cross-posted from: https://piefed.zip/c/energy@slrpnk.net/p/1799048/solid-state-battery-hits-381-wh-kg-as-taiwan-mass-production-begins
Solid-state battery hits 381 Wh/kg as Taiwan mass production begins
https://interestingengineering.com/energy/prologium-solid-state-battery-mass-production-381-wh-kg
50 Comments
rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz · 43 pts · 5d
For comparison, li-ion 18650-size 3500mAh cells are 260Wh/kg, that is almost +50% capacity per gram but only +15% capacity per volume
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
Drone batteries then
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 9 pts · 4d
Or car batteries. EVs are still heavier than ICE vehicles and road wear goes up by what was it, the 4th power of axle weight? Even at the exact same capacity per volume, an increased capacity per weight is a huge advantage. Not to mention that the car itself needs to have beefier suspension, tires and brakes for more weight (even though yes, on the braking side, EVs get regen braking - they still need to be able to stop quickly if something happens to the drivetrain). Also no danger of battery fires.
If this works out AND charge/discharge rates are good AND production scales fast enough, this could be huge in a few years. Of course it might also not be.
The incredibly unbelieveable smells-like-bullshit donut battery hit an even higher Wh/kg (not by much) in the new VTT test, but there's still no guarantee that every test's been on the same type of cell. Current leading theory is that they're just taking a bunch of completely different cells to be tested and the solid state one might not be the same one that did all the other tests.
rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz · -2 pts · 5d
Only if power density is good enough
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 5d
I'd have thought that the weight would be the deciding factor
DrunkenDuckling@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 4d
Ultimately yes. People easily get confused between power density (power per volume), energy density(energy per volume), specific energy(energy per mass unit) and specific power(power per mass unit)
geomela@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 3d
Can't imagine why...
DrunkenDuckling@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 4d
Didn't we literally just establish that the power density is higher than Li-Ion?
rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 4d
that's energy density, maybe you can only discharge it only over 20h without damaging it or something (probably not but there are so many places where things fail). power density was not reported there
Sxan@piefed.zip · 3 pts · 5d
Still...
rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz · 6 pts · 5d
I understand that these things are perhaps less flammable because no electrolyte that burns, but also there's a question about efficiency, manufacturability, overheating, charge depletion in time and across cycles etc. Maybe it's not even any good
Sxan@piefed.zip · 2 pts · 4d
Sure. And, given how people tend to hype stuff which never works out, it probably isn't. But, sometimes it is, so... maybe?
rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 4d
it's nice to find someone who gets it in the wild. i'll give you an example: 90% of clinical trials fail, and it creates a predicament: some news site grabs a headline from university press release, which is informed by a paper. paper says that maybe there is some effect in cell line, if you use some new compound, against some kind of cancer. sometimes it grabs more attention if it's a compound from common plant because of folk medicine connection. press release: university w made a compound y that kills cancer z. article: university w makes a drug for cancer z. clickbait youtube video: underdog researcher DESTROYS ALL CANCER. naturally, years pass, compound goes through extra testing and in most of cases, fails, many times even before it ever touches humans. sometimes it doesn't work, sometimes you need quarter of body mass of it to see effect, sometimes it wipes out liver, sometimes it does something else entirely. then clueless people looks back at these headlines, and ask, where is cure for cancer z, or sometimes even where is cure for all cancer. the stupid and embarrassing reality is that it never existed, because it was at best toy compound and maybe someone develops something out of it, but mostly it won't. some people take it as a sign of conspiracy that suppresses inconvenient TRUTH and there is a cure, but you can get it only from a BOLD RESEARCHER THAT THREADS WHERE NO ONE ELSE DARES. then we get clinics ran by scammers and a lot of dead people
that said, there's already a lot of things, mostly moving things, that can be electrified with current technology. it would be a nice thing to have something better, but it's not like it's strictly necessary to have it
Sxan@piefed.zip · 2 pts · 3d
You worked in Pharma too, huh?
Well put.
rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 2d
there are dozens of us, dozens!! (closer to third of dozen)
wdym worked? i don't think i'll ever retire
Sxan@piefed.zip · 2 pts · 2d
I was in briefly around þe time þe last MD C-level at GSK was replaced by a marketting wonk; a bunch of people I liked started trickling off, a couple got laid off, and I headed for greener pastures. Pharma wasn't my domain anyway, so I had no real career ties. I did learn a hell of a lot about drug development, and þe research process (specifically, þe business side). I was pretty young at the time and bought into þe whole "we have to charge a lot, because it's so expensive to develop drugs" until a director a couple of levels above me said, "don't feel sorry for the company. They're making plenty of money."
In a weird twist of fate, my wife, whose background was even less medical-related þan mine, found her way into þe medical device field, only she's stuck wiþ it. So I now know more þan I wanted to about med devices þan I ever þought I would, too.
Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip · 25 pts · 5d
yakko@feddit.uk · 13 pts · 5d
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this be great for electric commercial flights?
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 18 pts · 5d
Every percent gain in battery weight compounds insanely for commercial flight.
It is the same problem as with rocket fuel. You have to store the energy to carry the capacity to store the energy. And that's even worse for batteries because at least the rocket gets lighter as it uses its fuel. Whereas a loaded battery is basically the same weight as a loaded one.
yakko@feddit.uk · 3 pts · 4d
I realise that. I'm reading that energy densities will have to be around 800wh/kg for planes to rely entirely on battery power, but there are shorter distance planes already using battery power. With how quickly solid state batteries recharge, I don't see why planes couldn't just stop more often. It's a small price to pay for zero emission flights.
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 1 pts · 4d
There are many ways in which planes can be different.
Smaller plane going shorter distance at a slower speed can also mean that there are more lines and lines avoiding big hubs. If a plane goes slower but closer to your destination, you may not mind!
The cost equation changes a lot if fuel is much cheaper.
yakko@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 4d
You're right, so much about our world revolves around how cheaply we can put...fucking...smoke into the air. It's maddening, but you're right.
I don't know if oil will get cheaper though, do you think it will?
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 2 pts · 4d
By fuel, I was meaning electricity. Electricity is much cheaper than oil and I think will remain so.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 4d
Sigh....instead of short plane flights, just take a train.
blackberry28@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 4d
Unfortunately, train tickets are often more expensive than plane tickets. So you pay more and it takes longer.
Shadow_Glider@piefed.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 4d
This sounds absolutely insane to me, which country do you live in?
blackberry28@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 3d
Germany lol.
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 4d
For this reason, green hydrogen is likely the best bet for air transport
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 1 pts · 4d
Biofuel is a possibility too.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 4d
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 4d
But that has the same emissions issue as the current fuel
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 1 pts · 4d
That's a whole different debate. I tend to agree that they are less ideal, that their proponents say, but they are actually renewable. They don't add durably CO2 in the atmosphere from fossil sources. It is a very different thing. The CO2 they emit is part of a cycle. Ideally, that's also a type of emission that we cut, but it is possible to include them in a sustainable society.
skibidi@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 3d
Biofuel is a dead-end technology. Synthetic fuels from direct air capture of CO2 are about 3X as efficient in terms of energy in -> energy in fuel, while also avoiding wasting all the extra nutrients (phosphorus, potassium, nitrogen - some of which are scarce) needed for the plant to grow that give nothing in terms of energy storage and must be recaptured.
A bunch of solar panels and some direct air -> methanol plants uses far less land than corn fields for bioethanol, while also providing easy avenues to switch energy from feeding the grid to filling the tanks depending on conditions.
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 1 pts · 3d
I have a very hard time believing it to be true, but I am always opened to an unexpected good news. Do you have a specific tech/source in mind for that claim?
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 3d
CO2 is not the only emission and pollution in the high atmosphere is even more damaging than on the ground.
keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 1 pts · 3d
Which pollution are you thinking of?
Cypher@aussie.zone · 8 pts · 5d
That website is cancerous even with an ad blocker.
echodot@feddit.uk · 5 pts · 5d
Wait that's the whole article? One sentence.
Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip · 10 pts · 5d
Quoted the article for ya in another comment.
this_jury_is_hung@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
Is that from the same website? All I see for any article on their website is a single sentence.
AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 4d
Ohhh this actually seems cool. While for me size matters more than weight(heh) and this battery mainly improves on the weight but its still very cool. Its already smaller and lighter and i imagine its gonna get even better because that was what happened when lithium batteries overtook.
AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 5d
Any info on the cost? What the price per kWh would be?
LodeMike@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 3d
Do lithium batteries somehow move? Or do I just not know what solid state means in this context?
skibidi@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 3d
They are talking about the electrolyte - the material between the battery anode and cathode that allows the transport of lithium ions.
A normal lithium ion battery generally uses gels-like materials. Lithium hexafluorophosphate dissolved in organics is common, and is a viscous liquid.
A solid state electrolyte is basically a solid ceramic membrane that allows the ions to travel through it. Many potential benefits around stability, sustainability, and durability. Challenges around electrical contact, particularly as the battery cycles because the active materials do change volume slightly as the lithium moves between the sides of the cell.