Recent Advances on Mg–Li–Al Systems for Solid-State Hydrogen Storage: A Review

Introduction

Due to global environmental issues and the search for new energy sources and carriers, hydrogen is viewed as the most promising alternative to replace fossil fuel-based energy (Yang et al., 2019; Yao L. et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2019b). Hydrogen is an environment-friendly energy carrier since it has near-zero greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, hydrogen can also reduce the dependence on imported oil for countries without natural resources (Peláez Peláez et al., 2021; Sartbaeva et al., 2008). Hydrogen is not found naturally, but it can be produced from a variety of primary energy sources (e.g., fossil fuels and biomass) and secondary energy sources (e.g., renewable electricity from wind and hydropower) (Abdin et al., 2020; Thapa et al., 2021). As reported by Dunn (Dunn, 2002), since the mid-19^th century, the world has been shifting slowly from one form of energy to another, from solids to liquids and gases, as shown in Figure 1. Compared to fossil fuel, hydrogen holds high energy content and can be stored in large quantities over a long time (Satyapal et al., 2007; Sadhasivam et al., 2017). Hydrogen can offer a long-term solution as it can be continuously supplied and can contribute to a variety of automotive fuel sources. As a result, important research and developmental activities are being carried out to improve the efficiency of the hydrogen-based energy system to make it competitive with the existing fossil fuels.

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 1. Global transition of energy systems 1850–2150 (Dunn, 2002).

In addition to the lack of infrastructures for hydrogen (for example, production, distribution, and refueling), one of the main roadblocks to the spread of hydrogen is reliable hydrogen storage. Hydrogen-compressed gas tanks, hydrogen liquid tanks, and solid-state storage of hydrogen are possible current approaches to store hydrogen (Sazelee et al., 2018; Doğan et al., 2020). Liquid hydrogen storage systems present a promising opportunity to efficiently increase the capacity of hydrogen fueling stations and are also preferred for space missions (Jiang et al., 2021; Correa-Jullian & Groth, 2022). Although liquid hydrogen tanks are usually super-insulated tanks, at approximately 20 K, boil-off may occur due to the substantial temperature difference between the ambient and liquid hydrogen (Khurana et al., 2006; Zuo et al., 2020). On the other hand, although storage in a compressed gas tank is possible, technical simplicity and the fast filling-releasing rate requires very high pressure and has high costs (Zheng et al., 2012). Therefore, solid-state hydrogen storage draws more attention due to its security, high storage capacity, and hydrogen purification (Niaz et al., 2015; Sazelee et al., 2020b; Ye et al., 2020). However, a drawback of the solid-state hydrogen storage materials, especially for metal/complex hydrides, is their high decomposition temperature and sluggish sorption kinetics (absorb and desorb hydrogen) (Daulbayev et al., 2022).

An Overview of the Mg–Li–Al Systems

A wide variety of materials are currently being considered as the future reversible solid-state hydrogen storage materials (Zacharia & Rather, 2015). As claimed by David (David, 2005), the ability to separate hydrogen differs from each metal, and this ability depends on the metals’ purity, surface structure, and morphology. The list of the storage systems with their gravimetric capacities is shown in Table 1.

TABLE 1

TABLE 1. Hydride materials and theoretical gravimetric hydrogen density (Kojima, 2019).

Globally, among the solid-state hydrogen storage materials, research into the use of magnesium (Mg) in hydrogen storage applications is of considerable importance (Jain et al., 2010; Crivello et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2019a; Ouyang et al., 2020). In recent years, much attention has been given to examining the specific material properties of Mg alloys for the development of new functional materials (Yang et al., 2021). Mg is also one of the most abundant and lightly packed solid materials (1.738 g/cm³) (Li et al., 2015). Increasing interest in MgH₂ has been shown due to its high hydrogen storage capacity (7.6 wt.%), low cost, and superior reversibility (Imamura et al., 2005; Sakintuna et al., 2007; Montone et al., 2010; El Khatabi et al., 2018).

Thus, researchers suggested that hydrogen interaction with Mg is one of the most promising approaches (Eftekhari & Fang, 2017; Luo et al., 2019). While Mg satisfies many practical application requirements, the on-board applications can still not be used for many reasons, such as 1) the desorption/absorption kinetics process is very slow for pure Mg (Schlapbach et al., 1979) and 2) releasing hydrogen at high temperatures (>400°C), is correlated with the high stability of Mg–H bonds and is expressed in the high enthalpy of hydride formation (Zaluska et al., 1999; Dornheim et al., 2007; Jain et al., 2010). To boost MgH₂ hydrogen storage properties, numerous techniques have been developed including alloying (Li et al., 2019; Liang et al., 2020; Marques et al., 2020; Dematteis et al., 2021), nanosizing (Ranjbar et al., 2009; Zhang et al., 2015; Yu et al., 2017; Ma et al., 2021), and catalyzing (Polanski et al., 2011; Baricco et al., 2012; Ismail et al., 2016; Jangir et al., 2018; Yao P. et al., 2020; Ismail, 2021; Liu et al., 2021; Lu et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021). The remarkable improvements of these techniques have been demonstrated as the most successful methods but still do not fulfill the Department of Energy (DOE) target for solid-state hydrogen storage materials (Urgnani et al., 2008).

The ‘destabilization concept’ has been introduced as another method to enhance the sorption kinetics and alter the thermodynamics of MgH₂ (Vajo et al., 2004; Vajo et al., 2007; Vajo & Olson, 2007; Ali et al., 2021; Sulaiman et al., 2021b). The concept aims to modify the thermodynamics and kinetics of the hydrogen sorption reaction (Barkhordarian et al., 2007). Thermodynamic destabilization is achieved when the mixed hydrides react and form a new intermediate compound that alters the thermodynamic properties and facilitates hydrogen release and absorption (Reilly & Wiswall, 1968; Ismail & Mustafa, 2016; Ali & Ismail, 2021). Since several studies have been reported on this concept, researchers attempted to destabilize MgH₂ by using the reactive hydride composite approach, as in the systems such as MgH₂–AlH₃ (Liu et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2014; Ismail, 2016), MgH₂–Mg(AlH₄)₂ (Wang et al., 2014), MgH₂–NaAlH₄ (Ismail et al., 2013; Rafi-ud-din et al., 2014; Bendyna et al., 2015; Ali & Ismail, 2021), MgH₂–NaBH₄ (Mao et al., 2009; Kato et al., 2012; Mulas et al., 2012), and other promising destabilizing systems. Among all the destabilizing systems, the researchers tried the destabilizing concept with the most studied materials under the complex hydride, which is LiAlH₄, in order to enhance the performance for the practical use of MgH₂. Due to its high capacity for storage (10.5 wt.%), LiAlH₄ is interesting compared to the other complex hydrides such as NaAlH₄ (5.5 wt.%) (Sazelee & Ismail, 2021). LiAlH₄ decomposes in three steps (Liu C. et al., 2020). With 5.3 wt.% of H₂ at 150°C, the first decomposition occurs as in Eq. 1. Meanwhile, the second decomposition occurs at ∼180°C (2.6 wt.%), and the third decomposition occurs with a temperature above 350°C (2.6 wt.%), as in Eqs 2, 3, respectively.

$3\text{L}\text{i}\text{A}\text{l}{\text{H}}_4\to \text{L}{\text{i}}_3\text{A}\text{l}{\text{H}}_6+2\text{A}\text{l}+3{\text{H}}_2,(1)$

$\text{L}{\text{i}}_3\text{A}\text{l}{\text{H}}_6\to 3\text{L}\text{i}\text{H}+\text{A}\text{l}+3/2{\text{H}}_2,(2)$

$3\text{L}\text{i}\text{H}+3\text{A}\text{l}\to 3\text{L}\text{i}\text{A}\text{l}+3/2{\text{H}}_2.(3)$

Even though LiAlH₄ offers several benefits, it suffers from slow desorption kinetics (hard to release hydrogen at certain conditions), and the last reaction temperature is quite high (Hsu et al., 2014a; Ismail et al., 2021). The enthalpy change of Eq. 1 is calculated to be −27 kJmol⁻¹ (Ke & Chen, 2007), which indicates that the hydrogen evolution from the solid LiAlH₄ is thermodynamically allowed at low temperatures but is restricted by a relatively high kinetic barrier in transforming tetrahedron (AlH₄)⁻ to octahedron (AlH₆)³⁻ (Chen et al., 2010). All the theoretical and experimental works showed that the LiAlH₄ system could absorb hydrogen when a higher hydrogen pressure is applied (more than 8.0 MPa) (Sazelee & Ismail, 2021). This is because LiAlH₄ is restricted by weak reversibility and very high thermodynamic stability (Graetz et al., 2008). For instance, Jang et al. (Jang et al., 2006) stated that more than 10³ bar of hydrogen partial pressure is required for the absorption reaction of Li₃AlH₆ to LiAlH₄ above the room temperature.

To that end, this review concentrated on the destabilized MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite (Mg–Li–Al system). This idea is based on the hypothesis that so-called mechano-chemical reactions could occur between MgH₂ and LiAlH₄, and the intermediate phases (Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂) could be formed to modify the thermal stability of the Mg–Li–Al system. The primary goal of this article is to review the progress of the destabilized MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system in improving the performance of MgH₂ and LiAlH₄ hydrogen storage. Up to date, no researchers have been reviewing this Mg–Li–Al system. Therefore, we believed that the researchers and practitioners involved in research on hydrogen storage materials will benefit from this review article. Figure 2 illustrates the main topics discussed in this review.

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2. Schematic representation of the main topics discussed in this review.

The Effect of the MgH₂ and LiAlH₄ Ratios

The first systematic study on the mutual destabilization between MgH₂ and LiAlH₄ was reported by Zhang et al. (Zhang et al., 2008). They studied the different molar ratios (1:1, 2:1, and 4:1) of MgH₂–LiAlH₄. The result showed that the initial desorption temperature for the MgH₂–relevant decomposition in all the different molar ratios of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite was decreased to ∼250°C, which is 50°C lower than the milled MgH₂, as shown in Figure 3. By using the Kissinger method, the activation energy value of MgH₂–relevant decomposition in the composite was reduced dramatically compared to the undoped MgH₂. The dehydrogenation enthalpies of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites with different molar ratios 4:1, 2:1, and 1:1 are 61, 48.66, and 45 kJ/mol, respectively. These enthalpy values were smaller than the undoped MgH₂ (76 kJ/mol), which indicates that MgH₂ was destabilized by LiAlH₄. Further study revealed that the dehydrogenation process in the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system can be divided into two steps: the first step is due to the two-step decomposition of LiAlH₄ (The first step is the decomposition of LiAlH₄ to Li₃AlH₆ and Al (as in Eq. 1), and the second step is the decomposition of Li₃AlH₆ to LiH and Al (as in Eq. 2) and the second step is due to the reaction between LiH and Al phases to form Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ phases, as indicated in Eqs 4, 5.

$4.08\text{M}\text{g}{\text{H}}_2+0.92\text{L}\text{i}\text{H}\to \text{L}{\text{i}}_{0.92}\text{M}{\text{g}}_{.08}+4.54{\text{H}}_2,(4)$

$17\text{M}\text{g}{\text{H}}_2+12\text{A}\text{l}\to \text{A}{\text{l}}_{12}\text{M}{\text{g}}_{17}+17{\text{H}}_2.(5)$

FIGURE 3

FIGURE 3. Initial desorption temperature for the as-milled LiAlH₄, as-milled MgH₂, and MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites with different molar ratios (1:1, 2:1, and 4:1) (Zhang et al., 2008).

Moreover, rehydrogenation measurement shows that Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ are the fully absorbed hydrogen, as shown in Eqs 6, 7.

$\text{L}{\text{i}}_{0.92}\text{M}{\text{g}}_{4.08}+4.5{\text{H}}_2\to 4.08\text{M}\text{g}{\text{H}}_2+0.92\text{L}\text{i}\text{H},(6)$

$\text{A}{\text{l}}_{12}\text{M}{\text{g}}_{17}+\left(17-2y\right){\text{H}}_2\to \text{y}\text{M}{\text{g}}_2\text{A}{\text{l}}_3+\left(17-2y\right)\text{M}\text{g}{\text{H}}_2+\left(12-3y\right)\text{A}\text{l}.(7)$

Lin and Tsai (Lin & Tsai, 2017) in their study exposed that the diffraction peak intensity of LiAlH₄ decreased with an increasing amount of MgH₂ addition, as in Figure 4. No other compounds were found after milling, indicating that no reaction occurred between LiAlH₄ and MgH₂ during the milling process. This result is in agreement with a previous study by Hsu et al. (Hsu et al., 2014b), in which the diffraction peak intensity of MgH₂ increased with a decreasing amount of LiAlH₄ in the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ mixture.

FIGURE 4

FIGURE 4. XRD patterns of different ratios of MgH₂ and LiAlH₄ in the Mg–Li–Al system after the milling process (Lin & Tsai, 2017).

Next, the temperatures of desorption and the amount of hydrogen released from the composites of MgH₂–LiAlH₄ were quantitively evaluated by the thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), as shown in Table 2. It was evident that with the increasing MgH₂ content in the composites, the first desorption temperature was lowered. These findings showed that MgH₂ played an effective role in reducing the initial desorption temperature of these composites. As soon as the desorption of these composites was completed, absorption kinetics was initiated with a temperature maintained at 400°C, while charging hydrogen to the target pressure. As displayed in Table 2, the total amount of hydrogen absorbed (wt.%) increased from 0.3 to 3, and the onset desorption temperature also decreased to 85°C compared to 100°C with an increase in the MgH₂ content in the composites. The results proved that MgH₂ was the main compound that exhibited reversibility concerning the hydrogen absorption/desorption reaction. As shown in Table 2, the ability of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite to absorb hydrogen increased as the MgH₂ ratio increased.

TABLE 2

TABLE 2. TGA results show the temperature of desorption and the amount of hydrogen absorption/desorption from MgH₂–LiAlH₄ with different amounts of composites (Lin & Tsai, 2017).

The LiAlH₄–MgH₂ hydrogen storage system was studied by Chen et al. (Chen et al., 2010). The commercial LiAlH₄ was decomposed at 163°C; meanwhile, the commercial MgH₂ decomposed at 405°C. However, LiAlH₄ and MgH₂ mixtures start to release hydrogen at ∼107°C, indicating that the combination of LiAlH₄ and MgH₂ may improve their thermodynamic properties. Measurement of the XRD was performed after desorption, and the results showed that in all the LiAlH₄–xMgH₂ composites (LiAlH₄–MgH₂, LiAlH₄–2.5MgH₂, and LiAlH₄–4MgH₂), the Mg₁₇Al₁₂ phase was formed. In addition, the LiAlH₄–4MgH₂ composite contained major Li_0.92Mg_4.08 phases, whereas LiAlH₄–2.5MgH₂ contained minor Li_0.92Mg_4.08 phases, as shown in Figure 5. This indicates that Li_0.92Mg_4.08 can be formed while the ratio of MgH₂/LiAH₄ is relatively high. These composites also undergo an absorption process at 350°C under a pressure of 10 MPa hydrogen. In 60 min, the LiAlH₄–4MgH₂ composites reach 90% of their maximum absorption capacity. In brief, these reported studies indicated that the combination of LiAlH₄ and MgH₂ may have been shown to affect the thermal stability of both LiAlH₄ and MgH₂ by the formation of intermetallic Mg₁₇Al₁₂ and Li_0.92Mg_4.08.

FIGURE 5

FIGURE 5. XRD patterns of LiAlH₄ + xMgH₂ (x = 1, 2.5, and 4) after dehydrogenation at 350°C (Chen et al., 2010).

Based on the abovementioned discussions, the different molar ratios of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites also affected the performance of the Mg–Li–Al system. This review article outlined that 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ shows the best performance compared to the other ratios (e.g., 1:1, 2:1, and 2.5:1). The 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite created an intermediate compound of Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ that helps to enhance the hydrogen storage performance of the Mg–Li–Al system.

The Effect of Different Milling Times

Vittetoe et al. (Vittetoe et al., 2009) explored the destabilization effects of the combination of LiAlH₄ with a nanocrystalline MgH₂ by mechanical–chemical milling concerning reversibility and kinetics problems. Interestingly, they investigated the LiAlH₄–MgH₂ composite with different durations of milling (1, 2, 3, and 5 h). They discovered that the LiAlH₄–MgH₂ samples that have been milled for 1, 2, and 3 h started to decompose at ∼100°C. Researchers verified that for an optimal ball milling period of 2 h, a three-step hydrogen desorption response with an early-onset temperature and greater amount of hydrogen release is required. In addition, further study elucidates LiAlH₄–MgH₂ and LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ of TGA and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) profiles milled for 2 h, as seen in Figure 6. The LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ systems show a greater weight loss of approximately 5.2 wt.% (∼200°C), at least 1.0 wt.% higher capacity than the commercial-grade sample (LiAlH₄–MgH₂).

FIGURE 6

FIGURE 6. Comparison of TGA/DSC mechano-chemically milled for 2 h for LiAlH₄-MgH₂ and LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ (Vittetoe et al., 2009).

As LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ showed better performance than LiAlH₄–MgH₂, this material underwent repeated absorption of hydrogen (80 bars) and desorption at two different temperatures (300 and 350°C). After numerous attempts of hydrogen absorption–desorption experiments, these samples were carefully examined under a scanning electron microscope (SEM), as shown in Figure 7. SEM images of LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ after cycling indicated that the sample had a relatively smaller grain with a highly porous matrix and uniform (as in Figure 7B) as compared to LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ (as in Figure 7A). This is due to the host structure’s effective uptake and release of hydrogen.

FIGURE 7

FIGURE 7. SEM images of LiAlH₄–nanoMgH₂ (A) after milling for 2 h and (B) after absorption–desorption cycling (Vittetoe et al., 2009).

Milanovic et al. (Milanović et al., 2013) investigated the catalytic influence on the desorption of hydrogen from MgH₂. Indeed, when mixing MgH₂ with a 5 wt.% of LiAlH₄ for 15 min, the peak of the hydrogen desorption shifts to a lower temperature than as received MgH₂ and as milled MgH₂. In this study, milling up to 30 and 60 min of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites may reduce the catalytic activity of the LiAlH₄ additive, as revealed by the shift to a higher peak of desorption temperatures. According to Leon et al. (Léon et al., 2009), experiments conducted under various conditions revealed that the milling parameters, in particular the milling speed and milling time, can be of great importance through reactive ball milling for the formation of the new hydride phase. Next, Ding et al. (Ding et al., 2013) studied the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites milled at different milling times (2, 5, and 9 h). The result revealed that MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites milled for 2 h decompose in the temperature ranges of ∼130–183°C; meanwhile, after the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites were milled for 5 h, the composites start to release hydrogen at 102°C. However, the capacity of hydrogen released decreased compared with 2 h milled composites. In addition to that, the initial desorption temperature decreases to 86°C when the milling time increases to 9 h, but the amount of hydrogen released also decreases. The XRD pattern showed that the peaks of Li₃AlH₆ and Al appeared after milling the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites up to 5 h. Interestingly, milling up to 9 h proved that the intensity peaks of Li₃AlH₆ and Al become stronger. This indicated that more LiAlH₄ has been decomposed into Li₃AlH₆ and Al, accounting for the lowest onset desorption temperature. Based on the results obtained, the lower decomposition temperature was attributed to the decomposition of LiAlH₄ that had occurred, and more LiAlH₄ decomposed as the milling time increased. In addition, the peaks of the Mg₁₇Al₁₂ phase can also be detected when the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites were heated to 250°C. Furthermore, Ding et al. (Ding et al., 2013) also studied the reversibility of the destabilized MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite under a hydrogen pressure of 3 MPa and at 300°C, and the results show that the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite exhibits fast ab/desorption kinetics in the first two cycles, but the ab/desorption kinetics worsened during the third cycle, as shown in Figure 8. Moreover, SEM images indicated that the morphology of MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites was smaller. A reduction in the particle size and crystallite size results in the introduction of high surface defect density and the creation of more grain boundaries. In addition to that, a high density of the nanosized catalyst particles forms a large number of nucleation sites at the surface of the LiAlH₄ matrix, leading to the larger surface area of LiAlH₄ particles, as indicated by Zhai et al. (Zhai et al., 2012). Xia et al. (Xia et al., 2020) also stated that the morphological change should be beneficial for the enhancement of the desorption properties of LiAlH₄, owing to the reduction of the particle size and the process of creating small crystallite sizes. Halim Yap et al. (Halim Yap et al., 2019), in their study, revealed that the decrement of the grain sizes led to the increment of the contact surface area. As a result, the desorption reaction of hydrogen has been improved due to the reduction of the hydrogen diffusion length. A study conducted by Czujko et al. (Czujko et al., 2011) revealed that the average particle size of MgH₂+50 wt% LiAlH₄ composites was reduced to ∼3.5 ± 2.7 µm. It demonstrated that during MgH₂ ball milling, lithium alanate could act as a lubricant, and the reduction of particle size is much less efficient when the LiAlH₄ additive level reaches 50 wt.%. Based on this subsection, appropriate milling time is beneficial to the Mg–Li–Al systems. This indicates that the milling time at a suitable time is helpful to improve the hydrogen storage performance of the Mg–Li–Al system. The variation of the milling duration has obvious effects on the onset desorption temperature, activation energy, and morphology of the samples.

FIGURE 8

FIGURE 8. Reversibility study for the initial three cycles of the destabilized MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite under a hydrogen pressure of 3 MPa and at 300°C (Ding et al., 2013).

The Effect of Different Additives

A study conducted by Halim Yap and Ismail (Halim Yap & Ismail, 2017) indicated that the hydrogen sorption properties of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system can be enhanced by the addition of K₂ZrF₆. The onset desorption temperature for 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ exhibited two significant stages. For the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems, the onset desorption temperature was 135 and 275°C for the first and second desorption stages, with the total amount of hydrogen desorption being 7.5 wt.%. After the addition of 10 wt.% K₂ZrF₆, the desorption temperature for the first and second stages was decreased by 40 and 25°C, respectively. In addition, 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 10 wt.% K₂ZrF₆ demonstrates better kinetics of desorption, and the value of activation energy was decreased to 102.9 kJ/mol compared to the undoped composites (129.8 kJ/mol). However, the absorption kinetics under 33.0 atm at 320°C exposed that adding 10 wt.% of K₂ZrF₆ to 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ showed no improvement in the absorption of hydrogen. Meanwhile, the SEM images for comparing the morphology of undoped and doped samples are shown in Figure 9. The doped samples show that the particles size is less agglomerated and smaller as in Figure 9D than the undoped samples (Figure 9C). This result was also supported by Ranjbar et al. (Ranjbar et al., 2010) who suggested that the smaller particle size improves hydrogen ab/desorption as it makes the particle larger surface area and reduces the diffusion length of hydrogen.

FIGURE 9

FIGURE 9. SEM images for the (A) as-received MgH₂, (B) as-milled MgH₂, (C) 4MgH₂-LiAlH₄, and (D) 4MgH₂-LiAlH₄ + 10 wt.% K₂ZrF₆ (Halim Yap & Ismail, 2017).

Further research indicated that the new peaks of Al₃Zr and KH (indicating LiAlH₄ react with K₂ZrF₆) were formed after 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 10 wt.% K₂ZrF₆ were heated at 200°C. In addition, the peaks of MgH₂ were also present as well as LiH and Al (illustrated the decomposition as in Eq. 2). Heating up to 450°C, the peaks of Mg, Li_0.92Mg_4.08, and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ were detected, whereas the Al₃Zr and KH peaks remained unchanged. Furthermore, the XRD pattern of absorption for K₂ZrF₆-doped 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ sample at 300°C also exposed the peaks of Al₃Zr, KH, LiH, and Al remain unchanged. However, the peaks of the Mg₁₇Al₁₂ and Li_0.92Mg_4.08 disappeared, and it is suggested that a reaction occurred during the absorption process, as indicated in Eqs 6, 7. The amount of K₂ZrF₆ was increased to 20 wt.% to obtain a better insight into the F-containing, Zr-containing, and K-containing phase structures. New minor peaks attributed to LiF were detected along with the KH and Al₃Zr phases. Therefore, it is recognized that the new LiF, KH, and Al₃Zr products created during the heating process worked together as active components to work on improving the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system of the hydrogen storage performance. The hydrogen storage properties of MgH₂/LiAlH₄ were improved by the addition of SrFe₁₂O₁₉, as suggested by Sulaiman and Ismail (Sulaiman & Ismail, 2017). The result disclosed that the addition of 5 wt.% of SrFe₁₂O₁₉ resulted in a decrease of 40 and 10°C in the first and second stages of desorption, respectively, compared to the MgH₂/LiAlH₄ system. The doped samples begin to release hydrogen at ∼80°C for the first stages and ∼260°C for the second stages. Interestingly, the hydrogen released by the doped samples was 7.1 wt.%, which is the amount of hydrogen released equivalent to milled MgH₂. The energy barriers for the release of hydrogen affected the kinetic desorption performance of the samples. From the calculation of as-received MgH₂, the activation energy was 175 kJ/mol. However, the activation energy was decreased to 133 kJ/mol after MgH₂ was milled for 1 h. This proves that the value of the activation energy is also affected by the milling process (Sabitu & Goudy, 2012; Ismail, 2015; Lin et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2017). Furthermore, after destabilizing MgH₂ with LiAlH₄, the activation energy was reduced to 121 kJ/mol, which showed a reduction of 12 kJ/mol compared to the milled MgH₂ (133 kJ/mol). The improvement of desorption kinetics is related to the energy barrier for the hydrogen release from the composite. Lower activation energy means faster kinetics. In this context, the activation energy is the least energy required to instigate the decomposition process of the system (Ismail et al., 2020). The activation energy decreased to 104 kJ/mol, after the addition of 5 wt.% SrFe₁₂O₁₉ to 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄. Furthermore, these findings appear to be comparable to the previous studies reporting on the role of catalysts in reducing the activation energy, leading to improved dehydriding kinetics (Sazelee et al., 2019). Conversely, the newly developed products formed during the heating process of in situ Li₂Fe₃O₄ and Al₂Sr exhibit a synergistically catalytic effect on the improvement of the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composites.

According to Mao et al. (Mao et al., 2011), dehydrogenation has been improved after LiAlH₄ was combined with MgH₂, in which the first-stage desorption temperature is close to LiAlH₄ (∼150°C), while the second-stage desorption was completed at 233°C. This suggested that in the binary LiAlH₄–MgH₂ system, a mutual destabilization occurred. However, after being doped with TiF_3, hydrogen starts to release at ∼60°C (100°C lower than the undoped LiAlH₄–MgH₂ system). The desorption and absorption kinetics were also improved after the addition of TiF₃. For the LiAlH₄–MgH₂–TiF₃ system, the amount of hydrogen desorbed was 2.48 wt.% after 10 min, compared to the LiAlH₄–MgH₂ system (1.59 wt.%) at 300°C. Furthermore, the reversibility of this system was performed at 300°C under ∼2 MPa for both samples. LiAlH₄–MgH₂–TiF₃ systems demonstrate the ability to absorb 2.68 wt.% hydrogen after 5 min, which is greater than the LiAlH₄–MgH₂ system (1.75 wt.%). Further study showed that the intermediate phase of Mg₁₇Al₁₂ and Li₃Mg₇ produced during the heating process is mainly due to the Al/LiH reaction with MgH₂, as shown in Eqs 5, 8:

$3\text{L}\text{i}\text{H}+7\text{M}\text{g}{\text{H}}_2\to \text{L}{\text{i}}_3\text{M}{\text{g}}_7+8.5{\text{H}}_2.(8)$

The hydrogen sorption properties of 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ were greatly improved after the addition of 5 wt.% Fe₂O₃, as eloquently stated by Mustafa et al. (Mustafa & Ismail, 2014). As-milled MgH₂ can release hydrogen at 350°C; meanwhile, the as-milled LiAlH₄ can release at 135–160°C. For the destabilized system of 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄, the onset desorption temperature was reduced similar to the as-milled LiAlH₄. However, after the addition of Fe₂O₃, the onset of desorption was decreased to 95°C. The desorption and absorption kinetics were also improved after the addition of Fe₂O₃. The apparent activation energy of 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + Fe₂O₃ was reduced to 117 kJ/mol compared to the undoped 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems. Further research exposed that the Li₂Fe₃O₄ was developed by heating 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + Fe₂O₃ up to 400°C and revealed that the Li₂Fe₃O₄ also plays a crucial role in reducing the value of desorption temperature and activation energy in the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems.

According to Wan et al. (Wan et al., 2013), the hydrogen storage performance of MgH₂–LiAlH₄ was effectively improved after the addition of MnFe₂O₄ nanoparticles. As indicated in Table 3, the onset desorption temperature for MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 5 mol% of MnFe₂O₄ and MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 7 mol% of MnFe₂O₄ revealed the lowest onset desorption temperature. However, the total amount of hydrogen released for MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 5 mol% of MnFe₂O₄ is higher than the addition of 7 mol% of MnFe₂O₄. Nonetheless, the addition of MnFe₂O₄ can reduce the onset desorption temperature of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems.

TABLE 3

TABLE 3. Onset desorption temperature and the total amount of hydrogen released for MgH₂–LiAlH₄ and MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + xMnFe₂O₄ composites (x = 1, 2, 5, and 7 mol% of MnFe₂O₄ nanoparticles) (Wan et al., 2013).

For the desorption kinetics at 200°C, under 0.1 MPa, the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems release 0.94 wt.% hydrogen, whereas the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 5 mol% of MnFe₂O₄ can release 2.91 wt.%. Furthermore, the reversibility for those samples was investigated at 300°C under 3 MPa, and the doped samples show better absorption kinetics than the undoped samples. For MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + 5 mol% of MnFe₂O₄, a hydrogen absorption capacity of 3.64 wt.% was achieved within 300 s. In the meantime, the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems only absorbed 2.81 wt.% of hydrogen under the same conditions. Moreover, after heating up to 400°C, the XRD pattern shows the peaks of Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂. Furthermore, the new peak of Fe_0.872O observed also indicated that the interaction between LiAlH₄ and MnFe₂O₄ had occurred. However, no Mn-containing peak has been seen due to the low amount of MnFe₂O₄ that has been used. Also, the XRD pattern observed after the absorption kinetics at 300°C stated that no peaks of Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ have been detected. The peaks of Fe_0.872O can still be seen in the XRD pattern of the absorption results. Therefore, they concluded that the in situ formed Fe oxide and the Mn-containing peak enhanced hydrogen storage performances of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system.

The impact of various additives on the hydrogen storage properties of the MgH₂-LiAlH₄ system was studied by Ismail et al. (Ismail et al., 2011). Milled MgH₂ starts to decompose at 330°C and desorb about 7.1 wt.% of hydrogen at 420°C. Meanwhile, the as-milled LiAlH₄ decomposes at ∼142°C for the first and ∼173°C for the second stage. After the two hydrides (MgH₂–LiAlH₄) with ratio 4:1 have been mixed, the samples began to decompose at 130°C for the first stage (attributed to the decomposition of LiAlH₄), while at 270°C for the second stages (corresponding to the decomposition of Li₃AlH₆). The 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ was completed at ∼360°C with 7.5 wt.% of hydrogen released (attributed to the decomposition of MgH₂). After the addition of metal halides, the temperature-programmed desorption (TPD) curves of 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems were significantly improved. TiF₃ followed by NiF₂, CrF₂, NbF₅, and YF₃ showed a strong catalytic influence on the decomposition of MgH₂–LiAlH₄, as shown in Figure 10. The MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite doped with TiF₃ begins to decompose at 70°C. However, the desorption kinetics of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite were significantly enhanced after the addition of 5 wt.% of metal halides. Furthermore, the addition of metal halide additives could reduce the activation energy of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite. The apparent activation energy for the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite with the selected different metal halides is shown in Table 4.

FIGURE 10

FIGURE 10. Decomposition temperature results of the MgH₂-LiAlH₄ composite with different selected metal halides (Ismail et al., 2011).

TABLE 4

TABLE 4. Apparent activation energy for the MgH₂-LiAlH₄ composite with different selected metal halides (Ismail et al., 2011).

In order to study the phase structure of these samples, the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ samples were characterized by using XRD. After the samples were heated up to 400°C, apart from Mg, the intermediate phases of Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Al₁₂Mg₁₇ were eventually created in the composite system. The XRD measurements were also carried out on the absorption kinetics. The results showed that the peaks of Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Al₁₂Mg₁₇ disappeared; meanwhile, the appearance of peaks of Al₃Mg₂ indicated that the reaction, as in Eqs 6, 7, occurred during the absorption process. For the doped samples, further research showed that LiF and Al₃Ti are believed to act as the actual catalyst that can enhance the interaction of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system, while speeding up the hydrogen desorption process of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system. According to Mustafa et al. (Mustafa et al., 2015), the addition of K₂TiF₆ improves the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system of hydrogen storage performance. The desorption temperature of the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system was reduced to 80 and 250°C for the first and second stages, respectively, after the addition of K₂TiF₆. Meanwhile, the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite decomposed at 130 and 270°C for the first and second stages, respectively. In addition, after the addition of K₂TiF₆, desorption and absorption kinetics were also enhanced. The activation energy for 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems has also been reduced from 126 to 107 kJ/mol. The XRD analysis was conducted on 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ + K₂TiF₆ for the possible reaction of catalytic additives on the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems. The intermediate phases of Li_0.92Mg_4.08, Al₁₂Mg_17, and Mg were eventually formed after desorption at 400°C. The complete recovery of LiH and MgH₂ from the Li–Mg and Al–Mg alloys was accomplished in the absorption samples due to the reaction of Al₁₂Mg₁₇ and Li_0.92Mg_4.08 with hydrogen. Further verification stated that the peaks of TiH₂, LiF, and Al₃Ti act as the real catalyst, thus proving that the addition of K₂TiF₆ enhanced the sorption properties of the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems.

Recently, Sulaiman et al. (Sulaiman et al., 2021a) observed an improvement in the onset desorption temperature and the morphology of the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems when 5 wt.% of Al₂TiO₅ was added. The hydrogen started to release at 85°C which is decreased by 35°C for the undoped systems. It is important to note that the inclusion of Al₂TiO₅ to the 4MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems resulted in significantly smaller particle sizes which help to shorten the diffusion length and larger nucleation sites. Moreover, based on the XRD result, the new in situ active species of LiTi₂O₄, TiH_2, and AlTi₂ were detected after the de/rehydrogenation process which is believed to act as a true catalyzer in improving the hydrogen storage performance of the Al₂TiO₅-doped Mg–Li–Al systems. From the results, it is noted that the addition of additives ameliorates the performance of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ composite by reducing the onset decomposition temperature and fastening the sorption kinetics performance than the unary MgH₂ and LiAlH₄, as demonstrated in Table 5. Table 5 presents the onset desorption temperature, total desorption, absorption capacity, and activation energy for the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ system doped with several additives. The undoped MgH₂, LiAlH₄, and MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems are also included in Table 5 for comparison purposes.

TABLE 5

TABLE 5. Hydrogen storage performance of the Mg–Li–Al doped system with several additives compared with the undoped Mg–Li–Al system and unary MgH₂ and LiAlH₄.

Based on the abovementioned discussion and Table 5, it can be stated that the addition of the additives significantly enhanced the hydrogen storage performance of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems. It is reported that the active species that are in situ formed during the heating process are believed to play a catalytic role in enhancing the hydrogen sorption performance of the MgH₂–LiAlH₄ additive system. Up to this date, the addition of MnFe₂O₄ to Mg–Li–Al composites has presented the best performance which can release hydrogen approximately at 55°C (Wan et al., 2013). In addition, the MgH₂–LiAlH₄–MnFe₂O₄ system can absorb 3.64 wt.% of hydrogen in only 300 s and desorb more hydrogen (approximately 4 wt.% in 200 s), which shows a better performance in the sorption kinetics of MgH₂–LiAlH₄ systems.

Challenges and Possible Development Strategies

Continuous plans to improve solid-state hydrogen storage materials will undoubtedly demonstrate a further positive effect on the development of hydrogen storage technologies and the widespread use of hydrogen in global energy transitions. Continuous research to identify new hydrogen storage materials indicates that the Mg–Li–Al system is a promising material for the future storage of hydrogen. Although the destabilized system of the Mg–Li–Al system has attracted a lot of attention and many types of research and development were carried out in this field, some problems and challenges still exist in achieving a suitable hydrogen storage material for practical applications. A few possible developmental strategies are listed as follows:

1) The addition of additives has shown considerable promise in improving the Mg–Li–Al system’s performance. It is interesting to investigate the effect of other catalysts/additives to boost the performance of the Mg–Li–Al system and to understand the way catalysts/additives have an effect on improving the hydrogen storage properties of the Mg–Li–Al system.

2) The investigation on the reversible absorbs and desorbs hydrogen of the Mg–Li–Al system under moderate temperature and pressure must be the main target, and significant work is required to find the solution for the release and hydrogen uptake kinetics deteriorated during the cycling process.

3) It is reported that the formation of the Mg₂Al₃ during the rehydrogenation process has a negative effect on the hydrogen capacity and kinetic performance of the Mg–Li–Al system. The formation of Mg₂Al₃ could be avoided by applying a high pressure of hydrogen (> 10 MPa) during the rehydrogenation process. It is necessary to explore the ways of preventing the formation of Mg₂Al₃ without applying a high pressure of hydrogen, such as by using an appropriate additive or catalyst.

4) The hydrogen storage performance of the Mg–Li–Al system has been discovered to be influenced by the molar ratio and milling time. Furthermore, it is critical to investigate the other approaches, such as embedding materials in nanoconfinement, which could improve the hydrogen storage properties of the Mg–Li–Al system.

Therefore, we believe that with continuous effort, the limitations on the development of the Mg–Li–Al system as an ideal hydrogen storage material might be overcome and that the Mg–Li–Al system with favorable kinetics and thermodynamics should be one of the near-term goals.

Conclusion

In this review, it was clear that the transition from the current energy economy to cleaner energy like hydrogen was motivated by environmental and economic factors. Possible current approaches to store hydrogen are in the liquid state, compressed gas state, and solid state. However, due to the large amount of hydrogen that can be stored in a small amount and safety considerations, solid-state hydrogen storage systems are attractive to research. This comprehensive review highlighted the higher desorption temperature and sluggish sorption kinetics in MgH₂, which can be overcome through the destabilization concept (addition of LiAlH₄). Many researchers explored the reaction between the Mg–Li–Al system, including the ratio, the milling time, and the addition of an additive/catalyst to this composite. Interestingly, the doping Mg–Li–Al system with the catalyst can reduce the onset desorption temperature to below 60°C. The intermediate forms of Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ were eventually formed in the Mg–Li–Al composites. Cycling measurements show that Li_0.92Mg_4.08 and Mg₁₇Al₁₂ are fully reversible absorbs and desorbs of hydrogen. However, the Mg–Li–Al composites are still in their early development and need more time to prove themselves as viable long-term solutions for solid-state hydrogen storage. Further study, such as on doping with other additives/catalysts, could investigate the different milling times and ratios that should be focused on for the further design of advanced solid-state hydrogen storage materials.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.

Funding

This work was financially supported by the Golden Goose Research Grant (GGRG) VOT 55190, University Malaysia Terengganu and Casa Armada Sdn. Bhd. VOT 53468.

Conflict of Interest

MG was employed by the company Casa Armada Sdn. Bhd.

The remaining 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.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors, and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Malaysia Terengganu for providing complete facilities to perform this research. SS and MI thank the World Class Professor Program 2021 managed by the Indonesian Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology. N. A. Sazelee and N. A. Ali are grateful for the BUMT and SIPP scholarship provided by UMT.

References

Abdin, Z., Zafaranloo, A., Rafiee, A., Mérida, W., Lipiński, W., and Khalilpour, K. R. (2020). Hydrogen as an Energy Vector. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 120, 109620. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2019.109620

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ali, N. A., Idris, N. H., Sazelee, N. A., Yahya, M. S., Yap, F. A. H., and Ismail, M. (2019). Catalytic Effects of MgFe2O4 Addition on the Dehydrogenation Properties of LiAlH4. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 44 (52), 28227–28234. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.09.083

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ali, N. A., and Ismail, M. (2021). Advanced Hydrogen Storage of the Mg-Na-Al System: A Review. J. Magnesium Alloys 9 (4), 1111–1122. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2021.03.031

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ali, N. A., Sazelee, N. A., and Ismail, M. (2021). An Overview of Reactive Hydride Composite (RHC) for Solid-State Hydrogen Storage Materials. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 46 (62), 31674–31698. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.07.058

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ali, N. A., Sazelee, N., Yahya, M. S., and Ismail, M. (2020). Influence of K2NbF7 Catalyst on the Desorption Behavior of LiAlH4. Front. Chem. 8 (457), 457. doi:10.3389/fchem.2020.00457

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baricco, M., Rahman, M. W., Livraghi, S., Castellero, A., Enzo, S., and Giamello, E. (2012). Effects of BaRuO3 Addition on Hydrogen Desorption in MgH2. J. Alloys Comp. 536, S216–S221. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2011.12.008

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Barkhordarian, G., Klassen, T., Dornheim, M., and Bormann, R. (2007). Unexpected Kinetic Effect of MgB2 in Reactive Hydride Composites Containing Complex Borohydrides. J. Alloys Comp. 440 (1), L18–L21. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2006.09.048

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bendyna, J. K., Dyjak, S., and Notten, P. H. L. (2015). The Influence of ball-milling Time on the Dehydrogenation Properties of the NaAlH4-MgH2 Composite. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 40 (11), 4200–4206. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.01.026

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Cai, J., Zang, L., Zhao, L., Liu, J., and Wang, Y. (2016). Dehydrogenation Characteristics of LiAlH 4 Improved by In-Situ Formed Catalysts. J. Energ. Chem. 25 (5), 868–873. doi:10.1016/j.jechem.2016.06.004

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chen, R., Wang, X., Xu, L., Chen, L., Li, S., and Chen, C. (2010). An Investigation on the Reaction Mechanism of LiAlH4-MgH2 Hydrogen Storage System. Mater. Chem. Phys. 124 (1), 83–87. doi:10.1016/j.matchemphys.2010.05.070

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Correa-Jullian, C., and Groth, K. M. (2022). Data Requirements for Improving the Quantitative Risk Assessment of Liquid Hydrogen Storage Systems. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 47 (6), 4222–4235. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.10.266

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Crivello, J.-C., Denys, R. V., Dornheim, M., Felderhoff, M., Grant, D. M., Huot, J., et al. (2016). Mg-based Compounds for Hydrogen and Energy Storage. Appl. Phys. A. 122 (2), 85. doi:10.1007/s00339-016-9601-1

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Czujko, T., Zaranski, Z., Malka, I. E., and Wronski, Z. (2011). Composite Behaviour of MgH2 and Complex Hydride Mixtures Synthesized by ball Milling. J. Alloys Comp. 509, S604–S607. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2010.08.133

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Daulbayev, C., Lesbayev, B., Bakbolat, B., Kaidar, B., Sultanov, F., Yeleuov, M., et al. (2022). A Mini-Review on Recent Trends in Prospective Use of Porous 1D Nanomaterials for Hydrogen Storage. South Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 39, 52–61. doi:10.1016/j.sajce.2021.11.008

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

David, E. (2005). An Overview of Advanced Materials for Hydrogen Storage. J. Mater. Process. Tech. 162-163, 169–177. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.02.027

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Dematteis, E. M., Cuevas, F., and Latroche, M. (2021). Hydrogen Storage Properties of Mn and Cu for Fe Substitution in TiFe0.9 Intermetallic Compound. J. Alloys Comp. 851, 156075. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.156075

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ding, X., Zhu, Y., Wei, L., Li, Y., and Li, L. (2013). Synergistic Hydrogen Desorption of HCS MgH2 + LiAlH4 Composite. Energy 55, 933–938. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2013.04.043

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Doğan, M., Sabaz, P., Bi̇ci̇l, Z., Koçer Kizilduman, B., and Turhan, Y. (2020). Activated Carbon Synthesis from Tangerine Peel and its Use in Hydrogen Storage. J. Energ. Inst. 93 (6), 2176–2185. doi:10.1016/j.joei.2020.05.011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Dornheim, M., Doppiu, S., Barkhordarian, G., Boesenberg, U., Klassen, T., Gutfleisch, O., et al. (2007). Hydrogen Storage in Magnesium-Based Hydrides and Hydride Composites. Scripta Materialia 56 (10), 841–846. doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.01.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Dunn, S. (2002). Hydrogen Futures: toward a Sustainable Energy System. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 27 (3), 235–264. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00131-8

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Eftekhari, A., and Fang, B. (2017). Electrochemical Hydrogen Storage: Opportunities for Fuel Storage, Batteries, Fuel Cells, and Supercapacitors. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 42 (40), 25143–25165. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.08.103

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

El Khatabi, M., Naji, S., Bhihi, M., Benyoussef, A., El Kenz, A., and Loulidi, M. (2018). Effects of Double Substitution on MgH2 Hydrogen Storage Properties: An Ab Initio Study. J. Alloys Comp. 743, 666–671. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.11.083

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Graetz, J., Wegrzyn, J., and Reilly, J. J. (2008). Regeneration of Lithium Aluminum Hydride. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130 (52), 17790–17794. doi:10.1021/ja805353w

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Halim Yap, F. A., Mustafa, N. S., and Ismail, M. (2015). A Study on the Effects of K2ZrF6 as an Additive on the Microstructure and Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2. RSC Adv. 5 (12), 9255–9260. doi:10.1039/C4RA12487A

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Halim Yap, F. A., Sulaiman, N. N., and Ismail, M. (2019). Understanding the Dehydrogenation Properties of MgH2 Catalysed by Na3AlF6. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 44 (58), 30583–30590. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.02.073

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hsu, W.-C., Yang, C.-H., Tan, C.-Y., and Tsai, W.-T. (2014b). In Situ synchrotron X-ray Diffraction Study on the Dehydrogenation Behavior of LiAlH4-MgH2 Composites. J. Alloys Comp. 599 (0), 164–169. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.02.064

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hsu, W.-C., Yang, C.-H., and Tsai, W.-T. (2014a). Catalytic Effect of MWCNTs on the Dehydrogenation Behavior of LiAlH4. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 39 (2), 927–933. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.10.155

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hu, S., Zhang, H., Yuan, Z., Wang, Y., Fan, G., Fan, Y., et al. (2021). Ultrathin K2Ti8O17 Nanobelts for Improving the Hydrogen Storage Kinetics of MgH2. J. Alloys Comp. 881, 160571. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.160571

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Imamura, H., Masanari, K., Kusuhara, M., Katsumoto, H., Sumi, T., and Sakata, Y. (2005). High Hydrogen Storage Capacity of Nanosized Magnesium Synthesized by High Energy ball-milling. J. Alloys Comp. 386 (1), 211–216. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2004.04.145

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M. (2021). Effect of Adding Different Percentages of HfCl4 on the Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 46 (12), 8621–8628. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.12.068

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M. (2015). Effect of LaCl 3 Addition on the Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH 2. Energy 79, 177–182. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2014.11.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M., and Mustafa, N. S. (2016). Improved Hydrogen Storage Properties of NaAlH4MgH2LiBH4 Ternary-Hydride System Catalyzed by TiF3. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 41 (40), 18107–18113. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.090

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M., Sazelee, N. A., Ali, N. A., and Suwarno, S. (2021). Catalytic Effect of SrTiO3 on the Dehydrogenation Properties of LiAlH4. J. Alloys Comp. 855, 157475. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.157475

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M. (2016). The Hydrogen Storage Properties of Destabilized MgH2-AlH3 (2:1) System. Mater. Today Proc. 3 (Suppl. 1), S80–S87. doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2016.01.011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M., Yahya, M. S., Sazelee, N. A., Ali, N. A., Yap, F. A. H., and Mustafa, N. S. (2020). The Effect of K2SiF6 on the MgH2 Hydrogen Storage Properties. J. Magnesium Alloys 8 (3), 832–840. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2020.04.002

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M., Yap, F. A. H., Sulaiman, N. N., and Ishak, M. H. I. (2016). Hydrogen Storage Properties of a Destabilized MgH2Sn System with TiF3 Addition. J. Alloys Comp. 678, 297–303. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.03.168

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M., Zhao, Y., and Dou, S. X. (2013). An Investigation on the Hydrogen Storage Properties and Reaction Mechanism of the Destabilized MgH2-Na3AlH6 (4:1) System. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 38 (3), 1478–1483. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.11.035

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ismail, M., Zhao, Y., Yu, X. B., and Dou, S. X. (2011). Effect of Different Additives on the Hydrogen Storage Properties of the MgH2-LiAlH4 Destabilized System. RSC Adv. 1 (3), 408–414. doi:10.1039/C1RA00209K

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Jain, I. P., Lal, C., and Jain, A. (2010). Hydrogen Storage in Mg: A Most Promising Material. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 35 (10), 5133–5144. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.08.088

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Jang, J.-W., Shim, J.-H., Cho, Y. W., and Lee, B.-J. (2006). Thermodynamic Calculation of LiH↔Li3AlH6↔LiAlH4 Reactions. J. Alloys Comp. 420 (1), 286–290. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2005.10.040

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Jangir, M., Jain, A., Agarwal, S., Zhang, T., Kumar, S., Selvaraj, S., et al. (2018). The enhanced de/re-hydrogenation performance of MgH2 with TiH2 additive. Int. J. Energ. Res 42 (3), 1139–1147. doi:10.1002/er.3911

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Jiang, W., Sun, P., Li, P., Zuo, Z., and Huang, Y. (2021). Transient thermal Behavior of Multi-Layer Insulation Coupled with Vapor Cooled Shield Used for Liquid Hydrogen Storage Tank. Energy 231, 120859. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.120859

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kato, S., Borgschulte, A., Bielmann, M., and Züttel, A. (2012). Interface Reactions and Stability of a Hydride Composite (NaBH4 + MgH2). Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 14 (23), 8360–8368. doi:10.1039/C2CP23491B

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ke, X., and Chen, C. (2007). Thermodynamic Functions and Pressure-Temperature Phase Diagram of Lithium Alanates Byab Initiocalculations. Phys. Rev. B 76 (2), 024112. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.76.024112

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Khurana, T., Prasad, B., Ramamurthi, K., and Murthy, S. (2006). Thermal Stratification in Ribbed Liquid Hydrogen Storage Tanks. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 31 (15), 2299–2309. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.02.032

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kojima, Y. (2019). Hydrogen Storage Materials for Hydrogen and Energy Carriers. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 44 (33), 18179–18192. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.05.119

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Léon, A., Zabara, O., Sartori, S., Eigen, N., Dornheim, M., Klassen, T., et al. (2009). Investigation of (Mg, Al, Li, H)-based Hydride and Alanate Mixtures Produced by Reactive ball Milling. J. Alloys Comp. 476 (1-2), 425–428. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2008.09.023

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Li, X., Qin, Y., Fu, J., and Zhao, J. (2015). A Gupta Potential for Magnesium in Hcp Phase. Comput. Mater. Sci. 98, 328–332. doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.11.023

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Li, Z., Wang, H., Ouyang, L., Liu, J., and Zhu, M. (2019). Achieving superior De-/hydrogenation Properties of C15 Laves Phase Y-Fe-Al Alloys by A-Side Substitution. J. Alloys Comp. 787, 158–164. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.02.074

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liang, Z., Yao, Z., Xiao, X., Kou, H., Luo, W., Chen, C., et al. (2020). The Functioning Mechanism of Al Valid Substitution for Co in Improving the Cycling Performance of Zr-Co-Al Based Hydrogen Isotope Storage Alloys. J. Alloys Comp. 848, 156618. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.156618

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lin, H.-J., Matsuda, J., Li, H.-W., Zhu, M., and Akiba, E. (2015). Enhanced Hydrogen Desorption Property of MgH2 with the Addition of Cerium Fluorides. J. Alloys Comp. 645, S392–S396. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.12.102

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lin, I.-C., and Tsai, W.-T. (2017). “In Situ synchrotron X-ray Diffraction Study on the Rehydrogenation Behavior of MgH2-LiAlH4 Composites,” in SituSynchrotron X-ray Diffraction Study on the Rehydrogenation Behavior of MgH₂-LiAlH₄ Composites. Sapporo, Japan: International Conference on Applied System Innovation, 1918–1921. doi:10.1109/ICASI.2017.7988326

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, C., Guo, P., Qiao, Y., and Zhang, S. (2020a). A First-Principle Study on the Formation and Migration of AlH3 Defect on (1 1 2) NaAlH4 Surface. Chem. Phys. 538, 110871. doi:10.1016/j.chemphys.2020.110871

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, H., Lu, C., Wang, X., Xu, L., Huang, X., Wang, X., et al. (2021). Combinations of V2C and Ti3C2 MXenes for Boosting the Hydrogen Storage Performances of MgH2. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 13 (11), 13235–13247. doi:10.1021/acsami.0c23150

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, H., Wang, X., Liu, Y., Dong, Z., Cao, G., Li, S., et al. (2013). Improved hydrogen storage properties of MgH2 by ball milling with AlH3: preparations, de/rehydriding properties, and reaction mechanisms. J. Mater. Chem. A. 1 (40), 12527–12535. doi:10.1039/c3ta11953j

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, H., Wang, X., Liu, Y., Dong, Z., Ge, H., Li, S., et al. (2014). Hydrogen Desorption Properties of the MgH2-AlH3 Composites. J. Phys. Chem. C 118 (1), 37–45. doi:10.1021/jp407018w

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, J., Ma, Z., Liu, Z., Tang, Q., Zhu, Y., Lin, H., et al. (2020b). Synergistic Effect of rGO Supported Ni3Fe on Hydrogen Storage Performance of MgH2. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 45 (33), 16622–16633. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.04.104

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lu, X., Zhang, L., Yu, H., Lu, Z., He, J., Zheng, J., et al. (2021). Achieving superior Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2 by the Effect of TiFe and Carbon Nanotubes. Chem. Eng. J. 422, 130101. doi:10.1016/j.cej.2021.130101

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Luo, Q., Li, J., Li, B., Liu, B., Shao, H., and Li, Q. (2019). Kinetics in Mg-Based Hydrogen Storage Materials: Enhancement and Mechanism. J. Magnesium Alloys 7 (1), 58–71. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2018.12.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ma, Z., Liu, J., Zhu, Y., Zhao, Y., Lin, H., Zhang, Y., et al. (2020). Crystal-facet-dependent Catalysis of Anatase TiO2 on Hydrogen Storage of MgH2. J. Alloys Comp. 822, 153553. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.153553

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ma, Z., Panda, S., Zhang, Q., Sun, F., Khan, D., Ding, W., et al. (2021). Improving Hydrogen Sorption Performances of MgH2 through Nanoconfinement in a Mesoporous CoS Nano-Boxes Scaffold. Chem. Eng. J. 406, 126790. doi:10.1016/j.cej.2020.126790

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mao, J. F., Yu, X. B., Guo, Z. P., Liu, H. K., Wu, Z., and Ni, J. (2009). Enhanced Hydrogen Storage Performances of NaBH4-MgH2 System. J. Alloys Comp. 479 (1-2), 619–623. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2009.01.012

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mao, J., Guo, Z., Yu, X., Ismail, M., and Liu, H. (2011). Enhanced Hydrogen Storage Performance of LiAlH4-MgH2-TiF3 Composite. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 36 (9), 5369–5374. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.02.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Marques, F., Pinto, H. C., Figueroa, S. J. A., Winkelmann, F., Felderhoff, M., Botta, W. J., et al. (2020). Mg-containing Multi-Principal Element Alloys for Hydrogen Storage: A Study of the MgTiNbCr0.5Mn0.5Ni0.5 and Mg0.68TiNbNi0.55 Compositions. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 45 (38), 19539–19552. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.05.069

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Meng, Q., Huang, Y., Ye, J., Xia, G., Wang, G., Dong, L., et al. (2021). Electrospun Carbon Nanofibers with In-Situ Encapsulated Ni Nanoparticles as Catalyst for Enhanced Hydrogen Storage of MgH2. J. Alloys Comp. 851, 156874. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.156874

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Milanović, I., Milošević, S., Matović, L., Vujasin, R., Novaković, N., Checchetto, R., et al. (2013). Hydrogen Desorption Properties of MgH2/LiAlH4 Composites. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 38 (27), 12152–12158. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.05.020

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Montone, A., Aurora, A., Mirabile Gattia, D., and Vittori Antisari, M. (2010). On the Barriers Limiting the Reaction Kinetics between Catalysed Mg and Hydrogen. Scripta Materialia 63 (4), 456–459. doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2010.05.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mulas, G., Campesi, R., Garroni, S., Napolitano, E., Milanese, C., Dolci, F., et al. (2012). Hydrogen Storage in 2NaBH4+MgH2 Mixtures: Destabilization by Additives and Nanoconfinement. J. Alloys Comp. 536, S236–S240. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2011.12.042

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mustafa, N. S., Idris, N. H., and Ismail, M. (2015). Effect of K 2 TiF 6 Additive on the Hydrogen Storage Properties of 4MgH 2 -LiAlH 4 Destabilized System. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 40 (24), 7671–7677. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.10.112

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mustafa, N. S., and Ismail, M. (2014). Enhanced Hydrogen Storage Properties of 4MgH2 + LiAlH4 Composite System by Doping with Fe2O3 Nanopowder. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 39 (0), 7834–7841. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.02.118

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mustafa, N. S., Yahya, M. S., Itam Sulaiman, N. N., Abdul Halim Yap, M. F. A., and Ismail, M. (2021). Enhanced the Hydrogen Storage Properties and Reaction Mechanisms of 4MgH 2 + LiAlH 4 Composite System by Addition with TiO 2. Int. J. Energ. Res 45 (15), 21365–21374. doi:10.1002/er.7187

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Niaz, S., Manzoor, T., and Pandith, A. H. (2015). Hydrogen Storage: Materials, Methods and Perspectives. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 50, 457–469. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ouyang, L., Liu, F., Wang, H., Liu, J., Yang, X.-S., Sun, L., et al. (2020). Magnesium-based Hydrogen Storage Compounds: A Review. J. Alloys Comp. 832, 154865. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.154865

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Peláez-Peláez, S., Colmenar-Santos, A., Pérez-Molina, C., Rosales, A.-E., and Rosales-Asensio, E. (2021). Techno-economic Analysis of a Heat and Power Combination System Based on Hybrid Photovoltaic-Fuel Cell Systems Using Hydrogen as an Energy Vector. Energy 224, 120110. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.120110

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Polanski, M., Bystrzycki, J., Varin, R. A., Plocinski, T., and Pisarek, M. (2011). The Effect of Chromium (III) Oxide (Cr2O3) Nanopowder on the Microstructure and Cyclic Hydrogen Storage Behavior of Magnesium Hydride (MgH2). J. Alloys Comp. 509 (5), 2386–2391. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2010.11.026

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Rafi-ud-din, , Xuanhui, Q., Zahid, G. H., Asghar, Z., Shahzad, M., Iqbal, M., et al. (2014). Improved Hydrogen Storage Performances of MgH2-NaAlH4 System Catalyzed by TiO2 Nanoparticles. J. Alloys Comp. 604, 317–324. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.03.150

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ranjbar, A., Guo, Z. P., Yu, X. B., Wexler, D., Calka, A., Kim, C. J., et al. (2009). Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2-SiC Composites. Mater. Chem. Phys. 114 (1), 168–172. doi:10.1016/j.matchemphys.2008.09.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ranjbar, A., Ismail, M., Guo, Z. P., Yu, X. B., and Liu, H. K. (2010). Effects of CNTs on the Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2 and MgH2-BCC Composite. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 35 (15), 7821–7826. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.080

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Reilly, J. J., and Wiswall, R. H. (1968). Reaction of Hydrogen with Alloys of Magnesium and Nickel and the Formation of Mg2NiH4. Inorg. Chem. 7 (11), 2254–2256. doi:10.1021/ic50069a016

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sabitu, S. T., and Goudy, A. J. (2012). Dehydrogenation Kinetics and Modeling Studies of MgH2 Enhanced by Transition Metal Oxide Catalysts Using Constant Pressure Thermodynamic Driving Forces. Metals 2 (3), 219–228. doi:10.3390/met2030219

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sadhasivam, T., Kim, H.-T., Jung, S., Roh, S.-H., Park, J.-H., and Jung, H.-Y. (2017). Dimensional Effects of Nanostructured Mg/MgH 2 for Hydrogen Storage Applications: A Review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 72, 523–534. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.107

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sakintuna, B., Lamaridarkrim, F., and Hirscher, M. (2007). Metal Hydride Materials for Solid Hydrogen Storage: A Review☆. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 32 (9), 1121–1140. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.11.022

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sartbaeva, A., Kuznetsov, V. L., Wells, S. A., and Edwards, P. P. (2008). Hydrogen Nexus in a Sustainable Energy Future. Energy Environ. Sci. 1 (1), 79–85. doi:10.1039/B810104N

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Satyapal, S., Petrovic, J., Read, C., Thomas, G., and Ordaz, G. (2007). The U.S. Department of Energy's National Hydrogen Storage Project: Progress towards Meeting Hydrogen-Powered Vehicle Requirements. Catal. Today 120 (3), 246–256. doi:10.1016/j.cattod.2006.09.022

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sazelee, N. A., Idris, N. H., Md Din, M. F., Mustafa, N. S., Ali, N. A., Yahya, M. S., et al. (2018). Synthesis of BaFe12O19 by Solid State Method and its Effect on Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 43 (45), 20853–20860. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.09.125

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sazelee, N. A., Idris, N. H., Md Din, M. F., S.Yahya, M., Ali, N. A., and Ismail, M. (2020a). LaFeO3 Synthesised by Solid-State Method for Enhanced Sorption Properties of MgH2. Results Phys. 16, 102844. doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102844

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sazelee, N. A., and Ismail, M. (2021). Recent Advances in Catalyst-Enhanced LiAlH4 for Solid-State Hydrogen Storage: A Review. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 46 (13), 9123–9141. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.12.208

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sazelee, N. A., Yahya, M. S., Ali, N. A., Idris, N. H., and Ismail, M. (2020b). Enhancement of Dehydrogenation Properties in LiAlH4 Catalysed by BaFe12O19. J. Alloys Comp. 835, 155183. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.155183

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sazelee, N. A., Yahya, M. S., Idris, N. H., Md Din, M. F., and Ismail, M. (2019). Desorption Properties of LiAlH4 Doped with LaFeO3 Catalyst. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 44 (23), 11953–11960. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.03.102

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Schlapbach, L., Shaltiel, D., and Oelhafen, P. (1979). Catalytic Effect in the Hydrogenation of Mg and Mg Compounds: Surface Analysis of MgMg2Ni and Mg2Ni. Mater. Res. Bull. 14 (9), 1235–1246. doi:10.1016/0025-5408(79)90220-4

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sulaiman, N. N., and Ismail, M. (2016). Enhanced Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2 Co-catalyzed with K2NiF6 and CNTs. Dalton Trans. 45 (48), 19380–19388. doi:10.1039/C6DT03646E

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sulaiman, N. N., Ismail, M., Rashid, A. H. A., Ali, N. A., Sazelee, N. A., and Timmiati, S. N. (2021a). Hydrogen Storage Properties of Mg-Li-Al Composite System Doped with Al2TiO5 Catalyst for Solid-State Hydrogen Storage. J. Alloys Comp. 870, 159469. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.159469

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sulaiman, N. N., and Ismail, M. (2017). Study the Effect of SrFe12O19 on MgH2/LiAlH4 Composite for Solid-State Hydrogen Storage. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 42 (50), 29830–29839. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.10.071

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sulaiman, N. N., Ismail, M., Timmiati, S. N., and Lim, K. L. (2021b). Improved Hydrogen Storage Performances of LiAlH 4 + Mg( BH 4 ) 2 Composite with TiF 3 Addition. Int. J. Energ. Res 45 (2), 2882–2898. doi:10.1002/er.5984

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Thapa, B. S., Neupane, B., Yang, H.-s., and Lee, Y.-H. (2021). Green Hydrogen Potentials from Surplus Hydro Energy in Nepal. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 46 (43), 22256–22267. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.04.096

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Urgnani, J., Torres, F. J., Palumbo, M., and Baricco, M. (2008). Hydrogen Release from Solid State NaBH4. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 33 (12), 3111–3115. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.03.031

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vajo, J. J., Mertens, F., Ahn, C. C., Bowman, R. C., and Fultz, B. (2004). Altering Hydrogen Storage Properties by Hydride Destabilization through Alloy Formation: LiH and MgH2 Destabilized with Si. J. Phys. Chem. B 108 (37), 13977–13983. doi:10.1021/jp040060h

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vajo, J. J., and Olson, G. L. (2007). Hydrogen Storage in Destabilized Chemical Systems. Scripta Materialia 56 (10), 829–834. doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.01.002

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vajo, J. J., Salguero, T. T., Gross, A. F., Skeith, S. L., and Olson, G. L. (2007). Thermodynamic Destabilization and Reaction Kinetics in Light Metal Hydride Systems. J. Alloys Comp. 446-447 (0), 409–414. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2007.02.080

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vittetoe, A. W., Niemann, M. U., Srinivasan, S. S., McGrath, K., Kumar, A., Goswami, D. Y., et al. (2009). Destabilization of LiAlH4 by Nanocrystalline MgH2. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 34 (5), 2333–2339. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.01.025

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wan, Q., Li, P., Li, Z., Zhai, F., Qu, X., and Volinsky, A. A. (2013). Improved Hydrogen Storage Performance of MgH2-LiAlH4 Composite by Addition of MnFe2O4. J. Phys. Chem. C 117 (51), 26940–26947. doi:10.1021/jp410449q

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, X., Zhang, H., Jiao, L., and Yuan, H. (2014). Destabilization Effects of Mg(AlH 4 ) 2 on MgH 2 : Improved Desorption Performances and its Reaction Mechanism. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 39 (31), 17747–17753. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.08.117

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Xia, Y., Wei, S., Huang, Q., Li, J., Cen, X., Zhang, H., et al. (2020). Facile Synthesis of NiCo2O4-Anchored Reduced Graphene Oxide Nanocomposites as Efficient Additives for Improving the Dehydrogenation Behavior of Lithium Alanate. Inorg. Chem. Front. 7 (5), 1257–1272. doi:10.1039/C9QI01451A

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yang, L., Yu, L. L., Wei, H. W., Li, W. Q., Zhou, X., and Tian, W. Q. (2019). Hydrogen Storage of Dual-Ti-Doped Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 44 (5), 2960–2975. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.12.028

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yang, Y., Xiong, X., Chen, J., Peng, X., Chen, D., and Pan, F. (2021). Research Advances in Magnesium and Magnesium Alloys Worldwide in 2020. J. Magnesium Alloys 9 (3), 705–747. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2021.04.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yao, L., Lyu, X., Zhang, J., Liu, Y., Zhu, Y., Lin, H., et al. (2020a). Remarkable Synergistic Effects of Mg2NiH4 and Transition Metal Carbides (TiC, ZrC, WC) on Enhancing the Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 45 (11), 6765–6779. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.12.139

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yao, P., Jiang, Y., Liu, Y., Wu, C., Chou, K.-C., Lyu, T., et al. (2020b). Catalytic Effect of Ni@rGO on the Hydrogen Storage Properties of MgH2. J. Magnesium Alloys 8 (2), 461–471. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2019.06.006

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yap, F. A. H., and Ismail, M. (2017). The Hydrogen Storage Properties of Mg-Li-Al Composite System Catalyzed by K 2 ZrF 6. J. Phys. Chem. Sol. 104, 214–220. doi:10.1016/j.jpcs.2017.01.021

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ye, Y., Lu, J., Ding, J., Wang, W., and Yan, J. (2020). Numerical Simulation on the Storage Performance of a Phase Change Materials Based Metal Hydride Hydrogen Storage Tank. Appl. Energ. 278, 115682. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115682

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yu, X., Tang, Z., Sun, D., Ouyang, L., and Zhu, M. (2017). Recent Advances and Remaining Challenges of Nanostructured Materials for Hydrogen Storage Applications. Prog. Mater. Sci. 88, 1–48. doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.03.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zacharia, R., and Rather, S. U. (20152015). Review of Solid State Hydrogen Storage Methods Adopting Different Kinds of Novel Materials. J. Nanomater. 2015, 1–18. doi:10.1155/2015/914845

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zaluska, A., Zaluski, L., and Ström Olsen, J. O. (1999). Nanocrystalline Magnesium for Hydrogen Storage. J. Alloys Comp. 288 (1), 217–225. doi:10.1016/S0925-8388(99)00073-0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhai, F., Li, P., Sun, A., Wu, S., Wan, Q., Zhang, W., et al. (2012). Significantly Improved Dehydrogenation of LiAlH4 Destabilized by MnFe2O4 Nanoparticles. J. Phys. Chem. C 116 (22), 11939–11945. doi:10.1021/jp302721w

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, J., Li, Z., Wu, Y., Guo, X., Ye, J., Yuan, B., et al. (2019a). Recent Advances on the thermal Destabilization of Mg-Based Hydrogen Storage Materials. RSC Adv 9(1), 408–428. doi:10.1039/C8RA05596C

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, J., Shan, J., Li, P., Zhai, F., Wan, Q., Liu, Z., et al. (2015). Dehydrogenation Mechanism of ball-milled MgH 2 Doped with Ferrites (CoFe 2 O 4 , ZnFe 2 O 4 , MnFe 2 O 4 and Mn 0.5 Zn 0.5 Fe 2 O 4 ) Nanoparticles. J. Alloys Comp. 643, 174–180. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2015.04.135

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, J., Yan, S., Xia, G., Zhou, X., Lu, X., Yu, L., et al. (2021). Stabilization of Low-Valence Transition Metal towards Advanced Catalytic Effects on the Hydrogen Storage Performance of Magnesium Hydride. J. Magnesium Alloys 9 (2), 647–657. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2020.02.029

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, J., Zhu, Y., Yao, L., Xu, C., Liu, Y., and Li, L. (2019b). State of the Art Multi-Strategy Improvement of Mg-Based Hydrides for Hydrogen Storage. J. Alloys Comp. 782, 796–823. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.12.217

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, T., Isobe, S., Jain, A., Wang, Y., Yamaguchi, S., Miyaoka, H., et al. (2017). Enhancement of Hydrogen Desorption Kinetics in Magnesium Hydride by Doping with Lithium Metatitanate. J. Alloys Comp. 711, 400–405. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.03.361

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang, Y., Tian, Q.-F., Liu, S.-S., and Sun, L.-X. (2008). The destabilization mechanism and de/re-hydrogenation kinetics of MgH2-LiAlH4 hydrogen storage system. J. Power Sourc. 185 (2), 1514–1518. doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.09.054

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zheng, J., Liu, X., Xu, P., Liu, P., Zhao, Y., and Yang, J. (2012). Development of High Pressure Gaseous Hydrogen Storage Technologies. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 37 (1), 1048–1057. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.02.125

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zuo, Z., Jiang, W., Qin, X., and Huang, Y. (2020). Numerical Investigation on Full Thermodynamic Venting Process of Liquid Hydrogen in an On-Orbit Storage Tank. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 45 (51), 27792–27805. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.07.099

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar