2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.02.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimizing membrane thickness for vanadium redox flow batteries

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
64
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
3
64
1
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the best performing felt-VRFBs was reported by Chen et al, who achieved 311 mW cm −2 with a GFA5 electrode at a compression of 33% (Table 2, row 5) [20]. Despite the much lower relative flow rate, the peak power density of 429 mW cm −2 obtained with Cell 1 is noticeably higher (a 38% increase) than the result of Chen et al Furthermore, the discharge voltage efficiency at 0.5 A cm −2 is almost 20% higher for Cell 1.…”
Section: Vrfb Cell Performancementioning
confidence: 98%
“…One of the best performing felt-VRFBs was reported by Chen et al, who achieved 311 mW cm −2 with a GFA5 electrode at a compression of 33% (Table 2, row 5) [20]. Despite the much lower relative flow rate, the peak power density of 429 mW cm −2 obtained with Cell 1 is noticeably higher (a 38% increase) than the result of Chen et al Furthermore, the discharge voltage efficiency at 0.5 A cm −2 is almost 20% higher for Cell 1.…”
Section: Vrfb Cell Performancementioning
confidence: 98%
“…1,2 Among these advantages, the most important ones are their ability to decouple power and energy rating due to their unique system architecture, and their flexible design. [3][4][5][6] Despite these advantages, one major challenge which hinders their commercial viability is the relatively higher capital cost of these systems. 5 According to a recent study by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, the current capital cost of a VRFB system is about $350 per kWh for 4-h application, 7 which is much higher than the capital cost target set by government agencies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, some PEMs for methanol fuel cells and proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) or their modifications can be directly used for VRBs [17][18][19][20]. In other words, the cation exchange membranes (CEMs) are the mainstream for VRB applications, especially the Nafion series with high proton conductivity and good chemical stability in the harsh acid and high oxidizing electrolyte surrounding (concentration of vanadium ions: 1-3 M, concentration of sulfuric acid: 1-3 M) [8,12,[21][22][23][24]. However, because of the high vanadium ion permeability and large volume water transference during the charge-discharge processes and high cost, Nafion is not the ideal material for large-scale commercial applications of VRBs [20,25].…”
Section: Ion Exchange Membranes For Vrbsmentioning
confidence: 99%