4.7 Article

High-performance and stable La0.8Sr0.2Fe0.9Nb0.1O3-δ anode for direct carbon solid oxide fuel cells fueled by activated carbon and corn straw derived carbon

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 43, 期 27, 页码 12358-12367

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.04.176

关键词

Direct carbon-solid oxide fuel cell (DC-SOFC); Perovskite anode; Carbon fuel; Corn straw carbon; Electrochemical performance

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51372057, 21373071, 51402027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The novel perovskite La0.8Sr0.2Fe0.9Nb0.1O3-delta (LSFNb) anode for direct carbon-solid oxide fuel cells (DC-SOFCs) is evaluated using activated carbon and corn straw carbon as fuels. Activated carbon possesses less ratio of disorder carbon, smaller average particle size and much higher specific surface area, as well as porous structure with micropores and mesopores compared with corn straw carbon. Electrolyte-supported DC-SOFCs with LSFNb anode demonstrate excellent performance with peak power densities of 302.8 mW cm(-2) and 218.5 mW cm(-2), respectively, when operated with activated carbon and corn straw carbon at 850 degrees C. Polarization resistances of LSFNb anode indicate that performance of DC-SOFCs is largely determined by the reverse Boudouard reaction, which is related to specific surface area of fuels. Cells fueled by corn straw carbon exhibit more stable output, higher released electric quantity and higher fuel utilization rate than that using activated carbon. Despite more disorder carbon and better thermal reactivity of corn straw carbon, higher initial output performance is obtained with activated carbon, proving that specific surface area of fuels, particle size and porosity have a considerable influence on the reverse Boudouard reaction and cell performance. These results indicate that LSFNb is a promising perovskite anode material for DC-SOFC. (C) 2018 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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