Mohammad Ali Abdelkareem, Qaisar Abbas, Enas Taha Sayed et al. · Energy · 2024
Systematically review MOF chemistry, synthesis and conductivity enhancement, computational and scale-up context, and applications of MOFs/MOF-derived materials in fuel cells, supercapacitors, rechargeable batteries, CO2 reduction and photocatalytic hydrogen production.
The review’s argument is preserved as a navigable set of section summaries.
Covers battery fundamentals and the use of pristine MOFs, MOF glasses, MOF-derived oxides/sulphides/carbons and hybrid composites across LIB, SIB, ZIB, AlB and LSB systems.
Relevance: Supporting · p. 8 · MOF for rechargeable battery applications · Fig. 25-Fig. 28
Highlights secondary building units, topology retention, post-synthetic modification, linker functionalisation and chemical-stability caveats.
Relevance: Core · p. 2 · Chemistry of metal-organic frameworks · Fig. 6; Fig. 7; Fig. 8
Classifies common MOF names/compositions and contrasts MOFs with zeolites and carbons in porosity, tuneability and structural diversity.
Relevance: Core · p. 1 · Comparison with other porous materials · Table 1; Table 2; Fig. 3
Reviews DFT/QM descriptors, host-guest modelling, databases, featurisation and ML screening as tools for structure-property understanding and design acceleration.
Relevance: Supporting · p. 2 · Advancements in computational methods & machine learning for MOFs in energy · Fig. 9
Synthesises the main consensus: MOFs are attractive because of porosity and tuneability but remain limited by conductivity, stability, controllable derivatisation, scale-up and mechanism gaps.
Relevance: Core · p. 10 · Conclusions and key challenges
Organises mixed-metal, metal nanocluster, ligand design, cationic guest, PSM, doping, composite and electrodeposition strategies for improving conductivity.
Relevance: Core · p. 3 · Conducting MOFs synthesis approaches · Fig. 10; Table 4
Explains metal/linker selection, donor atoms, mixed ligands, defect control, dimensionality and synthesis route choice as design levers.
Relevance: Core · p. 2 · MOFs design · Fig. 4; Fig. 5
Summarises industrialisation constraints, solvent/yield effects, material costs and batch-to-continuous process needs.
Relevance: Supporting · p. 2 · Economics of MOF production
Reviews MOF cathodes, anodes and PEM fillers, with emphasis on ORR catalysts, urea/methanol/ethanol oxidation and proton-conducting mixed matrix membranes.
Relevance: Supporting · p. 4 · MOFs for fuel cells applications · Fig. 15; Tables 5-7
Frames electrochemical energy storage and conversion needs, introduces MOFs/PCPs, and positions the review around MOF chemistry plus applications in fuel cells, batteries, supercapacitors, CO2 reduction and photocatalytic hydrogen.
Relevance: Core · p. 1 · Introduction
Introduces heterogeneous photocatalysis and reviews MOF roles in H2 evolution, metal/phosphide doped MOFs, QD-MOF composites and photocatalytic CO2-to-methanol examples.
Relevance: Supporting · p. 9 · MOF as photocatalysts · Fig. 29-Fig. 31
Explains EDLC, pseudocapacitive and hybrid-capacitor mechanisms, then compares pristine MOF electrodes, MOF-derived carbons and MOF composite electrodes.
Relevance: Core · p. 6 · MOFs for supercapacitors applications · Fig. 19; Fig. 20; Tables 8-10
Classification systems are attributed to this review and are not treated as a global material registry.
Figure 1 groups MOF uses into broad application classes, placing energy devices within a wider materials landscape.
Categories: catalysis · optical · green · biomedical · electronics · energy
p. 11 · Figures and tables · Fig. 1
The review organises conductivity enhancement around node chemistry, ligand design, guest incorporation and hybridisation with conductive phases.
Categories: mixed-metal or mixed-valence nodes · metal nanoclusters · electroactive ligands · redox-active guest molecules · post-synthetic modification · doping · composites · electrodeposition
p. 15 · Conducting MOFs synthesis approaches · Fig. 10
The review distinguishes one-dimensional, two-dimensional and three-dimensional MOFs by coordination direction and stacking; Figure 5 also includes 0D.
Categories: 0D MOFs · 1D MOFs · 2D MOFs · 3D MOFs
p. 13 · MOFs design · Fig. 5
The photocatalysis section groups improvements by metal incorporation, phosphides, quantum dots, heterojunction formation and derived composites.
Categories: metal nanoparticle@MOF · transition-metal phosphide@MOF · QD-MOF composites · MOF-derived p-n heterojunctions · MOF-derived carbon-based photocatalysts
p. 24 · MOF based photocatalysts · Fig. 31
Table 2 and Figure 3 compare pore size, specific surface area, crystallinity and molecular tuneability across major porous-material families.
Categories: zeolites · carbons · MOFs
p. 25 · Figures and tables · Table 2
PSM is presented as a way to tune MOF structure and functionality after synthesis without changing connection/topology.
Categories: post-synthetic ligand exchange · post-synthetic metal exchange · post-synthetic elimination/insertion · covalent PSM · dative PSM · post-synthetic deprotection
p. 3 · Post synthetic modifications (PSMs) · Fig. 11
The review distinguishes physical adsorption-based EDLCs, Faradaic pseudocapacitors and hybrid devices combining different electrode behaviours.
Categories: electric double-layer capacitors · pseudocapacitors · hybrid capacitors
p. 6 · MOFs for supercapacitors applications · Fig. 20
Table 3 summarises strengths and weaknesses of common route families rather than detailed recipes.
Categories: slow diffusion · hydro/solvothermal · electrochemical · mechanochemical · microwave-assisted · ultrasonic
p. 25 · Figures and tables · Table 3
Review-defined families retain their representative materials and conduction descriptions.
Layered MOFs that use electroactive conjugated ligands and metal nodes to create extended electronic pathways.
Conduction: Presented as a leading route to high electrical conductivity via pi-d conjugation, orbital overlap and stacking.
Representative materials: M3(hexaiminobenzene)2 · Ni3(HITP)2 · Cu3(C6Se6)n · Co dithiolene MOF
Nodes / linkers: Ni · Cu · Co · hexaiminobenzene · HITP · dithiolene · benzenehexaselenolate
p. 3 · Designing ligands
MOFs whose conductivity is increased by redox-active guest molecules, iodine, TCNQ, methyl viologen or other charge-transfer species.
Conduction: Dopants provide free carriers, redox matching or electron-hopping pathways, but can reduce porosity or perturb frameworks.
Representative materials: TCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 · Cu-TATAB doped with TCNQ · methyl-viologen doped BMOF · iodine-doped Cu-Ni dithiolene MOF
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Zn · Ni · BTC · TATAB · naphthalenediimide pillars · dithiolene
p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through doping · Fig. 12; Table 4
MOFs incorporating two or more metals or accessible metal valence states to facilitate charge delocalisation.
Conduction: Conductivity is attributed to electron transfer between mixed-valence metal centres and enhanced HOMO-LUMO overlap.
Representative materials: Cu(I)-Cu(II) 2D MOF · Fe(II)-Fe(III) frameworks
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Fe · dithiocarbamate · triazolate · fluoranilate
p. 3 · Mixed-metal synthesis strategy
Oxide, sulphide, carbon and hybrid structures generated from MOF precursors for rechargeable battery electrodes.
Conduction: MOF-derived scaffolds provide porosity and morphology control while conductive carbon/heteroatom components address poor intrinsic conductivity.
Representative materials: TiO2@C@MoS2 · Sb@PC · N-doped MoS2 · 3D-S@NCoCPC
Nodes / linkers: Ti · Cu · Mo · Co · MIL-125-type · BTC · Mo-MOF precursors
p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries · Fig. 27; Fig. 28
Porous carbons generated by using MOFs as sacrificial scaffolds/templates.
Conduction: Carbonisation improves electronic conductivity and preserves/controls porosity, but high-temperature processing complicates pore control and metal removal.
Representative materials: MOF-5 derived porous carbon · IRMOF-3 derived N-doped carbon · HHCF · ZIF8-derived NC-rGO
Nodes / linkers: Zn · Al · ZIF-derived nodes · carboxylates · imidazolates
p. 7 · MOFs derived carbons-based electrodes · Fig. 23; Table 9
Hybrid materials combining MOFs with graphene, rGO, nickel foam, carbon black or conductive polymers.
Conduction: Conductive additives create percolating pathways and improve adhesion/mechanical integrity, but particle dispersion and pore blockage are caveats.
Representative materials: HKUST-1/graphene · Ni-BTC MOF@rGO · Ni-MOF/PANI/NF · Cu-MOF-rGO
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Ni · BTC · BDC-type ligands
p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through composites synthesis · Fig. 13; Table 4
Mixed-matrix or composite membranes where MOFs act as proton-conducting fillers or water-retaining structures in PEM fuel cells.
Conduction: Proton conduction is linked to water uptake, acid functional groups, humidity and temperature.
Representative materials: CPO-27(Mg)/Nafion · MOF/Nafion composite · Fe-MIL-101-NH2-SPPO · MOF/SPEAK
Nodes / linkers: Mg · Fe · Zn · Mn/Cr · imidazole · sulfonated polymers · phosphonate/acid groups
p. 5 · MOFs based membrane · Table 7
MOFs combined with metals, phosphides, quantum dots, graphene or MOF-derived heterojunctions for H2 generation and CO2 reduction.
Conduction: Performance is framed around band gaps, charge separation, carrier migration and active-site exposure rather than bulk electrode conductivity.
Representative materials: Pd nanocubes@ZIF-8 · Ni-MOF-74/BiVO4/P · MoS2 QDs@UiO-66-NH2/G · NiO/ZnO from Zn-Ni MOF
Nodes / linkers: Pd · Ni · Zr · Zn · ZIF · UiO · MOF-74 · Zn-Ni MOF
p. 10 · MOF based photocatalysts · Fig. 29-Fig. 31
Crystalline metal-ligand frameworks used directly, without conversion into derived carbons or oxides.
Conduction: Usually electronically insulating; valued for porosity, tunability and active sites but often limited in electrodes without modification.
Representative materials: MOF-74 · UiO-66 · MIL-53 · ZIF-8 · MOF-5
Nodes / linkers: Zn · Zr · Al · Fe · carboxylates · imidazolates
p. 25 · Classification and chemical composition of MOFs · Table 1
MOFs with zeolite-like topology based on tetrahedral metal ions linked by imidazole rings.
Conduction: Often used as sacrificial or host frameworks; conductive behaviour generally requires derivatisation, dopants or carbonisation.
Representative materials: ZIF-8 · ZIF-90 · ZIF-62 · ZIF-67
Nodes / linkers: Zn · Co · imidazolate · benzimidazolate
p. 1 · Classification and chemical composition of MOFs · Table 1
Review-level synthesis principles remain separate from primary-study recipes.
Grow or combine MOFs with graphene, rGO, nickel foam, carbon black or conductive polymers to supply conductive pathways and active interfaces.
Claimed effects: Improves conductivity, electrochemical activity, structural strength and electrode processability.
Controlling variables: conductive additive fraction · MOF layer thickness · adhesion · particle dispersion · pore accessibility
Representative materials: HKUST-1/graphene · Ni-BTC MOF@rGO · glucose-modified Ni-MOF-graphene
Caveat: Nano-layered growth is challenging and excess conductive phase can block pores or mask intrinsic MOF behaviour.
p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through composites synthesis · Fig. 13; Table 4
Use conjugated, redox-active or soft donor ligands to improve orbital overlap and electronic pathways through the framework.
Claimed effects: Can yield high-conductivity 2D or 3D MOFs through pi-d conjugation, S-overlap, and ligand-mediated charge transfer.
Controlling variables: ligand conjugation length · donor atoms · pi stacking motif · metal-ligand bond character · layer registry
Representative materials: M3(hexaiminobenzene)2 · Ni3(HITP)2 · TTF-based Zn-MOF
Caveat: Transport is sensitive to stacking and crystallinity; broad quantitative comparisons still require primary-source verification.
p. 3 · Designing ligands
Deposit MOFs directly and selectively on conductive surfaces, often under milder or faster conditions than solvothermal approaches.
Claimed effects: Enables thin-film MOFs for electrocatalysis, CO2 electroreduction, gas separation and sensing.
Controlling variables: substrate conductivity · applied potential · metal precursor · linker solution · film thickness
Representative materials: MOF-5 films · biphasic MOF thin films
Caveat: The review presents electrodeposition as emerging; material scope is narrower than general solvothermal synthesis.
p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through electrodeposition · Fig. 14
Introduce redox-active guest species such as methyl viologen or TCNQ to create charge-transfer channels and tune electrical conductivity.
Claimed effects: Doping can increase conductivity by orders of magnitude by inducing free charge carriers and enabling host-guest charge transfer.
Controlling variables: guest redox potential · guest loading · host pore accessibility · orbital overlap · framework stability
Representative materials: methyl-viologen doped BMOF · TCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 · TCNQ-doped Cu-TATAB
Caveat: The review cautions that guest incorporation can reduce porosity and has limited applicability.
p. 4 · Cationic metal MOFs; Conductivity enhancement through doping · Fig. 12
Introduce multiple metals or metal valence states into MOF nodes to promote charge transfer, avoid metal-centre accumulation and improve current density.
Claimed effects: Enhanced conductivity through mixed-valence electron transfer and improved HOMO-LUMO overlap.
Controlling variables: metal identity · metal ratio · accessible redox states · node spacing · ligand orbital alignment
Representative materials: Cu(I)-Cu(II) 2D MOF · Fe(II)-Fe(III) MOFs
Caveat: The review treats this as promising but does not establish universal design rules across all MOF topologies.
p. 3 · Mixed-metal synthesis strategy
Derive oxides, sulphides, porous carbons and hybrid composites from MOF precursors to combine morphology control with electrochemical activity.
Claimed effects: Improves diffusion, capacity retention and active-site exposure in rechargeable battery electrodes.
Controlling variables: sacrificial MOF morphology · sulfurisation or calcination condition · carbon framework conductivity · interlayer spacing · composite loading
Representative materials: TiO2@C@MoS2 · Sb@PC · 3D-S@NCoCPC
Caveat: The review states reaction mechanisms in MOF-derived materials still need clarification.
p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries · Fig. 27; Fig. 28
Use MOFs as templates or precursors for porous carbon electrodes with tunable pore structure and improved conductivity.
Claimed effects: Generates high-surface-area conductive carbons for supercapacitors while using MOF order to tune porosity.
Controlling variables: precursor MOF · carbonisation temperature · activation method · heteroatom content · pore size distribution
Representative materials: MOF-5 derived carbon · IRMOF-3 derived N-doped carbon · HHCF
Caveat: High-temperature carbonisation can make pore control difficult and leave residual metal traces.
p. 7 · MOFs derived carbons-based electrodes · Fig. 23; Table 9
Insert metal nanoclusters or cationic metal species into pores to create tunnelling pathways while trying to retain MOF porosity.
Claimed effects: Supports charge transport by tunnelling and can improve conductivity without fully collapsing the porous network.
Controlling variables: nanocluster size · pore filling · host pore dimensions · light intensity · host-guest charge transfer
Representative materials: AgNC@Rb-CD-MOF · NiCB-containing zirconium MOF
Caveat: Pore filling can compromise porosity, making optimisation between transport and accessible surface area necessary.
p. 3 · Metal nanoclusters MOFs
Combine MOFs with metals, phosphides, quantum dots, graphene or oxide heterojunctions to improve charge separation and light-driven catalytic activity.
Claimed effects: Promotes charge separation, reduces recombination, improves carrier migration and enhances H2 production or CO2 reduction.
Controlling variables: band alignment · co-catalyst identity · heterojunction architecture · active-site exposure · particle dispersion
Representative materials: Ni-MOF-74/BiVO4/P · NiO/ZnO porous hollow spheres · MoS2 QDs@UiO-66-NH2/G
Caveat: The review flags lab-scale production, uncertain mechanisms and nonspecific composite structures.
p. 10 · MOF based photocatalysts · Fig. 29-Fig. 31
Modify a preformed MOF through ligand exchange, metal exchange, insertion/elimination or related chemistry to tune function after synthesis.
Claimed effects: Provides flexible functionalisation and can activate catalytic sites or improve conductivity where direct synthesis is not viable.
Controlling variables: exchange chemistry · functional-group compatibility · topology retention · pore reactivity · chemical bond formation
Representative materials: functionalised MOFs · Zr-MOF PSM examples
Caveat: Requires preserving framework connectivity and chemical stability during post-synthetic reactions.
p. 3 · Post synthetic modifications (PSMs) · Fig. 11
These are the review authors’ synthesis, not newly measured results.
MOF-derived battery composites can improve capacity and cycling, but the review says mechanisms during derivatisation and operation need more research.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Secondary performance values should be checked in primary papers before quantitative comparison.
p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries · Fig. 27; Fig. 28
Direct use of pristine MOFs in rechargeable batteries is bottlenecked by structural stability in aqueous solutions and inferior conductivity, motivating MOF-derived materials and hybrids.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Some robust pristine MOF examples are highlighted as promising anodes.
p. 8 · MOFs for rechargeable batteries · Fig. 26
Combining MOFs with graphene, nickel foam, PANI or other conductive phases is interpreted as a practical way to improve conductivity and electrode processability.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review notes nano-layered growth and porosity retention remain difficult.
p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through composites synthesis · Fig. 13
The review identifies favourable metal-ligand energy/orientation overlap, pi-pi stacking and guest-induced free charge carriers as the main conceptual routes to MOF charge transport.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Guest molecules may reduce porosity and the review says many MOFs have not been experimentally studied for transport mechanism.
p. 4 · Techniques used for conductivity enhancement of MOFs
Doping is described as one of the leading and successful approaches for improving MOF conductivity.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Dopant selection must be compatible with pore structure and framework stability.
p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through doping · Table 4
MOF industrialisation is constrained by material cost, solvent choice, production time, equipment and scale-up quality control; aqueous routes can substantially reduce cost for UiO-66-NH2.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Costs are scenario-dependent and taken from techno-economic studies summarised by the review.
pp. 2-3 · Economics of MOF production
In fuel cells, MOFs are most developed as cathodes and electrolyte-membrane fillers, while anode use remains more limited because of electronic insulation.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: The review says fuel-cell applications remain at an initial stage and need stability improvements.
p. 5 · MOFs for fuel cells applications · Tables 5-7
Electroactive and extended conjugated ligands are presented as a core route for creating conductive MOFs, especially in 2D pi-d systems.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Actual conductivity depends on crystalline order, stacking and metal-ligand alignment.
p. 3 · Designing ligands
Mixed-valence metal nodes are interpreted as a durable strategy for conductivity because electron transfer between valence states can increase charge transport.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review does not quantify generality across all metal/linker combinations.
p. 3 · Mixed-metal synthesis strategy
Computational modelling and ML are presented as ways to accelerate MOF screening and reduce experimental trials, but model validation against repeatable experiments remains essential.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review notes difficulty representing complex structures and choosing molecular versus extended-solid models.
p. 2 · Advancements in computational methods & machine learning for MOFs in energy · Fig. 9
MOF-derived carbons are positioned as a more practical supercapacitor route because MOF precursors offer ordered porosity while carbonisation gives conductive electrode frameworks.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Energy density and pore optimisation still depend on electrolyte choice and carbonisation/activation conditions.
p. 7 · MOFs derived carbons-based electrodes · Table 9
MOFs offer high porosity, structural tuneability and rich functionality, but most are electrical insulators and this limits energy-device use.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: The review notes a growing subset of recently developed conductive MOFs.
p. 10 · Conclusions and key challenges
For MOF photocatalysts, promising H2 and CO2-reduction results are tempered by lab-scale production, poorly specified composite structures and unclear component-level mechanisms.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review stresses in situ encapsulation control and broader risk assessment before application.
p. 10 · MOF based photocatalysts · Fig. 31
Pristine MOFs can show high theoretical capacitance but are often limited in aqueous supercapacitors by electrolyte incompatibility, poor conductivity, cycle degradation and framework collapse.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review favours MOF-derived carbons/composites over pristine MOFs for practical supercapacitor devices.
p. 7 · Pristine MOFs based electrodes · Fig. 21; Fig. 22
Every row remains visibly secondary and links to a primary dossier only where the mapping is verified.
| Material | Property | Reported value | Context and quality | Primary evidence | Review source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SecondaryNi-MOF-74/BiVO4/P (20-NBP) | photocatalytic H2 production | 245.4 micromol in 5 h | 5 h photocatalytic H2 evolution test Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 10 · MOF based photocatalysts · Fig. 29 |
| Secondary3D-S@NCoCPC | initial discharge capacity | 1192 mAh g-1 | Lithium-sulfur battery cathode; sulfur content 77.5 wt% Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries · Fig. 28 |
| SecondaryAgNC@Rb-CD-MOF | light-enhanced electrical conductivity | 1.47 x 10^-8 S cm-1 | After increasing light intensity Text · Exact Reported | research_0037 | p. 3 · Metal nanoclusters MOFs |
| Secondarymethyl-viologen doped BMOF | electrical conductivity | 2.3 x 10^-3 S m-1 | BMOF thin film after MV2+ doping Text · Exact Reported | research_0431 | p. 3 · Cationic metal MOFs |
| SecondaryCPO-27(Mg)/Nafion membrane PEMFC | PEMFC power density | 591 mW cm-2 at 80 C and 99.9% RH | 80 C, 99.9% RH, composite membrane Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 6 · MOFs based membrane · Fig. 18 |
| Secondarybis(diselenolene)-based copper MOF | electrical conductivity | 110 S cm-1 at 300 K | 300 K Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3 · Designing ligands |
| SecondaryCu[Cu(pdt)2] MOF | electrical conductivity | 6 x 10^-4 S cm-1 | Conductive Cu[Cu(pdt)2]-based MOF Text · Exact Reported | research_0201 | p. 4 · Conductivity enhancement through doping |
| SecondaryFe-N-Co@C-800-AL | PEMFC power density | 137.1 mW cm-2 | AEM/PEM fuel-cell cathode catalyst, loading 3 mg cm-2 in review narrative Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 5 · MOFs based cathode · Table 5 |
| SecondaryHHCF MOF-derived carbon | energy density | 74 Wh kg-1 | EMIMBF4 electrolyte; Table 10 Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 26 · Figures and tables · Table 10 |
| SecondaryHKUST-1/graphene | electrical conductivity | 6.4 x 10^-3 S cm-1 | Solvothermal HKUST-1/graphene; Table 4 Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 25 · Figures and tables · Table 4 |
| SecondaryM3(hexaiminobenzene)2 MOFs | electrical conductivity | exceeding 800 S cm-1 | 2D MOFs constructed using HIB ligands of Cu, Ni and Co complexes Text · Approximate | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3 · Designing ligands |
| SecondaryMOF-5 derived porous carbon | specific capacitance | 204 F g-1 at 5 mV s-1 | 1 M H2SO4 aqueous electrolyte, 5 mV s-1 Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 7 · MOFs derived carbons-based electrodes · Fig. 23 |
| SecondaryMOF production | projected production cost | $55 per kilogram at 100 tons per year | Projected industrial production at 100 tons per year Text · Approximate | No verified corpus mapping | p. 2 · Economics of MOF production |
| SecondaryMOFs | specific surface area | ~7500 m2 g-1 | Generic porous material comparison in review Table 2 Table · Approximate | No verified corpus mapping | p. 25 · Figures and tables · Table 2 |
| Secondarynano-NiMOF-3 | specific capacitance | 1024 F g-1 at 1 A g-1 | Current density 1 A g-1 Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 7 · Pristine MOFs based electrodes · Fig. 21 |
| SecondaryNi@C from Ni-MOF | DUFC maximum power density | 6.99 mW cm-2 | 0.1 M urea at 50 C, Ni@C anode Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 5 · MOFs based anode · Fig. 17; Table 6 |
| SecondaryNiO/ZnO porous hollow spheres from Zn-Ni MOF | relative methanol production from CO2 | 3 times higher than ZnO | Photocatalytic CO2-to-methanol comparison Text · Approximate | No verified corpus mapping | p. 10 · Quantum dots (QD)-MOF composite based photocatalysts · Fig. 30 |
| SecondarynMOF-867 | specific capacitance | 726 F g-1 | Organic 1.0 M tetraethyl-ammonium tetrafluoroborate-acetonitrile electrolyte Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 7 · Pristine MOFs based electrodes · Fig. 22 |
| SecondarySb@PC | sodium-ion storage specific capacity | 635 mAh g-1 at 0.1 A g-1 after 200 cycles | 0.1 A g-1 after 200 cycles Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries · Fig. 27 |
| SecondaryTCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 | electrical conductivity | 0.07 S cm-1 | TCNQ-doped Cu3(BTC)2; Table 4 Table · Exact Reported | research_0110 | p. 25 · Figures and tables · Table 4 |
| SecondaryTiO2@C@MoS2 | lithium-ion storage specific capacity | 1175 mAh g-1 | 0.1C; MOF-derived composite Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries |
| SecondaryUiO-66-NH2 | aqueous route production cost | US$15.9 per kilogram | Aqueous solution-based route in techno-economic comparison Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3 · Economics of MOF production |
Open questions are presented as review-author priorities, not conclusions from the primary database.
The chemical reactions and transformations occurring when materials are derived from MOF precursors remain insufficiently understood.
Proposed direction: Use in situ/ex situ structural and electrochemical characterisation to follow derivatisation and charge-storage mechanisms.
p. 9 · MOF derived materials/composites for rechargeable batteries
Computational MOF studies still struggle with complex structures, actual behaviour prediction and choosing molecular versus extended-solid models.
Proposed direction: Benchmark models against repeatable experiments and integrate theoretical chemists with materials scientists for validated descriptors.
p. 2 · Advancements in computational methods & machine learning for MOFs in energy
MOF fuel-cell applications remain early stage and require better stability and catalytic activity, particularly in acid solutions.
Proposed direction: Prioritise durability testing under operating PEMFC/acidic conditions and stabilise MOF-derived catalysts against degradation.
p. 10 · Conclusions and key challenges
MOF photocatalyst composites are still lab-scale, with insufficient control of hybrid size/composition/homogeneity and unclear roles of individual components.
Proposed direction: Develop in situ encapsulation methods, expand metal choices, resolve composite structures and assess application risks.
p. 10 · MOF based photocatalysts
Guest molecules, polymers, conductive fillers and nanoclusters can improve transport but may reduce porosity or disrupt the MOF framework.
Proposed direction: Optimise conductive additives and dopants while measuring accessible porosity and framework integrity after modification.
p. 3 · Metal nanoclusters MOFs
Large-scale MOF production is limited by cost, solvent use, equipment, extended production time, humidity/temperature stability and product-quality scaling.
Proposed direction: Develop flexible, low-pressure, low-temperature, continuous and water/green-solvent production routes.
p. 2 · Economics of MOF production
Pristine MOF and MOF composite electrodes need stability improvements under operating potential, especially in aqueous electrolytes.
Proposed direction: Match pore structure to electrolyte ions, investigate non-aqueous electrolytes and design conductive frameworks without sacrificing cycle life.
p. 10 · Conclusions and key challenges
Most MOFs reported to date have not been experimentally studied enough to understand their charge-transport mechanisms.
Proposed direction: Use mechanism-focused electrical measurements to link hopping, through-bond transfer, guest doping and orbital-overlap pathways to specific structures.
p. 4 · Techniques used for conductivity enhancement of MOFs
Mappings show which printed review references have a verified counterpart in the frozen primary corpus.
| Reference | Study | Role and context | Corpus mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ref. 322016 | Metal-organic frameworks for membrane-based separations | porous_material_comparisonCited for Figure 3 and Table 2 context comparing MOFs with other porous materials. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 692021 | MOFs industrialization: a complete assessment of production costs | production_economicsUsed for projected MOF production costs and general scale-up economic criteria. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 702021 | Comparison between conventional solvothermal and aqueous solution-based production of UiO-66-NH2: Life cycle assessment, techno-economic assessment, and implications for CO2 capture and storage | production_economics · secondary_benchmarkUsed for the solvothermal versus aqueous UiO-66-NH2 cost comparison. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 712017 | Techno-economic Analysis of Metal-Organic Frameworks for Hydrogen and Natural Gas Storage | production_economicsCited for material-cost and yield sensitivity in MOF production for gas storage. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 722013 | Crystal structure and carrier transport properties of a new semiconducting 2D coordination polymer with a 3, 5-dimethylpiperidine dithiocarbamate ligand | mixed_valence_transportUsed as a mixed-valence Cu(I)-Cu(II) example for thermally activated conductivity and high charge mobility. | research_0202 |
| Ref. 792018 | Charge delocalization and bulk electronic conductivity in the mixed-valence metal-organic framework Fe (1, 2, 3-triazolate) 2 (BF4) x | mixed_valence_transportCited as an Fe(II)-Fe(III) mixed-valence framework example of enhanced conductivity. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 802015 | Tunneling electrical connection to the interior of metal-organic frameworks | transport_mechanism · secondary_benchmarkUsed for metal nanocluster-assisted tunnelling conductivity in MOF pores. | research_0037 |
| Ref. 852017 | Signature of metallic behavior in the metal-organic frameworks M3 (hexaiminobenzene) 2 (M= Ni, Cu) | ligand_design · transport_benchmarkSupports the review claim that HIB-based 2D MOFs can show very high conductivity. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 882019 | [Cu3 (C6Se6)] n: The First Highly Conductive 2D pi-d Conjugated Coordination Polymer Based on Benzenehexaselenolate | ligand_design · transport_benchmarkCited for a bis(diselenolene)/benzenehexaselenolate copper MOF with metallic conductivity. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 902014 | High electrical conductivity in Ni3 (2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11-hexaiminotriphenylene) 2, a semiconducting metal-organic graphene analogue | ligand_design · transport_benchmarkCited for triphenylene/HITP ligand structures and conductive MOF behaviour. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 942016 | Modulating the electrical conductivity of metal-organic framework films with intercalated guest pi-systems | guest_doping · transport_benchmarkCited for guest pi-system modulation of BMOF film conductivity. | research_0431 |
| Ref. 972012 | Postsynthetic methods for the functionalization of metal-organic frameworks | post_synthetic_modificationCited as a comprehensive source for PSM classifications and reactions. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 992009 | Electroconductive porous coordination polymer Cu [Cu (pdt) 2] composed of donor and acceptor building units | conductive_mof · transport_benchmarkPresented as a pioneering conductive Cu[Cu(pdt)2]-based porous coordination polymer. | research_0201 |
| Ref. 1032017 | Metallic conductivity in a two-dimensional cobalt dithiolene metal-organic framework | dithiolene_mof · transport_benchmarkCited for semiconducting-to-metallic transition and Table 4 conductivity for a 2D cobalt dithiolene MOF. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1052019 | Tunable electrical conductivity of a new 3D MOFs: Cu-TATAB | guest_doping · transport_benchmarkUsed for TCNQ-doped 3D Cu-TATAB MOFs with improved conductance and channel structure. | research_0110 |
| Ref. 1072014 | Synthesis and characterization of conductive copper-based metal-organic framework/graphene-like composites | composite_conductivityCited for conductive HKUST-1/graphene-like composites and Table 4 conductivity range. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1102019 | Electrically conductive, monolithic metal-organic framework-graphene (MOF@ G) composite coatings | composite_conductivity · secondary_benchmarkUsed for monolithic MOF-graphene coatings and a Table 4 conductivity benchmark. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1122019 | Facile surface properties engineering of high-quality graphene: toward advanced Ni-MOF heterostructures for high-performance supercapacitor electrode | composite_supercapacitorUsed for glucose-modified graphene/Ni-MOF composite capacitive performance and structural stability. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1152014 | Selective formation of biphasic thin films of metal-organic frameworks by potential-controlled cathodic electrodeposition | electrodeposition · thin_filmsCited for selective MOF film electrodeposition on conductive substrates. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1262018 | Nitrogen-coordinated single cobalt atom catalysts for oxygen reduction in proton exchange membrane fuel cells | fuel_cell_cathode · orrUsed for MOF-derived CoN4 ORR catalyst performance in PEMFC. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1302019 | Hybrid Porous Catalysts Derived from Metal-Organic Framework for Oxygen Reduction Reaction in an Anion Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell | fuel_cell_cathode · secondary_benchmarkUsed for MOF-derived Fe/N/Co porous catalyst power-density benchmark and durability context. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1322020 | Metal-organic framework-derived Ni@ C and NiO@ C as anode catalysts for urea fuel cells | fuel_cell_anode · secondary_benchmarkUsed for MOF-derived Ni@C/NiO@C anode catalysts in direct urea fuel cells. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1602014 | Enhancing performance of Nafion-based PEMFC by 1-D channel metal-organic frameworks as PEM filler | fuel_cell_membrane · proton_conduction · secondary_benchmarkUsed for the first MOF/Nafion PEMFC filler example and power-density benchmarks. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2012020 | Morphology control of nanoscale metal-organic frameworks for high-performance supercapacitors | supercapacitor_pristine · secondary_benchmarkUsed for pristine nano-NiMOF-3 capacitance and cycling example. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2032014 | Supercapacitors of nanocrystalline metal-organic frameworks | supercapacitor_pristine · secondary_benchmarkUsed for nMOF-867 organic-electrolyte supercapacitor performance. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2112008 | Metal-organic framework as a template for porous carbon synthesis | mof_derived_carbon · secondary_benchmarkPresented as a pioneering MOF-templated porous carbon supercapacitor study. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2132019 | Boosting the capacitive storage performance of MOF-derived carbon frameworks via structural modulation for supercapacitors | mof_derived_carbon · secondary_benchmarkUsed for MOF-derived carbon energy/power density in organic electrolyte. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2242020 | MOF-deviated zinc-nickel-cobalt ZIF-67 electrode material for high-performance symmetrical coin-shaped supercapacitors | mof_derived_supercapacitorUsed for ternary zinc-nickel-cobalt hollow polyhedron supercapacitor performance. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2502022 | Multi-thiol-supported dicarboxylate-based metal-organic framework with excellent performance for lithium-ion battery | battery_pristine_mofUsed for a stable redox-active Fe-TTTP MOF anode in LIBs. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2512022 | Metal-Organic Framework Glass Anode with an Exceptional Cycling-Induced Capacity Enhancement for Lithium-Ion Batteries | battery_mof_glassUsed for MOF glass anode behaviour in LIBs and Fig. 26. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2522019 | Robust hexagonal nut-shaped titanium (IV) MOF with porous structure for ultra-high performance lithium storage | battery_pristine_mofUsed for robust Ti-MOF anode in LIBs with high accessible sites and Li+ diffusion channels. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2542022 | A truncated octahedron metal-organic framework derived TiO2@C@MoS2 composite with superior lithium-ion storage properties | battery_mof_derived · secondary_benchmarkUsed for MOF-derived TiO2@C@MoS2 lithium storage benchmark. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2552021 | Metal-Organic Framework Derived Ultrafine Sb@ Porous Carbon Octahedron via In Situ Substitution for High-Performance Sodium-Ion Batteries | battery_mof_derived · secondary_benchmarkUsed for sodium-ion Sb@PC porous carbon octahedron performance and Fig. 27. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2642021 | Metal-Organic Frameworks Reinforce the Carbon Nanotube Sponge-Derived Robust Three-Dimensional Sulfur Host for Lithium-Sulfur Batteries | lithium_sulfur_battery · secondary_benchmarkUsed for MOF-reinforced sulfur host in lithium-sulfur batteries. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2742022 | Phosphorus modified Ni-MOF-74/BiVO4 S-scheme heterojunction for enhanced photocatalytic hydrogen evolution | photocatalysis_h2 · secondary_benchmarkUsed for S-scheme heterojunction photocatalytic H2 production benchmark. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 2832018 | Enhanced photocatalytic CO2 reduction activity of MOF-derived ZnO/NiO porous hollow spheres | photocatalysis_co2 · secondary_benchmarkUsed for MOF-derived NiO/ZnO p-n heterojunction methanol-from-CO2 example. | Unmapped |