4.7 Article

N-rich biomass carbon derived from hemp as a full carbon-based potassium ion hybrid capacitor anode

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 553, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2021.149569

关键词

Urea activation; N-rich carbon; Potassium ion battery; Hybrid capacitor; Anode material

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51672056]
  2. Excellent Youth Project of Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China [YQ2019B002]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, an innovative nitrogen-rich biomass carbon (N-CHC) with high specific surface area and nitrogen content is prepared using a novel method. It shows excellent performance as a potassium ion hybrid capacitor half-cell anode, with good rate performance and a higher diffusion coefficient, indicating potential for large-scale applications.
Potassium ion hybrid capacitors have the advantages of high energy density, high power density, and low cost, and are expected to replace expensive lithium ion storage devices in large-scale applications. Here, an innovative nitrogen-rich biomass carbon (N-CHC) is prepared using urea as the etchant and hemp core as the raw material, which has a high specific surface area of 1185.3 m2 g-1 and nitrogen content of 8.56%. In addition, it shows a capacity of 442.4 mAh g-1 as a potassium ion half-cell anode at 30 mA g-1. Even under the high current test of 2000 mA g-1, N-CHC also shows excellent performance (175.0 mAh g-1). Further, the good rate performance is attributed to the large-scale capacitance control by analyzing reaction process kinetics. And the constant current intermittent titration technique (GITT) results show that N-CHC has a larger K+ diffusion coefficient than unetched biomass carbon. The maximum energy density of the full carbon-based hybrid capacitor composed of N-CHC anode and activated carbon cathode is 127.36 Wh kg- 1, and the maximum power density is 2371 W kg- 1.

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