Sulfide-Based Solid-State Lithium-Sulfur Batteries: An in-Depth Study of the Li-Electrolyte Interface
Sébastien Liatard,Marine Soler,Vasily Tarnopolsky,Céline Barchasz,Frédéric Le Cras,Anass Benayad,Eric De Vito
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1149/ma2023-024551mtgabs
2023-12-22
ECS Meeting Abstracts
Abstract:The development of solid-state batteries has gained significant attention in recent years, owing to their potential to enhance the temperature range and energy density of energy storage devices. Sulfide-based electrolytes are some of the most promising candidates for solid-state batteries, thanks to their high ionic conductivity and low processing temperature. For lithium-sulfur (Li-S) batteries, the transition from liquid to solid electrolytes holds even greater promise. Sulfur is a readily available cathode material known for its high specific capacity, which endows Li-S batteries with remarkable specific energy and favourable environmental and economic impact. In liquid electrolytes however, the solubility of sulfur and lithium polysulfide causes a multitude of issues that hamper the performance of the Li-S system: rapid self-discharge, redox shuttle mechanism during charging, and loss of active sulfur and lithium material due to direct chemical reactivity. Solid-state Li-S cells are not prone to these issues, but they have, of course, issues of their own. Amongst them, the stability of the interface between the electrolyte and the lithium is of crucial importance to allow the use of this very high energy density negative electrode. In the present study, we compare two sulfide electrolytes, Li 6 PS 5 Cl and Li 7 P 3 S 11 , and assess their respective stability against lithium. We used innovative methods to characterize the interphase between the sulfide and the lithium without damaging it upon dismantling the cell. The nature and the properties of this interphase was characterised via EIS, XPS and ToF-SIMS. The EIS study showed that Li 6 PS 5 Cl forms a much more stable interphase with lithium than Li 7 P 3 S 11 , which is in accordance with most recent results in the literature. The XPS study confirmed the chemical composition of the interphase. Li 2 S and Li 3 P were present for both electrolytes. In the case of Li 6 PS 5 Cl, LiCl was also identified as expected. Gas cluster ion beam (GCIB) assisted abrasion of the interphase followed by in-situ XPS and ToF-SIMS suggested a separation of the components of the interphase depending on the depth of the abrasion. The interphase was found to be organised as Li 2 S-, Li 3 P- or LiCl-rich discrete layers, with the Li 2 S-rich layer being consistently the closest to lithium. This result confirms and completes the most recent research in the field published by Otto et al. in 2022 (doi: 10.1002/admi.202102387). To establish solid-state batteries as a practical energy storage option, it is essential to fully understand and effectively manage the Li-electrolyte interface. These findings suggest that thanks to the relative stability of its interface with lithium, Li 6 PS 5 Cl is the better option for solid-state lithium metal cells. It also sheds light on the reasons why this interface is more stable. The self-assembled lamellar structure of the interphase could also inspire strategies to better control the stability of solid electrolytes versus lithium.