Page 17 of 19

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Thu 09 Mar 2017, 19:08:56
by kublikhan
LulaNord wrote:The US has lithium mines sitting idle because right now the price of lithium is too low.
Lithium prices are on an upswing:

SQM is part of a global scramble to secure supplies of lithium by the world’s largest battery producers, and by end-users such as carmakers. That has made it the world’s hottest commodity. The price of 99%-pure lithium carbonate imported to China more than doubled in the two months to the end of December, to $13,000 a tonne.

An increasingly precious metal

The reason the US doesn't produce more lithium is because we don't have much(we are part of that that tiny cyan sliver market "Other"):

And what we do have is expensive and environmentally destructive to extract:

The extraction of lithium has significant environmental and social impacts, especially due to water pollution and depletion. In addition, toxic chemicals are needed to process lithium. The release of such chemicals through leaching, spills or air emissions can harm communities, ecosystems and food production. Moreover, lithium extraction inevitably harms the soil and also causes air contamination.
Tesla Motors' Dirty Little Secret Is a Major Problem

LulaNord wrote:Lithium recycling probably isn't profitable right now for the same reason, though Toxco and Umicore are both working on recycling lithium batteries, more for the other components than the lithium.
You need to differentiate between batteries in electronics and automotive batteries. Most automotive batteries, lithium or otherwise, are recycled.

Tesla's Closed Loop Battery Recycling Program


Will a New Glass Battery Accelerate the End of Oil?

Unread postPosted: Sat 11 Mar 2017, 19:10:56
by KaiserJeep
Will a New Glass Battery Accelerate the End of Oil?

By Mark Anderson
Posted 3 Mar 2017 | 21:30 GMT

Photo: Cockrell School of Engineering
John Goodenough, coinventor of the lithium-ion battery, heads a team of researchers
developing the technology that could one day supplant it.

Electric car purchases have been on the rise lately, posting an estimated 60 percent growth rate last year. They’re poised for rapid adoption by 2022, when EVs are projected to cost the same as internal combustion cars. However, these estimates all presume the incumbent lithium-ion battery remains the go-to EV power source. So, when researchers this week at the University of Texas at Austin unveiled a new, promising lithium- or sodium-glass battery technology, it threatened to accelerate even rosy projections for battery-powered cars.

“I think we have the possibility of doing what we’ve been trying to do for the last 20 years,” says John Goodenough, coinventor of the now ubiquitous lithium-ion battery and emeritus professor at the Cockrell School of Engineering at the University of Texas, Austin. “That is, to get an electric car that will be competitive in cost and convenience with the internal combustion engine.” Goodenough added that this new battery technology could also store intermittent solar and wind power on the electric grid.


Remainder is at:

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Mar 2017, 23:21:29
by jedrider
Another article about John Goodenough and his latest battery invention:

Goodenough’s new battery can store three times more energy than a comparable lithium-ion battery, according to the very serious Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). The new battery also solves some other lithium-ion troubles. Like, it won’t catch fire, so a hoverboard won’t suddenly melt your kid’s Vans as she scoots across the playground. The IEEE also reports that Goodenough’s batteries seem to be able to soak up in minutes as much charge as a lithium-ion battery gets in hours.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Mon 13 Mar 2017, 10:26:42
The new battery sounds interesting. It will be really interesting when they are made commercially and we discover the actual cost and utility. Until then EV will continue to fall further and further behind the production of ICE vehicles...last year 1.5 million vs 82 million. BTW some trivia: Where did the Cockrell School of Engineering come from? The school’s name honors the late Ernest Cockrell Jr., his wife Virginia and the Cockrell family of Houston, whose estate has developed the equivalent of a $220 million endowment for the school. A product of the depression, Ernest Cockrell Jr. was a self-made man, as was his father before him. Both earned their fortunes in the oil business. After working a short time for Texaco, Ernest Cockrell Jr. formed both an oil company, Producer’s Oil, and a drilling work-over company. When his father passed away in 1947, Ernest Cockrell Jr. also took over his father’s oil business.

Yes: the potential new battery that will "destroy the oil industry" had its funding come from a school funded partially by a fortune made in the oil industry. How we roll in Texas. LOL.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sun 09 Apr 2017, 14:29:33
by Zarquon
I heard a radio ad this afternoon for Mercedes-Benz home battery storage. And I thought, when you hear advertising for soft drinks and cell phones and then PV batteries that means it's truly gone mainstream.

Mercedes Benz Energiespeicher 2,5kWh ab 1990,-€
Mercedes Home 5.0: ab 3290,-€
Mercedes Home 7.5: ab 4300,-€
Mercedes Home 10.0: ab 5.500,-€
Mercedes Home 20.0: ab 9.990,-€

Sounds a bit steep, but hey, you always had to pay a little extra for the star on the hood...

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 6

Unread postPosted: Sun 14 May 2017, 00:25:01
by eclipse
What's the next big battery going to be? Anyone following trends?

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Thu 18 May 2017, 12:48:26
by Subjectivist
Interesting lecture on Lithium Sulfur batteries, the next great leap forward.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 6

Unread postPosted: Thu 18 May 2017, 14:04:35
by AdamB
eclipse wrote:What's the next big battery going to be? Anyone following trends? ... technology

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Mon 22 May 2017, 09:50:23
by efarmer
It would seem as a casual observer that Prof. Goodenough and his team in Texas and
Prof. Martin in Iowa, with his vast backround and Ames Research cred, and all others
in the US with similar moxie and track record actually get some DOE serious funding on
glass electrolyte, solid state, sodium battery technology. DARPA belongs right in there
as well. A new battery that uses copper and sodium and glass promises to be the next
big step AFTER li-on, and should be a clear cut national objective. I understand that
the market impact on the emergent EV industry of a better cell could be damaging
in it's infancy right now, but the knowledge of a better and less expensive cell on
the horizon, with a probable 10 year timeline to entering the market would be
a huge stimulus. Does anyone know of a physics flaw in this cell that has these
folks not funded?

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Mon 22 May 2017, 12:31:43
by KaiserJeep
The problems with all of the technologies you mention and many others is that something that shows promise in a laboratory at small scale may never become economical or even competitive with current technologies. Materials research, manufacturing engineering, and product design are hurdles that every promising tech has to go over before it even exists. Then marketing and mass production represent two more hurdles. Then even when in production, there is the danger represented by other techs also in development.

Out of 32 current Lithium battery manufacturers (Litium-Ion, Lithium-Iron Phosphate, and Lithium-Polymer), 8 are in production, 6 are not yet in production, and 18 have gone bankrupt or have stopped production. Lithium is a "relatively mature" tech, and was "disruptive" of lead-acid tech in it's day - 22 years ago.

The fanciful blurbs and press releases you read are geared at either securing government grants for R&D, or investment money for production. The solar industry suffers the same effect, I weary of all the new "solar tech" within five miles of my Silicon Valley home, all ever-so-promising, none in production.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Tue 23 May 2017, 15:35:27
by efarmer
Agreed KJ, these things are often grant and funding fishing lures.
But the talent is stellar and proven. And Goodenough has been immersed
in lithium ion tech for decades and a large force in it's development.
He seems a high prospect to pilot and pick the talent to bring solid state
sodium cells to commercial reality.

Asphalt helps batteries charge more quickly

Unread postPosted: Fri 06 Oct 2017, 15:24:19
by dolanbaker
Asphalt is more than just goop for paving roads.
Lithium batteries can be made to charge 10 to 20 times faster by using asphalt, suggests US research.

Scientists at Rice University speeded up the charging time by making one component of a battery using carbon derived from the viscous liquid.

In tests, batteries made using asphalt charged to full power in minutes, said the researchers.

They also found that using asphalt stopped the formation of deposits that can shorten the life of a battery.

As it is a very common material, it should never be at risk of "resource depletion" it may even make batteries cheaper, to produce as well as extend their working lives.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sun 08 Oct 2017, 18:09:04
by Subjectivist
An asfualt derivitive has as much to do with the tar as kerosene does to heavy crude. This new graphne is just a processed petroleum product, not smthing that has to come from asfualt, that is just the currently most convenient starting point because it is cheap.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sat 21 Oct 2017, 18:31:32
by kublikhan
MIT developing sulfur-air flow battery:

Researchers at MIT have developed a flow battery that breathes air in and out, and costs about a fifth of lithium-ion batteries for close to the same energy density. The new design is a rechargeable flow battery, meaning its cathode and anode components are liquids (catholyte and anolyte) that pass ions back and forth to store or release energy. In this case, the anolyte is made up of sulfur dissolved in water, and the hunt for an equally abundant material for the catholyte led the team to an oxygenated liquid salt solution.

"We went on a search for a positive electrode that would also have exceptionally low cost that we could use with sulfur as the negative electrode," says Yet-Ming Chiang, co-author of the study. "Through an accidental laboratory discovery, we figured out that it could actually be oxygen, and therefore air. We needed to add one other component, which was a charge carrier to go back and forth between the sulfur and air electrode, and that turned out to be sodium." The clever part of the battery is the fact that the catholyte "breathes" in air in from outside while discharging, and exhales while recharging. By this mechanism, the battery creates negatively-charged hydroxide ions in the catholyte while inhaling, and while recharging that oxygen is released, creating hydrogen ions which then send electrons back into the anolyte.

Lithium-air batteries use the same mechanism, but sulfur, water and salt are far cheaper materials, and cost-cutting is key to scaling up energy storage systems for use with the grid. The researchers say their battery would cost far less to make and run than lithium-ion batteries, while retaining almost the same energy density. Once in use, they estimate a scaled-up version of their flow battery would cost between US$20 and $30 per kWh stored to run, compared to about $100 per kWh for other storage systems.

The current prototype is about the size of a coffee cup, according to the researchers, but they're confident the design can be scaled up for use in larger applications. The team next plans to make the battery more efficient, less expensive, and expand its working life from its current 1,500 hours.
MIT's new flow battery breathes air to cut costs of renewable energy storage

Here's the paper:
Air-Breathing Aqueous Sulfur Flow Battery for Ultralow-Cost Long-Duration Electrical Storage

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 05:32:24
by eclipse
Arch doomers have been pulling back on their excuses for the doom and gloom, first stating electric cars were not able to do the job. (They were). Then stating that trucking was our Achille's heel, and that there was no way trucking could be replaced by electrons.

Tesla electric trucks will be *cheaper* than diesel trucks, safer, smarter, faster, and more reliable than diesel trucks. They'll have emergency self driving capabilities, and with bullet-proof glass enjoy less time off road. (In today's best diesel trucks, mere windshield damage is at least an annual cause of late delivery of goods, even on the best trucks). They have a 500 mile range and recharge in 30 minutes while they unload.
Oh, and for fun it was carrying the new Tesla roaster that will be the "fastest production car, period!" and has a 1000km range. That's Sydney to Melbourne in one charge.

Oh doomers... dooomeeeerrsss? :P Where's Mike Stasse or Gail Tverberg or Alice Friedemann when you need them? Alice seems to think we'll need to wire up the country to use electric trucks. :razz: WRONG! 500 mile range and 30 minute recharge while unloading put that to bed.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 07:56:22
by creedoninmo
Batteries are still to expensive for the general population to buy. I have a three thousand dollar electric bike and I think on the level of the electric bicycle it works. 40 thousand for an electric car that will need battery replacement within ten years is not practical. When civilization crashes in the early to mid 2020s people will not be able to afford electric cars. The priority will be to afford food.

Re: THE Battery Technology Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postPosted: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 15:42:12
by kublikhan
Fisker is working on solid state batteries as well:
Fisker announced that they are patenting a new solid-state electrode structure that would enable a viable battery with some unbelievable specs.
“Fisker’s solid-state batteries will feature three-dimensional electrodes with 2.5 times the energy density of lithium-ion batteries. Fisker claims that this technology will enable ranges of more than 500 miles on a single charge and charging times as low as one minute—faster than filling up a gas tank.”

Its latest solid-state project is led by Dr. Fabio Albano, VP of battery systems at Fisker and the co-founder of Sakti3, which adds credibility to the effort. Albano commented on the announcement:
“This breakthrough marks the beginning of a new era in solid-state materials and manufacturing technologies. We are addressing all of the hurdles that solid-state batteries have encountered on the path to commercialization, such as performance in cold temperatures; the use of low cost and scalable manufacturing methods; and the ability to form bulk solid-state electrodes with significant thickness and high active material loadings. We are excited to build on this foundation and move the needle in energy storage.”

Electrek’s Take
Like any battery breakthrough announcement, it should be taken with a grain of salt. Most of those announcements never result in any kind of commercialization. For this particular technology, Fisker says that it will be automotive production grade ready around 2023. A lot of things can happen over the next 5 years.
Fisker claims solid-state battery ‘breakthrough’ for electric cars with ‘500 miles range and 1 min charging’