4.6 Article

Activated carbon from agave wastes (agave tequilana) for supercapacitors via potentiostatic floating test

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10854-021-06649-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACYT)
  2. Programa de Apoyo a la Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon (PAICYT-UANL)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The research focuses on utilizing activated carbon derived from agave wastes for supercapacitor electrodes, showing high specific surface area and microporous structure, with an initial capacitance of 297 F g(-1) observed.
To prepare an efficient supercapacitor, an activated carbon from agave wastes was prepared and their electrochemical performance was evaluated as a novel electrode for supercapacitor. The carbon was prepared by two thermal pyrolysis processes under nitrogen atmosphere. The first pyrolysis was achieved at 500 degrees C until the charring of the bagasse; in the second pyrolysis step, the char was impregnated with different mass ratios of KOH (1:2-1:4) and thermally treated at 800 or 900 degrees C, for 1 h under N-2 flow. The textural analysis showed that the activated carbon had a specific surface area of 1462 m(2) g(-1) and depicted a type I isotherm (IUPAC) characteristic of a microporous carbon. Raman spectroscopy and XRD measurements confirm that the activated carbon contains a small graphitization degree and a disordered structure. The electrochemical study of the symmetric carbon supercapacitor was carried out in 1 M Li2SO4 solution as the electrolyte. The electrochemical performance of the coin cell supercapacitor was evaluated under an accelerated aging floating test consisting of potentiostatic steps at different voltages (1.5, 1.6 and 1.8 V) for 10 h followed by galvanostatic charge/discharge sequences, and the overall procedure summarized a floating time up to 200 h. The highest capacitance was observed at a floating voltage of 1.5 V, with a large initial specific capacitance of 297 F g(-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

4.6
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