Corrections to Table
In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in Table 2 as published. The flow rate of C2H4 product and H2 byproduct was incorrect. Corrected Table 2 appears below.
Table 2.
Material balance for 100 tons/day C2H4 production (present work scenario).
In the original publication, there was a mistake in Table 3 as published. j and the total cost of Cu2-C-1100-4 and Ag@BIF-104 NSs(Cu) were incorrect, and there was a mistake in the legend, for there was a lack of detailed explanation regarding the method used to determine the current density values for each catalyst. Corrected Table 3 appears below.
Table 3.
Production cost comparison for different copper-based catalyst (present work scenario; for consistency, the current densities for each catalyst were rounded to three significant figures based on the values reported in the literature).
Corrections to Citations
In the original publication, the following citations were not originally annotated in the source text but have now been added:
“3. Zhang, S.; Tang, W.; Yin, J.; Wang, S.; Yu, Y.; Huang, R.; Huo, E. Feasibility and Prospects of Electrocatalytic Conversion of CO2 for Chemical Feedstock Production and Renewable Energy Storage. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2025, 13, 9841–9858. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c03472.” has now been inserted in Section 1, Introduction, Paragraph 1. and should read: “The increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration has become a global environmental challenge, and the electrochemical reduction of CO2 to high-value-added chemicals and fuels is regarded as a sustainable solution to mitigate carbon emissions while realizing carbon resource utilization [1–3]”.
“8. Wang, H.; Zhang, F.; Li, Y.; Pang, Y.; Zhao, X.; Song, Z.; Wang, W.; Sun, J.; Mao, Y. Sn-Modified Cu Nanosheets Catalyze CO2 Reduction to C2H4 Efficiently by Stabilizing CO Intermediates and Promoting CC Coupling. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2025, 678, 506–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2024.09.117.” has now been inserted in Section 1, Introduction, Paragraph 4, and should read: “In recent years, significant progress has been made in the development of CO2RR catalysts for C2H4 production, with copper-based catalysts being the most promising due to their unique ability to catalyze C–C coupling [7,8].”
“14. Aui, A.; Moore, T.; Li, W.; Sarkar, A.; Duoss, E.B.; Hahn, C.; Baker, S. Net-Zero Ethylene: On the Sustainability, Economics, and Scalability of Synthetic and Fossil Production Pathways. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2025, 13, 14714–14725. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c02596.” and “15. Kumar, B.; Muchharla, B.; Dikshit, M.; Dongare, S.; Kumar, K.; Gurkan, B.; Spurgeon, J.M. Electrochemical CO2 Conversion Commercialization Pathways: A Concise Review on Experimental Frontiers and Technoeconomic Analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2024, 11, 1161–1174. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00564.” have now been inserted in Table 1, assumptions for C2H4 FE.
“3. Zhang, S.; Tang, W.; Yin, J.; Wang, S.; Yu, Y.; Huang, R.; Huo, E. Feasibility and Prospects of Electrocatalytic Conversion of CO2 for Chemical Feedstock Production and Renewable Energy Storage. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2025, 13, 9841–9858. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c03472.” was not cited. The citation has now been inserted in Table 1, assumptions for CO2 price.
The following references were inappropriate and could lead to confusion and have therefore been removed:
“Pérez-Fortes, M.; Schöneberger, J.C.; Boulamanti, A.; Harrison, G.; Tzimas, E. Formic Acid Synthesis Using CO2 as Raw Material: Techno-Economic and Environmental Evaluation and Market Potential. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2016, 41, 16444–16462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.05.199.” in Section 1, Introduction, Paragraph 7.
“Shi, R.; Guo, J.; Zhang, X.; Waterhouse, G.I.N.; Han, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Shang, L.; Zhou, C.; Jiang, L.; Zhang, T. Efficient Wettability-Controlled Electroreduction of CO2 to CO at Au/C Interfaces. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 3028. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16847-9.” in Section 2.1.3, Model Assumptions, Paragraph 1.
“Da Cunha, S.C.; Resasco, J. Insights from Techno-Economic Analysis Can Guide the Design of Low-Temperature CO2 Electrolyzers toward Industrial Scaleup. ACS Energy Lett. 2024, 9, 5550–5561. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.4c02647.” in Table 1, assumptions for Cell voltage.
“Romero Cuellar, N.S.; Scherer, C.; Kaçkar, B.; Eisenreich, W.; Huber, C.; Wiesner-Fleischer, K.; Fleischer, M.; Hinrichsen, O. Two-Step Electrochemical Reduction of CO2 towards Multi-Carbon Products at High Current Densities. J. CO2 Util. 2020, 36, 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2019.10.016.” in Section 3.2, Economic Analysis, Paragraph 2.
The following references were not appropriate in the original text and should be replaced with other references:
“Zhang, S.; Tang, W.; Yin, J.; Wang, S.; Yu, Y.; Huang, R.; Huo, E. Feasibility and Prospects of Electrocatalytic Conversion of CO2 for Chemical Feedstock Production and Renewable Energy Storage. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2025, 13, 9841–9858. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c03472.” in Table 1, assumptions for Electricity price was incorrect and should instead be “1. Jouny, M.; Luc, W.; Jiao, F. General Techno-Economic Analysis of CO2 Electrolysis Systems. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018, 57, 2165–2177. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b03514.”
“Wang, H.; Zhang, F.; Li, Y.; Pang, Y.; Zhao, X.; Song, Z.; Wang, W.; Sun, J.; Mao, Y. Sn-Modified Cu Nanosheets Catalyze CO2 Reduction to C2H4 Efficiently by Stabilizing CO Intermediates and Promoting CC Coupling. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2025, 678, 506–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2024.09.117.” in Table 1, assumptions for Single-pass conversion was incorrect and should instead be “6. Sisler, J.; Khan, S.; Ip, A.H.; Schreiber, M.W.; Jaffer, S.A.; Bobicki, E.R.; Dinh, C.-T.; Sargent, E.H. Ethylene Electrosynthesis: A Comparative Techno-Economic Analysis of Alkaline vs Membrane Electrode Assembly vs CO2–CO–C2H4 Tandems. ACS Energy Lett. 2021, 6, 997–1002. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.0c02633.”
“Da Cunha, S.C.; Resasco, J. Insights from Techno-Economic Analysis Can Guide the Design of Low-Temperature CO2 Electrolyzers toward Industrial Scaleup. ACS Energy Lett. 2024, 9, 5550–5561. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.4c02647.” in Table 1, assumptions for Electrolyzer cost was incorrect and should instead be “12. Moore, T.; Oyarzun, D.I.; Li, W.; Lin, T.Y.; Goldman, M.; Wong, A.A.; Jaffer, S.A.; Sarkar, A.; Baker, S.E.; Duoss, E.B.; et al. Electrolyzer Energy Dominates Separation Costs in State-of-the-Art CO2 Electrolyzers: Implications for Single-Pass CO2 Utilization. Joule 2023, 7, 782–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2023.03.015.”
“Feng, J.; Badreldin, A.; Li, Y. Electrochemical CO2 Reduction to Multicarbon Fuels and Chemicals: Progress and Prospects of Tandem Electrolyzer Strategies. Energy Fuels 2025, 39, 21175–21225. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5c04464.” and “Shao, P.; Zhang, H.-X.; Hong, Q.-L.; Yi, L.; Li, Q.-H.; Zhang, J. Enhancing CO2 Electroreduction to Ethylene via Copper−Silver Tandem Catalyst in Boron-Imidazolate Framework Nanosheet. Adv. Energy Mater. 2023, 13, 2300088. https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.202300088.” in Section 2.1.3, Model Assumptions, Paragraph 5. were incorrect and should instead be “16. Jun, M.; Kwak, C.; Lee, S.Y.; Joo, J.; Kim, J.M.; Im, D.J.; Cho, M.K.; Baik, H.; Hwang, Y.J.; Kim, H.; et al. Microfluidics-Assisted Synthesis of Hierarchical Cu2O Nanocrystal as C2 -Selective CO2 Reduction Electrocatalyst. Small Methods 2022, 6, e2200074. https://doi.org/10.1002/smtd.202200074.”
“Jun, M.; Kwak, C.; Lee, S.Y.; Joo, J.; Kim, J.M.; Im, D.J.; Cho, M.K.; Baik, H.; Hwang, Y.J.; Kim, H.; et al. Microfluidics-Assisted Synthesis of Hierarchical Cu2O Nanocrystal as C2 -Selective CO2 Reduction Electrocatalyst. Small Methods 2022, 6, e2200074. https://doi.org/10.1002/smtd.202200074.” and “Vos, J.; Ibarra-Gonzalez, P.; Burdyny, T.; Ramírez, A. Towards Fossil-Free Ethylene: Ex-Ante Techno-Economic Comparison of Three Alternative Processes at Low Technology Readiness Levels. J. Clean. Prod. 2026, 545, 147746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2026.147746.” in Section 4, Conclusions, Paragraph 3. were incorrect and should instead be “6. Sisler, J.; Khan, S.; Ip, A.H.; Schreiber, M.W.; Jaffer, S.A.; Bobicki, E.R.; Dinh, C.-T.; Sargent, E.H. Ethylene Electrosynthesis: A Comparative Techno-Economic Analysis of Alkaline vs Membrane Electrode Assembly vs CO2–CO–C2H4 Tandems. ACS Energy Lett. 2021, 6, 997–1002. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.0c02633.”
Text Correction
There was an error in the original publication. “The current market price for MEA electrolysis cells is $600 per kilowatt, indicating near-industrialization but not mass production yet” was not entirely correct. A correction has been made to Section 2.1.3, Model Assumptions, Paragraph 4: “The price of an MEA electrolyzer under present work scenario is based on $600 per kilowatt, indicating near-industrialization but not mass production yet [12].”
There was an error in the original publication. “Substitute the current density and FE values from Table 1 (the case study in this paper) with those from Table 2 (the catalysts) to calculate the cost of the catalysts listed in Table 2.” was not entirely correct. A correction has been made to Section 3.2, Economic Analysis, Paragraph 4: “Substitute the current density and FE values from Table 1 (the case study in this paper) with those from Table 3 (the catalysts) to calculate the cost of the catalysts listed in Table 3.”
There was an error in the original publication. “This cost is approximately 8.2% lower than the next best catalyst (CuO NS) and 53.3% lower than the highest cost catalyst (Ag@BIF-104 NSs(Cu)).” was not entirely correct. A correction has been made to Section 3.2, Economic Analysis, Paragraph 4: “This cost is approximately 8.2% lower than the next best catalyst (CuO NS) and 53.4% lower than the highest cost catalyst (Ag@BIF-104 NSs(Cu)).”
There was an error in the original publication. “As shown in Figure 8, the FE of C2H4 has the greatest impact on electricity costs.” was not entirely correct. A correction has been made to Section 3.4, Sensitivity Analysis, Paragraph 2: “As shown in Figure 7, the FE of C2H4 has the greatest impact on electricity costs.”
With this correction, the order of some references has been adjusted accordingly. The cross-referencing of citations has been optimized, and subsequent reference numbers and corresponding in-text citations have been reordered and standardized as needed.
The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
Reference
- Xiao, K.; Zhou, P.; Zhao, X. Techno-Economic Assessment of Electrochemical CO2 Reduction to Ethylene: A Cu10–Sn Catalyst Case Study and Performance Targets. Energies 2026, 19, 2462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.