Cited by 851Advanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesAdvancements in Battery MaterialsAdvanced battery technologies research

Tailoring electrolyte solvation for Li metal batteries cycled at ultra-low temperature

Open access
Holoubek, John, Liu, Haodong, Wu, Zhaohui, Yin, Yijie, Xing, Xing, Cai, Guorui, Yu, Sicen, Zhou, Hongyao +3 more·2021·Nature Energy

Abstract

Lithium metal batteries (LMBs) hold the promise to pushing cell level energy densities beyond 300 Wh kg-1 while operating at ultra-low temperatures (< -30°C). Batteries capable of both charging and discharging at these temperature extremes are highly desirable due to their inherent reduction of external warming requirements. Here we demonstrate that the local solvation structure of the electrolyte defines the charge-transfer behavior at ultra-low temperature, which is crucial for achieving high Li metal coulombic efficiency (CE) and avoiding dendritic growth. These insights were applied to Li metal full cells, where a high-loading 3.5 mAh cm-2 sulfurized polyacrylonitrile (SPAN) cathode was paired with a one-fold excess Li metal anode. The cell retained 84 % and 76 % of its room temperature capacity when cycled at -40 and -60 °C, respectively, which presented stable performance over 50 cycles. This work provides design criteria for ultra-low temperature LMB electrolytes, and represents a defining step for the performance of low-temperature batteries.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41560-021-00783-z

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Li/SPAN cell using 1 M LiFSI in DOL/DME failed immediately at -60 °C.

    “In contrast, the Li/SPAN cell using 1 M LiFSI in DOL/DME failed immediately at -60 °C.”

    From Review on Low-Temperature Electrolytes for Lithium-Ion and Lithium Metal Batteries (2023) · cites this paper as [57]

    The Full Cell Behavior section (Fig. 6g; page not provided) reports that the Li||SPAN cell using 1 M LiFSI in DOL/DME had no viable capacity output after two cycles at −60 °C. This supports failure at that temperature, but not the claim that it failed immediately. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The low binding energy of Li+(DEE)1.8 provided a favorable desolvation energy barrier and resulted in excellent Coulombic efficiency (98.4%) of Li/Cu cells at -60 °C.

    “The low binding energy of Li + (DEE) 1.8 provided a much favorable desolvation energy barrier to be overcome and resulted in excellent CE (98.4%) of Li/Cu cells at ultra-LTs (-60 °C), as shown in Fig. 8b.”
  • DEE electrolytes presented characteristic contact-ion pairs with 1.8 DEE oxygens and 2.0 FSI- oxygens per Li+.

    “Different from typical solvent-separated ion pair (SSIP) solvation structure, DEE electrolytes presented characteristic CIPs with 1.8 DEE oxygens and 2.0 FSI -oxygens per Li + .”
  • Li+(DEE)1.8 complexes possessed a much lower binding energy of -280 kJ mol-1 than Li+(DME)2.3 (-414 kJ mol-1) formed in 1 M LiFSI in DOL-DME electrolytes.

    “Meanwhile, the Li + (DEE) 1.8 complexes possessed a much lower binding energy of -280 kJ mol -1 than that of Li + (DME) 2.3 (-414 kJ mol -1 ) formed in 1 M LiFSI in DOL-DME electrolytes shown in Fig. 8a.”

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Holoubek, J., Liu, H., Wu, Z., Yin, Y., Xing, X., Cai, G., Yu, S., Zhou, H., Pascal, T. A., Chen, Z., & Liu, P.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
  • Pascal, Tod A.
  • Chen, Zheng
  • Liu, Ping
Venue
Nature Energy
Published
2021-02-25
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
303-313
ISSN
2058-7546 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3134786422
Cited by
851
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 98 · 2025: 210 · 2024: 184 · 2023: 176 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 43
FWCI
39.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Energy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (ECF 80NSSC18K1512)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE-EE0007764)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advancements in Battery Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced battery technologies research
Keywords
lithium metal batteries, electrolyte solvation structure, Coulombic efficiency, lithium dendrite suppression, lithium metal anode, low-temperature battery performance

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.

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