Anion Exchange Membranes Based on Bis-Imidazolium and Imidazolium-Functionalized Poly(phenylene oxide) for Vanadium Redox Flow Battery Applications

Although the Nafion membrane has a high energy efficiency, long service life, and operational flexibility when applied for vanadium redox flow battery (VRFB) applications, its applications are limited due to its high vanadium permeability. In this study, anion exchange membranes (AEMs) based on poly(phenylene oxide) (PPO) with imidazolium and bis-imidazolium cations were prepared and used in VRFBs. PPO with long-pendant alkyl-side-chain bis-imidazolium cations (BImPPO) exhibits higher conductivity than the imidazolium-functionalized PPO with short chains (ImPPO). ImPPO and BImPPO have a lower vanadium permeability (3.2 × 10^-9 and 2.9 × 10^-9 cm² s^-1) than Nafion 212 (8.8 × 10^-9 cm² s^-1) because the imidazolium cations are susceptible to the Donnan effect. Furthermore, under the current density of 140 mA cm^-2, the VRFBs assembled with ImPPO- and BImPPO-based AEMs exhibited a Coulombic efficiency of 98.5% and 99.8%, respectively, both of which were higher than that of the Nafion212 membrane (95.8%). Bis-imidazolium cations with long-pendant alkyl side chains contribute to hydrophilic/hydrophobic phase separation in the membranes, thus improving the conductivity of membranes and the performance of VRFBs. The VRFB assembled with BImPPO exhibited a higher voltage efficiency (83.5%) at 140 mA cm^-2 than that of ImPPO (77.2%). These results of the present study suggest that the BImPPO membranes are suitable for VRFB applications.

Porous Membranes of Polysulfone and Graphene Oxide Nanohybrids for Vanadium Redox Flow Battery

Porous nanohybrid membranes of polysulfone (PSF) with graphene oxide (GO) nanosheets (PSF/GO membrane) were developed to serve as proton exchange membranes in a vanadium redox flow battery (VRFB). Various ratios of PSF/GO and thickness were investigated to evaluate the optimal voltage efficiency (VE), coulombic efficiency (CE), and energy efficiency (EE) of the VRFB. The pore size, distribution, and hydrophilicity of PSF/GO membranes were studied using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images and contact angles. Functional groups of GO were evaluated using Raman spectroscopy. The mechanical properties and thermal stability of PSF/GO membranes were analyzed using a tensile tester and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), respectively. The results show that the mechanical properties of the PSF porous membrane with GO nanosheets were significantly improved, indicating that the addition of graphene oxide nanosheets consolidated the internal structure of the PSF membrane. Cyclic voltammetry revealed an obviously different curve after the addition of GO nanosheets. The CE of the VRFB in the PSF/GO membrane was significantly higher than that in the pristine PSF membrane, increasing from 80% to 95% at 0.6 wt.% GO addition. Moreover, PSF/GO membranes displayed great chemical stability during long-term operation; thus, they can evolve as potential porous membranes for application in VRFBs for green energy storage.

3D Printed and Conventional Membranes—A Review

Polymer membranes are central to the proper operation of several processes used in a wide range of applications. The production of these membranes relies on processes such as phase inversion, stretching, track etching, sintering, or electrospinning. A novel and competitive strategy in membrane production is the use of additive manufacturing that enables the easier manufacture of tailored membranes. To achieve the future development of better membranes, it is necessary to compare this novel production process to that of more conventional techniques, and clarify the advantages and disadvantages. This review article compares a conventional method of manufacturing polymer membranes to additive manufacturing. A review of 3D printed membranes is also done to give researchers a reference guide. Membranes from these two approaches were compared in terms of cost, materials, structures, properties, performance. and environmental impact. Results show that very few membrane materials are used as 3D-printed membranes. Such membranes showed acceptable performance, better structures, and less environmental impact compared with those of conventional membranes.