4.8 Review

Non-metallic charge carriers for aqueous batteries

Journal

NATURE REVIEWS MATERIALS
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages 109-123

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41578-020-00241-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2019YFA0705104]
  2. City University of Hong Kong [9667165]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Non-metallic charge carriers play a crucial role in aqueous batteries, offering improved performance and reduced manufacturing costs. Through insertion into electrode frameworks and serving as reversible redox centers, non-metallic charge carriers demonstrate superior performance compared to metallic counterparts.
Charge carriers are fundamental components of batteries that determine battery chemistry and performance. Non-metallic charge carriers provide an alternative to metallic charge carriers in aqueous batteries, enabling fast kinetics, long cyclic lifetime and low manufacturing costs. Non-metallic charge carriers not only can be inserted into the electrode framework, where they establish covalent-ionic bonds, but can also serve as reversible redox centres for charge transfer, resulting in superior performance compared with metallic charge carrier-based devices. In this Review, we discuss cationic and anionic non-metallic charge carriers, their physicochemical properties, charge storage mechanisms and electrode interactions. We examine battery configurations of non-metallic charge carrier-based devices and analyse battery performance based on costs, capacity, working potential, rate capability and cycling stability. Finally, we highlight design strategies for aqueous batteries based on non-metallic charge carriers and future applications. This Review discusses non-metallic charge carriers for aqueous batteries, investigating fundamental mechanisms of charge storage and electrode interactions, as well as battery design and performance.

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