4.5 Article

Two-Dimensional Cathode Materials for Aqueous Rechargeable Zinc-Ion Batteries†

期刊

CHINESE JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 40, 期 8, 页码 973-988

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cjoc.202100791

关键词

Two-dimensional materials; Zinc-ion batteries; Electrochemistry; Nanostructures; Energy conversion

资金

  1. NSFC [51873088, 12004195]
  2. Tianjin Municipal Science and Technology Commission [20JCQNJC01820, 18ZLZXZF00480]
  3. 111 Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review discusses the synthesis and properties of 2D materials for cathodes in ZIBs, as well as summarizes various reports on 2D materials as ZIBs cathodes. Three key strategies to elicit improved Zn2+ storage abilities are highlighted: defect engineering, heterostructure engineering, and interlayer engineering. Perspectives relating to the challenges and opportunities of 2D materials-based ZIBs are also provided at the end of this review.
Comprehensive Summary Rechargeable aqueous zinc-ion batteries (ZIBs) featuring low cost, superior performance, and environmental benignity have attracted dramatic attention as a promising alternative energy storage system to lithium-ion batteries. Nevertheless, the development of ZIBs is still hindered by the limited selection of cathode materials due to the large solvation sheath and charge density of Zn2+. Two-dimensional (2D) materials have attracted extraordinary attention owing to the unique layered structure bonded by weak van der Waals' forces, which makes them promising host materials for Zn2+ intercalation/de-intercalation. In this review, the synthesis and properties of 2D materials for cathodes in ZIBs are discussed. Meanwhile, various reports on 2D materials as ZIBs cathodes are summarized. Three key strategies to elicit improved Zn2+ storage abilities: defect engineering, heterostructure engineering, and interlayer engineering, are highlighted. Finally, this review ends with perspectives relating to the challenges and opportunities of 2D materials-based ZIBs.

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

4.5
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