Dehydrogenation Performances of Different Al Source Composite Systems of 2LiBH4 + M (M = Al, LiAlH4, Li3AlH6)

Introduction

Hydrogen energy has become an ideal new energy resource due to its clean, efficient, and renewable properties (Schlapbach and Zuttel, 2001). Although the use of hydrogen energy is promising, widespread use has been hindered by issues in the advancement of high-performance materials for hydrogen storage (Liu et al., 2010). The complex hydride (Ley et al., 2014) LiBH₄, which has a hydrogen capacity storage of 18.5 wt.%, has drawn extensive attention. LiBH₄ decomposes into an intermediate compound Li₂B₁₂H₁₂, which generates B and releases H₂ as described in Equation (1) (Orimo et al., 2006).

$\begin{array}{l}\text{LiB}{\text{H}}_4\to 1/12\text{L}{\text{i}}_2{\text{B}}_{12}{\text{H}}_{12}+5/6\text{LiH}+13/12{\text{H}}_2\to \text{LiH}\\ +\text{B}+3/2{\text{H}}_2& (1)\end{array}$

However, many factors impede the commercial application of pure LiBH₄, such as high dehydrogenation temperature, slow dehydrogenation rate, and poor cycle reversibility (Lodziana and Vegge, 2004). To solve these issues, researchers have concentrated on modifying LiBH₄ (Vajo and Olson, 2007) through anion/cation substitution (Fang et al., 2011; Lombardo et al., 2019), catalytic modification (Kou et al., 2012; Huang et al., 2016; Zhai et al., 2016), the combined effect of composites (Vajo et al., 2010; Kou et al., 2012), and the application of the confinement effect of nano-materials (Vajo, 2011; Zhang et al., 2017).

Al and Al-based composites with LiBH₄ are of interest. Founded on first-principles calculation, Siegel et al. (2007) predicted that LiBH₄ would react with Al to generate AlB₂, LiH, and H₂ at 280°C under a hydrogen pressure of 1 bar. For the LiAlH₄-LiBH₄ system, Mao et al. (2009) found that the addition of TiF₃ decreased the onset temperatures of H₂ release by 64 and 150°C compared with the undoped system. The decomposition enthalpy values of LiBH₄ also reduced to 60.4 kJ/mol. He et al. (2019) studied the dehydrogenation performance of LiBH₄/LiAlH₄ composite, found that 8.7 wt.% of hydrogen was released at 500°C, and defined a “Li-Al-B-H” compound. Soru et al. (2014) focused on the phase structural transformation of the LiAlH₄ + LiBH₄ system, which can produce 6.8 wt.% of hydrogen. According to a study by Carrillo-Bucio et al. (2017), a surface-oxidized 2LiBH₄ + Al composite did not release hydrogen until heated to 400°C under a 3 bar initial backpressure. With the catalytic effect of TiF₃, the mixture obtained 9.3 wt.% of hydrogen release as compared to the 5.8 wt.% of the undoped mixture. In research by Zhang et al. (2018), a combined mixture of MgH₂, LiBH₄, and LiAlH₄ showed superior performance, starting to release hydrogen at 280°C and maintaining reversibility. In our previous studies (Li et al., 2012), the dehydrogenation temperatures of 2LiBH₄ + Li₃AlH₆ doped with titanium were decreased by 80 and 50°C, respectively, vs. the undoped system. From the previous studies, it can be summarized that Al can enhance the hydrogen storage performance of LiBH₄ to some extent. However, the dehydrogenation behaviors of different Al source composite systems have not been systematically studied. In this work, three Al-based LiBH₄ composite systems, 2LiBH₄-Al, 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ were prepared, and the hydrogen storage performance was investigated.

Materials and Methods

Table 1 shows the raw materials used in this study. All powders were carefully stored in a glove box (MIKROUNA), in which noble gas was loaded and the oxygen content and water vapor content were kept below 1 ppm. A planetary mill (QM-3SP2) was utilized to prepare the composites.

TABLE 1

Table 1. Raw materials used in the study.

The dehydrogenation properties of the materials were tested with a Sievert-type device. The changes in temperature and pressure over time were recorded. The ideal gas state equation was utilized to calculate the dehydrogenation capacity. Thermal analysis was performed using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC, Netzsch 449C Jupiter) combined with thermogravimetric analysis (TG, QMS 403C). To protect the samples from oxidation, high purity argon gas was added at a flow rate of 50 mL/min. An empty aluminum crucible was used as a reference during analysis. The phase compositions of the samples were determined by X-ray powder diffraction (X'Pert-PRO, PANalytical); its scanning range (2θ) was 15°-80°. A specific sealed device was used to protect samples from being oxidized or damped during analysis. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR, Tensor 27) was employed to detect some amorphous substances with a scanning rate of 30 cm⁻¹/min and a resolution ratio of 0.5 cm⁻¹.

Results and Discussion

Preparation of Li₃AlH₆ Powder

In this work, Li₃AlH₆ powder was synthesized in-situ by ball milling LiH and LiAlH₄. Approximately 15 g mixed powder of LiH and LiAlH₄ was milled each time with a molar ratio of 2:1, a ball to powder ratio of 25:1, and a milling speed of 300 rpm. To suppress temperature rise in the ball milling, every 30 min was set as an operation cycle, which contained a stop time of 6 min, periodically. After ball milling for 20 h, XRD patterns were obtained and examined to characterize the mixed powder. Figure 1 shows the XRD results of pure LiH powder, LiAlH₄ powder, and the LiH and LiAlH₄ powder after ball milling for 20 h. No impurity phases were observed in any of the samples, which indicates that the samples were highly pure and did not oxidize. As shown in Figure 1C, a few Li₃AlH₆ diffraction peaks are present, while the rest are of LiAlH₄ and LiH. This shows that the synthesis reaction was not completed. Due to long milling time, LiH peaks were much lower than before. The LiH content was lower, and an amorphous structure was formed.

FIGURE 1

Figure 1. XRD patterns of (A) pure LiH, (B) pure LiAlH₄, and (C) mixed powder of LiH and LiAlH₄ after ball milling for 20 h.

Further ball milling was carried out since the synthesis reaction to Li₃AlH₆ was not completed. The milling samples were taken for XRD analysis after every 10 h. Figure 2 shows the XRD results of the milled powders after 20, 30, 40, and 50 h. Strong double peaks at 22° and 23° are detected, which are the characteristic peaks of Li₃AlH₆. After ball milling for 30 h, most of the diffraction peaks are Li₃AlH₆; however, some LiAlH₄ and LiH peaks can still be found at 27°, 43°, and 46°. As the ball milling time increased, the LiH and LiAlH₄ content decreased, which shows that the synthesis reaction proceeds as the milling time increases. Nevertheless, the diffraction intensity of Li₃AlH₆ decreased, which shows that the longer milling time, the more likely the production of an amorphous phase becomes.

FIGURE 2

Figure 2. XRD patterns of mixed powder of LiH and LiAlH₄ after ball-milling for different numbers of hours.

FTIR analysis was used to investigate the synthesized powder. In pure LiAlH₄ (Figure 3A), the bending modes around 1,780 and 1,610 cm⁻¹ correspond to the A-H stretching band, as was previously shown by Chen et al. (2001). After 50 h ball milling, this A-H stretching band disappeared in the 2LilH-LiAlH₄ mixtures (Figure 3B). A new A-H stretching band was generated around 1,380 cm⁻¹, which belongs to Li₃AlH₆. This indicates the completion of the synthesis reaction.

FIGURE 3

Figure 3. FT-IR spectrums of (A) pure LiAlH₄ and (B) 2LiH-LiAlH₄ mixed powder after 50-h ball milling.

Characterization of the Composite Samples

The 2LiBH₄ + M (M = Al, LiAlH₄, Li₃AlH₆) composite systems were prepared by ball milling, respectively. The ball-milling time was 1 h, with a mole ratio of 2:1. The as-milled mixtures are presented in Figure 4. In the 2LiBH₄-Al composite, the narrow and sharp diffraction peaks are of Al, while the other diffraction peaks are of LiBH₄. The intensity of the LiAlH₄ peaks in the 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄ composite are also strong, but both LiBH₄ and Li₃AlH₆ have attenuated diffraction peaks in 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆. The absence of other peaks indicated that there were no side reactions that could generate impurities or by-products during ball milling.

FIGURE 4

Figure 4. XRD patterns of 2LiBH₄-Al, 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ mixtures after ball milling for 1 h.

Dehydrogenation Performances

The dehydrogenation performances of the samples were investigated. The four samples were heated to 550°C at a heating rate of 5°C/min in an argon atmosphere. The DSC/TG results are shown in Figure 5. In the pure LiBH₄ sample (Figure 5A), the endothermic peak at 120°C denotes that LiBH₄ transformed from an orthorhombic to a hexagonal crystal system. The endothermic peak at 286°C is attributed to the melting of LiBH₄. According to the TG curve, LiBH₄ began to release hydrogen and lose weight at 400°C. There is a dehydrogenation peak at around 469°C, and the rate of dehydrogenation slowed down after that. Both the transformation and the melting peak of LiBH₄ for each composite sample are shown in Figures 5B–D. All samples have lower transformation and melting temperatures than pure LiBH₄ (transformation temperature: T_d < T_c < T_b < T_a; melting temperature: T_c < T_d < T_b < T_a). In the as-milled 2LiBH₄-Al sample (Figure 5B), the wide endothermic range around 445°C represents the decomposition of LiBH₄. The last peak at 529°C is the decomposition of LiH. As shown in Figure 5C, peaks at 190 and 198°C indicated the dehydrogenation of LiAlH₄, which were verified in our previous study (Li et al., 2012). LiAlH₄ decomposed into Li₃AlH₆ at 190°C, and Li₃AlH₆ started to generate LiH, Al, and release H₂ at 198°C. LiBH₄ and LiH started to decompose at 435 and 472°C, respectively. Figure 5D shows that the decomposition peak of Li₃AlH₆ is at 198°C, which is consistent with the 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄ sample. The decomposition peak of LiBH₄ (416°C) is lower than that of the 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄ (435°C) or 2LiBH₄-Al samples (445°C). In addition, the decomposition peak of LiH, which is around 452°C, is also lower than that of the other composite systems. These results showed that the LiBH₄ became more unstable due to the addition of Li₃AlH₆ and that hydrogen was released at a lower temperature. The main reason for this is that the Al present in Li₃AlH₆ was active enough to stimulate the dehydrogenation reaction.

FIGURE 5

Figure 5. DSC/TG curves of (A) pure LiBH₄, (B) 2LiBH₄-Al, (C) 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and (D) 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ samples after ball milling for 1 h.

The temperature-programmed desorption (TPD) method was implemented to study the dehydrogenation performance of pure LiBH₄, 2LiBH₄-Al, 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆; the results are shown in Figure 6. The samples were heated to 400°C and held for 5 h. The pure LiBH₄ began to release H₂ at around 400°C. Its desorption rate slowed down when 5 wt.% of H₂ had been released. The 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ sample released 9.1 wt.% H₂ within 150 min, which is the fastest reaction kinetics in this work. Its decomposition process includes two main steps, with the release of 3 and 6.1 wt.% H₂ as the first and second steps, respectively. In the 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄ sample, LiAlH₄ began to decompose at ~130°C and released 3.9 wt.% H₂. Subsequently, its desorption rate was retarded. This composite released a total of 8 wt.% H₂. The 2LiBH₄-Al composite had a slower desorption rate. Only 5.7 wt.% H₂ was released after 6 h, which is much lower than the 8.6 wt.% predicted by theoretical capacity. Previous research (Friedrichs et al., 2009) has reported that Al is an effective catalyst to activate LiBH₄, and this phenomenon can also be observed in this study. However, the Al element generated from 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ is much more effective than for the other samples. Since aluminum can be easily oxidized, an oxide film can easily form on the surface of the Al powder, which can slow down the dehydrogenation kinetics. In contrast, the Al in 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆, decomposed from Li₃AlH₆ exhibits high purity and is non-oxidized, resulting in the superior reaction kinetics of LiBH₄.

FIGURE 6

Figure 6. TPD curves of pure LiBH₄, 2LiBH₄-Al, 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ samples.

Characterization of the Dehydrogenation Materials

The XRD patterns of the dehydrogenated samples are shown in Figure 7. In Figure 7A, prominent diffraction peaks of LiH and Al are present. However, the LiBH₄ phase was not observed, as its diffraction intensity is relatively weaker. In Figure 7B, residual peaks of LiBH₄ are observed, which demonstrates incomplete dehydrogenation. In Figure 7C, besides LiH and Al, the dehydrogenation products contain AlB₂, which was reported as the reversible phase (Friedrichs et al., 2009). AlB₂ can accelerate the formation of LiBH₄ in the reverse reaction. The AlB₂ content was higher in 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ than in the other samples, which signifies higher reversibility of 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆. There is an unexpected peak near 50° both in the 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄ and 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ samples, which was not identified but was also detected in previous reports (Yang et al., 2007).

FIGURE 7

Figure 7. XRD results of dehydrogenated samples at 400°C: (A) 2LiBH₄-Al, (B) 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and (C) 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆.

Conclusions

In this work, the dehydrogenation performance of three different Al source composite systems, 2LiBH₄-Al, 2LiBH₄-LiAlH₄, and 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆, was analyzed. Elemental Al was the raw material and was used without further purification in the 2LiBH₄-Al composite, in contrast to the other two samples, where it was decomposed from LiAlH₄ or Li₃AlH₆. Li₃AlH₆ powder was prepared from LiH and LiAlH₄. It can be concluded that the optimum synthetic conditions for ball milling are 50 h with a 25:1 ball to powder ratio at 300 rpm. The results demonstrate that Al, LiAlH₄, and Li₃AlH₆ had a stimulative effect on LiBH₄, allowing dehydrogenation at a relatively lower temperature. Additionally, 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ was shown to have the best performance, with the endothermic peak of LiBH₄ at 416°C, 53°C lower than that of the pure LiBH₄ sample (469°C). The TPD results also verified the superior results of 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆, which showed the best kinetics performance among the composite samples. 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ released 9.1 wt.% H₂ in only 150 min, which is over 95% of its theoretical hydrogen storage capacity. Its dehydrogenation product, AlB₂, was reported as a reversible phase by researchers (Friedrichs et al., 2009), which could promote the reverse reaction of producing LiBH₄. Further studies are needed to research the reversibility of the 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ composite.

Data Availability Statement

All datasets generated for this study are included in the article/supplementary material.

Author Contributions

LC and YL: conception and design of study. YL and JH: acquisition of data. YL and XX: analysis and/or interpretation of data. YL: drafting the manuscript. DZ and SW: revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content. YL, SW, DZ, JH, XX, and LC: approval of the version of the manuscript to be published.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51671173) and the Curriculum Reform Project (KCSZ 201809 and JGXM201912).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

Carrillo-Bucio, J., Tena-García, J., and Suárez-Alcántara, K. (2017). Dehydrogenation of surface-oxidized mixtures of 2LiBH₄ + Al/additives (TiF₃ or CeO₂). Inorganics 5:82. doi: 10.3390/inorganics5040082

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chen, J., Kuriyama, N., Xu, Q., Takeshita, H. T., and Sakai, T. (2001). Reversible hydrogen storage via titanium-catalyzed LiAlH₄ and Li₃AlH₆. J. Phys. Chem. B 105, 11214–11220. doi: 10.1021/jp012127w

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fang, F., Li, Y., Song, Y., Sun, D., Zhang, Q., Ouyang, L., et al. (2011). Superior destabilization effects of MnF₂ over MnCl₂ in the decomposition of LiBH₄. J. Phys. Chem. C 115, 13528–13533. doi: 10.1021/jp203527c

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Friedrichs, O., Kim, J. W., Remhof, A., Buchter, F., Borgschulte, A., Wallacher, D., et al. (2009). The effect of Al on the hydrogen sorption mechanism of LiBH₄. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 11, 1515–1520. doi: 10.1039/b814282c

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

He, Q., Zhu, D., Wu, X., Dong, D., Xu, M., and Tong, Z. (2019). Hydrogen desorption properties of LiBH₄/xLiAlH₄ (x = 0.5, 1, 2) composites. Molecules 24:1861. doi: 10.3390/molecules24101861

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Huang, X., Xiao, X. Z., Shao, J., Zhai, B., Fan, X. L., Cheng, C. J., et al. (2016). Building robust architectures of carbon-wrapped transition metal nanoparticles for high catalytic enhancement of the 2LiBH₄-MgH₂ system for hydrogen storage cycling performance. Nanoscale 8, 14898–14908. doi: 10.1039/C6NR04100K

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kou, H. Q., Xiao, X. Z., Li, J. X., Li, S. Q., Ge, H. W., Wang, Q. D., et al. (2012). Effects of fluoride additives on dehydrogenation behaviors of 2LiBH₄ + MgH₂ system. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37, 1021–1026. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.03.027

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ley, M. B., Jepsen, L. H., Lee, Y. S., Cho, Y. W., von Colbe, J. M. B., Dornheim, M., et al. (2014). Complex hydrides for hydrogen storage - new perspectives. Mater. Today 17, 122–128. doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2014.02.013

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Li, Y., Xiao, X., Chen, L., Han, L., Shao, J., Fan, X., et al. (2012). Effects of fluoride additives on the hydrogen storage performance of 2LiBH₄-Li₃AlH₆ destabilized system. J. Phys. Chem. C 116, 22226–22230. doi: 10.1021/jp307572x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, C., Li, F., Ma, L. P., and Cheng, H. M. (2010). Advanced materials for energy storage. Adv. Mater. 22, E28–E62. doi: 10.1002/adma.200903328

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lodziana, Z., and Vegge, T. (2004). Structural stability of complex hydrides: LiBH₄ revisited. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93:145501. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.145501

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text

Lombardo, L., Yang, H., and Züttel, A. (2019). Study of borohydride ionic liquids as hydrogen storage materials. J. Energy Chem. 33, 17–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jechem.2018.08.011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mao, J. F., Guo, Z. P., Liu, H. K., and Yu, X. B. (2009). Reversible hydrogen storage in titanium-catalyzed LiAlH₄-LiBH₄ system. J. Alloys Comp. 487, 434–438. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2009.07.158

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Orimo, S. I., Nakamori, Y., Ohba, N., Miwa, K., Aoki, M., Towata, S–I., et al. (2006). Experimental studies on intermediate compound of LiBH₄. Appl. Phys. Lett. 89:021920. doi: 10.1063/1.2221880

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Schlapbach, L., and Zuttel, A. (2001). Hydrogen-storage materials for mobile applications. Nature 414, 353–358. doi: 10.1038/35104634

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Siegel, D. J., Wolverton, C., and Ozolins, V. (2007). Thermodynamic guidelines for the prediction of hydrogen storage reactions and their application to destabilized hydride mixtures. Phys. Rev. B 76:134102. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.134102

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Soru, S., Taras, A., Pistidda, C., Milanese, C., Bonatto Minella, C., Masolo, E., et al. (2014). Structural evolution upon decomposition of the LiAlH₄ + LiBH₄ system. J. Alloys Comp. 615, S693–S697. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2013.12.027

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vajo, J. J. (2011). Influence of nano-confinement on the thermodynamics and dehydrogenation kinetics of metal hydrides. Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. 15, 52–61. doi: 10.1016/j.cossms.2010.11.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vajo, J. J., Li, W., and Liu, P. (2010). Thermodynamic and kinetic destabilization in LiBH₄/Mg₂NiH₄: promise for borohydride-based hydrogen storage. Chem. Commun. 46, 6687–6689. doi: 10.1039/c0cc01026j

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vajo, J. J., and Olson, G. L. (2007). Hydrogen storage in destabilized chemical systems. Scripta Mater. 56, 829–834. doi: 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.01.002

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yang, J., Sudik, A., and Wolverton, C. (2007). Destabilizing LiBH₄ with a metal (M) Mg, Al, Ti, V, Cr, or Sc) or metal hydride (MH₂ = MgH₂, TiH₂, or CaH₂). J. Phys. Chem. C 111, 19134–19140. doi: 10.1021/jp076434z

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhai, B., Xiao, X., Lin, W., Huang, X., Fan, X., Li, S., et al. (2016). Enhanced hydrogen desorption properties of LiBH4–Ca(BH4)2 by a synergetic effect of nanoconfinement and catalysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 41, 17462–17470. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.06.170

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, L. T., Zheng, J. G., Xiao, X. Z., Wang, X. C., Huang, X., Liu, M. J., et al. (2017). A new strategy to remarkably improve the low-temperature reversible hydrogen desorption performances of LiBH₄ by compositing with fluorographene. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 42, 20046–20055. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.05.060

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, Y., Xiao, X., Luo, B., Huang, X., Liu, M., and Chen, L. (2018). Synergistic effect of LiBH₄ and LiAlH₄ additives on improved hydrogen storage properties of unexpected high capacity magnesium hydride. J. Phys. Chem. C 122, 2528–2538. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.7b11222

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar