ArticleScientific reports2026
Impact of over compressing gas diffusion electrodes in alkaline zero-gap CO
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The electrochemical reduction of CO2 offers a promising route to valuable fuels; however, stable performance is hindered by gas–liquid transport limitations in the cathode gas diffusion electrode (GDE), which are directly affected by GDE compression. Here, we showed that operating an alkaline zero-gap CO2 electrolyzer at a compression ratio (CR) of 10% achieved higher CO faradaic efficiency compared to CR = 20% and 30%. The improved performance is attributed to the fewer obstructions to gas transport in the 10% compressed cathode GDE, as evidenced by lower quantities of flooded anolyte and salt precipitates observed via synchrotron X-ray radiography. Less salt precipitate formation in the cathode at CR = 10% is further demonstrated by an 82% smaller mass transport resistance compared to CR = 30%, a result attributed to larger pores in the less compressed GDE that mitigate anolyte entrapment. Additionally, lower amounts of anolyte are observed at the cathode flow field–GDE interface at CR = 10%, whereas at CR = 30%, excess liquid at this interface led to CO2 gas inlet blockage and cell voltage instabilities. As such, operating the CO2 electrolyzer at lower CRs is recommended to facilitate gas–liquid transport within the cathode GDE and thereby improve overall cell performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.