4.8 Review

Challenges and perspectives on high and intermediate-temperature sodium batteries

期刊

NANO RESEARCH
卷 10, 期 12, 页码 4082-4114

出版社

TSINGHUA UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s12274-017-1602-7

关键词

sodium; batteries; high-temperature; intermediate-temperature; electrolytes

资金

  1. Basque Government [GV IT570-13]
  2. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad [MAT2016-78266-P]
  3. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Energy storage systems are selected depending on factors such as storage capacity, available power, discharge time, self-discharge, efficiency, or durability. Additional parameters to be considered are safety, cost, feasibility, and environmental aspects. Sodium-based batteries (Na-S, NaNiCl2) typically require operation temperatures of 300-350 A degrees C. The high operating temperatures substantially increase the operating costs and raise safety issues. This updated review describes the state-of-the-art materials for high-temperature sodium batteries and the trends towards the development and optimization of intermediate and low-temperature devices. Recent advances in inorganic solid electrolytes, glass-ceramic electrolytes, and polymer solid electrolytes are of immense importance in all-solid-state sodium batteries. Systems such as Na+ super ionic conductor (NASICON, Na1+x Zr2P3-x Si (x) O-12 (0 <= x <= 3)), glass-ceramic 94Na(3)PS(4)center dot 6Na(4)SiS(4), and polyethylene oxide (PEO)-sodium triflate (NaCF3SO3) are also discussed. Room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) are also included as novel electrolyte solvents. This update discusses the progress of on-going strategies to enhance the conductivity, optimize the electrolyte/electrode interface, and improve the cell design of emerging technologies. This work aims to cover the recent advances in electrode and electrolyte materials for sodium-sulfur and sodium-metal-halide (zeolite battery research Africa project (ZEBRA)) batteries for use at high and intermediate temperatures.

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

4.8
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