4.7 Review

Lithium-Sulfur Batteries: State of the Art and Future Directions

Journal

ACS APPLIED ENERGY MATERIALS
Volume 1, Issue 5, Pages 1783-+

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsaem.7b00153

Keywords

lithium-sulfur batteries; batteries beyond lithium; electrocatalytic polysulfides conversion; sulfur cathode coating; lithium anode protection; solid-state electrolytes

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education of Kazakhstan [180/077-2015]
  2. Government of Kazakhstan [180/077-2015]
  3. U.S. National Science Foundation [CBET-1335694]
  4. [0115CK03029]
  5. [5687/GF4]
  6. [5097/GF4-1]
  7. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys
  8. Directorate For Engineering [1335694] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sulfur remains in the spotlight as a future cathode candidate for the post-lithium-ion age. This is primarily due to its low cost and high discharge capacity, two critical requirements for any future cathode material that seeks to dominate the market of portable electronic devices, electric transportation, and electric-grid energy storage. However, before Li-S batteries replace lithium ion batteries, several technical challenges need to be solved. Among these challenges are polysulfide containment, the increase of sulfur loading (which must be >= 4-6 mg cm(-2)), the increase of sulfur fraction to >= 70%, the increase of sulfur utilization to >= 80%, the decrease of the electrolyte/sulfur weight ratio (which must be in the range of 3:1 or lower), and the stability of lithium anode material. Besides traditional carbon coating strategies, recent novel strategies addressing each of these challenges have been reported. The main purpose of this work is to review the state of the art and summarize and shed light on the most promising recent discoveries related to each challenge. This review also addresses the role of the electrolyte systems and electrocatalytic additives.

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