Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery • Hacker News Board

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#91

Post by adrian_b » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 4:19 AM UTC

Hypx_ wrote: post #81

Hydrogen-air batteries already exist and work extremely well. I think we are approaching the end of people seriously trying to make a new novel type of metal-air battery. Stuff like these are probably the last of its kind. BTW, hydrogen-air battery = hydrogen fuel cell, if you didn't realize that.

The efficiency of a complete cycle of storing then retrieving energy into hydrogen is quite low and there are thermodynamic reasons (due to the phase changes between liquid and gas) that limit the achievable efficiency.

Hydrogen might be a possible choice when high energy per mass or power per mass is desired, but it is a very bad choice for the purpose of this new iron-air battery, i.e. stationary storage with very high energy capacity and very low cost.

Iron-air might indeed be the best choice for medium-time energy storage, with low cost and good full-cycle efficiency.

For very long energy storage times, e.g. years, synthetic hydrocarbons would be preferable to hydrogen, due to much easier storage and handling.

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#92

Post by Robotbeat » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 4:21 AM UTC

newyankee wrote: post #74

andrew_ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LiFePo are starting to make a splash (pun intended) in the marine sector now that costs have started to fall, but lead acid still rules the roost. I have 4 AGMs and one Lithium in my vessel.

I have heard that large contracts on LFP batteries have touched under 100$/kwh in China, but on the retail side i have never seen anything cheaper than 300$/kwh ever sold. I guess even touching something like 200$/kwh retail is a big deal and might happen sooner than later with the flood of battery makers coming in.

Yeah, China domestically got really good at LFP chemistry. The US doesn’t make LFP domestically, and from what I understand it’s overall less common outside of China. I’m a big LFP fan. Under-rated and already capable of many things people claim for new chemistries (long cycle life, much safer, low cost, using very abundant minerals, etc).

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#93

Post by Hypx_ » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 5:03 AM UTC

adrian_b wrote: post #91

Hypx_ wrote: post #81

Hydrogen-air batteries already exist and work extremely well. I think we are approaching the end of people seriously trying to make a new novel type of metal-air battery. Stuff like these are probably the last of its kind. BTW, hydrogen-air battery = hydrogen fuel cell, if you didn't realize that.

The efficiency of a complete cycle of storing then retrieving energy into hydrogen is quite low and there are thermodynamic reasons (due to the phase changes between liquid and gas) that limit the achievable efficiency. Hydrogen might be a possible choice when high energy per mass or power per mass is desired, but it is a very bad choice for the purpose of this new iron-air battery, i.e. stationary storage with very…

All metal-air batteries have similar thermodynamic properties. If you can make a iron-air battery with good efficiency, than you can make a hydrogen-air battery with good efficiency too.

Since water is significantly more available than just about any other material, hydrogen-air cells should be the ideal battery for anything that isn't volume limited. Which is frankly a lot of cases. Unless there's some specific need for an iron-air battery where hydrogen-air can't be used, it's hard to conceive of a situation where we wouldn't use hydrogen-air.

Synthetic hydrocarbons are basically extensions of hydrogen electrochemistry. You are just adding carbon to the hydrogen made with the electrolysis step of a hydrogen-air battery. It's even possible to make a hydrocarbon-air cell such as direct-alcohol fuel cells or solid oxide fuel cells.

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#94

Post by __sy__ » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 5:05 AM UTC

coder543 wrote: post #76

lowercase1 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can take a battery and just decrease the discharge rate and claim "long duration storage". The hard part is making it cheaper per kWh. If they made it cheaper per kWh then they should say that

> If they made it cheaper per kWh then they should say that They do say that. Quote from the article: > at less than 1/10th the cost of lithium-ion "100 hours" isn't an advantage for this technology. The advantage is the cost effectiveness. "100 hour battery" mostly means that it will take 100 hours to discharge one of these batteries (of any capacity) at the maximum discharge rate that the technology allows. Obvious…

thank you for all the great comments in this thread. I'm a former Li-Ion researcher (Yi Cui group). I'm less familiar with grid storage. Would you be open to chatting a bit more about this? My email is in my profile. Thank You!

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#95

Post by DeRock » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 5:24 AM UTC

Robotbeat wrote: post #86

A little annoying they don’t mention cost per kWh, just “1/10th of lithium ion” which could mean almost anything. If you say lithium ion costs $1000/kWh (not far from short-lived grid lithium ion or residential), then maybe they’re $100/kWh. Or perhaps they’re using $125/kWh and they’re really $12.50/kWh. Also, working for 150 hours is no great feat. Just means they undersized the inverter and power electronics. If y…

There’s more details in the WSJ article: https://archive.is/2I7aq

$6/kWh raw materials, or $20/kWh for full system

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#96

Post by Dylan16807 » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 5:39 AM UTC

coder543 wrote: post #76

lowercase1 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone can take a battery and just decrease the discharge rate and claim "long duration storage". The hard part is making it cheaper per kWh. If they made it cheaper per kWh then they should say that

> If they made it cheaper per kWh then they should say that They do say that. Quote from the article: > at less than 1/10th the cost of lithium-ion "100 hours" isn't an advantage for this technology. The advantage is the cost effectiveness. "100 hour battery" mostly means that it will take 100 hours to discharge one of these batteries (of any capacity) at the maximum discharge rate that the technology allows. Obvious…

> Also, people in that industry know that surely no one would proudly advertise a "100 hour battery" if it weren't significantly cheaper than lithium ion on a per kWh basis, so the term "100 hour battery" also means (to the right audience) that the batteries have to be cheaper than lithium ion.

That seems like a stretch or an unwise convention. It could have some other advantage instead. Loudly proclaiming a disadvantage doesn't tell you what's good about a product, or what circumstances it's useful in.

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#97

Post by nazrulmum10 » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 6:02 AM UTC

This battery can be used continuously over a multi-day period and will enable a reliable, secure, and fully renewable electric grid year-round,” said Form Energy.

Or as Greg Lydkovsky, global head of R&D at steel giant ArcelorMittal — Form Energy’s latest investor — put it, the technology “holds exciting potential to overcome the intermittent supply of renewable energy”.

Form Energy president and chief operating officer Ted Wiley said: “We’ve completed the science, what’s left to do is scale up from lab-scale prototypes to grid-scale power plants.

“[At full production], the modules will produce electricity for one-tenth the cost of any technology available today for grid storage.”

The battery is said to work through “reversible oxidation of iron”. In discharge mode, thousands of tiny iron pellets are exposed to the air, which makes them rust (ie, the iron turning to iron oxide). When the system is charged with an electric current, the oxygen in the rust is removed, and it reverts back to iron.

Wiley said that a 300MW “pilot” project for Minnesota-based Great River Energy will be commissioned in 2023.

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#98

Post by warble » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 6:28 AM UTC

coder543 wrote: post #75

lazide wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry, that really doesn’t make any sense. There is several missing factors here, and it’s a useless metric. Lithium ion can do ‘100 hours’ as well - based on discharge rate. It can also do 10 minutes - based on discharge rate. 100 hours is literally useless on it’s own because it doesn’t tell you anything concrete. 100 hours….. of what? It looks like a classic science writing article where they left all the impo…

> > You could do the same thing with Lithium Ion, it would just be cost prohibitive... 10x as expensive, supposedly. > Lithium ion can do ‘100 hours’ as well Did you reply to the wrong person? I already addressed your entire comment several different ways in my original comment, and you didn't address anything I wrote in mine, as far as I can tell. Maybe I'm not the best at explaining things? > 100 hours... of what?…

Battery engineer here. 100 hours doesn't mean much by itself

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#99

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 6:47 AM UTC

teruakohatu wrote: post #41

Meandering wrote: post #11

This is interesting... I hope they can make it feasible in the long run. There is another interesting application for this oxidation phenomenon.[1] They burn iron dust to create a C02-free furnace. Imagine replacing coal with iron in concrete plants... [1] https://newatlas.com/energy/bavarian-brewery-carbon-free-ren...

Iron ore reserves: 168.6 billion tonnes Coal reserves: 1055 billion tonnes. Coal energy density: 6.7 kWh/kg [2] Iron Ore energy density: 1.4 kWh/kg [1] Total iron ore energy reserves: ~236.04 billion kWh [3] Total coal energy reserves: ~ 7,068 billion kWh [4] So as far as energy goes we have 30x as much coal energy. Now the rust can be renewed with energy ... but you need the energy to renew it in the first place. [1…

[deleted]

Re: Form Energy reveals the chemistry of its long-duration battery

#100

Post by hinkley » Sun, Jul 25, 2021, 6:55 AM UTC

2sk21 wrote: post #9

“We’ve completed the science, what’s left to do is scale up from lab-scale prototypes to grid-scale power plants." I can't even count the number of lab-stage announcements that I have seen in HN. This will be of interest only when they can get it to scale

I started following battery tech at the turn of the century and this was old behavior even then.

Battery prototypes are the moral equivalent of announcing you've found a new chemical that kills tumors - in vitro.

Back then the advice from others watching battery technology? If their tech is 10 years ahead of the current state of the art, then either it will take them 10 years to produce it or they will produce it sooner by sacrificing capacity for safety/manufacturing concerns.

Another important thing to remember in any discussion about power - there is almost always a substantial premium paid for portability. If someone is feeding you PR about a stationary power system and comparing it to any household-name portable system, then you should smile and nod and keep track of your wallet as you back away slowly. They are the snake in the grass your ancestors warned you about.