Next Article in Journal
Assisted Reductive Amination for Quantitation of Tryptophan, 5-Hydroxytryptophan, and Serotonin by Ultraperformance Liquid Chromatography Coupled with Tandem Mass Spectrometry
Previous Article in Journal
Development of Photothermal Catalyst from Biomass Ash (Bagasse) for Hydrogen Production via Dry Reforming of Methane (DRM): An Experimental Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Zinc Electrode Cycling in Deep Eutectic Solvent Electrolytes: An Electrochemical Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 28
Issue 12
10.3390/molecules28124579
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Recent Configurational Advances for Solid-State Lithium Batteries Featuring Conversion-Type Cathodes

by
Kuan-Cheng Chiu
1,
Jeng-Kuei Chang
2,* and
Yu-Sheng Su
1,3,*
1
International College of Semiconductor Technology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 1001 University Road, Hsinchu 30010, Taiwan
2
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 1001 University Road, Hsinchu 30010, Taiwan
3
Industry Academia Innovation School, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 1001 University Road, Hsinchu 30010, Taiwan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2023, 28(12), 4579; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124579
Submission received: 12 April 2023 / Revised: 25 May 2023 / Accepted: 2 June 2023 / Published: 6 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Electrochemical Energy Storage Devices 2.0)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Solid-state lithium metal batteries offer superior energy density, longer lifespan, and enhanced safety compared to traditional liquid-electrolyte batteries. Their development has the potential to revolutionize battery technology, including the creation of electric vehicles with extended ranges and smaller more efficient portable devices. The employment of metallic lithium as the negative electrode allows the use of Li-free positive electrode materials, expanding the range of cathode choices and increasing the diversity of solid-state battery design options. In this review, we present recent developments in the configuration of solid-state lithium batteries with conversion-type cathodes, which cannot be paired with conventional graphite or advanced silicon anodes due to the lack of active lithium. Recent advancements in electrode and cell configuration have resulted in significant improvements in solid-state batteries with chalcogen, chalcogenide, and halide cathodes, including improved energy density, better rate capability, longer cycle life, and other notable benefits. To fully leverage the benefits of lithium metal anodes in solid-state batteries, high-capacity conversion-type cathodes are necessary. While challenges remain in optimizing the interface between solid-state electrolytes and conversion-type cathodes, this area of research presents significant opportunities for the development of improved battery systems and will require continued efforts to overcome these challenges.

1. Introduction

Rechargeable lithium-ion batteries have dominated major energy storage battery applications for the past decade, including electric vehicles, drones, consumer electronics, and stationary and mobile energy storage systems. Traditional lithium-ion batteries consist of graphitic anodes, polyolefin separators, organic liquid electrolytes, and intercalation-type lithium transition metal oxides/phosphate cathodes. Among these, the cathode material is the key component that limits the energy density of lithium-ion/lithium metal batteries [1,2,3]. Therefore, conversion-type cathode materials are in the spotlight of battery material researchers because of their high gravimetric and volumetric capacity for lithium-ion storage [4,5].
The high-energy-density conversion-type cathode materials for lithium batteries can be divided into three main categories: chalcogens, chalcogenides, and halides. Figure 1 displays how lithium ions react with these cathodes during the conversion-type lithiation, and they can be reversibly transformed back to their initial states under a rational electrode design. When these conversion-type cathodes are cycled in the cell with a liquid electrolyte, dissolution of active materials can occur, inducing undesirable shuttle reactions that result in poor cycle life [5,6,7]. Chalcogen cathode materials form soluble intermediates (high-order polysulfides or polyselenides) at the early stage of lithiation and then convert into lithium sulfide/selenide as the final product upon further discharge [8,9,10]. The most investigated chalcogen cathode material is sulfur, which has been optimized using various state-of-the-art electrodes and cell architectures in Li–S cells with a liquid electrolyte [6,11]. Selenium has a much higher electrical conductivity than sulfur, leading to a potentially better power performance [12], but its high material cost and low earth abundance may hinder its commercial viability [5].
The second category of conversion-type cathodes are chalcogenides, mostly coupled with transition metals (Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Mn) [5,13]. Taking metal sulfides as an example, the cathode compound is converted to metal and lithium sulfide (Li2S) after lithiation and vice versa after delithiation [14,15,16,17]. The chalcogenide anions can be replaced by halide anions as the third type of conversion cathode. Fluoride cathode materials are popular in this category, forming intermediate lithiated metal fluoride compounds (LixMyFz), metal, and lithium fluoride (LiF) instead of Li2S after the discharge reactions [18,19,20,21]. In fact, FeF3 has multistep and mixed intercalation/conversion reactions during lithiation and delithiation [18,19], which is still included in this review. All three types of conversion cathode materials must be paired with lithiated anodes, such as metallic lithium, prelithiated graphite, and prelithiated silicon, to make a full cell, making them relatively difficult to process compared to traditional lithium-ion batteries. Oxygen cathodes have received considerable attention due to their environmentally friendly nature. This has led to a particular interest in their conversion reaction chemistry, especially when paired with solid-state electrolytes [22,23,24,25]. Compared to other solid-state conversion cathodes, oxygen cathodes have fundamentally different technological barriers due to the gas–solid conversion reactions and catalyst requirements. However, since several review articles have already covered Li–O2 batteries, we will not delve into the specifics of this chemistry but will focus only on chacolgen, chacolgenide, and halide cathodes in this review.
Figure 2 illustrates the advantages of integrating conversion-type cathodes with solid-state electrolytes in lithium batteries. The solid-state electrolyte can enable high-energy-density metallic lithium anodes, which are considered to have extremely poor cyclability in liquid electrolytes [8,26,27,28]. Lithium metal anodes are necessary for the non-lithiated conversion cathodes to be operated in a battery. By combining both high-energy-density electrodes, the battery can offer ~two times higher specific energy calculated based at the cell level [5]. By utilizing solid-state electrolytes instead of flammable organic liquid electrolyte, the fire hazards of the battery resulting from the low flash point of liquid electrolytes and the failure of low-melting-point polyolefin separators can be eliminated [29,30,31,32,33,34]. In addition, the absence of solvents in the cathode region can significantly solve the active material dissolution problem [35,36,37]. The notorious shuttle effect in Li–S batteries, caused by the migration of soluble polysulfides, can also be excluded in a solid-state battery [38,39]. However, the dissolution of polysulfide intermediates is required to achieve high power density and high active material utilization in Li–S batteries [40,41], which will be discussed later in the case of the solid-state configuration.

2. Challenges Remained in Conversion-Type Cathode Materials

Although conversion-type cathode materials have tremendous potential in terms of high gravimetric capacity, safe operating voltage, scalable synthesis routes, etc., there are still several obstacles to the commercialization of these cathode systems. In Li–S cells, poor electrical and ionic conductivities of sulfur and significant cathode volume change (from sulfur to lithium sulfide) can be addressed by intelligent 3D structural design, which is mainly enabled by carbonaceous materials and other functional materials that can accommodate and trap sulfur species [6,11,42]. Nevertheless, despite efforts to mitigate the rapid capacity degradation caused by the loss of soluble polysulfide intermediates, this problem cannot be completely solved. Moreover, there are currently no commercially viable solutions to the poor reversibility of the lithium metal anode in liquid electrolytes. In this regard, the integration of solid-state electrolyte into chalcogen cathode lithium batteries seems to be a rational strategy to mitigate the dissolution of active species in the traditional lithium battery with a liquid electrolyte [39,43,44].
For metal sulfide and metal fluoride cathode materials, their common processing problem is that they are both sensitive to moisture [45,46,47], which shares the same challenge with many solid-state electrolyte systems [48,49,50,51,52]. High electrical resistance and sluggish reaction kinetics of sulfide and fluoride materials are the main causes of their large voltage hysteresis in lithium batteries [4,5,7,18,53]. In addition, a non-uniform cathode–electrolyte interface (CEI) may be generated by the catalytic reaction during cycling, which is not strong enough to withstand the volume expansion of conversion-type cathodes [53,54]. The use of solid-state battery design can reduce the formation of unstable solid–electrolyte interface (SEI) at either the anode or the cathode (i.e., CEI) made from decomposed electrolyte components, which can improve the cycling stability of the battery with a chalcogenide or halide cathode. Other challenges, such as high overpotentials, gas generation from decomposed electrolyte ingredients, and safety concerns, also need to be addressed before the conversion-type cathodes can be implemented in commercial batteries [55,56,57].

3. Solid-State Lithium Battery with Conversion-Type Cathodes

3.1. Chalcogen Cathodes with Solid-State Electrolytes

The most popular chalcogen cathode material, sulfur, is attractive due to its high theoretical energy density, low cost, and environmental friendliness [6,11]. However, Li–S batteries with a liquid electrolyte have been limited by several challenges, such as short cycle life and poor rate performance [58,59,60]. Figure 3a exhibits the typical charge/discharge profiles of a Li–S cell adopting a liquid electrolyte. Two distinct discharge plateaus represent the polysulfide dissolution reactions (upper plateau; S8 → Li2S4; ~2.3 V) and solid-state reactions (lower plateau; Li2S4 → Li2S; ~2.1 V) [10,40,61,62]. In contrast, the solid-state Li–S battery shows only a sloping curve for the reaction of sulfur converting to lithium sulfide (Figure 3b). The same behavior can also be found in the liquid-phase carbonate electrolytes because carbonates cannot dissolve polysulfide intermediates [63,64,65]. The slow kinetics resulting from the solid-state reaction mechanism occurring in Li–S solid-state batteries may hinder their practicality due to sluggish diffusion and limited interfacial contact area, which can severely degrade their performance.
To reduce the charge-transfer resistance, similar to the strategy adopted in other solid-state batteries, sulfur or lithium sulfide active materials must be blended with solid-state electrolyte particles in the cathode to achieve better utilization [66,67,68,69]. Xu et al. demonstrated a well-mixed cathode consisting of reduced graphene oxide coated with sulfur (rGO@S)/acetylene black (AB)/Li10GeP2S12 (LGPS) via long-duration ball-milling (Figure 3c), delivering an impressive reversible capacity of 830 mA h g−1 after 750 cycles at a rate of 1 C and 60 °C [66]. The incorporation of rGO@S nanocomposite into the LGPS-AB matrix results in a homogeneous distribution of the composite cathode, which facilitates uniform volume changes during lithiation/delithiation. The high cathode uniformity significantly reduces stress and strain within the solid-state cells, thereby prolonging their cycle life. Additionally, to address the issue of bulky solid-state electrolyte, Wang et al. developed a cathode-supported solid-state electrolyte configuration shown in Figure 3d, which not only reduces the ion diffusion distance between the anode and cathode but also significantly enhances the energy density of the solid-state Li–S battery (370.6 W h kg−1) [67]. The cathode/electrolyte/anode laminated structure was accomplished by using a stainless steel mesh-supported Li2S cathode as a starting point, followed by adding a robust Kevlar nonwoven scaffold-reinforced Li3PS4 (LPS) electrolyte as the top layer, with a thickness of approximately 100 μm and a metallic lithium anode [67].
One alternative approach to addressing the interfacial challenges between the cathode and solid-state electrolyte is to adopt hybrid electrolyte systems. Cui et al. utilized Li7La3Zr2O12 (LLZO) nanoparticles-filled poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) polymer electrolyte in solid-state Li–S batteries (Figure 3e) to achieve an outstanding specific capacity of >900 mA h g–1 at human body temperature of 37 °C [68]. The remarkable electrochemical performance is attributed to the composite cathode and solid-state electrolyte where the LLZO nanoparticle serves both as a filler to enhance ion conductivity and as an interfacial stabilizer to mitigate interfacial resistance. Efficient ion transport in solid-state batteries depends on low interfacial resistance, which can facilitate electrochemical reactions and reduce the barrier for ions to cross the heterogeneous solid-state electrolyte/electrode interface [70,71,72]. On the other hand, PEO offers reasonable mechanical stability, good electrode compatibility, and excellent film-forming properties for the composite solid-state electrolyte [73,74]. Polymer electrolytes can fill in the interparticle voids generated at the cathode and solid-state electrolyte regions, effectively promoting interfacial wetting and enabling stable cycling of lithium electrodeposition and electrostripping at relatively low overpotentials [75,76,77]. Figure 3f shows another Li–S battery configuration adopting a hybrid electrolyte system, including a sodium (Na) super ionic conductor (NaSICON)-type solid electrolyte (Li1+xYxZr2−x(PO4)3 (LYZP) (x = 0–0.15)) and a liquid electrolyte [78,79]. By integrating a solid electrolyte with a liquid electrolyte, the hybrid dual-electrolyte Li–S battery exhibits significantly improved cyclability compared to conventional Li–S batteries that utilize a porous polymer separator immersed with a liquid-phase electrolyte [78,80]. Here, polysulfides can still dissolve in the liquid electrolyte like a catholyte and perform two-step electrochemical reactions to guarantee high active material utilization and reasonable rate performance. In summary, the solid electrolyte membrane demonstrates promising characteristics such as reasonable Li+ ion conductivity, superior polysulfide retention, chemical compatibility with cell components, and electrochemical stability under repeated charge-discharge conditions in Li–S cells [78,80].
As a cathode active material, the insulating nature of sulfur is always problematic during electrochemical reactions, especially in solid-state mechanisms. Much effort has been expended in the past to improve the contact between sulfur species and carbon substrates for better cyclability [81,82,83,84,85]. To improve the contact between the conductive carbon substrate and the sulfur, a simple heating process can be used. This involves coating the carbon surface uniformly with elemental sulfur, which promotes surface-to-surface contact. As the sulfur melts during the heating process and then solidifies after cooling, it forms a thin, uniform layer that adheres to the carbon surface. This layer facilitates the transfer of electrons between the carbon and sulfur, leading to more efficient active material utilization [86]. Substituting selenium for sulfur is a common method used to improve the intrinsic electrical conductivity of chalcogen cathode materials. Figure 4a shows an all-solid-state Li–Se battery configuration with LPS as the electrolyte [87]. The use of selenium in the cathode provides high electrical conductivity (1 × 10−3 S cm−1), while a high Li+ conductivity of 1.4 × 10−5 S cm−1 is achieved across the Se-LPS interface. This battery has a high reversible capacity of 652 mA h g−1 (96% of theoretical capacity) and exhibits favorable capacity retention during cycling. Kumar et al. also showcased the functionality of a high-temperature molten Li–Se battery cell with a garnet-type solid-state electrolyte (LLZO) operating at 465 °C (Figure 4b), which is essential for powering future space exploration missions [88]. The cells demonstrated a stable open-circuit voltage for 17 h and were subjected to electrochemical cycling at various current rates. Since selenium is a relatively high-cost material, introducing selenium into sulfur cathodes through the formation of SeSx solid solutions could be an alternative means to modify the electrical and ionic conductivities of the cathode without a significant increase in material price [89]. Figure 4c illustrates the solid-state cell configuration with SeSx cathode, sulfide-based solid electrolyte (LPS or LGPS), and Li metal. The use of SeS2 in high loading cells has been found to achieve an ultrahigh areal capacity of up to 12.6 mA h cm−2 [61,89]. The SeSx solid solution cathode confirms the importance of cathode ionic and electrical conductivities in determining electrochemical performance.
In addition to the high ionic conductivity of sulfide-based solid-state electrolyte, lithium argyrodite sulfide (Li6PS5Cl0.5Br0.5, LPSCB) offers the advantage of serving a bifunctional role as both a solid electrolyte and a precursor material for the chalcogen cathode [90,91]. In Figure 4d, a monolithic cell configuration that uses the LPSCB material all over the electrolyte and cathode region was designed, and the LPSCB in the cathode region, along with multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), forms a multiphase conversion-type cathode by partial decomposition during the first discharge. Meanwhile, the remaining LPSCB electrolyte remains unchanged and provides low-impedance ionic transport pathways, which enhances the cathode performance. The discharge capacity of the all-solid-state cell exhibits an initial sharp incline, followed by a gradual increase as the MWCNT content is increased [90]. This observation suggests that the active material formation occurs exclusively at the interface between the MWCNTs and the electrolyte particles, as illustrated in Figure 4e [90,92]. This finding paves the way for the development of high-performance all-solid-state batteries using thiophosphate solid electrolytes where the high cycling stability can be attributed to the intimate contact between the electrochemically reduced cathode and electrolyte interface.

3.2. Chalcogenide Cathodes with Solid-State Electrolytes

Pyrite (FeS2) shows promise as an electrode material for lithium-ion batteries due to its natural abundance, low cost (commercialized by Energizer, St. Louis, MO, USA), non-toxicity, and ultrahigh theoretical energy density of 1313 W h kg−1 [93,94,95]. Moreover, recent studies have reported improved electrochemical properties in all-solid-state secondary Li/FeS2 batteries [96,97,98,99]. Yang et al. investigated the usage of FeS2 as a dopant for Li7P3S11-type glass-ceramic electrolytes, which has been shown to enhance ionic conductivity while reducing interfacial resistance between the FeS2 cathode and electrolyte (Figure 5a,b) [100]. This design was different from previous reports where a conventional FeS2 cathode was doped into the sulfide electrolyte by a suitable proportion (99.5(70Li2S–30P2S5)–0.5FeS2) and the largest crystallinity was obtained, boosting the ionic conductivity of the electrolyte [100]. The FeS2 composite cathode and sulfide electrolyte had similar chemical potential, resulting in lower interfacial resistance and superior cycling stability. Although all-solid-state batteries have the capability to support reversible four-lithium-ion storage for FeS2 (FeS2 + 4 Li = Fe + 2 Li2S), issues such as strain/stress concentration resulting in electrode pulverization and sluggish electrochemical reactions between lithium sulfide and sulfur can impact the long-term cycling stability of the battery [101]. Figure 5c represents an approach to utilize the loose-structured Co0.1Fe0.9S2-based all-solid-state lithium batteries that have been optimized via nanoengineering to achieve impressive electrochemical performance. After initial charging to 3.0 V, it was observed that the element cobalt had an extremely homogeneous distribution with iron and sulfur, and no Fe/S aggregation was detected [101]. This indicates that cobalt has a catalytic effect on the electrochemical reaction, which improves the reaction between Li2S and Fe. Moreover, previous studies have reported that transition metals and their metal sulfides can effectively enhance the redox reaction kinetics and reduce the shuttle effect in lithium−sulfur batteries. This is attributed to the catalytic properties of these materials and their strong ability to absorb polysulfides [102,103].
Certain chalcogenide materials, including vanadium sulfide (VS2) and titanium sulfide (TiS2), exhibit exceptional electrical conductivity, making them suitable for use as efficient electrode materials [104,105,106,107]. Figure 5d demonstrates a high-performance solid-state battery with a VS2/S nanocomposite cathode, which combines intercalation-type vanadium sulfide with conversion-type sulfur chemistry [108]. A facile, low-cost, and low-energy mechanical blending process was implemented to prepare the S/VS2/LPS composite cathode [108]. The VS2 nanomaterial has a layered structure with fast Li-ion transport channels, metallic conductivity, and extra capacity contribution, providing an ideal platform for the solid-state S/Li2S redox couple to achieve its high gravimetric capacity. A similar idea was adopted by Jung et al., demonstrating that controlled ball-milling of a sulfide-based active material (TiS2) and a solid-state electrolyte (LPS) for the electrode led to a significant increase in capacity in all-solid-state lithium batteries without compromising the ionic and electronic conduction pathways [109]. The increased Li+ ion storage is believed to be associated with the formation of an amorphous Li–Ti–P–S phase during the controlled ball-milling process. The aforementioned structural designs indicate that utilizing a mixed ion/electron conductive transition metal sulfide and an active cathode material in an all-solid-state cell configuration is a promising strategy for the development of next-generation solid-state batteries.

3.3. Halide Cathodes with Solid-State Electrolytes

Although intercalation-type oxide cathodes and conversion-type chalcogen/chalcogenide cathodes have high capacity, their voltage output is relatively low, limiting their potential to achieve high energy density as positive electrodes. However, early studies have shown that metal fluorides can be used in the conversion process, enabling higher voltage materials through the use of nanomaterials and composites (as shown in Figure 6a) [110,111,112]. The voltage of these materials is about 1 V higher than that of chalcogens/chalcogenides. Metal fluorides thus offer a promising means towards achieving both specific and volumetric energy densities that greatly surpass the theoretical limits of current positive electrode materials (lithium cobalt oxides, lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxides, lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxides, and lithium iron phosphates) [113,114,115]. Halides have an intrinsic advantage of exhibiting extraordinarily specific and volumetric energy density while operating at moderate voltages compared to those of commercial intercalation-type cathodes. This allows for the use of various solid and liquid electrolytes that are not stable at the higher voltages (over 4 V) used with traditional positive electrodes. In addition, previous reports suggested that the lack of active oxygen in halides leads to improved safety compared to conventional layered oxides [116].
Halide cathodes, like other conversion-type cathode materials, face agglomeration challenges that can lead to increased electrical/ionic resistance, ultimately deteriorating battery performance [117,118,119]. Numerous efforts have been dedicated to developing carbon/metal fluoride nanocomposites in order to mitigate active material aggregation [120,121,122,123,124]. Another promising approach to prevent agglomeration is through the use of surfactants [125,126]. The aforementioned drawback of increased impedance in halide cathodes can be exacerbated when they are combined with a solid-state electrolyte, as this introduces additional solid–solid interfacial resistance and potential solid-state reactions. When two materials come into contact, the difference in their standard chemical potentials drives the flow of free ions across their interface, which could potentially lead to redox reactions [127]. To the best of our knowledge, no prior research has been conducted on the interfacial reactions between the solid-state electrolyte and halide cathode surface up until now. In the case of the interface between Li1.3Al0.3Ti1.7(PO4)3 (LATP) and Li metal, this flow is influenced by the fact that the Li chemical potential of LATP (−4.3 eV) is lower than that of Li metal (0 eV). As a result, Li+ ions may transfer from Li metal to LATP upon contact, while electrons are injected from Li metal into the Ti 3d unoccupied orbital in LATP, resulting in the reduction of Ti4+ to Ti3+, followed by structural cracks (Figure 6b) [128,129]. Li et al. developed a sericin protein (SP) buffer layer with the confined ionic liquid, which can assist in minimizing the contact between ionic liquid (IL) electrolyte and Li metal, improve the solidification of ionic liquid, and ensure a homogenous dispersion of Li-ion flux at the anode/solid-state electrolyte interface. Consequently, it promotes smooth Li deposition and mitigates side reactions that may occur. Additionally, the intermolecular interaction between TFSI- anions and sericin-chain can also alleviate the reduction of free TFSI− by Li metal, which prevents the fast accumulation of SEI and evident passivation of symmetric cells [128]. The use of the sericin protein film protected LATP solid-state electrolyte has been shown to facilitate the successful reversible operation of Li/FeF3 conversion solid-state batteries.
Table 1 summarizes the new cell configurations discussed in this review. Operating temperatures play a critical role in the practical applications of solid-state batteries. Most of the reported battery systems can be operated at room temperature or near body temperature. However, there are a few exceptions. The amorphous sulfur-coated reduced graphene cathode paired with a sulfide-based solid-state electrolyte requires heating to 60 °C. Despite the elevated temperature, this cell shows excellent performance in terms of capacity and cycle life at a high rate of 1 C [66]. On the other hand, a Li–Se battery designed for space applications must be operated at a much higher temperature of 465 °C [88]. As for chalcogenide and halide cathode systems, their cycle life in solid-state batteries is still under development, and their rate performance is not yet satisfactory. In conclusion, while most solid-state batteries can operate effectively at moderate temperatures, certain configurations require higher operating temperatures. However, chalcogenide and halide cathode systems require further development to improve their cycle life and rate performance.

4. Summary and Outlook

In a traditional lithium battery configuration with a conversion-type cathode and a liquid electrolyte, there are several scenarios that can lead to battery failure, as shown in Figure 7. On the anode side, during repeated cycling, dendritic lithium can form in the liquid electrolyte, potentially penetrating the separator and causing a short circuit (Figure 7a). On the cathode side, some conversion-type cathode materials can dissolve in the electrolyte during redox reactions, resulting in capacity loss and cathode structural instability (Figure 7b). The soluble active material species may further shuttle to the lithium metal anode, leading to rapid degradation. Brittle and fragile CEI could also form in conversion-type cathode systems, which would fracture and thicken further due to cathode swelling and shrinkage (Figure 7c). A thick and damaged CEI will significantly increase the impedance and thereby deactivate the cathode. The above challenges can be solved by introducing a solid electrolyte to replace the liquid electrolyte. Undoubtedly, lithium dendrite formation can be greatly suppressed, and the solid-state electrolyte can also act as a rigid separator to prevent short-circuiting. In addition, both the dissolution of the cathode active material and the formation of the CEI layer can be suppressed in the solid-state battery, so a stable cathode structure can be achieved.
While the solid-state electrolyte system appears to resolve several critical problems associated with the conversion-type cathodes in lithium batteries, there may be several concomitant problems that come with its implementation. First of all, in case the attachment between the carbon black and the cathode material surface is weak, the resulting electron contact resistance can be high (green arrow in Figure 7d). Second, the movement of lithium ions occurs through the channels established by the solid electrolyte, and the presence of any gaps between the electrolyte and cathode material can potentially render the cathode inactive or impair its efficiency (white gap in Figure 7d). Moreover, the transition metals present in chalcogenide and halide cathode materials can act as catalysts that degrade the solid-state electrolyte at the interface, resulting in unstable redox reactions (blue interface in Figure 7d). As a result, the challenges of interfacial instability, volume change, and chemical incompatibility should be effectively addressed through smart cell configuration and meticulous electrode preparation.
The development of commercial solid-state batteries is still a long way off, and solid-state batteries with conversion-type cathodes will require extensive efforts to become practical. However, solid-state Li–S cells have emerged as a promising advanced battery system due to the elimination of polysulfide dissolution and have attracted tremendous attention in recent years. Although there is not much work on solid-state battery design focusing on sulfide or fluoride cathodes, both of these cathode systems integrated into solid-state batteries have the potential to achieve high energy density if carefully designed. A rationally designed cell configuration can effectively improve the utilization of active materials, rate performance, and cycle life, which requires continuous research and development efforts in the future.

Author Contributions

K.-C.C., J.-K.C. and Y.-S.S. drafted this review paper together and participated in the discussion and editing of the draft. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) of Taiwan (110-2113-M-A49-027-MY2) and by the Ministry of Education (MOE) of Taiwan under the Yushan Young Fellow Program.

Data Availability Statement

All collected data are presented in the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Erickson, E.M.; Ghanty, C.; Aurbach, D. New Horizons for Conventional Lithium Ion Battery Technology. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2014, 5, 3313–3324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Erickson, E.M.; Li, W.; Dolocan, A.; Manthiram, A. Insights into the Cathode–Electrolyte Interphases of High-Energy-Density Cathodes in Lithium-Ion Batteries. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 16451–16461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Park, M.S.; Ma, S.B.; Lee, D.J.; Im, D.; Doo, S.-G.; Yamamoto, O. A Highly Reversible Lithium Metal Anode. Sci. Rep. 2015, 4, 3815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Yu, S.-H.; Feng, X.; Zhang, N.; Seok, J.; Abruña, H.D. Understanding Conversion-Type Electrodes for Lithium Rechargeable Batteries. Acc. Chem. Res. 2018, 51, 273–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wu, F.; Yushin, G. Conversion Cathodes for Rechargeable Lithium and Lithium-Ion Batteries. Energy Environ. Sci. 2017, 10, 435–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Manthiram, A.; Fu, Y.; Chung, S.-H.; Zu, C.; Su, Y.-S. Rechargeable Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Chem. Rev. 2014, 114, 11751–11787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Olbrich, L.F.; Xiao, A.W.; Pasta, M. Conversion-Type Fluoride Cathodes: Current State of the Art. Curr. Opin. Electrochem. 2021, 30, 100779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Xu, J.; Ma, J.; Fan, Q.; Guo, S.; Dou, S. Recent Progress in the Design of Advanced Cathode Materials and Battery Models for High-Performance Lithium-X (X = O2, S, Se, Te, I2, Br2) Batteries. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1606454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Deng, N.; Feng, Y.; Wang, G.; Wang, X.; Wang, L.; Li, Q.; Zhang, L.; Kang, W.; Cheng, B.; Liu, Y. Rational Structure Designs of 2D Materials and Their Applications toward Advanced Lithium-Sulfur Battery and Lithium-Selenium Battery. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 401, 125976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Su, Y.-S.; Fu, Y.; Cochell, T.; Manthiram, A. A Strategic Approach to Recharging Lithium-Sulphur Batteries for Long Cycle Life. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4, 2985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Manthiram, A.; Fu, Y.; Su, Y.-S. Challenges and Prospects of Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Acc. Chem. Res. 2013, 46, 1125–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Luo, C.; Xu, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zheng, S.; Liu, Y.; Langrock, A.; Wang, C. Selenium@Mesoporous Carbon Composite with Superior Lithium and Sodium Storage Capacity. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 8003–8010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Cabana, J.; Monconduit, L.; Larcher, D.; Palacín, M.R. Beyond Intercalation-Based Li-Ion Batteries: The State of the Art and Challenges of Electrode Materials Reacting Through Conversion Reactions. Adv. Mater. 2010, 22, E170–E192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Jache, B.; Mogwitz, B.; Klein, F.; Adelhelm, P. Copper Sulfides for Rechargeable Lithium Batteries: Linking Cycling Stability to Electrolyte Composition. J. Power Sources 2014, 247, 703–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Xiao, S.; Li, X.; Sun, W.; Guan, B.; Wang, Y. General and Facile Synthesis of Metal Sulfide Nanostructures: In Situ Microwave Synthesis and Application as Binder-Free Cathode for Li-Ion Batteries. Chem. Eng. J. 2016, 306, 251–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, J.; Chew, S.Y.; Wexler, D.; Wang, G.X.; Ng, S.H.; Zhong, S.; Liu, H.K. Nanostructured Nickel Sulfide Synthesized via a Polyol Route as a Cathode Material for the Rechargeable Lithium Battery. Electrochem. Commun. 2007, 9, 1877–1880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yufit, V.; Freedman, K.; Nathan, M.; Burstein, L.; Golodnitsky, D.; Peled, E. Thin-Film Iron Sulfide Cathodes for Lithium and Li-Ion/Polymer Electrolyte Microbatteries. Electrochim. Acta 2004, 50, 417–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hua, X.; Eggeman, A.S.; Castillo-Martínez, E.; Robert, R.; Geddes, H.S.; Lu, Z.; Pickard, C.J.; Meng, W.; Wiaderek, K.M.; Pereira, N.; et al. Revisiting Metal Fluorides as Lithium-Ion Battery Cathodes. Nat. Mater. 2021, 20, 841–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Yamakawa, N.; Jiang, M.; Key, B.; Grey, C.P. Identifying the Local Structures Formed during Lithiation of the Conversion Material, Iron Fluoride, in a Li Ion Battery: A Solid-State NMR, X-Ray Diffraction, and Pair Distribution Function Analysis Study. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 10525–10536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, L.; Jacobs, R.; Gao, P.; Gan, L.; Wang, F.; Morgan, D.; Jin, S. Origins of Large Voltage Hysteresis in High-Energy-Density Metal Fluoride Lithium-Ion Battery Conversion Electrodes. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 2838–2848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Wu, F.; Srot, V.; Chen, S.; Lorger, S.; Aken, P.A.; Maier, J.; Yu, Y. 3D Honeycomb Architecture Enables a High-Rate and Long-Life Iron (III) Fluoride–Lithium Battery. Adv. Mater. 2019, 31, 1905146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Gu, Z.; Xin, X.; Xu, Z.; He, J.; Wu, J.; Sun, Y.; Yao, X. Garnet Electrolyte-Based Integrated Architecture for High-Performance All-Solid-State Lithium-Oxygen Batteries. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2023, 2301583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yi, X.; Liu, X.; Qin, B.; Zhao, X.; Leong, K.W.; Pan, W.; Jiang, K.; Ma, S.; Hao, Z.; Leung, D.Y.C.; et al. High-Energy Composite Cathode for Solid-State Lithium-Oxygen Battery Boosted by Ultrafine Carbon Nanotube Catalysts and Amorphous Lithium Peroxide. Mater. Today Chem. 2023, 29, 101430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liu, Z.; Zhao, N.; Zhao, X.; Wang, C.; Zhang, T.; Xu, S.; Guo, X. Combination of Li-Rich Layered-Oxide with O2 Cathodes for High-Energy Li-Ion/Li-O2 Hybrid Batteries. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2022, 120, 193901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hou, Y.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, R.; Cui, H.; Yang, Q.; Zhi, C. Recent Advances and Interfacial Challenges in Solid-state Electrolytes for Rechargeable Li-air Batteries. Exploration 2023, 20220051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Xia, S.; Wu, X.; Zhang, Z.; Cui, Y.; Liu, W. Practical Challenges and Future Perspectives of All-Solid-State Lithium-Metal Batteries. Chem 2019, 5, 753–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Shen, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Han, S.; Wang, J.; Peng, Z.; Chen, L. Unlocking the Energy Capabilities of Lithium Metal Electrode with Solid-State Electrolytes. Joule 2018, 2, 1674–1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Tufail, M.K.; Zhai, P.; Jia, M.; Zhao, N.; Guo, X. Design of Solid Electrolytes with Fast Ion Transport: Computation-Driven and Practical Approaches. Energy Mater. Adv. 2023, 4, 0015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wan, J.; Xie, J.; Mackanic, D.G.; Burke, W.; Bao, Z.; Cui, Y. Status, Promises, and Challenges of Nanocomposite Solid-State Electrolytes for Safe and High Performance Lithium Batteries. Mater. Today Nano 2018, 4, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cheng, X.-B.; Zhao, C.-Z.; Yao, Y.-X.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Q. Recent Advances in Energy Chemistry between Solid-State Electrolyte and Safe Lithium-Metal Anodes. Chem 2019, 5, 74–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Zhao, Q.; Stalin, S.; Zhao, C.-Z.; Archer, L.A. Designing Solid-State Electrolytes for Safe, Energy-Dense Batteries. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2020, 5, 229–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Černý, R.; Murgia, F.; Brighi, M. Metal Hydroborates: From Hydrogen Stores to Solid Electrolytes. J. Alloys Compd. 2022, 895, 162659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Dimitrievska, M.; Shea, P.; Kweon, K.E.; Bercx, M.; Varley, J.B.; Tang, W.S.; Skripov, A.V.; Stavila, V.; Udovic, T.J.; Wood, B.C. Carbon Incorporation and Anion Dynamics as Synergistic Drivers for Ultrafast Diffusion in Superionic LiCB11H12 and NaCB11H12. Adv. Energy Mater. 2018, 8, 1703422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Duchêne, L.; Remhof, A.; Hagemann, H.; Battaglia, C. Status and Prospects of Hydroborate Electrolytes for All-Solid-State Batteries. Energy Storage Mater. 2020, 25, 782–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Li, X.; Liu, J.; Banis, M.N.; Lushington, A.; Li, R.; Cai, M.; Sun, X. Atomic Layer Deposition of Solid-State Electrolyte Coated Cathode Materials with Superior High-Voltage Cycling Behavior for Lithium Ion Battery Application. Energy Environ. Sci. 2014, 7, 768–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wang, C.; Fu, K.; Kammampata, S.P.; McOwen, D.W.; Samson, A.J.; Zhang, L.; Hitz, G.T.; Nolan, A.M.; Wachsman, E.D.; Mo, Y.; et al. Garnet-Type Solid-State Electrolytes: Materials, Interfaces, and Batteries. Chem. Rev. 2020, 120, 4257–4300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Wu, J.; Yuan, L.; Zhang, W.; Li, Z.; Xie, X.; Huang, Y. Reducing the Thickness of Solid-State Electrolyte Membranes for High-Energy Lithium Batteries. Energy Environ. Sci. 2021, 14, 12–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Umeshbabu, E.; Zheng, B.; Yang, Y. Recent Progress in All-Solid-State Lithium−Sulfur Batteries Using High Li-Ion Conductive Solid Electrolytes. Electrochem. Energ. Rev. 2019, 2, 199–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, S.; Zhang, W.; Zheng, J.; Lv, M.; Song, H.; Du, L. Inhibition of Polysulfide Shuttles in Li–S Batteries: Modified Separators and Solid-State Electrolytes. Adv. Energy Mater. 2021, 11, 2000779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Su, Y.-S.; Fu, Y.; Guo, B.; Dai, S.; Manthiram, A. Fast, Reversible Lithium Storage with a Sulfur/Long-Chain-Polysulfide Redox Couple. Chem. Eur. J. 2013, 19, 8621–8626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Fu, Y.; Su, Y.-S.; Manthiram, A. Highly Reversible Lithium/Dissolved Polysulfide Batteries with Carbon Nanotube Electrodes. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2013, 52, 6930–6935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Zhou, L.; Danilov, D.L.; Eichel, R.; Notten, P.H.L. Host Materials Anchoring Polysulfides in Li–S Batteries Reviewed. Adv. Energy Mater. 2021, 11, 2001304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nagao, M.; Hayashi, A.; Tatsumisago, M. Sulfur–Carbon Composite Electrode for All-Solid-State Li/S Battery with Li2S–P2S5 Solid Electrolyte. Electrochim. Acta 2011, 56, 6055–6059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lei, D.; Shi, K.; Ye, H.; Wan, Z.; Wang, Y.; Shen, L.; Li, B.; Yang, Q.-H.; Kang, F.; He, Y.-B. Progress and Perspective of Solid-State Lithium-Sulfur Batteries. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 28, 1707570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gocheva, I.D.; Nishijima, M.; Doi, T.; Okada, S.; Yamaki, J.; Nishida, T. Mechanochemical Synthesis of NaMF3 (M=Fe, Mn, Ni) and Their Electrochemical Properties as Positive Electrode Materials for Sodium Batteries. J. Power Sources 2009, 187, 247–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yang, Z.; Guo, J.; Das, S.K.; Yu, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Abruña, H.D.; Archer, L.A. In Situ Synthesis of Lithium Sulfide–Carbon Composites as Cathode Materials for Rechargeable Lithium Batteries. J. Mater. Chem. A 2013, 1, 1433–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Shit, S.C.; Khilari, S.; Mondal, I.; Pradhan, D.; Mondal, J. The Design of a New Cobalt Sulfide Nanoparticle Implanted Porous Organic Polymer Nanohybrid as a Smart and Durable Water-Splitting Photoelectrocatalyst. Chem. Eur. J. 2017, 23, 14827–14838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Li, X.; Liang, J.; Chen, N.; Luo, J.; Adair, K.R.; Wang, C.; Banis, M.N.; Sham, T.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, S.; et al. Water-Mediated Synthesis of a Superionic Halide Solid Electrolyte. Angew. Chem. 2019, 131, 16579–16584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhu, Y.; Mo, Y. Materials Design Principles for Air-Stable Lithium/Sodium Solid Electrolytes. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2020, 59, 17472–17476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ye, T.; Li, L.; Zhang, Y. Recent Progress in Solid Electrolytes for Energy Storage Devices. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2000077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wang, K.; Ren, Q.; Gu, Z.; Duan, C.; Wang, J.; Zhu, F.; Fu, Y.; Hao, J.; Zhu, J.; He, L.; et al. A Cost-Effective and Humidity-Tolerant Chloride Solid Electrolyte for Lithium Batteries. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 4410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Li, Y.; Xu, H.; Chien, P.; Wu, N.; Xin, S.; Xue, L.; Park, K.; Hu, Y.; Goodenough, J.B. A Perovskite Electrolyte That Is Stable in Moist Air for Lithium-Ion Batteries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2018, 57, 8587–8591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Huang, Q.; Pollard, T.P.; Ren, X.; Kim, D.; Magasinski, A.; Borodin, O.; Yushin, G. Fading Mechanisms and Voltage Hysteresis in FeF2 –NiF2 Solid Solution Cathodes for Lithium and Lithium-Ion Batteries. Small 2019, 15, 1804670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Huang, Q.; Turcheniuk, K.; Ren, X.; Magasinski, A.; Song, A.-Y.; Xiao, Y.; Kim, D.; Yushin, G. Cycle Stability of Conversion-Type Iron Fluoride Lithium Battery Cathode at Elevated Temperatures in Polymer Electrolyte Composites. Nat. Mater. 2019, 18, 1343–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Wang, J.; Yang, K.; Sun, S.; Ma, Q.; Yi, G.; Chen, X.; Wang, Z.; Yan, W.; Liu, X.; Cai, Q.; et al. Advances in Thermal-related Analysis Techniques for Solid-state Lithium Batteries. InfoMat 2023, 5, e12401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zhang, X.-D.; Yue, F.-S.; Liang, J.-Y.; Shi, J.-L.; Li, H.; Guo, Y.-G. Structure Design of Cathode Electrodes for Solid-State Batteries: Challenges and Progress. Small Struct. 2020, 1, 2000042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ye, H.; Li, M.; Liu, T.; Li, Y.; Lu, J. Activating Li2S as the Lithium-Containing Cathode in Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. ACS Energy Lett. 2020, 5, 2234–2245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Xia, S.; Huang, W.; Yan, W.; Yuan, X.; Chen, X.; Liu, L.; Fu, L.; Zhu, Y.; Huang, Q.; Wu, Y.; et al. A Separator Modified with Rutile Titania and Three-Dimensional Interconnected Graphene-Like Carbon for Advanced Li−S Batteries. ChemElectroChem 2022, 9, e202200301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Xia, S.; Zhou, Q.; Peng, B.; Zhang, X.; Liu, L.; Guo, F.; Fu, L.; Wang, T.; Liu, Y.; Wu, Y. Co3O4@MWCNT Modified Separators for Li–S Batteries with Improved Cycling Performance. Mater. Today Energy 2022, 30, 101163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Yan, W.; Yang, J.; Xiong, X.; Fu, L.; Chen, Y.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Zhao, J.; Wang, T.; Wu, Y. Versatile Asymmetric Separator with Dendrite-Free Alloy Anode Enables High-Performance Li–S Batteries. Adv. Sci. 2022, 9, 2202204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Yang, X.; Luo, J.; Sun, X. Towards High-Performance Solid-State Li–S Batteries: From Fundamental Understanding to Engineering Design. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2020, 49, 2140–2195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Yan, W.; Gao, X.; Yang, J.; Xiong, X.; Xia, S.; Huang, W.; Chen, Y.; Fu, L.; Zhu, Y.; Wu, Y. Boosting Polysulfide Catalytic Conversion and Facilitating Li+ Transportation by Ion-Selective COFs Composite Nanowire for Li–S Batteries. Small 2022, 18, 2106679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Rafie, A.; Kim, J.W.; Sarode, K.K.; Kalra, V. A Review on the Use of Carbonate-Based Electrolytes in Li-S Batteries: A Comprehensive Approach Enabling Solid-Solid Direct Conversion Reaction. Energy Storage Mater. 2022, 50, 197–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, D.-W.; Zhou, G.; Li, F.; Wu, K.-H.; Lu, G.Q.M.; Cheng, H.-M.; Gentle, I.R. A Microporous–Mesoporous Carbon with Graphitic Structure for a High-Rate Stable Sulfur Cathode in Carbonate Solvent-Based Li–S Batteries. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2012, 14, 8703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Xu, Z.; Wang, J.; Yang, J.; Miao, X.; Chen, R.; Qian, J.; Miao, R. Enhanced Performance of a Lithium-Sulfur Battery Using a Carbonate-Based Electrolyte. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 10372–10375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Yao, X.; Huang, N.; Han, F.; Zhang, Q.; Wan, H.; Mwizerwa, J.P.; Wang, C.; Xu, X. High-Performance All-Solid-State Lithium–Sulfur Batteries Enabled by Amorphous Sulfur-Coated Reduced Graphene Oxide Cathodes. Adv. Energy Mater. 2017, 7, 1602923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Xu, R.; Yue, J.; Liu, S.; Tu, J.; Han, F.; Liu, P.; Wang, C. Cathode-Supported All-Solid-State Lithium–Sulfur Batteries with High Cell-Level Energy Density. ACS Energy Lett. 2019, 4, 1073–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Tao, X.; Liu, Y.; Liu, W.; Zhou, G.; Zhao, J.; Lin, D.; Zu, C.; Sheng, O.; Zhang, W.; Lee, H.-W.; et al. Solid-State Lithium–Sulfur Batteries Operated at 37 °C with Composites of Nanostructured Li7La3Zr2O12/Carbon Foam and Polymer. Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 2967–2972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Tao, T.; Zheng, Z.; Gao, Y.; Yu, B.; Fan, Y.; Chen, Y.; Huang, S.; Lu, S. Understanding the Role of Interfaces in Solid-State Lithium-Sulfur Batteries. Energy Mater 2022, 2, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Manthiram, A.; Yu, X.; Wang, S. Lithium Battery Chemistries Enabled by Solid-State Electrolytes. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2017, 2, 16103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Sakuda, A.; Hayashi, A.; Tatsumisago, M. Interfacial Observation between LiCoO2 Electrode and Li2S−P2S5 Solid Electrolytes of All-Solid-State Lithium Secondary Batteries Using Transmission Electron Microscopy. Chem. Mater. 2010, 22, 949–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Takada, K. Interfacial Nanoarchitectonics for Solid-State Lithium Batteries. Langmuir 2013, 29, 7538–7541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Lightfoot, P.; Mehta, M.A.; Bruce, P.G. Crystal Structure of the Polymer Electrolyte Poly(Ethylene Oxide)3:LiCF3 SO3. Science 1993, 262, 883–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Croce, F.; Appetecchi, G.B.; Persi, L.; Scrosati, B. Nanocomposite Polymer Electrolytes for Lithium Batteries. Nature 1998, 394, 456–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Li, M.; Frerichs, J.E.; Kolek, M.; Sun, W.; Zhou, D.; Huang, C.J.; Hwang, B.J.; Hansen, M.R.; Winter, M.; Bieker, P. Solid-State Lithium–Sulfur Battery Enabled by Thio-LiSICON/Polymer Composite Electrolyte and Sulfurized Polyacrylonitrile Cathode. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 1910123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Meng, X.; Liu, Y.; Ma, Y.; Boyjoo, Y.; Liu, J.; Qiu, J.; Wang, Z. Diagnosing and Correcting the Failure of the Solid-State Polymer Electrolyte for Enhancing Solid-State Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2212039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Zhang, N.; Wu, S.; Zheng, H.; Li, G.; Liu, H.; Duan, H. Recent Progress of Multilayer Polymer Electrolytes for Lithium Batteries. Energy Mater. 2023, 3, 300009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yu, X.; Bi, Z.; Zhao, F.; Manthiram, A. Polysulfide-Shuttle Control in Lithium-Sulfur Batteries with a Chemically/Electrochemically Compatible NaSICON-Type Solid Electrolyte. Adv. Energy Mater. 2016, 6, 1601392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhang, L.; Liu, Y.; You, Y.; Vinu, A.; Mai, L. NASICONs-type Solid-state Electrolytes: The History, Physicochemical Properties, and Challenges. Interdiscip. Mater. 2023, 2, 91–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, L.; Wang, Y.; Xia, Y. A High Performance Lithium-Ion Sulfur Battery Based on a Li2S Cathode Using a Dual-Phase Electrolyte. Energy Environ. Sci. 2015, 8, 1551–1558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Wang, D.-W.; Zeng, Q.; Zhou, G.; Yin, L.; Li, F.; Cheng, H.-M.; Gentle, I.R.; Lu, G.Q.M. Carbon–Sulfur Composites for Li–S Batteries: Status and Prospects. J. Mater. Chem. A 2013, 1, 9382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Wang, M.; Xia, X.; Zhong, Y.; Wu, J.; Xu, R.; Yao, Z.; Wang, D.; Tang, W.; Wang, X.; Tu, J. Porous Carbon Hosts for Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Chem. Eur. J. 2019, 25, 3710–3725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Borchardt, L.; Oschatz, M.; Kaskel, S. Carbon Materials for Lithium Sulfur Batteries—Ten Critical Questions. Chem. Eur. J. 2016, 22, 7324–7351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Wang, J.-G.; Xie, K.; Wei, B. Advanced Engineering of Nanostructured Carbons for Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Nano Energy 2015, 15, 413–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Li, Z.; Huang, Y.; Yuan, L.; Hao, Z.; Huang, Y. Status and Prospects in Sulfur–Carbon Composites as Cathode Materials for Rechargeable Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Carbon 2015, 92, 41–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Hou, L.-P.; Yuan, H.; Zhao, C.-Z.; Xu, L.; Zhu, G.-L.; Nan, H.-X.; Cheng, X.-B.; Liu, Q.-B.; He, C.-X.; Huang, J.-Q.; et al. Improved Interfacial Electronic Contacts Powering High Sulfur Utilization in All-Solid-State Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. Energy Storage Mater. 2020, 25, 436–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Li, X.; Liang, J.; Li, X.; Wang, C.; Luo, J.; Li, R.; Sun, X. High-Performance All-Solid-State Li–Se Batteries Induced by Sulfide Electrolytes. Energy Environ. Sci. 2018, 11, 2828–2832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Gogia, A.; Vallo, N.; Subramanyam, G.; Fellner, J.P.; Kumar, J. Proof-of-Concept Molten Lithium–Selenium Battery. Energy Fuels 2021, 35, 20400–20405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Li, X.; Liang, J.; Luo, J.; Wang, C.; Li, X.; Sun, Q.; Li, R.; Zhang, L.; Yang, R.; Lu, S.; et al. High-Performance Li–SeSx All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries. Adv. Mater. 2019, 31, 1808100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wang, S.; Tang, M.; Zhang, Q.; Li, B.; Ohno, S.; Walther, F.; Pan, R.; Xu, X.; Xin, C.; Zhang, W.; et al. Lithium Argyrodite as Solid Electrolyte and Cathode Precursor for Solid-State Batteries with Long Cycle Life. Adv. Energy Mater. 2021, 11, 2101370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Ha Dao, A.; López-Aranguren, P.; Černý, R.; Guiader, O.; Zhang, J.; Cuevas, F.; Latroche, M.; Jordy, C. Improvement of the Ionic Conductivity on New Substituted Borohydride Argyrodites. Solid State Ion. 2019, 339, 114987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Zhang, Y.; Chen, R.; Liu, T.; Xu, B.; Zhang, X.; Li, L.; Lin, Y.; Nan, C.-W.; Shen, Y. High Capacity and Superior Cyclic Performances of All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries Enabled by a Glass–Ceramics Solo. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 10029–10035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Fan, H.-H.; Li, H.-H.; Huang, K.-C.; Fan, C.-Y.; Zhang, X.-Y.; Wu, X.-L.; Zhang, J.-P. Metastable Marcasite-FeS2 as a New Anode Material for Lithium Ion Batteries: CNFs-Improved Lithiation/Delithiation Reversibility and Li-Storage Properties. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 10708–10716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Zhu, Y.; Fan, X.; Suo, L.; Luo, C.; Gao, T.; Wang, C. Electrospun FeS2@Carbon Fiber Electrode as a High Energy Density Cathode for Rechargeable Lithium Batteries. ACS Nano 2016, 10, 1529–1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Shao-Horn, Y.; Osmialowski, S.; Horn, Q.C. Nano-FeS[Sub 2] for Commercial Li/FeS[Sub 2] Primary Batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2002, 149, A1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Ulissi, U.; Ito, S.; Hosseini, S.M.; Varzi, A.; Aihara, Y.; Passerini, S. High Capacity All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries Enabled by Pyrite-Sulfur Composites. Adv. Energy Mater. 2018, 8, 1801462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Pelé, V.; Flamary, F.; Bourgeois, L.; Pecquenard, B.; Le Cras, F. Perfect Reversibility of the Lithium Insertion in FeS2: The Combined Effects of All-Solid-State and Thin Film Cell Configurations. Electrochem. Commun. 2015, 51, 81–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Whiteley, J.M.; Taynton, P.; Zhang, W.; Lee, S.-H. Ultra-Thin Solid-State Li-Ion Electrolyte Membrane Facilitated by a Self-Healing Polymer Matrix. Adv. Mater. 2015, 27, 6922–6927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Whiteley, J.M.; Hafner, S.; Han, S.S.; Kim, S.C.; Oh, K.H.; Lee, S.-H. FeS2-Imbedded Mixed Conducting Matrix as a Solid Battery Cathode. Adv. Energy Mater. 2016, 6, 1600495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zhou, L.; Tufail, M.K.; Yang, L.; Ahmad, N.; Chen, R.; Yang, W. Cathode-Doped Sulfide Electrolyte Strategy for Boosting All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 391, 123529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Wan, H.; Liu, G.; Li, Y.; Weng, W.; Mwizerwa, J.P.; Tian, Z.; Chen, L.; Yao, X. Transitional Metal Catalytic Pyrite Cathode Enables Ultrastable Four-Electron-Based All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries. ACS Nano 2019, 13, 9551–9560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Zhang, B.-W.; Sheng, T.; Liu, Y.-D.; Wang, Y.-X.; Zhang, L.; Lai, W.-H.; Wang, L.; Yang, J.; Gu, Q.-F.; Chou, S.-L.; et al. Atomic Cobalt as an Efficient Electrocatalyst in Sulfur Cathodes for Superior Room-Temperature Sodium-Sulfur Batteries. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 4082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Dai, C.; Lim, J.-M.; Wang, M.; Hu, L.; Chen, Y.; Chen, Z.; Chen, H.; Bao, S.-J.; Shen, B.; Li, Y.; et al. Honeycomb-Like Spherical Cathode Host Constructed from Hollow Metallic and Polar Co9S8 Tubules for Advanced Lithium-Sulfur Batteries. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 28, 1704443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. He, P.; Yan, M.; Zhang, G.; Sun, R.; Chen, L.; An, Q.; Mai, L. Layered VS2 Nanosheet-Based Aqueous Zn Ion Battery Cathode. Adv. Energy Mater. 2017, 7, 1601920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Qi, H.; Wang, L.; Zuo, T.; Deng, S.; Li, Q.; Liu, Z.; Hu, P.; He, X. Hollow Structure VS2@Reduced Graphene Oxide (RGO) Architecture for Enhanced Sodium-Ion Battery Performance. ChemElectroChem 2020, 7, 78–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Su, Y.-S.; Manthiram, A. Sulfur/Lithium-Insertion Compound Composite Cathodes for Li–S Batteries. J. Power Sources 2014, 270, 101–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Chung, S.-H.; Luo, L.; Manthiram, A. TiS2—Polysulfide Hybrid Cathode with High Sulfur Loading and Low Electrolyte Consumption for Lithium–Sulfur Batteries. ACS Energy Lett. 2018, 3, 568–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Xu, S.; Kwok, C.Y.; Zhou, L.; Zhang, Z.; Kochetkov, I.; Nazar, L.F. A High Capacity All Solid-State Li-Sulfur Battery Enabled by Conversion-Intercalation Hybrid Cathode Architecture. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 31, 2004239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Shin, B.R.; Nam, Y.J.; Kim, J.W.; Lee, Y.-G.; Jung, Y.S. Interfacial Architecture for Extra Li+ Storage in All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 5572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Badway, F.; Pereira, N.; Cosandey, F.; Amatucci, G.G. Carbon-Metal Fluoride Nanocomposites: Structure and Electrochemistry of FeF3: C. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2003, 150, A1209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Badway, F.; Cosandey, F.; Pereira, N.; Amatucci, G.G. Carbon Metal Fluoride Nanocomposites: High-Capacity Reversible Metal Fluoride Conversion Materials as Rechargeable Positive Electrodes for Li Batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2003, 150, A1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Li, H.; Richter, G.; Maier, J. Reversible Formation and Decomposition of LiF Clusters Using Transition Metal Fluorides as Precursors and Their Application in Rechargeable Li Batteries. Adv. Mater. 2003, 15, 736–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Camargos, P.H.; dos Santos, P.H.J.; dos Santos, I.R.; Ribeiro, G.S.; Caetano, R.E. Perspectives on Li-ion Battery Categories for Electric Vehicle Applications: A Review of State of the Art. Int. J. Energy Res. 2022, 46, 19258–19268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Nitta, N.; Wu, F.; Lee, J.T.; Yushin, G. Li-Ion Battery Materials: Present and Future. Mater. Today 2015, 18, 252–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Li, M.; Lu, J.; Chen, Z.; Amine, K. 30 Years of Lithium-Ion Batteries. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1800561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Amatucci, G.G.; Pereira, N. Fluoride Based Electrode Materials for Advanced Energy Storage Devices. J. Fluor. Chem. 2007, 128, 243–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Wang, F.; Robert, R.; Chernova, N.A.; Pereira, N.; Omenya, F.; Badway, F.; Hua, X.; Ruotolo, M.; Zhang, R.; Wu, L.; et al. Conversion Reaction Mechanisms in Lithium Ion Batteries: Study of the Binary Metal Fluoride Electrodes. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 18828–18836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Li, C.; Gu, L.; Tong, J.; Tsukimoto, S.; Maier, J. A Mesoporous Iron-Based Fluoride Cathode of Tunnel Structure for Rechargeable Lithium Batteries. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2011, 21, 1391–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Jiang, J.; Li, L.; Xu, M.; Zhu, J.; Li, C.M. FeF3@Thin Nickel Ammine Nitrate Matrix: Smart Configurations and Applications as Superior Cathodes for Li-Ion Batteries. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 16240–16247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Zhang, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Yin, Y.; Fan, L.; Zhang, N. Packing FeF3·0.33H2O into Porous Graphene/Carbon Nanotube Network as High Volumetric Performance Cathode for Lithium Ion Battery. J. Power Sources 2020, 447, 227303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Wygant, B.R.; Schorr, N.B.; Kolesnichenko, I.V.; Lambert, T.N. Nanoparticulate FeF2@C as a Li Battery Conversion Cathode. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2022, 5, 13346–13355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Li, B.; Zhang, N.; Sun, K. Confined Iron Fluoride@CMK-3 Nanocomposite as an Ultrahigh Rate Capability Cathode for Li-Ion Batteries. Small 2014, 10, 2039–2046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Zhao, X.; Hayner, C.M.; Kung, M.C.; Kung, H.H. Photothermal-Assisted Fabrication of Iron Fluoride–Graphene Composite Paper Cathodes for High-Energy Lithium-Ion Batteries. Chem. Commun. 2012, 48, 9909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Li, J.; Fu, L.; Xu, Z.; Zhu, J.; Yang, W.; Li, D.; Zhou, L. Electrochemical Properties of Carbon-Wrapped FeF3 Nanocomposite as Cathode Material for Lithium Ion Battery. Electrochim. Acta 2018, 281, 88–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Xiao, A.W.; Lee, H.J.; Capone, I.; Robertson, A.; Wi, T.-U.; Fawdon, J.; Wheeler, S.; Lee, H.-W.; Grobert, N.; Pasta, M. Understanding the Conversion Mechanism and Performance of Monodisperse FeF2 Nanocrystal Cathodes. Nat. Mater. 2020, 19, 644–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Li, T.; Li, L.; Cao, Y.L.; Ai, X.P.; Yang, H.X. Reversible Three-Electron Redox Behaviors of FeF3 Nanocrystals as High-Capacity Cathode-Active Materials for Li-Ion Batteries. J. Phys. Chem. C 2010, 114, 3190–3195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Gao, B.; Jalem, R.; Ma, Y.; Tateyama, Y. Li+ Transport Mechanism at the Heterogeneous Cathode/Solid Electrolyte Interface in an All-Solid-State Battery via the First-Principles Structure Prediction Scheme. Chem. Mater. 2020, 32, 85–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Lei, M.; Fan, S.; Yu, Y.; Hu, J.; Chen, K.; Gu, Y.; Wu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Li, C. NASICON-Based Solid State Li-Fe-F Conversion Batteries Enabled by Multi-Interface-Compatible Sericin Protein Buffer Layer. Energy Storage Mater. 2022, 47, 551–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Tian, H.-K.; Jalem, R.; Gao, B.; Yamamoto, Y.; Muto, S.; Sakakura, M.; Iriyama, Y.; Tateyama, Y. Electron and Ion Transfer across Interfaces of the NASICON-Type LATP Solid Electrolyte with Electrodes in All-Solid-State Batteries: A Density Functional Theory Study via an Explicit Interface Model. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 54752–54762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Molecules 28 04579 g001 550
Figure 1. Schematic drawing of the lithiation reaction of conversion-type cathodes.
Figure 1. Schematic drawing of the lithiation reaction of conversion-type cathodes.
Molecules 28 04579 g001
Molecules 28 04579 g002 550
Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the advantages of using conversion-type cathodes in lithium solid-state batteries.
Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the advantages of using conversion-type cathodes in lithium solid-state batteries.
Molecules 28 04579 g002
Molecules 28 04579 g003 550
Figure 3. The charge/discharge voltage curves of a Li–S battery with (a) an ether-based liquid electrolyte and (b) a carbonate-based liquid electrolyte or a solid-state electrolyte. Reproduced with permission from ref. [61]. Copyright 2020, Royal Society of Chemistry (London, UK). (c) Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state lithium-sulfur battery with a well-mixed sulfur cathode. Reproduced with permission from ref. [66]. Copyright 2017, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany). (d) Schematic drawing of a cathode-supported and Kevlar fiber-reinforced all-solid-state Li−Li2S cell. Reproduced with permission from ref. [67]. Copyright 2019, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (e) Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state Li–S battery with a hybrid LLZO/PEO electrolyte system. Reproduced with permission from ref. [68]. Copyright 2017, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (f) Schematic drawing of a hybrid Li||LYZP||Li2S6 cell with the liquid electrolyte on both sides of the LYZP membrane. Reproduced with permission from ref. [78]. Copyright 2016, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany).
Figure 3. The charge/discharge voltage curves of a Li–S battery with (a) an ether-based liquid electrolyte and (b) a carbonate-based liquid electrolyte or a solid-state electrolyte. Reproduced with permission from ref. [61]. Copyright 2020, Royal Society of Chemistry (London, UK). (c) Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state lithium-sulfur battery with a well-mixed sulfur cathode. Reproduced with permission from ref. [66]. Copyright 2017, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany). (d) Schematic drawing of a cathode-supported and Kevlar fiber-reinforced all-solid-state Li−Li2S cell. Reproduced with permission from ref. [67]. Copyright 2019, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (e) Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state Li–S battery with a hybrid LLZO/PEO electrolyte system. Reproduced with permission from ref. [68]. Copyright 2017, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (f) Schematic drawing of a hybrid Li||LYZP||Li2S6 cell with the liquid electrolyte on both sides of the LYZP membrane. Reproduced with permission from ref. [78]. Copyright 2016, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany).
Molecules 28 04579 g003
Molecules 28 04579 g004 550
Figure 4. (a) Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state Li–Se battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [87]. Copyright 2018, Royal Society of Chemistry (London, UK). (b) Cell configuration of the molten Li–Se cell tested at 465 °C. Reproduced with permission from ref. [88]. Copyright 2021, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (c) Schematic drawing of a Li–SeSx solid-state battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [61]. Copyright 2020, Royal Society of Chemistry (London, UK). (d) Schematic drawing of an Li-In||LPSCB||LPSCB-MWCNTs cell with a monolithic structure. (e) Schematic drawing of the LPSCB-MWCNTs composite cathode. Reproduced with permission from ref. [90]. Copyright 2021, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany).
Figure 4. (a) Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state Li–Se battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [87]. Copyright 2018, Royal Society of Chemistry (London, UK). (b) Cell configuration of the molten Li–Se cell tested at 465 °C. Reproduced with permission from ref. [88]. Copyright 2021, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (c) Schematic drawing of a Li–SeSx solid-state battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [61]. Copyright 2020, Royal Society of Chemistry (London, UK). (d) Schematic drawing of an Li-In||LPSCB||LPSCB-MWCNTs cell with a monolithic structure. (e) Schematic drawing of the LPSCB-MWCNTs composite cathode. Reproduced with permission from ref. [90]. Copyright 2021, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany).
Molecules 28 04579 g004
Molecules 28 04579 g005 550
Figure 5. Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state lithium battery (a) without cathode-doped electrolyte and (b) with cathode-doped electrolyte. Reproduced with permission from ref. [100]. Copyright 2020, Elsevier (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). (c) Schematic drawing of the redox reactions of FeS2 and Co0.1Fe0.9S2 cathodes. Reproduced with permission from ref. [101]. Copyright 2019, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (d) Schematic drawing of the solid-state hybrid Li–S/VS2/LPS battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [108]. Copyright 2021, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany). (e) Schematic drawing of the solid-state hybrid Li–TiS2/LPS battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [109]. Copyright 2014, Springer (Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany).
Figure 5. Schematic drawing of an all-solid-state lithium battery (a) without cathode-doped electrolyte and (b) with cathode-doped electrolyte. Reproduced with permission from ref. [100]. Copyright 2020, Elsevier (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). (c) Schematic drawing of the redox reactions of FeS2 and Co0.1Fe0.9S2 cathodes. Reproduced with permission from ref. [101]. Copyright 2019, ACS Publications (Washington, DC, USA). (d) Schematic drawing of the solid-state hybrid Li–S/VS2/LPS battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [108]. Copyright 2021, Wiley-VCH (Weinheim, Germany). (e) Schematic drawing of the solid-state hybrid Li–TiS2/LPS battery. Reproduced with permission from ref. [109]. Copyright 2014, Springer (Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany).
Molecules 28 04579 g005
Molecules 28 04579 g006 550
Figure 6. (a) Schematic drawing of the crystallographic reaction mechanism that occurs during the discharge of metal fluoride electrodes. Reproduced with permission from ref. [116]. Copyright 2007, Elsevier (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). (b) Schematic drawing of interface environment of Li/IL-LATP (left) and Li/IL@SP-LATP (right) during cycling process. Reproduced with permission from ref. [128]. Copyright 2022, Elsevier (Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
Figure 6. (a) Schematic drawing of the crystallographic reaction mechanism that occurs during the discharge of metal fluoride electrodes. Reproduced with permission from ref. [116]. Copyright 2007, Elsevier (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). (b) Schematic drawing of interface environment of Li/IL-LATP (left) and Li/IL@SP-LATP (right) during cycling process. Reproduced with permission from ref. [128]. Copyright 2022, Elsevier (Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
Molecules 28 04579 g006
Molecules 28 04579 g007 550
Figure 7. The failure mechanisms of conversion-type cathodes in a liquid electrolyte: (a) lithium dendrite formation on the anode, (b) cathode active material dissolution, and (c) fractured cathode electrolyte interface. (d) Schematic drawing of possible interfacial conditions in the cathode region of a solid-state lithium battery with a conversion-type cathode.
Figure 7. The failure mechanisms of conversion-type cathodes in a liquid electrolyte: (a) lithium dendrite formation on the anode, (b) cathode active material dissolution, and (c) fractured cathode electrolyte interface. (d) Schematic drawing of possible interfacial conditions in the cathode region of a solid-state lithium battery with a conversion-type cathode.
Molecules 28 04579 g007
Table
Table 1. Summary of the solid-state battery configurations with various conversion-type cathodes.
Table 1. Summary of the solid-state battery configurations with various conversion-type cathodes.
Cell ConfigurationTemp.CapacityRateCycle LifeFeatureRef.
Chalcogen Cathode
rGO@S‖Li10GeP2S12‖75Li2S/24P2S5/1P2O5‖Li60 °C830 mAh g−11 C750The conformal S coating minimizing interface resistance & stress/strain [66]
80Li2S/20LiI+LPS‖LPS+Kevlar‖Li25 °C537.8 mAh g−10.2 C100Thick cathode-supported all-solid-state lithium batteries[67]
S@LLZO@C‖PEO-LiClO4‖Li37 °C>900 mAh g–1N/A90A LLZO nanoparticle-decorated porous carbon foam for high S utilization[68]
Li2S6‖LYZP‖Li25 °C≈1000 mAh g−10.2 C150A NaSICON solid-electrolyte/separator suppressing polysulfide crossover[78]
Se+Li3PS4‖Li3PS4‖Li or LiSn alloy25 °C652 mAh g−150 mA g−1100The Se cathode improving charge transfer in solid-state batteries[87]
Se‖Li7La3Zr2O12‖Li465 °C824 mAh g−130 mA g−1N/AA high-temperature molten Li-Se battery for stable OCV and cyclability[88]
SeS2‖Li10GeP2S12+Li3PS4‖Li25 °C1100 mAh g−150 mA g−1100SeSx solid solutions introduced into S cathode for enhanced utilization[89]
LPSCB-MWCNTs‖Li6PS5Cl0.5Br0.5‖Li-In25 °C12.56 mAh cm−2≈0.7 C1030The electrochemically decomposed LPSCB forming a multiphase cathode[90]
Chalcogenide Cathode
FeS2‖99.5(70Li2S/30P2S5)/0.5FeS2‖Li–In25 °C543 mAh g−10.03 mA cm−220A FeS2-doped solid electrolyte lowering interfacial resistance[100]
Co0.1Fe0.9S2‖Li10GeP2S12/75Li2S/24P2S5/1P2O5‖LiN/A685.8 mAh g−1500 mA g–1100The catalytic cobalt in FeS2 cathode enhancing electrochemical activity[101]
S+VS2+Li3PS4‖Li3PS4‖Li-In25 °C7.8 mAh cm−20.12 mA cm−2200The hybrid S/VS2 cathode achieving high sulfur utilization[108]
TiS2+75Li2S/25P2S5‖75Li2S/25P2S5‖Li0.5In30 °C837 mAh g−150 mA g−160An amorphous Li-Ti-P-S phase offering increased capacity[109]
Halide Cathode
FeF3‖IL@SPF+LATP‖Li25 °C524.3 mAh g−10.1 C100A conformal sericin protein film stabilizing the Li-LATP interface[128]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chiu, K.-C.; Chang, J.-K.; Su, Y.-S. Recent Configurational Advances for Solid-State Lithium Batteries Featuring Conversion-Type Cathodes. Molecules 2023, 28, 4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124579

AMA Style

Chiu K-C, Chang J-K, Su Y-S. Recent Configurational Advances for Solid-State Lithium Batteries Featuring Conversion-Type Cathodes. Molecules. 2023; 28(12):4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124579

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chiu, Kuan-Cheng, Jeng-Kuei Chang, and Yu-Sheng Su. 2023. "Recent Configurational Advances for Solid-State Lithium Batteries Featuring Conversion-Type Cathodes" Molecules 28, no. 12: 4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124579

APA Style

Chiu, K. -C., Chang, J. -K., & Su, Y. -S. (2023). Recent Configurational Advances for Solid-State Lithium Batteries Featuring Conversion-Type Cathodes. Molecules, 28(12), 4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124579

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop