indicative of the Li + (de)intercalation reaction. For micro-MoS2, it is visible that the signal is split into two separate peaks, while for nano-MoS2, the signal is significantly broadened with the peaks apparently merging and a more significant rectangular current emerging. This behavior is indicative of an increasingly pseudocapacitive Li + intercalation behavior with decreasing crystallite size in nano-MoS2, in line with previous reports. Accordingly, at higher sweep rates above 10 mV/s, the CV signature of micro-MoS2 rapidly becomes resistive, indicative of diffusion-limitations, while even at 100 mV/s a capacitor-like CV signal can be observed for nano-MoS2 in line with kinetically favorable pseudocapacitive Li + intercalation. Galvanostatic charge/discharge (GCD) tests were performed at constant specific currents between 0.02 -5 A/g (Fig. ). At the lowest rate of 20 mA/g, both MoS2 samples show a comparable first cycle anodic (delithiation) capacity of 175 and 182 mAh/g for micro-MoS2 and nano-MoS2, respectively, slightly above the theoretical capacity of 167 mAh/g for LixMoS2 with x=1. At higher rates, specifically above 1 A/g, nano-MoS2 delivers significantly higher capacities due to the reduced kinetic limitations by solid-state diffusion, confirming the CV results. Nano-MoS2 still exhibits a capacity of 90 mAh/g at a high rate of 5 A/g, which corresponds to a charge/discharge time of ca. 1 min, while micro-MoS2 only exhibits 38 mAh/g. These values are quantitatively comparable to a study of Cook at el., probing lithium intercalation in bulk versus nanostructured MoS2, where the latter was prepared by thermal sulfurization of nanostructured MoO2 in H2S.