4.5 Article

CoNiFe-layered double hydroxide decorated Co-N-C network as a robust bi-functional oxygen electrocatalyst for zinc-air batteries

期刊

ECOMAT
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/eom2.12394

关键词

layered double hydroxides; metal organic framework (MOF); oxygen electrocatalysis; zeolite imidazole framework (ZIF); zinc-air battery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A nanocomposite based on ternary CoNiFe-layered double hydroxides (LDH) and cobalt coordinated and N-doped porous carbon (Co-N-C) network was developed for high catalytic activity towards oxygen evolution/reduction reactions in rechargeable zinc-air batteries. The unique architecture of the nanocomposite provided rich active sites and enhanced electronic and mass transport properties, leading to outstanding bi-functional catalytic activity. In ZABs, it exhibited a high peak power density of 228 mW cm(-2) and a low voltage gap of 0.77 V over an ultra-long lifespan of 950 h.
Rechargeable zinc-air batteries (ZABs) are cost-effective energy storage devices and display high-energy density. To realize high round-trip energy efficiency, it is critical to develop durable bi-functional air electrodes, presenting high catalytic activity towards oxygen evolution/reduction reactions together. Herein, we report a nanocomposite based on ternary CoNiFe-layered double hydroxides (LDH) and cobalt coordinated and N-doped porous carbon (Co-N-C) network, obtained by the in-situ growth of LDH over the surface of ZIF-67-derived 3D porous network. Co-N-C network contributes to the oxygen reduction reaction activity, while CoNiFe-LDH imparts to the oxygen evolution reaction activity. The rich active sites and enhanced electronic and mass transport properties stemmed from their unique architecture, culminated into outstanding bi-functional catalytic activity towards oxygen evolution/reduction in alkaline media. In ZABs, it displays a high peak power density of 228 mW cm(-2) and a low voltage gap of 0.77 V over an ultra-long lifespan of 950 h.

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

4.5
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