4.7 Review

Challenges and strategies of zinc anode for aqueous zinc-ion batteries

Journal

MATERIALS CHEMISTRY FRONTIERS
Volume 5, Issue 5, Pages 2201-2217

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d0qm00693a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51771076]
  2. Guangdong ``Pearl River Talents Plan'' [2017GC010218]
  3. RAMP
  4. D Program in Key Areas of Guangdong Province [2020B0101030005]
  5. Key-Area Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province [2020B0101030005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article analyzes the problems with zinc anodes in AZIBs and summarizes recent improvement strategies from four aspects, including construction of composite materials, modification of the anode-electrolyte interface, design of electrolyte, and design of separator. Five suggestions for researchers on investigating the orientation of zinc anodes are proposed.
Poor safety and limited lithium resources have caused concerns for the future development of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), which are applied in many fields in our daily life. Aqueous zinc-ion batteries (AZIBs) with an aqueous electrolyte have a higher safety, and lower cost, which are regarded as one of the most promising types of rechargeable batteries applied in grid energy storage and industrial energy storage as a replacement for LIBs. However, during charging and discharging processes, dendrite growth, hydrogen evolution, corrosion and passivation of the zinc anode seriously restrict the cycling stability of AZIBs. In this article, we analyze the reasons for those problems in zinc anodes, and summarize the recent improvement strategies from four aspects: construction of composite materials, modification of anode-electrolyte interface, design of electrolyte and design of separator. Finally, we propose five suggestions about approaching the investigative orientation of zinc anodes for researchers to discuss.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available