4.8 Review

Rechargeable anion-shuttle batteries for low-cost energy storage

期刊

CHEM
卷 7, 期 8, 页码 1993-2021

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chempr.2021.02.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [51872157, 52072208]
  2. Shenzhen Technical Plan Project [JCYJ20170412170911187, JCYJ20170817161753629]
  3. Special Fund Project for Strategic Emerging Industry Development of Shenzhen [20170428145209110]
  4. Guangdong Technical Plan Project [2017B090907005]
  5. Local Innovative and Research Teams Project of Guangdong Pearl River Talents Program [2017BT01N111]
  6. Australian Research Council (ARC) [DP170100436, DP180102297, DP200101249]
  7. U.S. National Science Foundation [DMR-2004636, CBET-1551693]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ASBs, as promising alternatives to lithium-ion batteries, have advantages such as low cost, long cyclic lifetime, and high energy density. This review comprehensively provides insights into the anion shuttling mechanisms of ASBs, including ARBs, DIBs, and RDIBs, while also discussing the latest progresses and challenges in electrode materials and electrolytes for ASBs. Additionally, it summarizes the existing dilemmas of ASBs and outlines the perspective of ASB technology for future grid storage.
As promising alternatives to lithium-ion batteries, rechargeable anion-shuttle batteries (ASBs) with anions as charge carriers stand out because of their low cost, long cyclic lifetime, and/or high energy density. In this review, we provide for the first time, comprehensive insights into the anion shuttling mechanisms of ASBs, including anion-based rocking-chair batteries (ARBs), dual-ion batteries (DIBs), including insertion-type, conversion-type, and conversion-insertion-type, and reverse dual-ion batteries (RDIBs). Thereafter, we review the latest progresses and challenges regarding electrode materials and electrolytes for ASBs. In addition, we summarize the existing dilemmas of ASBs and outline the perspective of ASB technology for future grid 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

4.8
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