4.7 Article

Ion-Exchanged UPG-1 as Potential Electrolyte for Fuel Cells

期刊

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 60, 期 16, 页码 11803-11812

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.1c00800

关键词

-

资金

  1. Agencia Espanola de Investigacion/Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional [PID2019-106662RBC43]
  2. Comunidad de Madrid (Spain) [EPUC3M04]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research has shown that ionic exchange can significantly improve the conductivity and cyclability of electrolyte materials in proton-exchange membrane fuel cells. Metal-organic frameworks have higher stability and proton conductivity compared to organic polymers, providing a potential alternative for electrolytes.
Proton-exchange membrane fuel cells are an attractive green technology for energy production. However, one of their major drawbacks is instability of the electrolytes under working conditions (i.e., temperature and humidity). Some metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have recently emerged as promising alternative electrolyte materials because of their higher stability (compared with the organic polymers currently used as electrolytes), proton conductivity, and outstanding porosity and versatility. Here, we present ionic exchange in a microporous zirconium phosphonate, UPG-1, as an efficient strategy to enhance its conductivity and cyclability. Thus, labile protons of the hybrid structure were successfully replaced by different alkali cations (Li+, Na+, and K+), leading to 2 orders of magnitude higher proton conductivity than the pristine UPG-1 (up to 2.3 x 10(-2) S.cm(-1) , which is comparable with those of the commercial electrolytes). Further, the proton conductivity was strongly influenced by the MOF hydrophilicity and the polarization strength of the cation, as suggested by molecular simulation. Finally, a mixed-matrix membrane containing the best-performing material (the potassium-exchanged one) was successfully prepared, showing moderate proton conductivity (up to 8.51 x 10(-3) S.cm(-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