4.6 Article

Beyond graphene foam, a new form of three-dimensional graphene for supercapacitor electrodes

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 4, 期 5, 页码 1876-1886

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5ta10031c

关键词

-

资金

  1. UC Office of Research
  2. Mathewson Renewable Energy Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graphene foam (GF) is a three-dimensional (3D) graphene structure that has been intensively studied as an electrode material for energy storage applications. The porous structure and seamlessly connected graphene flakes make GF a promising electrode material for supercapacitors and batteries. However, the electrical conductivity of GF is still unsatisfactory due to the lack of macropore size (similar to 300 mu m) control that hinders its applications. Previously we reported a new seamless 3D graphene structure - graphene pellets (GPs) - with well-controlled mesopore size (similar to 2 nm), high electrical conductivity (148 S cm(-1)) and good electromechanical properties that differ substantially from the known GF. Here we demonstrate that the obtained 3D graphene structure is an ideal scaffold electrode for pseudocapacitive materials and redox additive electrolyte systems. For example, after electrochemical coating with MnO2, the GP/MnO2 electrode showed specific and volumetric capacitance up to 395 F g(-1) and 230 F cm(-3) at 1 A g(-1), respectively. When combined with a hydroquinone and benzoquinone redox additive electrolyte, the GPs showed a specific capacitance of 7813 F g(-1) at 10 A g(-1). Moreover, when the GP/MnO2 electrode was assembled with a GP/polypyrrole electrode, the obtained full cell showed good electrochemical performance with a maximum energy density of 26.7 W h kg(-1) and a maximum power density of 32.7 kW kg(-1), and a reasonable cycle life for practical application. The ease in material processing combined with the excellent electrical and electromechanical properties makes GPs promising for a variety of energy storage applications.

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