4.8 Article

An extremely safe and wearable solid-state zinc ion battery based on a hierarchical structured polymer electrolyte

期刊

ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 941-951

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7ee03232c

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSFC/RGC Joint Research Scheme [N_CityU123/15]
  2. City University of Hong Kong [PJ7004645]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Flexible and safe batteries, coupled with high performance and low cost, constitute a radical advance in portable and wearable electronics, especially considering the fact that these flexible devices are likely to experience more mechanical impacts and potential damage than well-protected rigid batteries. However, flexible lithium ion batteries (LIBs) are vastly limited by their intrinsic safety and cost issues. Here we introduce an extremely safe and wearable solid-state zinc ion battery (ZIB) comprising a novel gelatin and PAM based hierarchical polymer electrolyte (HPE) and an alpha-MnO2 nanorod/carbon nanotube (CNT) cathode. Benefiting from the well-designed electrolyte and electrodes, the flexible solid-state ZIB delivers a high areal energy density and power density (6.18 mW h cm(-2) and 148.2 mW cm(-2), respectively), high specific capacity (306 mA h g(-1)) and excellent cycling stability (97% capacity retention after 1000 cycles at 2772 mA g(-1)). More importantly, the solid-state ZIB offers a high wearability and an extreme safety performance over conventional flexible LIBs, and performs very well under various severe conditions, such as being greatly cut, bent, hammered, punctured, sewed, washed in water or even put on fire. In addition, flexible ZIBs were integrated in series to power a commercial smart watch, a wearable pulse sensor, and a smart insole, which has been achieved to the best of our knowledge for the first time. These results demonstrate the promising potential of ZIBs in many practical wearable applications and offer a new platform for flexible and wearable energy storage technologies.

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