4.8 Review

Self-supported metal-organic framework-based nanostructures as binder-free electrodes for supercapacitors

Journal

NANOSCALE
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages 2155-2166

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1nr08284a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [LY20E020005]
  2. National Science Foundation of China [5157227, 221971131]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review summarizes the recent advances in the design, fabrication, and application of self-supported MOF-based nanostructures as binderless electrodes in supercapacitors over the last five years. By overviewing the synthesis strategies for constructing nanostructures and highlighting the advantages and challenges of different electrode materials, it provides insights into the rational design of MOF-based electrode materials.
Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs), an interesting class of functional inorganic materials, have recently emerged as suitable electrode materials or templates/precursors of electrode materials for supercapacitors (SCs). The key in utilizing MOF-based electrode materials is to address the low electronic conductivity and poor stability issues. Therefore, the rational design and fabrication of self-supported binder-free electrodes is considered the most promising strategy to address these challenges. In this review, we summarize the recent advances in the design and manufacture of self-supported MOF-based nanostructures and their use as binderless electrodes for SCs, especially over the last five years. The synthesis strategies for constructing pristine MOFs, MOF composites and MOF derivative arrays are overviewed. By highlighting the advantages and challenges of each class of electrode materials, we hope that this review will provide some insights into the rational design of MOF-based electrode materials to promote the future development of this highly exciting field.

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