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

Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

newatlas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 396 posts

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#21

Post by specialist »

Sodium-ion compliments Li-ion in the marketplace. Each battery variation is better suited for various niches. eg Sodium is a better fit for stationary storage. Though CATL and others are using sodium for down market vehicles too, which should free up Li-ion capacity for other use cases.

To reach net-zero 2050, we'll need an installed base of 2 terawatts of battery storage. Annual production is ~30 gigawatts. (IIRC.) So mfgs will still continue to scale up and make as many Li-ion (eg LFP) batteries as possible.

--

Also exciting are the misc thermal solutions just now starting their own cost-learning-curves. Advanced geothermal (generation and storage), box of rocks (heat batteries), geothermal heat pumps (commercial and residential).

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#22

Post by addaon »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #3
downrightmike wrote: post #2

Lower capacity in the same form factor, but inputs are common and cheap as dirt and will be able to do the hard work of supporting grid scale battery storage. We've learned that there are many applications that do not need to capacity of lithium.

Even if it isn't as high-capacity, a longer-lasting and safer battery over a thinner smartphone isn't a _bad_ trade-off, specially considering chips and screens get more efficient. This might have more market than stationary batteries.

If customers were supportive of this trade-off, why would we not already see companies exploring it with LTO batteries?

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#24

Post by [deleted] »

rich_sasha wrote: post #4
hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it isn't as high-capacity, a longer-lasting and safer battery over a thinner smartphone isn't a _bad_ trade-off, specially considering chips and screens get more efficient. This might have more market than stationary batteries.

Are they safer? Sodium is also very highly reactive. Otherwise agreed, I'm very happy with form factor of 5-10 year old phones.

[deleted]

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#25

Post by GuB-42 »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #3
downrightmike wrote: post #2

Lower capacity in the same form factor, but inputs are common and cheap as dirt and will be able to do the hard work of supporting grid scale battery storage. We've learned that there are many applications that do not need to capacity of lithium.

Even if it isn't as high-capacity, a longer-lasting and safer battery over a thinner smartphone isn't a _bad_ trade-off, specially considering chips and screens get more efficient. This might have more market than stationary batteries.

But who wants a fat smartphone with lower battery life? Smartphones are where people want as much energy density as possible. Smartphones are also expensive devices with a relatively small battery, so it makes sense to add a few dollars for more energy density. Also most smartphone manufacturers are very much into planned obsolescence, so much that countries are starting to legislate, they don't really want long lasting batteries, especially not if it compromises the user experience.

There could be a market for power tools, where having more batteries of lower capacity for the same price can be desirable.

Also maybe for hybrid vehicles.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#26

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

nightowl_games wrote: post #7
downrightmike wrote: post #2

Lower capacity in the same form factor, but inputs are common and cheap as dirt and will be able to do the hard work of supporting grid scale battery storage. We've learned that there are many applications that do not need to capacity of lithium.

Hopefully we can continue to lower the power requirements of our every day items and the lower capacity of these batteries will become less of an issue.

Lowering the power we use, is the only realistic goal.

I wear an Apple Watch. On my wrist, is a small, Lithium-ion battery, that contains a great deal of power.

That power is trickled out, over time.

If it were to all release at once, I'd no longer have a left hand.

Packing all that energy into smaller and smaller form factors, increases the risk; no matter what tech we use.

Energy is energy. When it comes out quickly, we call those "explosions."

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#27

Post by addaon »

dtx1 wrote: post #8

50 Thousand Cycles would make replacing batteries unnecessary for almost all usecases. I would love such a battery in an electric bike. Max Range would be quite limited compared to a Lithium Version but with 10x discharge capacity and functionally unlimited life you could make a beast of a commuter e-bike. 50000 Cycles would realistically mean you can charge the bike every day for a hundred years

You can build such a bike today with LTO cells, which are commonly rated at 5,000 - 25,000 cycles (depending on manufacturer) to 80% of nameplate capacity. You'll compromise on range, of course; but in the worst-case corner (extremely low temperature outside, high current draw rate) the comparison to at least LFP is pretty favorable, and you're within a factor of 2x or 3x of NMC throughout the envelope.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#28

Post by hackernewds »

analognoise wrote: post #10
dtx1 wrote: post #8

50 Thousand Cycles would make replacing batteries unnecessary for almost all usecases. I would love such a battery in an electric bike. Max Range would be quite limited compared to a Lithium Version but with 10x discharge capacity and functionally unlimited life you could make a beast of a commuter e-bike. 50000 Cycles would realistically mean you can charge the bike every day for a hundred years

The first generation will work like that. Then they will introduce various defects into the manufacturing process to decrease the lifespan (and they'll say it's cost) and the batteries will last 10 years max. Maybe 15 if you're lucky.

Why so cynical

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#29

Post by gorpy7 »

Havoc wrote: post #6

Keen to see these enter the hobby market as well. Not super keen on yoloing DIY with lithium but sodium seems a bit safer

Most diyers are using LFP at this point and that’s considered quite stable. a smaller group try to reuse old ev batteries and those are generally considered more risky because of the runaway effect that’s possible- which still seems relatively low. regardless, more stable chemistries are always welcome and i agree with others that the discharge recharge and cycles would be amazing!

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#30

Post by londons_explore »

downrightmike wrote: post #2

Lower capacity in the same form factor, but inputs are common and cheap as dirt and will be able to do the hard work of supporting grid scale battery storage. We've learned that there are many applications that do not need to capacity of lithium.

> cheap as dirt

There are lots of things left to make grid battery storage cheap.

As well as the cells needing to be engineered to be cheaper, there are lots of changes to the battery packs that can be made, together with changes to inverters.

For batteries, I'd like to see research into less consistent manufacturing and higher failure rates. Current packs the entire pack is unusable if just one cell fails in a way that leads to lots of heat production. If pack balancing circuits had the ability to take a cell or a parallel group of cells 'out of circuit' while still using the rest of the pack, then battery lifespans could be dramatically increased and it would be possible to manufacture cells far cheaper.

For inverters, we should go for a direct-to-10kV inverter process. No transformers. At 10kV, currents are far lower and therefore wires can be far thinner (and cheaper).

Consider making batteries ~15kV too - that reduces by ~30% the amount of expensive silicon needed, together with big reductions in copper costs, at the expense of extra design effort for much higher voltage batteries. At these higher voltages, you'd either use oil cooling, or you'd have ~10 separate coolant loops, one at each ~1500 volts of potential.

Post reply on HN