4.7 Article

Nonlinear dynamics of capacitive charging and desalination by porous electrodes

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW E
卷 81, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.81.031502

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (USA) [DMS-6920068, DMS-0842504]
  2. MIT Energy Initiative
  3. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0854905] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Division Of Mathematical Sciences [0854905] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The rapid and efficient exchange of ions between porous electrodes and aqueous solutions is important in many applications, such as electrical energy storage by supercapacitors, water desalination and purification by capacitive deionization, and capacitive extraction of renewable energy from a salinity difference. Here, we present a unified mean-field theory for capacitive charging and desalination by ideally polarizable porous electrodes (without Faradaic reactions or specific adsorption of ions) valid in the limit of thin double layers (compared to typical pore dimensions). We illustrate the theory for the case of a dilute, symmetric, binary electrolyte using the Gouy-Chapman-Stern (GCS) model of the double layer, for which simple formulae are available for salt adsorption and capacitive charging of the diffuse part of the double layer. We solve the full GCS mean-field theory numerically for realistic parameters in capacitive deionization, and we derive reduced models for two limiting regimes with different time scales: (i) in the supercapacitor regime of small voltages and/or early times, the porous electrode acts like a transmission line, governed by a linear diffusion equation for the electrostatic potential, scaled to the RC time of a single pore, and (ii) in the desalination regime of large voltages and long times, the porous electrode slowly absorbs counterions, governed by coupled, nonlinear diffusion equations for the pore-averaged potential and salt concentration.

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

4.7
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