The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of electrochemical performances of olivine NaFePO4in sodium-ion batteries and olivine LiFePO4in lithium-ion batteries
Abstract
Carbon-coated olivine NaFePO(4) (C-NaFePO(4)) spherical particles with a uniform diameter of ∼80 nm are obtained by chemical delithiation and subsequent electrochemical sodiation of carbon-coated olivine LiFePO(4) (C-LiFePO(4)), which is synthesized by a solvothermal method. The C-NaFePO(4) electrodes are identical (particle size, particle size distribution, surface coating, and active material loading, etc.) to C-LiFePO(4) except that Li ions in C-LiFePO(4) are replaced by Na ions, making them ideal for comparison of thermodynamics and kinetics between C-NaFePO(4) cathode in sodium-ion (Na-ion) batteries and C-LiFePO(4) in lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries. In this paper, the equilibrium potentials, reaction resistances, and diffusion coefficient of Na in C-NaFePO(4) are systematically investigated by using the galvanostatic intermittent titration technique (GITT), electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and cyclic voltammetry (CV), and compared to those of the well-known LiFePO(4) cathodes in Li-ion batteries. Due to the lower diffusion coefficient of Na-ion and higher contact and charge transfer resistances in NaFePO(4) cathodes, the rate performance of C-NaFePO(4) in Na-ion batteries is much worse than that of C-LiFePO(4) in Li-ion batteries. However, the cycling stability of C-NaFePO(4) is almost comparable to C-LiFePO(4) by retaining 90% of its capacity even after 100 charge-discharge cycles at a charge-discharge rate of 0.1 C.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Update on Na-based battery materials. A growing research path
Palomares, V., Casas-Cabanas, M., Castillo-Martínez, E., Han, M. H., & Rojo, T. (2013) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c3ee41031e · Cited by 992
Bi, L., Li, X., Liu, X., Zheng, Q., & Lin, D. (2019) · ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b06385 · Cited by 105
Pérez-Rodríguez, S., Milton, J. A., & Garcia-Araez, N. (2020) · ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b07072 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhu, Y., Xu, Y., Liu, Y., Luo, C., & Wang, C.
- Venue
- Nanoscale
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 780-787
- ISSN
- 2040-3364 (ISSN-L)
- 2040-3372
- OpenAlex
- W2111698246
- Cited by
- 500
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of electrochemical performances of olivine NaFePO4in sodium-ion batteries and olivine LiFePO4in lithium-ion batteries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c2nr32758a
- The paper
- Zhu, Y., Xu, Y., Liu, Y., Luo, C., & Wang, C. (2013). Comparison of electrochemical performances of olivine NaFePO4in sodium-ion batteries and olivine LiFePO4in lithium-ion batteries. Nanoscale. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2nr32758a
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.