4.8 Article

Aqueous Electrochemistry of Poly(vinylanthraquinone) for Anode-Active Materials in High-Density and Rechargeable Polymer/Air Batteries

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 133, 期 49, 页码 19839-19843

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja206961t

关键词

-

资金

  1. Waseda University from MEXT, Japan
  2. GIST from MEST, Korea [R31-2008-000-10026-0]
  3. [21550120]
  4. [21106519]
  5. [19105003]
  6. [21655043]
  7. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19105003, 21655043, 21550120] Funding Source: KAKEN
  8. National Research Foundation of Korea [R31-2011-000-10026-0] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A layer of poly(2-vinylanthraquinone) on current collectors underwent reversible electrode reaction at 0.82 V vs Ag/AgCl in an aqueous electrolyte. A repeatable charging/discharging cycles with a redox capacity comparable to the formula weight-based theoretical density at the negative potential suggested that all of the anthraquinone pendants in the layer was redox-active, that electroneutralization by an electrolyte cation was accomplished throughout the polymer layer, and that the layer stayed on the current collector without exfoliation or dissolution into the electrolyte during the electrolysis. The charging/discharging behavior of the polymer layer in the aqueous electrolyte revealed the capability of undergoing electrochemistry even in the nonsolvent of the pendant group, which offered insight into the nature of the anthraquinone pendants populated on the aliphatic chain. Charging/discharging capability of air batteries was accomplished by using the polymer layer as an organic anode-active material. A test cell fabricated using the conventional MnO(2)/C cathode catalyst exhibited a discharging voltage at 0.63 V corresponding to their potential gap and a charging/discharging cycle of more than 500 cycles without loss of the capacity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据