2022
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202202665
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Activating Oxygen Redox in Layered NaxMnO2 to Suppress Intrinsic Deficient Behavior and Enable Phase‐Transition‐Free Sodium Ion Cathode

Abstract: P2-type layered Na x MnO 2 cathode shows great potential in practical sodium ion batteries, especially for grid-level applications due to its ecofriendly and cost-effective sodium and manganese resources, and high theoretical specific capacity. However, several obstacles including severe phase transitions of P2-O2 and P2-P2′, low redox potential of Mn 3+ /Mn 4+ , disproportionation reaction and Jahn-Teller distortion of Mn 3+ , and deficient behavior have already hindered its practical applications. Herein, a … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

1
36
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
1
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The survey spectra (Figure S6a and S7a, Supporting Information) for both NCO-AC and NCO-O samples present all of the elements of Na, Cr, and O. The fitted peaks at 574.9, 575.6, 576.4, and 577.4 eV in Cr 2p 3/2 and the fitted peaks at 585.3 and 586.3 eV in Cr 2p 1/2 suggest the Cr species in NCO-AC is trivalent, as illustrated in Figure S6b (SI). , The O 1s XPS spectrum of NCO-AC is shown in Figure S6c (SI), where the peak at 529.2 eV can be ascribed to the typical lattice oxygen, the peaks at 531.3 and 533.1 eV are attributed to the oxygenated species, and the peak at a higher binding energy of 535.7 eV is assigned to the Na Auger. , The Na 1s peak (Figure S6d, Supporting Information) of NCO-AC located at 1071.5 eV is in accordance with the typical binding energy in layered oxide. , Meanwhile, the XPS results (Figure S7b–d, Supporting Information) for NCO-O reveal that the chemical state of Cr, O, and Na elements is no obvious difference between NCO-O and NCO-AC. In short, the difference between NCO-AC and NCO-O is the micromorphology and the exposure of the lattice facets.…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%
“…The survey spectra (Figure S6a and S7a, Supporting Information) for both NCO-AC and NCO-O samples present all of the elements of Na, Cr, and O. The fitted peaks at 574.9, 575.6, 576.4, and 577.4 eV in Cr 2p 3/2 and the fitted peaks at 585.3 and 586.3 eV in Cr 2p 1/2 suggest the Cr species in NCO-AC is trivalent, as illustrated in Figure S6b (SI). , The O 1s XPS spectrum of NCO-AC is shown in Figure S6c (SI), where the peak at 529.2 eV can be ascribed to the typical lattice oxygen, the peaks at 531.3 and 533.1 eV are attributed to the oxygenated species, and the peak at a higher binding energy of 535.7 eV is assigned to the Na Auger. , The Na 1s peak (Figure S6d, Supporting Information) of NCO-AC located at 1071.5 eV is in accordance with the typical binding energy in layered oxide. , Meanwhile, the XPS results (Figure S7b–d, Supporting Information) for NCO-O reveal that the chemical state of Cr, O, and Na elements is no obvious difference between NCO-O and NCO-AC. In short, the difference between NCO-AC and NCO-O is the micromorphology and the exposure of the lattice facets.…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%
“…[ 21 ] Among the transition metal oxides, P2‐Na x MnO 2 stands in the spotlight owing to its low cost, environmental sustainability, and decent electrochemical performance. [ 22 ] And the structure of the P2 type system is more stable during Na ion insertion/removal compared to the O3 counterpart. [ 23 ] Nonetheless, the P2‐Na x MnO 2 compounds are still haunted by irreversible structural changes/phase transitions during cycling, insufficient electrochemical performances, and air/moisture instability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…cannot withstand the conspicuous structural variations derived from the process of repeated Na + /K + (de)insertion, causing significant polarization and capacity degradation, resulting in an inferior electrochemical performance. [53][54][55][56] Furthermore, some olivine-type materials (e.g., NaFePO 4 and KFePO 4 ) endure sluggish diffusion kinetics for migration of Na + /K + and large lattice mismatch between NaFe-PO 4 (KFePO 4 ) and FePO 4 , leading to a poor rate performance and unsatisfactory lifespan. 57,58 Organic polymers have a low specific discharge capacity and poor cyclability due to their dissolution reactions with the electrolyte, which are difficult to meet the actual needs of rechargeable equipment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%