4.7 Article

A comparative study of the role of additive in the MgH2 vs. the LiBH4-MgH2 hydrogen storage system

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
Volume 36, Issue 6, Pages 3932-3940

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.12.112

Keywords

Hydrogen storage; Magnesium hydride; Reactive hydride composites; Kinetic improvement by additives

Funding

  1. European Marie Curie training networks [HPRN-CT-2002-00208, MRTN-CT-2006-035366]
  2. GKSS research centre
  3. Spanish MICINN [CTQ2009-13440]
  4. Junta de Andalucia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of the present work is the comparative study of the behaviour of the Nb- and Ti-based additives in the MgH2 single hydride and the MgH2 + 2LiBH(4) reactive hydride composite. The selected additives have been previously demonstrated to significantly improve the sorption reaction kinetics in the corresponding materials. x-Ray Diffraction (XRD), X-Ray Absorption Spectroscopy (XAS), X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) and Electron Microscopy (TEM) analysis were carried out for the milled and cycled samples in absence or presence of the additives. It has been shown that although the evolution of the oxidation state for both Nb- and Ti-species are similar in both systems, the Nb additive is performing its activity at the surface while the Ti active species migrate to the bulk. The Nb-based additive is forming pathways that facilitate the diffusion of hydrogen through the diffusion barriers both in desorption and absorption. For the Ti-based additive in the reactive hydride composite, the active species are working in the bulk, enhancing the heterogeneous nucleation of MgB2 phases during desorption and producing a distinct grain refinement that favours both sorption kinetics. The results are discussed in regards to possible kinetic models for both systems. Copyright (C) 2010, Hydrogen Energy Publications, LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available