Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on August 1, 2014
Battery Life ‘Holy Grail’ Discovered
It comes top of almost all ‘most wanted’ polls, but manufacturers rarely listen. Battery life has become the great unloved element of the modern smartphone and it has built an entire industry of spares, charge cases, mini power cables and much more as a consequence. But that could all change after scientists announced they have achieved the ‘holy grail’ of battery design .
In a paper published in scientific journal Nature Nanotechnology, researchers at Stanford University report they have designed a pure lithium anode with the potential to increase the capacity of existing battery technology 400%.
“Of all the materials that one might use in an anode, lithium has the greatest potential,” said Yi Cui, professor of Material Science and Engineering and leader of the Stanford research team. “Some call it the Holy Grail. It is very lightweight and it has the highest energy density. You get more power per volume and weight, leading to lighter, smaller batteries with more power.”
The Science
To understand why requires some light science. The vast majority of all today’s batteries are so-called ‘Lithium Ion’ batteries. They have three core parts: an electrolyte which provides electrons (the essential part of electricity), an anode which discharges these electrons into a device giving it power and a cathode which receives the electrons back into the battery after they have been passed through the device’s circuit.
Where the problem lies today is the lithium in ‘lithium ion’ batteries is contained in the electrolyte but not in the anode (which is typically graphite or silicon) so the electrons cannot be harvested very efficiently before they are sent out to the device. Produce a pure lithium anode, however, and efficiency – and therefore performance – skyrockets. The quest to do so has been going on for decades.
The Challenge
The issue in making a pure lithium anode is that lithium ions expand in hair-like structures when a battery is charged. This expansion can be so strong that it can warp and crack the battery casing and, even if it could be contained, the anode is so chemically reactive that it consumes the electrolyte and the battery’s ability to recharge declines rapidly.
How rapidly? Previous scientific research produced a pure lithium anode battery that was 96 per cent efficient but that still meant its ability to charge fell to almost 50 per cent after just 100 charge cycles. Nowhere near good enough for the average lifespan of a smartphone, laptop or something bigger like an electric car.
The Breakthrough
What the Stanford researchers claim to have achieved is a pure lithium anode battery which doesn’t expand and has dramatically improved charge efficiency. The result is a stable battery which retains 99% charge efficiency after 150 cycles.
The researchers achieved this by building ‘nanospheres’ – protective layers of interconnected carbon domes on top of the pure lithium anode. Each layer has a honeycomb structure which is flexible, uniform and non-reactive which both stops the lithium ions expanding too much and the anode reacting with the electrode. Remarkably the nanosphere in each battery is just 20 nanometers thick – 1/5,000th the width of a human hair.
Furthermore because the battery retains the same core operation as a standard battery it could theoretically be fitted into our existing electronic devices without any modification. Devices with removable batteries could even swap out their lithium ion batteries for a pure lithium battery and enjoy up to 3x the battery life.
In future it would also allow batteries to become smaller (for example, half the size of a current battery but with twice the capacity) allowing for ever thinner, but longer lasting devices.
“In practical terms if we can improve the capacity of batteries to, say, four times today’s, that would be exciting. You might be able to have a cell phone with double or triple the battery life or an electric car with a range of 300 miles that cost only $25,000 – competitive with an internal combustion engine getting 40 mpg,” explains Steven Chu, the former US Secretary of Energy and Nobel Laureate who is part of the research team.
The Challenge Still To Come
But we are not quite there yet. To be commercially viable batteries need to be 99.9% efficient, which places the team’s 99% efficiency rating a fraction short.
“While we’re not quite to that 99.9 percent threshold, where we need to be, we’re close and this is a significant improvement over any previous design,” said Cui. “With some additional engineering and new electrolytes, we believe we can realize a practical and stable lithium metal anode that could power the next generation of rechargeable batteries.”
What’s that sound you hear? It’s Tesla and Apple beating down their door.
26 Comments on "Battery Life ‘Holy Grail’ Discovered"
jv153 on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 2:36 pm
This article is misleading – lithium has a fundamental charge carrying capacity, so this battery doesn’t change the amount of lithium needed to store a certain amount of electrical energy. Just increasing the size of a conventional anode would increase the battery storage capacity, but lithium is expensive. Recharge longevity can be increased though. Most of the weight of the battery is the electrolyte, and a minimum amount of electrolyte is needed to oxidize the anode.
Perk Earl on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 2:47 pm
Sounds like a great advancement, and for an EV that only costs 25k to go 300 miles would be incredible (if that really is possible), but we still have the concern of where the energy comes from. We haven’t gained any net energy, just more efficient usage of available energy.
dolanbaker on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 2:53 pm
If true, it will be a fantastic advance in storage for the “surplus” energy produced by solar & wind systems.
In my opinion, long range Electric vehicles are a bonus.
Plantagenet on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 3:00 pm
I’m sure somewhere an environmentalist is drawing protest signs in crayon and preparing to march against the new lithium mines that will be needed to fulfill increasing demand for these batteries.
steve on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 5:42 pm
I originally read this article last night and it was by the Times I believe but what is left out in this one is a quote from the designer of the original lithium battery in which he says it is good but a long way of from production. Another too little too late…
J-Gav on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 5:54 pm
Steve – Yeah , we’ll see when (if) it comes into mass production … Sounds like a cool idea but you know, intil it’s actually out there and making things better for a lot of people, it also still sounds like somebody pissing into a cello.
DMyers on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 7:11 pm
What I like about an article like this is the unspoken context of abundance. The target material here is lithium. Lithium is not a limited or finite ingredient. So, if we can make it work, it will be there for every usage you can imagine. Build it, and the lithium will come. New batteries for everyone. As many, as big, and as accessible as your heart desires.
Take Plantagenet’s comment above. A perfectly fine comment, Plant. It made the intended point. But consider this: ” …the new lithium mines that will be needed to fulfill increasing demand for these batteries.” A lithium mine is no big deal. We’ll be seeing them everywhere, from Maine to California. This is the presumption that pervades the subject at this point.
Even if there is abundant, economically feasible lithium, the quality will vary, and the better grades will make up a small portion of the whole.
The scarcity which may crush this great promise should be a consideration in judging how great this promise really is.
eugene on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 7:58 pm
There have been several “holy grails” and there will be more before this thing is done.
Makati1 on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 9:45 pm
More techie dreams of a BAU future. LOL.
Too many “what if’s” even in this article. Cost was not mentioned except in passing.
Tesla? Hahahahaha… Toys for the rich and the wannabees. Never gonna be more than that. Base price today is $68,738 – $73,401. To buy this car, you would need an income of about $140,000.00 per year and a good credit rating. BOTH are difficult to come by in 2014 America.
As for Apple, well, if they can get this ‘new battery’ actually in production before the financial collapse, it might sell, but I don’t see that happening. Techie I-toys are a fad that will die out as shrinking incomes go more and more for food, clothing and shelter. Say by 2020.
I would not hope to retire on my Apple stock income, not that I ever owned any stocks in anything. I try to stay out of rigged games.
Makati1 on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 9:47 pm
BTW: Tesla is Kelly Blue Book prices today for a basic new model delivered on the East Coast.
Kevin Cobley on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 10:25 pm
Lithium reserves are so minuscule it’s not even that clear that enough of a supply exists even for computers, tablets and phones. None of these batteries are recycled and the device makers all building “disposable products”.
It’s just a continuation of the wasteful society, I won’t buy tablets or smartphones and only buy a mobile with replaceable batteries.
The “electric car is as much fiction as George Jetson’s car”.
M1 on Fri, 1st Aug 2014 11:22 pm
Lithium and Solar will KILL OFF Tar Sands, so there won’t be any “Environmentalist” Protesting Lithium mines.
US Coal industry now going thru bankruptcy as well, as Solar power has dropped to 5 cent per kWh in the US Southwest and the South.
Imagine, with EV’s you’ll also get the convertible auto market back, because you’ll actually be able to breath fresh air.
Arthur on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 12:09 am
According to illustrious institutions such as Berkeley, U. of Michagan and the Norwegian car giant Fjord, there should be enough Lithium around to put everybody in a solar powered e-vehicle. End good, all good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#Production
Most of the lithium reserves are buried in South-America.
Let us face it, deep in our hearts we are all followers of the great Greek philosopher Demokritos, who taught us that the world consists of indestructible particles called atoms, although the good people of Hiroshima might have deveiating opinions about the indestructible part, but I digress. If we accept the thesis of Demokritos we can conclude that at some point in the future, mining of all metals will become superfluous, since all the gold, iron, lithium, etc. we will ever need, will be above the ground, ready to be used and to be recycled at the end of the particular products lifetime.
Storage is an essential ingredient of the upcoming solar age, so regardless if it is desirable or not to continue the life on wheels for hundreds of millions of people, i’m inclined to prudently welcome this battery technology breakthrough.
Dave Thompson on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 1:17 am
This all sounds plausible, or not. The tell will be in the military industrial complex. Longer lasting batteries in the sphere of the military, would be an edge that strategists would take big advantage of. They might even exist now in areas us da people is not privy to.
Makati1 on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 3:16 am
Arthur, all of those may be ‘above ground’ but they will be scattered across the whole world in landfills and just dumped anywhere. Not only would collecting them require large expenditures of energy, the actual recycling, i.e. smelting them into new forms would take OIL energy. Huge amounts of energy, not able to be provided by ‘renewables’. If you think that you can just make a new PC out of recycles, that have been buried for years, try it sometime. Not that there will be an internet to use it with, but that is another disagreement …
14 Kg of aluminum requires 13.52 MJ of energy to be melted down and reformed.
You can do the math. But you will not recycle much aluminum or other metals with ‘renewable’ energy sources.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=A0SO8wsInNxTMWwAEz1XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzb25pbnVkBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ0M18x?qid=20100329161025AA7hx66
Most of the resources currently buried in the dumps will stay there. As incomes drop in the Western world the land fills/dumps will be filled with people ‘recycling’ everything of value, as in 3rd world countries today. Or maybe not, if they are arrested for trespassing…lol.
Arthur on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 3:31 am
It is a pity that posts have become unreadable because of an ultra-long link.
Please use tinyurl, guys!
henriksson on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 4:15 am
That things are “above ground” and thus able to be recycled is like saying that there’s no difference between a plate of food and a salt container and a plate of food with salt sprinkled all over. Things are not recycled 100% efficiently: Even something like 90% efficiency will be essentially gone after only a few cycles since the waste is multiplied every time. I would not put much faith in exotic materials.
Arthur on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 6:11 am
A little bit of googling reveals recycling rates for iron of at least 75% for the west, with 93% for Germany. And the recycling measures are not yet really draconian.
Saw somewhere that it takes 20 times as much energy to produce an aluminium can from scratch, compared to a can made from recycled aluminium. As soon as the world population has reached its zenith, mining will gradually phase out.
Perk Earl on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 9:46 am
post peak collapse will begin an era of recycling only, as the energy required to process scant percentages of ores will be out of the question. But it won’t be a BAU world like the one we’ve become accustomed to, it will consist of very small operations scattered far and wide. And it won’t be for cell phones, more like hand tools and plows. Hopefully not cannons, but you know how mankind is – it’s always easier to pillage than make the stuff yourself.
steve on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 10:12 pm
I saw an episode of Vice on the Philippines and they had people making guns from old car springs…in the ghetto…
steve on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 10:14 pm
more guns per capita in the Philippines than anywhere else….they are gun nuts there!!!
MKohnen on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 10:37 pm
The “carbon nanotube” revolution has been promised for a long time. Has anything yet come of it? I remember how “Bucky Balls” were going to lead to extraordinary inventions. Have they? I’m kinda tired of all the “this wonder invention *could* blah blah blah.” I read articles about hyper-dense information storage on optical cubes almost 25 years ago. Whatever happened to that?
Makati1 on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 11:12 pm
steve, you are delusional…lol. And back that delusion up with a reference to the stats please. Zip guns are a toy the American gangs use, not Filipinos.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/09/19/u-s-has-more-guns-and-gun-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/
US: 97 guns per 100 people.
Ps: 5 guns per 100 people. And most of them are security guards, who are everywhere in the city.
You have a warped idea of the Philippines.
Makati1 on Sat, 2nd Aug 2014 11:13 pm
Steve, FYI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
Kenz300 on Sun, 3rd Aug 2014 9:37 am
Higher oil prices and cheaper batteries…..
The next oil shock will push electric cars and motor bikes into the main stream and speed up their acceptance by the masses.
James on Sun, 3rd Aug 2014 1:47 pm
These batteries will probably O.K. with running cars, electronic gadgets, Etc. But none of them will be able to sustainably operate a train, airplanes, large cargo trucks, Etc.