ELECTROCHEMICAL REACTOR

Assignment 3

Multiphase Reactor Engineering

CH3061

Group 2
Lesna Christwinarso (6136877) – MSc Sustainable Energy Technology
Thoriq Fauzan Ariandi (6290396) – MSc Sustainable Energy Technology
Abdul Aziiz Nugraha (6205135) – MSc Sustainable Energy Technology
Ioannis Patakos (6310028) – MSc Sustainable Energy Technology

Date of Submission: 04-03-2025

1
 Table of Contents
1. List of Symbols ...........................................................................................................................................3
2. Background ................................................................................................................................................4
3. Assumptions ...............................................................................................................................................4
4. Model Development ...................................................................................................................................5
4.1. Mole Balance.....................................................................................................................................5
4.2. Mole Balance Accounting with Parasitic Side Reaction ...................................................................6
4.2.1. Mole Balance in the Bulk Phase ...........................................................................................7
4.2.2. Mass Balance in the Stagnant Diffusion Layer ....................................................................7
5. Results and Discussion ..............................................................................................................................8
5.1. Velocity and Concentration Profile at the Cathode Side (Point a) ....................................................8
5.2. Expression for CO2 Concentration Change over The Reactor Length (Point b and c) .....................9
5.3. Specific Surface Area (Point d) .........................................................................................................9
5.4. Maximum Conversion Efficiency (Point e) ....................................................................................10
5.5. Concentration Profile CO2 Near the Electrode (Point f) .................................................................10
5.6. Faraday’s Law to Calculate the Partial Current Density (Point g) ..................................................11
5.7. Faradaic Efficiency as Function of Position in the Y-Axis (Point h) ..............................................11
6. Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................................13
7. References ................................................................................................................................................14
APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................................................15
A. APPENDIX 1 – Phyton Code .......................................................................................................15
B. APPENDIX 2 – The Effect of Varying itot on −𝒌𝑳𝒖𝒉𝒊𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒐𝒕 + 𝑪𝒓𝒆𝒇𝒌𝑳𝑭𝒏𝒆 −.....................17
C. APPENDIX 3 – The Effect of Varying itot on Faradaic Efficiency (FE) ...................................18
D. APPENDIX 4 – Sensitivity Analysis on Specific Surface Area (ae) and Mass Transfer
Coefficient (kL) ...............................................................................................................................19
E. APPENDIX 5 – Parameters and Operating Conditions Consideration for Reactor Design ..20
F. APPENDIX 6 – Timesheet ............................................................................................................23
G. APPENDIX 7 – Mole Balance Schematic in The Cathode Side ................................................24
H. APPENDIX 8 – The Proposed Optimum Parameter .................................................................25

2
1. List of Symbols
All the symbols and expressions in this assignment are provided in the following table.
Table A List of Symbols
Symbol Description Unit
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 Bulk concentration of CO2 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑚3
𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 Concentration of CO2 at the electrode surface 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑚3
𝑢 Fluid velocity 𝑚/𝑠
ℎ Cathode channel height (along the x-axis) 𝑚
𝑤 Cathode channel width 𝑚
𝑖𝐶𝑂 Current density of CO 𝐴/𝑚2
𝐹 Faraday’s constant 𝐶/𝑚𝑜𝑙
𝑒−
𝑛 Number of electrons per molecule -
𝑁𝐶𝑂2 Molar flux of CO2 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑚2 𝑠
𝑘𝐿 Mass transfer coefficient 𝑚/𝑠
𝑎𝑒 Specific surface area 1/𝑚
𝐴𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑒 Surface area of the electrode 𝑚2
𝑉 Volume of the electrode 𝑚3
∗
𝐶𝐶𝑂2 Saturation concentration of CO2 in water 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑚3
𝑣 Volumetric flow rate 𝑚3 /𝑠
𝐴𝑐 Cross-sectional area of the cathode 𝑚2
𝑋𝐶𝑂2 Conversion efficiency of CO2 -
𝑖𝑛
𝐹𝐶𝑂 2
Molar inflow rate 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑠
𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐹𝐶𝑂2 Molar outflow rate 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑠
𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐶𝐶𝑂 2 Concentration of CO2 at the outlet of the reactor 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑚3
𝐷𝑖 Diffusion coefficient of species i 𝑚2 /𝑠
𝑟𝑖" Reaction rate of species i 𝑚𝑜𝑙/(𝑚2 𝑠)
𝑋 Reaction conversion -
𝑦 Specified point within the length of the reactor/electrode 𝑚

3
2. Background
In this assignment, an electrochemical reactor to produce CO from CO2 is to be designed. The reaction
considered is the mass transfer limited formation of CO on a silver catalyst at neutral pH, defined as follows:

CO2 + 2 H+ + 2 e- → CO + H2O

First, the concentration profile in the x and y direction of the cathode compartment and the equation describing
the CO2 concentration along the reactor’s length will be determined. Then, the specific surface area 𝑎𝑒 of the
electrode is calculated and subsequently the maximum conversion of the reactor. Next, the parasitic side
reaction, that is the reduction of water to hydrogen, is considered. The concentration profile is again sketched
and the equation for faraday efficiency FE which will now depend on the position y is determined. Finally, the
equations for conversion and faradaic efficiency will be implemented in python and plotted. The effect of
variation of the mass transfer coefficient 𝑘𝐿 and the specific surface area to the conversion and faradaic
efficiency will also be studied.

3. Assumptions
1. Reduction of CO2 is the only reaction that exclusively occurs at the cathode surface.
2. The reaction is considered as mass transfer limited formation of CO on a silver catalyst at neutral pH.
3. It is assumed that the anode reaction does not limit the performance of the reactor. This implies that the
cathode compartment is decoupled from the anode and is not influenced by the anode reaction.
4. The pH is assumed to remain neutral despite the presence of H⁺ and OH⁻. Therefore, any potential effects
of pH on the reaction rate and mass transfer can be neglected.
5. Steady-state conditions eliminate the accumulation term in mole balances across the x and y directions.
This implies that the mass transfer across the x direction is equal to the reaction rate at the electrode surface.
6. Across the x-direction, the thin film theory is applied. This theory assumes the presence of a thin film
around the electrode, where all mass transfer resistance is concentrated. It is a crucial assumption in order
to simplify the mass balance over the x-direction.
7. The reaction occurs instantaneously on the electrode surface, therefore, the concentration of CO2 on the
electrode surface can be considered zero. This helps to simplify the mass balance and calculate the
maximum reaction rate.
8. The reactor length is assumed equal to the electrode length.
9. The temperature in the channel remains constant. Therefore, the reactions, as well as the mass transfer and
the saturation concentration of CO2 in water are not influenced by temperature changes. Also, the fluid
properties are considered constant.
10. The membrane is impermeable to CO2, CO, and H2, which is crucial for the operation of the electrochemical
reactor.
11. Inside the channel, there are no bubbles of components that could impact mass transfer and the performance
of the reactor.
12. The inlet flow contains the maximum allowable concentration of dissolved carbon dioxide.
13. The volumetric flow rate remains constant, which is a consequence of the absence of bubbles.
14. The stagnant diffusion layer is thin, thus it is assumed that the interphase mass transfer area is equal to
cathode surface area

4
4. Model Development
4.1. Mole Balance
The CO2 concentration change along the reactor length can be expressed by the mole balance on the catholyte
side, as illustrated in the Figure G-1 (Appendix G). This approach involves reduction reaction rate of CO2
occurring at the cathode of the electrochemical reactor, which is defined as follows:
𝐶𝑂2 + 2𝐻 + + 2𝑒 − → 𝐶𝑂 + 𝐻2 𝑂
The reaction occurs sequentially after the mass transfer of a highly concentrated CO2 in the bulk phase, through
the thin stagnant diffusion layer, to the surface of the cathode. The mass of CO products from the reaction, that
exclusively generated in the cathode surface, is subsequently transferred back into the bulk phase. These
phenomena can be observed axially in x and y direction.
In the y-axis direction, the mole balance for CO2 concentration change can be expressed as follows:
𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑛 − 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑢𝑡 +
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (1)

Under the assumption of steady-state conditions, the rate of molar accumulation is zero. The mass transfer of
CO₂ from the bulk phase to the cathode surface is considered exclusively along the x-direction. Meanwhile, the
CO₂ reduction reaction rate is analyzed based on the decrease in bulk concentration due to its conversion to
CO. In the electrochemical reaction, the rate of consumption of CO2 and production of CO in catholyte side is
described by Faraday’s Law as follows
−𝑖
𝑟"𝐶𝑂 = 𝐹∙𝑛𝐶𝑂
𝑒− (2)

Sequentially, given the parameters and general expression for the mole balance, the concentration changes of
CO2 along the reactor length can be derived as
−𝑑CCO2 −𝑑CCO2
𝑏 𝑏
0 = [ℎ𝑤 (𝐷𝐶𝑂2 𝑑𝑦
| + 𝑢 𝐶𝐶𝑂2 | )] − [ℎ𝑤 (𝐷𝐶𝑂2 𝑑𝑦
| + 𝑢 𝐶𝐶𝑂2 | )] + [(r"𝐶𝑂 ) ∙ ℎ∆𝑦] (3)
𝑏 𝑦 𝑏 𝑦 𝑏 𝑦+∆𝑦 𝑏 𝑦+∆𝑦

It is noteworthy that the mass transfer due to diffusion in the y-axis is assumed to be relatively small compared
to the convective bulk CO2 flow in the same axis, thus it can be assumed to be negligible. In addition, the value
of the bulk fluid velocity is assumed to be constant along the reactor length. Furthermore, by dividing all terms
with infinitesimal value of volume change ℎ𝑤∆𝑦 or ℎ2 ∆𝑦; given the square channel dimension in the catholyte
side (ℎ = 𝑤), the equation (3) can be rearranged further into:
ℎ 2 (𝐶𝐶𝑂2 | −𝐶𝐶𝑂2 | )
𝑏 𝑦+∆𝑦 𝑏 𝑦 (r"𝐶𝑂 )∙ℎ∆𝑦
𝑢 ∙ lim ℎ 2 ∆𝑦
= ℎ 2 ∆𝑦
(4)
∆y→0

By applying the equation (2) into equation (4), the expression for the CO2 change across the reactor length then
becomes:
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2
= r"𝐶𝑂 (5)
𝑑𝑦
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1 𝑖
= − 𝑢ℎ 𝐹𝑛𝐶𝑂𝑒− (6)
𝑑𝑦
Across the x-direction, the thin film theory is applied. This theory assumes the presence of a thin film around
the electrode, where all mass transfer resistance is concentrated (Wen et al., 2020). Maximum conversion is
achieved when operating in the mass transfer limited regime, meaning that the limiting step is the transport of

5
CO2 from the bulk phase through the stagnant diffusion layer at the electrode surface, while the reaction occurs
instantaneously. As a result, the CO2 concentration at the electrode surface is zero.

These assumptions imply the presence of a limiting current density, which represents the maximum achievable
current density before mass transfer limitations become dominant. Beyond this point, further increase in the
applied potential do not affect the reaction rate.
The mass transfer of CO2 from the bulk phase to the electrode surface is given by:
𝑁𝐶𝑂2 = 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) (7)

Given the above considerations, as well as the steady-state assumption, where the mass transfer of CO2 from
the bulk phase to the electrode surface is equal to the reaction rate of CO2, by combining Equations (5) and (7),
the following relationship is derived:
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1 𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1
𝑑𝑦
= − 𝑢ℎ 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) → 𝑑𝑦
= − 𝑢ℎ 𝑘𝐿 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 (8)

It is noteworthy that the mass transfer area at the interface between the bulk phase and the thin film area around
the electrode is equal to the area where the reaction occurs (ℎ ∙ 𝛥𝑦).
The specific surface area is given by:
𝐴𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑒
𝑎𝑒 = (9)
𝑉

where 𝐴𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑒 = 𝐿 ∙ 𝑤 (10) and 𝑉 = 𝐿 ∙ 𝑤 ∙ ℎ (11).

Combining Equations (9), (10), and (11),

1
𝑎𝑒 = ℎ (12)
Therefore, Equation (8) can be rewritten as:
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝑎𝑒
=− 𝑘 𝐶 (13)
𝑑𝑦 𝑢 𝐿 𝑏,𝐶𝑂2

By integrating Equation (13):

𝐶 𝑑𝐶𝐶𝑂2 𝑦 𝑎𝑒 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝑎𝑒
∫𝐶 ∗𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝐶 = ∫0 − 𝑢
𝑘𝐿 𝑑𝑦 → ln ( 𝐶 ∗ )=− 𝑢
𝑘𝐿 𝑦
𝐶𝑂2 𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝐶𝑂2
𝑎 𝑘 𝑦
∗ − 𝑒 𝐿
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 = 𝐶𝐶𝑂2
𝑒 𝑢 (14)

The velocity is given by:

𝑣 𝑣
𝑢= = (15)
𝐴𝑐 ℎ2
The conversion efficiency is given by:
𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐹𝐶𝑂 2
−𝐹𝐶𝑂 2
𝑋𝐶𝑂2 = 𝑖𝑛 (16)
𝐹𝐶𝑂
2
Assuming a constant volumetric flowrate:
∗ 𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐶𝐶𝑂 2
−𝐶𝐶𝑂 2
𝑋𝐶𝑂2 = ∗ (17)
𝐶𝐶𝑂
2

4.2. Mole Balance Accounting with Parasitic Side Reaction

CO2 mass transfer takes place from the liquid bulk phase into the stagnant diffusion layer, followed by a
subsequent reduction reaction on the cathode surface described as:
𝐶𝑂2 + 2𝐻 + + 2𝑒 − → 𝐶𝑂 + 𝐻2 𝑂
6
In addition to the CO2 reduction, an undesired competing reaction occurs in the case of limited 𝐶𝐶𝑂2 𝑠 , in which
water reduction reaction commences to produce hydrogen which is described as:
𝐻2 𝑂 + 2𝑒 − → 2𝑂𝐻 − + 𝐻2
A portion of the applied fixed current at the cathode goes towards the CO generation, while the remaining
current goes towards the water reduction which can be mathematically expressed as:
𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2
𝑖𝐶𝑂 = 𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 (18)
𝑖𝐶𝑂 = 𝐹𝐸 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 (19)
Furthermore, it is assumed that
𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 𝐶 ∗ (20)
The presence of a competing reaction invalidates the previous assumption of the CO2 concentration at the
electrode surface to be zero. Assuming so equates the argument of iCO to zero which further implies that the
applied current goes towards the water reduction reaction exclusively. The concentration of CO2 at the electrode
surface can be derived from the mass balances in the bulk phase and the stagnant diffusion layer.

4.2.1. Mole Balance in the Bulk Phase

Recalling Equation (8):
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1
= − 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 )
𝑑𝑦 𝑢ℎ
While in this case 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ≠ 0.

4.2.2. Mass Balance in the Stagnant Diffusion Layer

In the stagnant diffusion layer, the mole balance is constructed as:
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡 = 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 −
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 ±
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
Under the assumption of steady-state conditions, the rate of molar accumulation is zero. Additionally, it is
assumed that mass transfer due to diffusion in the y – axis is relatively small, thus it is assumed to be zero.
Furthermore, since the stagnant diffusion layer is thin it is assumed that the interphase mass transfer area is
equal to cathode surface area:
0 = [ℎ2 ∆𝑦𝑎𝑒 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 )] − [0] − [𝑟𝐶𝑂2 ℎ2 ∆𝑦𝑎𝑒 ] (21)

Equation (21) entails that the rate of interphase mass transfer from the bulk phase into the stagnant diffusion
layer is fully compensated by the rate of reaction
on the cathode surface. Subsequently, dividing all terms with ℎ2 ∆y𝑎𝑒 :
𝑖
0 = [𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 )] − [𝑟𝐶𝑂2 ] → 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) = 𝑟𝐶𝑂2 → 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) = 𝐹𝑛𝐶𝑂𝑒− (22)

By substituting Equation (18) into (22)

1 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 1 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2
𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) = 𝐹𝑛𝑒− 𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 → 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 = 𝑘 𝑒 − 𝑖
𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝐿 𝐹𝑛
1 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 𝑖
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 = 𝑘 𝐹𝑛 𝑒− 𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 + 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 → 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 = 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 (𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝑡𝑜𝑡𝐹𝑛𝑒− + 1)
𝐿 𝐿
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2
𝑖
= 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 (23)
( 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑒− +1)
𝐶 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛

7
Equation (23) relates 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 as a function of 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2

Substituting Equation (23) into (8)

𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1
𝑑𝑦
= − 𝑢ℎ 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 )→ 𝑑𝑦
=− 𝑢ℎ
𝑘𝐿 (1 − 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 )
− +1 − +1
𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − +1 𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝑘𝐿 −
𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 1 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
𝑑𝑦
=− 𝑢ℎ
𝑘𝐿 ( 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 − 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 )→ 𝑑𝑦
=− 𝑢ℎ
( 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 )
− +1 − +1 − +1
𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 =𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 −
𝑦=𝑦 𝑘 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝑘𝐿 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
∫𝐶 0 = ∫𝑦 = 0 − 𝑢ℎ𝐿 ( 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 ) 𝑑𝑦 → 𝑙𝑛( 𝑐 0 )=− ( 𝑖 )𝑦
𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 =𝑐𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − +1 𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 𝑢ℎ 𝑡𝑜𝑡
− +1
𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
−
𝑘𝐿 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
− ( 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 )𝑦 𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑢ℎ
− +1 − 𝐿( )𝑦
0 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 0 𝑢ℎ 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 = 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2
𝑒 → 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 = 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2
[𝑒 ] (24)

[ ]
Faradaic efficiency is defined as
𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2
𝐹𝐸 = (25)
𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓

Equation (23) relates 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 as a function of 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2

𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂 − 𝐿( )𝑦
2 0 𝑢ℎ 𝑖 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂 [𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝐿 ]
( − +1) 2
𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
𝐹𝐸 = 𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓
→ 𝐹𝐸 = 𝑖
( 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑒− +1)𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝐶 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛
𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
− 𝐿( )𝑦 − 𝐿( )𝑦
0 𝑢ℎ 𝑖 +𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘 𝐹𝑛𝑒− 0 𝑢ℎ 𝑖 +𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 [𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐿 ] 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 [𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐿 ]

𝐹𝐸 = 𝑖 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
− → 𝐹𝐸 = 𝑖 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
−
( 𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑓 − )𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 ( 𝑡𝑜𝑡 − )
𝐶 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒

− 𝑘𝐿 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 − ( )𝑦
0 𝑢ℎ 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝐹𝐸 = 𝑐𝑏,𝐶𝑂 [
2 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛 𝑒 − ] [𝑒 ] (26)

5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Velocity and Concentration Profile at the Cathode Side (Point a)
The velocity profile of the catholyte can be characterized by the general hydrodynamic behavior of the fluid in
the cathode compartment. This behavior is influenced by the square cross-section of the flow channel along the
reactor length. Given a constant volumetric flow rate and no change in cross-section dimension in the fluid
flow path along the reactor, it is reasonable to assume that the fluid velocity along y-axis will remain constant.
On the other hand, by respecting the no-slip condition between the solid cathode plate and membrane inside
the reactor, the fluid velocity relative to the surface is assumed to be zero. Consequently, the velocity of the
adjacent fluid layer relative to the solid surface will gradually decrease, which implies that the velocity varies
as a function of reactor width. The profile of fluid velocity along the cathode side is illustrated in Figure 5-1.

8
 Figure 5-1 Velocity Profile in The Catholyte Relative to x-axis and y-axis
The concentration profile of CO₂ along the reactor length (y-axis) can be predicted using Equation (6). This
equation indicates that the change in CO₂ concentration is influenced by the mass transfer from the bulk phase
and the rate of CO₂ reduction reaction on the cathode surface to produce CO. Consequently, the CO₂
concentration is expected to decrease as it is consumed along the reactor length. However, at a fixed x-axis
position, the CO₂ concentration in the bulk phase remains constant until it reaches the interface between the
bulk phase and the stagnant diffusion layer. Beyond that, the concentration of CO2 gradually decreases until it
reaches minimum on the cathode surface. It is noteworthy that the concentration of the CO2 on the membrane
(at x = 0) will change, depending on the specific point along the length of the reactor due to the consumption
of the CO2 from the reduction reaction. The profile of the CO2 concentration change along the cathode side is
shown in Figure 5-2.

Figure 5-2 CO2 Concentration Profile in The Catholyte Relative to x-axis and y-axis
5.2. Expression for CO2 Concentration Change over The Reactor Length (Point b and c)
The equation to represent the CO2 concentration change along the reactor length (y-axis) and reactor width (x-
axis) have been explained in detail at Section 4.1 and expressed in the equation (5) and (8) as follows.
𝑑𝐶𝐶𝑂2 1 𝑖𝐶𝑂
=− (5)
𝑑𝑦 𝑢ℎ 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1
=− 𝑘 (𝐶 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) (8)
𝑑𝑦 𝑢ℎ 𝐿 𝑏,𝐶𝑂2
Where in this case 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ≠ 0. Meanwhile, to simplify the expression on equation (8), parameter of 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 =
0 is applied, thus the equation (8) will be simplified into.
𝑑𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 1
𝑑𝑦
= − 𝑢ℎ 𝑘𝐿 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2

5.3. Specific Surface Area (Point d)

The specific surface area can be calculated using Equation (12), given that ℎ = 2 𝑚𝑚:
9
 1 1
𝑎𝑒 = = = 500 𝑚−1
ℎ 2·10−3 𝑚

5.4. Maximum Conversion Efficiency (Point e)

The maximum conversion efficiency can be calculated by combining Equations (14) and (17) and assuming
𝑦 = 𝐿 = 6 𝑚, which is the length of the channel.
𝑚 2
500𝑚−1 ∙7∙10−5 ∙6𝑚∙(2∙10−3 ) 𝑚2
− 𝑠
𝑎 𝑘 𝐿ℎ 2 𝑚𝐿 1𝑚3 1𝑚𝑖𝑛
120 ∙ ·
∗ − 𝑒 𝐿 𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝑚𝑖𝑛 106 𝑚𝐿 60𝑠
𝐶𝐶𝑂 2
−𝐶∗𝐶𝑂2 𝑒 𝑣 34
𝑚3
−34 𝑒
𝑚3
𝑜𝑟
𝑋𝐶𝑂2 = ∗ = 𝑚𝑜𝑙 = 0.343 → 34.3%
𝐶𝐶𝑂 2 34 3
𝑚

5.5. Concentration Profile CO2 Near the Electrode (Point f)

Figure 5-3 illustrates the predicted CO₂ concentration profile along the distance from the membrane to the
cathode surface. It compares the expected profiles at three different positions along the reactor's y-axis: near
the inlet (blue), around the midpoint (orange), and near the outlet (green).
As CO₂ travels through the reactor, its concentration in the bulk phase decreases along the y-axis due to mass
transfer from the bulk phase, followed by subsequent reaction on the cathode surface. However, at a fixed y-
axis position, the CO₂ concentration in the bulk phase remains constant until it reaches the interface between
the bulk phase and the stagnant diffusion layer. This behavior is represented by the straight blue, orange, and
green lines. Beyond this interface, the CO₂ concentration declines progressively until it reaches the surface
concentration, 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 , as expressed by Equation (23).

Figure 5-3 Expected CO2 Concentration Profile from Membrane to Cathode Surface
Equation (24) defines 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 as a dependent variable governed by multiple parameters, among which is the
𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
total applied current, itot. The effect of varying itot on the value of argument − 𝑢ℎ𝐿 (𝑖 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘 𝐹𝑛𝑒− ) in the
𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝐿
exponential term is illustrated in Appendix 2 and Figure 5-4. It is observed that, at the same position in the y-
axis, varying itot from 1,000 A/m2 to 30,000 A/m2 has a noticeable effect in decreasing the value of
𝑘𝐿 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
− ( −) which consequently results in decreasing 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 exponentially and simultaneously
𝑢ℎ 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
increases the conversion of CO2. However, this desired effect is more pronounced in lower values than higher
values of itot as illustrated by flattening trend in Figure 5-4. This phenomenon reveals that CO2 reduction is also
controlled by mass transfer, which in high values of itot the mass transfer resistance becomes the limiting step.
Thus, increasing itot to a greater extent does not yield the expected conversion of CO2.

10
 Figure 5-4 The Effect of Varying itot on Figure 5-5 The Effect of Varying itot on Faradaic
𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 Efficiency (FE)
− 𝑢ℎ𝐿 (𝑖 +𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
−)
𝑡𝑜𝑡

Equation (26) defines faradaic efficiency (FE) as a dependent variable governed by multiple parameters, among
which is the total applied current, itot. By setting all other parameters in Equation (26) constant and varying itot
from 1,000 A/m2 to 30,000 A/m2, the effect of varying itot on FE is illustrated in Appendix 3 and Figure 5-5.
It is observed that, at the same position in the y-axis, increasing current density is followed by decreasing
faradaic efficiency. This trend happens because increasing current density leads to higher reaction rates that
consume CO2, subsequently suppressing CO2 on the cathode surface. As CO2 concentration is limited, the
available current on the cathode surface will promote competing reaction and consequently reduce the faradaic
efficiency.
5.6. Faraday’s Law to Calculate the Partial Current Density (Point g)
Recalling Equation (22)
𝑖𝐶𝑂 −
𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) = 𝐹𝑛𝑒2− → 𝐹𝑛𝑒 𝑘𝐿 (𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 − 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 ) = 𝑖𝐶𝑂2

Equation (22) defines the partial current density (𝑖𝐶𝑂2 ) as a dependent variable governed by five parameters: F,
−
𝑛𝑒 , are 𝑘𝐿 are independent, while 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 and 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 are dependent on the position y in the reactor. Moreover,
Equation (23) expresses 𝐶𝑒,𝐶𝑂2 as a function of 𝐶𝑏,𝐶𝑂2 .
5.7. Faradaic Efficiency as Function of Position in the Y-Axis (Point h)
Equation (26) defines faradaic efficiency (FE) as a function of position in the y-axis of the reactor:
− 𝑘𝐿 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 − ( )𝑦
0 𝑢ℎ 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝐹𝐸 = 𝑐𝑏,𝐶𝑂 [
2 𝑖 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑒 − ] [𝑒 ]
𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛

5.8. CO2 as a Function of Position in the Y-Axis in Terms of Specific Surface Area (Point i)
𝑑𝐶𝐶𝑂2 1 𝑖
𝑑𝑦
= − 𝑢ℎ 𝐹𝑛𝐶𝑂𝑒−

Combining equations (6), (19), and (26) yields,

0 − 𝑘𝐿 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑑𝐶𝐶𝑂2 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑐𝑏,𝐶𝑂 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 − ( )𝑦
𝑢ℎ 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒−
𝑑𝑦
=− [ 2
𝑢ℎ𝐹𝑛𝑒− 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
− ] [𝑒 ] (27)

Recalling Equation (12)

11
 1
𝑎𝑒 = ℎ (12)
Substituting Equation (12) into (27)
0 𝑎𝑒 𝑘𝐿 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑑𝐶𝐶𝑂2 𝑎𝑒 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑐𝑏,𝐶𝑂 𝑘𝐿 − ( − )𝑦
=− 2
[𝑖 ] [𝑒 𝑢 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒 ]
𝑑𝑦 𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘 𝑒−
𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝐿 𝐹𝑛

5.9. Conversion and Faradaic Efficiency over the reactor length (Point j)
The conversion and Faradaic efficiency are determined using Equation 26 and are presented in Figure 5-6,
based on calculations performed using Python code.

Figure 5-6 Conversion Efficiency and Faradaic Efficiency as a Function of The Reactor Length
Conversion efficiency increases as the reactor length increases because more carbon dioxide reaches the
electrode surface and is consumed. The final conversion efficiency is 0.2893 (28.93%).
In contrast, Faradaic efficiency decreases as the reactor length increases, with a value of 0.1327 at the exit of
the channel. This reduction in Faradaic efficiency is due to the decreasing concentration of CO 2 in the bulk
phase along the channel, which also leads to a lower CO2 concentration at the electrode surface. Since the
concentration of CO2 at the electrode is proportional to its concentration in the bulk phase (Equation 23), a
decline in bulk CO2 concentration reduces the Faradaic efficiency of the electrochemical reaction.
Furthermore, under a fixed current, part of the current is allocated to the reduction of CO2, while the remainder
drives the reduction of water. As the bulk CO2 concentration decreases along the channel, the rate of the
parasitic side reaction increases.
5.10. Sensitivity Analysis on Mass Transfer Coefficient and Specific Surface Area (Point k)
The effect of varying the value of mass transfer coefficient (kL) and specific surface area (ae) in the ranges of
1e-5 to 1e-3 m/s and 1e2 to 1e4 1/m, respectively, on the achieved conversion and the faradaic efficiency at the
end of the reactor while maintaining other parameters constant is illustrated in Figure 5-7 (and Appendix-4).
It is demonstrated that an increase in ae leads to an enhanced CO2 conversion efficiency while simultaneously
causing a downturn in FE (Figure 5-7 Left). This behavior can be attributed to the fact that a higher ae
corresponds to an expanded electrode surface area for the same catholyte volume, which facilitates more
reduction reactions that consume CO2. However, as a greater proportion of CO2 is consumed, its availability on
the cathode surface becomes increasingly limited. Therefore, the reaction dynamics are shifted toward water
reduction which becomes more favorable under CO2 scarcity. A low value of FE indicates that most of the
electricity supply to the cathode does not generate the intended product of CO (Kelly, 2014), thus it is not
economically desirable. This phenomenon entails a further optimization of ae to seek the most profitable trade-
off between achieving high CO2 conversion while maintaining an acceptable FE.
12
The increase in reaction conversion with a higher mass transfer coefficient is associated with the enhanced
delivery of reactants to the cathode surface (Figure 5-7 Right). This relationship is intuitive, as the CO₂
reduction (or CO formation reaction) is a mass transfer-limited process. Generally, CO2 reduction reaction is
not mass-transfer limited in low cathodic current. However, this is not the case, considering the applied current
density of 2000 A/m2 (as outlined in the instruction). In practice, at a high current density, the gas diffusion
electrode (GDE) is commonly used to overcome the issue of mass-transport limitation in CO2 reduction reaction
(Ludwig et al., 2021). Moreover, higher kL value leads to abundant amount of reactant in the cathode surface,
promoting desired CO2 reduction reaction, thus increasing the FE. On the other hand, a lack of sufficient
reactant supply can shift the electrode potential toward side reactions, further reducing the Faradaic efficiency
for the desired product.

Figure 5-7 Sensitivity Analysis on Specific Surface Area (ae) and Mass Transfer Coefficient
5.11. Parameters for Operating Conditions
The effect of five operating conditions (concentration of dissolved CO2, current density, fluid flow rate, channel
height, and overall length of the channel) on two key parameters (CO2 conversion and the faradaic efficiency)
of electrochemical reactor is investigated. Further details are elaborated in Appendix 5. It is evident that
increasing (or decreasing) such parameters have a contrasting effect on the conversion and the faradaic
efficiency, which entails a more rigorous approach is required to seek on optimum trade-off that maximizes
conversion at acceptable faradaic efficiency. By assessing all parameters individually, which should not be the
case in reality, the proposed optimum value of each parameter is selected at the intersection point between the
conversion and the faradaic efficiency curves and listed in Appendix 8.
6. Conclusions
The velocity profile of the catholyte will remain constant along the y-axis while following a parabolic profile
along the x axis due to the no-slip condition between the fluid and the adjacent surfaces. The specific surface
area of the reactor is calculated to be 500 𝑚−1 . By deriving the equation for CO2 concentration change in the
bulk along the reactor’s length, the maximum conversion efficiency of the reactor is determined to be 34.3%.
The concentration profile in the bulk phase remains constant up until the interface between the bulk phase and
the stagnant diffusion layer, which declines progressively to the surface concentration. Varying the applied
current affects the conversion of CO2, where lower values of applied current resulted in more pronounced effect
due to mass transfer as a limiting step. Increasing the applied current also resulted in a decrease in faradaic
efficiency. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is performed by varying the mass transfer coefficient (𝑘𝐿 ) and specific
surface area (𝑎𝑒 ). It is found that increasing 𝑎𝑒 increase CO2 conversion efficiency. Meanwhile, increasing the
mass transfer coefficient also increases the reaction conversion efficiency through enhancing the delivery of
the reactants to the cathode surface.
13
7. References
Kelly, N. A. (2014). Hydrogen production by water electrolysis. Advances in Hydrogen Production,
Storage and Distribution, 173. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857097736.2.159

Ludwig, T., Singh, A. R., & Nørskov, J. K. (2021). Nonaqueous solvent adsorption on transition metal
surfaces with density functional theory: interaction of N, N-dimethylformamide (DMF),
tetrahydrofuran (THF), and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) with Ag, Cu, Pt, Rh, and Re
surfaces. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 125(40), 21943-21957.

Wen, T., Lu, L., He, W., & Min, Y. (2020). Fundamentals and applications of CFD technology on
analyzing falling film heat and mass exchangers: A comprehensive review. Applied Energy,
261, 114473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114473

14
APPENDIX
A. APPENDIX 1 – Phyton Code
Phyton code for the assignment:

15
16
 𝒌 𝒊𝒕𝒐𝒕
B. APPENDIX 2 – The Effect of Varying itot on − 𝒖𝒉𝑳 (𝒊 +𝑪𝒓𝒆𝒇 𝒌 𝑭𝒏𝒆− )
𝒕𝒐𝒕 𝑳

Parameter Value Unit

kL 7.00E-05 m/s
v 120.0 ml/min
u 0.5 m/sec
h 2.0 mm
itot Varied A/m2
Cref 34.0 mol/m3
F 9.65E+04 Coulombs/mol
ne- 2.0 e- / mol CO2
𝑘 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
Table B-1 The Effect of Varying itot on − 𝑢ℎ𝐿 (𝑖 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘 𝑒− )
𝑡𝑜𝑡 +𝐶 𝐿 𝐹𝑛

𝐴 𝑘𝐿 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 ( 2 ) − ( −)
𝑚 𝑢ℎ 𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 + 𝐶 𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑘𝐿 𝐹𝑛𝑒
1,000 -0.047969236
2,000 -0.056927495
3,000 -0.060706474
4,000 -0.062790566
5,000 -0.064111152
6,000 -0.065022842
7,000 -0.065690087
8,000 -0.066199577
9,000 -0.066601344
10,000 -0.066926286
11,000 -0.067194515
12,000 -0.067419688
13,000 -0.067611401
14,000 -0.067776596
15,000 -0.067920419
16,000 -0.068046766
17,000 -0.06815864
18,000 -0.068258392
19,000 -0.068347893
20,000 -0.068428644
21,000 -0.068501869
22,000 -0.068568573
23,000 -0.068629591
24,000 -0.068685619
25,000 -0.068737246
26,000 -0.06878497
27,000 -0.068829219
28,000 -0.068870357
29,000 -0.068908703
30,000 -0.068944531

17
C. APPENDIX 3 – The Effect of Varying itot on Faradaic Efficiency (FE)
Parameter Value Unit
y 3.0 m
kL 7.00E-05 m/s
v 120.0 ml/min
u 0.5 m/sec
h 2.0 mm
itot Varied A/m2
Cref 34.0 mol/m3
F 9.65E+04 Coulombs/mol
ne- 2.0 e- / mol CO2
Table C-1 The Effect of Varying itot on Faradaic Efficiency (FE)
𝐴
𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 ( 2 ) Faradaic Efficiency
𝑚
1,000 27.25%
2,000 15.74%
3,000 11.07%
4,000 8.53%
5,000 6.94%
6,000 5.85%
7,000 5.06%
8,000 4.45%
9,000 3.98%
10,000 3.59%
11,000 3.28%
12,000 3.01%
13,000 2.79%
14,000 2.59%
15,000 2.42%
16,000 2.28%
17,000 2.14%
18,000 2.03%
19,000 1.92%
20,000 1.83%
21,000 1.74%
22,000 1.66%
23,000 1.59%
24,000 1.53%
25,000 1.47%
26,000 1.41%
27,000 1.36%
28,000 1.31%
29,000 1.27%
30,000 1.23%

18
D. APPENDIX 4 – Sensitivity Analysis on Specific Surface Area (ae) and Mass Transfer Coefficient
(kL)
Table D-1 Conversion and Faradaic Efficiency Results by Varying ae
ae (1/m) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
1.00E+02 6.60% 17.44%
5.00E+02 28.93% 13.27%
1.00E+03 49.50% 9.43%
5.00E+03 96.71% 0.61%
1.00E+04 99.89% 0.02%

Table D-1 Conversion and Faradaic Efficiency Results by Varying kL

kL (m/s) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
1.00E-05 5.64% 3.00%
7.00E-05 28.93% 13.27%
1.00E-04 36.35% 15.72%
5.00E-04 67.90% 19.94%
1.00E-03 75.38% 18.87%

19
E. APPENDIX 5 – Parameters and Operating Conditions Consideration for Reactor Design
• Increasing Pressure (Concentration of Dissolved CO2)
∗
Remark CCO2
(mol/m3) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
Base Case 34.0 29% 13%
140%*base case 47.6 27% 18%
180%*base case 61.2 26% 22%
220%*base case 74.8 24% 25%
260%*base case 88.4 23% 29%

30% 35%
28%
30%
26%

Faradaic Efficiency (%)

24% 25%
Conversion (%)

22%
20%
20%
15%
18%
16% 10%
14%
Conversion 5%
12%
FE
10% 0%
30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0
Concentration of Dissolved CO2 (mol/m3)

• Decreasing Current Density

Remark Current Density (A/m2) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
20%*base case 6.80 18% 44%
40%*base case 13.60 23% 28%
60%*base case 20.40 26% 20%
80%*base case 27.20 28% 16%
Base Case 34.00 29% 13%

20
 30% 50%
28% 45%
26% 40%

Faradaic Efficiency (%)

24% 35%

Conversion (%) 22% 30%

20% 25%
18% 20%
16% 15%
14% 10%
Conversion
12% 5%
FE
10% 0%
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00
Current Density (A/m2)

• Increasing Fluid Flow Rate

Remark Fluid Flow Rate (m3/s) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
Base Case 2.00E-06 29% 13%
140%*base case 2.80E-06 22% 15%
180%*base case 3.60E-06 17% 15%
220%*base case 4.40E-06 14% 16%
260%*base case 5.20E-06 12% 16%

35% 18%

16%
30%
14%

Faradaic Efficiency (%)

25%
12%
Conversion (%)

20% 10%

15% 8%

6%
10%
4%
5%
Conversion 2%
FE
0% 0%
1.50E-06 2.50E-06 3.50E-06 4.50E-06 5.50E-06
Fluid Flowrate (m3/s)

21
 • Increasing Channel Height
Remark Channel Height (m) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
Base Case 0.002 29% 13%
140%*base case 0.0028 38% 12%
180%*base case 0.0036 46% 10%
220%*base case 0.0044 53% 9%
260%*base case 0.0052 59% 8%

70% 14%

60% 12%

Faradaic Efficiency (%)

50% 10%
Conversion (%)

40% 8%

30% 6%

20% 4%

10% Conversion 2%
FE
0% 0%
0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006
Channel Height (m)

• Decreasing Overall Length of the Channel

Remark Channel Height (m) Conversion Faradaic Efficiency
20%*base case 1.20 7% 17%
40%*base case 2.40 13% 16%
60%*base case 3.60 19% 15%
80%*base case 4.80 24% 14%
Base Case 6.00 29% 13%

35% 20%
18%
30%
16%
Faradaic Efficiency (%)

25% 14%
Conversion (%)

12%
20%
10%
15%
8%

10% 6%
4%
5% Conversion 2%
FE
0% 0%
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Overall Channel Length (m)
22
 F. APPENDIX 6 – Timesheet
Start Total
Date End Time Name Activity
Time Time
Meeting up to discuss and understand the assignment as
25/02/2025 12:30 14:00 01:30 All
well as dividing tasks.
Envelope calculation for mass balance expression in
26/02/2025 08:00 10:00 02:00 Aziiz
cathode side relative to electrode length (y-axis)
28/02/2025 10:00 12:00 02:00 Ioannis Working on questions c, d, e
28/02/2025 20:00 22:30 02:30 Lesna Studying the mass balance
01/03/2025 12:00 22:00 10:00 Lesna Constructinng the mass balance
01/03/2025 09:30 12:30 03:00 Ioannis Working on questions c, d, e
01/03/2025 19:00 21:00 02:00 Ioannis Wirting quations c, d, e in the report
01/03/2025 19:00 00:00 05:00 Thoriq Making presentation
Drafting the model development section for change in
02/03/2025 10:00 13:00 03:00 Aziiz CO2 concentration over the reactor length and the result
on velocity profile along cathode side.
Finishing the result on velocity and concentration
02/03/2025 21:00 23:00 02:00 Aziiz
change profile along cathode side.
02/03/2025 10:00 12:00 02:00 Ioannis Working on the Python code
02/03/2025 16:00 16:30 00:30 Thoriq Updating presentation
02/03/2025 14:00 18:00 04:00 Lesna Writing report on mass balance
03/03/2025 19:00 22:00 03:00 Lesna Conducting sensitivity analysis on specific surface area
Finalizing the Python code and generating the required
03/03/2025 13:30 15:30 02:00 Ioannis
graphs
Running python and drafting the result of sensitivity
03/03/2025 20:00 23:15 03:15 Aziiz
analysis for mass transfer coefficient (kL) variation.
04/03/2025 04:00 05:30 01:30 Lesna Parameters and Operating Conditions Consideration
04/03/2025 10:45 12:00 01:15 Thoriq Write introduction
Write report on Parameters and Operating Conditions
04/03/2025 13:45 14:30 00:45 Aziiz
Consideration
04/03/2025 15:00 16:30 01:30 Thoriq Check report and write conclusion

23
G. APPENDIX 7 – Mole Balance Schematic in The Cathode Side

Figure G-1 Mole Balance Schematic in the Catholyte Side of Electrochemical Reactor

24
H. APPENDIX 8 – The Proposed Optimum Parameter
Table H-1 Optimum Value for Each Parameter to Maximize Conversion and Faradaic Efficiency
Operating Condition Proposed Optimum Value
Concentration of dissolved CO2 75 mol/m3
Current density 14 A/m2
Fluid flow rate 2.4e-4 m3/s
Channel height 0.004 m
Overall length of the channel 5m

25