Lithium-sulfur batteries are considered a promising next-generation energy storage system, boasting high theoretical capacity and energy density, approximately double that of LiBs [1,2]. However, challenges such as low sulfur conductivity, significant volume expansion during cycling, and the lithium polysulfides shuttle effect hinder their practical use [3]. These issues result in side reactions, irreversible loss of active material, and anode degradation, leading to a rapid decline in cell capacity stability [4]. In this research, we successfully developed a sulfur cathode carbon matrix and separator modifier from rice husk through carbonization and thermal activation. The resulting graphene-like porous carbon (GPC) exhibited high efficiency as a sulfur host, enhancing the electrochemical performance of the cathode. The GPC-NiO composite also served effectively as a separator modifier, catalyzing lithium polysulfides' redox reactions and improving the overall cycling stability of lithium-sulfur batteries. In particular, the GPC@S/GPC-NiO-20 cell demonstrated an excellent initial discharge capacity of 1519 mAh g -1 at 0.2 C. Also, it delivered excellent long-term cycling, maintaining a discharge capacity of 661 mAh g -1 even after 400 cycles at 1 C, with a Coulombic efficiency exceeding 97%. It exhibited a promising rate capability of 568 mAh g -1 at 2 C and retained a discharge capacity of 603 mAh g -1 over 100 cycles at 0.2 C with a sulfur loading of 4.0 mg cm -2 . Acknowledgments This research is funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant No. AP19677708). References [1] H. Li, S. Ma, J. Li, F. Liu, H. Zhou, Z. Huang, S. Jiao, Y. Kuang, Altering the reaction mechanism to eliminate the shuttle effect in lithium-sulfur batteries, Energy Storage Materials. 26 (2020) 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensm.2020.01.002. [2] F. Sultanov, A. Mentbayeva, S. Kalybekkyzy, A. Zhaisanova, S.-T. Myung, Z. Bakenov, Advances of graphene-based aerogels and their modifications in lithium-sulfur batteries, Carbon. 201 (2023) 679–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2022.09.069. [3] M. Zhao, Y.-Q. Peng, B.-Q. Li, X.-Q. Zhang, J.-Q. Huang, Regulation of carbon distribution to construct high-sulfur-content cathode in lithium–sulfur batteries, Journal of Energy Chemistry. 56 (2021) 203–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jechem.2020.07.054. [4] Y. Hu, W. Chen, T. Lei, Y. Jiao, J. Huang, A. Hu, C. Gong, C. Yan, X. Wang, J. Xiong, Strategies toward High‐Loading Lithium–Sulfur Battery, Adv. Energy Mater. 10 (2020) 2000082. https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.202000082.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sultanov et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: