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

Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 218 posts

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#61

Post by greggsy »

nordsieck wrote: post #36
gonzo41 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. but more power to toyota. can't wait to get an electric hilux. hopefully it's cheap.

> Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. Is it though? Can't be a hedge if it doesn't really work well fundamentally. Although I'll admit to being largely ignorant of the Japanese car market. IMO, it'd be much more practical to invest in automotive LNG tech and combine that with synthesizing LNG from the atmosphere (or at least developing the tech to do so). Pra…

H2 has the benefit of being much easier to store, transport and transfer than batteries. It’s able to be stored in small containers and large vessels of any shape. Batteries manufacturing is much more complex. Electricity needs to be transferred from a power station over wires, while hydrogen can be pumped into a vehicle from a bulk source.

Sure H2 is dangerous, but so is LNG, and petrol for that matter. 100+ years of accidents and safety controls means that even a drunk person smoking at the pump can (probably) fill their car up safely.

Japan has very poor carbon security, so LNG reforming might come with its own challenges, but they could generate it via electrolysis using nuclear or wind power, or import ammonia from future mega producers like Australia.

It’s very likely that global demand in the transport sector will tend towards H2, so they need to gear their industry towards that market.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#62

Post by naasking »

ngrilly wrote: post #48
Tade0 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My position is as follows: -LFP wins on price where it fits the use case, so grid storage, current-gen EVs. -Silicon anode competes for market share with solid-state in areas where LFP can't, namely aerospace and next-gen EVs or even aviation, should they ever reach 1kWh/kg. The former has easily a decade lead considering that they're already selling packs and the latter exists largely in the lab or on paper. I also…

I totally agree with your position on LFP, and about 400 Wh/kg being enough to unlock some applications. But I’m not fully convinced on silicon anodes versus solid state. Yes, energy density is very promising, but I understand capacity fade is still a huge problem due to silicon volume expansion/reduction while charging/discharging?

Is there still a fire risk with LFP? From my understanding, solid state batteries have a large safety advantage here because of this.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#63

Post by mabbo »

Lithium ion batteries set the standard because they have an acceptable level of all the key metrics: energy storage by weight; energy storage by volume; discharge rate; charging rate; production costs.

Every single one of these big breakthrough announcements touts how great this new tech is- in just one or two particular metrics.

The problem is that Li-Ion batteries are just barely acceptable in all of those metrics. No new battery is going to replace them unless they can match Li-Ion in every metric and beat them in at least one.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#64

Post by RivieraKid »

hgomersall wrote: post #33
Aardwolf wrote: post #2

Nice, when can we use them for phones and laptops lasting 72% longer and without fire risk? Genuine question, because optimistic battery articles have been popping up for decades, but here we are still with lithium ion in practice.

I have a genuine question too. I've never been worried about phone battery life; I charge once a day and I almost never run out, nor do I consciously conserve battery. Is worrying about phone battery life a problem relevant to certain phones, or is it a problem with usage styles?

I have a Pixel 4a and it doesn't last a whole day if I use the phone a lot.

So basically, if I wanted the freedom to have occasional heavy-usage days, I would have to buy a larger, heavier phone.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#65

Post by Tade0 »

ngrilly wrote: post #48
Tade0 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My position is as follows: -LFP wins on price where it fits the use case, so grid storage, current-gen EVs. -Silicon anode competes for market share with solid-state in areas where LFP can't, namely aerospace and next-gen EVs or even aviation, should they ever reach 1kWh/kg. The former has easily a decade lead considering that they're already selling packs and the latter exists largely in the lab or on paper. I also…

I totally agree with your position on LFP, and about 400 Wh/kg being enough to unlock some applications. But I’m not fully convinced on silicon anodes versus solid state. Yes, energy density is very promising, but I understand capacity fade is still a huge problem due to silicon volume expansion/reduction while charging/discharging?

That's the problem they've solved here using nanowires - the cells have a 200-1200 cycle life depending on operating conditions - I suppose the range is so wide because of the temperature range - -30°C - 55°C. It's not surprising to see cells degrade fast at the hotter end of this spectrum.

For EVs they advertise cells with no less than 410Wh/L, 4C rate of discharge.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#66

Post by eutectic »

ben-schaaf wrote: post #10
chimen wrote: post #5

Surprised how "dead" this industry is. I remember having Lithium-Ion batteries since I was in high school which was more than 20 years ago (and some Li-Po until then). Everything is leaps and bounds since then but not the batteries. Seems like a massive disconnect to me but I'm no chemist or researcher in this field.

Energy density is ~8 times higher than in 2008 at 1/10th the price. That's more progress than we've made in single-core performance in the same timeframe. Sources: https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1234-apri... https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/evolution-of-... https://mlech26l.github.io/pages/2020/12/17/cpus.html

Any idea why utiliy-scale is so much more expensive than automotive?

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#67

Post by Tade0 »

naasking wrote: post #62
ngrilly wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree with your position on LFP, and about 400 Wh/kg being enough to unlock some applications. But I’m not fully convinced on silicon anodes versus solid state. Yes, energy density is very promising, but I understand capacity fade is still a huge problem due to silicon volume expansion/reduction while charging/discharging?

Is there still a fire risk with LFP? From my understanding, solid state batteries have a large safety advantage here because of this.

Yes - LFP still uses a flammable, liquid electrolyte - usually ethylene carbonate.

That being said LFP survives the nail penetration test without causing a fire, so it's considerably safer than the usual alternatives.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#69

Post by pjc50 »

greggsy wrote: post #61
nordsieck wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. Is it though? Can't be a hedge if it doesn't really work well fundamentally. Although I'll admit to being largely ignorant of the Japanese car market. IMO, it'd be much more practical to invest in automotive LNG tech and combine that with synthesizing LNG from the atmosphere (or at least developing the tech to do so). Pra…

H2 has the benefit of being much easier to store, transport and transfer than batteries. It’s able to be stored in small containers and large vessels of any shape. Batteries manufacturing is much more complex. Electricity needs to be transferred from a power station over wires, while hydrogen can be pumped into a vehicle from a bulk source. Sure H2 is dangerous, but so is LNG, and petrol for that matter. 100+ years o…

The bait-and-switch is that while green hydrogen can be made, it very rarely is, and when it is, it's less cost-effective than a battery electric solution. It's almost always a Trojan horse for shifting carbon emissions away from the tailpipe to a refinery where you can't see them quite as obviously.

Re: Solid-State Battery Has 2x the Energy–and No Anode

#70

Post by ibejoeb »

hgomersall wrote: post #33
Aardwolf wrote: post #2

Nice, when can we use them for phones and laptops lasting 72% longer and without fire risk? Genuine question, because optimistic battery articles have been popping up for decades, but here we are still with lithium ion in practice.

I have a genuine question too. I've never been worried about phone battery life; I charge once a day and I almost never run out, nor do I consciously conserve battery. Is worrying about phone battery life a problem relevant to certain phones, or is it a problem with usage styles?

It certainly depends on network quality. Do you stay mainly in one area, or do you move around all day? I use my phone for communication only--practically no browsing or app usage, no games--and in some places I can get away with a full day, others I need a recharge.
Post reply on HN