1. Volume 3, Issue 6, Pages 1036-1049 (December 2017)
Nernstian-Potential-Driven Redox-Targeting Reactions of Battery Materials 
Mingyue Zhou, Qizhao Huang, Thuan Nguyen Pham Truong, Jalal Ghilane, Yun Guang Zhu, Chuankun Jia, Ruiting Yan, Li Fan, Hyacinthe Randriamahazaka, Qing Wang 
Chem 
Volume 3, Issue 6, Pages (December 2017)
DOI: /j.chempr
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

2. Chem 2017 3, DOI: ( /j.chempr )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 1 Energy Density of Selected Redox Flow Systems
The theoretical energy density of a redox-targeting-based redox flow lithium battery (RFLB) is calculated on the basis of 50% porosity of LFP loaded with 1.4 M redox mediators. 1–8 represent water-based systems: 2,6-DHAQ/K4Fe(CN)6, Fe/Cr, AQDS/Br2, polysulfide/Br2, soluble Pb-Acid, BTMAP-Fc/BTMAP-Vi, and Zn/Br2, FcNCl/MV. 9 and 10 represent non-aqueous systems: Li/TEMPO, Li/MTLT ionic liquid; 11–15 represent all-organic or organometallic systems: FL/DBMMB, all Cr(acac)3, all V(acac)3, CoCp2/Fc, Li/Fc. The abbreviations are explained in Table S1.
Chem 2017 3, DOI: ( /j.chempr )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 2
Working Principle of the Single-Molecule Redox-Targeting (SMRT) Reaction
(A) Schematic of an RFLB half-cell with LiFePO4 granules filled in the energy storage tank. Lithium foil and carbon felt (CF) were used as the anode and cathode, respectively. The Nafion/polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) composite membrane was used as a separator in the RFLB to prevent crossover of FcIL.
(B) The LiFePO4 granules.
(C) Energy diagram and charge transfer of the SMRT reactions of RM+ with LiFePO4 upon charging and RM with FePO4 upon discharging. The thick dashed line marks the formal potential of RM/RM+, and the thin dashed line indicates the Fermi level of solid material.
Chem 2017 3, DOI: ( /j.chempr )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

5. Figure 3 Validation of the SMRT Reactions
(A) Molecular structure of FcIL.
(B) Cyclic voltammograms of 50 mM FcIL on a double-layer electrode in the absence (orange) and presence (green) of FePO4/LiFePO4 (1:1). For comparison, the gray curve shows the CV of a FePO4/LiFePO4-coated double-layer electrode in the absence of FcIL in the electrolyte. The electrolyte was 1 M LiTFSI/PC. The scan rate was 2 mV/s. The insets illustrate the reaction of FcIL on the double-layer electrode.
Chem 2017 3, DOI: ( /j.chempr )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

6. Figure 4 SMRT Reaction for Static and Flow Battery Applications
(A) A typical galvanostatic voltage profile of a static cell with 0.50 M FcIL in the catholyte and 0.44 M equivalent LiFePO4 on the cathode. The shaded area indicates the capacity from FcIL.The electrolyte was 1 M LiTFSI/PC. The current density was mA/cm2.
(B) Exploded view of the static cell.
(C) Voltage profiles of the static cell for five consecutive cycles.
(D) Voltage profiles of flow cells with 0.20 M FcIL in the catholyte and 0.37 M equivalent LiFePO4 granules in the tank. The inset is the enlarged voltage profiles of the flow cells after IR correction. The electrolyte was 1 M LiTFSI/PC. The current density was mA/cm2.
Chem 2017 3, DOI: ( /j.chempr )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

7. Figure 5 Operando UV-Vis Spectroscopic Study of SMRT Reactions
(A) Operando UV-vis spectra of the catholyte of an RFLB flow cell in the presence and absence of LiFePO4 during the discharge process. The spectra were recorded in the wavelength range of 430–750 nm and plotted by differentiating the transmittance of the fully charged state, with peak differential absorbance at 630 nm.
(B) Changes in [FcIL+] in the above cells as a function of discharging time.
(C) The total flux of charges flowing through the catholyte upon discharging with and without FePO4 in the tank.
Chem 2017 3, DOI: ( /j.chempr )
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions