4.6 Article

Effect of Structure on the Electrochemical Performance of Nitrogen- and Oxygen-Containing Carbon Micro/Nanospheres Prepared from Lignin-Based Composites

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 1, 期 3, 页码 334-340

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/sc300113w

关键词

Lignosulfonate; Polyandine; Self-assembly; Low-cost; Anode; Lithium ion battery

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51272045]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province, China [2012J01201]
  3. Science-Technology Foundation of Education Bureau of Fujian Province, China [JA12031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitrogen-and oxygen-containing carbon micro/nanospheres (C-PAN and C-PNA) were prepared by direct pyrolysis of lignosulfonate/polyaniline and lignosulfonate/poly(N-ethylaniline) composite spheres at the temperature of 700 degrees C. The two type lignin-based composite spheres were prepared by an in situ polymerization of aniline and N-ethylaniline in the presence of lignosulfonate, respectively. The carbon spheres were investigated by thermal gravimetric analysis, scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and were used as anodes for lithium ion batteries. The two carbon spheres showed different electrochemical performances due to their different surface functional groups and structures The C-PAN carbon nanospheres had better electrochemical performance as anodes for lithium ion batteries than that of C-PNA carbon microspheres. The first charge capacity and discharge capacity of the C-PAN nanospheres at a current density of 60, 100, and 200 mA g(-1) exhibited a discharge capacity of 1450, 1094, and 770 mAh g(-1), respectively, and a charge capacity of 707, 698, and 446 mAh g(-1) respectively. Furthermore, it still owned a high discharge capacity at a current density of 60, 100, and 200 mA g(-1) of 526, 431, and 338 mAh g(-1), respectively, after 20 cycles.

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

4.6
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