John W F To1, Zheng Chen1, Hongbin Yao1, Jiajun He1, Kwanpyo Kim2, Ho-Hsiu Chou1, Lijia Pan3, Jennifer Wilcox1, Yi Cui4, Zhenan Bao1. 1. Department of Chemical Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, and Department of Energy Resources Engineering, Stanford University , Stanford, California 94305, United States. 2. Department of Chemical Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, and Department of Energy Resources Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States; Department of Physics, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST), Ulsan 689-798, Korea. 3. National Laboratory of Microstructures (Nanjing), School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University , Nanjing 210093, China. 4. Department of Chemical Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, and Department of Energy Resources Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States; Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, California 94205, United States.
Abstract
Porous graphitic carbon is essential for many applications such as energy storage devices, catalysts, and sorbents. However, current graphitic carbons are limited by low conductivity, low surface area, and ineffective pore structure. Here we report a scalable synthesis of porous graphitic carbons using a conjugated polymeric molecular framework as precursor. The multivalent cross-linker and rigid conjugated framework help to maintain micro- and mesoporous structures, while promoting graphitization during carbonization and chemical activation. The above unique design results in a class of highly graphitic carbons at temperature as low as 800 °C with record-high surface area (4073 m(2) g(-1)), large pore volume (2.26 cm(-3)), and hierarchical pore architecture. Such carbons simultaneously exhibit electrical conductivity >3 times more than activated carbons, very high electrochemical activity at high mass loading, and high stability, as demonstrated by supercapacitors and lithium-sulfur batteries with excellent performance. Moreover, the synthesis can be readily tuned to make a broad range of graphitic carbons with desired structures and compositions for many applications.
Porous graphiticcarbon is essential for many applications such as energy storage devices, catalysts, and sorbents. However, current graphiticcarbons are limited by low conductivity, low surface area, and ineffective pore structure. Here we report a scalable synthesis of porous graphiticcarbons using a conjugated polymeric molecular framework as precursor. The multivalent cross-linker and rigid conjugated framework help to maintain micro- and mesoporous structures, while promoting graphitization during carbonization and chemicalactivation. The above unique design results in a class of highly graphiticcarbons at temperature as low as 800 °C with record-high surface area (4073 m(2) g(-1)), large pore volume (2.26 cm(-3)), and hierarchical pore architecture. Such carbons simultaneously exhibit electricalconductivity >3 times more than activated carbons, very high electrochemicalactivity at high mass loading, and high stability, as demonstrated by supercapacitors and lithium-sulfur batteries with excellent performance. Moreover, the synthesis can be readily tuned to make a broad range of graphiticcarbons with desired structures and compositions for many applications.
High surface area porous
carbon materials are of great technological
importance due to their diverse functionalities and excellent physical/chemical
robustness. Their high electronicconductivity, large surface area,
and good chemical and electrochemical stability are of particular
interest for electrochemical energy storage devices, such as electrochemicalcapacitors (or supercapacitors) and batteries.[1] Fundamentally, the performance of such devices mainly depends on
the capability of carbon materials to interact with ions and to transport
electrons. For example, an ideal supercapacitorcarbon material requires
high conductivity for electron transport, high surface area for effective
ion adsorption/desorption, and suitable pore architecture for rapid
access of ions from electrolyte solution to the carbon surface. Traditional
porous carbon materials, such as activated carbons (ACs), have high
surface area (up to 3000 m2/g), but their large pore tortuosity
and poor pore connectivity severely limit electrolyte ion transport
to the surface.[2] Furthermore, they are
generally synthesized from coal or biomass (e.g., coconut shell, rice
husk) containing a large amount of impurities. As a result, extensive
purification is needed to achieve high-quality supercapacitor-grade
AC, which substantially increases the cost.[3] Soft or hard templates can be used to prepare mesoporous carbons
to achieve better pore size control and tunable pore connection; however,
complicated and costly synthesis is required, prohibiting their practical
applications.[4]Porous graphiticcarbons,
such as three-dimensional (3D) porous
graphene network, are attracting increasing interest owing to their
high intrinsic electronicconductivity and large surface area.[5] However, bulk graphene powder made from random
stacking of individual sheets often suffers from severe aggregation,
which dramatically decreases its surface area, pore connectivity,
and electronicconductivity, leading to moderate charge storage performance.[5a] While some specially designed 3D porous graphene
networks[6] show good pore connectivity and
conductivity, large-scale and low-cost fabrication of such graphene
networks remains a challenge. The general strategy toward the above-mentioned
graphene networks is to use graphene oxides (GOs) as building blocks.
However, making conductive graphene from GO building blocks (normally
by Hummer’s method[7]) requires strong
oxidative and subsequently reductive chemicals, which is unfavorable
for large-scale production. In this context, efficient synthesis of
3D interconnected graphiticcarbon networks remains highly desired.Herein, we report a scalable synthesis toward low-cost and low-temperature
synthesis of 3D porous graphiticcarbon networks with ultrahigh surface
area and hierarchically interconnected pore architecture. Our strategy
is using a 3D cross-linked precursor from a conjugated polymeric molecular
framework without using any sacrificial templates (Figure 1a). As shown in Figure 1b,c,
we began with the synthesis of a cross-linked conjugated polymeric
molecular framework, which can be readily converted into porous carbon
simply by thermal annealing (carbonization). A subsequent chemicalactivation process at a temperature as low as 800 °C further
increases the surface area and porosity, leading to a 3D hierarchically
porous graphitic (HPG) carbon framework with high surface area (up
to 4073 m2 g–1), large pore volume (up
to 2.26 cm3 g–1), high electronicconductivity
(>3 times higher than typicalACs), and good pore connectivity.
The
resulting HPG carbon materials showed unprecedented energy storage
capacity and rate capability compared with previously reported porous
carbons, enabling high mass loading supercapacitors and highly stable
lithium–sulfur batteries. Dai and co-workers reported on synthesis
of N-doped carbon using our PANi hydrogel precursor for electrocatalysis
applications during this manuscript preparation.[8] However, their synthesis did not include chemicalactivation,
the carbonization required 1000 °C, and the resulting carbon
had a low surface area of 1663 m2 g–1.
Figure 1
Synthesis of 3D HPG. (a) Schematic synthetic preparation of 3D
HPG carbon network from the nanostructure polymer molecular framework.
The phytic acid helps to maintain the 3D structure, prevent pore collapse,
and retain volatile low molecular weight species during carbonization
and activation processes. (b) Illustration of the chemical synthesis
of PANi hydrogel in which the phytic acid acts as both dopant and
cross-linker. (c) Illustration of transformation of phytic acid cross-linked
PANi (left) into doped graphene-like carbon sheets (right). (d) A
digital photograph showing the phytic acid cross-linked PANi aerogel
(left) and the 3D HPG carbon (right) made from 700 °C carbonization
with 800 °C activation. A typical total yield is 30 wt % from
polymer to 3D HPG carbon.
Synthesis of 3D HPG. (a) Schematic synthetic preparation of 3D
HPG carbon network from the nanostructure polymer molecular framework.
The phytic acid helps to maintain the 3D structure, prevent pore collapse,
and retain volatile low molecular weight species during carbonization
and activation processes. (b) Illustration of the chemical synthesis
of PANi hydrogel in which the phytic acidacts as both dopant and
cross-linker. (c) Illustration of transformation of phytic acidcross-linked
PANi (left) into doped graphene-like carbon sheets (right). (d) A
digital photograph showing the phytic acidcross-linked PANi aerogel
(left) and the 3D HPG carbon (right) made from 700 °Ccarbonization
with 800 °Cactivation. A typical total yield is 30 wt % from
polymer to 3D HPG carbon.
Results
Synthesis of Ultrahigh Surface Area and Highly Graphitic Framework
at Low Temperature
Our polymer network is termed “molecular
framework” because of its rigid and cross-linked structure.
The rigid conjugated polymer backbone, PANi, was formed in the presence
of a cross-linker. The hydrogel network is readily formed upon mixing
the monomer, oxidizing agent, and a cross-linker as we previously
reported[9] (see experiments). After water
removal by freeze-drying, the hydrogel was converted into an aerogel,
which maintained the original macroscopic structure of the polymer
network (Figure 1d). Seen from the scanning
electron microscopic (SEM) image (Figure S1), the dried polymer shows interconnected coral-like nanofibers with
diameters of about 100–200 nm.Phytic acid is selected
as the cross-linker for two reasons: (1) It contains six phosphoricacid groups, which electrostatically associate with protonated aniline
to cross-link the entire network, giving rise to the 3D macroscopic
structure of a molecular framework. Unlike soft templates which are
selected for their low decomposition temperature <300 °C,
the degradation temperature of phytic acid is relatively high, ∼380
°C, which prevents pore collapsing during carbonization. (2)
As phytic acid is carbonized, the in situ formed
organophosphates were reported to generate a polymeric layer through
the formation of phosphate linkages that connect and further cross-link
polymer fragments.[10] This can help to effectively
retain the more volatile lower molecular weight species. Indeed, we
obtained a high carbon yield (∼50 wt %), which is more than
twice that of carbonization of biomass.[11]At even higher temperatures (>450 °C), cyclization
and condensation
reactions lead to increases in aromaticity and size of the polyaromatic
units, enabled by the scission of P–O–C bonds.[10a] Extensive growth of these aromatic units or
“embryonic” graphene layers in the carbonized polymercan be observed in transmission electron microscopic (TEM) images
(Figure S2). A subsequent chemicalactivation
process by mixing the above graphitized carbon with potassium hydroxide
(KOH) followed by a heat treatment at 800 °C further increases
the porosity and surface area. After activation, a typical overall
carbon yield (vs mass of polymer) of ∼30 wt % can be achieved.
By comparison, common carbon yield of commercialACs made from activation
of biomass at similar temperature is only ∼8%.[12]The surface area and pore structure of the polymer-derived
porous
graphiticcarboncan be readily tuned by adjusting the syntheticconditions,
such as annealing temperature and activation conditions (Table S1). For example, by increasing carbonization
temperature from 400 to 900 °C, BET (Brunauer–Emmett–Teller)
surface area (SBET) can be increased from
20 m2 g–1 to 423 m2 g–1. At the same time, the pore volume (VAr, measured with argon) can be increased from 0.04 to
0.38 cm3 g–1. Subsequent chemicalactivation
of these carbonscan further enhance SBET to as high as 4073 m2 g–1 and VAr to 2.26 cm3 g–1. This effect may have contributions from the activation from phosphoricacid group and organophosphate moieties that are generated during
decomposition of phytic acid. Note that the highest surface area attained
is the sample with the lowest carbonization temperature (400 °C),
and as the carbonization temperature increases to 900 °C while
fixing the activation temperature and KOH/C ratio, SBET first decreases and then increases. This confirms
the unique role of phytic acid as a cross-linker and its effect in
retaining the structural integrity at moderate temperature. Such high SBET together with large VAr is the highest achieved among graphiticcarbons.[6b,13] This value is even higher than that for the previously reported
activated graphene (SBET = 3100 m2 g–1, VAr =
2.14 cm3 g–1).[13a] We attribute this to the unique activation effect of phytic acid
and the rigid carbon framework, which prevents pore collapsing.Detailed pore structure was probed by N2 adsorption/desorption
techniques at 77 K (Figure 2a), which clearly
showed the coexistence of micro-, meso-, and macropores of typical
3D HPG carbons. CO2 adsorption/desorption isotherm at 273
K further revealed a steady increase of CO2 uptake under
low pressure (Figure S3). Figure 2b summarizes the cumulative pore volume and pore
size distribution from N2 and CO2 adsorption.
By comparison, a typicalcommercial high surface area AC (Figure 2a) only shows micropores with small peak pore size
(∼0.6 nm, Figure S4 and Figure S5) and moderate VAr (0.997 cm3 g–1). The existence
of abundant meso-/macropores in the HPG carbonallows a better mass
transport than for normalACs with only micropores. The high flexibility
of this synthetic approach makes it possible to achieve unprecedented
performance for a wide range of applications, such as electrochemical
energy storage.
Figure 2
Porosity and composition of 3D HPG carbon. (a) N2 adsorption/desorption
isotherm of HPG carbon, clearly showing the hierarchically porous
structure. The significant N2 uptake at a relative pressure
(P/P0) below 0.01 is
a typical characteristic of micropores. The continuous N2 uptake at P/P0 between
0.05 and 0.3 is attributed to N2 adsorption in the mesopores.
The N2 uptake with a relatively flat region followed by
a rapid increase at P/P0 of 0.9 suggests the existence of large mesopores and macropores.
Isotherms of a commercial high surface area AC (AC-1, for supercapacitor
application with high SBET of 1970 m2 g–1) are also provided for comparison.
No obvious continuous N2 uptake at P/P0 between 0.05 and 0.3 indicates the lack of
sufficient mesopores. (b) Cumulative pore volume and pore size distribution
(inset) for N2 and CO2 adsorption. Pore size
distribution was calculated by nonlinear density functional theory
(NLDFT) by assuming slit pore geometry for micropores and cylindrical
geometry pore for mesopores.
Porosity and composition of 3D HPG carbon. (a) N2 adsorption/desorption
isotherm of HPG carbon, clearly showing the hierarchically porous
structure. The significant N2 uptake at a relative pressure
(P/P0) below 0.01 is
a typicalcharacteristic of micropores. The continuous N2 uptake at P/P0 between
0.05 and 0.3 is attributed to N2 adsorption in the mesopores.
The N2 uptake with a relatively flat region followed by
a rapid increase at P/P0 of 0.9 suggests the existence of large mesopores and macropores.
Isotherms of a commercial high surface area AC (AC-1, for supercapacitor
application with high SBET of 1970 m2 g–1) are also provided for comparison.
No obvious continuous N2 uptake at P/P0 between 0.05 and 0.3 indicates the lack of
sufficient mesopores. (b) Cumulative pore volume and pore size distribution
(inset) for N2 and CO2 adsorption. Pore size
distribution was calculated by nonlinear density functional theory
(NLDFT) by assuming slit pore geometry for micropores and cylindrical
geometry pore for mesopores.
Physical and Chemical Characterization of the HPG Carbon
The 3D HPG carbons synthesized at different carbonization temperatures
share similar morphology and structure. Detailed microstructure characterization
reveals their hierarchical architectures. Typical SEM (Figure 3a) and TEM images (Figure 3b) show the interconnected carbon framework (primary) with large
pores (a few hundred nanometers) formed during the polymerization
of PANi (Figure S1). Close examination
of the carbon backbone shows a foamlike porous structure with small
mesopores with pore sizes in the range of a few nanometers (Figure 3c). The observed filamentary carbon structure suggests
that carbon sheets further intertwine into a continuous porous framework
(secondary). High-resolution TEM (HRTEM) images (Figure 3d,e) further identify the interconnected graphene sheets with
lateral dimensions of a few nanometers. The ordered hexagonal packing
of the carbon atoms in graphene nanosheets can be clearly seen, suggesting
a high degree of graphitization of the carbon framework. This porous
graphitic structure highly resembles porous graphene derived from
chemicalactivation of graphene oxide at the same temperature, which
shows small graphene domains and abundant edge sites.[13a] Nevertheless, our HPG carbon shows good pore
connectivity originated from the rigid 3D conjugated polymer network,
which can prevent particle aggregation or layer-to-layer stacking.
This HPG carbon structure is in sharp contrast to previously reported
pyrolysis porous carbons, which mostly contain amorphous carbon at
similar or even higher carbonization temperatures.[11b,14]
Figure 3
Structure
and morphology of 3D HPG carbon. (a) SEM image of carbonized
PANi polymer at 700 °C. (b, c) SEM and TEM images showing the
macroscopic network (primary) and macroporous feature of the 3D HPG
carbon after activation at 800 °C. (d) TEM image revealing the
mesoporous structure of the graphitic network (secondary) after 800
°C activation. (e) HR-TEM image showing the network of graphene
sheets, which have a typical lateral dimension of a few nanometers.
(f) HRTEM showing a relatively large graphene sheet with clearly ordered
hexagonal carbon atom packing. Inset shows the zoomed-in image at
the box in panel f.
Structure
and morphology of 3D HPG carbon. (a) SEM image of carbonized
PANi polymer at 700 °C. (b, c) SEM and TEM images showing the
macroscopic network (primary) and macroporous feature of the 3D HPG
carbon after activation at 800 °C. (d) TEM image revealing the
mesoporous structure of the graphitic network (secondary) after 800
°Cactivation. (e) HR-TEM image showing the network of graphene
sheets, which have a typical lateral dimension of a few nanometers.
(f) HRTEM showing a relatively large graphene sheet with clearly ordered
hexagonalcarbon atom packing. Inset shows the zoomed-in image at
the box in panel f.Raman spectroscopy further
confirms the strong graphitization of
all the 3D HPG carbons as featured by intensive G-bands at ∼1590
cm–1 (Figure 4a). While graphitic
structures were attained for all samples, the degree of graphitization
increases with the increase of carbonization temperature. The D-band
to G-band intensity ratio (ID/IG) was calculated to be 1.12, 0.94, and 0.83
for HPG carbon from PANi carbonized at 400, 700, and 900 °C,
respectively (Figure 4b, Table S1), which is consistent with their different surface
area and porosity. Even the maximum ID/IG is smaller than that of GO-derived
activated graphene (∼1.2) with a similar activation condition,[13a] indicating a higher degree of graphitization.
However, due to the highly porous structure and overlap of small graphene
domains, our 3D HPG samples show a weak 2D band (Figure S6). The amount of sp2 carbon is further
determined by comparing the π* and σ* bonding to a graphite
standard with equivalent thickness by using electron energy loss spectroscopy.
For example, the fraction of sp2 carbon in HPG carbon (from
900 °Ccarbonization) was found to be as high as 94% (±5%,
Figure 4c), assuming the graphite reference
spectrum is 100%.[15] We note that this value
may be underestimated due to the presence of abundant small graphene
sheets (Figure 3d–b, Figure S7) in the filamentary network which can project more
edge defects to electron beam, thus reducing the detected content
of sp2 carbon.
Figure 4
(a) Raman spectra of 3D HPG carbons made from
activation of carbonized
PANi aerogel at 400, 700, and 900 °C. (b) Summary of ID/IG for carbonized
PANi and 3D HPG carbons from different carbonization temperatures.
(c) Comparison of EELS spectra of HPG carbon and graphite suggesting
a large portion (∼94% ± 5%) of sp2 bonding
in the HPG carbon. (d) N 1s XPS spectra indicating the existence of
N dopants at different chemical environments in the carbon framework.
(a) Raman spectra of 3D HPG carbons made from
activation of carbonized
PANi aerogel at 400, 700, and 900 °C. (b) Summary of ID/IG for carbonized
PANi and 3D HPG carbons from different carbonization temperatures.
(c) Comparison of EELS spectra of HPG carbon and graphite suggesting
a large portion (∼94% ± 5%) of sp2 bonding
in the HPG carbon. (d) N 1s XPS spectra indicating the existence of
N dopants at different chemical environments in the carbon framework.X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy
(XPS) shows that typical HPG carboncontains C, N, and O dopants (Figure S8) but an undetectable amount of P. Elemental analysis further confirms
that P content is below 1 ppm for sample carbonized at 700 °C.
The N 1s core level spectrum (Figure 4d) suggests
the presence of three types of nitrogen: pyrrolicnitrogen (N-5, 399.5
eV), quarternary nitrogen (N-Q, 400.6 eV), and oxides of pyridine-N
peak (N-O, 402.9 eV). The N-5 (25 atom % for totalN) originated from
structure confinement and low molecular weight PANi produced from
the rapid polymerization. The N-Q predominates (61 atom %) due to
its highest thermal stability.[16] The existence
of N-O (14 atom %) can be ascribed to the oxidizing environment of
the activation process. The totalNcontent of HPG carboncan be tuned
from 0.55% to 2.33% depending on carbonization temperature (Table S1). Such development of doping in HPG
carbon is also elucidated by analyzing the composition of PANi and
carbonized PANi (Figure S9 and Figure S10).
Electrochemical Performance
of HPG Carbon-Based Supercapacitors
The high surface area
and 3D pore structure of the HPG carbon are
favorable for electrode applications. In addition, the relatively
small carbon particle size offers scalability and high flexibility
for processing. Essentially, the HPG carbon-based electrodes can be
easily fabricated on various substrates. For example, micropatterned
electrodes can be directly spray coated on polyethylene terephthalate
(PET) sheets, flexible polyimide films, or silicon wafers from an
ink consisting of carbon suspension in ethanol (Figure 5a–c). Very thick electrodes (>100 μm) can
be
readily blade coated on metallic substrates (e.g., Ti, Al) using carbon
slurry in N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (Figure 5d). Since the carbon particles are composed of interconnected
coral-like nanofibers, they provide electrodes with good mechanical
flexibility. The resulting electrodes also possess high conductivity
(∼300 S m–1), which is close to that of activated
graphene (500 S m–1)[13a] and significantly higher than that of strutted graphene (1 S m–1)[17] and commercialACs
(10–100 S m–1).[11b,18] Together with large active surface area, such electrodes hold great
potential for supercapacitors, batteries, electrocatalysts, and other
applications.
Figure 5
HPG carbon electrodes and supercapacitors fabricated on
different
substrates. (a) An interdigital supercapacitor made by spray coating
HPG carbon ink on a gold-coated (50 nm) PET film. (b) A flexible supercapacitor
with interdigital electrodes made by spray coating HPG carbon ink
on an Al-coated (50 nm) Kapton polyimide film with 50 nm Al conducting
layer. (c) Ten supercapacitors with interdigital electrodes fabricated
at the same time on a silicon wafer using a removable PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane)
mask. (d) A 4 cm × 5 cm size electrode (thickness of ∼100
μm) made by blade coating HPG carbon slurry on a Ti substrate.
Scale bar, 1 cm (a–d).
HPG carbon electrodes and supercapacitors fabricated on
different
substrates. (a) An interdigital supercapacitor made by spray coating
HPG carbon ink on a gold-coated (50 nm) PET film. (b) A flexible supercapacitor
with interdigital electrodes made by spray coating HPG carbon ink
on an Al-coated (50 nm) Kapton polyimide film with 50 nm Alconducting
layer. (c) Ten supercapacitors with interdigital electrodes fabricated
at the same time on a silicon wafer using a removable PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane)
mask. (d) A 4 cm × 5 cm size electrode (thickness of ∼100
μm) made by blade coating HPG carbon slurry on a Ti substrate.
Scale bar, 1 cm (a–d).To evaluate supercapacitor performance, we used a conventional
slurry coating method to fabricate electrodes. The devices showed
high performance in both aqueous and organic electrolyte (Figure S11). For example, prototype devices based
on HPG carbon maintained rectangular cyclic voltammetry (CV) curves
even at a very high voltage sweep rate of 1000 mV s–1 in 0.5 M H2SO4 (Figure 6a), a feature observed only for ideal supercapacitors.[19] Typical galvanostaticcharge/discharge profiles
show linear curves with a small voltage (IR) drop,
for example, only 0.014 V drop at a current density as high as 10
A g–1 (Figure 6b). This value
is only 1/5 of the value for AC-1 (a commonly used supercapacitorcarbon) and lower than that of the graphene thin film supercapacitor
(0.018 V).[6b] Specificcapacitance of the
HPG carbon and typicalcommercialACs at different current densities
from 0.5 to 50 A g–1 are summarized in Figure 6c. The HPG carbon showed a capacitance of 225 and
162 F g–1 at a current density of 0.5 and 50 A g–1, respectively, corresponding to a capacitance retention
of 72%. By comparison, AC-1 maintained only ∼44% of the initialcapacitance (198 to 88 F g–1) as current density
increased from 0.5 to 50 A g–1. Even for thin-film
graphene,[6b] macro-/mesoporous graphene,[20] and 3D strutted graphene supercapacitors,[17] the capacitance retention was only ∼50%
as current density increased by the same magnitude. We note that the
N dopant in our HPG carbon may have contributed to the measured capacitance
due to pseudocapacitive effect.
Figure 6
HPG carbon supercapacitor performance
in 0.5 M H2SO4 aqueous electrolyte. (a) Representative
CV curves of HPG
carbon supercapacitors at scan rates of 100, 500, and 1000 mV s–1. The mass loading of electrodes for CV measurement
was ∼1.5 mg cm–2. (b) Typical galvanostatic
charge/discharge curve of single HPG carbon electrode (in three-electrode
cell) at a current density of 10 A g–1. (c) Specific
capacitance dependence on current density of supercapacitor electrodes
made from different porous carbon. The HPG carbon shows higher capacitance
and significantly better rate capability than ACs. (d) Nyquist plot
of a symmetric supercapacitor device made from HPG carbon. Inset shows
the high-frequency range. (e) Impedance phase angle versus frequency
for one HPG carbon-based and two commercial AC-based supercapacitors.
A commercial electrolytic capacitor was also compared. The characteristic
frequency f0 occurs at phase angle of
45° where resistive and capacitive impedance are equal. As expected,
the electrolytic capacitor shows a high characteristic frequency f0 of 1,000 Hz due to the absence of ion diffusion
process. The f0 occurs at ∼7 Hz
for HPG carbon, 1 Hz for AC-1, and ∼0.1 Hz for AC-2. (f) Dependence
of areal capacitance on mass loading of HPG carbon electrodes at current
densities of 0.5 and 2 A g–1. Commercial supercapacitors
have an areal capacity of ∼1 F cm–2, while
most of the recently reported high-performance electrodes have low
or moderate areal capacity (<1 F cm–2).
HPG carbon supercapacitor performance
in 0.5 M H2SO4 aqueous electrolyte. (a) Representative
CV curves of HPG
carbon supercapacitors at scan rates of 100, 500, and 1000 mV s–1. The mass loading of electrodes for CV measurement
was ∼1.5 mg cm–2. (b) Typical galvanostaticcharge/discharge curve of single HPG carbon electrode (in three-electrode
cell) at a current density of 10 A g–1. (c) Specificcapacitance dependence on current density of supercapacitor electrodes
made from different porous carbon. The HPG carbon shows higher capacitance
and significantly better rate capability than ACs. (d) Nyquist plot
of a symmetric supercapacitor device made from HPG carbon. Inset shows
the high-frequency range. (e) Impedance phase angle versus frequency
for one HPG carbon-based and two commercialAC-based supercapacitors.
A commercial electrolyticcapacitor was also compared. The characteristic
frequency f0 occurs at phase angle of
45° where resistive and capacitive impedance are equal. As expected,
the electrolyticcapacitor shows a high characteristic frequency f0 of 1,000 Hz due to the absence of ion diffusion
process. The f0 occurs at ∼7 Hz
for HPG carbon, 1 Hz for AC-1, and ∼0.1 Hz for AC-2. (f) Dependence
of arealcapacitance on mass loading of HPG carbon electrodes at current
densities of 0.5 and 2 A g–1. Commercial supercapacitors
have an arealcapacity of ∼1 F cm–2, while
most of the recently reported high-performance electrodes have low
or moderate arealcapacity (<1 F cm–2).The fast electrode kinetics was
further confirmed using electrochemical
impedance spectroscopy (EIS). A typicalNyquist plot of HPG carbon
(Figure 6d) reveals a very low electrode series
resistance (ESR, ∼0.7 ohm), which is attributed to the highly
graphitized porous network. The nearly vertical line displayed at
low-frequency range further suggests an idealcapacitive behavior
due to facile ion transport.[19] More clearly,
Bode plots shown in Figure 6e compare the response
times of different supercapacitors. For commercialACs, the characteristic
frequency (f0) is on the order of 0.1–1
Hz.[6b] Remarkably, our HPG carbon devices
show a high f0 of ∼7 Hz, which
corresponds to a time constant τ0 (=1/f0) of only ∼0.14 s. This value is also lower than
that of activated graphene (∼0.25 s),[6b] liquid-mediated dense graphene (0.51–3.85 s),[6c] and holey graphene framework (0.17–0.49
s).[6d] The short time constant is mainly
due to the 3D interconnected hierarchically porous structure, which
provides fast ion transport in the bulk electrodes.Practical
application of supercapacitors requires high active mass
loadings to obtain large arealcapacitances.[21] Our HPG carboncan be easily made on gram scale in powder form,
and high mass loading electrodes can be readily attained. Owing to
the effective porous conductive structure, the HPG carbon electrodes
can retain ∼83% of the initialcapacitance (from 225 to 187
F g–1) at 0.5 A g–1 as mass loading
increased from 1 to 11 mg cm2, which corresponds to an
arealcapacitance of 2.12 F cm–2 (Figure 6f). The arealcapacity can still be maintained as
1.62 F cm–2 at a current density of 2 A g–1. Such high arealcapacitances and high rate capability meet the
requirements for commercial supercapacitors (e.g., >1 F cm–2). However, previously reported high-performance porous
graphiticcarbon electrodes could only achieve low/moderate mass loadings (<5
mg cm–2) or are difficult for large-scale industry
manufacturing.[6c,6d]In addition, the HPG carbon
electrodes showed a highly stable cycling
performance, with capacitance retention of 96% after 10,000 cycles
at 5 A g–1 (Figure S12). The EIS measurement of prototype devices before and after cycling
showed little change in ESR (Figure S13), which confirms the high electrochemical stability of our HPG carbon.
Electrochemical Performance of HPG Carbon for Li–S Batteries
In addition to supercapacitors, the HPG carboncan enable high-performance
lithium–sulfur (Li–S) batteries owing to the aforementioned
structure merits. One criticalchallenge for Li–S battery is
to provide large conducting surface area for activating and trapping
the insulating sulfur, lithium sulfide, and polysulfide species in
electrodes. While a variety of porous carbons have been used for Li–S
cathodes, they often show insufficient cycling stability and/or low
sulfur mass loadings (<2 mg cm–2) due to moderate
surface area and lack of effective pore structure to keep active sulfur
species and thus electrode activity.[1d,22] Again high
mass loading could not previously be realized due to the poor conductivity
of the carbon electrodes.A schematic of the cell structure
is shown in Figure S14. Charge/discharge
voltage profiles of HPG carbon/polysulfide electrodes show a typical
two-step discharging behavior (Figure 7a, Figure S15a).[23] The
electrodes exhibit exceptional electrochemicalactivities. The initial
discharge capacity (sulfur loading: 3.2 mg cm–2)
at a rate of C/5 was ∼1270 mAh g–1, approaching ∼90% of the theoreticalcapacity (1466 mAh g–1, Li2S8 to Li2S).[24] Accordingly, the arealcapacity reached a value
as high as 4.2 mAh cm–2. A capacity of 920, 740,
and ∼600 mAh g–1 can be delivered at rate
of 0.5C, 1C, and 2C, respectively (Figure S15b), indicating
a high rate capability at a high mass loading. After initial equilibrium
cycles, the electrodes can retain a high capacity of 980 mAh g–1 after 200 cycles (∼80% of initialcapacity)
at C/5 (Figure 7b). The high
specificcapacity attained at high mass loading can be attributed
to the effective hierarchically porous conductive architecture and
the doping atoms of N and O for the strong LiS interaction that controls the formation of lithium sulfide
species and maintains high active material utilization. This performance
is superior to most porous carbon-based sulfur electrodes reported
so far (<3 mAh cm–2, < 200 cycles, Figure 7c).[23−25]
Figure 7
Electrochemical performance of 3D HPG carbon for Li–S
batteries.
(a) Charge/discharge voltage profiles at a C/5 current
rate for HPG carbon/polysulfide and KB/polysulfide electrode after
equilibrium, respectively. The discharging curve starts with plateaus
at 2.4 and 2.05 V, while the charging curve displayed overlapped plateaus
starting from 2.4 V. (b) Long-term cycling stability of HPG carbon/polysulfide
(3.2 mg cm–2), AC-1/polysulfide (2.56 mg cm–2), and KB/polysulfide (1.28 mg cm–2) electrodes, respectively. After initial activation, high coulombic
efficiency (CE, ∼99.8%) was maintained for HPG carbon electrode
during all the cycles. (c) Comparison of areal capacity and cycling
life between HPG carbon/sulfur electrodes and recently reported high-performance
sulfur electrodes. Previously reported sulfur electrodes often had
areal capacity of below 3 mAh g–1 and cycling lifetime
of less than 200 cycles.
Electrochemical performance of 3D HPG carbon for Li–S
batteries.
(a) Charge/discharge voltage profiles at a C/5 current
rate for HPG carbon/polysulfide and KB/polysulfide electrode after
equilibrium, respectively. The discharging curve starts with plateaus
at 2.4 and 2.05 V, while the charging curve displayed overlapped plateaus
starting from 2.4 V. (b) Long-term cycling stability of HPG carbon/polysulfide
(3.2 mg cm–2), AC-1/polysulfide (2.56 mg cm–2), and KB/polysulfide (1.28 mg cm–2) electrodes, respectively. After initialactivation, high coulombic
efficiency (CE, ∼99.8%) was maintained for HPG carbon electrode
during all the cycles. (c) Comparison of arealcapacity and cycling
life between HPG carbon/sulfur electrodes and recently reported high-performance
sulfur electrodes. Previously reported sulfur electrodes often had
arealcapacity of below 3 mAh g–1 and cycling lifetime
of less than 200 cycles.By comparison, control electrodes made from AC-1 (sulfur
loading:
2.52 mg cm–2) showed low capacity (<400 mAh g–1). This might be due to the low electricalconductivity
and poor electrolyte wetting and diffusion in the microporous AC particles.
Similarly, electrodes made from carbon black (Kejten black, SBET of 1200 m2 g–1) also showed a low initialcapacity of 890 mAh g–1 even at a low sulfur loading (1.28 mg cm–2). Moreover,
such electrodes only retained a capacity of 600 mAh g–1 after 200 cycles. Their faster capacity drop can be ascribed to
uncontrolled deposition of insulating sulfide species, which resulted
in large inactive particles and loss of electrode activity.[26] In our HPG carbon electrodes, the ultrahigh
surface area and polar doping atoms (N, O) provide more active sites
for lithium sulfide deposition, and the interconnected framework can
effectively maintain conductive pathways,[25e,27] thus providing high cycling stability. This is supported by EIS
measurements (Figure S16), where the ESR
of HPG carbon/polysulfide remains small during cycling. It is noted
that cycling stability of over 500 cycles was only reported with sulfur
mass loading of <1 mg cm–2.[25a,25c,25d] However, making high mass loading
electrodes always results in significantly decreased lifetime. Our
high sulfur mass loading HPG carbon electrodes are therefore highly
promising for practical applications.
Discussion
The
3D HPG carbon framework outperforms other reported porous carbons,
commercialactivated carbon, and other 3D porous graphenes in terms
of their electrochemicalcharge storage capability because of their
highly graphitic structure with ultrahigh surface area, large pore
volume, and interconnected pore architecture. Even though ACs with
high SBET of ∼3000 m2 g–1 have been reported, their electrochemicalcapacitance and rate capability were worse.[28] In our case, we also found that the best supercapacitive performance
was not from the sample with the highest surface area. This is likely
due to the more irregular pore structure that is unfavorable for mass
transport.[28] Nevertheless, our versatile
synthesis approach allows high structural tunability to achieve unprecedented
electrochemical performance. For carbon black, there are no pores
inside carbon particles, thus the total surface area is insufficient
for supercapacitor application. Moreover, their particle size is so
small (<100 nm) that contact resistance is very large especially
for thick electrodes. This is even worse in Li–S batteries,
where insulating polysulfide deposited on the particle surface can
block the charge-transfer pathway easily. By comparison, the HPG carbon
framework is composed of a 3D porous network of small graphene sheets
and, thus, can simultaneously achieve high surface area, small carbon
particle size, open pore structure, and good conductivity. As a result,
critical requirements are satisfied for high-performance electrodes:
(i) efficient transport of ions and minimal electrolyte transport
resistance, (ii) large electrode/electrolyte interface to provide
a large number of active sites for redox reaction, thus enabling a
high charge storage capacity, and (iii) graphitized carbon framework
that ensures high electronicconductivity for efficient charge transfer
and high chemical stability. These features together enable fast kinetics
and low ESR, providing high rate capability for electrodes. Therefore,
this class of porous graphiticcarbons holds great promise for supercapacitors
and Li–S batteries with high energy and high power density.It is noted that a few other 3D porous graphene structures have
been recently reported. For example, graphene networks can be made
from a templated chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process followed
by etching, but large-scale production using CVD remains challenging.[6a] While strutted graphene grown from a sugar blowing
process can be potentially made in a large scale, its ultrahigh porosity
(99.85%) and ultralow density (∼3 mg cm–3) make it challenging to fabricate devices with reasonable volumetric
energy density.[17] Laser induction of commercialpolymer was used to prepare 3D porous graphene, but the low surface
area (SBET ∼340 m2 g–1) limits its application for high-energy electrochemical
devices.[29] By comparison, our approach
is compatible with the current large-scale production method for ACs
and the HPG carbon provides an ultrahigh surface area with a density
(∼0.47 g cm–3) similar to that of commercialACs. With a low cost of starting materials (<7–11 $/kg of
HPG carbon produced, Table S2), our HPG
carboncan be readily manufactured at large scale at low cost.In summary, we have developed a scalable synthetic approach to
prepare 3D porous graphiticcarbon from conjugated polymer molecular
framework by a one-step synthesis from low-cost starting materials.
Particularly, this methodology allows production of highly graphiticcarbons with ultrahigh surface area along with large pore volume and
interconnected graphene-like network structures. These properties
lead to exceptional electrochemicalactivity and high stability, with
unprecedented performances in both supercapacitors and Li–S
batteries. The monomer, cross-linker, and oxidation agents to make
the precursor polymercan be readily changed to provide a large tunability
for the finalcarbon morphology, surface area, and chemicalcomposition.
Our synthetic method also allows easy incorporation of metal, metal
oxides, nitrides, or carbides into the carbon framework by adding
metal-containing salts during the polymerization process or using
it as oxidizing agent for polymerization. Therefore, this new route
of making 3D porous graphiticcarbonscan be adapted to prepare carbon
materials with desired properties for a broad range of applications.
Authors: Hanan H Mohamed; Amerah A Alsanea; Nuhad A Alomair; Sultan Akhtar; Detlef W Bahnemann Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Dennis Sheberla; John C Bachman; Joseph S Elias; Cheng-Jun Sun; Yang Shao-Horn; Mircea Dincă Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2016-10-10 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: Catherine R Mulzer; Luxi Shen; Ryan P Bisbey; James R McKone; Na Zhang; Héctor D Abruña; William R Dichtel Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 14.553