The successful synthesis of Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 possessing the Pentlandite structure is confirmed by powder X-ray diffraction experiments due to the prominent (111), (311), (222), (331) and (511) reflections being present (Figure 1a). A proper temperature control during the reaction, however, is the key to obtain phase pure materials. Notably, mono-sulfide solid solutions (mss), a common impurity of pentlandite materials11, have been observed, when the mixture was heated to 700 °C at a higher heating rate (e.g. 20 °C/min). An exemplary XRD pattern of such a sample is also depicted (Figure 1a, red). On the contrary, if an appropriate heating rate of 5 °C/min is applied, the appearance of mss can be significantly reduced if not even eliminated (Figure 1a, black). Mössbauer spectroscopy (Figure 1b) confirms the pentlandite structure of the Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 sample. The material reveals two distinct different iron sites with isomeric shifts of 0.13 (±0.02) and 0.50 (±0.02) mm/s as well as quadrupole couplings of 0.12 (±0.02) and 0.13 (±0.02), respectively (Figure 1b). This observation is in good agreement with literature reports and structural findings showing two different iron sites.12 Additionally, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) (Figure 1c) revealed two main phase transitions at 612 °C and 861 °C, proving the absence of undesirable phases according to literature reports.13

Figure 1: XRD and Mössbauer Spectroscopy. (a) XRD patterns of samples prepared with heating rates of 5 °C/min (black) and 20 °C/min (red). For reference, a pattern of Pentlandite simulated from single crystal diffraction data is shown (blue). Reflections corresponding to mss are marked with #. (b) Mössbauer spectrum and (c) DSC curve of Fe4.5Ni4.5S8. Parts of the figure were reproduced from a previous publication in Nat Comm.8 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
SEM images of polished Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 rock and pellet electrodes are depicted in Figure 2a. We employed EDX analysis to determine the elemental composition of the material on the surface. The EDX spectrum is shown in Figure 2b. The carbon peak in the spectrum yields from the use of carbon pads to mount the sample on the holder. From the EDX quantification – shown in Figure 2c – the ratio between iron and nickel was determined to be 1.06: 1.00. Assuming that the sum of iron and nickel is 9, the actual sum formula is Fe4.64Ni4.36S8.11. The deviation from the ideal formula Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 is within the margin of error. This result is consistent with the observation of a pure Pentlandite phase in the XRD pattern of the sample.

Figure 2: SEM and EDX analysis. SEM micrograph of (a) 'rock' and (b) 'pellet' electrodes. Scale bars = 1 µm. (c) EDX spectrum and (d) composition analysis of the 'rock' electrode. Parts of the figure were reproduced from a previous publication in Nat Comm.8 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
For electrochemical performance testing towards HER, first the electrodes have been prepared using a cut piece of rock and a pellet pressed from finely ground powder, respectively. The key steps of the 'rock' and 'pellet' electrode preparation are shown in Figures 3a and 3b, respectively. The standard testing procedure involves first, polishing and electrochemical washing of the electrodes. Then, linear sweep voltammograms (LSV) are recorded, followed by stability testing, coupled with product quantification. Finally, the electrochemical surface area (ESCA) is estimated. In Figure 3c, the LSV´s of both types' electrodes are shown. From the LSV the over potential for the HER is estimated to be -280 mV and -285 mV vs. RHE at a current density of 10 mA/cm2 for 'rock' and 'pellet' electrode, respectively. An exfoliated drop coated electrode did not show any improved electrocatalytic performance. Therefore, the influence of the preparation method on the performance is minor. Neglecting the drop-coating procedure, a similar behavior can be observed for the long-term stability of the electrodes (Figure 3d), whereas the 'pellet' shows a faster activation behavior as we have reported before for 'rock' Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 electrodes.8 Both electrodes show comparable current densities after the activation is finished. However, if a drop-coated electrode is exposed to comparable electrochemical conditions, the high amount of hydrogen produced, leads to detachment of the catalyst from the electrode support and thus to inactivation of the system. Figure 3d (inset) shows the amount of hydrogen produced depending on the time of electrolysis using a 'rock' electrode. Comparable hydrogen amounts can be observed for 'pellet' electrodes. From the slope of a linear fit of the GC quantification, a hydrogen production rate of 2.14 mmol H2 h-1 cm-2 is determined, which is – to our best knowledge – only beaten by platinum (11 mmol H2 h-1 cm-2) at comparable applied potentials.14 For determination of the ECSA, the charging current density difference was plotted as a function of the scan rate. The resulting graph is shown in Figure 3e. From the slope, only marginal differences in ECSA and hence the number of active sites, which are well in the margin of error of such measurements, can be observed. Therefore, both preparation types offer electrodes of similar performance. In Figure 3f an exemplary Nyquist plot from the EIS data of a 'rock' electrode is shown. Likewise, the 'pellet' electrodes reveal the same behavior. This plot reveals a very low charge-transfer resistance (Rct = 57.2 Ω) of the Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 bulk electrode, which is consistent with the high intrinsic conductivity of the material.

Figure 3: Electrode preparation and electrochemical analysis. Preparation steps of 'rock' (a) and 'pellet' (b) type Fe4.5Ni4.5S8 electrodes. Linear sweep voltammograms (c) at 5 mV s-1 of a 'rock' (black), a 'pellet' (red) and a drop coated (blue) electrode. (d) over 18 h at 0.6 V of 'rock' (black) and 'pellet' electrodes (red). Inset shows the hydrogen production over the first 4 h of electrolysis using a 'rock' electrode. The blue line indicates the linear fit of the data. (e) Charging current density differences as a function of the scan rate for 'rock' (black) and 'pellet' electrodes (red). The linear slope represents the electrochemical surface area (ECSA). f) Nyquist plot and the equivalent circuit at HER overpotential (η = 300 mV) of a 'rock' electrode. Parts of the figure were reproduced from a previous publication in Nat Comm.8 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.