4.5 Article

Zn Electrochemistry in 1-Ethyl-3-Methylimidazolium and N-Butyl-N-Methylpyrrolidinium Dicyanamides: Promising New Rechargeable Zn Battery Electrolytes

Journal

CHEMELECTROCHEM
Volume 1, Issue 10, Pages 1688-1697

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/celc.201402177

Keywords

batteries; electrolytes; ionic liquids; overpotential; zinc

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council through the Australian Centre of Excellence for Electromaterials Science (ACES)
  2. ARC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have studied both 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium (C(2)mim) and N-butyl-N-methylpyrrolidinium (C(4)mpyr) dicyanamide (dca) ionic liquids (ILs) containing 3wt% H2O and 9mol% Zn(dca)(2) salt for their ability to support Zn0/2+ electrochemistry in the context of a rechargeable Zn battery. Despite the similarities of the two IL electrolyte systems [identical H2O and Zn(dca)(2) contents], the system based on [C(2)mim] supported much higher current densities for Zn electrochemistry at greatly reduced overpotentials [-0.23V vs. Zn pseudo-reference, 32mAcm(-2) (red) and 61mAcm(-2) (ox)] compared to the [C(4)mpyr]-based electrolyte [-0.84V vs. Zn pseudo-reference, 8mAcm(-2) (red) and 15mAcm(-2) (ox)]. The overpotential for Zn deposition is reduced by 0.13V on Zn metal surfaces compared to glassy carbon (GC), regardless of the electrolyte used. The morphologies of the Zn deposits on both GC and Zn surfaces were also studied. The Zn surfaces promote a deposition that displays a smooth morphology, resulting from an instantaneous nucleation mechanism demonstrated by chronoamperometric experiments. Finally, both [C(2)mim] and [C(4)mpyr] electrolytes were tested in symmetrical Zn|Zn cells, where it was determined that the [C(2)mim] system could sustain over 90 cycles at 0.1mAcm(-2), whereas the [C(4)mpyr] based system could only achieve 15 cycles at the more modest current density of 0.05mAcm(-2).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available