4.8 Article

Critical Role of Oxygen Evolved from Layered Li-Excess Metal Oxides in Lithium Rechargeable Batteries

期刊

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
卷 24, 期 14, 页码 2692-2697

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cm3005634

关键词

Li-excess metal oxides; layered; oxygen evolution; surface reaction; Li-air batteries

资金

  1. Converging Research Center Program through the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2011K000691]
  2. Human Resources Development of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP)
  3. Korea government Ministry of Knowledge Economy [20114010203120]
  4. Fundamental R&D Program for Technology of World Premier Materials
  5. Ministry of Knowledge Economy, Republic of Korea
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea
  7. Korean Government (MEST) [NRF-2009-0094219]
  8. National Research Foundation of Korea [2009-0094229] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The high capacity of the layered Li-excess oxide cathode is always accompanied by extraction of a significant amount of oxygen from the structure. The effects of oxygen on the electrochemical cycling are not well understood. Here, the detailed reaction scheme following oxygen evolution was established using real-time gas analysis and ex situ chemical analysis of the surface of the electrodes. A series of electrochemical/chemical reactions involving oxygen radicals constantly produced and decomposed lithium carbonate during cell operation. Moreover, byproducts, including water, affected the cycle life and rate capability: hydrolysis of the electrolyte salt formed hydrofluoric acid that attacked the surface of the electrode. This finding implies that protection of the electrode surface from damage, for example, by a coating or removal of oxygen radicals by scavengers, will be critical to widespread usage of Li-excess transition metal oxides in rechargeable lithium batteries.

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