High Active PdSn Binary Alloyed Catalysts Supported on B and N Codoped Graphene for Formic Acid Electro-Oxidation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Chen et al report the preparation of PdSn nanoparticles on B, N co-doped graphene. The ratio of Pd:Sn was investigated to find the optimal proportion for enhancing formic acid electro-oxidation. They found that the Pd:Sn ratio of 3:1 provided the highest activity and stability on formic acid electro-oxidation. I suggest this manuscript can be accepted for publication after revision. The comments are given below.  

1. Please check superscript and subscript in the manuscript (e.g., rSn, αalloy, s-1, cm-2, etc.)
2. Please change “=” to “→” for the dehydrogenation pathways (Eq. (2)-(5))
3. Why did the intensity of the C(002) peak of xPdySn/BN-G samples quite fluctuate?
4. Regarding the XRD analysis, in addition to the calculation of lattice parameters, the crystallite size of PdSn particles should be calculated and discussed.
5. What is the particle size of 1Pd1Sn, 2Pd1Sn, and 4PdSn1 on BN-G?
6. The lattice parameters of 3Pd1Sn/G and Pd/G in Table 1 are missing.
7. How about the dispersion of PdSn nanoparticles on BN-G after stability test? It would be better to show the TEM images of PdSn/BN-G before and after the chronoamperometric test to confirm the dispersion of PdSn nanoparticles.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have presented an approach to develop PdSn based alloys supported on codoped graphene substrate for formic-acid electro-oxidation. The manuscript was well-written and hence, I recommend acceptance of this in the journal catalysts.

The authors need to consider revising the minor comments described below:

1) I recommend the authors to include stability studies at different time intervals.

2) Too many typos noted, please check and revise. For example, Sigmar, instead of sigma.

3) Include expansion of the abbreviation KBH4

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper is written clearly and in my opinion can be published after minor revisions.

I only have a few corrections to suggest:

1 - lines 36-37: "..are considered as a good candidate for Pt" The phrase is not clear and it looks like there is some word missing.

2 - line 68: Why double-doped graphene? It should be explained.

3 - line 77: 26°C should be corrected

4 - line 104: what is the doping amount of B and N in graphene?

5 - line 133: Re-oxidation? I think the authors mean Reduction!

6 - line 175: The XPS analysis results are reported with too many digits. XPS measurements are affected by about 10% error and therefore the percent amounts should be integer numbers like 15%, 27%... and so on.

7 line 193: I would also add that the main effect of Sn consists in acting as a sacrificial component in the alloy. In fact it is oxidized instead of Pd.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf