Cargando…

Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes

Sulfonic acid-functionalized polymer electrolyte membranes alternative to Nafion(®) were developed. These were hydrocarbon systems, such as blend sulfonated polyetheretherketone (s-PEEK), new generation perfluorosulfonic acid (PFSA) systems, and composite zirconium phosphate–PFSA polymers. The membr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aricò, Antonino S., Sebastian, David, Schuster, Michael, Bauer, Bernd, D’Urso, Claudia, Lufrano, Francesco, Baglio, Vincenzo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4704012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26610582
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes5040793
_version_ 1782408826509590528
author Aricò, Antonino S.
Sebastian, David
Schuster, Michael
Bauer, Bernd
D’Urso, Claudia
Lufrano, Francesco
Baglio, Vincenzo
author_facet Aricò, Antonino S.
Sebastian, David
Schuster, Michael
Bauer, Bernd
D’Urso, Claudia
Lufrano, Francesco
Baglio, Vincenzo
author_sort Aricò, Antonino S.
collection PubMed
description Sulfonic acid-functionalized polymer electrolyte membranes alternative to Nafion(®) were developed. These were hydrocarbon systems, such as blend sulfonated polyetheretherketone (s-PEEK), new generation perfluorosulfonic acid (PFSA) systems, and composite zirconium phosphate–PFSA polymers. The membranes varied in terms of composition, equivalent weight, thickness, and filler and were investigated with regard to their methanol permeation characteristics and proton conductivity for application in direct methanol fuel cells. The behavior of the membrane electrode assemblies (MEA) was investigated in fuel cell with the aim to individuate a correlation between membrane characteristics and their performance in a direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC). The power density of the DMFC at 60 °C increased according to a square root-like function of the membrane selectivity. This was defined as the reciprocal of the product between area specific resistance and crossover. The power density achieved at 60 °C for the most promising s-PEEK-based membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) was higher than the benchmark Nafion(®) 115-based MEA (77 mW·cm(−2) vs. 64 mW·cm(−2)). This result was due to a lower methanol crossover (47 mA·cm(−2) equivalent current density for s-PEEK vs. 120 mA·cm(−2) for Nafion(®) 115 at 60 °C as recorded at OCV with 2 M methanol) and a suitable area specific resistance (0.15 Ohm cm(2) for s-PEEK vs. 0.22 Ohm cm(2) for Nafion(®) 115).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4704012
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47040122016-01-21 Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes Aricò, Antonino S. Sebastian, David Schuster, Michael Bauer, Bernd D’Urso, Claudia Lufrano, Francesco Baglio, Vincenzo Membranes (Basel) Article Sulfonic acid-functionalized polymer electrolyte membranes alternative to Nafion(®) were developed. These were hydrocarbon systems, such as blend sulfonated polyetheretherketone (s-PEEK), new generation perfluorosulfonic acid (PFSA) systems, and composite zirconium phosphate–PFSA polymers. The membranes varied in terms of composition, equivalent weight, thickness, and filler and were investigated with regard to their methanol permeation characteristics and proton conductivity for application in direct methanol fuel cells. The behavior of the membrane electrode assemblies (MEA) was investigated in fuel cell with the aim to individuate a correlation between membrane characteristics and their performance in a direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC). The power density of the DMFC at 60 °C increased according to a square root-like function of the membrane selectivity. This was defined as the reciprocal of the product between area specific resistance and crossover. The power density achieved at 60 °C for the most promising s-PEEK-based membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) was higher than the benchmark Nafion(®) 115-based MEA (77 mW·cm(−2) vs. 64 mW·cm(−2)). This result was due to a lower methanol crossover (47 mA·cm(−2) equivalent current density for s-PEEK vs. 120 mA·cm(−2) for Nafion(®) 115 at 60 °C as recorded at OCV with 2 M methanol) and a suitable area specific resistance (0.15 Ohm cm(2) for s-PEEK vs. 0.22 Ohm cm(2) for Nafion(®) 115). MDPI 2015-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4704012/ /pubmed/26610582 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes5040793 Text en © 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Aricò, Antonino S.
Sebastian, David
Schuster, Michael
Bauer, Bernd
D’Urso, Claudia
Lufrano, Francesco
Baglio, Vincenzo
Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes
title Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes
title_full Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes
title_fullStr Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes
title_full_unstemmed Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes
title_short Selectivity of Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Membranes
title_sort selectivity of direct methanol fuel cell membranes
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4704012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26610582
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes5040793
work_keys_str_mv AT aricoantoninos selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes
AT sebastiandavid selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes
AT schustermichael selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes
AT bauerbernd selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes
AT dursoclaudia selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes
AT lufranofrancesco selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes
AT bagliovincenzo selectivityofdirectmethanolfuelcellmembranes