Correction to: Theoretical versus Practical Energy: A Plea for More Transparency in the Energy Calculation of Different Rechargeable Battery Systems (Advanced Energy Materials, (2019), 9, 6, (1803170), 10.1002/aenm.201803170)

Abstract

Adv. Energy Mater. 2019, 9, 1803170 The calculation spreadsheet in the supporting information of the original manuscript contained an error, which had minor implications on the calculated volumetric energy content of the discussed battery technologies. Therefore, minor corrections in the calculation spreadsheet and in the resulting values were made. The results of which slightly change the data used to calculate Figure b. (Figure presented.) b) Recalculated Energy densities versus specific energies of the six different battery technologies from theoretical values (Step 1) to cell level (Step 6). The error was related to the thickness variation of the cell stacks due to volume changes of the active materials during charge/discharge. In case of LSBs, the calculation included the volume expansion (+81%) due to the transformation of sulfur into lithium sulfide upon discharge. Since this volume expansion in the original article was linked to the mass share instead of the volume share of sulfur within the composite cathode, a false overall volume expansion of the cathode was calculated. In the same way, false values for the volume expansion of all other active materials within this study were calculated. This error has resulted in an overestimation of the volume change (additional volume) and thus slightly different energy contents in Steps 5 and 6 (Depicted in Figure 1 in the original manuscript). In the case of LSBs (and also QSS-LSBs and MSBs), the correct volume expansion at the sulfur cathode is overcompensated by the shrinkage of the metal anode, so no additional volume has to be considered. Since the changes are very small, the corrections do not change the general outcome of this article. The authors apologize for any inconvenience that this mistake may have caused.