4.8 Article

Electrochemical Insight into the Sodium-Ion Storage Mechanism on a Hard Carbon Anode

Journal

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
Volume 13, Issue 16, Pages 18914-18922

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.1c03748

Keywords

sodium-ion batteries; anode; hard carbon; reaction mechanism; intercalation

Funding

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [U20A20249, 21972108]
  2. National Key Research Program of China [2016YFB0901500]
  3. Supercomputing Center of Wuhan University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hard carbon as an anode material for sodium-ion batteries has a different sodium-storage mechanism compared to graphite, where it operates through the intercalation of Na+ into the graphitic layers to form sodium-graphite intercalation compounds. This insight may help in designing better HC materials for high-energy density SIBs.
Hard carbon (HC) has been actively investigated as a high-capacity and low-cost anode material for sodium-ion batteries (SIBs); however, its sodium-storage mechanism has remained controversial, which imposes great difficulties in the design and construction of better microstructured HC materials. To obtain a deeper understanding of the Na-storage mechanism, we comparatively investigated electrochemical behaviors of HC and graphite for Na- and Li-storage reactions. The experimental results reveal that the Na-storage reaction on HC at a low-potential plateau proceeds in a manner similar to the Li+-insertion reaction on graphite but very differently from the Li+-storage process on HC, suggesting that the Na-storage mechanism of HC at a low-voltage plateau operates through the Na+ intercalation into the graphitic layers for the formation of sodium-graphite intercalation compounds (Na-GICs) and is consistent with the adsorption-intercalation mechanism. Our work might provide new insight for designing better HC materials of high-energy density SIBs.

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