An Advanced Composite Membrane for the All-Vanadium Redox Flow Battery
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Redox flow batteries (RFBs) are a promising technology for grid scale stationary energy storage to complement renewable energy systems. These batteries have a relatively low energy density; however, they offer important advantages, including: long life-time; decoupled energy (arbitrarily large electrolyte volume) and power (electrode area); high round-trip efficiency; scalability and design flexibility; fast response; and low environmental impacts. These advantages make them superior to many energy storage technologies for stationary applications [1-4]. Among the various types of RFBs, vanadium RFBs (VRFBs) are an emerging technology for grid scale energy storage and the integration of renewable energy generation [5]. The membrane is a key component of a VRFB that separates the two half-cell electrolytes and prevents cross-mixing, while allowing the transport of ions during charge-discharge cycles [6]. The VRFB membrane should exhibit low vanadium ion permeability to minimize self-discharge, low cost, and long‐term chemical stability under normal operating conditions. A high proton conductivity and low vanadium ion crossover are known to improve the efficiency of VRFBs [6-7]. In this study, we present a novel composite Nafion based membrane that results in a significant increase in the VRFB performance. The composite membrane has been characterized for its chemical, structural, and thermal properties using appropriate analytical techniques. The battery performance was evaluated in a flow cell using a ‘zero-gap’ design with an electrode area of 5 cm 2 . The electrolytic solution, 1.6 M VOSO 4 in 3 M H 2 SO 4 , was circulated through the cell. Thermally treated carbon papers were used as the cathode and anode electrodes. For charge-discharge experiments, a constant current density (10 to 80 mA cm −2 ) was applied with upper and lower voltage cut-offs of 1.65 and 0.8 V, respectively. The stability of the battery using the composite membrane was evaluated over 100 cycles. Figures 1 and 2 show the energy efficiency and capacity retention during 100 charge-discharge cycles. The results reveal that the energy efficiency was improved from 51% to 63% by using the composite membrane. In addition, the charge-discharge capacity and capacity retention improved by around 200% and 25%, respectively. This improvement can be attributed to a higher proton conductivity and lower vanadium permeability of the composite membrane. References: [1] M. Skyllas-Kazacos, L. Cao, M. Kazacos, N. Kausar, A. Mousa, Vanadium Electrolyte Studies for the Vanadium Redox Battery-A Review, ChemSusChem. 9 (2016) 1521–1543. [2] A.K. Singh, M. Pahlevaninezhad, N. Yasri, E. Roberts, Degradation of Carbon Electrodes in the All-Vanadium Redox Flow Battery, ChemSusChem. (2021). [3] K.E. Rodby, T.J. Carney, Y. Ashraf Gandomi, J.L. Barton, R.M. Darling, F.R. Brushett, Assessing the levelized cost of vanadium redox flow batteries with capacity fade and rebalancing, J. Power Sources. 460 (2020) 227958. [4] M. Pahlevaninezhad, P. Leung, M. Pahlevani, F. C. Walsh, C. Ponce de Leon, and E. P. L. Roberts, Experimental and Computational Studies of Disperse Blue-1 in Organic Non-Aqueous Redox Flow Batteries, J. Power Sources, Volume 500, 15 July 2021, 229942. [5] X.Z. Yuan, C. Song, A. Platt, N. Zhao, H. Wang, H. Li, K. Fatih, D. Jang, A review of all-vanadium redox flow battery durability: Degradation mechanisms and mitigation strategies, Int. J. Energy Res. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/er.4607. [6] X. Li, H. Zhang, Zh. Mai, H. Zhang, I. Vankelecom, Ion exchange membranes for vanadium redox flow battery (VRB) applications, Energy Environ. Sci., 2011, 4, 1147. [7] L. Yu, F. Lin, L. Xua, J. Xi, A recast Nafion/graphene oxide composite membrane for advanced vanadium redox flow batteries, RSC Adv., 2016, 6, 3756. Figure 1
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».