Does this still need lithium?
Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
21–30 of 79 posts
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
They steadily make their way into the mainstream. Silicon has been used in batteries for several years now, in low amounts. Usually the new "big news" comes with a significant gotcha. For silicon this has always been the cycle life. Silicon hasn't seen larger use because it expands by 400% when filled, compared to graphite's ~12% expansion. This though- this is very cool. If they've actually demonstrated 100 cycles i…
What are the critical questions you should ask about battery technology? Here are some I've thought of, please suggest others: 1. Cost of raw materials - even if the tech improves, will it still be expensive? 2. Charge/Discharge cycle count - thermal and mechanical stresses 3. Power to weight ratio; power to cost ratio 4. Manufacturability - does it require novel manufacturing techniques or can it be integrated into…
It helps to have some level of understanding of the chemistry. It can be hard for anyone but a legitimate chemist to sniff out the bullshit in academic papers (I've fallen prey to this before; I'm just an electrical engineer).
Raw materials can be important, but only very rarely and it can also be misleading. By far most of the cost comes from the complexity and time of manufacture. That makes it tricky. For instance sulfur is far cheaper than other anode materials, but there will never be a cheap sulfur battery- it's way too complicated.
It helps to know the basics[1] of battery manufacture: it's a decades old process and highly optimized. The gist is that you apply coatings to a reel of tape. If it sounds like it can't be put on a tape very easily, it will probably fail the sniff test. Solid/ceramic electrolytes and most kinds of nanotechnology fall into this category. Coating a tape is cheap, but using an electron microscope or laser on every battery is not.
>2. Charge/Discharge cycle count - thermal and mechanical stresses >3. Power to weight ratio; power to cost ratio
Critical. Any article, paper or press release will stress the interesting part of the battery; it's up to you to figure out how relevant it is. If the article emphasizes the current capacity, check the voltage of the chemistry. If it emphasizes the energy density, check the power density. If it emphasizes the weight, check the size. If it emphasizes safety, check everything. This is often nontrivial though. It's possible to tweak your numbers to balance things out- if you scale back the storage level you can increase cycle count, etc. If a paper has improved everything, it has a shot at being a next gen chemistry. Of course it may also be bullshit.
In my experience just remembering to check the other attributes of the battery will weed out 90%+ of bad articles. Most people are honest, they're just obligated to play a certain game to keep their funding up. Unfortunately there still are folks who will publish garbage though.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assure you, they do regularly. A123 is the most well known example, but the vast majority of new developments don't involve a new company being formed. Making batteries is hard and few researchers want to build companies. Instead these developments quietly slip into commercial formulations as continuous, incremental improvements. There's certainly an unending flood of hyped up articles about new experiments, but al…
> Apple wouldn't even blink if a 50% better battery cost $60. Apple seems content to merely maintain the status quo of barely a days battery life. I would not expect them to lead the way on this front.
Justification: Apple would very much like to avoid a Samsung-level PR catastrophe. That's a pretty good reason to avoid pushing the envelope right there. They also have their battery life tuned to where they like it wrt the rest of the internals, but if you get a free upgrade in capacity, I doubt there's too much more they could do with the extra space. You're right that they would probably try to figure something out though.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, Solution. Phones with stretchy backs and a balloon battery.
You laugh, but a pouch cell as mentioned in this article is in fact a cell that is permitted to swell and shrink. That's probably why these researchers started there. As regards the article, Lithium-Silicon batteries have the potential to add much more than 50% to the charge density of Lithium-ion batteries. More like 400% in theory. But nobody has demonstrated a cheap, production-ready process for such a thing, beca…
In cases where space and portability aren't a concern (utility energy storage), this would be a great fit.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
No... the question is how easy will it be for "Solar" companies to slide into becoming "Solar & Battery" companies. Full solution - all with Silicon. If that's possible - and they can improve the cycle count... or do it cheap enough to make up for a low cycle count... or all of it - improve it, make it cheaper AND under one roof?
Current solar panels have nothing in common with this manufacturing method. It uses a machine based on obsolete amorphous thin-film silicon solar cells. The article just indicates that the technology is understood, not that solar manufacturers can produce batteries. Even if that were true, this is a release by a company... they aren't going to give away their technology for other people to use.
I never said this company would "give" away the technology... nor do they honestly have to produce it themselves.
That's what licensing agreements are for.
I just think that if I was a solar company that could use my equipment to produce batteries as well? That would be high on the priority list to include in packages...
Companies sure do love bundling things together.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#26This article, and this comment thread, both seem to be ignoring what is actually in the way of any "50% more energy" battery tech being used in consumer laptops: FAA regulations limit all such batteries to 100 watt/hrs or less. It's not Apple, it's not Samsung...they have no choice.
So until we get over our stupid post-9/11 policies, it doesn't matter if Star Trek batteries magically spring into existence. The tech isn't going anywhere, other than allowing something like Apple Watch to have a little more capacity.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#27This article, and this comment thread, both seem to be ignoring what is actually in the way of any "50% more energy" battery tech being used in consumer laptops: FAA regulations limit all such batteries to 100 watt/hrs or less. It's not Apple, it's not Samsung...they have no choice. So until we get over our stupid post-9/11 policies, it doesn't matter if Star Trek batteries magically spring into existence. The tech i…
That's fine. Laptops can keep getting more efficient. This tech can be used for cars and home storage and.. basically everything except devices like laptops that are on that 100w/h boundary. Already, laptops suffice for most flights. Then, eventually, this regulation will go away.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#28Silicon has been used in batteries for several years now in low amounts. It hasn't seen larger use because it expands by 400% when filled, compared to graphite's ~12% expansion. Most attempts to solve this have been extremely complicated; nanopatterning, nanowires, graphene coatings to literally compress the silicon metal, etc. It's one of the most promising avenues for battery tech (silicon anodes alone may be able…
> Commercial cells have 500-800 cycles in their lifetime (until their capacity falls to 80%)
What does this mean? I feel like I charge my phone more than 500-800 times.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple wouldn't even blink if a 50% better battery cost $60. Apple seems content to merely maintain the status quo of barely a days battery life. I would not expect them to lead the way on this front.
Justification: Apple would very much like to avoid a Samsung-level PR catastrophe. That's a pretty good reason to avoid pushing the envelope right there. They also have their battery life tuned to where they like it wrt the rest of the internals, but if you get a free upgrade in capacity, I doubt there's too much more they could do with the extra space. You're right that they would probably try to figure something ou…
They also need high volume guaranteed before they can put any part in an iPhone and they probably want it to be tested enough to not explode in the user pocket.
It's challenging to achieve for a new part. It's like there is money for much better and much more expensive... but it doesn't come for free.
Re: Batteries with 50 per cent more energy with pure silicon anode
#30This article, and this comment thread, both seem to be ignoring what is actually in the way of any "50% more energy" battery tech being used in consumer laptops: FAA regulations limit all such batteries to 100 watt/hrs or less. It's not Apple, it's not Samsung...they have no choice. So until we get over our stupid post-9/11 policies, it doesn't matter if Star Trek batteries magically spring into existence. The tech i…
Those rules have nothing to do with 9/11, they are based on risk of fire due to manufacturing defects.