4.6 Review

Roadmap of Solid-State Lithium-Organic Batteries toward 500 Wh kg-1

Journal

ACS ENERGY LETTERS
Volume 6, Issue 9, Pages 3287-3306

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.1c01368

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), as part of the Battery 500 Consortium [DEEE0008234]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The combination of solid-state electrolytes and organic battery electrode materials shows potential for high-energy solid-state batteries with high safety, low cost, and long-term sustainability. The challenges facing organic solid-state batteries include performance-limiting factors and critical cell design parameters affecting cell-level specific energy and energy density. Guidelines are proposed to achieve a specific energy of 500 Wh kg(-1) with solid-state Li-organic batteries.
Over the past few years, solid-state electrolytes (SSEs) have attracted tremendous attention due to their credible promise toward high-energy batteries. In parallel, organic battery electrode materials (OBEMs) are gaining momentum as strong candidates thanks to their lower environmental footprint, flexibility in molecular design and high energy metrics. Integration of the two constitutes a potential synergy to enable energy-dense solid-state batteries (SSBs) with high safety, low cost, and long-term sustainability. In this Review, we present the technological feasibility of combining OBEMs with SSEs along with the possible cell configurations that may result from this peculiar combination. We provide an overview of organic SSBs and discuss their main challenges. We analyze the performance-limiting factors and the critical cell design parameters governing cell-level specific energy and energy density. Lastly, we propose guidelines to achieve 500 Wh kg(-1) cell-level specific energy with solid-state Li-organic batteries.

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