% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Chayambuka:885680,
author = {Chayambuka, Kudakwashe and Mulder, Grietus and Danilov,
Dmitri L. and Notten, Peter H. L.},
title = {{F}rom {L}i‐{I}on {B}atteries toward {N}a‐{I}on
{C}hemistries: {C}hallenges and {O}pportunities},
journal = {Advanced energy materials},
volume = {10},
number = {38},
issn = {1614-6840},
address = {Weinheim},
publisher = {Wiley-VCH},
reportid = {FZJ-2020-04011},
pages = {2001310 -},
year = {2020},
abstract = {Among the existing energy storage technologies,
lithium‐ion batteries (LIBs) have unmatched energy density
and versatility. From the time of their first
commercialization in 1991, the growth in LIBs has been
driven by portable devices. In recent years, however,
large‐scale electric vehicle and stationary applications
have emerged. Because LIB raw material deposits are unevenly
distributed and prone to price fluctuations, these
large‐scale applications have put unprecedented pressure
on the LIB value chain, resulting in the need for
alternative energy storage chemistries. The sodium‐ion
battery (SIB) chemistry is one of the most promising
“beyond‐lithium” energy storage technologies. Herein,
the prospects and key challenges for the commercialization
of SIBs are discussed. By comparing the technological
evolutions of both LIBs and SIBs, key differences between
the two battery chemistries are unraveled. Based on
outstanding results in power, cyclability, and safety, the
path toward SIB commercialization is seen imminent.},
cin = {IEK-9},
ddc = {050},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-9-20110218},
pnm = {131 - Electrochemical Storage (POF3-131)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-131},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000558672700001},
doi = {10.1002/aenm.202001310},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/885680},
}