2016
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201602459
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Oxidation‐Resistant and Elastic Mesoporous Carbon with Single‐Layer Graphene Walls

Abstract: An oxidation-resistant and elastic mesoporous carbon, graphene mesosponge (GMS), is prepared. GMS has a sponge-like mesoporous framework (mean pore size is 5.8 nm) consisting mostly of single-layer graphene walls, which realizes a high electric conductivity and a large surface area (1940 m 2 g −1 ). Moreover, the graphene-based framework includes only a very small amount of edge sites, thereby achieving much higher stability against oxidation than conventional porous carbons such as carbon blacks and activated… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
146
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 120 publications
(152 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
(81 reference statements)
5
146
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This could be a novel option for the design of materials for energy storage. In this sense, we have shown by using Synchrotron radiation that ACFs present a flexible porous network which pore size is modified by applying uniaxial tensile forces along the fiber main axis, being this change reversible A recent report by Nishihara et al . has shown a highly flexible graphene mesosponge (GMS) which might be very interesting for H 2 storage applications considering that it has the possibility of tailoring the porosity.…”
Section: Avenues Towards Improvement: Where To From Where We Stand?mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…This could be a novel option for the design of materials for energy storage. In this sense, we have shown by using Synchrotron radiation that ACFs present a flexible porous network which pore size is modified by applying uniaxial tensile forces along the fiber main axis, being this change reversible A recent report by Nishihara et al . has shown a highly flexible graphene mesosponge (GMS) which might be very interesting for H 2 storage applications considering that it has the possibility of tailoring the porosity.…”
Section: Avenues Towards Improvement: Where To From Where We Stand?mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In recent years, carbon materials (i.e., graphene, carbon nanotubes (CNTs), graphitic arrays, and other nanostructures) have been developed as promising cost‐effective alternatives for promoting oxygen and hydrogen electrocatalysis in energy technologies . In particular, 3D carbon architectures, with tunable porous structures, offer extraordinary mass and electron transport capabilities, which are extremely attractive for electrocatalysis in energy conversion and storage systems . In the last decade, major breakthroughs in the field of metal‐free carbon electrocatalysts have been achieved, making the creation of a new generation of energy devices based on cost‐efficient sustainable metal‐free carbons possible ( Figure 1 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that the relatively rapid capacitance decline in the first 500 cycles should be ascribed to the irreversible side reactions caused by the high-electrochemical-activity defects on APDC-6. [34][35][36][37] Figure 4d shows cycling performance of SC with a m + /m À of 1.3 : 1, which was inferior to that of SC with a m + /m À of 1.2 : 1. This is because the excessive mass of positive electrode made its potential change too slow, thus the potential of negative electrode exceed P L .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…As shown in Figure c, the device showed good cycling stability over 5000 cycles with nearly 100 % coulombic efficiency. Note that the relatively rapid capacitance decline in the first 500 cycles should be ascribed to the irreversible side reactions caused by the high‐electrochemical‐activity defects on APDC‐6 . Figure d shows cycling performance of SC with a m + /m − of 1.3 : 1, which was inferior to that of SC with a m + /m − of 1.2 : 1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%