Next Article in Journal
Spatial Differentiation of Microbial Communities in Hybrid Membrane Bioreactor (HMBR) and Their Impact on Pollutant Removal
Previous Article in Journal
Correction: Castro-Muñoz et al. Merging Proline:Xylitol Eutectic Solvent in Crosslinked Chitosan Pervaporation Membranes for Enhanced Water Permeation in Dehydrating Ethanol. Membranes 2023, 13, 451
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Membranes
Volume 16
Issue 2
10.3390/membranes16020067
membranes-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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Mechanically Reinforced Anion-Exchange Composite Membrane with Improved Interface Integrity for Water Electrolysis

by
Yuhui Gong
1,2,
Tongshuai Wang
2,3,*,
Han Song
1,2,
Linjuan Zhang
2,3,* and
Mingdong Zhou
1,*
1
College of Chemical Engineering, Shenyang University of Chemical Technology, Shenyang 110819, China
2
Department of Energy Materials and Chemistry, Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201800, China
3
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Membranes 2026, 16(2), 67; https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes16020067
Submission received: 13 January 2026 / Revised: 3 February 2026 / Accepted: 4 February 2026 / Published: 6 February 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ion Exchange Membrane in Water Electrolysis)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Anion exchange membrane water electrolysis (AEMWE) is promising for low-cost hydrogen production, but its progress is limited by the weak mechanical strength and structural instability of polymer membranes. Here, a PPS-PBP/PVA composite membrane was developed using a polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) mesh as the mechanical scaffold, poly(biphenyl piperidinium) (PBP) as the ion-conducting polymer, and poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) as an interfacial binder. The membrane shows significantly enhanced tensile strength and puncture resistance, reduced swelling, and improved interfacial integrity. The optimized PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane delivers 6 A cm−2 at 2.16 V in 1 M KOH at 80 °C and maintains stable operation for 500 h at 1 A cm−2 with only a slight voltage increase. The results demonstrate that reinforcement coupled with interface regulation is an effective approach to constructing robust and durable composite membranes for AEMWE.

1. Introduction

Hydrogen is increasingly regarded as an important secondary energy carrier in future low-carbon energy systems [1,2,3]. Among the various hydrogen production technologies, water electrolysis holds particular promise for producing high-purity hydrogen and can be carbon-free when powered by renewable electricity [4,5]. In this context, anion exchange membrane water electrolysis (AEMWE) has attracted growing attention because it combines the advantages of alkaline water electrolysis (AWE) and proton exchange membrane water electrolysis (PEMWE) [6,7,8], enabling operation in dilute alkaline or near-neutral media with improved safety and gas purity, while allowing the use of non-precious catalysts under alkaline conditions [9,10,11,12,13]. Nevertheless, the practical development of AEMWE is still constrained by the performance and durability of anion exchange membranes (AEMs), particularly their alkaline stability, mechanical robustness, and ionic conducting ability under operating conditions [14,15,16].
As a core component, the membrane must provide hydroxide conduction while suppressing gas crossover and preventing electrical short circuit between electrodes [17,18,19]. Polymer-based AEMs, especially ether-free poly(aryl piperidinium) (PAP) membranes, have shown promising ionic conductivity and alkaline stability [20,21,22,23]. However, as self-supporting polymer films, they often suffer from limited mechanical strength and dimensional stability, which may lead to deformation, cracking, or structural failure during stack assembly and long-term operation [22,24,25,26,27]. Composite membrane designs, on the other hand, offer an effective solution by integrating a mechanically robust porous scaffold with an ion-conducting polymer phase, enabling enhanced strength with acceptable transport penalties [28,29,30].
Most reported AEM composite membranes use polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) or polyolefin supports such as polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene (PE) as reinforcing substrates because of their excellent chemical resistance and low swelling characteristics [29,31,32,33]. Our previous work demonstrated a layered composite structure in which a porous PTFE film served as a mechanical support and a hydrophilic NiFe layered double hydroxide (LDH) layer was introduced to simultaneously improve the mechanical property as well as electrochemical performance [34]. Zou et al. reported a PE-reinforced membrane with excellent mechanical properties and good gas tightness [35]. However, despite these advantages, commercial PTFE and polyolefin substrates are typically designed as battery separators and therefore often possess relatively low porosity, which can reduce the effective ion-transport volume and increase internal resistance in AEMWE systems. In addition, porous PTFE supports commonly exhibit limited tensile strength, which may compromise structural robustness during membrane fabrication and electrolyzer assembly [36,37].
Polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) is a high-performance engineering thermoplastic featuring high mechanical robustness, thermal stability, and chemical resistance, and has been widely used in harsh chemical environments and alkaline electrolyzer separators [38,39]. Representative ZIRFON-type diaphragms employ PPS fabrics combined with inorganic fillers to achieve robust structures and improved wettability [40,41,42]. These attributes suggest that PPS can serve as a promising reinforcing scaffold for composite membranes operating under alkaline conditions. However, PPS is intrinsically hydrophobic with low surface energy, and PPS-based supports in AEMWE often exhibit insufficient interfacial compatibility with polar ion-conducting polymer matrices, which may cause interfacial defects and compromise structural stability [43].
In this work, we employed a PPS mesh as a porous reinforcing framework and filled it with poly(biphenyl piperidinium) (PBP) to construct PPS-PBP composite membranes. PBP was selected as the ion-conducting polymer due to its rigid biphenyl backbone and stable piperidinium cation, which together provide a favorable combination of high hydroxide conductivity and acceptable alkaline stability [22,27]. To further improve interfacial adhesion between the hydrophobic PPS scaffold and the polar PBP matrix, high-molecular-weight poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) was introduced as an interfacial binder, forming PPS-PBP/PVA composite membranes. Compared with other surface treatment technology, such as plasma treatment or chemical sulfonation, PVA incorporation provides a mild, scalable, and surface-localized approach that preserves the intrinsic chemical stability of PPS while effectively improving interfacial compatibility, without requiring additional surface-modification equipment. As a result, the optimized composite membrane exhibited excellent structural stability and sustained AEMWE operation for over 500 h, demonstrating the effectiveness of this interface-engineered reinforcement strategy.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Biphenyl (≥99%), N-methyl-4-piperidone (≥98%), trifluoromethanesulfonic acid (TFSA, ≥99%), trifluoroacetic acid (TFA, 99%), methyl iodide (CH3I, 99%), dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, 99.7%), Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) (PVA, Mowiol® 28–98, Mw~145,000) and dichloromethane (DCM, 99.9%) were purchased from Adamas Beta Inc. (Shanghai, China). Ethyl acetate (≥99.5%) and isopropyl alcohol (≥99.5%) were obtained from Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China), together with inorganic reagents potassium carbonate (K2CO3, ≥99%) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH, 95%, pellet). The PPS mesh was supplied by Zhengben Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. (Shaoxing, China).

2.2. Synthesis of Poly(aryl piperidinium) Polymers

Poly(biphenyl piperidinium) (PBP) was synthesized following previously reported procedures [27,44,45,46] via a two-step route. In the first step, biphenyl (1.54 g) and N-methyl-4-piperidone (1.41 g) were dissolved in dichloromethane, and a mixed acid catalyst of trifluoroacetic acid (1.8 mL) and trifluoromethanesulfonic acid (12.6 mL) was added dropwise at 0 °C under continuous stirring to initiate Friedel–Crafts polycondensation. After 12 h, the resulting viscous solution was poured into 1 M KOH aqueous solution to precipitate the polymer and neutralize residual acid. The precipitate was stirred for 6 h, thoroughly washed with deionized water until neutral pH, and dried at 60 °C for 48 h to obtain the PBP precursor.
For quaternization, the precursor (2.82 g) was dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (70 mL), followed by addition of methyl iodide (1 g). The Menshutkin reaction proceeded at room temperature for 24 h under light-protected conditions. The product was precipitated in ethyl acetate, collected by filtration, washed, and dried for 48 h to yield the quaternized PBP.

2.3. Preparation of PPS-Reinforced PBP Composite Membranes

To fabricate PPS-reinforced PBP membranes (PPS-PBP), a 10 × 10 cm2 PPS mesh was first ultrasonically cleaned in ethanol for 30 min and dried to remove surface impurities. The mesh was then sandwiched between two PTFE films and hot-pressed at 160 °C for 2 h to obtain a flat surface. A 6-inch silicon wafer was placed on a heating platform and leveled. After stabilizing at 50 °C for 30 min, a 10 wt% PBP/DMSO solution was uniformly coated onto the PPS mesh using a doctor blade. The solvent was evaporated on the 50 °C hot stage, followed by annealing at 70 °C for 10 h to obtain the PPS-PBP composite membrane.
PPS-PBP/PVA composite membranes were prepared using the same method as PPS-PBP, except that PBP was replaced by PBP-PVA solution. Different amounts of PVA were incorporated to improve interfacial bonding and suppress phase separation. The PVA content was adjusted to 5 wt%, 10 wt%, 15 wt% and 20 wt%, denoted as PPS-PBP/PVA (x wt%). PPS-PBP/PVA (x wt%) refers to x wt% PVA relative to the total polymer (PBP + PVA).

2.4. Fabrication of Membrane Electrode Assembly

The membrane electrode assembly (MEA) was prepared using the catalyst-coated substrate (CCS) method. Catalyst inks (7.5 mg mL−1) were sprayed using an SCP102 ultrasonic spraying system (Suzhou Sinero Technology Co., Suzhou, China) at a feeding rate of 0.1 mL min−1 and gas pressure of 2.8 psi, with the substrate maintained at 70 °C.
Nickel felt (porosity 60%, Zhejiang Changda Co., Wenzhou, China) loaded with NiFe-LDH catalyst (~2.5 mg cm−2) was used as the anode. Toray TGP-H-060 carbon paper loaded with commercial Pt/C catalyst (40 wt% Pt, 2.5 mg cm−2) served as the cathode. The MEAs were cured at 60 °C for 10 h and immersed in 1.0 M KOH solution for 12 h to exchange iodide with hydroxide ions. The PBP polymer obtained after quaternization initially contains iodide (I−) as the counter anion. Therefore, the assembled MEAs were immersed in 1.0 M KOH for 12 h to fully exchange iodide ions with hydroxide ions prior to electrochemical measurements.

2.5. Electrolysis Performance Evaluation

An AEMWE single cell with serpentine flow channels was employed (Figure S1). 1.0 M KOH electrolyte was circulated at 30 mL min−1 using a LABN1-III peristaltic pump (Suzhou Innovfluid Technology Co., Suzhou, China). The electrolyte was preheated via stainless-steel coils immersed in a constant-temperature water bath (HH-2, Shanghai Lichen Instrument Co., Shanghai, China). The cell temperature was controlled using an STC101 heating-thermocouple unit (Suzhou Sinero Technology Co., Suzhou, China).
Prior to testing, the samples were pre-soaked in 1.0 M KOH for at least 12 h, then assembled into the electrolysis cell. After starting the peristaltic pump to circulate the electrolyte, testing commenced once the temperature displayed by the heating–thermocouple controller had stabilized. Polarization curves were measured using a CE-4008Q-5V30A-SR battery analyzer (Neware, Shenzhen, China), with the current density stepped from 0.02 to 10 A cm−2. Durability tests were performed under constant current at 1.0 A cm−2. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) was carried out with a SP-50e/150e workstation (BioLogic, Grenoble, France) at a DC bias of 1.6 V, using an AC amplitude of 10 mV over a frequency range of 500 kHz to 0.5 Hz. Data were fitted using ZSim software (version 3.60).

2.6. Material Characterization

Surface morphology and elemental distributions were examined via field-emission SEM (Zeiss Crossbeam 540, Carl Zeiss AG, Oberkochen, Germany) equipped with EDS. Puncture strength was measured using a universal testing machine (SS-8600, Sartec, Beijing, China) with a 1.0 mm probe at 2 mm min−1. Tensile strength was measured using a LD23.103 universal testing machine (Lishi, Shanghai, China) with 10 mm width and 20 mm gauge length specimens at 2 mm min−1.
Thermal stability was evaluated using thermal gravimetric analyzer (TGA) (DTG-60H, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) from 28 to 600 °C with 10 °C min scan rate under N2 atmosphere. The membrane swelling ratio (SR) and water uptake (WU) were evaluated as follows.
First, sample membranes were dried overnight in a vacuum oven at 60 °C. Subsequently, they were immersed in 1.0 M KOH at room temperature for 24 h. The dimensions and weights of the samples were recorded in both the dry and wet states, and these values were then used to calculate the SR and WU.
SR was calculated with the following equation:
SR = (Lw − Ld)/Ld × 100%
where Lw and Ld represent the length of the wet and dried membrane samples, respectively.
WU was calculated with the following equation:
WU = (Mw − Md)/Md × 100%
where Mw and Md represent the masses of the wet and dried membrane samples, respectively.

3. Results and Discussions

3.1. Design and Morphological Characterization of Composite Membranes

Figure 1 schematically illustrates the fabrication strategy of the PPS-PBP/PVA composite membranes, in which a PPS mesh served as a porous reinforcing scaffold and was impregnated with a PBP/PVA mixed solution. A photograph of the fabricated PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane is provided in Figure S2. The PPS mesh provides a rigid skeleton and helps resist mechanical damage during electrolyzer assembly and operation, thereby reducing the risks of membrane rupture, internal short circuit, and gas crossover. However, as shown in Figure 2a,d, noticeable interfacial gaps were observed between the PPS mesh and PBP polymer in the PPS-PBP membrane, indicating poor interfacial compatibility. Such interfacial defects may compromise the structural integrity of the membrane and lead to performance decay during prolonged operation.
To address this issue, a certain amount of high-molecular weight PVA was incorporated into the PBP solution. PVA improves the film-forming ability of the polymer matrix, enabling more efficient wetting and encapsulation of the PPS mesh. Meanwhile, PVA chains contain both hydrophilic hydroxyl groups and hydrophobic carbon backbones, allowing dual interactions: hydrophobic chain segments can physically adsorb and entangle with the hydrophobic PPS surface, while hydroxyl groups form hydrogen bonding or polar interactions with the hydrophilic quaternary ammonium-containing PBP.
As shown in Figure 2b,e, PPS-PBP/PVA (5 wt%) exhibited significantly reduced interfacial voids compared with PPS-PBP. Further cross-sectional SEM analysis (Figures S3 and S4) provides direct morphological evidence for this interfacial enhancement: distinct gaps and partial delamination are observed in PPS-PBP, whereas PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) exhibits a continuous and seamless interface between PPS fibers and the polymer matrix.

3.2. Mechanical Strength and Structural Stability of Composite Membranes

In AEMWE systems, the anion exchange membrane experiences compressive stress from the catalyst layers and gas diffusion layers during stack assembly and mechanical impact from electrolyte flow during operation. These stresses may lead to crack formation, perforation, or delamination, resulting in gas crossover, membrane failure, and performance degradation. Therefore, improving membrane mechanical robustness is critical for reliable long-term operation.
The mechanical properties of different membranes were evaluated by tensile and puncture tests (Figure 3a,b). Pure PBP exhibited the lowest strength, with a tensile strength of 23.63 MPa and a puncture force of only 1.14 N. The PPS mesh greatly improved mechanical strength, raising the tensile strength of PPS-PBP to 40.31 MPa and its puncture resistance to 3.37 N. With the incorporation of PVA, the PPS-PBP/PVA membranes exhibited even higher strength. As PVA content increased, tensile strength gradually improved, reaching 48.69 MPa for PPS-PBP/PVA (20 wt%) (Figure 4a). This improvement can be mainly attributed to the enhanced interfacial adhesion between the PPS mesh and the PBP matrix, which suppresses interfacial voids and enables more efficient stress transfer from the polymer phase to the reinforcing framework.
Figure 4b summarizes the swelling ratio (SR) and water uptake (WU) at 25 °C. Pure PBP exhibited relatively high WU (63.91%) and SR (12.46%). The introduction of PPS dramatically suppressed swelling due to mechanical constraint imposed by the mesh framework, reducing SR to 5.92% and WU to 16.74%. Such reduced swelling is essential for ensuring dimensional stability, preventing mechanical weakening, and maintaining gas-separation efficiency. From an electrochemical perspective, controlled swelling helps maintain stable and continuous ion-conducting pathways while avoiding excessive local resistance. As the PVA content increased from 0 to 20 wt%, the swelling ratio showed a slight increase from 5.92% to 10.09%, while the water uptake exhibited a more substantial rise from 16.75% to 75.49%. This is because high-molecular-weight PVA contains abundant hydrophilic hydroxyl groups, which are prone to water absorption and swelling. Excessive PVA addition is therefore detrimental. However, with a modest addition of 10 wt% PVA, the PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane shows a swelling ratio of 6.99%, only slightly higher than PPS-PBP (5.92%), remaining acceptable for AEMWE operation. Additionally, TGA indicated that the composite membranes possess excellent thermal stability, with their initial decomposition temperature being significantly higher than the normal operating temperature of AEMWE (Figure S5), which further ensures their structural integrity during long-term operation.
Overall, the synergistic effect of PPS reinforcement and PVA interfacial regulation significantly enhances both mechanical strength and dimensional stability, fulfilling the stringent requirements of AEMWE membranes for puncture resistance, deformation tolerance, and long-term structural robustness.

3.3. AEMWE Performances Evaluation

The AEMWE performance of PBP, PPS-PBP, PPS-PBP/PVA, and a commercial reinforced AEM (Fumasep® PK130) was evaluated in 1 M KOH at 80 °C (Figure 5a,b). Among all tested membranes, pristine PBP exhibited the lowest cell voltage (1.60 V at 1 A cm−2), which can be attributed to its low membrane resistance; even at a high current density of 6 A cm−2, the cell voltage still remained below 2.0 V (1.98 V at 6 A cm−2). However, its poor mechanical robustness severely limits practical application. Incorporation of the PPS mesh effectively addresses this issue by significantly enhancing mechanical strength, as discussed above. Although the reinforced membranes exhibited slightly higher cell voltages, the differences at industrially relevant current densities were minimal (1.63 V at 1 A cm−2 for PPS-PBP and 1.64 V at 1 A cm−2 for PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%)). By contrast, the commercial composite membrane Fumasep® PK130 showed substantially higher cell voltages under identical testing conditions (1.77 V at 1 A cm−2), and this discrepancy became more pronounced at higher current densities. At 6 A cm−2, the cell voltage of Fumasep® PK130 increased to 2.86 V, approaching the safety cutoff of our testing system. In comparison, the as-prepared composite membranes delivered much lower voltages at the same current density (6 A cm−2), with values of 2.06 V for PPS-PBP and 2.16 V for PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%). These results highlight the competitive high-current-density electrolysis performance of the PPS-PBP/PVA membrane.
EIS results (Figure 5b) further support these observations. The EIS spectra were fitted using an equivalent circuit model, where RΩ represents the overall ohmic resistance, and two parallel R-CPEs (R1||CPE1 and R2||CPE2) describe the interfacial electrochemical processes. In this model, R1 and R2 correspond to charge-transfer-related resistances associated with the porous electrode interfaces, and their sum is reported as the effective charge-transfer resistance (Rct = R1 + R2). The constant phase elements (CPEs) account for non-ideal double-layer capacitance [47]. The fitted parameters are summarized in Table S1. PBP and PPS-PBP exhibited low resistances, including both RΩ and charge-transfer resistance (Rct), both of which were extracted from the EIS spectra. In comparison, PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) showed only a slight increase (Rct = 88.27 mΩ cm2 and RΩ = 79.65 mΩ cm2, Table S1), indicating that the transport penalty induced by PVA is limited.
To further analyze the influence of PVA content, membranes with PVA loadings ranging from 0 to 20 wt% were evaluated (Figure 6a). Increasing PVA content resulted in a gradual decrease in electrolysis performance, which is attributed to the reduced effective ion-conducting polymer fraction and the associated increase in membrane resistance (Figure 6b). Among the investigated compositions, PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) achieved an optimal balance between interfacial integrity (as evidenced from the SEM images) and electrolysis performance, and was therefore selected for subsequent long-term durability tests.
To place the obtained performance in a broader context, we further compared the electrolysis metrics of PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) with recently reported reinforced AEMs under comparable conditions (Table S2). The present membrane exhibits competitive, and in most cases superior, cell voltages at both moderate (1 A·cm−2) and high current densities (6 A·cm−2).

3.4. Long-Term Durability Evaluation

To evaluate long-term durability, electrolyzers assembled with PPS-PBP and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membranes were operated at 1 A·cm−2 in 1 M KOH at 60 °C for 500 h (Figure 7). The cell voltage gradually increased for both membranes; PPS–PBP increased from 1.69 V to 1.84 V, while PPS–PBP/PVA (10 wt%) increased from 1.68 V to 1.80 V. These results demonstrate that both PPS–PBP and PPS–PBP/PVA membranes exhibit good operational stability under the tested conditions, whereas the incorporation of PVA provides a modest improvement in long-term durability, likely associated with enhanced interfacial stability.
Polarization curves after durability testing (Figure 8a) further verify that PPS-PBP/PVA experiences smaller performance decay. EIS results (Figure 8b) demonstrate that PPS-PBP/PVA shows minimal increase in high-frequency resistance, whereas PPS-PBP exhibits a notable increase, indicating more severe membrane resistance growth. Meanwhile, charge-transfer resistance of PPS-PBP increased from 69.10 mΩ·cm2 to 124.55 mΩ·cm2, while that of PPS-PBP/PVA increased only slightly (93.40 to 105.38 mΩ·cm2) (Table S1), confirming that catalyst degradation is not the dominant factor. Instead, interfacial structural deterioration plays a major role. SEM images after the 500 h test (Figures S10 and S11) show that electrode structures remain generally intact, but catalyst shedding is observable, consistent with electrochemical analysis. These results clearly demonstrate that PVA-enabled interfacial reinforcement effectively suppresses interfacial failure, improves structural robustness, and enhances operational durability of the composite AEM under practical AEMWE conditions.

4. Conclusions

In this work, a PPS-PBP/PVA composite membrane was successfully developed to address the insufficient mechanical robustness of polymer-based AEMs in AEMWE systems. Using PPS mesh as a reinforcing skeleton, PBP as the ion-conducting polymer, and PVA as an interfacial adhesive, the composite membrane exhibits significantly enhanced interfacial compatibility between hydrophobic PPS and hydrophilic PBP, leading to excellent mechanical integrity and structural stability. The PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane demonstrates high tensile strength (up to 42.97 MPa), low swelling ratio (6.99%), suppressed dimensional deformation, and stable hydroxide conduction (RΩ ~79.65 mΩ·cm2 at 80 °C). Compared with PBP and PPS-PBP membranes, PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) delivers competitive electrolysis performance (2.16 V at 6 A·cm−2 at 80 °C) while achieving outstanding long-term durability. Under 1 A·cm−2 and 1 M KOH, it maintained stable operation for 500 h with only a small voltage increase from 1.68 V to 1.80 V, outperforming PPS-PBP. Electrochemical impedance and post-mortem analyses confirmed that the improved durability primarily originates from PVA-enhanced interfacial adhesion, which effectively suppresses membrane delamination and slows resistance growth during prolonged operation. Overall, this study demonstrates that interface engineering combined with mechanical reinforcement is an effective strategy to construct durable, high-strength, and high-performance composite anion exchange membranes, providing valuable insights for developing next-generation AEMWE systems.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/membranes16020067/s1, Figure S1: Diagram of the testing equipment for hydrogen production via water electrolysis; Figure S2: Photograph of the PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane; Figure S3: SEM images: (a,c) PPS mesh and (b,d) PBP membrane cross-sections (scale bars: 100 μm and 20 μm, respectively); Figure S4: SEM images: (a,c) PPS-PBP and (b,d) PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) composite membrane cross-sections (scale bars: 100 μm and 40 μm, respectively); Figure S5: TGA mass-loss profiles of various membranes from 28 to 600 °C; Figure S6: Polarization curves of various membranes at 60 °C; Figure S7: Nyquist plots of various membranes at 60 °C; Figure S8: Polarization curves of PPS-PBP membranes with varying PVA content at 60 °C; Figure S9: Nyquist plots of PPS-PBP membranes with varying PVA content at 60 °C and 1.6 V; Figure S10: SEM images of AEMWE anode electrode sheets before and after the 500 h stability test; Figure S11: SEM images of AEMWE cathode electrode sheets before and after the 500 h stability test. Table S1. Fitted EIS parameters of the as-prepared membranes and commercial Fumasep®PK130 recorded on the AEMWE single cell. Table S2. Comparison of state-of-the-art reinforced anion exchange membranes reported for alkaline media electrolysis [14,29,34,35,48,49,50,51,52,53,54].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.W.; validation, T.W., L.Z., and M.Z.; formal analysis, Y.G.; investigation, H.S.; data curation, Y.G.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.G.; writing—review and editing, Y.G. and H.S.; supervision, T.W., L.Z. and M.Z.; project administration, T.W., L.Z. and M.Z.; funding acquisition, T.W. and L.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 22409205 and 22179141), Talent Plan of Shanghai Branch, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CASSHB-QNPD-2023-006), Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant No. XDA0400000), Young Talent Recruitment Program of Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, CAS (Grant No. E3552401), the Photon Science Center for Carbon Neutrality, and Pujiang Talents Program (Grant No. 24PJA157).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge Tian Lan from ShanghaiTech University for his contribution to the design of the electrolysis cell.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Parolin, F.; Colbertaldo, P.; Campanari, S. Optimal design of hydrogen delivery infrastructure for multi-sector end uses at regional scale. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2024, 79, 839–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ganter, A.; Gabrielli, P.; Goericke, H.; Sansavini, G. Minimum-Regret Hydrogen and Carbon Supply Chains to Decarbonize European Industrial Hydrogen Demands. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 59, 14372–14387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Odenweller, A.; Ueckerdt, F. The green hydrogen ambition and implementation gap. Nat. Energy 2025, 10, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Qin, D.; Zhai, H.; Quillinan, S. Comparative Life Cycle Water Use Assessment of Diverse Hydrogen Production Pathways. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 59, 25237–25250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Yang, J.; Lam, T.Y.; Luo, Z.; Cheng, Q.; Wang, G.; Yao, H. Renewable energy driven electrolysis of water for hydrogen production, storage, and transportation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2025, 218, 115804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sanei, S.A.; Baimbetov, D.; Syrlybekkyzy, S.; Akhmetov, B.B.; Darband, G.B.; Abbas, Q. Morphological, structural, and binder-free engineering for enhanced water electrolyzers. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2026, 203, 153102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Witte, J.; Jordan, P.; Turek, T. Experimental investigation of OER catalysts under real-life conditions in half-cell setup for Anion Exchange Membrane Water Electrolysis. Electrochim. Acta 2025, 517, 145539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Xie, Y.; Ling, X. Forecasting green hydrogen production in China: Hybrid deep learning assessment of economic, environmental, and renewable energy integration. Renew. Energy 2026, 256, 124414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Razmjooei, F.; Morawietz, T.; Taghizadeh, E.; Hadjixenophontos, E.; Mues, L.; Gerle, M.; Wood, B.D.; Harms, C.; Gago, A.S.; Ansar, S.A.; et al. Increasing the performance of an anion-exchange membrane electrolyzer operating in pure water with a nickel-based microporous layer. Joule 2021, 5, 1776–1799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Muhyuddin, M.; Santoro, C.; Osmieri, L.; Ficca, V.C.A.; Friedman, A.; Yassin, K.; Pagot, G.; Negro, E.; Konovalova, A.; Lindquist, G.; et al. Anion-Exchange-Membrane Electrolysis with Alkali-Free Water Feed. Chem. Rev. 2025, 125, 6906–6976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ng, W.S.; Azhar, N.; Rosman, N.N.; Masdar, M.S.; Majlan, E.H.; Shamsul, N.S.; Kassim, Z.; Aizamddin, M.F.; Yunus, R.M. Review of membrane electrode assembly fabrication for anion exchange membrane water electrolysis: From catalyst ink preparation to membrane electrode assembly. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2026, 200, 152883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Titheridge, L.J.; Marshall, A.T. The Rationale for a Standardized Testing Protocol for Anion Exchange Membrane Water Electrolyzers. ACS Energy Lett. 2024, 9, 1288–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lim, H.; Jeong, J.-Y.; Shin, G.; Kim, C.; Choi, G.; Myeong, S.-W.; Choi, S.M.; Park, T. Realizing Superior Durability of Water Electrolyzer Using Anion Exchange Membrane with an Interstitial Alkyl Chain: From a Single Cell to Large-Sized 1-cell Stack. Adv. Energy Mater. 2024, 14, 2401725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Simari, C.; Caprì, A.; Rehman, M.H.U.; Enotiadis, A.; Gatto, I.; Baglio, V.; Nicotera, I. Composite anion exchange membranes based on polysulfone and silica nanoscale ionic materials for water electrolyzers. Electrochim. Acta 2023, 462, 142788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kwon, H.S.; Byeon, J.; Lim, C.; Park, J.; Lee, J.; Choi, J.; Kim, T.H.; Lee, J.; Kim, B.J. Design of Efficient and Mechanically Robust Anion Exchange Membrane for Water Electrolysis Achieved by Chemically Crosslinked Elastomers using Polyfluorene-Based Conjugated Polymers. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 36, e17390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hua, D.; Huang, J.; Fabbri, E.; Rafique, M.; Song, B. Development of Anion Exchange Membrane Water Electrolysis and the Associated Challenges: A Review. ChemElectroChem 2023, 10, e202200999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rakhshani, S.; Araneo, R.; Pucci, A.; Rinaldi, A.; Giuliani, C.; Pozio, A. Synthesis and Characterization of a Composite Anion Exchange Membrane for Water Electrolyzers (AEMWE). Membranes 2023, 13, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Vinodh, R.; Kalanur, S.S.; Natarajan, S.K.; Pollet, B.G. Recent Advancements of Polymeric Membranes in Anion Exchange Membrane Water Electrolyzer (AEMWE): A Critical Review. Polymers 2023, 15, 2144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Choi, Y.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Kim, S.; Kim, Y.; Lee, Y.; Seong, J.G.; Hu, C.; Lim, K.H.; Park, H.-Y.; Jang, J.H.; et al. A highly durable thin-film assembled membrane for efficient gas crossover suppression in anion exchange membrane water electrolysis. Adv. Compos. Hybrid Mater. 2026, 9, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Olsson, J.S.; Pham, T.H.; Jannasch, P. Poly(arylene piperidinium) Hydroxide Ion Exchange Membranes: Synthesis, Alkaline Stability, and Conductivity. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 28, 1702758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, X.; Fang, Z.; Zhang, M.; Xie, S.; Xie, D.; Liu, P.; Wang, S.; Cheng, F.; Xu, T. Macromolecular crosslinked poly(aryl piperidinium)-based anion exchange membranes with enhanced ion conduction for water electrolysis. J. Membr. Sci. 2024, 700, 122717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hu, X.; Huang, Y.; Liu, L.; Ju, Q.; Zhou, X.; Qiao, X.; Zheng, Z.; Li, N. Piperidinium functionalized aryl ether-free polyaromatics as anion exchange membrane for water electrolysers: Performance and durability. J. Membr. Sci. 2021, 621, 118964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Chen, N.; Paek, S.Y.; Lee, J.Y.; Park, J.H.; Lee, S.Y.; Lee, Y.M. High-performance anion exchange membrane water electrolyzers with a current density of 7.68 A cm−2 and a durability of 1000 h. Energy Environ. Sci. 2021, 14, 6338–6348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Chen, N.; Lu, C.; Li, Y.; Long, C.; Zhu, H. Robust poly(aryl piperidinium)/N-spirocyclic poly(2,6-dimethyl-1,4-phenyl) for hydroxide-exchange membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2019, 572, 246–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lee, T.K.; Park, J.H.; Im, K.S.; Chitale, S.K.; Nam, S.Y. Enhanced durability of carbazole-based anion exchange membranes via crosslinking and pore filling: Fabrication and evaluation of anion exchange membrane water electrolysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2025, 176, 151441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Jiang, Z.; Yi, G.; Yao, X.; Ma, Y.; Su, X.; Liu, Q.; Zhang, Q. Durable and highly-efficient anion exchange membrane water electrolysis using poly(biphenyl alkylene) membrane. Chem. Eng. J. 2023, 467, 143442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Caielli, T.; Ferrari, A.R.; Bonizzoni, S.; Sediva, E.; Caprì, A.; Santoro, M.; Gatto, I.; Baglio, V.; Mustarelli, P. Synthesis, characterization and water electrolyzer cell tests of poly(biphenyl piperidinium) Anion exchange membranes. J. Power Sources 2023, 557, 232532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hu, C.; Lee, J.Y.; Lee, Y.J.; Kim, S.H.; Hwang, H.; Yoon, K.-S.; Park, C.-D.; Lee, S.Y.; Lee, Y.M. Reinforced poly(dibenzyl-co-terphenyl piperidinium) membranes for highly durable anion-exchange membrane water electrolysis at 2 A cm−2 for 1000 h. Next Energy 2023, 1, 100044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zuo, Y.; Li, Y.; Chen, W.; Chen, Y.; Li, C.; Ding, Y.; Wu, L.; Wei, H. Reinforced poly(arylene alkylene) anion exchange membranes with superior robustness for alkaline fuel cells and water electrolyzers. Chem. Eng. J. 2025, 522, 167359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zhang, L.; Wang, C.; Tong, L.; Liu, L.; Shi, B.; Wang, C. Structure design of a new efficient composite anion exchange membrane ion channel for water electrolysis. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2026, 240, 114–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Henkensmeier, D.; Cho, W.-C.; Jannasch, P.; Stojadinovic, J.; Li, Q.; Aili, D.; Jensen, J.O. Separators and Membranes for Advanced Alkaline Water Electrolysis. Chem. Rev. 2024, 124, 6393–6443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kim, K.W.; Lee, K.A.; Lee, J.H.; Kim, S.H.; Kim, J.F.; Kim, T.H.; Kim, S.; Sung, Y.-E.; Yoon, K.R. Membrane Reinforcement Strategy Using Robust Nanofibers for Durable and Safe AEM Water Electrolysis. Small 2025, 21, e04805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Feng, Z.; Gupta, G.; Mamlouk, M. Robust poly(p-phenylene oxide) anion exchange membranes reinforced with pore-filling technique for water electrolysis. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2024, 141, e55340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gong, Y.; Ni, Y.; Lan, T.; Song, H.; Zhang, H.; Wang, S.; Liu, M.; Wang, T.; Wang, J.-Q.; Zhang, L. Composite membranes with tailored interfaces for high-efficiency anion exchange membrane-based alkaline water and simulated alkaline seawater electrolysis. J. Mater. Chem. A 2025, 13, 28546–28558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zou, W.; Peng, K.; Ling, R.; Li, Q.; Liu, Y.; Xu, T.; Yang, Z. Robust and ultrathin pore-filling anion exchange membranes for water electrolysis. AIChE J. 2025, 71, e18769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kaya, O. Exploring the Interfacial Formation between Aqueous Slabs and a Hydrophobic Membrane. ACS Omega 2025, 10, 18650–18656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Sun, X.; Yu, C.; Zhang, L.; Xie, G. Strategy to Enhance Interfacial Properties: Preparation of Porous Polytetrafluoroethylene Fibers and the Adsorption of Initiators/Curing Agents. Langmuir 2025, 41, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Tang, Y.; Song, W.; Guo, M.; Yang, G.; Su, K.; Zhang, M.; Li, Z. Hydrophilic modified polyphenylene sulfide fabric separator for efficient alkaline water electrolysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2025, 126, 66–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Liu, L.; Wang, J.; Ren, Z.; Wang, F.; Wang, T.; Guo, H. Ultrathin reinforced composite separator for alkaline water electrolysis: Comprehensive performance evaluation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2023, 48, 23885–23893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Li, H.; Hu, X.; Geng, K.; Liu, M.; Hu, B.; Chen, Q.; Jiang, Z.; He, M.; Huang, Y.; Li, N.; et al. Highly hydrophilic polybenzimidazole/Zirconia composite separator with reduced gas crossover for alkaline water electrolysis. J. Membr. Sci. 2023, 683, 121844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Sun, Q.; Min, L.; Wu, B.; Zhang, X.; Liang, H.; Xu, L.; Zhang, W.; Wang, Y. A Zirfon-type membrane based on exfoliated layered double hydroxide for advanced alkaline water electrolysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2025, 182, 151819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bhattacharyya, R.; Kumar, A.; Ramírez-Rico, D.S.; Dhanavath, D.; Assaud, L.; Ghosh, P.C. Investigation of 2,5-polybenzimidazole-zirconia composite membrane for high-performance alkaline water electrolysis. Electrochim. Acta 2026, 546, 147764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Najibah, M.; Hnát, J.; Plevová, M.; Dayan, A.; Stojadinovic, J.; Žitka, J.; Bae, C.; Bouzek, K.; Henkensmeier, D. PPS-reinforced poly(terphenylene) anion-exchange membranes with different quaternary ammonium groups for use in water electrolysers. J. Membr. Sci. 2025, 713, 123335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Liu, Q.; Ma, W.; Tian, L.; Li, J.; Yang, L.; Wang, F.; Wang, Z.; Li, J.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, H. Side-chain cation-grafted poly(biphenyl piperidine) membranes for anion exchange membrane fuel cells. J. Power Sources 2022, 551, 232105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Jeevitha, A.; Arunkumar, I.; Asaithambi, A.; Kim, T.H.; Kim, A.R.; Yoo, D.J. Poly(biphenyl piperidinium)/Poly(vinyl alcohol)-Based Blended Anion Exchange Membrane for Fuel Cell Application. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. 2025, 7, 8547–8557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yang, L.; Wang, Z.; Wang, F.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, H. Poly(aryl piperidinium) anion exchange membranes with cationic extender sidechain for fuel cells. J. Membr. Sci. 2022, 653, 120448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Liu, C.; Wippermann, K.; Rasinski, M.; Suo, Y.; Shviro, M.; Carmo, M.; Lehnert, W. Constructing a Multifunctional Interface between Membrane and Porous Transport Layer for Water Electrolyzers. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13, 16182–16196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Choi, J.; Kim, H.; Jeon, S.; Shin, M.G.; Seo, J.Y.; Park, Y.I.; Park, H.; Lee, A.S.; Lee, C.; Kim, M.; et al. Thin Film Composite Membranes as a New Category of Alkaline Water Electrolysis Membranes. Small 2023, 19, 2300825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Simari, C.; Rehman, M.U.; Caprì, A.; Gatto, I.; Baglio, V.; Nicotera, I. High-performance anion exchange membrane water electrolysis by polysulfone grafted with tetramethyl ammonium functionalities. Mater. Today Sustain. 2023, 21, 100297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Xu, Z.; Delgado, S.; Atanasov, V.; Morawietz, T.; Gago, A.S.; Friedrich, K.A. Novel Pyrrolidinium-Functionalized Styrene-b-ethylene-b-butylene-b-styrene Copolymer Based Anion Exchange Membrane with Flexible Spacers for Water Electrolysis. Membranes 2023, 13, 328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kim, J.E.; Yun, Y.H.; Park, H.; Albers, J.; Doo, G.; Lee, S.; Seo, J.; Lee, C.; Kim, M.; Cho, H. Hydrogen-bonded QSEBS/ZrO2 mixed matrix anion exchange membranes for water electrolyzer. Fuel 2024, 376, 132684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. You, J.; Lu, J.; Liu, C.; Wang, W.; Li, Y.; Gao, Y.; Liu, L.; Luo, X.; Bao, X.; Chen, H. A rationally thin composite membrane with differentiated pore structure for industrial-scale alkaline water electrolysis. Nat. Commun. 2025, 16, 5981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Eo, J.Y.; Lee, T.K.; Kim, G.; Park, B.R.; Chai, G.S.; Yoo, S.J.; Kim, J.H.; Kim, J. Preparation of PTFE-reinforced anion exchange membranes using poly (vinyl benzyl chloride-co-vinyl imidazole) functionalized with 1, 2-dimethyl-imidazole and their electrochemical properties for water electrolysis. J. Power Sources 2025, 652, 237638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sharma, Y.; Singh, D.; Cao, Z.; Gabski, J.; Dong, J. An anion exchange membrane of layered silicalite nanosheets with surface quaternary ammonium cations. Chem. Commun. 2025, 61, 4503–4506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Membranes 16 00067 g001
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the preparation process for the PPS-PBP/PVA membrane and a surface SEM image of the pristine PPS mesh.
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the preparation process for the PPS-PBP/PVA membrane and a surface SEM image of the pristine PPS mesh.
Membranes 16 00067 g001
Membranes 16 00067 g002
Figure 2. Surface SEM images of the composite membranes: (a) PPS-PBP, (b) PPS-PBP/PVA (5 wt%), (c) PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), (d–f) Corresponding higher-magnification images of PPS-PBP, PPS-PBP/PVA (5 wt%), and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), respectively.
Figure 2. Surface SEM images of the composite membranes: (a) PPS-PBP, (b) PPS-PBP/PVA (5 wt%), (c) PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), (d–f) Corresponding higher-magnification images of PPS-PBP, PPS-PBP/PVA (5 wt%), and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), respectively.
Membranes 16 00067 g002
Membranes 16 00067 g003
Figure 3. (a) Load–displacement response obtained from puncture test for PBP, PPS-mesh, PPS-PBP, and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane. The load was normalized with the membrane thickness. (b) Tensile strength-strain curves of the PBP, PPS-mesh, PPS-PBP, and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane.
Figure 3. (a) Load–displacement response obtained from puncture test for PBP, PPS-mesh, PPS-PBP, and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane. The load was normalized with the membrane thickness. (b) Tensile strength-strain curves of the PBP, PPS-mesh, PPS-PBP, and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membrane.
Membranes 16 00067 g003
Membranes 16 00067 g004
Figure 4. (a) Stress–strain curves of PPS-PBP composites with varying PVA content (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%). (b) Water uptake and swelling ratio (SR) of the PBP membrane, PPS mesh, and PPS-PBP composites with PVA content varying from 0 to 20 wt%.
Figure 4. (a) Stress–strain curves of PPS-PBP composites with varying PVA content (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%). (b) Water uptake and swelling ratio (SR) of the PBP membrane, PPS mesh, and PPS-PBP composites with PVA content varying from 0 to 20 wt%.
Membranes 16 00067 g004
Membranes 16 00067 g005
Figure 5. (a) Polarization curves of cells equipped with PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), PPS-PBP, PBP and commercial Fumasep® PK130 membranes, recorded under identical operating conditions at 80 °C. The test of PK130 was terminated at high current densities due to the voltage approaching the safety cutoff (~2.9 V) of the testing system. (b) Nyquist plots of electrolysis cells equipped with PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), PPS-PBP, PBP and commercial Fumasep® PK130 membranes, recorded at 80 °C and 1.6 V. Additional polarization and Nyquist plots recorded at 60 °C are provided in Figures S6 and S7.
Figure 5. (a) Polarization curves of cells equipped with PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), PPS-PBP, PBP and commercial Fumasep® PK130 membranes, recorded under identical operating conditions at 80 °C. The test of PK130 was terminated at high current densities due to the voltage approaching the safety cutoff (~2.9 V) of the testing system. (b) Nyquist plots of electrolysis cells equipped with PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%), PPS-PBP, PBP and commercial Fumasep® PK130 membranes, recorded at 80 °C and 1.6 V. Additional polarization and Nyquist plots recorded at 60 °C are provided in Figures S6 and S7.
Membranes 16 00067 g005
Membranes 16 00067 g006
Figure 6. (a) Polarization curves of cells equipped with PPS-PBP membranes with varying PVA content (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%). (b) Nyquist plots of electrolysis cells equipped with PPS-PBP membranes with varying PVA content (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%), recorded at 80 °C and 1.6 V. Corresponding data measured at 60 °C are shown in Figures S8 and S9.
Figure 6. (a) Polarization curves of cells equipped with PPS-PBP membranes with varying PVA content (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%). (b) Nyquist plots of electrolysis cells equipped with PPS-PBP membranes with varying PVA content (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%), recorded at 80 °C and 1.6 V. Corresponding data measured at 60 °C are shown in Figures S8 and S9.
Membranes 16 00067 g006
Membranes 16 00067 g007
Figure 7. Cell voltage recorded during 500 h galvanostatic operation for AEMWE single-cell assembled with PPS-PBP and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membranes tested at 60 °C.
Figure 7. Cell voltage recorded during 500 h galvanostatic operation for AEMWE single-cell assembled with PPS-PBP and PPS-PBP/PVA (10 wt%) membranes tested at 60 °C.
Membranes 16 00067 g007
Membranes 16 00067 g008
Figure 8. (a) Beginning-of-test (Bot) and End-of-test (Eot) Polarization curves of the AEMWE cell and (b) Bot and Eot Nyquist plot of the AEMWE cell tested at 60 °C.
Figure 8. (a) Beginning-of-test (Bot) and End-of-test (Eot) Polarization curves of the AEMWE cell and (b) Bot and Eot Nyquist plot of the AEMWE cell tested at 60 °C.
Membranes 16 00067 g008
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

Gong, Y.; Wang, T.; Song, H.; Zhang, L.; Zhou, M. Mechanically Reinforced Anion-Exchange Composite Membrane with Improved Interface Integrity for Water Electrolysis. Membranes 2026, 16, 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes16020067

AMA Style

Gong Y, Wang T, Song H, Zhang L, Zhou M. Mechanically Reinforced Anion-Exchange Composite Membrane with Improved Interface Integrity for Water Electrolysis. Membranes. 2026; 16(2):67. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes16020067

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gong, Yuhui, Tongshuai Wang, Han Song, Linjuan Zhang, and Mingdong Zhou. 2026. "Mechanically Reinforced Anion-Exchange Composite Membrane with Improved Interface Integrity for Water Electrolysis" Membranes 16, no. 2: 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes16020067

APA Style

Gong, Y., Wang, T., Song, H., Zhang, L., & Zhou, M. (2026). Mechanically Reinforced Anion-Exchange Composite Membrane with Improved Interface Integrity for Water Electrolysis. Membranes, 16(2), 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes16020067

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop