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

41–50 of 396 posts

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

#41

Post by justinclift »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #14
rich_sasha wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The battery made by the company mentioned uses an aqueous electrolyte construction which is theoretically safer from what I read, but I don't know if it can be made small for a portable. The fact it supports more cycles and tolerates a broader temperature range than Lithium counts points towards safety too. Lithium isn't happy above like 30 Celsius, which a fast charging portable device can _easily_ reach.

> Lithium isn't happy above like 30 Celsius, which a fast charging portable device can _easily_ reach.

Sounds pretty bad for people living in warmer climates then, as they tend to be above 30 celsius anyway. ;)

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

#42

Post by moffkalast »

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.

It'll be a good day when we can finally ditch lead acid.

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

#44

Post by JumpCrisscross »

MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #36
GuB-42 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 last…

Personally, I wouldn't mind a fatter phone. It actually might be easier for me to hold. I've never seen the appeal of phones so thin I could shave with them.

> never seen the appeal of phones so thin I could shave with them

For people who wear slimmer-fitting clothing, this matters. Also, it’s more about the weight: you want a phone light enough that holding it up isn’t tedious.

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

#45

Post by thejohnconway »

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.

For iPhones, at least, I believe that period was when they were thinnest (the iPhone 6 is the thinnest one, 2014).

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

#46

Post by bobthepanda »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #43

Hopefully long term, this can help us dismantle unnecessary high voltage transmission lines, and let people trickle store power at 48volts and discharge it at 110 through inverters.

Why would it? Moving these batteries would be more work than having transmission lines and we still need long distance power.

There is a reason why pipelines are popular even though we have the capability to move oil using normal transportation.

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

#47

Post by conradev »

> We haven't seen a weight-based energy density figure from Natron itself, but a 2022 article from Chemical & Engineering News put its sodium-ion batteries at 70 Wh/kg, around the very bottom of the sodium-ion energy density scale. That aligns well with the company's stationary-only business plan, as sodium-ion batteries being pursued for potential mobility use have more than double that density. CATL showed a 160 Wh/kg sodium-ion battery in 2021 and has plans to increase that density over 200 Wh/kg to better meet the needs of electric vehicles.

CATL’s sodium batteries were more than twice as dense three years ago

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

#48

Post by alberth »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #5
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.

Not only that: > Natron says its batteries charge and discharge at rates 10 times faster than lithium-ion, a level of immediate charge/discharge capability that makes the batteries a prime contender for the ups and downs of backup power storage. Also helping in that use case is an estimated lifespan of 50,000 cycles. So you take up more space, but the storage system is better in every other way (agility, conflict min…

It’s also significantly heavier by weight.

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

#49

Post by dtx1 »

addaon wrote: post #27
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.

Honestly after a quick google search I'm not convinced LTO Cells are applicable for that use case. Best I found on a quick search is 80wh/kg and at a low voltage and good enough but not great discharge capacity. Even in the electrical bicycle range that's just not enough to be practical, let alone competitive.

LFP at it's peak gets you there but it's also not a great experience. The Battery needs to be too large to get you enough current to be enjoyable.

That's why the 10x (even a 3x would do it) in discharge capacity is what get's me excited. That's enough that you can use only a few cells but with enough output to be a nice experience, just with short range.

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

#50

Post by proee »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #43

Hopefully long term, this can help us dismantle unnecessary high voltage transmission lines, and let people trickle store power at 48volts and discharge it at 110 through inverters.

Hi Voltage transmission lines are completely necessary. Running on 48V would require ridiculously large cables over any significant distance. Is there a reason you want to "Dismantle" high voltage transmission lines? They are the greatest invention since sliced bread.

edit: Sliced bread was invented in 1928, and the first high voltage transmission line was apparently tested in 1889. Therefore my statement needs revised to be historically accurate.

Post reply on HN