4.6 Article

Rational Design of Sandwiched Ni-Co Layered Double Hydroxides Hollow Nanocages/Graphene Derived from Metal-Organic Framework for Sustainable Energy Storage

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 5, 期 11, 页码 9923-9934

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b01879

关键词

Sustainable; Supercapacitor; Metal organic frameworks; Layered double hydroxides; Graphene

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC 61473095]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds of the Central University (HEUCFM)
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province [B2015021]
  4. International Science & Technology Cooperation Program of China [2015DFR50050]
  5. Major Project of Science and Technology of Heilongjiang Province [GA14A101]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In situ growth of Ni-Co layered double hydroxides on graphene nanosheets by virtue of metal-organic framework as a sacrifice template is reported, which yields hollow nanocages uniformly deposited on graphene nanosheets. The strong impact of graphene amount on the electrochemical performance of Ni-Co layered double hydroxides is illustrated. Controlling the mass of graphene (15 mg) leads to a maximum specific capacitance of 1265 F g(-1) high rate capability (50% capacitance retention after increasing current density ten times), and good cycling life (92.9% capacitance retention after 2000 circles). The combination of battery-type Ni-Co LDH hollow nanocages/graphene composite and active carbon allows for the excellent electrochemical performance measured in an asymmetric device. In detail, the assembled asymmetric supercapacitor is able to deliver maximum specific capacitance 170.9 F g(-1) in a potential window of 0-1.7 V, high energy density (68.0 Wh kg(-1)), as well as excellent power output (4759 W kg(-1)). These electrochemical performances, in combination with its facile fabrication, render hollow Ni-Co LDH/graphene composite as a promising electrode material in a sustainable energy storage device.

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