4.7 Article

Integrating Carbon Dots with Porous Hydrogels to Produce Full Carbon Electrodes for Electric Double-Layer Capacitors

期刊

ACS APPLIED ENERGY MATERIALS
卷 3, 期 7, 页码 6907-6914

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsaem.0c00990

关键词

carbon dots; porous (hydro)gel; host-guest structure; carbon electrode material; electric double-layer capacitors

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21975048, 21771039]
  2. Shanghai Science and Technology Committee [19DZ2270100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As a class of electrode materials for electric double-layer capacitors (EDLCs), carbon dots (CDs) are able to enlarge specific surface areas, fabricate hierarchical pores, and graft pseudocapacitive groups, leading to additional capacities and superior energy densities. In this work, the commercial polyacrylamide gel (PAMG) is used as a good host for CDs, which has continuously interconnected pores, a cross-linked network, and good swelling capacity so as to form continuous conductive carbon skeleton. After a one-step calcination-activation treatment, CDs are fused onto the final carbon architecture to form a series of porous carbon materials with specific functional groups. Different kinds of CDs, including the oxygen-doped, the nitrogen-doped, and the oxygen, nitrogen co-doped ones, are employed to prepare such carbon materials and tested, respectively. All of these materials have high specific surface areas, well-balanced pore size distributions, high conductivity, abundant superficial functional groups, and good wettability. When they are assembled as electrodes in EDLC, they exhibit remarkable performances, such as specific capacitance of 401-483 F g(-1), rate stability over 75% (1-30 A g(-1)), energy density of 17-23 Wh kg(-1), and cycling life of nearly 100%. These results prove that our method, calcination-activation on the CDs-porous (hydro)gel composites, is a universal route of preparing good carbon electrode materials for electrochemical energy storage.

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