4.7 Article

Achieving copper sulfide leaf like nanostructure electrode for high performance supercapacitor and quantum-dot sensitized solar cells

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 435, 期 -, 页码 666-675

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.11.171

关键词

Supercapacitors; Quantum-dot sensitized solar cells; Counter electrode; Nickel foam; Excellent specific capacitance

资金

  1. Basic Research Laboratory through the National Research Foundations of Korea - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [NRF-2015R1A4A1041584]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Copper sulfide is an important multifunctional semiconductor that has attracted considerable attention owing to its outstanding properties and multiple applications, such as energy storage and electrochemical energy conversion. This paper describes a cost-effective and simple low-temperature solution approach to the preparation of copper sulfide for supercapacitors (SCs) and quantum-dot sensitized solar cells (QDSSCs). X-ray diffraction, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and transmission electron microscopy confirmed that the nickel foam with a coriander leaf like nanostructure had been coated successfully with copper sulfide. As an electrode material for SCs, the CC-3 h showed excellent specific capacitance (5029.28 at 4 A g(-1)), energy density (169.73 W h kg(-1)), and superior cycling durability with 107% retention after 2000 cycles. Interestingly, the QDSSCs equipped with CC-2 h and CC-3 h counter electrodes (CEs) exhibited a maximum power conversion efficiency of 2.52% and 3.48%, respectively. The improved performance of the CC-3 h electrode was attributed mainly to the large surface area (which could contribute sufficient electroactive species), good conductivity, and high electrocatalytic activity. Overall, this work delivers novel insights into the use of copper sulfide and offers an important guidelines for the fabrication of next level energy storage and conversion devices. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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