Cited by 118Advancements in Battery MaterialsAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesBattery Modeling and Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 170 of the 170 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 72 of the 225 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Review on Low-Temperature Electrolytes for Lithium-Ion and Lithium Metal Batteries

Open access

Abstract

Among various rechargeable batteries, the lithium-ion battery (LIB) stands out due to its high energy density, long cycling life, in addition to other outstanding properties. However, the capacity of LIB drops dramatically at low temperatures (LTs) below 0 °C, thus restricting its applications as a reliable power source for electric vehicles in cold climates and equipment used in the aerospace. The electrolyte engineering has proved to be one of the most effective approaches to mitigate LIB performance degradation at LTs. In this review, we summarize the important factors contributing to the deterioration in Li + transport and capacity utilization at LTs while systematically categorize the solvents, salts and additives reported in the literature. Strategies to improve the Li + transport kinetics, in the bulk electrolyte and across the interphases, are discussed. In particular, the formation mechanism of solid electrolyte interphase and its functionality for LT electrolytes are analyzed. Perspectives on the future evolution of this area are also provided. Graphical abstract

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes mechanisms and electrolyte-engineering strategies for low-temperature lithium-ion and lithium metal batteries, emphasizing that interphasial charge transfer—especially desolvation and SEI transport—dominates subzero performance. It catalogs solvents, salts, and additives that improve bulk conductivity and interphase chemistry, with reported capacity retentions from −20 to −60 °C.

Key findings

  • Low-temperature degradation is not only a bulk-electrolyte conductivity problem: charge-transfer/interphasial resistance becomes rate-determining, with desolvation barriers of 50–70 kJ mol⁻¹ and higher discharged-state Rct making charging at low temperature especially difficult.
  • Solvent engineering improves performance: ternary EC:DMC:DEC (1:1:1) showed the highest ionic conductivity at −20 °C and largest discharge capacity versus EC:DMC and EC:DEC; optimized EC:DMC:EMC (8.3:25:66.7 wt) achieved 90% capacity at −40 °C; MP-based electrolyte with FEC delivered >60% RT capacity at −60 °C and 1 C; a graphite||graphite dual-ion battery retained 93.1% and 84.4% of RT capacity at −40 and −60 °C.
  • Additives and salts can lower interphase impedance: LiDFBOP increased −30 °C capacity retention from 14% to 49% and 200-cycle retention at 0 °C from 57% to 94%; LiPO₂F₂ gave 71.9% vs 49.4% retention at −20 °C and 91% vs ~16% after 100 cycles; EMI-BF₄ gave 45.8% vs 16.3% at −30 °C; LiFSI additive suppressed Li plating and delivered ~30% higher capacity at −20 °C.
  • LiF-rich/anion-derived SEIs are generally considered beneficial, but the role of LiF and inorganic content remains controversial: some studies report lower impedance with fewer inorganic species, while others emphasize LiF as critical for good SEI.

Methods

  • Design: narrative review, not a primary experimental study; it synthesizes literature on low-temperature electrolytes for lithium-ion and lithium metal batteries.
  • Data/sample: published studies and tables categorizing solvents, salts, and molecular/ionic additives; no new samples or measurements are reported.
  • Analysis: mechanistic synthesis of Li⁺ transport through bulk electrolyte, desolvation, and SEI/CEI diffusion, using cited EIS/Arrhenius data and performance metrics across different cell chemistries.

Limitations

  • Stated: precise knowledge of SEI formation mechanism, Li⁺ conduction mechanism in SEI, and composition/structure/morphology–performance correlations remains little understood; efforts are still mainly empirical.
  • Stated: most SEI characterization relies on surface-sensitive XPS with limited elemental information, and conclusions based only on XPS may need re-examination with techniques such as NMR, XRD/PDF, neutron diffraction/PDF, and cryo-TEM.
  • Stated/evident: performance comparisons across tables are limited because results from different chemistries and cell designs are not comparable; most Li-plating diagnostics are at coin-cell level and not easily applied to pouch cells or real-time detection.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s41918-023-00199-1

Cites

170 of 170 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

131 No full text of the sources · 56 No basis given · 33 Supported · 26 Partly supported · 20 Own interpretation · 5 Not checked yet · 4 Own result · 2 Supported so far · 2 Not supported · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Mixed support · 1 Own method · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 149 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 125
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 14
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
134 of 134
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A systematic review on the related mechanism of low-temperature electrolytes is still quite limited.

    “However, the systematic review on the related mechanism is still quite limited.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    SEI components derived from decomposition of anions are generally better than those derived from solvent decomposition.

    “the SEI components derived from the decomposition of anions are generally better than those derived from solvent decomposition.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Electrode materials are less critical for the LT operation of LIBs compared to electrolytes.

    “Electrode materials are less critical for the LT operation of LIBs compared to electrolytes.”
3 of 3

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 118

Metadata

Authors
Tan, S., Shadike, Z., Cai, X., Lin, R., Kludze, A., Borodin, O., Lucht, B. L., Wang, C., Hu, E., Xu, K., & Yang, X.-Q.
Affiliations
  • Brookhaven National Laboratory (US)
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
  • Cornell University (US)
  • DEVCOM Army Research Laboratory (US)
  • University of Rhode Island (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
  • Shadike, Zulipiya
  • Hu, Enyuan
  • Xu, Kang
  • Yang, Xiao-Qing
Venue
Electrochemical Energy Reviews
Published
2023-11-28
Volume
6
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2520-8136 (ISSN-L)
  • 2520-8489
OpenAlex
W4389398624
Cited by
118
References
170
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 25
FWCI
8.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Electrochemical Energy Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Energy (DE-SC0012704)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advancements in Battery Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Battery Modeling and Management
Keywords
low-temperature electrolytes, lithium-ion batteries, lithium metal batteries, electrolyte engineering, lithium ion transport, solid electrolyte interphase, electrolyte additives, electrolyte solvents, electrolyte salts

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review