“…At 1, 5, 10, 15, and 25 mV s –1 scan rates, the areal specific capacitances (ASC) of the NiF 2 @Ni NA were respectively 51, 13, 9, 7, and 5 F cm –2 , which is ascribed to a reduction in the migration speed of ions for redox reactions, as at higher scan rates and accessibility of inner active sites is limited. , Because of a high surface area and a mechanically robust adhesion with lowered interfacial resistance to the underlying Ni, the self-grown mesoporous NiF 2 @Ni NA offers more accessible sites for redox reactions compared to polished Ni and similar nanostructured electrode materials of various composition and morphologies on Ni (see Table S1 of the Supporting Information). The inner/outer surface contributions to the ASC of NiF 2 @Ni NA compared to Ni are shown in inset of Figure a, where we consistently observe a higher amount of charge (typically a factor of ∼2× greater) is stored on the NiF 2 @Ni NA (for more details see the Supporting Information Figure S3a,b). − For both electrodes, at the initial potential of 0.2 V (vs Hg/HgO), the slope of 0.2 increased to 0.45 and reached 0.5 (indicating a diffusion-limited intercalative process) at potentials >0.4–0.5 V, indicating that NiF 2 @Ni NA behaves as a battery-type material (see Figure S3c,d for more details) . Taken together, the intercalation capacitive contribution was more than 90% in both electrodes, signifying its dominance in the ASC performance (Figure S3e–h, Supporting Information) with higher values obtained for the NiF 2 nanorod coating.…”