A Study on Electrochemical Properties of Fuel-Electrode-Supported Reversible Solid Oxide Cells

Abstract

Introduction Reversible solid oxide cells (r-SOCs) enable both power generation and steam electrolysis, and have attracted attention as a solid state electrochemical energy device for a decarbonized society (1). R-SOCs have the advantage of high efficiency due to high temperature operation, but there exist various technical issues remained in materials selection, start-up and shutdown, and long-term durability. Therefore, reducing operating temperature is desirable for practical applications (2,3). Electrode-supported cells, in which the electrode acts as a structural support, enable lower temperature operation by reducing the thickness of the electrolyte, which has certain electrical resistivity. Here in this study, the current-voltage characteristics and reversible cycle durability under r-SOC operating conditions are evaluated using fuel-electrode-supported cells, with the aim of developing r-SOCs capable of highly efficient fuel cell power generation and steam electrolysis. Experimental For the experiments, fuel-electrode-supported cells were fabricated using fuel electrode-supported half-cells (Japan Fine Ceramics, Japan), schematically shown in Fig. 1. The half-cell consists of scandia-stabilized zirconia (ScSZ: 10 mol%Sc2O3-1mol%CeO2-89 mol%ZrO2) or yttria-stabilized zirconia (YSZ: 8 mol%Y2O3-92 mol%ZrO2) electrolyte and a Ni-cermet fuel electrode, such as Ni-ScSZ or Ni-YSZ. (La0.6Sr0.4)(Co0.2Fe0.8)O3 (LSCF) was applied for the air electrode, and Gd0.1Ce0.9O2 (GDC) was inserted between the electrolyte and the air electrode to suppress interdiffusion and chemical reactions. Four types of cells were used with different combinations of the electrolyte component (YSZ or ScSZ) in the electrolyte layer or the supporting fuel electrode.In electrochemical tests, 50%-humidified hydrogen (100 ml min-1) was supplied to the fuel electrode, and air (150 ml min-1) was supplied to the air electrode. R-SOC initial performance tests were conducted using an electrochemical analyzer (1255B, Solartron). Cell voltage and impedance were measured at 700-800°C at current densities ranging from -0.5 A cm-2 to +0.5 A cm-2. Positive current density means the value in SOFC mode, while negative current density means the value in SOEC mode. In r-SOC 1,000 cycle durability tests, cycles of switching between SOFC and SOEC operation were repeated 1,000 times by varying current density. The range of current density in the cycle tests was between -0.2 A cm-2 and +0.2 A cm-2. The cell impedance was measured before the cycling test and every 100 cycles. After each test, the cells were analyzed by using a focused-ion beam scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) to observe and evaluate the electrode microstructure. Results and discussion Figure 2 (a) shows the r-SOC initial performance of each fuel-electrode-supported cell. The cell with the Ni-YSZ fuel electrode and the YSZ electrolyte showed better current voltage characteristics than other cells. Figure 2 (b) shows the r-SOC 1000-cycle durability of the cell with the Ni-YSZ fuel electrode and the YSZ electrolyte. The results showed a decrease in power generation and electrolysis performance with increasing the number of cycles in both SOFC and SOEC modes. Possible degradation mechanisms will be discussed. Acknowledgments This paper is based on results obtained from a project (Research and Development Program for Promoting Innovative Clean Energy Technologies Through International Collaboration), JPNP20005, commissioned by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO). Collaborative support by Prof. H. L. Tuller and Prof. B. Yildiz at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is gratefully acknowledged. References (1) Venkataraman, M. Pérez-Fortes, L. Wang, Y. S. Hajimolana, C. Boigues-Muñoz, A. Agostini, S. J. Mcphail, F. Mar échal, J. V. Herle, and P. V. Aravind, J. Energy Storage, 24, 100782 (2019).(2) Subotić, S. Pofahl, V. Lawlor, N. H. Menzler, T. Thaller, and C. Hochenauer, Energy Proc., 158, 2329 (2019).(3) B. Mogensen, Current Opinion Electrochem., 21, 265 (2020). Figure 1