4.7 Article

Evaluation of La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+δ as cathode for intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 41, 期 15, 页码 6476-6485

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.03.019

关键词

La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta; Cathode; IT-SOFCs; Electrochemical properties

资金

  1. Nature Science Foundation of China [51572204]
  2. International Cooperation Programs of Wuhan Science and Technology Bureau [2014030709020315]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [WUT: 2013-IV-018]
  4. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea - Ministry of Education [NRF-2013R1A1A2062172]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electrical conducting, thermal expansion and electrochemical properties of La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta were investigated in view of cathode utilization for intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cells. La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta exhibited electrical conductivities of 96 -114 S cm(-1) at 600-800 degrees C and a thermal expansion coefficient of 12.6 x 10(-6) K-1 between 50 and 1000 degrees C. Based on a three-electrode half cell, the electrode properties of La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta were diagnosed using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy and chronopotentiometry techniques. Moreover, the, performance of an anode-supported single cell with La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta cathode was examined. Compared with La2NiO4+delta, La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta manifested improved electrode properties under cathodic polarization conditions while showing an analogous catalytic activity under open-circuit conditions. At 800 degrees C in air, La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta electrode displayed a polarization resistance of 0.41 0 cm(2) and a cathodic overpotential of 90 mV at 200 mA cm(-2). The anode-supported single cell with La1.8Sr0.2NiO4+delta cathode achieved a maximum power density of 520 mW cm(-2) at 800 degrees C in hydrogen fuel. Copyright (C) 2016, Hydrogen Energy Publications, LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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