4.4 Review

ZnO and MXenes as electrode materials for supercapacitor devices

期刊

BEILSTEIN JOURNAL OF NANOTECHNOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 49-57

出版社

BEILSTEIN-INSTITUT
DOI: 10.3762/bjnano.12.4

关键词

2D materials; electrodes; MXenes; supercapacitors; zinc oxide (ZnO)

资金

  1. Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [118C243]
  2. Sabanci University [B. A.CF-19-01962]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The choice of electrode material is crucial for the efficiency of supercapacitor devices, with metal oxides and MXenes emerging as potential candidates. While the discussion of MXenes and ZnO highlights differences in dimensionality regarding defect-driven effects, the volume under the influence of defect centers is expected to differ between bulk and 2D structures.
Supercapacitor devices are interesting owing to their broad range of applicability from wearable electronics to energy storage in electric vehicles. One of the key parameters that affect the efficiency of supercapacitor devices is selecting the ideal electrode material for a specific application. Regarding this, recently developed metal oxides, specifically nanostructured ZnO, and MXenes with their defect structures, size effects, as well as optical and electronic properties have been presented as electrode material in supercapacitor devices. The discussion of MXenes along with ZnO, although different in chemistry, also highlights the differences in dimensionality when it comes to defect-driven effects, especially in carrier transport. The volume under the influence of the defect centers is expected to be different in bulk and 2D structures, regardless of composition. Hence, analysis and discussion of both materials provide a fundamental understanding regarding the manner in which 2D structures are impacted by defects compared to bulk. Such an approach would therefore serve the scientific community with the material design tools needed to fabricate the next generation of supercapacitor 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

4.4
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