for the end customer. An example of such a strategy is shown in Fig. 4.

Conclusions and Outlook Whether as a primary treatment option for complex samples or a secondary treatment option for large-scale remediation, EO with BDD electrodes has shown considerable promise for permanent destruction of PFAS compounds. While our team has had great success in treating PFOA and PFOS with our BDD reactor systems, more work is required to characterize the byproducts of these reactions and their fate. PFAS contaminated solutions are complex and contain additional species, such as chloride compounds, and efforts to characterize all possible byproducts that may be generated are currently underway.

Furthermore, as we have observed the conversion of longer chain PFAS molecules to shorter chains during EO, ongoing work in our group is focusing on improving the removal of these shorter chains from landfill leachates and ion exchange regenerate solutions using BDD. Other EO electrode materials, such as Ti4O7, have exhibited poor performance for short chain PFAS destruction.36 We have collected preliminary data indicating that removal of shorter chain PFAS molecules increases at higher current densities (Fig. 5, where PFBA = pentafluorobenzoic acid). This makes a strong case for the use of BDD in EO, as this material is able to sustain these high current densities without fouling. © The Electrochemical Society. DOI: 10.1149.2/2.F11202IF.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank the City of Grand Rapids, MI; Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes; and Energy (EGLE) and the Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) for their generous and continued support for much of the work presented above.

About the Authors Suzanne Witt received a BS in biochemistry from Ohio Northern University in 2012, and a PhD in chemistry from The Ohio State University in 2017. As a PhD student, she investigated inorganic complexes for electrochemical water splitting and carbon dioxide reduction. After defending, she moved to the University of Missouri, where she studied nuclear battery systems during a one-year postdoctoral fellowship. In 2018, she was awarded a National Research Council Postdoctoral Associateship to conduct research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). At NIST, she developed an in-situ characterization technique for ceramic electrode materials. She joined Fraunhofer USA Center for Coatings and Diamond Technologies as a scientist in March 2020. She may be reached at switt@fraunhofer.org. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9227-6682 Nick Rancis has industry experience spanning numerous roles, including CTO, founder, and executive specializing in venture creation, product development, manufacturing, and corporate growth within the water and energy sectors. Leveraging his experience in entrepreneurship and commercialization in new, emerging, and mature markets, Rancis leads the TechBridge Program at Fraunhofer USA. Before joining the Fraunhofer USA Team, Nick served as co-founder and CTO at Clear Comfort Water, leading product strategy, technical sales, and applied R&D. Previous roles include regional director of the Rocky Mountain Institute, advising consultant (continued on next page)

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

75

Witt et al.

(continued from previous page)

to the vice president at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and senior scientist for two venture funded energy-related startups: BioVantage Resources and Solix Biofuels. He also served as a board member of the Deming Center for Entrepreneurship at the Leed’s School of Business, holds an MBA from Babson College and a BS in microbiology from Colorado State University. Rancis holds seven patents. He may be reached at nrancis@fraunhofer.org. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2261-2441 Mary Ensch is a chemical engineering graduate student at Michigan State University working towards her PhD at the MSU/Fraunhofer USA Center for Coatings and Diamond Technologies.

She received her BS in chemical engineering from Michigan State University (2016). Her research has been focused on using boron-doped diamond (BDD) for biological and heavy metal sensing applications, and the destruction of persistent compounds in the environment. She is a recipient of the Clifford Humphrys Fellowship for Preservation of Water Quality in The Great Lakes for the fall 2019 and spring 2020 school year. She may be reached at mensch@fraunhofer.org. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4718-7517 Vanessa Maldonado received her bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering from the National Polytechnic School of Quito (EPN), Ecuador. In August of 2018, she started a PhD program in chemical engineering in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Material Science at Michigan State University (MSU). Her main research interests are focused on destructive technologies for per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) water remediation that includes electrochemical oxidation and plasma treatment, as well as treatment trains for PFAS remediation in wastewater. She develops her research at the Fraunhofer Center for Coatings and Diamond Technologies (CCD). She may be reached at vmaldonado@ fraunhofer.org. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8671-1863

About the Company Fraunhofer USA Center for Coatings and Diamond Technologies CCD performs research under contract to industry partners and government institutions. Since 1998, our team of experienced process engineers develops coating solutions based on physical and chemical vapor deposition (PVD, CVD) technologies.

Fraunhofer USA CCD is located on the campus of Michigan State University. Our objective is to support customers in the development of new products and production processes by providing them with the latest process and systems technologies. Customers include companies from industry sectors such as manufacturing, semiconductor, water treatment, biomedical, and energy. Fraunhofer USA CCD is a confident and reliable partner providing proprietary and competitive R&D services based on core competences in diamond and coating technologies. Fraunhofer USA CCD’s quality management system is certified according to the standard ISO 9001: 2015.

References 1. M. F. Rahman, S. Peldszus, and W. B. Anderson, Water Res., 50, 318 (2014).

2. M. Houde, J. W. Martin, R. J. Letcher, K. R. Solomon, and D. C. G. Muir, Environ. Sci. Technol., 40, 3463 (2006).

3. N. Merino, Y. Qu, R. A. Deeb, E. L. Hawley, M. R. Hoffmann, and S. Mahendra, Environ. Eng. Sci., 33, 615 (2016).

4. K. H. Kucharzyk, R. Darlington, M. Benotti, R. Deeb, and E. Hawley, J. Environ. Manage., 204, 757 (2017).

76

5. K. E. Carter and J. Farrell, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 6111 (2008).

6. C. Fang, M. Megharaj, and R. Naidu, J. Adv. Oxid. Technol., 20, 20170014 (2017).

7. L. A. Schaider, S. A. Balan, A. Blum, D. Q. Andrews, M. J. Strynar, M. E. Dickinson, D. M. Lunderberg, J. R. Lang, and G. F. Peaslee, Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett., 4, 105 (2017).

8. E. M. Sunderland, X. C. Hu, C. Dassuncao, A. K. Tokranov, C. C. Wagner, and J. G. Allen, J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol., 29, 131 (2019).

9. V. A. Arias Espana, M. Mallavarapu, and R. Naidu, Environ.

Technol. Innov., 4, 168 (2015).

10. Y. Deng and J. D. Englehardt, Waste Manag., 27, 380 (2007).

11. C. Comninellis and C. Guohua, Electrochemistry for the Environment. Springer, 2010.

12. B. P. Chaplin, Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts, 16, 1182 (2014).

13. S. Liang, R. “David” Pierce, H. Lin, S. Y. D. Chiang, and Q. “Jack” Huang, Remediation, 28, 127 (2018).

14. J. Niu, Y. Li, E. Shang, Z. Xu, and J. Liu, Chemosphere, 146, 526 (2016).

15. C. E. Schaefer, S. Choyke, P. L. Ferguson, C. Andaya, A. Burant, A. Maizel, T. J. Strathmann, and C. P. Higgins, Environ. Sci. Technol., 52, 10689 (2018).

16. C. E. Schaefer, C. Andaya, A. Urtiaga, E. R. McKenzie, and C. P. Higgins, J. Hazard. Mater., 295, 170 (2015).

17. C. E. Schaefer, C. Andaya, A. Burant, C. W. Condee, A. Urtiaga, T. J. Strathmann, and C. P. Higgins, Chem. Eng. J., 317, 424 (2017).

18. A. M. Trautmann, H. Schell, K. R. Schmidt, K. M. Mangold, and A. Tiehm, Water Sci. Technol., 71, 1569 (2015).

19. A. Urtiaga, C. Fernández-González, S. Gómez-Lavín, and I. Ortiz, Chemosphere, 129, 20 (2015).

20. H. Xiao, B. Lv, G. Zhao, Y. Wang, M. Li, and D. Li, J. Phys.

Chem. A, 115, 13836 (2011).

21. Q. Zhuo, S. Deng, B. Yang, J. Huang, B. Wang, T. Zhang, and G. Yu, Electrochim. Acta, 77, 17 (2012).

22. B. Gomez-Ruiz, S. Gómez-Lavín, N. Diban, V. Boiteux, A. Colin, X. Dauchy, and A. Urtiaga, J. Electroanal. Chem., 798, 51 (2017).

23. B. Gomez-Ruiz, N. Diban, and A. Urtiaga, Sep. Purif. Technol., 208, 169 (2019).

24. Z. Liao and J. Farrell, J. Appl. Electrochem., 39, 1993 (2009).

25. T. Ochiai, Y. Iizuka, K. Nakata, T. Murakami, D. A. Tryk, A. Fujishima, Y. Koide, and Y. Morito, Diam. Relat. Mater., 20, 64 (2011).

26. Á. Soriano, D. Gorri, and A. Urtiaga, Water Res., 112, 147 (2017).

27. F. Xiao, K. J. Davidsavor, S. Park, M. Nakayama, and B. R. Phillips, J. Colloid Interface Sci., 368, 505 (2012).

28. A. Zaggia, L. Conte, L. Falletti, M. Fant, and A. Chiorboli, Water Res., 91, 137 (2016).

29. K. E. Carter and J. Farrell, Sep. Sci. Technol., 45, 762 (2010).

30. P. Chularueangaksorn, S. Tanaka, S. Fujii, and C. Kunacheva, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 130, 884 (2013).

31. L. Conte, L. Falletti, A. Zaggia, and M. Milan, Chem. Eng. Trans., 43, 2257 (2015).

32. S. Deng, Q. Yu, J. Huang, and G. Yu, Water Res., 44, 5188 (2010).

33. Z. Du, S. Deng, Y. Chen, B. Wang, J. Huang, Y. Wang, and G. Yu, J. Hazard. Mater., 286, 136 (2015).

34. S. Woodard, J. Berry, and B. Newman, Remediation, 27, 19 (2017).

35. X. C. Hu, D. Q. Andrews, A. B. Lindstrom, T. A. Bruton, L. A. Schaider, P. Grandjean, R. Lohmann, C. C. Carignan, A. Blum, S. A. Balan, C. P. Higgins, and E. M. Sunderland, Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett., 3, 344 (2016).

36. H. Lin, J. Niu, S. Liang, C. Wang, Y. Wang, F. Jin, Q. Luo, and Q. Huang, Chem. Eng. J., 354, 1058 (2018).

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

SEC TION NE WS Section Leadership Arizona Section – Candace Kay Chan, Chair Brazil Section – Luis F. P. Dick, Chair Canada Section – Bradley Easton, Chair Chicago Section – Alan Zdunek, Chair Chile Section – Jose H. Zagal, Chair China Section – Yong Yao Xia, Chair Cleveland Section – Heidi B. Martin, Chair Detroit Section – Kris Inman, Chair Europe Section – Renata Solarski, Chair Georgia Section – Seung Woo Lee, Chair India Section – S. A. Ilangovan, Chair Israel Section – Daniel Mandler, Chair

Japan Section – Masayoshi Watanabe, Chair Korea Section – Won-Sub Yoon, Chair Mexico Section – Carlos E. Frontana-Vazquez, Chair National Capital Section – Eric D. Wachsman, Chair New England Section – Sanjeev Mukerjee, Chair Pittsburgh Section – Clifford W. Walton, Chair San Francisco Section – Zhichuan J. Xu, Chair Singapore Section – Alex Yan Qingyu, Chair Taiwan Section – Hsisheng Teng, Chair Texas Section – Jeremy P. Meyers, Chair Twin Cities Section – Vicki Gelling, Chair

Visit www.electrochem.org/sections to learn more about ECS sections,or contact Keerthana.Varadhan@electrochem.org to become involved.

The 17th International Symposium on Solid Oxide Fuel Cells (SOFC-XVII) Sponsored by High-Temperature Energy, Materials, & Processes Division of The Electrochemical Society, Inc. and The SOFC Society of Japan

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN July 18-23, 2021

The Brewery Conference Center

Abstract Submission Opens August 2020

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

77

AWARDS PROGRAM

Awards, Fellowships, Grants ECS distinguishes outstanding technical achievements in electrochemistry, solid state science and technology, and recognizes exceptional service to the Society through the Honors & Awards Program. Recognition opportunities exist in the following categories: Society Awards, Division Awards, Student Awards, and Section Awards.

ECS recognizes that todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s emerging scientists are the next generation of leaders in our field, and offers competitive Fellowships and Grants to allow students and young professionals to make discoveries and shape our science long into the future.

See highlights below and visit www.electrochem.org/awards for further information.

Society Awards The ECS Carl Wagner Memorial Award was established in 1980 to recognize mid-career achievement and excellence in research areas of interest of the Society, and significant contributions in the teaching or guidance of students or colleagues in education, industry, or government.

The award consists of a silver medal, wall plaque, Society life membership, complimentary meeting registration, and travel assistance of up to $1,000.

Materials are due by October 1, 2020.

The ECS Olin Palladium Award was established in 1950 to recognize distinguished contributions to the fields of electrochemical or corrosion science.

The award consists of a palladium medal, wall plaque, a $7,500 prize, Society life membership, and complimentary meeting registration.

Materials are due by October 1, 2020.

Division Awards The ECS Electronics and Photonics Division Award was established in 1968 to encourage excellence in electronics research and outstanding technical contributions to the field of electronics science. The award consists of a framed certificate, a $1,500 prize, and the choice between travel assistance of up to $1,000 or Society life membership.

Materials are due by August 1, 2020.

The ECS Energy Technology Division Research Award was established in 1992 to encourage excellence in energy-related research. The award consists of framed certificate, a $2,000 prize, and membership in the Energy Technology Division for as long as the recipient is an ECS member.

Materials are due by September 1, 2020.

78

The ECS Energy Technology Division Supramaniam Srinivasan Young Investigator Award was established in 2011 to recognize and reward an outstanding young researcher in the field of energy technology. The award consists of a framed certificate, a $1,000 prize, and complimentary meeting registration.

Materials are due by September 1, 2020.

The ECS Nanocarbons Division Richard E. Smalley Research Award was established in 2006 to encourage excellence in fullerenes, nanotubes, and carbon nanostructures research. The award is intended to recognize, in a broad sense, those persons who have made outstanding contributions to the understanding and applications of fullerenes. The award consists of a framed certificate, a $1,000 prize, and assistance up to a maximum of $1,500 to facilitate attendance of the meeting at which the award is to be presented.

Materials are due by October 8, 2020.

The ECS Corrosion Division Herbert H. Uhlig Award was established in 1972 to recognize excellence in corrosion research and outstanding technical contributions to the field of corrosion science and technology. The award consists of a framed certificate, a $1,500 prize, and possible travel assistance.

Materials are due by December 15, 2020.

The ECS Organic and Biological Electrochemistry Division Manuel M. Baizer Award was established in 1992 and currently recognizes outstanding scientific achievements in the electrochemistry of organics and organometallic compounds, carbon-based polymers and biomass, whether fundamental or applied, and including but not limited to synthesis, mechanistic studies, engineering of processes, electrocatalysis, devices such as sensors, pollution control, and separation/recovery. The award consists of a framed certificate and a $1,000 prize.

Materials are due by January 15, 2021.

The Electrochemical Society Interface â&#x20AC;˘ Summer 2020 â&#x20AC;˘ www.electrochem.org

AWARDS AWAPROGRAM RDS The ECS Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry Division Max Bredig Award in Molten Salt and Ionic Liquid Chemistry was established in 1984 to recognize excellence in the field and to stimulate publication of high quality research papers in this area in the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. The award consists of a framed certificate and a $1,500 prize. As the award presentation coincides with the International Symposium on Molten Salts and Ionic Liquids, the recipient is required to attend the corresponding Society meeting and present the corresponding lecture.

Materials are due by March 1, 2021.

Student Awards The ECS Georgia Section Outstanding Student Achievement Award was established in 2011 to recognize academic accomplishments in any area of science or engineering in which electrochemical and/ or solid state science and technology is the central consideration.

The award consists of a $500 prize.

Materials due by August 15, 2020.

The ECS Energy Technology Division Graduate Student Award sponsored by Bio-Logic was established in 2012 to recognize promising young engineers and scientists in fields pertaining to this division. The award consists of a framed certificate, a $1,000 prize, complimentary student meeting registration, and complimentary admission to the Energy Technology Division business meeting.

Materials are due by September 1, 2020.

The ECS Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering Division Student Achievement Award was established in 1989 to recognize promising young engineers and scientists in the field of electrochemical engineering. The award consists of a framed certificate and a $1,000 prize.

Materials due by September 15, 2020.

The ECS Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering Division H. H. Dow Memorial Student Achievement Award was established in 1990 to recognize promising young engineers and scientists in the field of electrochemical engineering and applied electrochemistry. The award consists of a framed certificate and a $1,000 prize to be used for expenses associated with the recipient’s education or research project.

Materials are due by September 15, 2020.

The ECS Corrosion Division Morris Cohen Graduate Student Award was established in 1991 to recognize and reward outstanding graduate research in the field of corrosion science and/or engineering. The award consists of a certificate and the sum of $1,000. The award, for outstanding master’s or PhD work, is open to graduate students who have successfully completed all the requirements for their degrees, as testified to by the students’ advisers, within a period of two years prior to the nomination submission deadline.

Materials are due by December 15, 2020.

Section Awards The ECS Europe Section Heinz Gerischer Award was established in 2001 to recognize an individual or a small group of individuals (no more than three) who have made an outstanding contribution to the science of semiconductor electrochemistry and photoelectrochemistry, including the underlying areas of physical and materials chemistry of significance to this field. The award consists of a framed certificate and 2,000 EUR prize and, if required, financial assistance for unreimbursed travel expenses incurred to receive the award, not to exceed 1,000 EUR. Materials are due by September 30, 2020.

Visit www.ecsdl.org today!

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

79

NE W MEMBERS

Member Spotlight I am a new assistant professor in materials science and engineering at the University of California, Davis. My research is focused on the thermodynamics and crystallography of materials in extreme environments, in particular, ultra-high temperatures (above 3,000˚C). I joined ECS so that I could meet other scientists in the ECS High-Temperature Energy, Materials, & Processes (H-TEMP) Division.

As a new member, I am hoping to meet other researchers outside of my already established sphere to extend collaborations and scientific discussions in new directions.”

Scott McCormack Assistant Professor University of California, Davis, USA

Kenneth Crossley Los Alamos, NM, USA

I chose to become an ECS member because of the excellent network of researchers advancing alternative energy storage and conversion technologies. I hope to learn from you and collaborate with you to improve the state of our world.”

Would you like to be featured in our new Member Spotlight, and be entered for a chance to win a

$25.00

Amazon gift card?

Contact customerservice@electrochem.org for details!

ESC is proud to announce the following new members for January, February, and March 2020.

(Members are listed alphabetically by family/last name.)

Members

A

Altomare, Marco, Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany Amirjani, Amirmostafa, Ecublens, Vaud, Switzerland

B

Bayatsarmadi, Bita, Clayton South, Victoria, Australia Brunet, Paul, Jordanstown, Londonderry, UK Brunklaus, Gunther, Muenster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany Burdyny, Thomas, Delft, Zuid Holland, Netherlands

C

Chen, Zheng, La Jolla, CA, USA Chenevier, Pascale, Grenoble, AuvergneRhÔne-Alpes, France Chong, Vanessa, Alor Gajah, Melaka, Malaysia

Coman, Paul, Columbia, SC, USA Costa, Ruben, Getafe, Madrid, Spain Crossley, Kenneth, Los Alamos, NM, USA

D

Driscoll, Darren, Lemont, IL, USA

F

Feiner, Ron, New York, NY, USA Fujita, Mitsuharu, Ichikawa, Chiba, Japan

G

Garg, Sakshi, Fremont, CA, USA Gendel, Youri, Technion City, Haifa, Israel Ghuman, Kulbir, Varennes, QC, Canada Gordiz, Kiarash, Cambridge, MA, USA

H

Hill, Jonathan, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan Hong, Jong-in, Seoul, North Gyeongsang, South Korea Huot, Jacques, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada

80

I

Ilangovan, Sinthai, Thiruvananthapuram, KL, India

J

Ji, Huiwen, Walnut Creek, CA, USA

K

Kawamuro, Yuki, Ueda, Nagano, Japan Kerr, Emily, Geelong, Victoria, Australia Kim, Jae Chul, Edgewater, NJ, USA Kim, Taeyoung, Potsdam, NY, USA Kuwata, Shigemasa, Santa Clara, CA, USA

L

Landesman, Jean-Pierre, Rennes, Brittany, France Lebegue, Estelle, Nantes, Pays de la Loire, France Lestriez, Bernard, Nantes, Pays de la Loire, France Li, Zhihai, Muncie, IN, USA

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

NE W MEMBERS M

Madan, Deepa, Baltimore, MD, USA Manger, Dirk, Dresden, Saxony, Germany Matunis, Frank, Yardley, PA, USA McCormack, Scott, Woodland, CA, USA McGlynn, Ruairi, Belfast, Antrim, UK McKinney, Bryan, Frisco, TX, USA Minty, Colin, Didsbury, AB, Canada Mota-Lima, Andressa, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Mutschke, Gerd, Dresden, Saxony, Germany

N

Naik, Gururaj, Houston, TX, USA Naldoni, Alberto, Olomouc, Moravia, Czech Republic Neale, Alex, Liverpool, England, UK

O

Ono, Takahito, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan

P

Pacquette, Adele, Elmsford, NY, USA Paul, Anirban, Dallas, TX, USA

R

Reggente, Melania, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland Reichmanis, Elsa, Atlanta, GA, USA Rippy, Kerry, Glenwood Springs, CO, USA Rowell, Nelson, Ottawa, ON, Canada Rusinek, Cory, Las Vegas, NV, USA

S

Sayeed, Md Abu, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Shadike, Zulipiya, Upton, NY, USA Sherazi, Syed Tauqir, Abbottabad, KPK, Pakistan Stevens, David, Vancouver, BC, Canada

T

Tanaka, Isao, Kofu, Yamanashi, Japan Tessonnier, Jean-Philippe, Ames, IA, USA

V

Vermaas, David, Delft, South Holland, Netherlands

W

Wang, Chih-Liang, Taichung, Taichung City, Taiwan Wang, Hailiang, West Haven, CT, USA Weiss, Anna, Elgin, IL, USA Woollam, Richard, Katy, TX, USA

X

Xu, Jun, Harrisburg, NC, USA

Y

Yaari, Zvi, New York, NY, USA Yarar Kaplan, Beguim, Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey

Z

Zhuang, Xiaodong, Shanghai, Shanghai, China

Zimmerman, John, Madison Heights, MI, USA

Student Members

A

Abate, Seid Yimer, Taipei, Taipei City, Taiwan Abdelal, Aysegul, Hamilton, ON, Canada Aboonasr Shiraz, Mohammad Hossein, Kelowna, BC, Canada Adeli, Parvin, Ottawa, ON, Canada Adhikari, Bal Ram, Montreal, QC, Canada Ahammou, Brahim, Rennes, Brittany, France Ahmed, Mohamed, Dundee, Scotland, UK Akther, Jasmeen, St. Johns, NL, Canada Al-Attas, Tareq, Calgary, AB, Canada Aldhafeeri, Tahani, Waterloo, ON, Canada Allen, Eva, Berwyn, IL, USA Allen, Jennifer, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK Alqdeimat, Diala, St. John’s, NL, Canada Alsac, Elif Pinar, Waterloo, ON, Canada Alvarez, Luis, Soledad de Graciano Sanchez, S L P, Mexico An, Kihun, Daejeon, South Chungcheong, South Korea Arfania, Sheida, Vancouver, BC, Canada Arora, Sweety, Bangalore, KA, India Attia, Elhadi, Waterloo, ON, Canada Awayssa, Omar, Trondheim, Sor-Trond, Norway Azimzadeh Sani, Bochum, North RhineWestphalia, Germany

B

Bapat, Shalmali, Duisburg, North RhineWestphalia, Germany Bax, Carmen, Milano, Lombardia, Italy Bell, Ellsworth, Waterloo, ON, Canada Berg, Clara, Muenchen, Baveria, Germany Bian, Yixuan, Haidian, Anhui, China Blanchard, Samantha, Chicago, IL, USA Bohinsky, Amy, West Lafayette, IN, USA Borley, William, Muncie, IN, USA Braley, Sarah, Bloomington, IN, USA Brown, Kelly, Johnstone, Scotland, UK Butler, Derrick, State College, PA, USA

C

Carson, Oliver, Huntsville, TX, USA Casebolt, Rileigh, Ithaca, NY, USA Castro, Jose, Colorado Springs, CO, USA Certe Real Barbieri, Eduardo, Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil Chatterjee, Subhodeep, Hsinchu, Hsinchu County, Taiwan Chen, Jialu, Toronto, ON, Canada Chen, Kuo Hao, Muncie, IN, USA Chhetri, Kisan, Jeonju, Jeollabuk-do, South Korea Chowdhury, Azmal, Miami, FL, USA Cole, Conrad, Gainesville, FL, USA Conlin, Samuel, Kingwood, TX, USA

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

D

Dangel, Gabrielle, Cincinnati, OH, USA Darga, Joseph, Austin, TX, USA deLaat, Stephen, Georgetown, ON, Canada Deng, Changyu, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Deutsch, Anna-Lena, Hannover, Lower Saxony, Germany Dim, Vincent, Guelph, ON, Canada Doswell, Claire, Brimingham, West Midlands, UK Dsouza, Slavia Deeksha, Newtownabbey, Antrim, UK Du, Hoang-Long, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Duah, Kwabena, Muncie, IN, USA Dykes, Hannah, Stillwater, OK, USA

E

Elabbadi, Mohsen, Cambridge, Cambridge, UK El Hage, Ranine, Toulouse, Midi-Pyrénées, France El-Sherif, Hesham, Hamilton, ON, Canada Engelkamp, Bernd, Düsseldorf, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany Ernst, Matthias, Garching, BademWürttemberg, Germany Eyovge, Cavit, Enschede, Overijssel, Netherlands

F

Fabiyi, Victor, Potsdam, NY, USA Fahmi, Machda, Kyoto, Kyoto, Japan Fonseca, William, Pocos de Caldas, Minas Gerais, Brazil Foroughi, Shervin, Montreal, QC, Canada Frey, Daniel, Brooklyn, NY, USA

G

Gaikwad, Mayur, Hyderabad, TG, India Gazica, Kiera, Cincinnati, OH, USA Ghannoum, AbdulRahman, Waterloo, ON, Canada Ghosh, Moumita, Bloomington, IN, USA Gökoğlan Barut, Tuğba Ceren, Lowell, MA, USA Gomez, Joshua, El Paso, TX, USA Gordon, Matt, Bloomington, IN, USA Goshinsky, Kelsi, Muncie, IN, USA Gouda, Abdelaziz, Montreal, QC, Canada Gourley, Storm, Markham, ON, Canada Gregory, Darrell, Stillwater, OK, USA Gunnarsdottir, Anna, Cambridge, Cambridge, UK Gupta, Arti, Kandi, TG, India Gupta, Pankaj, Cincinnati, OH, USA

H

Hang, Hui, St. John’s, NL, Canada Hasanpour, Sadegh, Victoria, BC, Canada Hemmati, Sahar, Waterloo, ON, Canada Herbert, Robert, Atlanta, GA, USA Hmam, Ons, Laval, QC, Canada Ho, Alec, Berkeley, CA, USA Hong, Yuanyuan, Edmonton, AB, Canada (continued on next page) 81

NE W MEMBERS (continued from previous page)

Hoque, Md Abdul, Cincinnati, OH, USA Hsieh, YiChieh, Los Angeles, CA, USA Hsu, Wen-Po, Taipei, Taipei City, Taiwan Huang, William, Palo Alto, CA, USA Huseinov, Artur, Cincinnati, OH, USA Hussein, Hussein, Belfast, Antrim, UK

I

Ikeda, Yutaka, Meguro-ku, Tokyo-to, Japan Illa, Mani Pujitha, Sangareddy, TG, India Izaguirre Arostegui, Nagore, San Sebastian, EUS, Spain

J

Jafari, Maasoomeh, Lubbock, TX, USA Jafarizadeh, Borzooye, Miami, FL, USA Jauhar, Mohd Altamash, Waterloo, ON, Canada Jiang, Haoran, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China Joseph, Sonia, Mangalore, KA, India Joulie, Dorian, Paris, Ile-de-France, France Jovino Marques, Otavio, Chicago, IL, USA

K

K C, Akshaya, Kochi, KL, India Kabir, Ehsan, Fayetteville, AR, USA Katzenberg, Adlai, Brooklyn, NY, USA Kaup, Kavish, Brampton, ON, Canada Kaylor, Lukas, Muncie, IN, USA Khalid, Hessan, Belfast, Antrim, UK Khan, Imran, Hsinchu City, Hsinchu County, Taiwan Klenke, Chris, Fayetteville, AR, USA Komatsu, Natsumi, Houston, TX, USA Konda, Kumari, Chennai, TN, India Krause, Kevin, Toronto, ON, Canada Kuo, Jason, Mercer Island, WA, USA Kwak, Sehyun, Daejeon, South Chungcheong, South Korea Kwok, Chun Yuen, Toronto, ON, Canada

L

Labbe, Matthew, Edmonton, AB, Canada Lahade, Shashikant, Miami, FL, USA Laube, Armin, Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany Lauro, Samantha, Austin, TX, USA Lee, Michael, Lincoln, NE, USA Leonhardt, Alessandra, Leuven, Flemish Brabant, Belgium Leslie, Nathaniel, Montreal, QC, Canada Leuaa, Pradipkumar, Mumbai, MH, India Lin, Wendy, Tempe, AZ, USA Liu, Lu, Bloomington, IN, USA Liu, Yutong, Waterloo, ON, Canada Lynn, Michael, Fayetteville, AR, USA

M

Madugula, Dronareddy, Columbia, MO, USA Mahmood, Mudasar, Calgary, AB, Canada Maleki, Kamyar, Trondheim, Trondelag, Norway Manso, Ryan, Fayetteville, AR, USA

Martinez-Baltodano, Francisco, Saltillo, Coahuila, Mexico McKean, Thomas, Fayetteville, AR, USA Mecozzi, Francesco, Manchester, Greater Manchester, UK Medina, Victor, Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico DF, Mexico Medvedev, Iurii, Waterloo, ON, Canada Medvedeva, Kseniia, Waterloo, ON, Canada Mehta, Rohit, New Delhi, DL, India Miljkovic, Bojan, Toronto, ON, Canada Misaghian, Niloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada Mohamed Raseek, Nishya, Lexington, KY, USA Mohtat, Peyman, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Momodu, Damilola, Calgary, AB, Canada Moore, Michael, Edmonton, AB, Canada Mosali, Venkata Sai Sriram, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Mui, Jonathan, Armonk, NY, USA Munawar, Hasim, Bogor, West Java, Indonesia Munonde, Tshimangadzo, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa Murugesan, Geetha Lakshmi, Chennai, TN, India Mustafa, Fatima, Potsdam, NY, USA

N

Nabil, Shariful, Calgary, AB, Canada Nain, Amit, Taipei, Chiayi County, Taiwan Nakata, Jarrid, Seattle, WA, USA Nath, Anish, Calicut, KL, India Negrete, Karla, Elkridge, MD, USA

O

Or, Tyler, Toronto, ON, Canada Ostervold, Lars, Fayetteville, AR, USA

P

Pao, Li, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan Parameswaran, Sriganesh, Waterloo, ON, Canada Parekh, Jay, Waterloo, ON, Canada Park, Sungwon, Potsdam, NY, USA Patricelli, Colin, Watervliet, NY, USA Pendergast, Andrew, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Perera, Anton, Lexington, KY, USA Posada Perez, Sergio, Louvain-la-Neuve, Wallonia, Belgium Proschel, Alexander, Philadelphia, PA, USA Punathil Meethal, Ranjith, Chennai, TN, India

R

Raghu, Gayatri, San Francisco, CA, USA Rahe, Christiane, Aachen, North RhineWestphalia, Germany Rahm, Connor, Goshen, OH, USA Rajith, Leena, Ernakulam, KL, India Rasmussen, Elizabeth, Seattle, WA, USA Ratso, Sander, Tartu, Tartu, Estonia Redondo Soto, Cinthya, Madrid, Madrid, Spain Regalado Vera, Clarita, Ammon, ID, USA Ren, Dezhang, Kitchener, ON, Canada Rhodes, Zayn, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

82

Riesgo-Gonzalez, Victor, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK Roberge, Emma, Durham, NH, USA Rougier, Agathe, Besancon, BourgogneFranche-Comté, France Rouhollahi, Foroogh, Farmington Hills, MI, USA Roy Barman, Snigdha, Hsinchu, Hsinchu County, Taiwan Ruhunage, Chethani, Cincinnati, OH, USA Ryzhov, Alexander, Yekaterinburg, Sverdlovsk, Russia

S

Safari, Tahereh, Qom, Qom, Iran Saito, Haruka, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan Salverda, Michael, Guelph, ON, Canada Samira, Samji, Detroit, MI, USA Sarakhman, Olha, Stare Mesto, Bratislava Region, Slovakia Sayadi, Azam, St. John’s, NL, Canada Selarka, Viraj, Waterloo, ON, Canada Sethi, Sashikanta, Visakhapatnam, AP, India Shafei, Ibrahim, Bloomington, IN, USA Shah, Krishna, Austin, TX, USA Shahcheraghi, Ladan, Hamilton, ON, Canada Shanmughan, Prasanth, Kottayam, KL, India Shao, Zheng, Sendai, Myagi, Japan Sharma, Lalit, Bangalore, KA, India Sharma, Shyam, Austin, TX, USA Shuldes, Benjamin, Lincoln, NE, USA Silcox, Benjamin, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Sola-Hernandez, Lluis, Sophia Antipolis, Provence-Alpes-Cote-d’Azur, France Sonawane, Apurva, Miami, FL, USA Sozal, Md. Shariful Islam, Miami, FL, USA Stephan, Aria, Gilford, NH, USA Stephens, Zachary, Marion, IN, USA Strangmueller, Stefan, Garching, Bavaria, Germany Su, Ning, Chicago, IL, USA Sullivan, Mason, Oshawa, ON, Canada Sun, Xiangming, Nashville, TN, USA Suresh, Mamidi, Sangareddy, TG, India

T

Taghikhani, Kasra, Golden, CO, USA Talukdar, Krishan, Stuttgart, BademWürttemberg, Germany Tanji, Ayoub, Quebec, QC, Canada Tatavarthi, Sai Sudheer, Hsin-Chu, Taiwan, Taiwan Taylor, Jeffrey, Chicago, IL, USA Thiruwana Kankanamage, Rumasha, Storrs, CT, USA Toledo, Giselle, Fayetteville, AR, USA

U

Ueda, Shotaro, Yonezawa, Yamagata, Japan

V

Van Helten, Seth, Iowa City, IA, USA Vasudev, Madhav, Ottawa, ON, Canada

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

NE W MEMBERS W

Wade, Jacob, Muncie, IN, USA Wang, Jiaqi, Waterloo, ON, Canada Wang, Michael, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Wang, Yong, Varennes, QC, Canada Wanzi, Kegum, Oak Park, MI, USA Wen, Guobin, Waterloo, ON, Canada Weng, Wei Yang, Taipei, Taipei City, Taiwan Wettstein, Alina, Münster, North RhineWestphalia, Germany

Wittmann, Markus, Ulm, BademWürttemberg, Germany Wong, Joseph, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK

Yilmaz, Meltem, Singapore, Singapore Yu, Ting, Saint-Lambert, QC, Canada

Z

X

Xiao, Jing, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Y

Yassine, Sarah, Montreal, QC, Canada Yen Tzu, Lin, Hsinchu City, Hsinchu County, Taiwan

New Members by Country

Zabara, Mohammed Ahmed, Ankara, Ankara, Turkey Zeng, Xianci, Amherst, MA, USA Zhao, Yuanya, Urbana, IL, USA Zheng, Zhou, Waterloo, ON, Canada Zubi, Yasmine, Bloomington, IN, USA

Look who joined ECS in the First Quarter of 2020.

Czech Republic Estonia Indonesia Iran Israel Italy Malaysia Pakistan Russia Singapore Slovakia Belgium Norway South Africa Switzerland Turkey

Brazil Mexico Netherlands Spain China South Korea Australia France Taiwan Japan UK Germany India Canada USA

Czech Republic...... 1 Estonia................... 1 Indonesia............... 1 Iran........................ 1 Israel...................... 1 Italy........................ 1 Malaysia................ 1 Pakistan ................ 1 Russia.................... 1 Singapore.............. 1 Slovakia................. 1 Belgium................. 2 Norway................... 2 South Africa........... 2 Switzerland............ 2 Turkey.................... 2

Brazil...................... 3 Mexico................... 3 Netherlands............ 3 Spain..................... 3 China..................... 4 South Korea........... 4 Australia ................ 5 France.................. 10 Taiwan.................. 10 Japan................... 11 UK........................ 15 Germany.............. 17 India..................... 18 Canada................. 27 USA................... 131

Member Anniversaries 2020 It is with great pleasure that we recognize the following ECS members who have reached their 30, 40, 50, and 60 year anniversaries with the Society in 2020.

Congratulations to you all!

60 Year

John L. Devitt George A. Dibari Fumio Hine Keith E. Johnson Yung Ling Ko Thomas B. Reddy Forrest A. Trumbore

50 Year

William A. Adams George E. Blomgren John Broadhead Keith T. Burnette Huk Y. Cheh Frederick W. Dampier Giovanni Davolio Francis P. Fehlner L. G. Marianowski Frank McLarnon

Romano Morlotti Martin C Peckerar M. Stanley Whittingham

40 Year

Bert L. Allen Ryoichi Aogaki Hans Boehni Chung-Yuan Cheng K.C. Ray Chiu Cor L. Claeys William D. K Clark Dennis A. Corrigan Walter B. Ebner James M. Fenton David T. Fouchard Jun Furukawa Michael Paul Herlem Kan-Lin Hsueh Richard T. Johnson

Hasuck Kim Rajanikant S. Korde Frank C. Krieger Howard Kurasaki Pierre Louis Thomas W. Orent John H. Perepezko Peter N. Pintauro Terrence F. Reise Robert H. Reuss Richard E. Ricker Albert Schmitz Jay A. Switzer Hideaki Takahashi Harshad Tataria Edward Twesme Katalin Voros Clifford W. Walton Masahiro Watanabe Larry M. Williams Osamu Yamamoto

30 Year

James C. Acheson Sheikh Akbar Antonio J. Aldykiewicz Wayne T Babie Thomas P. Barrera Thomas P. Blakley Giovanni P. Chiavarotti James A. Cox Guy Davis L. G. J. De Haart Howard D. Dewald Francesco Di Quarto Timothy G. Dietz Edward J. Donahue Nick Fradette Gerald S. Frankel Thomas F. Fuller Andrew A. Gewirth David Goad Mike Goldstein Thomas F. Guarr Nobuyoshi Hara Stephen Harrison Jason N. Howard

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

Chenfu A. Hung Derek A. Johnson Yoshio Kirino David G. Kolman Pawel J. Kulesza Naoaki Kumagai Dong-Myun Lee Fernando M. B. Marques Peter Mascher Christopher Milliken Sylvie Morin Sri Narayan Jeffrey Poirier Maria Porrini Towner B. Scheffler Masahiro Seo Alok M. Srivastava Michael M. Thackeray Steven J. Thorpe Holger Vogt Brijesh Vyas Jesse S. Wainright Masaharu Watanabe Derek R. Witty Geun-Young Yeom

83

ST UDENT NE WS Calgary Student Chapter The ECS Calgary Student Chapter announced its new executive committee in July 2019. Marwa Atwa is the new president; Hamideh Eskandari, vice president; Zohreh Fallah, secretary; and Maedeh Pahlevaninezhad, treasurer. Behzad Fuladpanjeh-Hojaghan, Annie Hoang, Katelynn Daly, Oliver Calderon, Samantha Luong, Jialang Li, and Umer Farooq are members. The chapter’s two major 2019 accomplishments are recognition as the 2019 ECS Outstanding Student Chapter, and receiving a grant from the University of Calgary (UC) Graduate Students’ Association Quality Money Program for upcoming events. Chapter members celebrated these awards on August 23, and thanked members whose efforts and support contributed to these achievements. Current and new members networked at the event.

On September 21, members of the UC science faculty hosted Science Takeover, a one-day event at the Calgary Central Library.

Over 3,000 science lovers—kids and parents, ages two to 102—came

from all over Calgary to enjoy the free exhibits. Event activities sparked exploration and curiosity about science. The chapter’s family-friendly booth showcased electrochemical applications.

They demonstrated batteries using fruit and vegetables (lemons, limes, apples, bananas, tomatoes, and potatoes) as the electrolyte.

Attendees guessed which fruit or vegetable battery would work, then completed the circuit to light up an LED bulb. Participants measured each option’s cell potential with a voltmeter to determine which fruit or vegetable was the best battery. The chapter also demonstrated an educational mini fuel cell car at the booth. It used a reversible proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell to split water into oxygen and hydrogen. The resulting hydrogen powered the car.

To increase interest in science and promote electrochemistry and its many practical applications to the broader community, the chapter plans to organize more science outreach events in the coming year.

The ECS Calgary Student Chapter (left to right): Members Jialang Li and Samantha Luong; President Marwa Atwa; Katelynn Daly, member; Secretary Zohreh Fallah; members Behzad Fuladpanjeh-Hojaghan and Annie Hoang; Vice-President Hamideh Eskandari; members Yalda Zamani Keteklahijani and Oliver Calderon.

Photo: Lesley Rigg

Advertisers Index Bio-Logic.................................................................... 2, 15

Koslow..............................................................................31

El-Cell............................................................................. 35

Pine Research................................................................... 4

Gamry............................................................................... 6

Scribner............................................................................. 1 Wiley......................................................................... 29, 50

84

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

ST UDENT NE WS Clarkson University Student Chapter The ECS Clarkson University (CU) Chapter organized its first one-day workshop, The Capacity of Electrochemistry, on February 14, 2020. More than 50 CU students and faculty members from the chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, and environmental engineering departments considered topics from electrochemistry fundamentals to electrochemical energy and environmental applications.

The workshop consisted of two sessions. The morning began with a welcome speech by chapter President Farideh H. Narouei.

A series of interesting scientific talks followed. Various aspects of electrochemistry were discussed by renowned professors: Dr. Taeyoung Kim on “Water Desalination using Capacitive and Battery Electrodes,” Dr. Paolo Bollella on “Electrochemical Techniques: Fundamentals and Applications,” Dr. Yang Yang on “Environmental Applications of Electrochemistry: From Bench-scale to Field Applications,” and Prof. Evgeny Katz on “Implantable Biofuel Cells Operating In Vivo Potential Power Sources for Bioelectronic Devices.” At a raffle after the morning session, attendees had a chance

to win funding for summer 2020 field trip travel.

At the beginning of the afternoon session, CU ECS officers introduced ECS and the student chapter benefits, activities, and upcoming events. The presentation was followed by an interactive panel discussion with Profs. Silvana Andreescu, Elizabeth J. Podlaha, Sitaraman Krishnan, Evgeny Katz, and Drs. Taeyoung Kim and Paolo Bollella. The panel discussed scientific topics and career opportunities in the field of electrochemistry, and shared their experience and knowledge on related topics. The panelists actively engaged in the following discussion and enthusiastically answered students’ questions.

The workshop, which featured numerous opportunities for discussion and networking, generated a great discussion about research and chapter involvement. The chapter is very grateful for the event’s great success and thanks the workshop speakers and participants. Members are working diligently to achieve the same success at upcoming events.

CU ECS chapter members and advisors at The Capacity of Electrochemistry workshop.

Photo: Steve Jacobs

Lewis University Student Chapter 2019-2020 was exciting for the ECS Lewis University Student Chapter. Members continued traveling to local schools and community centers to promote STEM awareness. Through demonstrations and hands-on activities, students of all backgrounds, ages, and interests learned about metal complexes, polymer chemistry, and the electrochemistry of batteries. The focus was on how these concepts apply to daily life.

One of the chapter’s largest events was the STEM themed haunted house. Decorations transformed the Lewis University chemistry and physics labs. Guests were guided through a series of energy-based demonstrations. They were then asked to solve a puzzle at the end to escape. For the second year in a row, over 400 budding scientists and their parents explored the university science labs, learning about energy in the process. (continued on next page)

(Left to right) Carolyn Graverson, Allie Mikos, and Prof. Jason J. Keleher present the ECS Lewis University Student Chapter’s donation to the American Cancer Society.

Photo: Michael Graverson

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

85

ST UDENT NE WS (continued from previous page)

The chapter was honored to host its second 24-hour bike-a-thon event. This year, members raised funds for the American Cancer Society. Students and faculty volunteered to pedal a stationary bike in the science building for 24 hours. They generated $3,222 for the

charity through pledges and other donations. A representative of the American Cancer Society received the check at a Lewis basketball game on February 1, 2020. In coming years, the chapter hopes to continue this tradition, which gives students a great opportunity to network with the community.

Monterrey Student Chapter The new ECS Monterrey Student Chapter held its first meeting with Prof. Marcelo Videa and Dr. Alfonso Crespo. They shared their career and personal experiences in planning academic events, and discussed ways to expand the chapter in northern Mexico. The new chapter officers are President María Paula Salinas, Vice President Roberto Moreno, Treasurer Montserrat Argente, and Secretary José Estrada. Founding members are Armando Santiago, Ana Sofía Elizondo, Yeremi Pérez, Daniel Herrera, and Miriam Salas.

On September 25, the chapter collaborated with Tecnológico de Monterrey on their first electrochemistry colloquium. The first speaker, Dr. Alfonso Crespo-Yapur (Tecnológico de Monterrey) presented his project “Electrodeposición galvanostática de nanomateriales para electrocatatálisis.”

The second colloquium was on November 19. Dr. Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine presented “Uso de sensores electroquímicos a base de aptámeros en estudios farmaco-cinéticos.” The colloquiums were broadcast live to increase their impact on the science of electrochemistry.

The chapter’s first trip was to the 2020 CEC Annual Workshop on Electrochemistry at The University of Texas at Austin from February 21-23, 2020. Attendees included early career researchers, undergrad, graduate, and PhD students. Chapter members interacted with the speakers who helped them improve their professional skills and connections. As a highlight of the trip, the students met with Profs.

Allen Bard and Cynthia Zoie.

The third Electrochemistry Colloquium is the chapter’s next event. Guest speaker Dr. Oliver Rodríguez from the University of Southampton will discuss his project, “The influence of dissolved oxygen and local changes of pH on Pt electrochemistry.” The chapter is also planning a networking event in early September with Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León.

Current student members (from left to right): Prof. Marcelo Videa (faculty advisor), Roberto Moreno (vice president), Daniel Herrera (member), Armando Santiago (member), Dr. Alfonso Crespo (faculty advisor), María Paula Salinas (president), Ana Sofia Eli (member).

Photo: Diana Leticia Lomelí Marroquín

From left to right: ECS Monterrey Student Chapter members Yeremi Perez, Daniel Herrera, Samuel Castro, María Paula Salinas, and Prof.

Cynthia Zoski at the 2020 Annual CEC Workshop on Electrochemistry.

Photo: Diana Leticia Lomelí Marroquín

Munich Student Chapter The ECS Munich Student Chapter hosted its third symposium on September 24, 2019, at the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS) Technische Universität München. Thanks to chapter members’ efforts and funding from BMW, Hereaeus Group, ECS, BioLogic, and PINE, seven invited speakers and around 80 attendees participated, including a visiting group from the ECS Ulm Student Chapter.

Marc Koper from Leiden University gave insights into the world of platinum electrochemistry, providing mechanistic details and new findings on cathodic dissolution of platinum. Electrocatalysis was also the focus of Karl Mayrhofer’s work at the Helmholtz-Institute Erlangen-Nürnberg. He explained how to evaluate the catalyst’s activity, stability, and selectivity, and how online coupling of analytical 86

techniques to electrochemical flow cells helps evaluation. Thomas Schmidt from the Paul-Scherrer Institut in Villigen, Switzerland, is well-known for his work on oxygen evolution catalysts. He shared the latest findings from operando studies, demonstrating that the chemical composition of an as-synthesized IrOx and a heat-treated IrO2 remains constant during operation, whereas the morphology is altered only in the case of the as-synthesized IrO2. Peter Strasser from Technischen Universität Berlin continued the discussion. The audience was intrigued by new findings on the catalytic “dark side” of solar fuels and chemicals showing that improved OER activity is reached by doping IrOx with nickel. He also pointed out how the most significant results are achieved by a strong spirit of collaboration between scientists. After digging deep into the world of fundamental The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

ST UDENT NE WS research, Andreas Peschel focused on industrially relevant topics.

He elucidated the technical processes for hydrogen distribution developed by Linde AG. Apparently, Germany is prepared for many more fuel cell cars than currently found on the streets.

At the poster sessions, students presented their current research with a vivid exchange between all the participants. Then Dina Fattakhova-Rohlfing (Forschungszentrum Jülich) and Arnulf Latz (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft-und Raumfahrt and Helmholtz-Institut Ulm) explored the world of battery cells. Fattakhova-Rohlfing’s

recent work is on a multitude of materials for novel ceramic lithium and sodium batteries. Latz provided insights into the physics of strongly interacting electrolytes with respect to their bulk and surface dynamics.

These events encourage interdisciplinary dialogue in electrochemistry and build bridges between different European electrochemistry institutes. We are happy that many researchers joined the event and made it successful.

Participants and invited speakers of the Interdisciplinarity in Electrochemistry symposium held by the ECS Munich Student Chapter.

Photo: Björn Stühmeier

University of Texas at Austin Student Chapter The ECS University of Texas at Austin Student Chapter announced new chapter officers in February: Chair Jason Weeks, Vice Chair Shyam Sharma, Secretary Maitri Uppaluri, Treasurer Amruth Bhargav, and Social Secretary Samantha Lauro. The officers have shown great merit, working diligently to improve social outreach and increase ECS’s presence in the college community.

In light of recent events, the chapter decided to advocate social distancing and encourage virtual togetherness. The group started a monthly seminar where chapter members present their research through interactive webinars. The sessions cover a wide range of research topics such as lithium ion batteries, fuel cells, and electrocatalysis. The recurring webinar is scheduled for the last Thursday of each month at 1300 pm CST @ https://utexas.zoom. us/j/98235634191. All are welcome to attend.

The ECS UT Austin Student Chapter Webinar launched on April 30 with Chair Jason Weeks presenting his research. Weeks is an electrochemist at the UT Austin Mullins Research Laboratory. His work focuses on novel materials for lithium ion batteries, primarily high capacity metal carbon composites for next generation anodes and electronically conductive carbon based materials for low weight, high mass loading alternative current collectors. His talk, “Stable Tin Carbon Composite Anodes for Lithium Ion Batteries,” centered on the implementation of a novel metal complex precursor based

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

synthesis for tin carbon nanoparticulate composites. On May 28, the webinar’s next speaker, Yoon Jun Son, will discuss his work on the anodization of nickel foam and its use as an electrocatalyst.

In other highlights, chapter members Ho-Hyun Sun, Hrishikesh S. Srinivasan, and Jason Weeks published their work “A Stable Lead (II) OxideCarbon Composite Anode Candidate for Secondary Lithium Batteries” in the Journal of The Electrochemical Society, Volume 167, Number 6.

To stay in touch and keep track of the amazing work of the electrochemists at UT Austin, please follow the chapter’s social media accounts listed below. Here the chapter announces new seminars, upcoming events, and highlights ECS UT Austin Student Chapter members’ recent publications.

Jason Weeks, ECS UT Austin Student Chapter’s chair and presenter at the April Webinar.

Photo: Jason Weeks

Facebook: @UT.Austin.ECS Instagram: @UT_Austin_ECS_Chapter LinkedIn: UT Austin 87

ST UDENT NE WS University of Washington Student Chapter The ECS University of Washington (UW) Student Chapter kicked off the turn of the decade with several educational and outreach opportunities. Chapter meetings featured an Identify Series that focused on “who we are” and the incredible research members conduct in the lab. Participants delved into electrochemical topics and techniques related to their research. Seminar-like talks were presented on various topics, including Microsoft’s initiative to power data centers with fuel cells; the utilization of forced convection with polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells; and Battery500, an association of national labs, universities, and industries striving to develop lithium-metal batteries for electric vehicles. These presentations taught chapter members about the broad range of research available in electrochemistry, and provided opportunities for critical discussions about the future direction of these research topics.

Members represented the chapter at Enumclaw’s Annual Interactive STEAM (iSTEAM) Expo in February. The expo brings together local K-12 schools, businesses, and universities to engage K-12 students in science, technology, engineering, arts, and math related topics through exhibits and demos. Chapter members set up a hand battery demonstration, providing a fun and engaging way for students to learn about basic electrochemistry concepts and interact with graduate students.

Chapter members Victor Hu (left) and Erica Eggleton (right) demonstrate a hand battery at the Enumclaw Annual iSTEAM Expo.

Photo: Linnette Teo

University of Waterloo Student Chapter The ECS University of Waterloo Student Chapter hosted a successful kickoff event in January of 2020, attracting almost 100 researchers in electrochemistry from the University of Waterloo (UW), and neighboring McMaster University and University of Guelph. The event featured a panel discussion with four UW professors who are experts in electrochemistry: Mark Pritzker, Rodney Smith, Jeff Gostick, and Michael Pope. They shared insights on academic careers in electrochemistry, and answered questions posed by early researchers in the field. An electrochemistry trivia game awarded prizes to promote student engagement. The chapter gratefully acknowledges the financial support provided by ECS and the UW Chemical Engineering Department, as well as a Graduate Student Initiatives award.

Next, the chapter was thrilled to organize an industrial tour at Hydrogenics-Corporation. This local company is a worldwide leader in designing, manufacturing, and building hydrogen fuel cells. Twenty chapter members met engineers and scientists at Hydrogenics. The visit culminated in a tour of the fuel cell fabrication facilities and laboratories, as well as a showcase of the history of Hydrogenics commercial fuel cell products. In addition to the educational experience, this was an excellent networking opportunity for students to make connections in the fuel cell industry.

The chapter received funding from the UW Graduate Studies Endowment to host a full-day symposium in the summer or fall, public health measures permitting. It will feature invited speakers and workshops on electrochemistry basics.

ECS UW Student Chapter kickoff event.

Photo: Mariam Gad 88

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

CALL FOR PAPERS

239th ECS Meeting

CHICAGO, IL May 30-June 3, 2021 Hilton Chicago

18th

with the 18th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors

Abstract Submission Deadline: December 4, 2020

www.electrochem.org/239

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

89

General Information

The 239th ECS Meeting and the 18th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors will be held in Chicago, Illinois from May 30-June 3, 2021 at the Hilton Chicago. This joint international conference will bring together scientists, engineers, and researchers from academia, industry, and government laboratories to share results and discuss issues on related topics through a variety of formats, such as oral presentations, poster sessions, panel discussions, tutorial sessions, short courses, professional development workshops, and exhibits. The unique blend of electrochemical and solid state science and technology at an ECS meeting provides an opportunity and forum to learn and exchange information on the latest scientific and technical developments in a variety of interdisciplinary areas.

Abstract Submission

To give an oral or poster presentation at the 239th ECS Meeting and/or IMCS you must submit an original or Montreal/IMCS 2020 meeting abstract for consideration via the ECS website which will be announced August 2020, no later than December 4, 2020. Faxed, e-mailed, and/or late abstracts will not be accepted. Meeting abstracts should explicitly state objectives, new results, and conclusions or significance of the work.

Once the submission deadline has passed, the symposium organizers will evaluate all abstracts for content and relevance to the symposium topic, and will schedule all acceptable submissions as either oral or poster presentations.

In February 2021, Letters of Acceptance/Invitation will be sent via email to the corresponding author of all accepted abstracts, notifying them of the date, time, and location of their presentation. Regardless of whether you requested a poster or an oral presentation, it is the symposium organizers’ discretion to decide how and when it is scheduled.

Paper Presentation

Oral presentations must be in English; LCD projectors and laptops will be provided for all oral presentations. Presenting authors MUST bring their presentation on a USB flash drive to be used with the dedicated laptop that will be in each technical session room. Speakers requiring additional equipment must make written request to meetings@electrochem.org at least one month prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements may be worked out, subject to availability, and at the expense of the author.

Poster presentations must be displayed in English, on a board approximately 3 feet 10 inches high by 3 feet 10 inches wide (1.17 meters high by 1.17 meters wide), corresponding to their abstract number and day of presentation in the final program.

Meeting Publications

ECS Meeting Abstracts—All meeting abstracts will be published in the ECS Digital Library, copyrighted by ECS, and all abstracts become the property of ECS upon presentation.

ECS Transactions—Select symposia will be publishing their proceedings in ECS Transactions (ECST). Authors presenting in these symposia are strongly encouraged to submit a full-text manuscript based on their presentation. Issues of ECST will be available for sale on a pre-order basis, as well as through the ECS Digital Library and the ECS Online Store. Please see each individual symposium listing in this Call for Papers to determine if your symposium will be publishing an ECST issue. Please visit the ECST website (www.electrochem.org/ecst) for additional information, including overall guidelines, author and editor instructions, a downloadable manuscript template, and more.

ECSarXiv—All authors are encouraged to submit their full-text manuscripts, posters, slide presentations, or data sets to ECS’s preprint service, ECSarXiv. For more information on this offering, please visitwww. electrochem.org/ecsarxiv. Please note that submission to ECSarXiv does not preclude submission to ECST. ECS Journals—Authors presenting papers at ECS meetings, and submitting to ECST or ECSarXiv, are also encouraged to submit to the Society’s technical journals: Journal of The Electrochemical Society and ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology. Although there is no hard deadline for the submission of these papers, it is considered that six months from the date of the symposium is sufficient time to revise a paper to meet the stricter criteria of the journals. Author instructions are available from http:// www.electrochem.org/submit.

In partnership with the 18th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors (IMCS), ECS will publish volume two of this focus issue in the Journal of The Electrochemical Society. The call for papers release date is slated for May 2021. Visit www.electrochem.org/focusissues for up-to-date information.

Short Courses

Five short courses will be offered on Sunday, May 30, 2021 from 0900-1630h.

Short courses require advanced registration and may be cancelled if enrollment is under 10 registrants in the respective course. The following short courses 90

are scheduled: (1) Basic Impedance Spectroscopy, (2) Fundamentals of Electrochemistry Basic Theory and Thermodynamic Methods, (3) Introduction to Micro/Nanofabrication, C-MEMS and Applications of Chemical Gas Sensors, (4) AC Electrical Measurements and Modelling of Gas Sensors, and (5) Electrochemical Biosensors. Registration opens February 2021.

Technical Exhibit

The 239th ECS Meeting and will include a Technical Exhibit, featuring presentations and displays by dozens of manufacturers of instruments, materials, systems, publications, and software of interest to meeting attendees.

Coffee breaks are scheduled in the exhibit hall along with evening poster sessions.

Interested in exhibiting at the meeting with your company? Exhibitor opportunities include unparalleled benefits and provide an extraordinary chance to present your scientific products and services to key constituents from around the world. Exhibit opportunities can be combined with sponsorship items and are customized to suit your needs. Please contact sponsorship@ electrochem.org for further details.

Meeting Registration

All participants—including authors and invited speakers—are required to pay the appropriate registration fees. Hotel and meeting registration information will be posted on the ECS website as it becomes available. The deadline for discounted early registration is May 3, 2021.

Hotel Reservations

The 239th ECS Meeting and IMCS will be held at the Hilton Chicago. Please refer to the meeting website for the most up-to date information on hotel availability and information about the blocks of rooms where special rates have been reserved for participants attending the meeting. The hotel block will be open until May 3, 2021 or until it sells out.

Letter of Invitation

In February 2021, Letters of Invitation will be sent via email to the corresponding author of all accepted abstracts, notifying them of the date, time, and location of their presentation. Anyone else requiring an official letter of invitation should email abstracts@electrochem.org; such letters will not imply any financial responsibility of ECS.

Financial Assistance

ECS divisions and sections offer travel grants to students, postdoctoral researchers, and young professionals to attend ECS biannual meetings.

Applications are available beginning December 4, 2020 at www.electrochem. org/travel-grants and must be received no later than the submission deadline of Monday, February 22, 2021. Additional financial assistance is very limited and generally governed by symposium organizers. Individuals may inquire directly to organizers of the symposium in which they are presenting to see if funding is available.

For general ECS travel grant questions, please contact travelgrant@ electrochem.org.

Sponsorship Opportunities

ECS biannual and IMCS meetings offer a wonderful opportunity to market your organization through sponsorship. Sponsorship allows exposure to key industry decision makers, the development of collaborative partnerships, and potential business leads. ECS and IMCS welcomes support in the form of general sponsorship at various levels. Sponsors will be recognized by level in the Meeting Program, meeting signage, and on the website. In addition, sponsorships are available for the plenary, meeting keepsakes and other special events. In addition, ECS and IMCS offer specific symposium sponsorship.

By sponsoring a symposium your company can help offset travel expenses, registration fees, complimentary proceedings, and/or host receptions for invited speakers, researchers, and students. Advertising opportunities for the Meeting Program as well as in Interface magazine are also available. Please contact sponsorship@electrochem.org for further details.

Contact Information If you have any questions or require additional information, contact ECS. The Electrochemical Society 65 South Main Street, Pennington, NJ, 08534-2839, USA tel: 1.609.737.1902, fax: 1.609.737.2743 meetings@electrochem.org www.electrochem.org

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

CHICAGO SYMPOSIUM TOPICS & DEADLINES A— Batteries and Energy Storage A01— New Approaches and Advances in Electrochemical Energy Systems A02— Lithium Ion Batteries A03— Large Scale Energy Storage 12 A04— Battery Student Slam 5 A05— Battery Safety and Failure Modes 3 A06— Next Generation Batteries A07— Ion Coordination and Dynamics in Battery Electrolytes, Interfaces and Interphases B— Carbon Nanostructures and Devices B01— Carbon Nanostructures for Energy Conversion and Storage B02— Carbon Nanostructures in Medicine and Biology B03— Carbon Nanotubes - From Fundamentals to Devices B04— NANO in La Francophonie B05— Fullerenes - Endohedral Fullerenes and Molecular Carbon B06— 2D Layered Materials from Fundamental Science to Applications B07— Light Energy Conversion with Metal Halide Perovskites, Semiconductor Nanostructures, and Inorganic/Organic B08— Porphyrins, Phthalocyanines, and Supramolecular Assemblies B09— Nano for Industry C— Corrosion Science and Technology C01— Corrosion General Session D— Dielectric Science and Materials D01— Chemical Mechanical Polishing 16 D02— Plasma and Thermal Processes for Materials Modification, Synthesis, and Processing 3 D03— Plasma Electrochemistry and Catalysis D04— Quantum Dot Science and Technology D05— Advanced Additive Manufacturing D06— Young Scientists on Fundamentals and Applications of Dielectrics E— Electrochemical/Electroless Deposition E01— Electrodeposition for Advanced Node Interconnect Metallization Beyond Copper 2 E02— Electrodeposition as Enabler of (other) Electrochemical Processes and Devices F— Electrochemical Engineering F01— Advances in Industrial Electrochemistry and Electrochemical Engineering F02— Tutorial on Industrial Electrochemistry: Process Intensification F03— Characterization of Porous Materials 9 F04— Multiscale Modeling, Simulation and Design 4: Enhancing Understanding, and Extracting Knowledge from Data F05— Contemporary Issues and Case Studies in Electrochemical Innovation 3 F06— Scaling CO2 Electrolysis: Cells, Economics, Life Cycle F07— Advances in Subtractive Manufacturing: Electrodissolution, Polishing, and Other Surface Modifications G— Electronic Materials and Processing G01— Silicon Compatible Emerging Materials, Processes, and Technologies for Advanced CMOS and Post-CMOS Applications 11 G02— Processes at the Semiconductor Solution Interface 9 G03— Organic Semiconductor Materials, Devices, and Processing 8 H— Electronic and Photonic Devices and Systems H01— Wide Bandgap Semiconductor Materials and Devices 22 H02— High Purity and High Mobility Semiconductors 16 H03— Solid State Electronics and Photonics in Biology and Medicine 8 H04— Wearable and Flexible Electronic and Photonic Technologies 3 I— Fuel Cells, Electrolyzers, and Energy Conversion I01— Ionic and Mixed Conducting Ceramics 13: Symposium in Honor of Anil Virkar I02— Hydrogen or Oxygen Evolution Catalysis for Water Electrolysis 7 I03— Renewable Fuels via Artificial Photosynthesis or Heterocatalysis 6 I04— Energy Conversion Systems Based on Nitrogen 4

K— Organic and Bioelectrochemistry K01— Advances in Organic and Biological Electrochemistry 2: In Memory of Dennis Peters K02— Pharmaceutical Organic and Biological Electrochemistry K03— Student Symposium in Organic and Biological Electrochemistry L— Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry, Electrocatalysis, and Photoelectrochemistry L01— Physical and Analytical Electrochemistry, Electrocatalysis, and Photoelectrochemistry General Session and Grahame Award Symposium: In Honor of Bruce Parkinson L02— Electrocatalysis 11 L03— Computational Electrochemistry 6 L04— Spectroelectrochemistry 5 L05— Recent Trends in Interfaces Between Immiscible Electrolytes 2 L06— Nanostructured Functional Materials for Electrochemistry L07— Complex and Dynamic Electrochemical Systems L08— Electrochemical Studies by Synchrotron Techniques Z— General Z01— General Student Poster Session Z02— COVID-19 and Pathogen Related Research, Development, and Engineering in Sensors and Systems - A Joint Symposium of ECS and IMCS Z03— Tutorials: Electrochemical and Solid State Data Science Hack Week IMCS— 18th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors (IMCS) IMCS 01 — Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Chemometrics, and Sensor Arrays IMCS 02 — Chemical and Biosensors, Medical/Health, and Wearables IMCS 03 — Electrochemical and Metal Oxide Sensors

18th

IMCS 04 — Sensors for Agricultural and Environmental Applications IMCS 05 — Recent Advances and Future Directions in Chemical and Bio Sensor Technology and Networked Systems IMCS 06 — MEMS/NEMS, FET Sensors, and Resonators IMCS 07— Microfluidic Devices and Sensors IMCS 08 — Optical Sensors, Plasmonics, Chemiluminescent, and Electrochemiluminescent Sensors IMCS 09 — Sensors for Breath Analysis, Biomimetic Taste, and Olfaction Sensing IMCS 10 — Chemical and Biosensing Materials and Sensing Interface Design

Important Dates and Deadlines Meeting abstract submission opens.................................August 2020 Meeting abstracts submission deadline.................December 4, 2020 Notification to corresponding authors of abstract acceptance or rejection............................ February 8, 2021 Technical program published online............................. February 2021 Meeting registration opens............................................ February 2021 ECS Transactions submission site opens.................. February 12, 2021 Travel grant application deadline........................... February 22, 2021 Meeting sponsor and exhibitor deadline (for inclusion in printed materials)............................ February 26, 2021 ECS Transactions submission deadline........................ March 12, 2021 Travel grant approval notification....................................April 12, 2021 Hotel and early meeting registration deadlines............... May 3, 2021 Release date for ECS Transactions.............on or before May 21, 2021

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

91

92

The Electrochemical Society Interface • Summer 2020 • www.electrochem.org

ECS STUDENT PROGRAMS Biannual Meeting Travel Grants Many ECS divisions and sections offer funding to undergraduates, graduate students, postdocs, and young professionals that are presenting research at ECS biannual meetings.

Make the Connection The ECS Career Center gives students the opportunity to advance their job search with various career services.

More information at https://jobs.electrochem.org.

Visit www.electrochem.org/travel-grants to learn more!

Enhance Your Resume Summer Fellowships Apply for a $5,000 summer fellowship with ECS! The annual deadline for applications is January 15.

ECS equips our student members to be successful when starting their careers.

The professional development workshops provide attendees with skills not often learned in the classroom.

Review candidate qualifications at www.electrochem.org/summerfellowships.

Student Chapters There are more than100 student chapters worldwide. ECS offers funding to support chapter events!

View offerings on www.electrochem.org/education.

Find the guidelines for starting a student chapter at www.electrochem.org/student-center.

Awarded Student Membership Our divisions offer memberships to full-time students.

You can re-apply to receive an awarded student membership for up to four years!

Student Chapter Membership Apply for a student membership for those involved in active ECS student chapters.You must apply or re-apply each year for a student chapter membership.

Check out www.electrochem.org/student-center for qualifications!

ECS Institutional Members The Electrochemical Society values the support of its institutional members. These organizations help ECS support scientific education, sustainability, and innovation.

Through ongoing partnerships, ECS will continue to lead as the advocate, guardian, and facilitator of electrochemical and solid state science and technology.

2020 Leadership Circle Awards Gold Level – 25 years

Panasonic Corporation

Westlake Bronze Level – 5 years

BASi

Benefactor

Bio-Logic USA/Bio-Logic SAS (12) Duracell (63) Gamry Instruments (13) Gelest, Inc. (11) Hydro-Québec (13) Pine Research Instrumentation (14)

Patron Energizer (75) Faraday Technology, Inc. (14) GE Global Research Center (2) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (16) Scribner Associates, Inc. (24) Toyota Research Institute of North America (12)

Sponsoring

Sustaining

BASi (5)

General Motors Holdings LLC (68)

Central Electrochemical Research Institute (27)

Giner, Inc./GES (34)

DLR-Institut für Vernetzte Energiesysteme e.V. (12) EL-CELL GmbH (6) Ford Motor Corporation (6) GS Yuasa International Ltd. (40)

Hydrogenics Corporation (2) Ion Power Inc. (6) Kanto Chemical Co., Inc. (8)

Honda R&D Co., Ltd. (13)

Los Alamos National Laboratory (12)

Medtronic Inc. (40)

Microsoft Corporation (3)

Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. (13)

Occidental Chemical Corporation (78)

Panasonic Corporation, AIS Company (26)

Sandia National Laboratories (44)

Permascand AB (17) Teledyne Energy Systems, Inc. (21) The Electrosynthesis Company, Inc. (24) Center for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research BadenWürttemberg (ZSW) (16)

SanDisk (6) Technic Inc. (24) Westlake (25) Yeager Center for Electrochemical Sciences (22) 06/04/2020

Please help us continue the vital work of ECS by joining as an institutional member today.

Contact Anna.Olsen@electrochem.org for more information.