Review Topical Sections

Composite anodes for lithium-ion batteries: status and trends

  • Received: 29 June 2016 Accepted: 24 July 2016 Published: 29 July 2016
  • Presently, the negative electrodes of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) is constituted by carbon-based materials that exhibit a limited specific capacity 372 mAh g−1 associated with the cycle between C and LiC6. Therefore, many efforts are currently made towards the technological development nanostructured materials in which the electrochemical processes occurs as intercalation, alloying or conversion reactions with a good accommodation of dilatation/contraction during cycling. In this review, attention is focused on advanced anode composite materials based on carbon, silicon, germanium, tin, titanium and conversion anode composite based on transition-metal oxides.

    Citation: Alain Mauger, Haiming Xie, Christian M. Julien. Composite anodes for lithium-ion batteries: status and trends[J]. AIMS Materials Science, 2016, 3(3): 1054-1106. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.3.1054

    Related Papers:

    [1] Masahiro Tokumura, Rurika Hatayama, Kouichi Tatsu, Toshiyuki Naito, Tetsuya Takeda, Mohammad Raknuzzaman, Md. Habibullah-Al-Mamun, Shigeki Masunaga . Car indoor air pollution by volatile organic compounds and aldehydes in Japan. AIMS Environmental Science, 2016, 3(3): 362-381. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2016.3.362
    [2] Senem Ozgen, Giovanna Ripamonti, Alessandro Malandrini, Martina S. Ragettli, Giovanni Lonati . Particle number and mass exposure concentrations by commuter transport modes in Milan, Italy. AIMS Environmental Science, 2016, 3(2): 168-184. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2016.2.168
    [3] Dimitrios Kotzias . Built environment and indoor air quality: The case of volatile organic compounds. AIMS Environmental Science, 2021, 8(2): 135-147. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021010
    [4] Scheitel M, Stanic M, Neuberger M . PM10, PM2.5, PM1, number and surface of particles at the child’s seat when smoking a cigarette in a car. AIMS Environmental Science, 2016, 3(4): 582-591. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2016.4.582
    [5] Pierre Bonnet, Jérémie Achille, Laeticia Malingre, Hervé Duret, Olivier Ramalho, Corinne Mandin . VOCs in cleaning products used in age care and social facilities: Identification of hazardous substances. AIMS Environmental Science, 2018, 5(6): 402-417. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2018.6.402
    [6] Tharwat Mokalled, Stéphane Le Calvé, Nada Badaro-Saliba, Maher Abboud, Rita Zaarour, Wehbeh Farah, Jocelyne Adjizian-Gérard . Atmospheric dispersion modelling of gaseous emissions from Beirutinternational airport activities. AIMS Environmental Science, 2022, 9(5): 553-572. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2022033
    [7] Lars Carlsen . A posetic based assessment of atmospheric VOCs. AIMS Environmental Science, 2017, 4(3): 403-416. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2017.3.403
    [8] Pasquale Avino, Maurizio Manigrasso . Ozone formation in relation with combustion processes in highly populated urban areas. AIMS Environmental Science, 2015, 2(3): 764-781. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2015.3.764
    [9] Suwimon Kanchanasuta, Sirapong Sooktawee, Natthaya Bunplod, Aduldech Patpai, Nirun Piemyai, Ratchatawan Ketwang . Analysis of short-term air quality monitoring data in a coastal area. AIMS Environmental Science, 2021, 8(6): 517-531. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021033
    [10] Steffen E. Eikenberry . Hybrids are an effective transitional technology for limiting US passenger fleet carbon emissions. AIMS Environmental Science, 2020, 7(2): 117-139. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2020007
  • Presently, the negative electrodes of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) is constituted by carbon-based materials that exhibit a limited specific capacity 372 mAh g−1 associated with the cycle between C and LiC6. Therefore, many efforts are currently made towards the technological development nanostructured materials in which the electrochemical processes occurs as intercalation, alloying or conversion reactions with a good accommodation of dilatation/contraction during cycling. In this review, attention is focused on advanced anode composite materials based on carbon, silicon, germanium, tin, titanium and conversion anode composite based on transition-metal oxides.


    The pollutants present in indoor and outdoor air may undergo different classifications in respect of their nature: organic or inorganic; physical state: gas, liquid, solid or in broader view as disperse systems; particle sizes; biological or non-biological origin, etc. They are present in air as a complex mixture, which, inter alia, consists of [1,2,3]:

    - organic compounds in form of gases or particles,

    - inorganic compounds, such as carbon oxides, nitrogen oxides, radon, ozone,

    - particles, such as dust and fibres,

    - biological particles, such as bacteria, fungi, mould.

    Organic compounds are often divided into four groups on the basis of their boiling points (Table 1) [4,5].

    Table 1.  Classification of VOCs.
    Category Group of compounds Boiling point (°C)
    Start End
    1 Very volatile organic compounds (gases), VVOC < 0 50-100
    2 Volatile organic compounds, VOC 50-100 240-260
    3 Semi-volatile organic compounds, SVOC 240-260 380-400
    4 Organic particle matter, PM > 380 -

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Taking into account that organic compounds in interior environment originate mainly from materials off-gassing, some general remarks can be drawn. Very volatile organic compounds are present at room temperature in the form of gases, because they have low boiling points (< 100 °C), and their off-gassing from materials is relatively fast [2,6]. Semi-volatile organic compounds are compounds with boiling temperatures above 240-260 °C, and among them mainly phthalates, long-chain alkanes, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), fatty acids and their esters, phosphate esters, and others can be found. These compounds can be present in indoor air for several years from their introduction, since they are removed from materials relatively slow [7].

    Organic compounds, which are present in air, may both influence human comfort and have a negative impact on human health. Selected compounds are responsible for [8,9]:

    - drowsiness (e.g. saturated and unsaturated aliphatic hydrocarbons, cyclohexane, ethylbenzene, 1-butanol);

    - headache and dizziness (e.g. hexane, heptane, cyclohexane, toluene, naphthalene, trimethylbenzene);

    - eye irritation (e.g. 2-ethylhexanol, benzaldehyde, styrene, propylbenzene);

    - respiratory problems and throat irritation (e.g. styrene, methyl cyclopentane, decalin);

    - fatigue, nausea, skin irritation,

    - may have toxic, carcinogenic or mutagenic effect, and many others.

    Negative health effects were confirmed in case of many organic compounds [10]. Many of those compounds have irritant effect on eyes, throat and respiratory system. Moreover, for selected compounds some other serious effects were found:

    - benzene: has a strong negative effect on central nervous system, can cause genetic diseases, anaemia and other circulatory system diseases, may cause fatigue, somnolence and headache. Moreover, benzene was classified as carcinogenic compound [10,11,12,13,14],

    - toluene: has a negative effect on central nervous system and respiratory system, causes headache, nausea, has impact on awareness, reproduction and hormonal system [10,12,14],

    - styrene: has a negative neurotic effect, can cause genetic illness and may have a carcinogenic effect [14],

    - naphthalene: causes genetic disease, cells destruction and anaemia [11],

    - isomers of trimethylbenzene: each isomer causes somnolence, headache and nausea. The most often found in air is 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene. [12],

    - aldehydes (especially formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein): are known to be toxic, mutagenic or carcinogenic. They are known both respiratory system and eye irritants and their inhalation may increase the likelihood of respiratory illness [10,15].

    Some of organic compounds has both short- and long-term activity, and negative health effects may appear even after few years after exposition, even if compounds' concentrations in air were at low level [4,16]. In vehicle, driver and passengers are exposed to relatively high concentrations of VOCs in car cabin [17]. When present in vehicle interior, organic compounds may also influence driving safety. Besides aforementioned health effects, semi-volatile organic compounds with boiling temperatures above 240-260 °C [5], mainly phthalates, condensate on interior surface of glass windscreen, reducing the transparency and causing light reflections. This phenomenon is called fogging [18,19].

    Many of organic compounds have both irritating and odorous character. People usually can recognize air quality on the basis of surrounding odour [20], and odour-effect usually appears faster than irritation-effects [4]. Human nose is a very sensitive odour detector, capable to detect odorous substances on very low concentration level [21]. On the other hand, odour perception is very subjective and for that reason people can recognize differently the same odour. Moreover, even if specific odour is recognized as a pleasant, after long-term exposure may lead to odour annoyance and discomfort [22].

    On the basis of total volatile organic compounds (TVOC) concentration some sensitivity thresholds values can be defined (Table 2, [16]). To our best knowledge, these threshold values have not been confirmed in scientific researches yet. For that reason it is difficult to establish precise guidelines or legal requirements [23].

    Table 2.  The possible health effects in dependence of the TVOC concentration [16].
    Total VOC (µg/m3) Possible health effects
    < 200 no irritation or discomfort feelings
    200 ÷ 3000 possible irritation or discomfort feelings
    3000 ÷ 25,000 expected discomfort feelings, possible headache
    > 25,000 possible neurotoxic effects

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Indoor air can be polluted by several hundred different organic compounds, including aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene derivatives, carbonyl compounds, halogenated derivatives of hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and others.

    The cabin of a vehicle is regarded to be a specific indoor microenvironment [24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. The vehicle interior is a closed space in which harmful compounds are concentrated, even if initially they are present at low concentration levels or their emission is relatively low [29,34]. The concentrations of different compounds in the passenger compartment are usually higher (even 2-3 fold) compared with the concentrations of these compounds in other closed environments, where people spend their time (residential, workplace, public buildings, hospitals, and others) [24,29,35,36].

    Volatile organic compounds are the main air pollutants inside the new vehicle. For emission of VOCs into the cabin air in majority plastics are responsible, among them polystyrene, polyethylene, polypropylene, polyamide, polyester, polyacetal, acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene, and others. The next sources of VOCs are rubber, natural or artificial leather, textiles, fibres, polyurethane foams, coatings, adhesives and others. Those materials are used to produce components in the cabin interior: dashboard, steering wheel, insulations (plastics), seats and couch, wrapping of the steering wheel (artificial or natural leather), upholstery, soundproofing, roof ceiling, floor mats, seat covers (textiles and fibres) [16,24,25,33,35,37,38,39,40]. The most commonly used material in the automotive industry is polyester, used among others for production of seat covers, floor mats, seat belts and others. Other materials, used to equip vehicle's interior are, for example, polyamide 6 and 6.6, and polypropylene (floor mats), polyethylene and poly(vinyl chloride) (headrests), polyurethane (seats, headrests) [41]. Among all these materials, natural leather is probably the biggest source of emissions of volatile organic compounds [18,37].

    The composition of VOCs, emitted from materials, is quite complicated mixture and difficulties in identification of organic compounds source may occur. Such difficulties are affected by the fact, that there are many indoor sources of VOCs emissions, and one compound can be emitted by different materials [20]. Additionally, some metallic or other inorganic elements can also be the source of organic compounds emissions due to the VOCs accumulation on the element's surface and their subsequent gradual release [42]. On the other hand porous materials can act as sorbents, therefore VOCs emitted from one material can be adsorbed on the surface of the other material [43,44].

    Emission from materials, called "materials off-gassing", can be divided into primary and secondary emission [45,46]. It is assumed that the primary emission of VOCs from materials is the emission which takes place during the first year after material production date. Emitted VOCs are mostly low-molecular organic compounds (i.e. solvent residues, additives and monomers). The secondary emission takes place over one year after material manufacture/introduction to indoor environment and is mostly connected with organic compounds which are products of degradation, hydrolysis or oxidation reaction, and others. The concentration of the compounds resulting from the secondary emission is usually several orders lower than from the primary emission [47].

    The amount of volatile organic compounds emitted from materials used to equip vehicle interior depends on several factors, including air temperature and relative humidity (RH) inside vehicle, the air exchange rate, type of material and the age of vehicle [25,35,37,38,48]. None of indoor environment can be recognized to be static, because temperature and humidity of air changes within time, which affects VOCs emission [2,7,47]. Along with the atmospheric conditions changes the change of organic compounds concentration takes place [1,7,34]. In summer days, when car is exposed to direct sunlight, air temperature in cabin can exceed 65 °C, and the most exposed to sunlight piece of equipment is a dashboard, which temperature may be even higher [41]. A significant dependence of VOCs concentrations inside the cabin on air temperature was confirmed in many studies [12,24,37,40,49]. It should be taken into account, that driver entering vehicle interior, where the air temperature is high, is exposed to maximum temporary VOCs concentration level [12].

    Increased temperature in vehicle interior leads to solvents, various types of additives and other compounds, such as toluene for example, evaporation from materials [38]. Previous studies of vehicle conditioned in an environmental chamber have shown that at a temperature of about 50 °C, the total emission of VOCs in vehicle interior may be even eleven times higher than at ambient temperature (about 20 °C). With the temperature increase inside the cabin, emission of heavier hydrocarbons and their methyl derivatives also increased [49].

    Many scientific researches on emission of harmful compounds from materials are available, however, multiplicity of materials causes that still little is known about the impact of different materials and their interactions on air quality in closed environment of car cabin. It was found that among the compounds, typically emitted into vehicle interior, are acetaldehyde, formaldehyde and xylenes [12], however it is very difficult to indicate clearly one source of those compounds. Ethylbenzene, for example, may be emitted by insulating and soundproofing foams, varnishes and degreasing agents, while emission of undecane may have source in paints and solvents [2].

    Elements made from poly(vinyl chloride), like skin texture imitating materials, are the main source of 2-ethyl-1-hexanol [50,51,52]. It was found that ethylbenzene and styrene are specific compounds emitted from polystyrene, both in ambient and elevated temperature. Benzaldehyde, nonanal, tridecane, decanal, and diethyl phthalate can be emitted at 23 °C from polyethylene, while in higher temperature (70 °C) 2-ethyl-1-hexanol was additionally detected [52]. Additionally, polyethylene may emit inter alia acetic acid, aldehydes, ketones, esters, terpenes, benzene, toluene, naphthalene and wide range of other compounds. Polyamide 6.6 is the source of emission of its degradation products, i.e. cyclopentanone, pentanoic acid and 1-methyl-2-pyridine [51]. The main compound, which is usually emitted from polypropylene, is 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethylheptane, regardless the temperature, while polyurethane foam emits inter alia toluene, phenol, decane, nonanal, benzaldehyde, diethyl phthalate etc. at ambient temperature [52].

    The floor mats are usually the source of styrene, ethylbenzene, hexane and toluene [33,42], while upholstery made from natural leather is the source of alcohols and 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone. Steering wheel covered with natural leather emits much more carbonyl compounds and furans than steering wheel made from polyurethane [53].

    Mentioned above compounds, which can be emitted from materials, were measured in test conditions, usually after conditioning in glass vessels. It should be pointed out, that test conditions may differ significantly from real conditions [54]. Complexity of chemical composition of air in vehicle interior is also affected by the fact, that multiplicity of different materials are used in small closed space, and each of them is a potential source of air pollution. The situation is also complicated by the fact, that there are many suppliers of similar car components and differences in material's manufacturing process, resulting in different emission rates, may occur. The quantity of organic compounds emitted from materials depends mainly on quality of particular processing steps, and being influenced by, inter alia, material and its residual moisture, mould temperature, residence time, cooling rate, hot spots etc. [55]. Additionally, plastics are often enriched by different additives to achieve desired properties. Among those additives plasticizers, stabilizers or flame retardants can be found [19].

    Despite the fact, that car is a very often used mean of transport, vehicle interior is not well recognized indoor environment, especially in comparison to other indoor environments. It is mainly connected with the fact, that many car brands and models with different interior equipment and many car producers are present on the market.

    The driver and passengers may spend in vehicle interior even 8% of the day, commuting from home to work, traveling during private or business activities [37,53,56,57]. Therefore, persons traveling in automobiles are exposed to, inter alia, the presence of various aromatic hydrocarbons [6,12,24,58,59,60,61,62], aldehydes [24,26,27,28,29,30,63], and phthalates [24], further on carbon monoxide [29,64,65], nitrogen oxides [29,65], particulate matter [29,31,58,66], polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [60], and others.

    Chemical composition of air inside vehicle differs qualitatively and quantitatively for new cars in comparison to older vehicles [38]. In new car, in which VOCs emission from materials is the highest [33,37], there are present mainly low molecular weight volatile organic compounds. Concentrations and types of organic compounds present in new car cabin, obtained during different scientific researches, are presented in section 2.1.

    Along with the time of vehicle usage, emission of organic compounds from materials is gradually replaced by emission from so-called moving external sources, that is, for example, the combustion of fuel, fuel leakages and others [57]. The concentrations of VOCs in driven cars depend on many factors, among them the model of the car, it's construction and the related exchange of air, season and weather conditions, time and travel routes, traffic congestion, fuel distribution, and others [35,67,68,69]. The summary of air quality studies in used vehicles is presented in section 2.2.

    The number of researches carried out in terms of human exposure to in-vehicle pollution associated with communication traffic is relatively high, however, there is only few research on air quality in new vehicles connected with materials off-gassing [33,35,53,62], or the number of vehicles under study is limited [25].

    In most of researches on in-vehicle air quality, air samples were collected under static conditions, which means that the engine was shut off and all doors and windows were closed. In most cases vehicles were conditioned at specified temperature before air sampling. Static conditions and conditioning of vehicle under study ensured homogenous distribution of organic compounds in vehicle compartment.

    The concentrations of VOCs in parked vehicle (static conditions) were significantly higher than in vehicle during the test under normal operating conditions (vehicle moving) [17]. This conclusion was confirmed in studies performed by Fedoruk and Kerger [40], on the example of a 4-year-old vehicle, found that concentrations of 10 major compounds were higher in static than in dynamic conditions (vehicle in traffic). Moreover, qualitative air composition was dependent on air sampling conditions.

    The summary of results obtained during studies on air quality in the cabin of new vehicles is presented in Table 3. Vehicles with the age under 3 years were considered as new ones. Only few studies concentrated on vehicles directly after manufacturing are available [70,71,72,73,74,75]. The sum of determined organic compounds differed significantly in different vehicles, depending on test conditions, and ranged from 136 to 14,081 µg/m3. Another factor influencing quantity of organic compounds determined, were differences in air sampling procedure and preparation of vehicle before air sampling.

    Comparison of main compounds frequency in new vehicles is presented in Figure 1. This comparison is based on data presented in Table 3 and presents ten main compounds which were found in new vehicles cabins the most frequently. Among those compounds, isomers of xylene were found as one of main air pollutants in majority of vehicles under study (79%). Another compound frequently detected in new vehicles interiors on elevated concentration level was toluene (68% vehicles), which is consistent with statements in chapter 1.4 (emission from materials). On the other hand, those compounds may also originate from exhaust gases, when vehicle is in road traffic.

    Figure 1.  Frequency of the main VOCs compounds in new vehicles (based on Table 3).
    Table 3.  Investigation on air quality in new vehicles (less than 3 years-old).
    Vehicles Test conditions TVOC (µg m−3) Main compounds (µg m−3) Ref.
    101 Japanese models: Daihatsu, Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru Static, summer, average t = 27 °C, RH = 50%, about 80 cm above the floor 136 ÷ 3968 Heptane: 28.0, hexane: 23.0, 2,4-dimethylheptane: 20.0, decane: 16.0, 2-methylpentane: 15.0, toluene: 33.0, m, p-xylene: 9.4, 1,2,4-TMB(2): 8.3, ethylbenzene: 7.2, 3-ethyltoluene: 5.5, 1-butanol: 23.0, methylcyclopentane: 7.9, 1-nonanal: 5.9, ethyl acetate: 5.7 [25]
    4 models: Toyota Serena, Ford F150 Truck, Ford Mustang, VW Beetle > 1 h of conditioning (1), about 50 cm above the floor, at passenger seat, t = 16 ÷ 44 °C 300 ÷ 7500 1: toluene, undecane, xylenes, 1,2,4-TMB(2); 2: 1-butanol, xylenes, 1,2,4-TMB(2), acetophenone; 3: dodecane, undecane, 2,6-dimethylundecane, 2-ethyltoluene; 4: toluene, xylenes, 1,2,3-TMB(2), 2-ethyltoluene [33]
    1 vehicle: Nissan Serena Static, outdoor parking, summer/autumn, 5 h conditioning (1), about 80 cm above the floor, Osaka, Japan 14,081 m, p-xylene: 3104.0, undecane: 1615.8, decane: 1300.6, o-xylene: 898.9, 1-hexadecene: 767.8, dodecane: 715.7 [35]
    5 vehicles: 3 domestic, Taiwan (< 3 months), 2 from E.U. (> 4 months) 1 h of conditioning (1), at driver seat at shoulder's position, t = 32 °C, RH = 56% N/A(3) Toluene: 2000 ± 3000, m, p-xylene: 2500 ± 1400, o-xylene: 1400 ± 1500, styrene: 1500 ± 2200, 1,2,3-TMB(2): 170 ± 140, undecane: 130 ± 76 [37]
    1 vehicle Static, 16 h of conditioning in environmental chamber, t = 25 ± 0.5 °C; RH = 50±10%, in the middle of front headrests, 20 cm away from the car roof (driver's breathing zone) 4940 Benzene: 48, toluene: 82, o-xylene: 95, m, p-xylene: 346, ethylbenzene: 85, styrene: 155, undecane: 40, decane: 345, nonane: 341, cyclohexanone: 301, tetrachlorethylene: 242, bytyl acetate: 225, α-pinene: 200 [38]
    3 vehicles (<6 months), Ford Taurus, Chevrolet Lumina Static and driving conditions, static—outdoor parking, driving—in traffic, summer, Los Angeles, USA > 5673 and > 1999 1: 2-methyldecane: > 375, 5-methyldecane: > 271, styrene: > 264, 2-methylnonane: > 227 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethyl-heptane: 218, phenol: 194; 2: toluene: > 239, phenol: 124, styrene: 94, e-caprolaktam: 96, 2-ethylhexane acid: 83 [40]
    101 Japanese models: Daihatsu, Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru Static, summer, average t = 32 °C, RH = 45%, about 80 cm above the floor 556 ÷ 11,398 Heptane: 150.0, hexane: 65.0, 2,4-dimethylheptane: 97.0, decane: 58.0, 3-methylnonane: 68.0, dodecane: 46.0, 2-methylpentane: 36.0, tridecane: 29.0, tetradecane: 26.0, toluene: 40.0, o-xylene: 21.0, 1,2,4-TMB(2): 24.0, ethylbenzene: 12.0, 1-butanol: 58.0, methylisobutyl ketone: 34.0 [53]
    802 vehicles, different trims and styles Static, underground parking garage in Beijing, China, t = 18 ± 2 °C N/A(3) Benzene: 270 ± 250, toluene: 1220 ± 1810, Σxylenes: 170 ± 330, formaldehyde: 80 ± 60 [57]
    11 vehicles (< 1 week), the same model produced in Poland Static, outdoor parking area, 1 h of conditioning (1), 50 cm above driver seat, (breathing zone) N/A(3) Benzene: 2.1 ÷ 28.0, toluene: 8.9 ÷ 156.6, xylenes: 37.3 ÷ 198.2 [70]
    9 vehicles (< 1 week), the same model produced in Poland Static, outdoor parking area, 50 cm above driver seat (breathing zone) 1326 ÷ 3067 Aliphatics: 316.6 ÷ 878.4, aromatics: 136.6 ÷ 266.3, cycloalkanes: 46.6 ÷ 232.1, carbonyls: 3.9 ÷ 14.4 [71]
    9 vehicles (< 1 day), the same model, different trim and equipment Outdoor parking area, autumn, t = 21 ÷ 25 °C, RH = 48 ÷ 56%, 15 cm from steering wheel, 50 cm above the driver seat 854 ÷ 6899 Heptane: 6.7 ÷ 670.1, 3-methylhexane: 3.9 ÷ 421.8, 2-methylhexane: 1.8 ÷283.7, undecane: 60.6 ÷ 273.3, methylcyclohexane: 4.0 ÷ 686.5, toluene: 19.4 ÷ 315.1, xylenes: 39.2 ÷ 425.4, 2-ethylhexanol: 13.6 ÷ 58.4 [72]
    10 vehicles (< 3 days), 2 brands produced in Poland Static, t = 17.5 ÷ 24.7 °C, RH = 21.3 ÷ 56.9%, 50 cm above driver seat (breathing zone) Model 1: 3205 (av.), Model 2: 2517 (av.) Model 1: undecane: 195 ± 47.3, decane: 67.8 ± 13.5, dodecane: 62.3 ± 10.6, heptane: 41.4 ± 24.8, xylenes: 50.4, toluene: 103 ± 15.8, ethylbenzene: 38.8 ± 5.12, methylcyclohexane: 39.4 ± 22.7, 2-ethylhexanol: 45.1 ± 11.6, limonene: 38.8 ± 9.51; Model 2: undecane: 147 ± 30.2, heptane: 100 ± 54.4, 3-methylhexane: 90.3 ± 50.0, decane: 49.8 ± 21.3, dodecane: 44.5 ± 9.88, toluene: 54.7 ± 17.9, xylenes: 41.2, methylcyclohexane: 67.1 ± 37.4, 2-ethylhexanol: 41.1 ± 20.0, limonene: 35.4 ± 13.9 [73]
    5 vehicles (< 1 month), 3 brands Static, 16 h of conditioning (1), 50 cm above driver seat (breathing zone) 1259.9 ÷ 8612.4 Heptane: 7.5 ÷ 918.1, undecane: 18.4 ÷ 274.7, toluene: 35.7 ÷ 240.9, ethylbenzene: 43.9 ÷ 519.7, xylenes: 34.8 ÷ 287.4 [74]
    1 vehicle (< 1 month) Environmental chamber, t = 65 °C, RH = 50% 10,929 m, p-xylene: 1570.7, C3-alkilbenzene: 693.5, C4-alkilbenzene: 1041.1, dodecane: 928.9, o-xylene: 879.8, tridecane: 687.1, methylpyrrolidinone: 425.1 [75]
    (1) conditioning means vehicle in static conditions before air sampling (doors and windows closed, ventilation off); (2) TMB: trimethylbenzene; (3) N/A: not available

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Concentration of main air pollutants in new vehicles varied significantly, i.e. toluene range was: 5.5-2000 µg/m3; xylenes: 9.4-2500 µg/m3; undecane: 40.0-1615.8 µg/m3; dodecane: 44.5-928.9 µg/m3; and decane: 16.0-1300.6 µg/m3. These differences originated probably from differences in vehicles' age, and differences in materials used.

    Chien [37] found that intra-model variability (expressed as a coefficient of variation between different examples of the same model) for 12 organic compounds was on average 47%, and between different brands (inter-brand variability) it was 95%. This means that air composition, determined in one example of vehicle model can be transferred with approximation of 47% to another vehicle example of the same model. The differences in the concentrations of volatile organic compounds in different vehicle brands are so significant, that air composition in one vehicle brand cannot be directly transferred to another brand. Chien performed researches on 12 most common organic compounds, in five different vehicles. On this basis it was found that the concentrations of determined compounds varied significantly, depending on the vehicle model. On the other hand, Faber et al. in their studies investigated changes of key compounds (benzene, toluene and xylenes, BTX) in eleven new vehicles of the same model. They found, that concentration of BTX compounds was as follows: benzene 2.1 ÷ 28.0 µg/m3, toluene 8.9 ÷ 156.6 µg/m3, xylenes: 37.3 ÷ 198.2 µg/m3, depending significantly on the vehicle example [70]. In other study, Faber et al. found that compounds like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, naphthalene, methylcyclohexane, 3-methylhexane, octane, decane, undecane, dodecane, tridecane, cyclohexanone etc. were found in all nine vehicles tested [71]. Fedoruk and Kerger found that toluene, styrene and alkanes were present in all three vehicles tested [40].

    Buters et al. [75] conducted a study on two vehicles of the same type with the same interior equipment. One car was new (about one month after production date) and one was used (about 3 years-old). It was found that the concentration of organic compounds in a new car was ten times higher than in used car. On the basis of above mentioned studies, it can be stated that not only compounds concentrations change with the vehicle usage, but also changes the quantity of VOCs. You et al. [38] identified 82 compounds in one new vehicle, whereas in the one-year-old vehicle they found 61 compounds, and only 36 compounds in five-year-old.

    Presented results differ in terms of number of vehicles tested and number of VOC analysed. For example, Zhang et al. [57] conducted a study on 802 different new cars, but they analysed only four organic compounds. They found that toluene was the predominant air pollutant in all vehicles cabins. In another study, Yoshida and Matsunaga [35], determined 161 organic compounds, however, the subject of their research was only one new private car. The widest range of research, both in terms of the number of vehicles tested and the number of identified organic compounds, was conducted by Yoshida et al. [25,53]. During their study air samples were collected from 101 Japanese cars. In air samples a total number of 275 organic compounds were identified, and TVOC depended significantly on the model and age of vehicle tested, varying from 136 to 11,398 µg/m3. From all determined compounds, 242 were present in all vehicles tested.

    Some studies were focused also on the influence of materials in vehicle interior on air quality, VOCs concentrations and their types changes. Brodzik et al. [72] investigated the influence of interior materials change (colour of steering wheel, changes in upholstery, introducing of sunroof or convertible roof) on concentration of organic compounds. They found that intra-model variability in identically equipped cars was below 14%. Introducing sunroof into vehicle with the same interior equipment caused increase of TVOC by 1.6 times. On the other hand changes in upholstery materials in vehicles with sunroof caused increase of TVOC 2 times. Effect of trim materials was also described by Xu et al. [17], who found that in cabin with leather trim concentrations of benzene, toluene, xylenes, styrene, acrolein with acetone were higher than in cabin with fabric trim, while formaldehyde concentration was on similar level, regardless trim material.

    To sum up, in most of the vehicles under study the main air pollutants were aliphatic hydrocarbons, accounting from 42 to 59% of TVOC [25,35,38,53], then aromatic hydrocarbons, accounting from 16 to 42% of TVOC [25,35,53]. Cycloalkanes, chlorinated hydrocarbons, terpenes, esters, and other compounds, accounted for less than 10% of the total emission of VOCs [35] or 18% of TVOC [53]. In other study, unidentified compounds accounted for 41.8 ÷ 66.3% of VOCs emission [33]. The most found compounds at high concentration level in new vehicles interiors were: toluene [25,33,37,38,40,53,57,70,71,72,73,74], xylenes [25,33,37,38,53,57,70,71,72,73,74,75], ethylbenzene [25,38,53,71,74], isomers of trimethylbenzene [25,33,37,53,71], heptane [25,40,53,71,72,73,74], undecane [33,37,38,71,72,73,74], styrene [37,38,40] and 1-butanol [25,33,53].

    Many of researches on air quality in used vehicles were described so far, and mainly focused on the exposure of people to volatile organic compounds present in the interiors of these vehicles. Mentioned studies have been conducted mainly in urban areas with heavy traffic in Europe, Asia, and in the USA. Comparison of the research results on air quality inside the cabin of used vehicles is presented in Table 4.

    Most of the investigations were focused on compounds to be known as vehicle exhaust gases emissions markers and indicators of car cabin pollution: benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, o-xylene, m-xylene and p-xylene (BTEX) [26,27,28,30,36,63,67,69,70,76,77,78]. These compounds are emitted during fuel combustion in car engines or refuelling, and can penetrate into the interior of the cabin in natural circulation of air or suction through the ventilation system [28,29,36,59,64,69,78,79]. Comparison of average BTEX concentrations on the basis of 20 used vehicles is presented in Figure 2, however average value or median does not reflect the concentration range of BTEX compounds in vehicles in different traffic conditions. The concentrations ranges were, respectively: benzene 0.75-203.7 µg/m3; toluene 32.2-770 µg/m3; o-xylene 6.6-76 µg/m3; m, p-xylene 7.4-127.2 µg/m3; ethylbenzene 0.6-213 µg/m3.

    Figure 2.  Average BTEX compounds concentrations in used vehicles.

    It can be noticed that the highest reported concentrations of toluene and xylenes are lower than in some cases of new vehicles. These compounds concentrations undergo the same changes as benzene, which concentration is much higher than in new cars. This suggests that toluene and xylenes are example of compounds which undergo two opposite trends: lowering in-vehicle concentration due to decrease of materials emission in time, and increase of in-vehicle concentration due to outdoor pollution, i.e. exhaust gases.

    Car exhaust gases are major source of human exposure to particulate matter and soot [31,66], aldehydes, among which the most toxic are formaldehyde and acetaldehyde [80], naphthalene, which is a component of gasoline and diesel fuel [59]. In non-moving car (in traffic jam) the car's exhaust gases can penetrate to cabin and contribute to pollution inside car [76]. Moreover, vehicle's exhaust gases are the main source of aldehydes in urban areas, and it was found that aldehydes may be present in car cabin at elevated concentrations. Therefore, car's users are exposed to these toxic compounds, which can originate both from exhaust gases and from materials off-gassing [15]. It is also believed that human exposure to BTEX compounds is closely associated with the use of a car [36,65]. It is estimated that high concentration of toxic pollutants such as benzene and other aromatic compounds in vehicle interior, may comprise from 10 to 60% of non-smoking human exposure to these compounds [58].

    Table 4.  Investigation of air quality in used vehicles.
    Vehicles Test conditions Place of testing Compounds (µg m−3) Ref.
    7 private or rental vehicles (~ 5 years of usage) Real busy traffic Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, Shenzhen, China TVOC: 612.25 ± 188.92, benzene: 16.73 ± 7.45, toluene: 66.02 ± 62.00, ethylbenzene: 14.20 ± 12.14, styrene: 6.78 ± 5.55, xylenes: 28.09 ± 28.72, formaldehyde: 16.43 ± 4.95, acetaldehyde: 12.47± 11.44, acrolein + acetone: 20.65 ± 11.44 [17]
    20 taxis Real traffic, summer, winter, breathing zone, smoking allowed Taegu, Korea Benzene: 33.3 ± 14.2, toluene: 120.0 ± 59.6, ethylbenzene: 10.7 ± 4.4, o-xylene: 9.0 ± 4.7, m, p-xylene: 21.6 ± 9.9 [26]
    33 private vehicles (29 models, 15 producers) Real traffic, winter/spring (t = 16 ÷ 45 °C), in the breathing zone, in the middle of cabin Heraklion, Greece ΣPBDE(1): 0.00040 ÷ 0.00057 [24]
    2 vehicles Real traffic, smoking not allowed Detroit, USA Toluene: 8.4 ÷ 26.3, hexane: 7.9 ÷ 21.2, m, p-xylene: 4.7 ÷ 10.1, benzene: 3.9 ÷ 9.3, 1,2,4-TMB(2): 2.0 ÷ 4.8 [27]
    2 used vehicles: Hyundai Excel Real traffic, winter, in the breathing zone Taegu, Korea Benzene: 30.7 ± 17.0, toluene: 100.8 ± 78.1, ethylbenzene: 9.2 ± 6.6, o-xylene: 22.8 ± 17.1, m, p-xylene: 29.1 ± 17.6 [28]
    2 vehicles: Hyundai Sonata Ⅱ, Hyundai Elantra Driving conditions, simulated, autumn/winter, passenger seat and back seat Taegu, Korea Benzene: 49.1 ± 35.8, toluene: 115.0 ± 56.4, ethylbenzene: 11.7 ± 8.8, o-xylene: 13.2 ± 10.0, m-xylene: 20.5 ± 13.2, p-xylene: 10.1 ± 9.7 [30]
    50 trooper cars Real traffic, summer/autumn, at backside of front passenger seat, no smoking North Carolina, USA Aldehydes: 38.1 ± 17.1, benzene: 4.0 ± 3.2 ppb, toluene: 10.4 ± 20.2 ppb, ethylbenzene: 0.9 ± 0.4 ppb, xylenes: 4.5 ± 2.0 ppb, p-ethyltoluene: 0.4 ± 0.2 ppb, ΣTMB(2): 2.0 ± 0.8 ppb [37]
    11 private vehicles, urban area Real traffic Hannover, Germany Benzene: 26.6 ± 40.3, toluene: 90.2 ± 141.1, ethylbenzene: 22.5 ± 35.2, o-xylene: 18.5 ± 25.9, m, p-xylene: 54.4 ± 80.3 [36]
    33 private vehicles, industrial area Real traffic Hannover, Germany Benzene: 42.0 ± 101.8, toluene: 129.4 ± 280.7, ethylbenzene: 16.4 ± 31.6, o-xylene: 13.6 ± 24.4, m, p-xylene: 48.0 ± 92.6 [36]
    2 used vehicles (1-year, 5-years old) Static, environmental chamber, conditioning for 16 h, t = 25 °C, RH = 50 ± 10% China Benzene: 2.4 ÷ 10.0, toluene: 32.2 ÷ 50.0, o-xylene: 3.3 ÷ 9.9, m, p-xylene: 10.2 ÷ 20.0, ethylbenzene: 3.5 ÷ 9.9, styrene: 2.3 ÷ 9.8, decane: 8.1 ÷ 89.3, undecane: 9.3 ÷ 130.0, dodecane: 6.4 ÷ 163.4 [38]
    2 vehicles (4-years old) Real traffic, summer Los Angeles, USA Benzene: 1.9, toluene: 71.4 ± 23.7, ethylbenzene: 4.2 ± 2.3, o-xylene: 6.2 ± 2.7, m, p-xylene: 11.2 ± 5.2, hexane: 5.2 ± 4.3 [40]
    20 vehicles (> 3 years old) Static, underground parking garage, t = 18 ± 2 °C Beijing, China Benzene: 250, toluene: 770, Σxylenes: 110 [57]
    10 vehicles: 5 unleaded gasoline, 5 diesel Real traffic, winter/spring, at passenger seat, no smoking Taegu, Korea Gasoline: benzene: 6.52 ÷ 33.6, naphthalene: 1.13 ÷ 5.36 [59]
    1 vehicle: VW Golf Simulated, summer, winter, in the breathing zone Spandau-Neukölln, Germany ΣPAH(3) in summer: 10.2 ± 5.6, ΣPAH(3) in winter: 28.7 ± 14.5 [60]
    8 private vehicles: Hyundai Grandure ⅡI, gasoline Driving conditions, static—parking area, at the back seat Seoul, Korea Toluene: 34.8 ± 16.8, styrene: 1.15 ± 0.82, formaldehyde: 49.0 ± 13.9, acetaldehyde: 45.6 ± 8.20, propionaldehyde: 13.5 ± 8.51, butyraldehyde: 24.13 ± 13.5, benzene: 1.14 ± 0.69 [61]
    23 private vehicles Real traffic, summer, winter, smoking allowed Ispra, Italy Summer: dodecane: 10.4 ÷ 192.5, benzene: 2.0 ÷ 149.1, toluene: 3.3 ÷ 558.4, xylenes: 2.9 ÷ 281.7, ethylbenzene: 0.6 ÷ 60.2, 1,2,4-TMB(2): 0.7 ÷ 54.6, acetaldehyde: 10.8 ÷ 65.1, acetone: 9.3 ÷ 56.0; winter: dodecane: 4.3 ÷ 23.3, benzene: 4.3 ÷ 90.7, toluene: 9.3 ÷ 309.5, xylenes: 8.3 ÷ 202.1, ethylbenzene: 1.5 ÷ 39.4, 1,2,4-TMB(2): 1.6 ÷ 40.1, acetaldehyde: 5.2 ÷ 38.9, acetone: 14.4 ÷ 39.7 [62]
    9 private vehicles Real traffic, winter Boston, USA Benzene: 17.0 ± 10.0, toluene: 33.1 ± 20.4, ethylbenzene: 5.8 ± 3.9, o-xylene: 7.3 ± 4.8, m, p-xylene: 20.9 ± 13.8, formaldehyde: 5.1 ± 3.9 [63]
    2 rental cars: Mercury Sable, Mercuty Marquis, gasoline Simulated, at driver's breathing zone Raleigh, USA Benzene: 11.6 ± 6.9, toluene: 46.5 ± 27.3, o-xylene: 11.4 ± 6.2, m, p-xylene: 30.5 ± 17.2, 1,2,4- TMB(2): 15.6 ± 8.7, butane: 54.3 ± 84.7, isopentane: 68.7 ± 68.8, pentane: 30.8 ± 77.1, hexane: 13.6 ± 18.5 [65]
    4 vehicles: Hyundai Elantra, Daewoo Prince, Kia Pride, gasoline Simulated conditions, summer, winter, 55 cm above passenger seat, breathing zone Taegu, Korea Benzene: 60.2 ± 50.9, toluene: 181.0 ± 158.0, ethylbenzene: 24.8 ± 18.9, o-xylene: 53.0 ± 41.9, m, p-xylene: 71.8 ± 75.7 [67]
    5 private vehicles: Ford Fiesta, Vauxhall, Cavalier, Nissan Micra, BMW-5 Simulated, in the breathing zone, normal ventilation Birmingham, UK Benzene: 7.7 ppb, toluene: 31.0 ppb, o-xylene: 2.5 ppb, m, p-xylene: 2.7 ppb [69]
    2 vehicles produced in Poland Static, outdoor parking area, 50 cm above driver seat (breathing zone) Bielsko-Biała, Poland Benzene: 1.4 to 38.5, toluene: 13.2 to 74.5, xylenes: 3.0 to 58.9 [70]
    1 vehicle (3 years) Environmental chamber, t = 65 °C, RH = 50% - Acetone: 250.0, mehtylpyrrolidinone: 93.0, methylcyclohexane: 91.7, acetaldehyde: 73.8, ethylhexanol: 56.2, toluene: 47.1, m, p-xylene: 46.3, o-xylene: 24.4, ethylbenzene: 11.7 [75]
    1 vehicle, gasoline fuelled, Renault Express Simulated, from autumn to summer, in the breathing zone Paris, France Benzene: 42 ± 16, toluene: 218 ± 61, ethylbenzene: 33 ± 12, o-xylene: 36 ± 12, m, p-xylene: 110 ± 43, 1,2,4-TMB (2): 47 ± 13 [76]
    1 vehicle, Ford Fiesta Real traffic, autumn, 6 days per week Huddersfield, UK Benzene: 108.3 ± 106.2 [82]
    12 private vehicles Real traffic, smoking allowed Birmingham, UK Benzene: 203.7 ± 152.3, toluene: 494.0 ± 283.6, ethylbenzene: 51.9 ± 30.8, o-xylene: 54.2 ± 33.6, m-xylene: 127.2 ± 76.8, p-xylene: 52.5 ± 31.5, 1,3,5-TMB(2): 9.4 ± 5.9, styrene: 4.3 ± 3.1, 1,2,4- TMB(2): 33.9 ±21.5, naphthalene: 5.0 ± 3.3 [81]
    11 vehicles, different fuels: petrol, diesel, LPG Simulated, winter, t = 29, 1 °C, RH = 55%, at driver breathing zone Kolkata, India Gasoline engines: benzene: 112.4 ± 65.6, toluene: 207.3 ± 86.4, ethylbenzene: 69.4 ± 30.8, o-xylene: 54.6 ± 33.7, m, p-xylene: 93.6 ± 28.3; diesel engines: benzene: 87.0 ± 59.5, toluene: 178.9 ± 78.5, ethylbenzene: 53.6 ± 20.6, o-xylene: 50.9 ± 15.1, m, p-xylene: 112.7 ± 36.3 [78]
    2 private vehicles: Chevrolet Celebrity, Plymouth Horizon Real traffic, 50 cm above passenger seat New Jersey/ New York, USA Benzene: 16.2 ÷ 26.4, toluene: 71 ÷ 101, o-xylene: 12.5 ÷ 20.7, m, p-xylene: 31.4 ÷ 52.9, ethylbenzene: 8.8 ÷ 14.3, 1,2,4- TMB(2): 13.9 ÷23.2, hexane: 9.8 ÷ 9.9, isooctane: 21.9 ÷ 29.2, 3-methylpentane: 15.5 ÷ 26.0 [79]
    40 private vehicles, gasoline, Daewoo Real traffic, summer, winter, in the front of passenger seat, in the breathing zone, no smoking Taegu, Korea Formaldehyde: 20.0 ± 7.3, acetaldehyde: 8.9 ± 5.7 [80]
    24 vehicles, Japanese models: Nissan, Honda, Suzuki, Toyota, Subaru, Mitsubishi, Daihatsu, Mazda, Isuzu; different age Outdoor parking, not conditioned, late autumn, t = 13.7 ÷ 25.8 °C, near driver headrest in the breathing zone, smoking allowed Yokohama, Kawagoe, Japan TVOC: 8 ÷ 867, 3-methylpentane: 0 ÷ 342, 2-methylpropane: 0 ÷ 310, p-dichlorobenzene: 0 ÷ 209, 1,2,3-TMB(2): 0 ÷ 163, cyclohexane: 0 ÷ 85.7, 1-methyl-4-ethylbenzene: 0 ÷ 83.9, toluene: 4.23 ÷ 78.3, undecanal: 0 ÷ 78.0, dichloromethane: 0 ÷ 69.4 [83]
    Multiple vehicles, gasoline Real traffic, at driver's collar Taichung, Taiwan TVOC: 962 ÷ 1071, benzene: 135, toluene: 371, ethylbenzene: 213, m, p-xylene: 90, o-xylene: 76 [84]
    2 vehicles Simulated driving conditions, in driver breathing zone Dublin, Ireland Benzene: 0.84 ÷ 8.94, 1,3-butadiene: 0.37 ÷ 2.96 [85]
    3 vehicles: compact, midsize sedan, large sedan; gasoline Static, outdoor parking, t = 35.8 °C, RH = 41.9%, at 60 cm above centre of back seat Seoul, Korea Benzene: 0.75 ÷ 6.03, toluene: 4.77 ÷ 18.7, xylenes: 2.02 ÷ 14.4, styrene: 0.05 ÷ 0.57, formaldehyde: 7.03 ÷ 38.2, acetaldehyde: 2.11 ÷ 14.0, acetone: 3.54 ÷ 15.9, methyl ethyl ketone: 0.29 ÷ 2.09, methyl isobutyl ketone: 0.06 ÷ 4.48 [86]
    (1) PBDE: polybrominated diphenyl ethers; (2) TMB: trimethylbenzene; (3) PAH: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    When comparing different indoor microenvironments, occupied by people: homes, offices, laboratories, cinemas, libraries, pubs, restaurants, department stores, perfume shops, coach and train stations, trains, buses and cars, it was found that the highest concentration of benzene and 1,3-butadiene was in cars [81]. Moreover, VOCs concentrations were higher in vehicle cabin than outside vehicle (roadside) at the same time [31,36]. In addition, the highest concentration of benzene was observed in the case of a car in comparison to the other means of road transport (train, bus, bicycle) [82].

    Presented results of particular investigations differ in terms of compounds concentrations. Those differences are the result of differences in the vehicle model, it's height, cabin volume, smoking, driving and meteorological parameters [26,67].

    Seasonal differences in VOCs concentrations are clearly visible. In winter, when combustion efficiency of gasoline is lower, the concentrations of aromatic compounds in the roadway air are higher [26,76]. This resulted in higher concentrations of aromatic VOCs in vehicle cabin, despite the fuel used (both in cars with gasoline and diesel or LPG engines). On this basis, it was stated that the presence of organic compounds in vehicle interior risen from car exhaust gases of other road users [26]. This theory was confirmed by Dor et al. [76], who proved that the exhaust gases enter vehicle interior in heavy traffic. In addition, higher concentrations of determined compounds in winter months can be explained by lower air circulation inside the car (windows closed). Research of Lawryk and Weisel [79] have shown that under conditions of limited air exchange in the vehicle cabin, toluene and xylenes are present at a significantly higher concentration levels, than under normal ventilation. In the case of well-maintained cars, most of the VOCs present in the passenger compartment comes from the exhaust gases of other road users [78]. Such situation may occur especially during slow driving in heavy traffic, because VOCs concentrations in car's interior is highly dependent upon traffic density and driving speed [64,84]. Moreover, it was proved that the closer distance to the exhaust gases of former vehicle in heavy traffic, the higher concentration of 1,3-butadiene inside vehicle [85].

    On the other hand, Geiss et al. [62] found that concentration of 18 different organic compounds were 36% higher in summer than in winter, which is consistent with the results of Jo and Choi [28]. The exceptions were benzene and α-pinene, whichconcentrations were independent of the season. Jo and Park [67] found, that much higher concentrations of analysed compounds were determined in summer months than in winter, and in the case of benzene and toluene differences of concentrations between seasons were statistically significant.

    Faber et al. in their studies investigated changes of key compounds (benzene, toluene and xylenes, BTX) during vehicles usage. They found, that concentrations of BTX compounds increased with mileage, from 1.4 to 38.5 µg/m3 for benzene; from 13.2 to 74.5 µg/m3 for toluene, reaching the maximum value of 93.1 µg/m3 during the test; and from 3.0 to 58.9 µg/m3 for xylenes [70]. Aromatic compounds may enter the interior of vehicle during driving, refuelling due to fuel evaporation or to local fuel leakages. Jo and Choi concluded that emissions and fuel evaporation are the main sources of human exposure to aromatic compounds in the passenger vehicle [28], and toluene was the most abundant compound in vehicle interior [26,30]. Exhaust gases from fuel combustion contain aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons, oxygen containing hydrocarbons, cycloalkanes, terpenes, and halogenated compounds, and among them BTEX compounds are present at relatively high level, accounting for 37-50% of total VOCs contents [87]. Moreover, aldehydes penetration from roadside into the vehicle interior exceeds any potential amount which can be emitted by materials [80].

    Another parameter influencing VOCs concentration in vehicles under traffic conditions, is the type of fuel used. According to research, in gasoline powered vehicle, car user is exposed to increased concentrations of 5 to 24 different VOCs in comparison to cars powered by other fuels or other means of transport [26,28,59,67,68,69]. Concentrations of benzene and toluene were 3 times higher in cars fuelled with gasoline than in cars with diesel engines [36]. Som et al. [78] in their work investigated cars powered by different types of fuel (diesel, LPG, gasoline with 3 and 5% benzene content). Based on the survey, it was found that exposure to organic compounds from the group of BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and m, p-xylene) depends on the type of fuel used. Drivers exposure to benzene and naphthalene was studied by Jo and Lee [59], who found, that these compounds concentrations are much higher in cars fuelled with gasoline than in cars fuelled with diesel.

    The influence of the external environment (urban and industrial area) on BTEX concentrations in the passenger compartment was studied by Ilgen et al. [36]. It was found that external air pollution (industrial area) significantly affected in-vehicle air quality. Similar conclusions arisen from research of Chan et al. [65], who found that the concentrations of 24 different VOCs (16 aliphatic compounds, 1 olefin and 7 aromatic compounds) clearly depends on the driving route. The highest concentrations were observed on road transport for isopentane, butane and pentane, and among aromatic hydrocarbons, for toluene, m, p-xylene and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene. Chan et al. [63] also found, that among target VOCs the highest concentration was for toluene and the lowest for ethylbenzene in each commuting mode.

    There is no worldwide accepted regulation or guidelines regarding interior vehicle air quality so far. A level of TVOC concentration at 1÷3 mg/m3 was proposed by Schupp et al. few years ago [12]. Local limitations differ both in measured organic compounds number and their concentrations. Voluntary guidelines of Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (JAMA, [88]) cover 9 compounds, while Chinese [89] and Korean [90] limitations 7 and 8, respectively. In each case formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, ethylbenzene, styrene, toluene and xylenes are in the scope of interest and for these compounds maximum allowed values were established. Although type of volatile organic compounds in the area of interest may be the same, the differences appear in the test method details. Limitations of considered VOCs concentrations are presented in Table 5.

    Table 5.  Limitations of VOCs concentrations in vehicle (µg m−3).
    Compound Japan (2006) [88] China (2011) [89] Korea (2013) [90]
    Benzene - 110 30
    Toluene 260 1100 1000
    Xylene 870 1500 870
    Ethylbenzene 3800 1500 1000
    Styrene 220 260 220
    Tetradecane 330 - -
    Formaldehyde 100 100 210
    Acetaldehyde 48 50 -
    Acrolein - 50 50
    p-dichlorobenzene 240 - -
    di-n-butyl phthalate 220 - -

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Several standards, besides aforementioned, regarding whole vehicle testing are being used worldwide, and many of car manufacturers do control vehicle interior air quality on the basis of their own standards. The differences between methodologies prevent simple comparison of the results obtained, as some major factors influencing compounds concentrations are different in each case. These factors are such as vehicle storage time, test temperature, conditioning/soaking and preconditioning time.

    The big step to harmonization of the test procedures was possible by ISO 12219 standard introduction, which part no. 1 describes the normalized tests on interior air quality based on simulation of three vehicle states [91]. Ambient mode at 23 °C simulates conditions of car parked in the garage overnight, in parking mode vehicle is heated by heating lamps and these conditions correspond to parking mode of the vehicle in the sunlight. Both of these modes requires no air exchange while third simulates driving condition and takes place immediately after the second. In this case air conditioning system is on. There is a chance that further legal regulations regarding vehicle air quality will be based on ISO 12219-1 test methodology. Acceptation of such methodology will certainly be gladly welcome by car manufacturers worldwide as they will not be forced to fulfil requirements regarding the same matter but differently measured.

    Implementation of worldwide accepted testing procedure would also allow for independent testing and independent quality control. However, it is expected that in foreseeable future there will not be worldwide accepted interior emission limit values due to different levels of country development and costs associated with interior emission control technology [92]. ISO 12219 family of standards up to date covers also testing of VOC emission from materials under different conditions and with the use of different testing chambers: from micro scale (ca. 44 cm3) to small (up to 4 m3), allowing independent comparison of material test results. As none of aforementioned ISO standards introduces concentrations limits for any of volatile compounds, the process of vehicle or material approval on markets with different legal regulations may be significantly simplified.

    Elevated concentrations of various VOCs in vehicle cabin, compared with ambient air or other indoor environments, and their impact on human health has been paid a risen attention of the researches. Multiplicity of synthetic materials placed in vehicle interior emit even hundreds of volatile organic compounds. For that reason, concentrations of different organic compounds are probably the highest in new vehicles and decrease with vehicle age increase, along with decreased with time emission of VOCs from materials. Concentrations of main air pollutants in new vehicles varied significantly, depending mainly on vehicle age and type and materials used in vehicle interior. For example, toluene concentration varied from 5.5 to 2000 µg/m3; xylenes were in the range of 9.4-2500 µg/m3; undecane from 40.0 to 1615.8 µg/m3, and decane from 16.0 to 1300.6 µg/m3. Similarly, the sum of determined organic compounds ranged from 136 to 14,081 µg/m3, depending on vehicle type and test conditions.

    On the other hand air in driven car may be polluted by compounds originating from fuel combustion. For that reason vehicle user is exposed to different harmful species. While in used vehicle organic compounds from exterior sources may be eliminated by application of proper air filters and air quality can be improved, in new vehicle air quality is strictly connected with quality of materials used in car cabin.

    Legislative regulations concerning Vehicle Interior Air Quality are likely to be introduced by more and more countries, however in foreseeable future no worldwide limits of VOCs concentrations are expected. Introducing harmonized test methodologies would allow gathering more accurate data on VOCs presence in vehicles cabin, as air quality is influenced by multiple factors. Such approach would also presumably allow for better recognition of health risks connected with volatile organic compounds presence. Regarding the possibility of car driver and passengers exposure to the presence of even several hundreds of organic compounds it can be also assumed that in the future regulations will cover more than few compounds as it is nowadays.

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper

    [1] Zaghib K, Mauger A, Julien CM (2015) Rechargeable lithium batteries for energy storage in smart grids, In: Rechargeable Lithium Batteries, Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy number 81, Elsevier.
    [2] Kasavajjula U, Wang C, Appleby AJ (2007) Nano- and bulk-silicon-based insertion anodes for lithium-ion secondary cells. J Power Sources 163: 1003–1039. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2006.09.084
    [3] Julien CM, Mauger A, Vijh A, et al. (2016) Lithium Batteries: Science and Technology, Springer, New York, 323–429.
    [4] Zhao K, Pharr M, Hartle L, et al. (2012) Fracture and debonding in lithium-ion batteries with electrodes of hollow core-shell nanostructures. J Power Sources 218: 6–14.
    [5] Ma ZS, Xie ZC, Wang Y, et al. (2015) Failure modes of hollow core-shell structural active materials during the lithiation-delithiation process. J Power Sources 290: 114–122.
    [6] Wang C, Ma Z, Wang Y, et al. (2016) Failure prediction of high-capacity electrode materials in lithium-ion batteries. J Electrochem Soc 163: A1157–A1163. doi: 10.1149/2.0251607jes
    [7] Jiang W, Li T, Ma Z, et al. (2015) Optimal design of hollow core-shell structural active materials for lithium ion batteries. Results in Phys 5: 250–252. doi: 10.1016/j.rinp.2015.08.010
    [8] Hu Y, Zhao X, Suo Z (2010) Averting cracks caused by insertion reaction in lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Res 25: 1007–1010. doi: 10.1557/JMR.2010.0142
    [9] Wang Y, Ma Z, Lei W, et al. (2016) Double effect of electrochemical reaction and substrate on hardness in electrodes of lithium-ion batteries. Acta Mechan 1–6.
    [10] Ma Z, Li T, Huang YL, et al. (2013) Critical silicon-anode size for averting lithiation-induced mechanical failure of lithium-ion batteries. RSC Adv 3: 7398–7402. doi: 10.1039/c3ra41052h
    [11] Haftbaradaran H, Gao H (2012) Ratcheting of silicon island electrodes on substrate due to cyclic intercalation. Appl Phys Lett 100: 121907. doi: 10.1063/1.3696298
    [12] Xie Z, Ma Z, Wang Y, et al. (2016) A kinetic model for diffusion and chemical reaction of silicon anode lithiation in lithium ion batteries. RSC Adv 6: 22383–22388. doi: 10.1039/C5RA27817A
    [13] Zhang P, Ma Z, Wang Y, et al. (2015) A first principles study of the mechanical properties of Li-Sn alloys. RSC Adv 5: 36022–36029. doi: 10.1039/C5RA04685H
    [14] Zhang P, Ma Z, Jiang W, et al. (2016) Mechanical properties of Li-Sn alloys for Li-ion battery anodes: A first-principles perspective. AIP Adv 6: 015107. doi: 10.1063/1.4940131
    [15] Gao X, Ma Z, Jiang W, et al. (2016) Stress-strain relationships of LixSn alloys for lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 311: 21–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.02.024
    [16] Sony press news (2005) Available from: www.Sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200502/05-006 E/index.html.
    [17] Agubra VA, Zuniga L, Flores D, et al. (2016) Composite nano-fibers as advanced materials for Li-ion, Li-O2 and Li-S batteries. Electrochim Acta 192: 529–550. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2016.02.012
    [18] Aravindan V, Sundaramurthy J, Kumar PS, et al. (2015) Electrospun nanofibers: A prospective electro-active material for constructing high performance Li-ion batteries. Chem Commun 51: 2225–2234. doi: 10.1039/C4CC07824A
    [19] Jung JW, Lee CL, Yu S, et al. (2016) Electrospun nanofibers as a platform for advanced secondary batteries: a comprehensive review. J Mater Chem A 4: 703–750.
    [20] Goodenough JB, KimY (2010) Challenges for rechargeable Li batteries. Chem Mater 22: 587–603. doi: 10.1021/cm901452z
    [21] Liu Y, Yang Y (2016) Recent progress of TiO2-based anodes for Li ion batteries. J Nanomater 2016: 1–15.
    [22] Zhang Y, Tang Y, Li W, et al. (2016) Nanostructured TiO2-based anode materials for high-performance rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. ChemNanoMat.
    [23] Rahman A, Wong Y, Song G, et al. (2015) A review on porous negative electrodes for high performance lithium-ion batteries. J Porous Mater 22: 1313–1343. doi: 10.1007/s10934-015-0010-1
    [24] Niu J, Zhang S, Niu Y, et al. (2015) Silicon-based anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Prog Chem 27: 1275–1290.
    [25] Roy P, Srivastava K (2015) Nanostructured anode materials for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 3: 2454–2484. doi: 10.1039/C4TA04980B
    [26] Ji L, Lin Z, Alcoutlabi M, et al. (2011) Recent developments in nanostructured anode materials for rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. Energy Environ Sci 4: 22682–2699.
    [27] Zhang WJ (2011) A Review of the electrochemical performance of alloy anodes for lithium-ion batteries. J Power Sources 196: 13–24. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.07.020
    [28] Lou S, Cheng X, Ma Y, et al. (2015) Nb-based oxides as anode materials for lithium ion batteries. Prog Chem 27: 297–309.
    [29] Lahiri I, Oh SM, Hwang JY, et al. (2011) Ultrathin alumina-coated carbon nanotubes as an anode for high-capacity Li-ion batteries. J Mater Chem 21: 13621–13626. doi: 10.1039/c1jm11474c
    [30] Leung K, Qi Y, Zavadil KR, et al. (2011) Using atomic layer deposition to hinder solvent decomposition in lithium-ion batteries: first principles modeling and experimental studies. J Am Chem Soc 133: 14741–14754. doi: 10.1021/ja205119g
    [31] De Las Cazas C, Li WZ (2012) A review of application of carbon nanotubes for lithium-ion battery anode material. J Power Sources 208: 74–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.02.013
    [32] Fan S, Sun T, Rui X, et al. (2012) Cooperative enhancement of capacities in nanostructured SnSb/carbon nanotube network nanocomposite as anode for lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 201: 288–293.
    [33] Wu Y, Wei Y, Wang J, et al. (2013) Conformal Fe3O4 sheath on aligned carbon nanotube scaffolds as high-performance anodes for lithium-ion batteries. Nano Lett 13: 818–823. doi: 10.1021/nl3046409
    [34] Ban C, Wu Z, Gillaspie DT, et al. (2010) Nanostructured Fe3O4/SWNT electrode: binder-free and high-rate Li-ion anode. Adv Energy Mater 22: E145–E149. doi: 10.1002/adma.200904285
    [35] Bindumadhavan K, Srivastava SK, Mahanty S (2013) MoS2-MWCNT hybrids as a superior anode in lithium-ion batteries. Chem Commun 49: 1823–1825. doi: 10.1039/c3cc38598a
    [36] Wang ZL, Xu D, Wang HG, et al. (2013) In-situ fabrication of porous graphene electrodes for high performance energy storage. ACS Nano 7: 2422–2430. doi: 10.1021/nn3057388
    [37] Lavoie N, Courtel F, Malenfant PRL, et al. (2013) Graphene-based composite anodes for lithium-ion batteries, In: Nanotechnology for Lithium-Ion Batteries, ed. by Y. Abdu-Lebdeh, I. Davidson, Springer, New York.
    [38] Fu YS, Zhu JW, Hu C, et al. (2014) Covalently coupled hybrid of graphitic carbon nitride with reduced graphene oxide as a superior performance lithium-ion battery anode. Nanoscale 6: 12555–12564. doi: 10.1039/C4NR03145H
    [39] Takamura T, Ohara S, Uehara M, et al. (2004) A vacuum deposited Si film having a Li extraction capacity over 2000 mAh g?1 with a long cycle life. J Power Sources 129: 96–100.
    [40] Ohara S, Suzuki J, Sekine K, et al. (2003) Li insertion/extraction reaction at a Si film evaporated on a Ni foil. J Power Sources 119–121: 591–596.
    [41] Chen LB, Xie JY, Yu HC, et al. (2009) An amorphous thin film Si anode with high capacity and long cycling life for lithium ion batteries. J Appl Electrochem 39: 1157–1162. doi: 10.1007/s10800-008-9774-1
    [42] Ohara S, Suzuki J, Sekine K, et al. (2004) A thin film silicon anode for Li-ion batteries having a very large specific capacity and long cycle life. J Power Sources 136: 303–306. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.03.014
    [43] Kim JB, Lee, HY, Lee KS, et al. (2003) Fe/Si multi-layer thin film anodes for lithium rechargeable thin film batteries. Electrochem Commun 5: 544–548. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2481(03)00120-6
    [44] Lee HY, Lee SM (2002) Graphite-FeSi alloy composites as anode materials for rechargeable lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 112: 649–654. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7753(02)00461-5
    [45] Yu C, Li X, Ma T, et al. (2012) Silicon thin films as anodes for high-performance lithium-ion batteries with effective stress relaxation. Adv Energy Mater 2: 68–73. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201100634
    [46] Liu Y, Hudak NS, Huber DL, et al. (2011) In-situ transmission electron microscopy observation of pulverization of aluminum nanowires and evolution of the thin surface Al2O3 layers during lithiation-delithiation cycles. Nano Lett 11: 4188–4194. doi: 10.1021/nl202088h
    [47] Xiao X, Lu P, Dahn J (2011) Ultrathin multifunctional oxide coatings for lithium ion batteries. Adv Mater 23: 3911–3915. doi: 10.1002/adma.201101915
    [48] He Y, Yu X, Wang Y, et al. (2011) Alumina-coated patterned amorphous silicon as the anode for a lithium ion battery with high coulombic efficiency. Adv Mater 23: 4938–4941. doi: 10.1002/adma.201102568
    [49] Ge M, Rong J, Fang X, et al. (2012) Porous doped silicon nanowires for lithium ion battery anode with long cycle life. Nano Lett 12: 2318–2323. doi: 10.1021/nl300206e
    [50] Kim H, Cho J (2008) Superior lithium electroactive mesoporous Si@carbon core-shell nanowires for lithium battery anode material. Nano Lett 8: 3688–3691. doi: 10.1021/nl801853x
    [51] Lytle JC (2013) Inverse opal nanoarchitecture as lithium ion anode materials. In: Nanotechnology for Lithium-Ion Batteries, ed. by Y. Abdu-Lebdeh, I. Davidson, Springer, New York.
    [52] Chen HX, Dong ZX, Fu YP, et al. (2010) Silicon nanowires with and without carbon coating as anode materials for lithium ion batteries. J Solid State Electrochem 14: 1829–1834. doi: 10.1007/s10008-009-1001-4
    [53] Sethuraman VA, Kowolik K, Sirinavan V (2011) Increased cycling efficiency and rate capability of copper-coated silicon anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. J Power Sources 196: 6657–6662. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.12.075
    [54] Yao Y, Liu N, McDowell MT, et al. (2012) Improving the cycling stability of silicon nanowire anodes with conducting polymer coatings. Energy Environ Sci 5: 7927–7930. doi: 10.1039/c2ee21437g
    [55] Memarzadeh EL, Kalisvaart WP, Kohandehghan A, et al. (2012) Silicon nanowire core aluminium shell coaxial nanocomposites for lithium ion anodes grown with and without a TiN interlayer. J Mater Chem 22: 6655–6668. doi: 10.1039/c2jm16167b
    [56] Ruy I, Choi JW, Cui Y, et al. (2011) Size dependent fracture of Si nanowire battery anodes. J Mechan Phys Solids 59: 1717–1730. doi: 10.1016/j.jmps.2011.06.003
    [57] Liu XH, Zheng H, Zhong L, et al. (2011) Anisotropic swelling and fracture of silicon nanowires during lithiation. Nano Lett 11: 3312–3318. doi: 10.1021/nl201684d
    [58] Nguyen HT, Zamfir MR, Duong LD, et al. (2012) Alumina-coated silicon-based nanowire arrays for high quality Li-ion battery anodes. J Mater Chem 22: 24618–24626. doi: 10.1039/c2jm35125k
    [59] Wu H, Chan G, Choi JW, et al. (2012) Stable cycling for double-walled silicon nanotubes battery anodes through solid-electrolyte interphase control. Nano Technol 7: 310–315.
    [60] Song T, Cheng HY, Choi H, et al. (2012) Si/Ge double-layered nanotube array as a lithium ion battery anode. ACS Nano 6: 303–309. doi: 10.1021/nn203572n
    [61] Rong J, Fang X, Ge M, et al. (2013) Coaxial Si/anodic titanium oxide/Si nanotube arrays for lithium-ion battery anodes. Nano Res 6: 182–190. doi: 10.1007/s12274-013-0294-x
    [62] Choi NS, Yao Y, Cui Y, et al. (2011) One-dimensional Si/Sn-based nanowires and nanotubes for lithium-ion energy storage materials. J Mater Chem 21:9 825–9840.
    [63] Evanoff K, Kahn J, Balandin AA, et al. (2012) Towards ultra-thick battery electrodes: aligned carbon nanotube, enabled architecture. Adv Mater 24: 533–537. doi: 10.1002/adma.201103044
    [64] Krishnan R, Lu TM, Koratkar N (2011) Functionally strain-graded nanoscoops for High Power Li-Ion Battery Anodes. Nano Lett 11: 377–384. doi: 10.1021/nl102981d
    [65] Kim H, Han B, Choo J, et al. (2008) Three-dimensional porous silicon particles for uses in high-performance lithium secondary batteries. Angew Chem 47: 10151–10154. doi: 10.1002/anie.200804355
    [66] Son IH, Park JH, Kwon S, et al. (2015) Silicon carbide-free graphene growth on silicon for lithium-ion battery with high volumetric energy density. Nature Commun 6: 7393. doi: 10.1038/ncomms8393
    [67] Wu H, Zheng G, Liu N, et al. (2012) Engineering empty space between Si nanoparticles for lithium-ion battery anodes. Nano Lett 12: 904–909. doi: 10.1021/nl203967r
    [68] Liu N, Wu H, McDowell MT, et al. (2012) A yolk-shell design for stabilized and scalable li-ion battery alloy anodes. Nano Lett 12: 3315–3325. doi: 10.1021/nl3014814
    [69] Liu N, Lu Z, Zhao J, et al. (2014) A pomegranate-inspired nanoscale design for large-volume-change lithium battery anodes. Nat Nanotechnol 9: 187–190. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2014.6
    [70] Chou SL, Wang JZ, Choucair M, et al. (2010) Enhanced reversible lithium storage in a nanosize silicon/graphene composite. Electrochem Commun 12: 303–306. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2009.12.024
    [71] Wang JZ, Zhong C, Chou SL, et al. (2010) Flexible free-standing graphene-silicon composite film for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochem Commun 12: 1467–1470. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2010.08.008
    [72] Lee JK, Smith KB, Hayner CM, et al. (2010) Silicon nanoparticles-graphene paper composites for Li ion battery anodes. Chem Commun 46: 2025–2027. doi: 10.1039/b919738a
    [73] Chen S, Bao P, Huang X, et al. (2014) Hierarchical 3D mesoporous silicon@graphene nanoarchitectures for lithium ion batteries with superior performance. Nano Res 7: 85–94. doi: 10.1007/s12274-013-0374-y
    [74] Zhao X, Hayner CM, Kung MC, et al. (2011) In-plane vacancy-enabled high-power Si-graphene composite electrode for lithium-ion batteries. Adv Energy Mater 1: 1079–1084. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201100426
    [75] Zhao X, Li M, Chang KH, et al. (2014) Composites of graphene and encapsulated silicon for practically viable high-performance lithium-ion batteries. Nano Res 7: 1429–1438. doi: 10.1007/s12274-014-0463-6
    [76] Zamfir MR, Nguyen HT, Moyen E, et al. (2013) Silicon nanowires for Li-based battery anodes: a review. J Mat Chem A 1: 9566–9586. doi: 10.1039/c3ta11714f
    [77] Wen Z, Lu G, Mao S, et al. (2013) Silicon nanotube anode for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochem Commun 29: 67–70. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2013.01.015
    [78] Baggetto L, Notten PHN (2009) Lithium ion (de)insertion reaction of germanium thin-film electrodes and electrochemical and in-situ XRD study batteries and energy storage. J Electrochem Soc 156: A169–A175. doi: 10.1149/1.3055984
    [79] Liu XH, Huang S, Picraux ST, et al. (2011) Reversible nanopore formation in Ge nanowires during lithiation-delithiation cycling: an in-situ transmission electron microscopy study. Nano Lett 11: 3991–3997. doi: 10.1021/nl2024118
    [80] Liang W, Yang H, Fan F, et al. (2013) Tough germanium nanoparticles under electrochemical cycling. ACS Nano 7: 3427–3433. doi: 10.1021/nn400330h
    [81] Graetz J, Ahn CC, Yazami R, et al. (2004) Nano crystalline and thin film germanium electrodes with high lithium capacity and high rate capabilities. J Electrochem Soc 151: A698–A702 doi: 10.1149/1.1697412
    [82] Ren JG, Wu Q-H, Tang H, et al. (2013) Germanium-graphene composite anode for high-energy lithium batteries with long cycle life. J Mater Chem A 1: 1821–1826. doi: 10.1039/C2TA01286C
    [83] Fang S, Shan L, Zheng H, et al. (2015) Ge-graphene-carbon nanotube composite anode for high performance lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 3: 1498–1503. doi: 10.1039/C4TA04350B
    [84] DiLeo RA, Frisco S, Ganter MJ, et al. (2011) Hybris germanium nanoparticle—single wall carbon nanotube free-standing anodes for lithium batteries. J Phys Chem C 115: 22609–22614. doi: 10.1021/jp205992w
    [85] Ashuri M, He Q, Shaw LL (2016) Silicon as a potential anode material for Li-ion batteries: where size, geometry and structure matter. Nanoscale 8: 74–103. doi: 10.1039/C5NR05116A
    [86] Kamali AR, Fray DJ (2011) Tin-based as advanced anode materials for lithium-ion batteries: a review. Rev Adv Mater Sci 27: 14–24.
    [87] Youn DH, Heller A, Mullins CB (2016) Simple synthesis of nanostructured Sn/nitrogen-doped carbon composite using nitrilotriacetic acid as lithium ion Battery Anode. Chem Mater 28: 1343–1347. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b04282
    [88] Yu Y, Gu L, Wang C, et al. (2009) Encapsulation of Sn-carbon nanoparticles in bamboo-like hollow carbon nanofibers as an anode material in lithium-based batteries. Angew Chem Int Ed 48: 6485–6489. doi: 10.1002/anie.200901723
    [89] Wang Y, Ma Z, Lu C (2016) A twins-structural Sn@C core-shell composite as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Compos Interface 23: 273–280. doi: 10.1080/09276440.2016.1136523
    [90] Liang S, Zhu X, Lian P, et al. (2011) Superior cycle performance of Sn@C/graphene nanocomposite as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. J Solid Stat Chem 184: 1400–1404. doi: 10.1016/j.jssc.2011.03.052
    [91] Agubra VA, Zuniga L, De La Garza D, et al. (2016) Forcespinning: A new method for the mass production of Sn/C composite nano fiber anodes for lithium ion batteries. Solid State Ionics 286: 72–82. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2015.12.020
    [92] Beaulieu LY, Dahn JR (2000) The reaction of lithium with Sn-Mn-C intermetallics prepared by mechanical alloying. J Electrochem Soc 147: 3237–3241. doi: 10.1149/1.1393889
    [93] Mao O, Dunlap RA, Dahn JR (1999) Mechanically alloyed Sn-Fe-C powders as anode materials for Li-ion batteries. I. The Sn2Fe-C system. J Electrochem Soc 146: 405–413.
    [94] Mao O, Dahn JR (1999) Mechanically alloyed Sn-Fe-C powders as anode materials for Li-ion batteries. II. The Sn-Fe system. J Electrochem Soc 146: 414–422.
    [95] Mao O, Dahn J (1999) Mechanically alloyed Sn-Fe-C powders as anode materials for Li-ion batteries. III. Sn2Fe: SnFe3C active/inactive composites. J Electrochem Soc 146: 423–427.
    [96] Dahn JR, Mar RE, Abouzeid A (2006) Combinatorial study of Sn1-xCox (0 < x < 0.6) and [Sn0.55Co0.45]1-yCy (0 < y < 0.5) alloy negative electrode materials for Li-ion batteries. J Electrochem Soc 153: A361–A365.
    [97] Hassoun J, Ochal P, Panero S, et al. (2008) The effect of CoSn/CoSn2 phase ratio on the electrochemical behavior of Sn40Co40C20 ternary alloy electrodes in Li cells. J Power Sources 180: 568–575. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.01.059
    [98] Hassoun J, Mulas G, Panero S, et al. (2007) Ternary Sn-Co-C Li-ion battery electrode material prepared by high energy ball milling. Electrochem Commun 9: 2075–2081. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2007.05.033
    [99] Mukaibo H, Sumi T, Yokoshima T, et al. (2003) Electrodeposited Sn-Ni alloy film as a high capacity anode material for lithium-ion secondary batteries. Electrochem Solid-State Lett 6: A218–A220. doi: 10.1149/1.1602331
    [100] Wolfenstine J, Campos S, Foster D, et al. (2002) Nano-scale Cu6Sn5 anodes. J Power Sources 109: 230–233. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7753(02)00061-7
    [101] Ferguson PP, Todd ADW, Dahn JR (2008) Comparison of mechanically alloyed and suttered tin-cobalt-carbon as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochem Commun 10: 25–31. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2007.10.025
    [102] Hassoun J, Panero S, Mulas G, et al. (2007) An electrochemical investigation of a Sn-Co-C ternary alloy as a negative electrode in Li-ion batteries. J Power Sources 171: 928–931. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2007.06.067
    [103] Sony corporation (2011) Sony the market for notebook PC; development of a tin-based amorphous anode for high-capacity rechargeable lithium-ion battery 3.5 Ah: the “Nexelion”. Available from: http:www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/201107/11-078/.
    [104] Lei WX, Pan Y, Zhou YC, et al. (2014) CNTs-Cu composite layer enhanced Sn-Cu alloy as high performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. RSC Adv 4: 3233–3237. doi: 10.1039/C3RA44431G
    [105] Meschini I, Nobili F, Mancini M, et al. (2013) High performance Sn@carbon nanocomposite anode for lithium batteries. J Power Sources 226: 241–248. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.11.004
    [106] Jiang W, Zeng W, Ma Z, et al. (2014) Advanced amorphous nanoporous stannous oxide composite with carbon nanotubes as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. RSC Adv 4: 41281–41286. doi: 10.1039/C4RA06968D
    [107] Zhu XJ, Guo ZP, Zhang P, et al. (2009) Highly porous reticular tin-cobalt oxide composite thin film anodes for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem 19: 8360–8365. doi: 10.1039/b913993a
    [108] Zhu XJ, Guo ZP, Zhang P, et al. (2010) Three-dimensional reticulartin-manganese oxide composite anode materials for lithium ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 55: 4982–4986.
    [109] Chen JS, Cheah YL, Chen YT, et al. (2009) SnO2 nanoparticles with controlled nano-coating as high-capacity anode for lithium-ion batteries. J Phys Chem 113: 20504–20508.
    [110] He M, Yuan L, Zhang W, et al. (2013) A SnO2-carbon nanocluster anode material with superior cyclablity and rate capability for lithium batteries. Nanoscale 5: 3298–3305. doi: 10.1039/c3nr34133j
    [111] Hassan MF, Rahman MM, Guo Z, et al. (2010) SnO2-NiO-C nanocomposite as a high capacity anode material for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem 20: 9707–9712. doi: 10.1039/c0jm01341b
    [112] Yesibolati N, Shahid M, Chen W, et al. (2014) SnO2 anode surface passivation by atomic layer deposited HfO2 improves Li-ion battery performance. Small 10: 2849–2858. doi: 10.1002/smll.201303898
    [113] Du Z, Zhang S, Jiang T, et al. (2012) Facile synthesis of SnO2 nanocrystals coated conductive polymer nanowires for enhanced lithium storage. J Power Sources 219: 199–203. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.07.052
    [114] Lou XW, Li CM, Archer LA (2009) Design synthesis of coaxial SnO2@carbon hollow nanospheres for highly reversible lithium storage. Adv Mater 21: 2536–2539. doi: 10.1002/adma.200803439
    [115] Wang Z, Fierke MA, Stein A (2008) Porous carbon/tin oxide monoliths as anodes for lithium-ion batteries. J Electrochem Soc 155: A658–A663.
    [116] Zhang L, Wu HB, Liu B, et al. (2014) Formation of porous SnO2 microboxes via selective leaching for highly reversible lithium storage. Energy Environ Sci 7: 1013–1017. doi: 10.1039/c3ee43305f
    [117] Du G, Zhong C, Zhang P, et al. (2010) Tin dioxyde/carbon nanotube composites with high uniform SnO2 loading as anode materials for lithium ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 55: 2582–2586. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2009.12.031
    [118] Ren JR, Yang J, Abouimrane A, et al. (2011) SnO2 nanocrystals deposited on multiwalled carbon nanotubes with superior stability as anode material for Li-ion batteries. J Power Sources 196: 8701–8705. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.06.036
    [119] Zhu CL, Zhang ML, Qiao YJ, et al. (2010) High capacity and good cycling stability of multi-walled carbon nanotube/SnO2 core-shell structures as anode materials of lithium-ion batteries. Mater Res Bull 45: 437–441. doi: 10.1016/j.materresbull.2009.11.011
    [120] Wang Y, Zeng HC, Lee JY (2006) Highly reversible lithium storage in porous SnO2 nanotubes with coaxially grown carbon nanotubes overlayers. Adv Mater 18: 645–649. doi: 10.1002/adma.200501883
    [121] Zhang J, Ma Z, Jiang W, et al. (2016) Sandwich-like CNTs@SnO2/SnO/Sn anodes on three-dimensional Ni foam substrate for lithium ion batteries. J Electroanal Chem 767: 49–55.
    [122] Li YM, Lv XJ, Lu J, et al. (2010) Preparation of SnO2-nanocrystal/graphene-nanosheets composites and their lithium storage ability. J Phys Chem C 114: 21770–21774.
    [123] Zhao B, Zhang GH, Song JS, et al. (2011) Bivalent tin ion assisted reduction for preparing graphene/SnO2 composite with good cyclic performance and lithium storage capacity. Electrochim Acta 56: 7340–7346. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2011.06.037
    [124] Zhong C, Wang JZ, Chen ZX, et al. (2011) Photoinduced optical transparency in dye-sensitized solar cells containing graphene nanoribbons. J Phys Chem C 115: 25115–25131. doi: 10.1021/jp2061128
    [125] Lian PC, Zhu XF, Liang SZ, et al. (2011) High reversible capacity of SnO2/graphene nanocomposite as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 56: 4532–4539. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2011.01.126
    [126] Huang XD, Zhou XF, Zhou LA, et al. (2011) A facile one-step solvothermal synthesis of SnO2/graphene nanocomposite and its application as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. ChemPhysChem 12: 278–281. doi: 10.1002/cphc.201000376
    [127] Xie J, Liu SY, Chen XF, et al. (2011) Nanocrystal-SnO2-loaded graphene with improved Li-storage properties prepared by a facile one-pot hydrothermal route. Int J Electrochem Sci 6: 5539–5549.
    [128] Baek S, Yu SH, Park SK, et al. (2011) A one-pot microwave-assisted non-aqueous sol-gel approach to metal oxide/graphene nanocomposites for Li-ion batteries. RSC Adv 1: 1687–1690. doi: 10.1039/c1ra00797a
    [129] Wang XY, Zhou XF, Yao K, et al. (2011) A SnO2/graphene composite as a high stability electrode for lithium ion batteries. Carbon 49: 133–139. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2010.08.052
    [130] Xu CH, Sun J, Gao L (2012) Direct growth of monodisperse SnO2 nanorods on graphene as high capacity anode materials for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem 22: 975–979. doi: 10.1039/C1JM14099J
    [131] Lin J, Peng Z, Xiang C, et al. (2013) Graphene nanoribbon and nanostructured SnO2 composite anodes for lithium ion batteries. ACS Nano 7: 6001–6007. doi: 10.1021/nn4016899
    [132] Zhou X, Wan LJ, Guo YG (2013) Binding SnO2 nanocrystals in nitrogen-doped graphene sheets as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Adv Mater 25: 2152–2157. doi: 10.1002/adma.201300071
    [133] Botas C, Carriazo D, Singh G, et al. (2015) Sn- and SnO2-graphene flexible foams suitable as binder-free anodes for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 25: 13402–13410.
    [134] Jiang W, Zhao X, Ma Z, et al. (2016) SnO2/reduced graphene oxide nanocomposite as anode material for lithium-ion batteries with enhanced cyclability. J Nanosci Nanotech 16: 4136–4140. doi: 10.1166/jnn.2016.12541
    [135] Sun J, Xiao L, Jiang S, et al. (2015) Fluorine-doped SnO2@graphene porous composite for high capacity lithium-ion batteries. Chem Mater 27: 4594–4603. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b00885
    [136] Liu L, An M, Yang P, et al. (2015) Superior cycle performance and high reversible capacity of SnO2/graphene composite as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. Sci Rep 5: 9055. doi: 10.1038/srep09055
    [137] Deng Y, Fang C, Chen G (2016) The developments of SnO2/graphene nanocomposites as anode materials for high performance lithium ion batteries: a review. J Power Sources 304: 81–101. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.11.017
    [138] Liu S, Wang R, Liu M, et al. (2014) Fe2O3-SnO2 nanoparticle decorated graphene flexible films as high-performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 2: 4598–4604. doi: 10.1039/c3ta14897a
    [139] Bhaskar A, Deepa M, Ramakrishna M, et al. (2014) Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) sheath over a SnO2 hollow spheres/graphene oxide hybrid for a durable anode in Li-ion batteries. J Phys Chem C 118: 7296–7306. doi: 10.1021/jp412038y
    [140] Ren H, Yu RB, Wang JY, et al. (2014) Multishelled TiO2 hollow microspheres as anodes with superior reversible capacity for lithium ion batteries. Nano Lett 14: 6679–6684.
    [141] Wang HY, Chen JZ, Hy S, et al. (2014) High-surface-area mesoporous TiO2 microspheres via one-step nanoparticle self-assembly for enhanced lithium-ion storage. Nanoscale 6: 14926–14931. doi: 10.1039/C4NR04729J
    [142] Xia T, Zhang W, Wang Z, et al. (2014) Amorphous carbon-coated TiO2 nanocrystals for improved lithium-ion battery and photocatalytic performance. Nano Energy 6: 109–118. doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2014.03.012
    [143] Acevedo-Peña P, Haro M, Rincón ME, et al. (2014) Facile kinetics of Li-ion intake causes superior rate capability in multiwalled carbon nanotube@TiO2 nanocomposite battery anodes. J Power Sources 268: 397–403. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.06.058
    [144] Jiang X, Yang X, Zhu Y, et al. (2014) 3D nitrogen-doped graphene foams embedded with ultrafine TiO2 nanoparticles for high-performance lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 2: 11124–11133.
    [145] Fu Y, Ming H, Zhou Q, et al. (2014) Nitrogen-doped carbon coating inside porous TiO2 using small nitrogen-containing molecules for improving performance of lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 134: 478–485.
    [146] Chen WN, Jiang H, Hu YJ, et al. (2014) Mesoporous single crystals Li4Ti5O12 grown on rGO as high-rate anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Chem Commun 50: 8856–8859. doi: 10.1039/C4CC02886D
    [147] Xin X, Zhou XF, Wu JH, et al. (2012) Scalable synthesis of TiO2/graphene nanostructured composite with high-rate performance for lithium ion batteries. ACS Nano 6: 11035–11043. doi: 10.1021/nn304725m
    [148] Mo RW, Lei ZY, Sun KN, et al. (2014) Facile synthesis of anatase TiO2 quantum-dot/graphene-nanosheet composites with enhanced electrochemical performance for lithium-ion batteries. Adv Mater 26: 2084–2088. doi: 10.1002/adma.201304338
    [149] Wang J, Zhou Y, Xiong B, et al. (2013) Fast lithium-ion insertion of TiO2 nanotube and graphene composites. Electrochim Acta 88: 847–857. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2012.10.010
    [150] Zhang X, Zhang J, Liu Y, et al. (2015) Improving the anode performances of TiO2-carbon-rGO composites in lithium ion batteries by UV irradiation. New J Chem 39: 9345–9350. doi: 10.1039/C5NJ01855B
    [151] Zha CY, He DF, Zou JW, et al. (2014) A minky-dot-fabric-shaped composite of porous TiO2 microsphere/reduced graphene oxide for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 2: 16931–16938. doi: 10.1039/C4TA03675A
    [152] Fang Y, Lv Y, Che R, et al. (2013) Two-dimensional mesoporous carbon nanosheets and their derived graphene nanosheets: synthesis and efficient lithium ion storage. J Am Chem Soc 135: 1524–1530. doi: 10.1021/ja310849c
    [153] Lan T, Kiu H, Xie F, et al. (2015) Rutile TiO2mesocrystals/reduced graphene oxide with high-rate and long-term performance for lithium-ion batteries. Sci Rep 5: 8498. doi: 10.1038/srep08498
    [154] Liu H, Bi Z, Sun XG, et al. (2011) Mesoporous TiO2-B microspheres with superior rate performance for lithium ion batteries. Adv Mater 23: 3450–3454. doi: 10.1002/adma.201100599
    [155] Yang Z, Du G, Guo Z, et al. (2011) TiO2(B)-carbon composite nanowires as anode for lithium ion batteries with enhanced reversible capacity and cyclic performance. J Mater Chem 21: 8591–8596. doi: 10.1039/c0jm03873c
    [156] Yan X, Li Y, Li M, et al. (2015) Ultrafast lithium storage in TiO2-bronze nanowires/N-doped graphene nanocomposites. J Mater Chem A 3: 4180–4187. doi: 10.1039/C4TA06361A
    [157] Etacheri V, Yourey JE, Bartlett BM (2014) Chemically bonded TiO2-Bronze nanosheet/reduced graphene oxide hybrid for high-power lithium ion batteries. ACS Nano 8: 1491–1499. doi: 10.1021/nn405534r
    [158] Li MS, Li XF, Li WH, et al. (2015) Atomic layer deposition derived amorphous TiO2 thin film decorating graphene nanosheets with superior rate capability. Electrochem Commun 57: 43–47. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2015.05.005
    [159] Luo J, Xia X, Luo Y, et al. (2013) Rationally designed hierarchical TiO2/Fe2O3 hollow nanostructures for improved lithium ion storage. Adv Energy Mater 3: 737–743. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201200953
    [160] Liao JY, Higgins D, Lui G, et al. (2013) Multifunctional TiO2-C/MnO2 core-double-shell nanowire arrays as high-performance 3D electrodes for lithium ion batteries. Nano Lett 13: 5467–5473. doi: 10.1021/nl4030159
    [161] Jeun JH, Park KY, Kim DH, et al. (2013) SnO2@TiO2 double-shell nanotubes for a lithium ion battery anode with excellent high rate cyclability. Nanoscale 5: 8480–8483. doi: 10.1039/c3nr01964k
    [162] Jung HG, Myung ST, Yoon CS, et al. (2011) Microscale spherical carbon-coated Li4Ti5O12 as ultra high power anode material for lithium batteries. Energy Environ Sci 4: 1345–1351. doi: 10.1039/c0ee00620c
    [163] Zaghib K, Dontigny M, Guerfi A, et al. (2012) An improved high-power battery with increased thermal operating range: C-LiFePO4/C-Li4Ti5O12. J Power Sources 216: 192–200. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.05.025
    [164] Li B, Han C, He YB, et al. (2012) Facile synthesis of Li4Ti5O12/C composite with super rate performance. Energy Environ Sci 5: 9595–9602. doi: 10.1039/c2ee22591c
    [165] Zhao L, Hu YS, Li H, et al. (2011) Porous Li4Ti5O12 coated with N-doped carbon from ionic liquids for Li-ion batteries. Adv Mater 23: 1385–1388. doi: 10.1002/adma.201003294
    [166] Fan L, Tan X, Yu T, et al. (2016) Li4Ti5O12/hollow graphitized nano-carbon composites as anode materials for lithium ion battery. RCS Adv 6: 26406–26411.
    [167] Shen L, Yuan C, Luo H, et al. (2011) Novel template-free solvothermal synthesis of mesoporous Li4Ti5O12-C microspheres for high power lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem 21: 14414–14416. doi: 10.1039/c1jm12324f
    [168] Lin C, Fan X, Yin Y, et al. (2014) Mono-dispersed mesoporous Li4Ti5O12 submicrospheres as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries: morphology and electrochemical performances. Nanoscale 21: 6651–6650.
    [169] Jhan YR, Duh JG (2012) Synthesis of entanglement structure in nanosized Li4Ti5O12/multi-walled carbon nanotubes composite anode material for Li-ion batteries by ball-milling-assisted solid-state reaction. J Power Sources 198: 294–297. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.09.063
    [170] Shi Y, Wen L, Li F, et al. (2011) Nanosized Li4Ti5O12/graphene hybrid materials with low polarization for high rate lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 196: 8610–8617. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.06.002
    [171] Li X, Qu M, Huai Y, et al. (2010) Preparation and electrochemical performance of Li4Ti5O12/carbon/carbon nanotubes for lithium ion battery. Electrochim Acta 55: 2978–2982. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2010.01.015
    [172] Jhan YR, Duh JG (2012) Synthesis of entanglement structure in nanosized Li4Ti5O12/multi-walled carbon nanotubes composite anode material for Li-ion batteries by ball-milling-assisted solid-state reaction. J Power Sources 198: 294–297. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.09.063
    [173] Ni H, Fan LZ (2012) Nano-Li4Ti5O12 anchored on carbon nanotubes by liquid phase deposition as anode material for high rate lithium-ion batteries. J Power Sources 214: 195–199. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.04.074
    [174] Shen L, Yuan C, Luo H, et al. (2012) In situ growth of Li4Ti5O12 on multi-walled carbon nanotubes: novel coaxial nanocables for high rate lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem 21: 761–767.
    [175] Zhu N, Liu W, Xue MQ, et al. (2010) Graphene as a conductive additive to enhance the high-rate capabilities of electrospun Li4Ti5O12 for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 55: 5813–5818. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2010.05.029
    [176] Ge H, Hao T, Osgood H, et al. (2016) Advanced mesoporous spinel Li4Ti5O12/rGO composites with increased surface lithium storage capability for high-power lithium-ion batteries. ACS Appl Mater Inter 8: 9162–9169. doi: 10.1021/acsami.6b01644
    [177] Chen C, Agrawal R, Wang C (2015) High performance Li4Ti5O12/Si composite anodes for Li-ion batteries. Nanomaterials 5: 1469–1480. doi: 10.3390/nano5031469
    [178] Li N, Mei T, Zhu Y, et al. (2012) Hydrothermal synthesis of layered Li1.81H0.19Ti2O5·xH2O nanosheets and their transformation to single-crystalline Li4Ti5O12 nanosheets as the anode materials for Li-ion batteries. CrystEngComm 14: 6435–6440.
    [179] Liu GY, Wang HY, Liu GQ, et al. (2013) Synthesis and electrochemical performance of high-rate dual-phase Li4Ti5O12-TiO2 nanocrystallines for Li-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 87: 218–223. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2012.09.010
    [180] Xu C, Xue L, Zhang W, et al. (2014) Hydrothermal synthesis of Li4Ti5O12/TiO2 nano-composite as high performance anode material for Li-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 147: 506–512. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2014.09.060
    [181] Zhong H, Yang G, Song H, et al. (2012) Vertically aligned graphene-like SnS2 ultrathin nanosheet arrays: excellent energy storage, catalysis, photoconduction, and field-emitting performances. J Phys Chem C 116: 9319–9326. doi: 10.1021/jp301024d
    [182] Du Y, Yin Z, Rui X, et al. (2013) A facile, relative green, and inexpensive synthetic approach toward large-scale production of SnS2 nanoplates for high-performance lithium-ion batteries. Nanoscale 5: 1456–1459. doi: 10.1039/c2nr33458e
    [183] He M, Yuan LX, Huang YH (2013) Acetylene black incorporated three-dimensional porous SnS2 nanoflowers with high performance for lithium storage. RSC Adv 3: 3374–3383. doi: 10.1039/c2ra22764a
    [184] Li J, Wu P, Lou F, et al. (2013) Mesoporous carbon anchored with SnS2 nanosheets as an advanced anode for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 111: 862–868. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2013.08.104
    [185] Sun H, Ahmad M, Luo J, et al. (2014) SnS2 nanoflakes decorated multiwalled carbon nanotubes as high performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Mater Res Bull 49: 319–324. doi: 10.1016/j.materresbull.2013.09.005
    [186] Balogun MS, Qiu W, Jian J, et al. (2015) Vanadium nitride nanowire supported SnS2 nanosheets with high Reversible capacity as anode material for lithium ion batteries. ACS Appl Mater Inter 7: 23205–23215.
    [187] Wang Q, Huang Y, Miao J, et al. (2013) Graphene-supported Ce-SnS2 nanocomposite as anode material for lithium-ion batteries. J Am Ceram Soc 96: 2190–2196. doi: 10.1111/jace.12302
    [188] Chen P, Su Y, Liu H, et al. (2013) Interconnected tin disulfide nanosheets grown on graphene for Li-ion storage and photocatalytic applications. ACS Appl Mater Inter 5: 12073–12082. doi: 10.1021/am403905x
    [189] Chang K, Wang Z, Huang G, et al. (2012) Few-layer SnS2/graphene hybrid with exceptional electrochemical performance as lithium-ion battery anode. J Power Sources 201: 259–266. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.10.132
    [190] Zhuo L, Wu Y, Wang L, et al. (2012) One-step hydrothermal synthesis of SnS2/graphene composites as anode material for highly efficient rechargeable lithium ion batteries. RSC Adv 2: 5084–5087. doi: 10.1039/c2ra00002d
    [191] Yin J, Cao H, Zhou Z, et al. (2012) SnS2@reduced graphene oxide nanocomposites as anode materials with high capacity for rechargeable lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem 22: 23963–23970. doi: 10.1039/c2jm35137d
    [192] Wang Q, Nie YX, He B, et al. (2014) SnS2/graphene nanocomposites as anodes of lithium-ion batteries. Solid State Sci 31: 81–84. doi: 10.1016/j.solidstatesciences.2014.03.001
    [193] Liu S, Lu X, Xie J, et al. (2013) Preferential c-axis orientation of ultrathin SnS2 nanoplates on graphene as high-performance anode for Li-ion batteries. ACS Appl Mater Inter 5: 1588–1595. doi: 10.1021/am302124f
    [194] Zhang Q, Li R, Zhang M, et al. (2014) SnS2/reduced graphene oxide nanocomposites with superior lithium storage performance. Electrochim Acta 115: 425–433. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2013.10.193
    [195] Mei L, Xu C, Yang T, et al. (2013) Superior electrochemical performance of ultra-small SnS2 nanocrystals decorated on flexible RGO in lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 1: 8658–8664. doi: 10.1039/c3ta11269a
    [196] Luo B, Fang Y, Wang B, et al. (2012) Two dimensional grapheme-SnS2 hybrids with superior rate capability for lithium ion storage. Energy Environ Sci 5: 5226–5230. doi: 10.1039/C1EE02800F
    [197] Qin J, He C, Zhao N, et al. (2014) Graphene networks anchored with Sn@graphene as lithium ion battery anode. ACS Nano 8: 1728–1738. doi: 10.1021/nn406105n
    [198] Jiang X, Yang X, Zhu Y, et al. (2013) In situ assembly of graphene sheets-supported SnS2 nanoplates into 3D macroporous aerogels for high-performance lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 237: 178–186. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.03.048
    [199] Zhao Y, Li X, Yan B, et al. (2015) Significant impact of 2D graphene nanosheets on large volume change tin-based anodes in lithium-ion batteries: A review. J Power Sources 274: 869–884.
    [200] Lei WX, Pan Y, Zhou YC, et al. (2014) CNTs-Cu composite layer enhanced Sn-Cu alloy as high performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. RSC Adv 4: 3233–3237. doi: 10.1039/C3RA44431G
    [201] Chen SY, Wang ZX, Fang XP, et al. (2011) characterization of TiS2 as an anode material for lithium ion batteries. Acta Phys Chim Sin 27: 97–102.
    [202] Kartick B, Srivastava SK, Mahanty S (2013) TiS2-MWCNT hybrid as highperformance anode in lithium-ion battery. J Nanopart Res 15: 1950–1962. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-1950-5
    [203] Deng D (2015) Li-ion batteries: basics, progress, and challenges. Energy Sci Eng 3: 385–418. doi: 10.1002/ese3.95
    [204] Rui X, Tan H, Yan Q (2014) Nanostructured metal sulfides for energy storage. Nanoscale 6: 9889–9924. doi: 10.1039/C4NR03057E
    [205] Son MY, Choi JH, Kang YC (2014) Electrochemical properties of bare nickel sulfide and nickel sulfide-carbon composites prepared by one-pot spray pyrolysis as anode materials for lithium secondary batteries. J Power Sources 251: 480–487. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2013.10.093
    [206] Aso K, Sakuda A, Hayashi A, et al. (2013) All-solid-state lithium secondary batteries using NiS-carbon fiber composite electrodes coated with Li2S-P2S5 solid electrolytes by pulsed laser deposition. ACS Appl Mater Inter 5: 686–690. doi: 10.1021/am302164e
    [207] Aso K, Hayashi A, Tatsusago M (2012) Synthesis of NiS-carbon fiber composites in high-boiling solvent to improve electrochemical performance in all-solid-state lithium secondary batteries. Electrochim Acta 83: 448–453. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2012.07.088
    [208] Sebastian ST, Jagan RS, Rajagoplan R, et al. (2014) Lithium-ion storage performance of camphoric carbon wrapped NiS nano/micro-hybrids RSC Adv 4: 11673–11679.
    [209] Geng H, Kong SF, Wang Y (2014) NiS nanorod-assembled nanoflowers grown on graphene: morphology evolution and Li-ion storage applications. J Mater Chem A 2: 15152–15158. doi: 10.1039/C4TA03440F
    [210] Pan Q, Xie J, Liu S, et al. (2013) Facile one-pot synthesis of ultrathin NiS nanosheets anchored on graphene and the improved electrochemical Li-storage properties. RSC Adv 3: 3899–3906. doi: 10.1039/c2ra22410k
    [211] Zhou W, Zheng JL, Yue YH, et al. (2015) Highly stable rGO-wrapped Ni3S2 nanobowls: Structure fabrication and superior long-life electrochemical performance in LIBs. Nano Energy 11: 428-435.
    [212] Gao Z, Song N, Zhang Y, et al. (2015) Cotton-textile-enabled, flexible lithium-ion batteries with enhanced capacity and extended lifespan. Nano Lett 15: 8194-8203.
    [213] Chen Q, Chen W, Ye JB, et al. (2015) L-Cysteine-assisted hydrothermal synthesis of nickel disulfide/graphene composite with enhanced electrochemical performance for reversible lithium storage. J Power Sources 294: 51–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.06.071
    [214] Mahmoud N, Zhang C, Hou Y (2013) Nickel sul?de/nitrogen-doped graphene composites: phase-controlled synthesis and high performance a increased the grafting of node materials for lithium ion batteries. Small 9: 1321–1328.
    [215] Reddy ALM, Srivastava A, Gowda SR, et al. (2010) Synthesis of nitrogen-doped graphene films for lithium battery application. ACS Nano 4: 6337–6342. doi: 10.1021/nn101926g
    [216] Zhou Y, Yan D, Xu H, et al. (2015) Hollow nanospheres of mesoporous Co9S8 as a high-capacity and long-life anode for advanced lithium ion batteries. Nano Energy 12: 528-537.
    [217] Shi W, Zhu J, Rui X, et al. (2012) Controlled synthesis of carbon-coated cobalt sulfide nanostructures in oil phase with Enhanced Li Storage Performances. ACS Appl Mater Inter 4: 2999-3006.
    [218] Gu Y, Wang Y (2013) Graphene-Wrapped CoS Nanoparticles for high-capacity lithium-ion storage. ACS Appl Mater Inter 5: 801–806. doi: 10.1021/am3023652
    [219] Zhang D, Mai YJ, Xiang JY, et al. (2012) FeS2/C composite as an anode for lithium ion batteries with enhanced reversible capacity. J Power Sources 217: 229–235. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.05.112
    [220] Gan Y, Xu F, Luo J, et al. (2016) One-pot biotemplate synthesis of FeS decorated sulfur-doped carbon fiber as high capacity anode for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 209: 201–209. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2016.05.076
    [221] Wen X, Wei X, Yang L, et al. (2015) Self-assembled FeS2 cubes anchored on reduced graphene oxide as an anode material for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 3: 2090–2096. doi: 10.1039/C4TA05575F
    [222] Zhang SS, Tran DT (2015) Electrochemical verification of the redox mechanism of FeS2 in a rechargeable lithium battery. Electrochim Acta 176: 784–789. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2015.07.096
    [223] Cao F, Pan GX, Chen J, et al. (2016) Synthesis of pyrite/carbon shells on cobalt nanowires forming core/branch arrays as high-performance cathode for lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 303: 35–40. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2015.10.096
    [224] Cui H, Zhu G, Liu X, et al. (2015) Niobium nitride Nb4N5 as a new high-performance electrode material for supercapacitors. Adv Sci 2: 1500126. doi: 10.1002/advs.201500126
    [225] Fu ZW, Wang Y, Yue XL, et al. (2004) Electrochemical reactions of lithium with transition metal nitride electrodes. J Phys Chem B 108: 2236–2244. doi: 10.1021/jp030530s
    [226] Balogun MS, Qiu W, Wang W, et al. (2015) Recent advances in metal nitrides as high-performance electrode materials for energy storage devices. J Mater Chem A 3: 1364–1387. doi: 10.1039/C4TA05565A
    [227] Miller TS, Jorge AB, Sella A, et al. (2015) The use of graphitic carbon nitride based composite anodes for lithium-ion battery applications. Electroanal 27: 2614–2619. doi: 10.1002/elan.201500205
    [228] Tan G, Wu F, Yuan Y, et al. (2016) Free standing three-dimensional core-shell nanoarrays for lithium-ion battery anodes. Nature Commun 7: 11774. doi: 10.1038/ncomms11774
    [229] Wang Y, Ding X, Huang L, et al. (2015) Critical influence of carbon nitride self-assembly coating on the electrochemical performance of SnO2-TiO2 nanocomposite anode material for lithium ion battery. Int J Electrochem Sci 11: 2461–2472.
    [230] Ulvestad A, Maehlen JP, Kirkengen M (2015) Silicon nitride coated silicon thin films as anodes for Li-ion batteries. ECS Trans 64: 107–111.
    [231] Wang R, Lang J, Zghang P, et al. (2015) Fast and large lithium storage in 3D porous VN nanowires-graphene composite as a superior anode toward high-performance hybrid supercapacitors. Adv Func Mater 25: 2270–2278.
    [232] Zhang K, Wang H, He X, et al. (2011) A hybrid material of vanadium nitride and nitrogen-doped graphene for lithium storage. J Mater Chem 21: 11916–11922. doi: 10.1039/c1jm11710f
    [233] Lei D, Yang T, Qu B, et al. (2014) Synthesis of TiN@C nanocomposites for enhanced electrochemical properties. Sustain Ener 2: 1–4. doi: 10.7569/JSEE.2014.629502
    [234] Zheng H, Fang S, Tong Z, et al. (2015) Stabilized titanium nitride nanowire supported silicon core-shell nanorods as high capacity lithium-ion anodes. J Mater Chem A 3: 12476–12481. doi: 10.1039/C5TA02259B
    [235] Zhang J, Zhang J, Cai W, et al. (2012) Improving electrochemical properties of spinel lithium titanate by incorporation of titanium nitride via high-energy ball-milling. J Power Sources 211: 133–139. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.03.088
    [236] Yue Y, Han P, He X, et al. (2012) In situ synthesis of a graphene/titanium nitride hybrid material with highly improved performance for lithium storage. J Mater Chem 22: 4938–4943. doi: 10.1039/c2jm16128a
    [237] Liu M, Zhang L, Han P, et al. (2015) Controllable formation of niobium nitride/nitrogen-doped graphene nanocomposites as anode materials for lithium-ion capacitors. Part Part Syst Charact 32: 1006–1011. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.201500095
    [238] Li Y, Yan Y, Ming H, et al. (2014) One-step synthesis Fe3N surface-modified Fe3O4 nanoparticles with excellent lithium storage ability. Appl Surf Sci 305: 683–688. doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2014.03.169
    [239] Liu J, Tang S, Lu Y, et al. (2013) Synthesis of MoN nanolayer coated MoO2 hollow nanostructures as high-performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Energy Environ Sci 6: 2691–2697. doi: 10.1039/c3ee41006d
    [240] Sun Q, Fu ZW (2012) Mn3N2 as a novel negative electrode material for rechargeable lithium batteries. Appl Surf Sci 258: 3197–3201. doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2011.11.063
    [241] Wu Y, Liu M, Feng H, et al. (2014) Carbon coated MnO@Mn3N2 core-shell composites for high performance lithium ion battery anodes. Nanoscale 6: 14697–14701. doi: 10.1039/C4NR05043F
    [242] Zhang L, Hu P, Zhao X, et al. (2011) Controllable synthesis of core-shell Co-CoO nanocomposites with a superior performance as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem 21: 18279–18283. doi: 10.1039/c1jm12990b
    [243] Xiong S, Chen JS, Lou XW, et al. (2012) Mesoporous Co3O4 and CoO-C topotactically transformed from chrysanthemum-like Co(CO3)0.5(OH)·0.11H2O and their lithium-storage properties. Adv Funct Mater 22: 861–871.
    [244] Qi Y, Du N, Zhang H, et al. (2012) CoO/NiSix core-shell nanowire arrays as lithium-ion anodes with high rate capabilities. Nanoscale 4: 991–996. doi: 10.1039/C2NR11545J
    [245] Qi Y, Du N, Zhang H, et al. (2012) Nanostructured hybrid cobalt oxide/copper electrodes of lithium-ion batteries with reversible high-rate capabilities. J Alloy Compd 521: 83–89. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2012.01.046
    [246] Zhao W, Du N, Zhang H, et al. (2016) A novel Co-Li2O@Si core-shell nanowire array composite as a high-performance lithium-ion battery anode material. Nanoscale 8: 4511-4519. doi: 10.1039/C5NR06120B
    [247] Nethravathi C, Rajamathi CR, Rajamathi M, et al. (2013) N-doped graphene-VO2(B) nanosheet-built 3D flower hybrid for lithium ion battery. ACS Appl Mater Inter 5: 2708–2714. doi: 10.1021/am400202v
    [248] Zhang L, Wang Z, Yang K, et al. (2016) Preparation and electrochemical performances of CoO/3D graphene composite as anode for lithium-ion batteries. J Alloy Compd 656: 278–283. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2015.09.208
    [249] Qi Y, Zhang H, Du N, et al. (2013) Highly loaded CoO/graphene nanocomposites as lithium-ion anodes with superior reversible capacity. J Mat Chem A 1: 2337–2342. doi: 10.1039/c2ta00929c
    [250] Zhu J, Zhu T, Zhou X, et al. (2011) Facile synthesis of metal oxide/reduced graphene oxide hybrids with high lithium storage capacity and stable cyclability. Nanoscale 3: 1084–1089. doi: 10.1039/C0NR00744G
    [251] Peng C, Chen B, Qin Y, et al. (2012) Facile ultrasonic synthesis of CoO quantum dot/graphene nanosheet composites with high lithium storage capacity. ACS Nano 6: 1074–1081. doi: 10.1021/nn202888d
    [252] Sun Y, Hu X, Luo W, et al. (2012) Ultrathin CoO/graphene hybrid nanosheets: a highly stable anode material for lithium-ion batteries. J Phys Chem C 116: 20794–20799. doi: 10.1021/jp3070147
    [253] Verrelli R, Hassoun J (2015) High-capacity NiO-(mesocarbon microbeads) conversion anode for lithium-ion battery. ChemElectroChem 2: 988–994. doi: 10.1002/celc.201500069
    [254] Sun X, Yan C, Chen Y, et al. (2014) Three-dimensionally curved NiO nanomembranes as ultrahigh rate capability anodes for Li-ion batteries with long cycle lifetimes. Adv Energy Mater 4.
    [255] Chen X, Zhang N, Sun K (2012) Facile ammonia-induced fabrication of nanoporous NiO films with enhanced lithium-storage properties. Electrochem Commun 20: 137–140. doi: 10.1016/j.elecom.2012.04.009
    [256] Huang XH, Yuan YF, Wang Z, et al. (2011) Electrochemical properties of NiO/Co-P nanocomposite as anode materials for lithium ion batteries. J Alloy Compd 509: 3425–3429. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2010.12.117
    [257] Zou Y, Wang Y (2011) NiO nanosheets grown on graphene nanosheets as superior anode materials for Li-ion batteries. Nanoscale 3: 2615–2620. doi: 10.1039/c1nr10070j
    [258] Huang Y, Huang XL, Lian JS, et al. (2012) Self-assembly of ultrathin porous NiO nanosheets/graphene hierarchical structure for high-capacity and high-rate lithium storage. J Mater Chem 22: 2844–2847. doi: 10.1039/c2jm15865e
    [259] Zhu XJ, Hu J, Dai HL, et al. (2012) Reduced graphene oxide and nanosheet-based nickel oxide microsphere composite as an anode material for lithium ion battery. Electrochim Acta 64: 23–28. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2011.12.040
    [260] Choi SH, Ko YN, Lee JK, et al. (2014) Rapid continuous synthesis of spherical reduced graphene ball-nickel oxide composite for lithium ion batteries. Sci Rep 4: 5786. doi: 10.1038/srep05786
    [261] Zhou F, Chen Y, Liu K, et al. (2016) Metal organic frameworks derived hierarchical hollow NiO/Ni/graphene composites for lithium and sodium storage. ACS Nano 10: 377-386.
    [262] Zhong KF, Xia X, Zhang B, et al. (2010) MnO powder as anode active materials for lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 195: 3300–3308. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.11.133
    [263] Li SR, Sun Y, Ge SY, et al. (2012) A facile route to synthesize nano-MnO/C composites and their application in lithium ion batteries. Chem Eng J 192: 226–231. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2012.04.009
    [264] Zhong K, Zhang B, Luo S, et al. (2011) Investigation on porous MnO microsphere anode for lithium ion batteries. J Power Sources 196: 6802–6808. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2010.10.031
    [265] Tang X, Sui G, Cai Q, et al. (2016) Novel MnO/carbon composite anode material with multi-modal pore structure for high performance lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 4: 2082–2088. doi: 10.1039/C5TA10073A
    [266] Xia Y, Xiao Z, Dou X, et al. (2013) Green and facile fabrication of hollow porous MnO/C microspheres from microalgaes for lithium-ion batteries. ACS Nano 7: 7083–7092. doi: 10.1021/nn4023894
    [267] Yue J, Gu X, Wang N, et al. (2014) General synthesis of hollow MnO2, Mn3O4 and MnO nanospheres as superior anode materials for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 2: 17421–17426. doi: 10.1039/C4TA03924F
    [268] Liu B, Hu X, Xu H, et al. (2014) Encapsulation of MnO nanocrystals in electrospun carbon nanofibers as high-performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Sci Rep 4: 4229.
    [269] Sun Y, Hu X, Luo W, et al. (2013) Reconstruction of conformal nanoscale MnO on graphene as a high-capacity and long-life anode material for lithium ion batteries. Adv Func Mater 23: 2436–2443. doi: 10.1002/adfm.201202623
    [270] Jiang H, Hu YJ, Guo SJ, et al. (2014) Rational design of MnO/carbon nanopeapods with internal void space for high-rate and long-life Li-ion batteries. ACS Nano 8: 6038–6046. doi: 10.1021/nn501310n
    [271] Wang Y, Han ZJ, Yu SF, et al. (2013) Core-leaf onion-like carbon/MnO2 hybrid nano-urchins for rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. Carbon 64: 230–236. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2013.07.057
    [272] Lai H, Li JX, Chen ZG, et al. (2012). Carbon nanohorns as a high-performance carrier for MnO2 anode in lithium-ion batteries. ACS Appl Mater Inter 4: 2325–2328. doi: 10.1021/am300378w
    [273] Xia H, Lai M, Lu L (2010) Nanoflaky MnO2/carbon nanotube nanocomposites as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem 20: 6896–6902. doi: 10.1039/c0jm00759e
    [274] Yun YS, Kim JM, Park HH, et al. (2013) Free-standing heterogeneous hybrid papers based on mesoporous γ-MnO2 particles and carbon nanotubes for lithium-ion battery anodes. J Power Sources 244: 747–751. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.11.056
    [275] Yu AP, Park HW, Davies A, et al. (2011) Free-standing layer-by-layer hybrid thin film of graphene-MnO2 nanotube as anode for lithium ion batteries. J Phys Chem Lett 2: 1855–1860. doi: 10.1021/jz200836h
    [276] Li L, Raji ARO, Tour JM (2013) Graphene-wrapped MnO2-graphene nanoribbons as anode materials for high-performance lithium ion batteries. Adv Mater 25: 6298–6302. doi: 10.1002/adma.201302915
    [277] Li YY, Zhang QW, Zhu JL, et al. (2014) An extremely stable MnO2 anode incorporated with 3D porous graphene-like networks for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 2: 3163–3168. doi: 10.1039/c3ta14372d
    [278] Luo W, Hu X, Sun Y, et al. (2011) Electrospinning of carbon-coated Mo2 nanofibers with enhanced lithium-storage properties. Phys Chem Chem Phys 13: 16735–16740. doi: 10.1039/c1cp22184a
    [279] Liu B, Zhao X, Tian Y, et al. (2013) A simple reduction process to synthesize MoO2/C composites with cage-like structure for high-performance lithium-ion batteries. Phys Chem Chem Phys 15: 8831–8837. doi: 10.1039/c3cp44707c
    [280] Gao Q, Yang L, Lu X, et al. (2010) Synthesis, characterization and lithium-storage performance of MoO2/carbon hybrid nanowires. J Mater Chem 20: 2807–2812.
    [281] Zeng L, Zheng C, Deng C, et al. (2013) MoO2-ordered mesoporous carbon nanocomposite as an anode material for lithium-ion batteries. ACS Appl Mater Inter 5: 2182–2187. doi: 10.1021/am303286n
    [282] Ihsan M, Wang H, Majid SR, et al. (2016) MoO2/Mo2C/C spheres as anode materials for lithium ion batteries. Carbon 96: 1200–1207. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2015.10.076
    [283] Xu Y, Yi R, Yuan B, et al. (2012) High capacity MoO2/graphite oxide composite anode for lithium-ion batteries. J Phys Chem Lett 3: 309–314.
    [284] Sun Y, Hu X, Luo W, et al. (2011) Self-assembled hierarchical MoO2/graphene nanoarchitectures and their application as a high-performance anode material for lithium-ion batteries. ACS Nano 5: 7100–7107. doi: 10.1021/nn201802c
    [285] Tang Q, Shan Z, Wang L, et al. (2012) MoO2-graphene nanocomposite as anode material for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 79: 148–153. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2012.06.093
    [286] Hou Y, Li JY, Wen ZH, et al. (2014) N-doped graphene/porous g-C3N4 nanosheets supported layered-MoS2 hybrid as robust anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. Nano Energy 8: 157–164. doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2014.06.003
    [287] Kumar V, Lee PS (2015) Redox active polyaniline-h-MoO3 hollow nanorods for improved pseudocapacitive performance. J Phys Chem C 119: 9041–9049. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b00153
    [288] Brezesinski T, Wang J, Tolbert SH, et al. (2010) Ordered mesoporous α-MoO3 with iso-oriented nanocrystalline walls for thin-film pseudocapacitors. Nat Mater 9: 146–151. doi: 10.1038/nmat2612
    [289] Zhou K, Zhou W, Liu X, et al. (2015) Ultrathin MoO3 nanocrystals self-assembled on graphene nanosheets via oxygen bonding as supercapacitor electrodes of high capacitance and long cycle life. Nano Energy 12: 510–520. doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2015.01.017
    [290] Han B, Lee KH, Lee YW, et al. (2015) MoO3 nanostructured electrodes prepared via hydrothermal process for lithium ion batteries. Int J Electrochem Sci 10: 4232–4240..
    [291] Wang Q, Sun J, Wang Q, et al. (2015) Electrochemical performance of α-MoO3-In2O3 core-shell nanorods as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 3: 5083–5091.
    [292] Hamed B, Shahid M, Nagae-raju DH, et al. (2015) Surface passivation of MoO3 nanorods by atomic layer deposition toward high rate durable Li ion battery anodes. ACS Appl Mater Inter 7: 13154–13163. doi: 10.1021/acsami.5b03395
    [293] Zhao G, Li C, Zhang L, et al. (2015) “Sea cucumber”-like Ti@MoO3 nanorod arrays as self-supported lithium ion battery anodes with enhanced rate capability and durability. J Mater Chem A 3: 22547–22551.
    [294] Ma F, Yuan A, Xu J, et al. (2015) Porous α-MoO3/MWCNT nanocomposite synthesized via a surfactant-assisted solvothermal route as a lithium-ion-battery high-capacity anode material with excellent rate capability and cyclability. ACS Appl Mater Inter 7: 15531–15541. doi: 10.1021/acsami.5b03953
    [295] Tauseef A, Li W, Li J, et al. (2016) Lithium storage study on MoO3-grafted TiO2 nanotube arrays. Appl Nanoscience [in press].
    [296] Xue XY, Chen ZH, Xing LL, et al. (2011) SnO2/MoO3 core-shell nanobelts and their extraordinarily high reversible capacity as lithium-ion battery anodes. Chem Commun 47: 5205–5207. doi: 10.1039/c1cc00076d
    [297] Hashem AM, Abbas SB, Abdel-Ghany AE, et al. (2016) Blend formed by oxygen deficient MoO3?δ oxides as lithium-insertion compounds. J Alloy Compd 686: 744–752.
    [298] Bruck A, Cama CA, Gannett CN, et al. (2016) Nanocrystalline iron oxide based electroactive materials in lithium ion batteries: the critical role of crystallite size, morphology, and electrode heterostructure on battery relevant electrochemistry. Inorg Chem Front 3: 26–40. doi: 10.1039/C5QI00247H
    [299] Zhang WM, Wu XL, Hu JS, et al. (2008) Carbon-coated Fe3O4 nanospindles as a superior anode material for lithium-ion batteries. Adv Funct Mater 18: 3941–3946. doi: 10.1002/adfm.200801386
    [300] Zhu T, Chen JS, Lou XW (2011) Glucose-assisted one-pot synthesis of FeOOH nanorods and their transformation to Fe3O4@carbon nanorods for application in lithium ion batteries. J Phys Chem C 115: 9814–9820. doi: 10.1021/jp2013754
    [301] Chen JS, Zhang YM, Lou XW (2011) One-pot synthesis of uniform Fe3O4 nanospheres. ACS Appl Mater Inter 3: 3276–3279. doi: 10.1021/am201079z
    [302] Wang ZY, Luan DY, Madhavi S, et al. (2012) Assembling carbon-coated γ-Fe2O3 hollow nanohorns on the CNT backbone for superior lithium storage capability. Energ Environ Sci 5: 5252–5256. doi: 10.1039/C1EE02831F
    [303] Ji L, Toprakci O, Alcoutlabi M, et al. (2012) α-Fe2O3 nanoparticle-loaded carbon nanofibers as stable and high-capacity anodes for rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. ACS Appl Mater Inter 4: 2672–2679. doi: 10.1021/am300333s
    [304] Sun Z, Madej E, Genç A, et al. (2016) Demonstrating the steady performance of iron oxide composites over 2000 cycles at fast charge-rates for Li-ion batteries. Chem Commun 52: 7348–7351. doi: 10.1039/C6CC00168H
    [305] Jang B, Park M, Chae OB, et al. (2012) Direct synthesis of self-assembled ferrite/carbon hybrid nanosheets for high performance lithium-ion battery anodes. J Am Chem Soc 134: 15010–15015. doi: 10.1021/ja305539r
    [306] He CN, Wu S, Zhao NQ, et al. (2013) Carbon-encapsulated Fe3O4 nanoparticles as a high-rate lithium-ion battery anode material. ACS Nano 7: 4459–4469. doi: 10.1021/nn401059h
    [307] Zhu X, Zhu Y, Murali S, et al. (2011) Nanostructured reduced graphene oxide/Fe2O3 composite as a high-performance anode material for lithium ion batteries. ACS Nano 5: 3333–3338. doi: 10.1021/nn200493r
    [308] Wang G, Liu T, Luo Y, et al. (2011) Preparation of Fe2O3/graphene composite and its electrochemical performance as an anode material for lithium ion batteries. J Alloy Compd 509: L216–L220. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2011.03.151
    [309] Shi M, Wu T, Song X, et al. (2016) Active Fe2O3 nanoparticles encapsulated in porous g-C3N4/graphene sandwich-type nanosheets as superior anode for high-performance lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A [in press].
    [310] Wang R, Xu C, Sun J, et al. (2013) Flexible free-standing hollow Fe3O4/graphene hybrid films for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 1: 1794–1800. doi: 10.1039/C2TA00753C
    [311] Zhuo L, Wu Y, Wang L, et al. (2013) CO2-expanded ethanol chemical synthesis of a Fe3O4/graphene composite and its good electrochemical properties as anode material for lithium-ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 1: 3954–3960. doi: 10.1039/c3ta01388j
    [312] Pan L, Zhu XD, Xie XM, et al. (2015) Smart hybridization of anatase TiO2 nanorods and Fe3O4 nanoparticles with pristine graphene nanosheets: hierarchically nanoengineered ternary heterostructures for high-rate lithium storage. Adv Func Mater 25: 3341–3350. doi: 10.1002/adfm.201404348
    [313] Mo R, Lei Z, Sun K, et al. (2014) Facile synthesis of anatase TiO2 quantum-dot/graphene-nanosheet composites with enhanced electrochemical performance for lithium-ion batteries. Adv Mater 26: 2084–2088. doi: 10.1002/adma.201304338
    [314] Ding S, Chen JS, Luan D, et al. (2011) Graphene-supported anatase TiO2 nanosheets for fast lithium storage. Chem Commun 47: 5780–5782. doi: 10.1039/c1cc10687b
    [315] Qiu B, Xing M, Zhang J (2014) Mesoporous TiO2 nanocrystals grown in situ on graphene aerogels for high photocatalysis and lithium-ion batteries. J Am Chem Soc 136: 5852–5855. doi: 10.1021/ja500873u
    [316] Li W, Wang F, Feng S, et al. (2013) Sol-gel design strategy for ultradispersed TiO2 nanoparticles on graphene for high-performance lithium ion batteries. J Am Chem Soc 135: 18300–18303. doi: 10.1021/ja4100723
    [317] Gao L, Hu H, Li G, et al. (2014) Hierarchical 3D TiO2@Fe2O3 nano-framework arrays as high-performance anode materials. Nanoscale 6: 6463–6467. doi: 10.1039/c4nr00387j
    [318] Yan C, Chen G, Sun J, et al. (2016) Novel anode of C&N co-doped Co3O4 hollow nanofibres with excellent performance for lithium-ion batteries. Phys Chem Chem Phys [in press].
    [319] Yang H, Wang Y, Nie Y, et al. (2016) Co3O4/porous carbon nanofibers composite as anode for high-performance lithium ion batteries with improved cycle performance and lithium storage capacity. J Compos Mater [in press].
    [320] Zhu X, Ning G, Ma X, et al. (2013) High density Co3O4 nanoparticles confined in a porous graphene nanomesh network driven by an electrochemical process: ultra-high capacity and rate performance for lithium ion batteries. J Mater Chem A 1: 14023–14030. doi: 10.1039/c3ta12824e
    [321] Li BJ, Cao HQ, Shao J, et al. (2011) Co3O4@graphene composites as anode materials for high-performance lithium ion batteries. Inorg Chem 50: 1628–1632. doi: 10.1021/ic1023086
    [322] Kim H, Seo DH, Kim SW, et al. (2011) Highly reversible Co3O4/graphene hybrid anode for lithium rechargeable batteries. Carbon 49: 326–332. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2010.09.033
    [323] Sun H, Liu Y, Yu Y, et al. (2014) Mesoporous Co3O4 nanosheets-3D graphene networks hybrid materials for high-performance lithium ion batteries. Electrochim Acta 118: 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2013.11.181
    [324] Li P, Cui M, Zhang M, et al. (2016) Facile fabrication of Co3O4/nitrogen-doped graphene hybrid materials as high performance anode materials for lithium ion batteries. CrystEngComm 18: 3383–3388. doi: 10.1039/C6CE00462H
    [325] Dou Y, Xu J, Ruan B, et al. (2016) Atomic layer-by-layer Co3O4/graphene composite for high performance lithium-ion batteries. Adv Energy Mater 6.
    [326] Wang HG, Ma DL, Huang Y, et al. (2012) General and controllable synthesis strategy of metal oxide/TiO2 hierarchical heterostructures with improved lithium-ion battery performance. Sci Rep 2: 136–136.
    [327] Weng BC, Xu FH, Lozano K (2014) Mass production of carbon nanotube-reinforced polyacrylonitrile fine composite fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 131: 2928–2935.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Jong Bum Kim, Chang Hyeok Kim, Sujin Noh, Jeongho Kim, Kyung Hwan Kim, Ji Na Woo, Gwi-Nam Bae, Indoor air pollution in a residential building near the urban expressway, 2020, 19, 2288-9167, 128, 10.15250/joie.2020.19.2.128
    2. Argel Gastelum-Arellanez, Jovanni Esquivel-Días, Rigoberto Lopez-Padilla, Víctor Hugo Robledo, Rodríguez Paulina, Mónica Fabiola Beltrán, José Octavio Saucedo-Lucero, Assessment of persistent indoor VOCs inside public transport during winter season, 2021, 263, 00456535, 128127, 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128127
    3. Bo Liang, Xiang Yu, Haipeng Mi, Di Liu, Qingqing Huang, Mi Tian, Health risk assessment and source apportionment of VOCs inside new vehicle cabins: A case study from Chongqing, China, 2019, 10, 13091042, 1677, 10.1016/j.apr.2019.06.008
    4. N.D. Buitrago, J. Savdie, S.M. Almeida, S. Cabo Verde, Factors affecting the exposure to physicochemical and microbiological pollutants in vehicle cabins while commuting in Lisbon, 2021, 270, 02697491, 116062, 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116062
    5. Aalekhya Reddam, David C. Volz, Inhalation of two Prop 65-listed chemicals within vehicles may be associated with increased cancer risk, 2021, 149, 01604120, 106402, 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106402
    6. S. M. Almeida, V. Martins, 2022, Chapter 75-1, 978-981-10-5155-5, 1, 10.1007/978-981-10-5155-5_75-1
    7. Nilusha Jayawickrama, Enric Perarnau Ollé, Jesse Pirhonen, Risto Ojala, Klaus Kivekäs, Jari Vepsäläinen, Kari Tammi, Architecture for determining the cleanliness in shared vehicles using an integrated machine vision and indoor air quality-monitoring system, 2023, 10, 2196-1115, 10.1186/s40537-023-00696-6
    8. S. M. Almeida, V. Martins, 2022, Chapter 75, 978-981-16-7679-6, 2023, 10.1007/978-981-16-7680-2_75
    9. Enric Perarnau Ollé, Jasmina Casals‐Terré, Joan Antoni López Martínez, Josep Farré‐Lladós, Hansen Solubility Parameters (HSPs): A Reliable Tool for Assessing the Selectivity of Pristine and Hybrid Polymer Nanocomposites in the Presence of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Mixtures, 2022, 1438-7492, 2200511, 10.1002/mame.202200511
    10. Anna Bukłaha, Anna Wieczorek, Ewelina Kruszewska, Piotr Majewski, Dominika Iwaniuk, Paweł Sacha, Elzbieta Tryniszewska, Piotr Wieczorek, Air Disinfection—From Medical Areas to Vehicle, 2022, 10, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2022.820816
    11. Aalekhya Reddam, Nicholas Herkert, Heather M. Stapleton, David C. Volz, Partial dust removal in vehicles does not mitigate human exposure to organophosphate esters, 2022, 205, 00139351, 112525, 10.1016/j.envres.2021.112525
    12. Benjamin Barthod-Malat, Maxime Hauguel, Karim Behlouli, Michel Grisel, Géraldine Savary, Influence of the Compression Molding Temperature on VOCs and Odors Produced from Natural Fiber Composite Materials, 2023, 13, 2079-6412, 371, 10.3390/coatings13020371
    13. Berkay Yesildagli, Seung-Bok Lee, Jiwon Lee, Temporal variations of volatile organic compounds inside the cabin of a new electric vehicle under different operation modes during winter using proton transfer reaction time-of-flight mass spectrometry, 2023, 453, 03043894, 131368, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131368
    14. Xiuning Hou, Xuemin Zhang, Yulong Wang, Distribution of benzene and formaldehyde in tractor cabin: Effects of components, ventilation conditions, and vent positions, 2023, 0954-4070, 10.1177/09544070231184102
    15. Xueren Li, Yihuan Yan, Xiang Fang, Fajiang He, Jiyuan Tu, Towards understanding of inhalation exposure of pilots in the control cabin environment, 2023, 03601323, 110572, 10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110572
    16. Samuele Marinello, Francesco Lolli, Antonio Maria Coruzzolo, Rita Gamberini, Exposure to Air Pollution in Transport Microenvironments, 2023, 15, 2071-1050, 11958, 10.3390/su151511958
    17. Kyleigh Rhodes, Thomas Jobson, Manuel Raul Pelaez‐Samaniego, Vikram Yadama, Effect of thermal and ultraviolet exposure on volatile organic compounds emitted from basalt‐hemp reinforced polypropylene, 2023, 0272-8397, 10.1002/pc.27638
    18. Enric Perarnau Ollé, Josep Farré-Lladós, Jasmina Casals-Terré, Joan A. López Martínez, Enhanced selectivity of a 3D-printed microfluidic gas detector towards different volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for the effective monitoring of indoor air quality in vehicles, 2024, 33, 23521864, 103481, 10.1016/j.eti.2023.103481
    19. Petr Čech, Zuzana Paschová, Milan Gaff, Haitao Li, František Kačík, Synthetic leathers as a possible source of chemicals and odorous substances in indoor environment, 2023, 62, 1605-8127, 10.1515/rams-2023-0132
    20. Myoungho Lee, Soyeon Lee, Jongmin Park, Chungsik Yoon, Effect of spraying air freshener on particulate and volatile organic compounds in vehicles, 2024, 916, 00489697, 170192, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.170192
    21. Ángel Danilo Parra Parra, Luis Fernando Taguada Cruz, Johnny Pancha Ramos, Víctor Bravo Morocho, Study of the Incidence of CO and CO2 Gas Emission Levels and Temperature, of the Automotive Air Conditioning System Inside an Interprovincial Bus at Different Environmental and Operating Conditions, 2024, 2789-5009, 10.18502/espoch.v3i3.16622
    22. Argel Gastelum-Arellanez, José Octavio Saucedo-Lucero, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Urban Public Transportation: Seasonal Influences and Variations, 2024, 29498392, 100152, 10.1016/j.scenv.2024.100152
    23. Thawat Ngamsritrakul, Sirima Panyametheekul, Pichaya Rachdawong, Mushtaq Ahmad, Indoor air pollutants and microbes in mass rapid transit (MRT) trains of north-western area of Bangkok, Thailand: Impact on indoor air quality and human health, 2024, 26670100, 101022, 10.1016/j.envc.2024.101022
    24. Ángel Danilo Parra Parra, Luis Fernando Taguada Cruz, Johnny Pancha Ramos, Víctor Bravo Morocho, Study of the Incidence of CO and CO2 Gas Emission Levels and Temperature, of the Automotive Air Conditioning System Inside an Interprovincial Bus at Different Environmental and Operating Conditions, 2023, 2789-5009, 10.18502/espoch.v3i1.16590
    25. Anu Shrestha, Narayan Babu Dhital, In-vehicle air quality in public buses during real-world trips in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal, 2024, 26670100, 101054, 10.1016/j.envc.2024.101054
    26. John Omomoluwa Ogundiran, Jean-Paul Kapuya Bulaba Nyembwe, James Ogundiran, Anabela Salgueiro Narciso Ribeiro, Manuel Gameiro da Silva, A Systematic Review of Indoor Environmental Quality in Passenger Transport Vehicles of Tropical and Subtropical Regions, 2025, 16, 2073-4433, 140, 10.3390/atmos16020140
    27. Ho-Hyeong Yang, Jun Jeong, Hye-Rim Lee, Heun-Woo Cho, In-Ji Park, Cha-Ryung Kim, Hyun-Woo Lee, Ho-Hyun Kim, Pollutant concentration changes in vehicles under real road driving: Focusing on certain domestic vehicles, 2024, 23, 2288-9167, 300, 10.15250/joie.2024.23.4.300
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(12773) PDF downloads(2439) Cited by(30)

Figures and Tables

Figures(8)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog