Skip to content
1887
Volume 71, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2056-5135
file format pdf download PDF

  • oa Platinum Counter Electrode Contamination in Oxygen Reduction Reaction Measurements

    Implications for non-platinum group metal catalyst durability evaluation

  • Authors: Albert Mufundirwa1,2, Askin Eldiven1,3, Shoyo Suzuki1,4, Kazunari Sasaki1,5 and Stephen M. Lyth1,6
  • 1 Next-Generation Fuel Cell Research Center (NEXT-FC), Kyushu University, 744 Motooka Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan 2 Japan Synchrotron Radiation Research Institute, 1-1-1 Kouto, Sayo-cho, Sayo-gun, Hyogo, 679-5198, Japan 3 Department of Chemistry, Technical University of Munich, Lichtenbergstraße 4, 85748 Garching, Germany 4 Department of Automotive Science, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan 5 Department of Hydrogen Energy Systems, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan 6 Strathclyde Incubator for Green Hydrogen Technologies (SigH2t), Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Strathclyde, James Weir 4.04, 75 Montrose Street, Glasgow, G1 1XQ, UK
    *[email protected]
  • Source: Johnson Matthey Technology Review, Volume 71, Issue 1, Jan 2027, e71102
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793
    • Received: 21 Aug 2025
    • Accepted: 09 Feb 2026

Abstract

The transition to non-platinum group metal (PGM) electrocatalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in polymer electrolyte fuel cells (PEFCs) is central to achieving sustainable and cost-effective energy conversion. However, the continued widespread use of platinum counter electrodes in electrochemical testing introduces a critical artefact, namely, platinum dissolution, migration through the electrolyte and redeposition onto the working electrode. This potentially skews performance metrics and undermines claims of ‘platinum-free’ sustained ORR activity. This study systematically investigates this issue using a model nitrogen-doped carbon electrocatalyst with inherently low catalytic activity, allowing facile observation of small performance improvements that may be difficult to separate in high-performance catalysts. Platinum wire and graphite rod counter electrodes are compared under load cycling and start-stop conditions in both acidic and alkaline media over 60,000 potential cycles. We demonstrate that platinum contamination from the counter electrode significantly enhances ORR activity and slows performance degradation, effects which are absent when a graphite counter electrode is used. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) confirms platinum electrodeposition on the working electrode. These findings challenge prevailing experimental protocols and establish the graphite counter electrode as essential for accurate benchmarking of non-PGM catalysts. The work delivers a clear methodological clarification with broad implications for electrocatalyst development and validation.

© 2027 Johnson Matthey
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. You are free to: share: copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format; adapt: remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. Under the following terms: attribution: you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793
2027-01-01
2026-04-01

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmtr/71/1/Lyth_13a_Imp.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. H. Nazir, N. Muthuswamy, C. Louis, S. Jose, J. Prakash, M. E. M. Buan, C. Flox, S. Chavan, X. Shi, P. Kauranen, T. Kallio, G. Maia, K. Tammeveski, N. Lymperopoulos, E. Carcadea, E. Veziroglu, A. Iranzo, A. M. Kannan, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2020, 45, (53), 28217 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.07.256
    [Google Scholar]
  2. “Hydrogen Energy Engineering: A Japanese Perspective”, eds. K. Sasaki, H.-W. Li, A. Hayashi, J. Yamabe, T. Ogura, S. M. Lyth, Green Energy and Technology, Springer Japan, Tokyo, Japan, 2016 LINK https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-56042-5
    [Google Scholar]
  3. T. Stangarone, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy, 2020, 23, (2), 509 LINK https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01936-6
    [Google Scholar]
  4. M. A. Bird, S. E. Goodwin, D. A. Walsh, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2020, 12, (18), 20500 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c03307
    [Google Scholar]
  5. M. David, S. M. Lyth, R. Lindner, G. F. Harrington, “Future-Proofing Fuel Cells: Critical Raw Material Governance in Sustainable Energy”, Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, 2021 LINK https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76806-5
  6. M. Nagashima, ‘Japan’s Hydrogen Strategy and Its Economic and Geopolitical Implications’, Études de l’Ifri, Ifri, Paris, France, October, 2018 LINK https://www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/migrated_files/documents/atoms/files/nagashima_japan_hydrogen_2018_3.pdf
  7. ‘The Future of Hydrogen: Seizing Today’s Opportunities’, International Energy Agency, Paris, France, June, 2019 LINK https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2019/06/the-future-of-hydrogen_2d59d5dd/1e0514c4-en.pdf
  8. J. Liu, D. Takeshi, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2014, 161, (9), F838 LINK https://doi.org/10.1149/2.0231409jes
    [Google Scholar]
  9. J. Liu, D. Takeshi, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, Fuel Cells, 2014, 14, (5), 728 LINK https://doi.org/10.1002/fuce.201300258
    [Google Scholar]
  10. S. M. Lyth, A. Mufundirwa, ‘Electrocatalysts in Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells’, in “Heterogeneous Catalysts: Advanced Design, Characterization and Applications”, eds. W. Y. Teoh, A. Urakawa, Y. H. Ng, P. Sit, Wiley, Weinheim, Germany, 2021, p. 571
    [Google Scholar]
  11. W. R. Grove, London Edinburgh Dublin Philos. Mag. J. Sci., 1842, 21, (140), 417 LINK https://doi.org/10.1080/14786444208621600
    [Google Scholar]
  12. M. J. N. Pourbaix, J. Van Muylder, N. de Zoubov, Platinum Metals Rev., 1959, 3, (2), 47 LINK https://doi.org/10.1595/003214059x324753
    [Google Scholar]
  13. T. Daio, A. Staykov, L. Guo, J. Liu, M. Tanaka, S. M. Lyth, K. Sasaki, Sci. Rep., 2015, 5, 13126 LINK https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13126
    [Google Scholar]
  14. K. Strickland, E. Miner, Q. Jia, U. Tylus, N. Ramaswamy, W. Liang, M.-T. Sougrati, F. Jaouen, S. Mukerjee, Nat. Commun., 2015, 6, 7343 LINK https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8343
    [Google Scholar]
  15. E. F. Holby, P. Zelenay, Nano Energy, 2016, 29, 54 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoen.2016.05.025
    [Google Scholar]
  16. J. Weiss, H. Zhang, P. Zelenay, J. Electroanal. Chem., 2020, 875, 114696 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2020.114696
    [Google Scholar]
  17. A. Pedersen, J. Pandya, G. Leonzio, A. Serov, A. Bernardi, I. E. L. Stephens, M.-M. Titirici, C. Petit, B. Chachuat, Green Chem., 2023, 25, (24), 10458 LINK https://doi.org/10.1039/D3GC03206J
    [Google Scholar]
  18. R. Ezhov, O. Maximova, X. Lyu, D. Leshchev, E. Stavitski, A. Serov, Y. Pushkar, ACS Appl. Energy Mater., 2023, 7, (2), 604 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaem.3c02522
    [Google Scholar]
  19. X. Xu, B. Zulevi, A. Serov, P. N. Pintauro, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2025, 105, 1375 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2025.01.356
    [Google Scholar]
  20. J. Liu, D. Takeshi, D. Orejon, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2014, 161, (4), F544 LINK https://doi.org/10.1149/2.095404jes
    [Google Scholar]
  21. A. Serov, M. J. Workman, K. Artyushkova, P. Atanassov, G. McCool, S. McKinney, H. Romero, B. Halevi, T. Stephenson, J. Power Sources, 2016, 327, 557 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.07.087
    [Google Scholar]
  22. L. Yang, J. Shui, L. Du, Y. Shao, J. Liu, L. Dai, Z. Hu, Adv. Mater., 2019, 31, (13), 1804799 LINK https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201804799
    [Google Scholar]
  23. L. Qu, Y. Liu, J.-B. Baek, L. Dai, ACS Nano, 2010, 4, (3), 1321 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/nn901850u
    [Google Scholar]
  24. ‘Basic Overview of the Working Principle of a Potentiostat/Galvanostat (PGSTAT) – Electrochemical Cell Setup’, AN-EC-008, Metrohm, Runcorn, UK, July, 2018 LINK https://www.metrohm.com/en_gb/applications/application-notes/autolab-applikationen-anautolab/an-ec-008.html
    [Google Scholar]
  25. A. J. Bard, L. R. Faulkner, H. S. White, “Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications”, 3rd Edn., John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Oxford, UK, 2022
  26. S. Cherevko, G. P. Keeley, S. Geiger, A. R. Zeradjanin, N. Hodnik, N. Kulyk, K. J. J. Mayrhofer, ChemElectroChem, 2015, 2, (10), 1471 LINK https://doi.org/10.1002/celc.201500098
    [Google Scholar]
  27. A. A. Topalov, S. Cherevko, A. R. Zeradjanin, J. C. Meier, I. Katsounaros, K. J. J. Mayrhofer, Chem. Sci., 2014, 5, (2), 631 LINK https://doi.org/10.1039/c3sc52411f
    [Google Scholar]
  28. T. Takahashi, T. Ikeda, K. Murata, O. Hotaka, H. Shigeki, Y. Tachikawa, M. Nishihara, J. Matsuda, T. Kitahara, S. M. Lyth, A. Hayashi, K. Sasaki, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2022, 169, (4), 044523 LINK https://doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/ac662d
    [Google Scholar]
  29. T. Takahashi, Y. Kokubo, K. Murata, O. Hotaka, S. Hasegawa, Y. Tachikawa, M. Nishihara, J. Matsuda, T. Kitahara, S. M. Lyth, A. Hayashi, K. Sasaki, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2022, 47, (97), 41111 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.09.172
    [Google Scholar]
  30. A. Ohma, K. Shinohara, A. Iiyama, T. Yoshida, A. Daimaru, ECS Trans., 2011, 41, (1), 775 LINK https://doi.org/10.1149/1.3635611
    [Google Scholar]
  31. M. Tian, C. Cousins, D. Beauchemin, Y. Furuya, A. Ohma, G. Jerkiewicz, ACS Catal., 2016, 6, (8), 5108 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.6b00200
    [Google Scholar]
  32. R. M. Darling, J. P. Meyers, J. Electrochem. Soc., 2003, 150, (11), A1523 LINK https://doi.org/10.1149/1.1613669
    [Google Scholar]
  33. K.-I. Ota, S. Nishigori, N. Kamiya, J. Electroanal. Chem. Interfacial Electrochem., 1988, 257, (1–2), 205 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0728(88)87042-6
    [Google Scholar]
  34. A. Zadick, L. Dubau, N. Sergent, G. Berthomé, M. Chatenet, ACS Catal., 2015, 5, (8), 4819 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.5b01037
    [Google Scholar]
  35. A. Muthukrishnan, Y. Nabae, J. Phys. Chem. C, 2016, 120, (39), 22515 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b07905
    [Google Scholar]
  36. T. Iwazaki, R. Obinata, W. Sugimoto, Y. Takasu, Electrochem. Commun., 2009, 11, (2), 376 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2008.11.045
    [Google Scholar]
  37. A. Ishihara, T. Nagai, K. Ukita, M. Arao, M. Matsumoto, L. Yu, T. Nakamura, O. Sekizawa, Y. Takagi, K. Matsuzawa, T. W. Napporn, S. Mitsushima, T. Uruga, T. Yokoyama, Y. Iwasawa, H. Imai, K. Ota, J. Phys. Chem. C, 2019, 123, (30), 18150 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b02393
    [Google Scholar]
  38. H. T. Chung, D. A. Cullen, D. Higgins, B. T. Sneed, E. F. Holby, K. L. More, P. Zelenay, Science, 2017, 357, (6350), 479 LINK https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan2255
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Y. Zhou, L. Yan, J. Hou, Molecules, 2022, 27, (1), 328 LINK https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27010328
    [Google Scholar]
  40. A. Ilnicka, M. Skorupska, M. Tyc, K. Kowalska, P. Kamedulski, W. Zielinski, J. P. Lukaszewicz, Sci. Rep., 2021, 11, 7084 LINK https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86507-5
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Y. Chu, Q.-L. Jiang, L.-Y. Chang, Y.-H. Jin, R.-Z. Wang, J. Electroanal. Chem., 2023, 928, 117041 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2022.117041
    [Google Scholar]
  42. W. Huang, Y. Chen, G. Deng, C. Xu, J. Cheng, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2024, 88, 1003 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.09.261
    [Google Scholar]
  43. K. A. Kuterbekov, K. Z. Bekmyrza, A. M. Kabyshev, M. M. Kubenova, A. Baratova, I. Abdullayeva, A. T. Ayalew, Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol., 2025, 20, 368 LINK https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlct/ctaf008
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Y. Jiang, H. Xu, B. Ma, Z. Zhang, Y. Zhou, Fuel, 2024, 366, 131404 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2024.131404
    [Google Scholar]
  45. S. G. Ji, H. Kim, C. Park, W. Kim, C. H. Choi, ACS Catal., 2020, 10, (18), 10773 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c01783
    [Google Scholar]
  46. J. Li, H. Liu, Y. Lü, X. Guo, Y. Song, Chin. J. Catal., 2016, 37, (7), 1109 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/s1872-2067(16)62454-3
    [Google Scholar]
  47. P. J. Kulesza, W. Lu, L. R. Faulkner, J. Electroanal. Chem., 1992, 336, (1–2), 35 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0728(92)80260-b
    [Google Scholar]
  48. R. Chen, C. Yang, W. Cai, H.-Y. Wang, J. Miao, L. Zhang, S. Chen, B. Liu, ACS Energy Lett., 2017, 2, (5), 1070 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.7b00219
    [Google Scholar]
  49. M. M. Hasan, N. K. Allam, Sci. Rep., 2022, 12, 9368 LINK https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13385-w
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Z. Cui, W. Sheng, ACS Catal., 2023, 13, (4), 2534 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05145
    [Google Scholar]
  51. X. Lyu, J. Yang, A. Serov, Electrochim. Acta, 2024, 501, 144824 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2024.144824
    [Google Scholar]
  52. G. Jerkiewicz, ACS Catal., 2022, 12, (4), 2661 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.1c06040
    [Google Scholar]
  53. J. Liu, B. V. Cunning, T. Daio, A. Mufundirwa, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, Electrochim. Acta, 2016, 220, 554 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2016.10.090
    [Google Scholar]
  54. A. Mufundirwa, G. F. Harrington, M. S. Ismail, B. Šmid, B. V. Cunning, Y. Shundo, M. Pourkashanian, K. Sasaki, A. Hayashi, S. M. Lyth, Nanotechnology, 2020, 31, (22), 225401 LINK https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6528/ab76ed
    [Google Scholar]
  55. S. M. Lyth, H. Shao, J. Liu, K. Sasaki, E. Akiba, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2014, 39, (1), 376 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.10.044
    [Google Scholar]
  56. M. I. M. Kusdhany, Z. Ma, A. Mufundirwa, H.-W. Li, K. Sasaki, A. Hayashi, S. M. Lyth, Microporous Mesoporous Mater., 2022, 343, 112141 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2022.112141
    [Google Scholar]
  57. S. M. Lyth, ‘Doped and Decorated Carbon Foams for Energy Applications’, in “Nanocarbons for Energy Conversion: Supramolecular Approaches”, ed. N. Nakashima, Nanostructure Science and Technology, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2019, pp. 175–203 LINK https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92917-0_8
    [Google Scholar]
  58. M. Vorokhta, M. I. M. Kusdhany, D. Vöröš, M. Nishihara, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, Chem. Eng. J., 2023, 471, 144524 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2023.144524
    [Google Scholar]
  59. S. Ma, J. Liu, K. Sasaki, S. M. Lyth, P. J. A. Kenis, Energy Technol., 2017, 5, (6), 861 LINK https://doi.org/10.1002/ente.201600576
    [Google Scholar]
  60. S. Rojas-Carbonell, K. Artyushkova, A. Serov, C. Santoro, I. Matanovic, P. Atanassov, ACS Catal., 2018, 8, (4), 3041 LINK https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.7b03991
    [Google Scholar]
  61. S. Maass, F. Finsterwalder, G. Frank, R. Hartmann, C. Merten, J. Power Sources, 2008, 176, (2), 444 LINK https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2007.08.053
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793
Loading
Platinum Counter Electrode Contamination in Oxygen Reduction Reaction Measurements
Johnson Matthey Technology Review 71, e71102 (2027); https://doi.org/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793
/content/journals/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793
/content/journals/10.1595/205651327X17708941599793
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): counter electrode; durability; non-PGM electrocatalysts; platinum; voltammetry

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test