4.6 Article

Reactivity at the Lithium-Metal Anode Surface of Lithium-Sulfur Batteries

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 119, 期 48, 页码 26828-26839

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b08254

关键词

-

资金

  1. Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Vehicle Technologies of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-EE0006832]
  2. CAPES Foundation, Ministry of Education of Brazil [11941/13-8]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to their high energy density and reduced cost, lithium sulfur batteries are promising alternatives for applications such as electrical vehicles. However, a number of technical challenges need to be overcome in order to make them feasible for commercial uses. These challenges arise from the battery highly interconnected chemistry, which besides the electrochemical reactions includes side reactions at both electrodes and migration of soluble polysulfide (PS) species produced at the cathode to the anode side. The presence of such PS species alters the already complex reactivity of the Li anode. In this work, interfacial reactions occurring at the surface of Li metal anodes due to electrochemical instability of the electrolyte components and PS species are investigated with density functional theory and ab initio molecular dynamics methods. It is found that the bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonimide lithium salt reacts very fast when in contact with the Li surface, and anion decomposition precedes salt dissociation. The anion decomposition mechanisms are fully elucidated. Two of the typical solvents used in Li-S technology, 1,3-dioxolane and 1,2-dimethoxyethane, are found stable during the entire simulation length, in contrast with the case of ethylene carbonate that is rapidly decomposed by sequential 2- or 4-electron mechanisms. On the other hand, the fast reactivity of the soluble PS species alters the side reactions because the PS totally decomposes before any of the electrolyte components forming Li2S on the anode surface.

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