4.6 Article

Voltage and Temperature Limits of Advanced Electrolytes for Lithium-Metal Batteries

期刊

ACS ENERGY LETTERS
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 1735-1743

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.3c00235

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluates the electrochemical performance and thermal stability of several advanced electrolytes (mainly ether-based) in high-energy-density lithium-metal batteries. The results show that most ether-based electrolytes have better thermal resilience than carbonate electrolytes. However, extreme voltages can severely destabilize the ether-based electrolytes. Phosphate-based high-concentration electrolytes exhibit improved stability over carbonate electrolytes, even at elevated temperatures. These findings provide valuable guidance for the safety of future electrolyte designs.
Several advanced electrolytes (mainly ether-based) have shown promising electrochemical performance in high-energy-density lithium-metal batteries. This work evaluates their thermal stability under abuse conditions to elucidate their safety limits compared to carbonate electrolytes typically used in Li-ion batteries. Electrolyte stability was assessed in conjunction with a LiNi0.8Mn0.1Co0.1O2 cathode and a Li-metal anode at ultra-high voltages (<4.8 V) and temperatures (<300 degrees C). The onset and extent of heat release were monitored via isothermal microcalorimetry and differential scanning calorimetry. Most ether-based electrolytes show improved thermal resilience over carbonate electrolytes. While extreme voltages severely destabilize the ether-based electrolytes, a phosphate-based localized high-concentration electrolyte exhibits improved stability over carbonate electrolytes, even at 60 degrees C. Although thermal analysis during the first charge process may be insufficient to conclude the longterm advantages of these electrolytes, a more stable electrolyte identified under extreme voltage and temperature conditions provides valuable guidance for the safety of future electrolyte designs.

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