4.8 Article

Highly stable magnesium-ion-based dual-ion batteries based on insoluble small-molecule organic anode material

期刊

ENERGY STORAGE MATERIALS
卷 30, 期 -, 页码 34-41

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ensm.2020.04.025

关键词

Dual-ion battery; Magnesium ion; Small-molecule organic anode; Insoluble

资金

  1. Key-Area Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province [2019B090914003]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51822210, 51972329, 51902339]
  3. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province [2018A050506066,2019A1 515011902]
  4. Shenzhen Peacock Plan [KQTD2016112915051055]
  5. Shenzhen Science and Technology Planning Project [JCYJ20170818153404696]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Magnesium-ion batteries (MIBs) are promising candidates for large-scale energy storage applications owing to their high volumetric capacity, low cost, and no dendritic hazards. However, the development of the MIBs is restricted owing to the obstacles of incompatibility between Mg metal and conventional electrolytes as well as the lack of suitable cathode materials with fast ion reaction kinetics, which lead to low working voltage, poor rate performance and unsatisfied cycling stability. In this work, a magnesium-ion based dual-ion battery (Mg-DIB) is constructed, using 3,4,9,10-perylenetetracarboxylic diimide (PTCDI) as organic anode, expanded graphite (EG) with high potential and fast anion diffusion kinetics as cathode, and ionic liquid as electrolyte. The PTCDI was demonstrated to go through threefold coordination mechanism and hydrogen bond formation during Mg-ion insertion, which shows good insolubility in organic electrolytes and good structural stability. As a result, the Mg-DIB was demonstrated to exhibit a reversible discharge capacity of 57.7 mAh g(-1) at 2C in the voltage range of 1-4 V, and good cycling stability with capacity retention of 95.7% after 500 cycles at 5C, which present a new way to design high-performance MIBs and other energy storage devices.

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