5 ms·
This is great news (and from a trusted source, CNRS is one of the most prestigious research institute in France, state-owned). As the article says, it's not ab
by hbbio 11y ago
This is great news (and from a trusted source, CNRS is one of the most prestigious research institute in France, state-owned).
As the article says, it's not about having the most performing batteries (they announce 90 Wh/kg which is below Li-ion batteries) but cheaper batteries, made of salt instead of Lithium. And it matters for many use cases.
- Already__Taken 11y agoIf the W/hr can improve enough compared to lithium the higher weight but smaller packaging might help to offset that disadvantage. Less volume you need active cooling through comes to mind.
- Natanael_L 11y agoFor almost anything not mobile, that would definitely be an improvement. They mentioned houses with solar storing excess energy, and there's numerous other possible uses including industrial. Potentially also slow moving autonomous machines including lawnmovers could benefit, as replacement is cheaper. Also for anything with charge cycles fast enough that cost outweighs other factors.
- abdulhannanali 11y agotesting
- AnthonBerg 11y agoRe. the Wh/kg figure - If the sodium chemistry has properties comparable to lithium IRON (LiFePO4) in other respects, such as safety and robustness, then the 90Wh/kg figure is quite good in that comparison. The LiFePo4 chemistry is quite interesting and very stable and a drop-in-and-forget-about-it replacement for lead-acid battires, which is harder to do with the more sensitive and aggressive high-Wh Li-ion stuff. Afaik Tesla use LiFePo4.
- nine_k 11y agoPO, not Po, please. Po is Polonium, the real death metal.
- AnthonBerg 11y agohaha! Thanks :)
- thescriptkiddie 11y agoTesla is not currently using LiFePO4 cells. They've invested a lot into LiCoO2 because it has the highest specific energy, and therefore the lightest battery for the same range.
- RightWingRabble 11y agoSwing and a miss! They don't use LiCoO2 because of the increased potential for fires. What Tesla uses is a modified version of NCA, or Lithium Nickel Cobalt Aluminum Oxide (LiNiCoAlO2). It still has the potential for fire, but it's not as volatile as LiCoO2. https://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/battery-experts-say-tesla-battery-chemistry-volatile-and-dangerous https://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/battery-experts-say-...
- thescriptkiddie 11y agoGood old Cunningham's Law.
- RightWingRabble 11y agoAgreed. One of the reasons Li-ion (Lithium Cobalt Oxide) batteries are so expensive is the extensive quality controls that have to be performed on it. If you put 100 cells in a car and even 1% of those cells are faulty, your car catches fire. The worst that happens with LiFePO4 is the internal goo bubbles out of the battery and smells bad. AFAICT, Tesla uses Lithium Nickel Cobalt Aluminum Oxide (LiNiCoAlO2) aka "NCA". It's safer than Cobalt, but not as safe as Iron.
- ChuckMcM 11y agoI agree that it is great news, I wish they were a bit more open with some of the details (charge rate? discharge rate?) 90 Wh/kg is decent, a one day supply for a nominal house[1] that would be 266kg of batteries (about a quarter ton) which seems pretty reasonable. Sodium is highly reactive which is an issue but unclear if its any worse than Lithium in that regard. [1] For reasons I don't know, the "nominal" single family house consumes 24kwhrs per day, hence each kW of generating capactity is said to support 1 house.