4.6 Review

Recent progress in advanced electrode materials, separators and electrolytes for lithium batteries

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
Volume 6, Issue 42, Pages 20564-20620

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c8ta05336g

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFB0102900]
  2. Shanghai Pujiang Program [17PJD016]
  3. PhD Program of Shanghai University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) possess several advantages over other types of viable practical batteries, including higher operating voltages, higher energy densities, longer cycle lives, lower rates of self-discharge and less environmental pollution. Therefore, LIBs have been widely and successfully applied in portable electronic devices and industrial fields. However, the rapidly increasing demands of new energy vehicles have also quickly increased the performance requirements of LIBs, including the need for higher power densities, greater capacity densities and better safety. As battery designs gradually standardize, improvements in LIB performances mainly depend on the technical progress in key electrode materials such as positive and negative electrode materials, separators and electrolytes. For LIB performances to meet the rising requirements, many studies on the structural characteristics and morphology modifications of electrode/separator/electrolyte materials with different synthesis methods have been conducted. In this review, recent progress of LIBs is reviewed with a focus on positive electrode materials, negative electrode materials, separators and electrolytes in terms of energy density, power density, life-cycle and safety. To accelerate the research and development and to overcome the challenges of LIB technology and application, several possible research directions are also discussed to further improve LIB performances.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available