0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Microphase Separation Engineering toward 3D Porous Carbon Assembled from Nanosheets for Flexible All-Solid-State Supercapacitors

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Benchmarking heterogeneous electrocatalysts for the oxygen evolution reaction.

          Objective evaluation of the activity of electrocatalysts for water oxidation is of fundamental importance for the development of promising energy conversion technologies including integrated solar water-splitting devices, water electrolyzers, and Li-air batteries. However, current methods employed to evaluate oxygen-evolving catalysts are not standardized, making it difficult to compare the activity and stability of these materials. We report a protocol for evaluating the activity, stability, and Faradaic efficiency of electrodeposited oxygen-evolving electrocatalysts. In particular, we focus on methods for determining electrochemically active surface area and measuring electrocatalytic activity and stability under conditions relevant to an integrated solar water-splitting device. Our primary figure of merit is the overpotential required to achieve a current density of 10 mA cm(-2) per geometric area, approximately the current density expected for a 10% efficient solar-to-fuels conversion device. Utilizing the aforementioned surface area measurements, one can determine electrocatalyst turnover frequencies. The reported protocol was used to examine the oxygen-evolution activity of the following systems in acidic and alkaline solutions: CoO(x), CoPi, CoFeO(x), NiO(x), NiCeO(x), NiCoO(x), NiCuO(x), NiFeO(x), and NiLaO(x). The oxygen-evolving activity of an electrodeposited IrO(x) catalyst was also investigated for comparison. Two general observations are made from comparing the catalytic performance of the OER catalysts investigated: (1) in alkaline solution, every non-noble metal system achieved 10 mA cm(-2) current densities at similar operating overpotentials between 0.35 and 0.43 V, and (2) every system but IrO(x) was unstable under oxidative conditions in acidic solutions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Benchmarking hydrogen evolving reaction and oxygen evolving reaction electrocatalysts for solar water splitting devices.

            Objective comparisons of electrocatalyst activity and stability using standard methods under identical conditions are necessary to evaluate the viability of existing electrocatalysts for integration into solar-fuel devices as well as to help inform the development of new catalytic systems. Herein, we use a standard protocol as a primary screen for evaluating the activity, short-term (2 h) stability, and electrochemically active surface area (ECSA) of 18 electrocatalysts for the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) and 26 electrocatalysts for the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) under conditions relevant to an integrated solar water-splitting device in aqueous acidic or alkaline solution. Our primary figure of merit is the overpotential necessary to achieve a magnitude current density of 10 mA cm(-2) per geometric area, the approximate current density expected for a 10% efficient solar-to-fuels conversion device under 1 sun illumination. The specific activity per ECSA of each material is also reported. Among HER catalysts, several could operate at 10 mA cm(-2) with overpotentials <0.1 V in acidic and/or alkaline solutions. Among OER catalysts in acidic solution, no non-noble metal based materials showed promising activity and stability, whereas in alkaline solution many OER catalysts performed with similar activity achieving 10 mA cm(-2) current densities at overpotentials of ~0.33-0.5 V. Most OER catalysts showed comparable or better specific activity per ECSA when compared to Ir and Ru catalysts in alkaline solutions, while most HER catalysts showed much lower specific activity than Pt in both acidic and alkaline solutions. For select catalysts, additional secondary screening measurements were conducted including Faradaic efficiency and extended stability measurements.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Carbon materials for chemical capacitive energy storage.

              Carbon materials have attracted intense interests as electrode materials for electrochemical capacitors, because of their high surface area, electrical conductivity, chemical stability and low cost. Activated carbons produced by different activation processes from various precursors are the most widely used electrodes. Recently, with the rapid growth of nanotechnology, nanostructured electrode materials, such as carbon nanotubes and template-synthesized porous carbons have been developed. Their unique electrical properties and well controlled pore sizes and structures facilitate fast ion and electron transportation. In order to further improve the power and energy densities of the capacitors, carbon-based composites combining electrical double layer capacitors (EDLC)-capacitance and pseudo-capacitance have been explored. They show not only enhanced capacitance, but as well good cyclability. In this review, recent progresses on carbon-based electrode materials are summarized, including activated carbons, carbon nanotubes, and template-synthesized porous carbons, in particular mesoporous carbons. Their advantages and disadvantages as electrochemical capacitors are discussed. At the end of this review, the future trends of electrochemical capacitors with high energy and power are proposed. Copyright © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces
                ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces
                American Chemical Society (ACS)
                1944-8244
                1944-8252
                March 23 2022
                March 08 2022
                March 23 2022
                : 14
                : 11
                : 13250-13260
                Affiliations
                [1 ]CAS Key Laboratory of Carbon Materials, Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 27 Taoyuan South Road, Taiyuan 030001, PR China
                [2 ]Center of Materials Science and Optoelectronics Engineering, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 19A Yuquan Road, Beijing 100049, PR China
                [3 ]Institute of Energy Innovation, College of Materials Science and Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, 79 West Yingze Street, Taiyuan 030024, PR China
                Article
                10.1021/acsami.1c23624
                76cd8554-fd59-43d3-99e7-16e338b5089a
                © 2022

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-029

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-037

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-045

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article