4.8 Review

Research Development on K-Ion Batteries

Journal

CHEMICAL REVIEWS
Volume 120, Issue 14, Pages 6358-6466

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00463

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. MEXT program ESICB [JPMXP0112101003]
  2. A-STEP program [JPMJTS1611]
  3. CONCERT-Japan program [JPMJSC17C1]
  4. Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
  5. JSPS KAKENHI [JP16K14103, JP16H04225, JP18K14327]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Li-ion batteries (LIBs), commercialized in 1991, have the highest energy density among practical secondary batteries and are widely utilized in electronics, electric vehicles, and even stationary energy storage systems. Along with the expansion of their demand and application, concern about the resources of Li and Co is growing. Therefore, secondary batteries composed of earth-abundant elements are desired to complement LIBs. In recent years, K-ion batteries (KIBs) have attracted significant attention as potential alternatives to LIBs. Previous studies have developed positive and negative electrode materials for KIBs and demonstrated several unique advantages of KIBs over LIBs and Na-ion batteries (NIBs). Thus, besides being free from any scarce/toxic elements, the low standard electrode potentials of K/K+ electrodes lead to high operation voltages competitive to those observed in LIBs. Moreover, K+ ions exhibit faster ionic diffusion in electrolytes due to weaker interaction with solvents and anions than that of Li+ ions; this is essential to realize high-power KIBs. This review comprehensively covers the studies on electrochemical materials for KIBs, including electrode and electrolyte materials and a discussion on recent achievements and remaining/emerging issues. The review also includes insights into electrode reactions and solid-state ionics and nonaqueous solution chemistry as well as perspectives on the research-based development of KIBs compared to those of LIBs and NIBs.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available