4.6 Article

Recycled LiMn2O4 from the spent lithium ion batteries as cathode material for sodium ion batteries: Electrochemical properties, structural evolution and electrode kinetics

期刊

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 320, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.electacta.2019.134626

关键词

LiMn2O4; Spent lithium ion batteries; Reuse; Cathode material; Sodium ion batteries

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51602048]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2412019ZD010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the extensive application processes of lithium ion batteries (LIBs), a great quantity of spent LIBs is producing, which is harmful to human and the environment if not handled properly. In addition, due to the scarcity of lithium on earth, sodium with relatively high abundance and low cost is expected to replace lithium. Hence, it is an interesting and urgent work of reusing the spent materials from the end-of-life LIBs for designing sodium-ion batteries (SIBS). Herein, an efficient method is proposed to recycle the spent LiMn2O4 and directly reuse it as the cathode of SIBS. As electrochemical tests show, such recycled LiMn2O4 delivers excellent Na-storage properties in SIBS. For example, its discharge capacity can gradually increase to 163.2 mAh g(-1) over 50 cycles at 100 mA g(-1), and the highest reversible capacity is up to 176.3 mAh g(-1) at 20 mA g(-1). It is further revealed by combining the electrochemical analyses and ex-situ characterizations that, the continuous increase of capacity during the initial 50 cycles is due to the phase transition of the spinel into layered structure caused by the Li+/Na+ (de)insertion. Studies of electrode kinetics indicate the faster ion diffusion in the layered material than the spinel one. This work provides a new strategy to recycle the spent LIBs, i.e., directly reusing the exhausted electrode materials to the next-generation batteries. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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