Nano Energy (2015) 11, 277–293

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/nanoenergy

RAPID COMMUNICATION

Preparation and application of iron

oxide/graphene based composites
for electrochemical energy storage
and energy conversion devices: Current
status and perspective
Zongyuan Wang, Chang-Jun Liun

Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemical Science and Engineering, School of Chemical Engineering and
Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Received 29 August 2014; received in revised form 23 October 2014; accepted 26 October 2014
Available online 8 November 2014

KEYWORDS Abstract
Iron oxide; This review summarizes the research progresses in the preparation of graphene based iron oxide
Graphene; composites for electrochemical energy storage and conversion devices like lithium ion batteries,
Lithium ion battery; supercapacitors and fuel cells. Iron oxides (including Fe3O4, α-Fe2O3 and γ-Fe2O3) are promising
Supercapacitor; materials for these electrochemical devices because of their low cost, nontoxicity, good chemical
Fuel cell
stability and high theoretical capacity. However, iron oxides suffer from aggregation after reaction,
poor capacity retention and low electronic conductivity. The loading of iron oxide on graphene
cannot only solve these problems but also minimize the aggregation or restacking of graphene or
reduced graphene oxide and enhance the properties of graphene. The high surface area, high
conductivity, excellent chemical and thermodynamic stability, unique lightweight characteristic
and superior optical, thermal and mechanical properties make graphene exactly excellent for
applications in those electrochemical energy storage and conversion devices. The preparation of
graphene based iron oxide composite therefore becomes extremely important. Hydrothermal
decomposition, thermal decomposition, chemical precipitation and co-precipitation are the most
frequently applied methods, which can be used for a production with a large amount of
composites. Hydrothermal and thermal decomposition make a better production with higher
dispersion and easier quality control. Other preparation methods, like sol–gel method, atomic layer
deposition, microwave heating, plasma decomposition, electrochemical approach and hydrolysis,
have also been exploited for a further improvement in the size, structure and performance control
or for a simple and easy fabrication with use of fewer chemicals. No matter which method is

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 22 27406490.
E-mail address: [email protected] (C.-J. Liu).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoen.2014.10.022
2211-2855/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
278 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

applied, the nucleation and crystal growth of iron oxide nanoparticles on the graphene substrate
are the key influencing factors but still need to be investigated. The functional groups or structure
defects in graphene or reduced graphene oxide play a very important role in the nucleation and
crystal growth. Many opportunities and challenges exist with the design and controllable formation
of these functional groups or structure defects.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction FeSO4, leading to an in situ deposition of Fe3O4 nanoparticles

onto the self-reduced rGO sheets [13,15]. Figure 2 shows
A great effort has been made worldwide towards the schematically representatives of GO and rGO. The latter is
development of electrochemical energy storage and con- also frequently applied for the composite substrate.
version devices like lithium ion batteries, supercapacitors GO has been employed as the precursor for synthesis or
and fuel cells. Since its discovery in 2004 [1], the magic preparation of graphene based iron oxide composites. During
single atomic layer graphene has been rapidly exploited for the synthesis, the positive charged Fe ions interact with the
the applications of electrochemical energy storage and functional groups of GO. The attachment of Fe ions to the
conversion devices [2–8]. Graphene has a theoretical sur- surface and edges of GO (via chemisorption, physisorption,
face area of 2630 m2/g,  260 times higher than that of electrostatic interaction, van der Waals or covalent bonding)
graphite and twice than that of carbon nanotubes [9]. It [21] leads to the nucleation sites. The further formation of
possesses zero energy gap between the highest occupied iron oxide composite can be performed with various methods
molecular orbit (HOMO) and the lowest unoccupied mole- like hydrothermal approaches, thermal decomposition,
cular orbit (LUMO) with fast electron transport property microwave heating and plasma decomposition.
[10]. The high surface area, high conductivity, excellent In this review, we summarize the recent progresses in
chemical and thermodynamic stability, unique lightweight syntheses of iron oxide/graphene (or GO) composites for
characteristic and superior optical, thermal and mechanical applications in electrochemical energy storage and conver-
properties make graphene excellent for many promising sion devices (lithium ion batteries, supercapacitors and fuel
applications including applications in the electrochemical cells). For those applications with catalyses (photo-assisted
energy storage and conversion devices [11,12]. water splitting and Fischer–Tropsch synthesis [22,23]),
On the other hand, iron oxides (including Fe3O4, α-Fe2O3 environmental science (detection and degradation of hazar-
and γ-Fe2O3) are promising materials too for electrochemical dous materials, magnetic separation of pollutants and
energy storage and conversion devices because of their low microwave absorption) [24–29], biomedicine (targeted drug
cost, nontoxicity, good chemical stability and high theore- delivery, bio-sensor, magnetic resonance imaging, photo-
tical capacity. However, iron oxides suffer from aggregation thermal therapy, enzyme immobilization and protein
after reaction, poor capacity retention and low electronic adsorption) [30–38], magnetic-controlled switches [39] and
conductivity, which hamper their practical applications. The others [40,41], the synthetic methods of the composites are
loading of iron oxide on graphene cannot only solve these the same. The present discussions will be useful for these
problems but also enhance or improve the properties of applications too.
graphene. The formed iron oxide nanoparticles minimize the
aggregation or restacking of graphene or reduced graphene
oxide (rGO). The loading and dispersion of iron oxide on
graphene or the preparation of graphene based iron oxide
composite therefore become extremely important.
Figure 1 shows schematically representatives of graphene.
Obviously, the prefect graphene is chemically inert for the
loading or nucleation of iron oxide nanoparticles (and other
nanoparticles). It is seldom used directly as a starting material
due to its poor dispersibility in most solvents resulting from its
fewer surface functional groups [13]. Fortunately, graphene
oxide (GO), a nice precursor of graphene, possesses abundant
oxygen-containing groups that can serve as the sites to bind
with metal or metal oxide. Exactly, for those preparations
directly using graphene, some trace amount of oxygen-
containing groups on graphene plays an important role
(together with defects). GO is a two-dimensional material
with graphene structure but with oxygen-containing groups
like epoxy (C–O–C), hydroxyl (OH) and carboxyl (COOH) on
both basal planes and edges. GO in bulk form is also named as
graphite oxide, reported firstly by Brodie in 1855 [14]. GO has Figure 1 Graphene is a 2D building material for carbon materials
been considered to be a convenient and flexible precursor for of all other dimensionalities. It can be wrapped up into 0D bucky-
the preparation of graphene and graphene based materials. balls, rolled into 1D nanotubes or stacked into 3D graphite. Rep-
GO can even serve as an oxide to oxidize Fe2 + in FeCl2 or roduced with permission from Ref. [16] Copyright 2014, Springer.
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 279

Applications for electrochemical energy accessibility for Li + insertion and causing a low theoretical
storage and energy conversion devices capacity (744 mAh/g) [42]. On the other hand, iron oxide
shows high capacity with the use for LIBs. Exactly, iron
oxides possess much higher theoretical specific capacity
Lithium ion batteries (1005 mAh/g for Fe2O3 [43], 924 mAh/g for Fe3O4 [44],
compared with 372 mAh/g for graphite [45]). However,
Lithium ion battery (LIB) is a kind of rechargeable battery these high-capacity materials suffer from low electronic
with which lithium ion transfers from the negative electrode conductivity and poor cyclic performance caused by the
to the positive one during discharge and back during huge volume change during repeated lithium uptake and
charging. LIBs can supply electricity over a long period removal reactions. Large volume change leads to the break-
and can be used repeatedly. Graphene has been considered down of electrical connection of anode materials from
as anode material of LIBs because of its superior conductiv- current collectors, which hinders its practical application.
ity. However, as above addressed, graphene has the defects To solve these problems, the combination of iron oxide
of naturally stack into multilayers. This reduces its site and graphene leads to a promising anode material for LIBs

Figure 2 Chemical and atomic structures of GO and rGO. (a) The chemical structure of a single sheet of GO according to the Lerf–Klinowski
model [18,19]; (b) an updated chemical structure proposed by Gao and colleagues [20]. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [17]
Copyright 2010, Nature Publishing Group.

Figure 3 (a) TEM image of a Fe2O3/graphene electrode after the first delithiation process. (b) HRTEM image of a delithiated
nanoparticle. Inset of (b) is the FFT pattern of the nanograin marked by red circle. (c) ED pattern and (d) EELS spectrum of the
delithiated electrode. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [64] Copyright 2013, American Chemical Society.
280 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

with high specific capacity, high-rate performance, and as electrode material that undergo Faradic redox reactions
long-term cyclic lifetime. Significant achievements have during charge–discharge process. Pseudocapacitances can be
been achieved with iron oxide/graphene composites, like superimposed on EDLCs and provide higher energy density.
Fe3O4/graphene [46–51], α-Fe2O3/graphene [52–55] and Among the candidates for pseudocapacitances, iron oxides are
γ-Fe2O3/graphene [56]. Wang et al. [57] have synthesized considered as one of the most promising materials due to its
the Fe3O4/graphene with 3D laminated structure, which low cost, natural abundance, low toxicity and environmental
exhibits a stable capacity of about 650 mAh/g with no friendliness. On the other hand, graphene, with its high surface
noticeable fading for up to 100 cycles in the voltage range
of 0.0–0.3 V. Zhang et al. [58] have showed that α-Fe2O3/
Table 1 A summary of the electrode materials and
graphene composites, synthesized by a microwave heat
their corresponding specific capacitances.
treatment, possess high reversible capacities of about
800 mAh/g after 100 cycles at a charge–discharge rate of Composition Specific Ref.
0.2 C. Recently, nitrogen containing graphene has been capacitance and
confirmed with more surface defects that provide more current density
active and nucleation sites, more effectively prevent the
aggregation of iron oxide nanoparticles and strengthen the Fe3O4/graphene sheets 236 F/g with 0.5 A/ [66]
binding energy for the adsorption of electrolyte ions on the synthesized by hydrothermal g
electrode surface [59]. In addition, the nitrogen dopant method followed by H2 107 F/g with 4 A/g
changes the electronic structure of the adjacent carbon reduction
atoms and enhances the electrical conductivity of graphene Fe3O4/graphene sheets 349 F/g with 0.5 A/ [67]
[60,61]. Nitrogen-doped graphene (N–G)/iron oxide has synthesized by hydrolysis g
been exactly utilized for LIBs [62]. Du et al. [63] have method followed by 304 F/g with 10 A/g
prepared Fe2O3/N–G composites as anode materials for LIBs. electrochemical
The Fe2O3/N–G can deliver a reversible capacity of transformation
1012 mAh/g after 100 cycles, which is much higher than Fe3O4/graphene sheets 890 F/g with 1 A/g [68]
samples of pure Fe2O3 and Fe2O3/graphene at the same synthesized by chemical co- 480 F/g with 5 A/g
conditions. precipitation
For Fe3O4/graphene, the principal electrochemical reaction Fe2O3/graphene sheets 151.8 F/g with 1 A/ [69]
occurs within the electrode can be described as follows: synthesized by chemical g
precipitation 120 F/g with 6 A/g
Fe3O4 + 8e + 8Li + 23Fe0 + 4Li2O (1)
Fe2O3/graphene sheets 226 F/g with 1 A/g [70]
Su et al. [64] have investigated the conversion mechanism synthesized by hydrothermal
of Fe2O3/graphene anode during lithiation–delithiation pro- method
cesses via in situ transmission electron microscopy. They Fe2O3/graphene sheets 181 F/g with 3 A/g [71]
found that single-crystalline Fe2O3 nanoparticles (NPs) synthesized by hydrothermal 69 F/g with 6 A/g
transform to multicrystalline NPs with many Fe nanograins method
embedded in Li2O matrix during the first lithiation. The Fe3O4/graphene sheets 220.1 F/g with [72]
delithiated product is FeO rather than Fe2O3 (Figure 3). synthesized by hydrothermal 0.5 A/g
Their work confirms the charge–discharge processes of method
Fe2O3 in LIBs are a fully reversible electrochemical phase
conversion between Fe and FeO nanograins, accompanying
the formation and disappearance of the Li2O layer. There-
fore, for Fe2O3/graphene, the electrochemical reactions
can be described as following:
Fe2O3 + 6e + 6Li + 22Fe0 + 3Li2O (first lithiation) (2)

Fe+Li2O2FeO+2e +2Li + (subsequent delithiation/lithiation)(3)

Supercapacitor

Supercapacitor, also called electrochemical capacitor or ultra-

capacitor, is one of the most promising energy storage devices
for portable electronic devices and hybrid electric vehicles
thanks to their high energy density, superior rate capacity and
long cycling life. Generally, supercapacitors can be classified as
electrochemical double layer capacitors (EDLCs) and pseudoca-
pacitors based on their energy storage mechanisms [65]. EDLCs Figure 4 Specific capacitance of Fe3O4 microcubes, Fe3O4/
employ carbon materials with high surface area as electrode carbon nanotubes (CNTs) composite and Fe3O4/rGO composite
material and store charge at the electrode/electrolyte inter- at a constant discharge current density of 0.5 A g 1. Repro-
face. Pseudocapacitors use metal oxide or conducting polymer duced with permission from Ref. [72] Copyright 2014, Elsevier.
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 281

area, is an ideal carbon material for EDLCs. However, the other oxidizing agents. A fuel cell includes an anode, a
observed capacitances of graphene are limited because of the cathode and an electrolyte. Electrons are drawn from the
exfoliated sheets tends to restack. To develop novel low-cost anode to the cathode through an external circuit, producing
supercapacitors with graphene, iron oxide/graphene compo- direct current electricity. Hydrogen powered fuel cells have
sites have been exploited for capacitive applications. Table 1 been considered to be the best alternative to fossil fuels as
shows the performance of the reported iron oxide/graphene they offer a clean and carbon-free method to convert
composites for supercapacitors [66–71]. As shown in Table 1, chemical energy directly into electrical energy [73]. They
iron oxide/graphene composites possess excellent rate cap- are almost twice as efficient as fossil fuels (60% efficiency
ability at different current density with good cyclic perfor- for fuel cells versus 34% for fossil fuels) [73]. Catalysts for
mance (Figure 4) [72]. The improved electrochemical oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) play a crucial role in
performance can be attributed to two aspects: (I) iron oxide electrochemical energy conversion within fuel cells. Pt
decorated on graphene prevents the restack of graphene sheets and its alloys have long been used and remain the most
and (II) graphene increases the cycling stability of iron oxide. efficient ORR catalysts for ORR. However, due to the
expensive cost and limited source of Pt, there is an urgent
need to find an alternative to Pt with a non-noble metal or
Fuel cells to reduce the use of Pt. In addition, Pt-based catalysts are
sensitive toward poisoning and are easily to be oxidized.
Fuel cells are those devices for the generation of electricity Therefore, great efforts have been made to find cheap and
from chemical energy of fuels via reaction with oxygen or more active non-noble metal electrocatalysts for ORR.

Figure 5 (a) RRDE test of the ORR on Fe3O4/N–GAs, Fe3O4/N–GSs and Fe3O4/N–CB in an O2-saturated 0.1 M KOH electrolyte at
1600 rpm. The inset shows the ring current as a function of the electrode potential. (b) Peroxide percentage and (c) electron
transfer number of Fe3O4/N–GAs, Fe3O4/N–GSs and Fe3O4/N–CB as functions of the electrode potential. (d) Peroxide percentage and
electron transfer number as functions of Fe3O4 loading at 0.4 V, as measured using an RRDE in an O2-saturated 0.1 M KOH
electrolyte. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [78] Copyright 2012, American Chemical Society.
282 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

Nonprecious metal [74] or metal oxides [75] as well as positive onset potential, higher cathodic density, lower H2O2
N-doped carbon materials [76,77] are extensively investi- yield, higher electron transfer number and better durability
gated for it. As addressed before, the nitrogen dopant for ORR (Figure 5).
changes the electronic structure of the adjacent carbon
atoms and enhances the electrical conductivity of gra-
phene. The nitrogen-doped graphene has been demon- Syntheses
strated to possess exceptionally high activity for
activation of C–H bond [60,61]. The nitrogen atoms intro- Synthetic routes in general
duced are preferentially bound at graphitic sites in the
carbon framework, leading to high charge and spin density Currently, the synthetic routes of iron oxide/graphene (or GO)
at the adjacent ortho carbon. This enhances the formation composites can be roughly divided into in situ synthetic routes
of reactive oxygen species and the makes the catalyst show and ex situ synthetic routes, as schematically illustrated in
exceptional activity even at room temperature. This is very Scheme 1. For the ex situ synthetic routes, the synthesis and
promising for the development of alternatives to Pt catalyst decoration of iron oxide onto graphene or GO are separately
for ORR, as confirmed by Yu and his co-workers [77]. Wu carried out. The reported methods include mechanical mixing
et al. [78] have demonstrated 3D N-doped graphene aerogel [79], hydrothermal (solvothermal) assembly [80], grafting [81],
supported Fe3O4 (Fe3O4/N–GAs) is a promising catalyst for and impregnation [23]. For the in situ synthetic routes, iron
ORR. Compared with the Fe3O4/N-doped carbon black oxide NPs are directly growing on the surface of graphene or
(Fe3O4/N–CB) and Fe3O4/N-doped graphene sheets (Fe3O4/ GO. The synthesis and decoration are carried out at the same
N–GSs) catalysts, the Fe3O4/N–GAs composites show a more time and combined into one step. Therefore, compared with
ex situ routes, in situ synthetic routes usually need fewer
synthetic steps.
The interaction behaviors between iron oxide and gra-
phene (or GO) make difference in the synthetic processes.
For ex situ routes, the interaction behaviors can be
attributed to covalent, non-covalent, π-stacking, and elec-
trostatic interactions [79]. For in situ routes, a variety of
chemical and physical processes occur during the formation
of composites causing a more complex interaction. Zhou
et al. [79] have reported that Fe3O4/graphene composites
prepared by in situ method showed a strong covalent
interaction (Fe–O–C bond) between Fe3O4 NPs and graphene
basal plane. The obtained composites exhibit better per-
formance for LIBs than those prepared by ex situ method
(ultrasonic mixing). Qu et al. [67] have prepared a Fe3O4/
graphene composite by in situ method (hydrolysis followed
by electrochemical transformation). The composite shows
higher energy density, better rate capability, and longer
cycle life than that synthesized by ex situ method
Scheme 1 The ex situ and in situ synthetic routes of iron (co-precipitation followed by mixing), when used as anode
oxide/graphene (or GO) composites. materials for supercapacitors. Such significant improvement

Table 2 A summary of the reported iron oxide/graphene or GO composites synthesized by ex situ and in situ methods.

Composition Synthetic Synthesis Additional reagent Particle size Ref.

routes condition (nm)

Fe3O4/graphene prepared by solvothermal ex situ 80 1C, 24 h EDC, water 5–13 [30]

assembly
Fe3O4/GO prepared by grafting ex situ 70 1C, 24 h; SOCl2, benzene, DMF, 2.7 [81]
50 1C, 24 h triethylamine
γ-Fe2O3/graphene prepared by ex situ 90 1C, 20 h KOH, hydrazine, water 10–15 [82]
hydrothermal precipitation
Fe3O4/graphene prepared by solvothermal in situ 200 1C, 10 h NaAc, NaOAc, EG, DEG 9 [26]
approach
Fe3O4/GO prepared by hydrothermal co- in situ 90 1C, 8 h NH3
H2O, water 20 [83]
precipitation
α-Fe2O3/graphene prepared by in situ 180 1C, 24 h Water 50–80 [70]
hydrothermal approach

Remark: 1-ethyl-3-(3-dime-thyamino-propyl) carbodiimide (EDC), N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), ethylene glycol (EG), diethylene
glycol (DEG).
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 283

is attributed to a result of the uniform distribution of Fe3O4 Hydrothermal or solvothermal method

on graphene. Thus far, in situ methods usually lead to a Hydrothermal method, as well as solvothermal method, is a
stronger interaction and a more uniform distribution than physical and chemical process to produce chemicals or
ex situ methods. Table 2 presents a summary of the materials using closed-system in aqueous solution or organic
reported iron oxide/graphene composites synthesized by solvent. The advantages of these methods include the mild
in situ and ex situ methods. conditions, the ability to synthesize large crystals with high
quality and the potential for industrial application. Both
hydrothermal and solvothermal methods have been applied
Synthetic methods for synthese of iron oxide/graphene composites. They are
usually carried out at low temperature (o200 1C) [90–93].
There are more than ten reported methods for transforming The morphology, content of components, particle size, and
Fe ion into iron oxide in order to produce iron oxide/ intensity of magnetism of the obtained composites can be
graphene (or GO) composites: hydrothermal or solvothermal easily adjusted by controlling the mass ratio of Fe and C in
method, thermal decomposition, chemical precipitation or reactant, reaction time, temperature, solvent and additive.
co-precipitation, microwave heating, sol–gel method, elec- Moreover, the growth of iron oxide and the reduction of GO
trochemical approach, hydrolysis, atomic layer deposition can be simultaneously achieved [90,93]. This simplifies the
and cold plasma decomposition. Typical examples are listed preparation. Homogeneous distribution of active Fe2O3 nano-
in Table 3. particles can be easily fabricated with highly efficient lithium

Table 3 A summary of the reported iron oxide/graphene or GO composites.

Composition Synthetic methods Synthesis Iron Additional Particle Saturated Ref.

condition species reagent size (nm) magneti-zation
(emu/g)

α-Fe2O3/ Hydrothermal method 120 1C, 12 h FeCl3 PEG, ascorbic 2000– [53]
graphene acid, urea, water 5000
α-Fe2O3/ Hydrothermal precipitation 180 1C, 12 h FeCl3 NaOH, water 30–60 [69]
graphene
α-Fe2O3/ Hydrothermal precipitation 15 min FeCl2 Urea, water 50 [58]
graphene and microwave heating
α-Fe2O3/ Electrochemical approach 400 1C, 1 h, Ar FeSO4 Na2SO4, water 20–50 [84]
graphene and calcination
γ-Fe2O3/ Sol–gel method 100 1C, 3 days; Fe Water, NaDDBS, 30 [56]
graphene 500 1C, 2 h, Ar (NO3)3 propylene oxide
α-Fe2O3/γ- Thermal decomposition 150 1C Fe 70 0.13 [85]
Fe2O3/GO (acac)3 200 5.5
Fe3O4/ Solvothermal method 200 1C, 6 h FeCl3 NaAc, EG 200 42.9 [86]
graphene
Fe3O4/ Hydrothermal co- 90 1C, 4 h FeCl2, N2H4, NH3
H2O, 11 22.3 [27]
graphene precipitation FeCl3 water 12 59.0
Fe3O4/ Precipitation and thermal 400 1C, 2 h, H2/ Fe EG, NH3
H2O, 10 [47]
graphene decomposition N2 (NO3)3
Fe3O4/ Thermal decomposition 500 1C, 3 h, N2 Fe 30–50 [79]
graphene (NO3)3
Fe3O4/ Sol–gel method 180 1C, 6 h in an FeCl3 Glutamic acid, 100 0.55 [28]
graphene autoclave water, EG, KOH
Fe3O4/ Microwave heating and 10 min; 300 1C, Fe Urea, water 20–40 [65]
graphene calcination 2h (NO3)3
Fe3O4/ Hydrolysis and annealing 153 1C, 4 h; Fe DMF 12.1 2.4 [87]
graphene 500 1C, 2 h, H2/ (CO)5 17.4 14.7
Ar
Fe3O4/ Hydrolysis and 80 1C FeCl3 o20 [67]
graphene electrochemical
transformation
Fe3O4/GO Solvothermal method 200 1C, 12 h FeCl3 PPDA, PSS, SDS, 10 10.5 [88]
EG, PEG, NaAc
Fe3O4/GO Hydrothermal co- 65 1C, 2 h FeCl2, NH3
H2O, water 20 43.85 [89]
precipitation FeCl3

Remark: poly (diallyldimethylammonium chloride) (PDDA), sodium polystyrene sulfonate (PSS), sodium dodecyl sulfonate (SDS),
ethylene glycol (EG), polyethylene glycol (PEG), sodium dodecyl benzene sul-fonate (NaDDBS), N,N,dimethylformamide (DMF).
284 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

storage [90]. Nitrogen doping can be even performed together heating rate of 2 1C/min under air to make the porous iron
with hydrothermal treatment to get further enhanced perfor- ribbons finally. A finite lateral size, high surface area, porous
mances [94]. The nitrogen doping can be followed by dehy- structure and enhanced open-edges, lead to a high reversible
dration via freeze-drying and thermal treatment (at 600 1C) capacity and excellent cycle stability (as anode materials) for
under nitrogen. 3D nitrogen-doped graphene aerogel sup- lithium storage (Figure 6).
ported Fe3O4 nanoparticles can be fabricated this way using The synthesis of 2D α-Fe2O3 nanosheets with well-defined
iron acetate as iron precursor under assistance of polypyrrole hexagonal shape is a challenging work. Wang et al. [62] made
(PPy) [78]. The obtained hybrid shows a more positive onset a progress in this topic with thermal decomposition. They
potential, higher cathodic density, lower H2O2 yield and higher applied a H2O/DMF mixture solution to prepare a homoge-
electron transfer number for the ORR in alkaline media, neous GO suspension. Hydrazine monohydrate was added
compared to Fe3O4 NPs supported on N-doped carbon black under stirring at 80 1C for 12 h in a N2 flow. After that, a
or N-doped graphene sheets. This study indicated the impor- water solution of FeCl3
6H2O was added. The obtained
tance of the 3D macropores and high specific surface area of mixture was stirred overnight under N2 for the ion exchange.
the graphene support in the improvement of the ORR An aqueous solution of NaOH was added dropwise under air.
performance. The sample was then washed thoroughly with water and
The hydrothermal method and solvothermal method are ethanol and dried under vacuum at room temperature.
commonly employed with chemical precipitation or co- Thermal treatment was finally performed at 500 1C for 1 h
precipitation and hydrolysis. Some examples are illustrated under flowing argon. By this way, α-Fe2O3 hexagonal nano-
in Table 3 [27,69,87]. platelets sandwiched between graphene layers were
However, in order to make the iron oxide NPs dispersed obtained. The composite shows a high reversible capacity of
more homogeneously, tune the structure easily and enhance 1100 mAh/g after 50 cycles for LIB applications.
the interaction between metal oxide and support, hydro- The thermal decomposition has also been applied for the
thermal and solvothermal methods mostly require a long synthesis of Fe-doped graphene, instead of iron oxide. Kamiya
reaction time (several hours and even longer) or an assis- et al. [97] developed an instantaneous one-pot synthesis of Fe
tance of surfactant (like polyethylene glycol (PEG) and poly and nitrogen modified graphene using GOs with defined
(diallyldimethylammonium chloride) (PDDA)) [53,86,88] or graphitic structure as a precursor. They rapidly (within 3 s)
weak acid like H3BO3 [95] or electrostatic equilibrium agent placed GOs, made by the modified Hummers method, under
(NaAc, NaOAc or others) [26,54]. Therefore, extra opera- the protection of argon and maintained at 900 1C together
tions, like washing, filtration, centrifugation and drying, are with pentaethylenehexamine and FeCl3 as nitrogen and Fe
required to purify the product. Due to the low density and sources. The sample was then incubated for only 45 s. The
small size of graphene, the purification is not easy to be obtained sample was washed using acid thoroughly. It shows
carried out for the potential practical applications. high activity for ORR with an onset potential of 850 mV vs.
RHE in acidic solution.
For the loading of high content Fe3O4, CO2 expanded
Thermal decomposition ethanol can be employed. To do so, the precursor was
Thermal decomposition is another common method to synthesized through the decomposition of ferric nitrate in
prepare iron oxide/graphene composites. It is a simple the presence of GO in the mixed solvent of CO2 expanded
and rapid method. The reaction is normally carried out in ethanol. The precursor was then converted to the Fe3O4/
two hours with no need of extra chemicals. Before thermal graphene composite via thermal treatment in N2 atmosphere.
decomposition, a precursor, consisted of iron source (iron With the help of the CO2 expanded ethanol, Fe3O4 nanopar-
salt or iron hydroxide) and carbon source (graphene or GO), ticles were coated on the surface of graphene completely and
will be prepared by impregnation, chemical deposition or uniformly with high loading [51].
physical mixing. During the thermal decomposition at
elevated temperatures, iron salt or iron hydroxide is
decomposed into iron oxide, leading to the formation of Chemical precipitation or co-precipitation
iron oxide/graphene composites. In order to obtain magne- Chemical precipitation or co-precipitation is a common
tite NPs, the synthesis of Fe3O4/graphene composites is method to synthesize iron oxide materials. The synthetic
usually carried out under nitrogen or argon atmosphere processes include the precipitation of Fe ions and the
(with hydrogen in some cases). decomposition of Fe(OH)2 and Fe(OH)3. Thus, the precipita-
Yang et al. [96] reported a fabrication of porous iron oxide tion method or co-precipitation method is usually followed
ribbons by controlling the nucleation and growth of iron by thermal decomposition or used in combination with
precursor onto the graphene surface and then by annealing hydrothermal or solvothermal method [27,89]. Besides,
treatment. They made a dark suspension firstly by dispersing before adding alkali, it requires a stirring process for the
the rGO into a solution of ethylene glycol with an aid of electrostatic adsorption of Fe-ions on graphene or GO.
polyvinylpyrrolidone (0.1 wt%). The suspension was then There are several advantages with precipitation or co-
mixed with iron (II) acetylacetonate (FeAa) via ultrasonication precipitation method. On one hand, the composites can
for 3 h at a weight ratio of 1:1 of rGO and FeAa. After that, be conveniently adjusted with precipitation or co-
the suspension was heated to 170 1C for the heterogeneous precipitation since the morphology, content of components
nucleation of iron glycolate (FeG) onto the surface of rGO. The and particle size are influenced by experimental conditions,
nucleuses were gradually replaced by the iron glycolate such as ferric salt, the ratio of Fe2 + /Fe3 + , temperature, pH
ribbons with increasing lengths. Subsequent thermal annealing value and the amount of graphene or GO [98]. On the other
was performed at elevated temperatures (250–400 1C) with a hand, the reducing agent (like N2H4 and NaBH4) can be
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 285

Scheme 2 Procedure of iron oxide/rGO composites fabrication. Reproduced with permission from Ref. [100] Copyright 2013, John
Wiley and Sons.

Figure 6 Morphological and structural analysis of iron oxide ribbons annealed at various temperatures. (a,b) TEM images with
different magnifications and (c) HRTEM image of FeO-250, (d,e) TEM images with different magnifications and (f) HRTEM image of
FeO-300, (g,h) TEM images with different magnifications and (i) HRTEM image of FeO-350. It discloses that the annealing
temperature can effectively tailor the nanostructure of iron oxide ribbons. The number after FeO represents the annealing
temperature (1C). Reproduced with permission from Ref. [96] Copyright 2014, Nature Publishing Group.
286 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

employed to achieve the reduction of Fe3 + and GO in the the control of nucleation and growth of iron oxide NPs in
meanwhile [27]. precipitation or co-precipitation processes are of great impor-
However, some problems need to be overcome with this tance. Secondly, unreacted alkali or Fe-ions have to be
method. Firstly, it is hard to obtain uniform distribution of iron removed by washing, filtration, centrifugalization, and drying.
oxide NPs by precipitation or co-precipitation method. Wide It increases the cost and makes the production become time
particle size distribution leads to unsatisfied properties. Thus, consuming.

Figure 7 High-resolution TEM Images of (a) IG2, (b) IG6 and (c) IG7. The HRTEM in (c) shows lattice fringes due to the iron oxide
nanocrystals as well as the fringes due to several layers of stacked rGO (white arrow). (d) Power spectrum of the center of the image
in (c). IG2, IG6 and IG7 are iron oxide/rGO composites with different ID/IG values (1.254, 1.276 and 1.529, respectively; from Raman
spectra). Reproduced with permission from Ref. [100] Copyright 2013, John Wiley and Sons.

Figure 8 TEM and SEM images of various iron oxide/graphene (or GO) composites with different graphene structure. (a) Fe3O4/2D
sheet-by-sheet graphene, [57] (b) Fe3O4/3D N-doped graphene aerogel, reproduced with permission from Ref. [78] Copyright 2012,
American Chemical Society; (c) γ-Fe2O3 core/graphene shell, reproduced with permission from Ref. [115] Copyright 2012, American
Chemical Society.
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 287

Microwave heating method heating. They declaimed that the easy production in a variety
Microwave heating is usually performed with another of temperatures and composition ranges with 5 min reaction
method to synthesize nanocomposites. Karthikeyan et al. time allows a fine control over the final particle size, density
[65] have synthesized Fe3O4/graphene composite with and distribution. The obtained samples are excellent in terms
superior rate performance for supercapacitors via a urea- of the particle size homogeneity and dispersion onto the rGO
assisted microwave irradiation followed by low temperature surface (Figure 7). The resulted homogeneous and less defec-
calcination. Zhang et al. [58] have synthesized α-Fe2O3/ tive rGO enables good electrochemical performances even at
graphene composite with enhanced Li-ion storage proper- high current densities (over 500 mAh/g delivered at current
ties via hydrothermal precipitation followed by microwave densities as high as 1600 mA/g) [100]. Scheme 2 shows the
heating. The principal advantages of microwave heating procedure of the fabrication.
method include the use of fewer chemicals, the fast Hu et al. [56] have synthesized 3D graphene/Fe3O4
operation (within a few minutes) and high absorption of nanocomposites by using sol–gel method. The morphological
GO (compared to the solvent and metal oxide precursor) structure of the graphene hybrid aerogel is a 3D porous
[99]. The selective heating helps the nucleation of Fe3O4 framework with a crumpled sheet structure. Due to the
onto the graphene surface [99]. unique structure, the composites show high performance for
microwave absorption.
There are also some weaknesses of sol–gel method, such
Sol–gel method as the long reaction time and high price of raw materials.
Sol–gel method is a novel method to prepare materials with 3D The combination of microwave heating can significantly
structure. The non-aqueous sol–gel route involves the reaction shorten the reaction time, as shown by Yu et al. [100].
of iron oxide precursors in organic solvents (e.g., benzyl
alcohol) at moderate temperature and pressure. It has advan-
tages such as high purity, high reproducibility and the ability to Electrochemical approach
control the crystal growth without the need of using additional The synthesis of iron oxide/graphene composites using
ligands [99,100]. Yu et al. [100] reported a series of iron oxide/ electrochemical approach has been also reported. Zhang
rGO composites by the sol–gel method at the aid of microwave et al. [84] described an electrochemical deposition of metal

Table 4 A summary of the reported applications of iron oxide/graphene or GO composites.

Component Morphology Particle size Application Ref.

α-Fe2O3/graphene Particle 30–60 nm (diameter) Supercapacitors [69]

γ-Fe2O3/graphene Particle 15 nm (diameter) Lithium ion batteries [56]
Fe3O4/graphene Particle 9 nm (diameter) Dye removal [26]
Fe3O4/GO Particle 12 nm (diameter) Reduction of nitroarenes [116]
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nanocubes 23–47 nm (diameter) Dye removal [117]
Fe3O4/graphene Nanocubes 196 nm (diameter) Lithium ion batteries [46]
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nano rods 50 nm (length) Supercapacitors [95]
10 nm (diameter)
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nano rods 150–200 nm (length) Dye removal [118]
15–20 nm (diameter)
Fe3O4/graphene Nano rods 100 nm (length) Lithium ion batteries [119]
11 nm (diameter)
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nanotubes 370 nm (length) Electrochemical capacitor [71]
15–40 nm (thickness)
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nano rice 150–200 nm (length) Lithium ion batteries [120]
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nano disks 200 nm (diameter) Lithium ion batteries [121]
Fe3O4/graphene Nano crystalline 50–70 nm (clusters) Lithium ion batteries and targeted drug [122]
clusters 5–6 nm (crystalline size) delivery
Fe3O4/graphene Hollow 300–400 nm (diameter) Heavy metal ions Cr(VI) removal [123]
microspheres 40 nm (thickness)
α-Fe2O3/graphene Hexagonal 20–50 nm (width) Lithium ion batteries [62]
nanoplatelets 5 nm (thickness)
α-Fe2O3/graphene Nano spindles 120 nm (length) Lithium ion batteries [124]
60 nm (width)
Fe3O4/graphene Porous beads 500 nm (diameter) Lithium ion batteries [125]
α-Fe2O3/graphene Inverse opaline 781.3 nm (hole diameter) Photo-assisted water splitting [22]
Fe3O4/α-Fe2O3/graphene Ribbons 600 nm-several micrometers Lithium ion batteries [96]
(length)
50 nm (thickness)
5 nm (crystalline size)
288 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 289

oxides onto the graphite surface together with the exfolia- discharge plasma, will be formed. Based on the energy of
tion of graphene sheets. The synthesized iron oxide/gra- discharge plasma, thermal plasma and cold plasma can be
phene composites exhibit improved performance for Li-O2 generated. Thermal plasma is an equilibrium one with which
batteries. The advantages of electrochemical method are the bulk temperature will reach several thousand 1C. Cold
high purity and low pollution. This method is also used in plasma is a non-equilibrium one with which the bulk
the combination with other treatments like hydrolysis [67] temperature can remain as low as room temperature but
and thermal decomposition [84]. the electron temperature can reach several thousand 1C or
even more. Cold plasma has been found to be excellent for
the catalyst preparation [103–108] or loading of nano metal
Hydrolysis method
particles on the thermal sensitive substrates [108–110]. Cold
Hydrolysis method is exactly the hydrolysis of Fe-ions to
plasma has been extensively applied for the preparation of
form FeOOH or iron hydroxide. Thermal treatment has to be
graphene based materials [111–113]. Zhou et al. [114]
followed to obtain iron oxide [101]. Hydrolysis at room
reported a fabrication of porous rod-shaped Fe3O4 anchored
temperature is a slow process. Thus the hydrolysis is
on rGO (Fe3O4/rGO) by controlling the in situ nucleation and
normally carried out at elevated temperature (80 1C or
growth of beta-FeOOH onto GO (beta-FeOOH/GO), followed
higher). The following thermal treatment can be performed
by dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) hydrogen plasma
via hydrothermal process, calcination or annealing under
treatment. Such well-designed hierarchical nanostructures
different atmosphere. Zhou et al. [46] have synthesized
are beneficial for maximum utilization of electrochemically
graphene-wrapped Fe3O4 anode material via hydrolysis
active matter in lithium ion batteries. Superior Li uptake
method with calcination at 600 1C under argon atmosphere.
with high reversible capacity, good rate capability, and
The obtained composite shows improved reversible capacity
excellent stability, maintaining 890 mA h/g capacity over
as well as enhanced cyclic stability and excellent rate
100 cycles at a current density of 500 mA/g has been
capability. Hydrolysis method is suitable for the synthesis
achieved. DBD is a conventional cold plasma phenomenon
of iron oxide/ graphene, but unsuitable for bimetallic
that has been applied for the industrial production of ozone,
system because of the different hydrolysis rate. Compared
plasma TV and others. The specific character of the DBD
with chemical precipitation method, hydrolysis method can
plasma is that one or two metallic electrodes are covered by
obtain composites with more uniform particle size, regard-
the dielectric materials (like quartz plates). The DBD
less of its more narrow applicable range.
plasma decomposition of catalyst precursors has been
previously applied for the production of zeolite and other
Atomic layer deposition catalysts at atmospheric pressure and temperature lower
Luo and his co-workers [102] recently reported a bottom-up than 200 1C [104,105,108]. Zhou et al. [114] employed a
strategy with atomic layer deposition to graft bicontinuous hydrogen plasma that contains highly active reducing spe-
mesoporous nanostructure Fe3O4 onto three-dimensional cies like hydrogen radical and energetic electrons. These
graphene foams. The obtained composite is directly used species convert FeOOH in a high efficiency and reduce GO
as the lithium ion battery anode. High reversible capacity simultaneously. The further investigation conducted by our
(up to 785 mAh/g at 1 C rate) is achieved with fast charging group confirms that the air DBD can fabricate Fe3O4/rGO
and discharging capability. The high capacity is maintained composites directly without the formation of FeOOH. With
without decay up to 500 cycles. In addition, the rate of up the plentiful contents of active species (including electrons,
to 60 C is also demonstrated, rendering a fast discharge radicals and excited species), cold plasmas will find more
potential. It would be the best reported rate performance and more applications in the fabrication of graphene
for Fe3O4 in LIBs [102]. A primary advantage of atomic layer based composites for electrochemical energy storage and
deposition method is easy to fabricate uniform particles or conversion.
continuous thin film, but this method is only suitable small-
scale preparation due to its low rate of deposition.
Morphology control
Cold plasma decomposition via dielectric-barrier
discharge Iron oxide/graphene (or GO) composites with various
When one supply sufficient electrical energy into gas, the morphologies have been synthesized via different synthesis
gas will be ionized and an electric gas discharge, or methods and raw materials. According to the different

Figure 9 TEM and SEM images of various iron oxide/graphene (or GO) composites with different iron oxide morphology listed in
Table 4. (a) α-Fe2O3 particles/graphene [69], Copyright 2011, Springer; (b) γ-Fe2O3 particles/graphene [56], Copyright 2013,
Elsevier; (c) Fe3O4 particles/graphene; (d) Fe3O4 particles/GO [116], Copyright 2013, Elsevier; (e) α-Fe2O3 nanocubes/graphene
[117], Copyright 2012, Royal Society of Chemistry; (f) Fe3O4 nanocubes/graphene [46], Copyright 2010, American Chemical Society;
(g) α-Fe2O3 nanorods/graphene [118], Copyright 2012, Springer; (h) Fe3O4 nanorods/graphene [119], Copyright 2013, Elsevier; (i) α-
Fe2O3 nanotubes/graphene [71], Copyright 2012, Royal Society of Chemistry; (j) α-Fe2O3 nanorice/graphene [120], Copyright 2011,
American Chemical Society; (k) α-Fe2O3 nanodisks/graphene [121], Copyright 2013, American Chemical Society; (l) Fe3O4
nanocrystalline clusters/graphene [122], Copyright 2011, American Chemical Society; (m) Fe3O4 hollow microspheres/graphene
[123], Copyright 2013, Royal Society of Chemistry; (n) α-Fe2O3 hexagonal nanoplatelets/graphene [62], Copyright 2013, Elsevier; (o)
α-Fe2O3 nanospindles/graphene [124], Copyright 2012, Royal Society of Chemistry; (p) Fe3O4 porous beads/graphene [125],
Copyright 2012, Royal Society of Chemistry; (q) α-Fe2O3 with inverse opaline structure/graphene [22], Copyright 2013, Royal Society
of Chemistry; (r) Fe3O4 and α-Fe2O3 ribbons/graphene [96], Copyright 2014, Nature Publishing Group.
290 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

architectural structures, the iron oxide/graphene (or GO) changes upon lithiation/delithiation and prevents the crum-
composites can be divided into 2D sheet-by-sheet structure, bling of the electrode material; (III) sandwich structure can
3D structure, and core/shell structure (Figure 8) [57,78,115]. possess the shorter electronic transport length, the fast and
2D sheet-by-sheet structure is the most common structure versatile transport pathways [62].
form of iron oxide/graphene composites, which has been Yang et al. reported an α-Fe2O3 mesocrystal/graphene
extensively investigated. Iron oxide/graphene composites nanohybrid by self-assembly of FeOOH nanorods as the
with 3D structure and core/shell structure have also been primary building blocks, accompanied by the phase transi-
investigated. As the example mentioned above, Fe3O4/3D tion from FeOOH to α-Fe2O3, under hydrothermal conditions
N-doped graphene synthesized by Wu et al. [78] show a [92]. The nanohybrid possesses unique porous structure and
better durability than commercial Pt/C catalysts for ORR. high electrical conductivity, resulting in effective ion and
The 3D structure, as shown in Figure 8b, can enhance their charge transport in the whole electrode. Even at a high
interfacial contact, suppress the dissolution/agglomeration discharge current density of 10 A g 1, a high capacitance
of nanoparticles, and facilitate the transport of electrolyte (98.2 F g 1) is achieved [92].
ions [78].
On the other hand, the morphology of iron oxide is multi-
farious, due to the significant impact of iron source and Conclusions and perspective
synthesis methods. According to the different morphologies
of iron oxide, the iron oxide/graphene (or GO) composites can The applications of iron oxide/graphene or GO composites for
be divided into different groups. At present, more than a the electrochemical energy storage and conversion have been
dozen iron oxide/graphene (or GO) composites with different demonstrated. These composites can meet the requirement of
morphologies of iron oxide have been reported, including excellent electrical conductivity, high specific surface area and
nanoparticles [26,56,69,116], nanocubes [46,117], nanorods porosity, desired for high performance electrode materials,
[95,118,119], nanotubes [71], nanorice [120], nanodisks [121], which not only facilitate ion transport by shortening diffusion
nanocrystalline clusters [122], hollow microspheres [123], pathway but also enhance the electro-active surface area by
hexagonal nanoplatelets [62], nanospindles [124], porous intercalating ions in a wide range of sites [92] Various methods
beads [125], inverse opaline [22] and ribbons [96], as shown have been exploited for the preparation of iron oxide/gra-
in Table 4. As shown in Figure 9, the size of iron oxide particles phene or GO composites. These methods include hydrothermal
listed in Table 4 is distributed from less than 10 nm to decomposition, thermal decomposition, chemical precipita-
hundreds of nanometers, while iron oxide and graphene are tion, co-precipitation, sol–gel method, atomic layer deposition,
combined with the form of particle-anchored-on-sheet [117] microwave heating, plasma decomposition, electrochemical
or particle-wrapped-in-sheet [46]. These composites are quite approach and hydrolysis. The first four methods are the most
different in structure and exhibit unique properties and out- frequently applied ones. Hydrothermal and thermal decom-
standing performance in various applications. Wang et al. [62] position can be used for a production with a large amount of
have synthesized α-Fe2O3 hexagonal nanoplatelets sandwiched composites with high dispersion and easy quality control. Other
between graphene layers (Figure 9n). The composites exhibit methods, like sol–gel method, atomic layer deposition, micro-
an ultrahigh reversible capacity of 1100 mAh/g after 50 cycles, wave heating, plasma decomposition and electrochemical
which is much higher than α-Fe2O3 particles/graphene and approach are promising for a further improvement in the size,
α-Fe2O3 (Figure 10). For the improvement of the cycling structure and performance control or for a simple and easy
performances, Wang et al. [62] put forward three reasons: fabrication with use of less chemicals. All these methods can
(I) α-Fe2O3 hexagonal nanoplatelets render a shorter transport be grouped into in situ and ex situ synthetic routes. For ex situ
length for lithium ions during insertion/extraction; (II) the synthetic routes, the synthesis and decoration of iron oxide
graphene covered α-Fe2O3 effectively reduces the volume onto graphene or GO are separately carried out. For in situ
synthetic routes, iron oxide NPs are directly growing on the
surface of graphene or GO. The synthesis and decoration are
carried out at the same time and combined into one step.
Therefore, compared with ex situ routes, in situ synthetic
routes usually need fewer synthetic steps. For ex situ routes,
the interaction behaviors can be attributed to covalent, non-
covalent, π-stacking, and electrostatic interactions. For in situ
routes, a variety of chemical and physical processes occur with
a more complex interaction during the formation of compo-
sites. No matter which methods applied, the nucleation and
crystal growth of iron oxide NPs are the basic steps for the
composite formation. The functional groups or the structure
defects should have significant effects. However, few studies
can be found in the literature with these important issues,
although we observed a rapidly increasing publication in the
production of iron oxide/graphene or rGO composites. The
Figure 10 Comparision of the cycling performances of control of the nanoscale assembly at the atomic or molecular
α-Fe2O3 hexagonal nanoplatelets/graphene, α-Fe2O3 particles/ level is still difficult with the fabrication of iron oxide/
graphene and α-Fe2O3. Reproduced with permission from Ref. graphene composites. A well-designed architecture is still a
[62] Copyright 2013, Elsevier. challenge. More fundamental studies have to be conducted
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 291

including the molecular modeling, which also remains as a [30] X.J. Fan, G.Z. Jiao, W. Zhao, P.F. Jin, X. Li, Nanoscale 5
significant challenge to the theoretical scientists. A multi- (2013) 1143–1152.
disciplinary effort is immediately needed since we are obser- [31] H. Teymourian, A. Salimi, S. Khezrian, Biosens. Bioelectron.
ving the rapid increasing applications of iron oxide/graphene 49 (2013) 1–8.
(or rGO) composites. [32] G.S. Wang, G.Y. Chen, Z.Y. Wei, X.F. Dong, M. Qi, Mater.
Chem. Phys. 141 (2013) 997–1004.
[33] H.P. Cong, J.J. He, Y. Lu, S.H. Yu, Small 6 (2010) 169–173.
Acknowledgment [34] W.H. Chen, P.W. Yi, Y. Zhang, L.M. Zhang, Z.W. Deng,
Z.J. Zhang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 3 (2011) 4085–4091.
[35] X.X. Ma, H.Q. Tao, K. Yang, L.Z. Feng, L. Cheng, X.Z. Shi,
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Y.G. Li, L. Guo, Z. Liu, Nano Res. 5 (2012) 199–212.
Foundation of China (#51174276). [36] K. Yang, L.L. Hu, X.X. Ma, S.Q. Ye, L. Cheng, X.Z. Shi, C.H. Li,
Y.G. Li, Z. Liu, Adv. Mater. 24 (2012) 1868–1872.
[37] H. Wei, W.S. Yang, Q. Xi, X. Chen, Mater. Lett. 82 (2012)
References 224–226.
[38] S. Goenka, V. Sant, S. Sant, J. Control. Release 173 (2014) 75–88.
[1] K.S. Novoselov, A.K. Geim, S.V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang, [39] J.J. Liang, Y.F. Xu, D. Sui, L. Zhang, Y. Huang, Y.F. Ma, F.F. Li,
S.V. Dubonos, I.V. Grigorieva, A.A. Firsov, Science 306 (2004) Y.S. Chen, J. Phys. Chem. C 114 (2010) 17465–17471.
666–669. [40] J.J. Liang, Y. Huang, J. Oh, M. Kozlov, D. Sui, S.L. Fang,
[2] K.S. Novoselov, V.I. Fal'ko, L. Colombo, P.R. Gellert, R.H. Baughman, Y.F. Ma, Y.S. Chen, Adv. Funct. Mater. 21
M.G. Schwab, K. Kim, Nature 490 (2012) 192–200. (2011) 3778–3784.
[3] C. Sealy, Nano Energy 2 (2013) 1391–1395. [41] F.K. Meng, J.T. Li, S.K. Cushing, J. Bright, M.J. Zhi,
[4] Y. Peng, J. Zhong, K. Wang, B.F. Xue, Y.B. Cheng, Nano Energy J.D. Rowley, Z.L. Hong, A. Manivannan, A.D. Bristow,
2 (2013) 235–240. N.Q. Wu, ACS Catal. 3 (2013) 746–751.
[5] X. Zhong, L. Liu, X.D. Wang, H.Y. Yu, G.L. Zhuang, D.H. Mei, [42] J. Yao, X.P. Shen, B. Wang, H.K. Liu, G.X. Wang, Electro-
X.N. Li, J.G. Wang, J. Mater. Chem. A 2 (2014) 6703–6707. chem. Commun. 11 (2009) 1849–1852.
[6] H. Wang, Z. Xu, H. Yi, H. Wei, Z. Guo, X.F. Wang, Nano Energy [43] W. Xiao, Z.X. Wang, H.J. Guo, X.H. Li, J.X. Wang, S.L. Huang,
7 (2014) 86–96. L. Gan, Appl. Surf. Sci. 266 (2013) 148–154.
[7] Y. Jiao, Y. Zheng, M. Jaroniec, S.Z. Qiao, J. Am. Chem. Soc. [44] P.C. Lian, X.F. Zhu, H.F. Xiang, Z. Li, W.S. Yang, H.H. Wang,
136 (2014) 4394–4403. Electrochim. Acta 56 (2010) 834–840.
[8] S.Y. Liu, J. Xie, Q.M. Su, G.H. Du, S.C. Zhang, G.S. Cao, [45] P. Poizot, S. Laruelle, S. Grugeon, L. Dupont, J.M. Tarascon,
T.J. Zhu, X.B. Zhao, Nano Energy 3 (2014) 84–94. Nature 407 (2000) 496–499.
[9] X.M. Chen, G.H. Wu, Y.Q. Jiang, Y.R. Wang, X. Chen, Analyst [46] G.M. Zhou, D.W. Wang, F. Li, L.L. Zhang, N. Li, Z.S. Wu,
136 (2011) 4631–4640. L. Wen, G.Q. Lu, H.M. Cheng, Chem. Mater. 22 (2010)
[10] F. Chen, N.J. Tao, Acc. Chem. Res. 42 (2009) 429–438. 5306–5313.
[11] A.K. Geim, Science 324 (2009) 1530–1534. [47] C.T. Hsieh, J.Y. Lin, C.Y. Mo, Electrochim. Acta 58 (2011)
[12] Y.W. Zhu, S.T. Murali, W.W. Cai, X.S. Li, J.W. Suk, J.R. Potts, 119–124.
R.S. Ruoff, Adv. Mater. 22 (2010) 3906–3924. [48] X.J. Zhu, W.Y. Wu, Z. Liu, L. Li, J. Hu, H.L. Dai, L. Ding, K. Zhou,
[13] J. Su, M.H. Cao, L. Ren, C.W. Hu, J. Phys. Chem. C 115 (2011) C.Y. Wang, X.G. Song, Electrochim. Acta 95 (2013) 24–28.
14469–14477. [49] Y. Chen, B.H. Song, L. Lu, J.M. Xue, Nanoscale 5 (2013)
[14] B.C. Brodie, Ann. Chim. Phys. 45 (1855) 351–353. 6797–6803.
[15] Y.H. Xue, H. Chen, D.S. Yu, S.Y. Wang, M. Yardeni, Q.B. Dai, [50] Y.C. Dong, R.G. Ma, M.J. Hu, H. Cheng, Q.D. Yang, Y.Y. Li,
M.M. Guo, Y. Liu, F. Lu, J. Qu, L.M. Dai, Chem. Commun. 47 J.A. Zapien, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15 (2013) 7174–7181.
(2011) 11689–11691. [51] L.H. Zhuo, Y.Q. Wu, L.Y. Wang, J.Y. Ming, Y.C. Yu, X.B. Zhang,
[16] D. Haag, H.H. Kung, Top. Catal. 57 (2013) 762–773. F.Y. Zhao, J. Mater. Chem. A 1 (2013) 3954–3960.
[17] K.P. Loh, Q.L. Bao, G. Eda, M. Chhowalla, Nat. Chem. 2 [52] X.Y. Xue, C.H. Ma, C.X. Cui, L.L. Xing, Solid State Sci. 13
(2010) 1015–1024. (2011) 1526–1530.
[18] H.Y. He, J. Klinowski, M. Forster, A. Lerf, Chem. Phys. Lett. [53] G. Wang, T. Liu, Y.J. Luo, Y. Zhao, Z.Y. Ren, J.B. Bai,
287 (1998) 53–56. H. Wang, J. Alloys Compd. 509 (2011) L216–L220.
[19] A. Lerf, H.Y. He, M. Forster, J. Kinowski, J. Phys. Chem. [54] H.W. Zhang, L. Zhou, C.Z. Yu, RSC Adv. 4 (2014) 495–499.
B 102 (1998) 4477–4482. [55] B. Zhao, R.Z. Liu, X.H. Cai, Z. Jiao, M.H. Wu, X.T. Ling, B. Lu,
[20] W. Gao, L.B. Alemany, L.J. Ci, P.M. Ajayan, Nat. Chem. Y. Jiang, J. Appl. Electrochem. 44 (2013) 53–60.
1 (2009) 403–408. [56] I.T. Kim, A. Magasinski, K. Jacob, G. Yushin, R. Tannenbaum,
[21] V. Singh, D. Joung, L. Zhai, S. Das, S.I. Khondaker, S. Seal, Carbon 52 (2013) 56–64.
Prog. Mater. Sci. 56 (2011) 1178–1271. [57] J.Z. Wang, C. Zhong, D. Wexler, N.H. Idris, Z.X. Wang,
[22] K. Zhang, X.J. Shi, J.K. Kim, J.S. Lee, J.H. Park, Nanoscale 5 L.Q. Chen, H.K. Liu, Chem.-Eur. J. 17 (2011) 661–667.
(2013) 1939–1944. [58] M. Zhang, B. Qu, D.N. Lei, Y.J. Chen, X.Z. Yu, L.B. Chen, Q.H. Li,
[23] H.B. Zhao, Q.J. Zhu, Y.J. Gao, P. Zhai, D. Ma, Appl. Catal. Y.G. Wang, T.H. Wang, J. Mater. Chem. 22 (2012) 3868–3874.
A-Gen. 456 (2013) 233–239. [59] J. Tuček, K.C. Kemp, K.S. Kim, R. Zbořil, ACS Nano 8 (2014)
[24] A. Prakash, S. Chandra, D. Bahadur, Carbon 50 (2012) 4209–4219. 7571–7612.
[25] S. Guo, G.K. Zhang, Y.D. Guo, J.C. Yu, Carbon 60 (2013) 437–444. [60] W.J. Li, Y.J. Gao, W.L. Chen, P. Tang, W.Z. Li, Z.J. Shi,
[26] H.M. Sun, L.Y. Cao, L.H. Lu, Nano Res. 4 (2011) 550–562. D.S. Su, J.G. Wang, D. Ma, ACS Catal. 4 (2014) 1261–1266.
[27] V. Chandra, J. Park, Y. Chun, J.W. Lee, I.C. Hwang, K.S. Kim, [61] Y. Gao, G. Hu, J. Zhong, Z. Shi, Y. Zhu, D.S. Su, J.G. Wang,
ACS Nano 4 (2010) 3979–3986. X.H. Bao, D. Ma, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 52 (2013) 2109–2113.
[28] C.G. Hu, Z.Y. Mou, G.W. Lu, N. Chen, Z.L. Dong, M.J. Hu, L. [62] X. Wang, W. Tian, D.Q. Liu, C.Y. Zhi, Y. Bando, D. Golberg,
T. Qu, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15 (2013) 13038–13043. Nano Energy 2 (2013) 257–267.
[29] B. Shen, W. Zhai, M. Tao, J.Q. Ling, W.G. Zheng, ACS Appl. [63] M. Du, C.H. Xu, J. Sun, L. Gao, Electrochim. Acta 80 (2012)
Mater. Interfaces 5 (2013) 11383–11391. 302–307.
292 Z. Wang, C.-J. Liu

[64] Q.M. Su, D. Xie, J. Zhang, G.H. Du, B.S. Xu, ACS Nano 7 [98] H.K. He, C. Gao, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2 (2010)
(2013) 9115–9121. 3201–3210.
[65] K. Karthikeyan, D. Kalpana, S. Amaresh, Y.S. Lee, RSC Adv. [99] S. Baek, S.H. Yu, S.K. Park, A. Pucci, C. Marichy, D.C. Lee,
2 (2012) 12322–12328. Y.E. Sung, Y.Z. Piao, N. Pinna, RSC Adv. 1 (2011) 1687–1690.
[66] J.P. Cheng, Q.L. Shou, J.S. Wu, F. Liu, V.P. Dravid, X.B. Zhang, [100] S.H. Yu, D.E. Conte, S. Baek, D.C. Lee, S.K. Park, K.J. Lee,
J. Electroanal. Chem. 698 (2013) 1–8. Y.Z. Piao, Y.E. Sung, N. Pinna, Adv. Funct. Mater. 23 (2013)
[67] Q.T. Qu, S.B. Yang, X.L. Feng, Adv. Mater. 23 (2011) 5574–5580. 4293–4305.
[68] W.H. Shi, J.X. Zhu, D.H. Sim, Y.Y. Tay, Z.Y. Lu, X.J. Zhang, [101] T. Qi, J.J. Jiang, H.C. Chen, H.Z. Wan, L. Miao, L. Zhang,
Y. Sharma, M. Srinivasan, H. Zhang, H.H. Hng, Q.Y. Yan, Electrochim. Acta 114 (2013) 674–680.
J. Mater. Chem. 21 (2011) 3422–3427. [102] J.S. Luo, J.L. Liu, Z.Y. Zeng, C.F. Ng, L.J. Ma, H. Zhang,
[69] D.W. Wang, Y.Q. Li, Q.H. Wang, T.M. Wang, J. Solid State J.Y. Lin, Z.X. Shen, H.J. Fan, Nano Lett. 13 (2013) 6136–6143.
Electrochem. 16 (2011) 2095–2102. [103] J.J. Wang, Z.Y. Wang, C.J. Liu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 6
[70] Z. Wang, C.Y. Ma, H.L. Wang, Z.H. Liu, Z.H. Hao, J. Alloys (2014) 12860–12867.
Compd. 552 (2013) 486–491. [104] Q.T. Guo, P. With, Y. Liu, R. Gläser, C.J. Liu, Catal. Today 211
[71] K.K. Lee, S. Deng, H.M. Fan, S. Mhaisalkar, H.R. Tan, E.S. Tok, (2013) 156–161.
K.P. Loh, W.S. Chin, C.H. Sow, Nanoscale 4 (2012) 2958–2961. [105] N. Wang, K. Shen, X.P. Yu, W.Z. Qian, W. Chu, Catal. Sci.
[72] Q.H. Wang, L.F. Jiao, H.M. Du, Y.J. Wang, H.T. Yuan, J. Power Technol. 3 (2013) 2278–2287.
Sources 245 (2014) 101–106. [106] Y.T. Chen, H.P. Wang, C.J. Liu, Z.Y. Zeng, H. Zhang,
[73] Y.Q. Ren, G.H. Chia, Z.Q. Gao, Nano Today 8 (2013) 577–597. C.M. Zhou, X.L. Jia, Y.H. Yang, J. Catal. 289 (2012) 105–117.
[74] H. Tributsch, U.I. Koslowski, I. Dorbandt, Electrochim. Acta [107] L.B. Di, Z.J. Xu, K. Wang, X.L. Zhang, Catal. Today 211 (2013)
53 (2008) 2198–2209. 109–113.
[75] I. Roche, E. Chainet, M. Chatenet, J. Vondrak, J. Phys. Chem. [108] C.J. Liu, Y. Zhao, Y.Z. Li, D.S. Zhang, Z. Chang, X.H. Bu, ACS
C 111 (2007) 1434–1443. Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2 (2014) 3–13.
[76] L.T. Qu, Y. Liu, J.B. Baek, L.M. Dai, ACS Nano 4 (2010) [109] J.M. Yan, Y.X. Pan, A.G. Cheetham, Y.A. Lin, W. Wang,
1321–1326. H.G. Cui, C.J. Liu, Langmuir 29 (2013) 16051–16057.
[77] H.P. Cong, P. Wang, M. Gong, S.H. Yu, Nano Energy 3 (2014) [110] Y.W. Li, R.T. Yang, C.J. Liu, Z. Wang, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46
55–63. (2007) 8277–8281.
[78] Z.S. Wu, S.B. Yang, Y. Sun, K. Parvez, X.L. Feng, K. Mullen, [111] Y.Z. Li, Y. Yu, J.G. Wang, J. Song, Q. Li, M.D. Dong, C.J. Liu,
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134 (2012) 9082–9085. Appl. Catal. B-Environ. 125 (2012) 189–196.
[79] J.S. Zhou, H.H. Song, L.L. Ma, X.H. Chen, RSC Adv. 1 (2011) [112] J. Moon, J. An, U. Sim, S.P. Cho, J.H. Kang, C. Chung,
782–791. J.H. Seo, J. Lee, K.T. Nam, B.H. Hong, Adv. Mater. 26 (2014)
[80] Y. Zhang, B. Chen, L.M. Zhang, J. Huang, F.H. Chen, Z. 3501–3505.
P. Yang, J.L. Yao, Z.J. Zhang, Nanoscale 3 (2011) 1446–1450. [113] C.J. Russo, L.A. Passmore, Nat. Methods 11 (2014) 773 (773).
[81] Y. Li, J. Chu, J.Y. Qi, X. Li, Appl. Surf. Sci. 257 (2011) [114] Q. Zhou, Z.B. Zhao, Z.Y. Wang, Y.F. Dong, X.Z. Wang,
6059–6062. Y. Gogotsi, J.S. Qiu, Nanoscale 6 (2014) 2286–2291.
[82] A. Sinha, N.R. Jana, Chem.-Asian J. 8 (2013) 786–791. [115] R.G. Mendes, A. Bachmatiuk, A.A. El-Gendy, S. Melkhanova,
[83] P.F. Zong, S.F. Wang, Y.L. Zhao, H. Wang, H. Pan, C.H. He, R. Klingeler, B. Büchner, M.H. Rümmeli, J. Phys. Chem. C 116
Chem. Eng. J. 220 (2013) 45–52. (2012) 23749–23756.
[84] W.Y. Zhang, Y. Zeng, C. Xu, H.T. Tan, W.L. Liu, J.X. Zhu, [116] G.Y. He, W.F. Liu, X.Q. Sun, Q. Chen, X. Wang, H.Q. Chen,
N. Xiao, H.H. Hng, J. Ma, H.E. Hoster, R. Yazami, Q.Y. Yan, Mater. Res. Bull. 48 (2013) 1885–1890.
RSC Adv. 2 (2012) 8508–8514. [117] J.K. Liu, H.Q. Cao, J.P. Xiong, Z.Y. Cheng, CrystEngComm 14
[85] V.K. Singh, M.K. Patra, M. Manoth, G.S. Gowd, S.R. Vadera, (2012) 5140–5144.
N. Kumar, New Carbon Mater. 24 (2009) 147–152. [118] X.H. Jia, H.J. Song, C.Y. Min, X.Q. Zhang, Appl. Phys.
[86] L.H. Ai, C.Y. Zhang, Z.L. Chen, J. Hazard. Mater. 192 (2011) A-Mater. Sci. Process. 109 (2012) 261–265.
1515–1524. [119] A.P. Hu, X.H. Chen, Y.H. Tang, Q.L. Tang, L. Yang, S.P. Zhang,
[87] J.H. Zhu, Z.P. Luo, S.J. Wu, N. Haldolaarachchige, Electrochem. Commun. 28 (2013) 139–142.
D.P. Young, S.Y. Wei, Z.H. Guo, J. Mater. Chem. 22 (2012) [120] Y.Q. Zou, J. Kan, Y. Wang, J. Phys. Chem. C 115 (2011)
835–844. 20747–20753.
[88] Z.H. Wang, C.F. Zhou, J.F. Xia, B. Via, Y.Z. Xia, F.F. Zhang, [121] J. Qu, Y.X. Yin, Y.Q. Wang, Y. Yan, Y.G. Guo, W.G. Song, ACS
Y.H. Li, L.H. Xia, Colloid Surf. B-Biointerfaces 106 (2013) Appl. Mater. Interfaces 5 (2013) 3932–3936.
60–65. [122] X.Y. Li, X.L. Huang, D.P. Liu, X. Wang, S.Y. Song, L. Zhou,
[89] S.L. Zeng, N. Gan, R. Weideman-Mera, Y.T. Cao, T.H. Li, H.J. Zhang, J. Phys. Chem. C 115 (2011) 21567–21573.
W.G. Sang, Chem. Eng. J. 218 (2013) 108–115. [123] M.C. Liu, T. Wen, X.L. Wu, C.L. Chen, J. Hu, J. Li, X.K. Wang,
[90] L. Li, G.M. Zhou, Z. Weng, X.Y. Shan, F. Li, H.M. Cheng, Dalton Trans. 42 (2013) 14710–14717.
Carbon 67 (2014) 500–507. [124] S. Bai, S.Q. Chen, X.P. Shen, G.X. Zhu, G.X. Wang, RSC Adv.
[91] X.P. Shen, J.L. Wu, S. Bai, H. Zhou, J. Alloys Compd. 506 2 (2012) 10977–10984.
(2010) 136–140. [125] Y. Chen, B.H. Song, X.S. Tang, L. Lu, J.M. Xue, J. Mater.
[92] S.H. Yang, X.F. Song, P. Zhang, J. Sun, L. Gao, Small 10 (2014) Chem. 22 (2012) 17656–17662.
2270–2279.
[93] J. Su, M.H. Cao, L. Ren, C.W. Hu, J. Phys. Chem. C 115 (2011) Mr. Zongyuan Wang received his bachelor
14469–14477. degree from Tianjin University in 2012. After
[94] L. Li, Y.Y. Dou, L.F. Wang, M. Luo, J. Liang, RSC Adv. 4 (2014) that, he joined Prof. Liu's group as a graduate
25658–25665. student. He has published one paper in
[95] Q.X. Low, G.W. Ho, Nano Energy 5 (2014) 28–35. Scientific Reports on the 3D-printed polymer
[96] S.B. Yang, Y. Sun, L. Chen, Y. Hernandez, X.L. Feng, composites and co-authored other three
K. Mullen, Sci. Rep. 2 (2012) 427. papers in ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces,
[97] K. Kamiya, K. Hashimoto, S. Nakanishi, Chem. Commun. 48 Catalysis Science & Technology and Nanoscale
(2012) 10213–10215. Research Letters.
Electrochemical energy storage and energy conversion devices 293

Dr. Chang-jun Liu is a Chang Jiang Distin-

guished Professor and Fellow of the Royal
Society of Chemistry. His research interests
include catalysis, energy material and
plasma science. He served as Chair of the
10th International Conference on CO2 Utili-
zation and 2010 Program Chair of Fuel
Chemistry Division of American Chemical
Society. He was the Advisory Board Member
of Energy & Environmental Science and
serves now as the Advisory Board Member of Greenhouse Gases:
Science & Technology (Wiley) and the Editorial Board member of
Applied Catalysis B, Journal of CO2 Utilization, Chinese Journal of
Catalysis and Journal of Energy Chemistry.