Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 96 posts

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#11

Post by fnordpiglet »

metadat wrote: post #6
CyanLite2 wrote: post #5

Same article from Dec of 2020. Lots of promises, but no tangible product.

Can you provide a link to corroborate this is the typical [sad] battery vaporware? I'm searching but haven't yet found the goods.

The article links to an article from 10/22 stating they filed with regulators intent to produce in 2023, a year they’ve been promoting for at least three years so seems a fairly reliable indicator of ability to produce.

https://www.caixinglobal.com/2022-10-25/catl-aims-to-mass-pr...

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#13

Post by nharada »

Any battery experts have opinions on this chemistry? My understanding is that CATL is a fairly established operation and far along in development -- what are the remaining risks in using this chemistry?

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#14

Post by isoprophlex »

noipv4 wrote: post #7

How easy is it to obtain sodium from common salt?

Take the salt, heat it, run current through it. Sodium vapor comes out.

Not exactly "easy", but self-contained. From an environmental point of view sodium is absolutely brilliant compared to lithium. Everyone with access to sea water can produce almost 400 g of sodium from 1kg of common table salt. No lithium mining needed.

More info: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downs_cell

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#15

Post by fnordpiglet »

hunglee2 wrote: post #9

There is no way that CATL is going to escape the US policy of suppressing China's technological development. Batteries are going to follow SC's - very likely next in line - and Tesla's reliance on CATL batteries is the weak point upon which Musk's empire will fall. Destroying CATL will probably set back EV adoption by some years, replacement suppliers will surely be built if industrial policy continues to be applied

Any references towards US policy against CATL? Most battery producers build plants in the local region anyways.

Surely you don’t think China has been a fair partner in technology and business? That perhaps the Chinese state has conducted systematic espionage to favor its local industry development, mandated technology transfer for market access, established unfair trade policies to favor local business development, and suppressed the success of foreign investment that was purchased at the cost of aforementioned technology transfer?

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#17

Post by tromp »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #4

Sodium ion is a better fit for houses and grid storage than vehicles or consumer electronics.

Given that sodium ion is claimed to

- charge twice as fast as lithium ion

- have double the number of charge cycles

- cost substantially less

- be substantially safer

- and more environmentally friendly

I think it would be the clear preference for all but the highest performance vehicles.

Note that Tesla is also trying to reduce cost in moving to 4680 cells [1]:

> the main reason Tesla is using 4680 batteries at the moment is to cut manufacturing costs, rather than any of the other pie-in-the-sky advantages announced on Battery Day a few years back.

> A Model Y's 4680 pack, for instance, is US$3,600 cheaper to manufacture than one with 2170 cells, but even then Tesla is only halfway through with the cost reduction potential of the new technology. It has yet to master and scale the dry-coating cathode method which would bring the pack's cost down US$5,500 compared to the 2170 battery.

[1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Tesla-4680-vs-2170-battery-cel....

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#18

Post by quonn »

tromp wrote: post #17
throwawaymaths wrote: post #4

Sodium ion is a better fit for houses and grid storage than vehicles or consumer electronics.

Given that sodium ion is claimed to - charge twice as fast as lithium ion - have double the number of charge cycles - cost substantially less - be substantially safer - and more environmentally friendly I think it would be the clear preference for all but the highest performance vehicles. Note that Tesla is also trying to reduce cost in moving to 4680 cells [1]: > the main reason Tesla is using 4680 batteries at the…

Comparing to LFP the advantages are not that big. It might be cheaper and scale better. Charging speed is now mostly limited by public charger speed and good enough. I expect sodium batteries to have a big impact in cars that cost 25k or less.

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#19

Post by throwawaymaths »

tromp wrote: post #17
throwawaymaths wrote: post #4

Sodium ion is a better fit for houses and grid storage than vehicles or consumer electronics.

Given that sodium ion is claimed to - charge twice as fast as lithium ion - have double the number of charge cycles - cost substantially less - be substantially safer - and more environmentally friendly I think it would be the clear preference for all but the highest performance vehicles. Note that Tesla is also trying to reduce cost in moving to 4680 cells [1]: > the main reason Tesla is using 4680 batteries at the…

The assumption there is that lithium is fully optimized. It's not.

Re: CATL's Sodium-Ion Battery

#20

Post by throwawaymaths »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #12
throwawaymaths wrote: post #4

Sodium ion is a better fit for houses and grid storage than vehicles or consumer electronics.

Presumably you say that due to energy density. However it discusses that in the article. You’re invited to read.

Yes, they are comparing currently available lithium tech to unavailable sodium tech even though lithium is hardly fully optimized. It's certainly the case that sodium development benefits from decades of lithium research
Post reply on HN