11 ms·

Open-Source Iron Battery Project

84 points by ZenoArrow 9y ago

ZenoArrow 9y ago
This could be a good stepping stone towards creating DIY batteries that have a useful level of power storage. Seems to tick a lot of boxes; cheap, abundant materials, non-toxic. Whilst it's not likely to be a good fit for all cases, it could help the growth of off-grid energy solutions, as well as being an interesting science project.
juliangoldsmith 9y ago
If there's any way to spur adoption of renewable energy, it's this. Once renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels, almost everyone will start to switch.
- zackmorris 9y ago
  Renewables are already cheaper than coal: https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+solar+cheaper+than+coal&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+solar+cheaper+than+coal... I saw a chart a decade ago that projected when the cost of rooftop photovoltaic panels would be be less than the install cost, and it was before now. Looks like that happened around last year ($3 per watt for panel, $3 per watt for install cost): https://www.solarpowerauthority.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to-install-solar-on-an-average-us-house/ https://www.solarpowerauthority.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to... With free energy all around us from the sun, the difficulty is no longer in collection. The next big opportunities from a profit vs effort descending perspective will be in areas that are causing friction in adopting renewables: * legalities * inverters (currently priced 2-10x higher than they should be for non-technical reasons) * storage (batteries, compressed air, gravity etc) * conversion (electrolysis and methane production) * distribution
  - Zaak 9y ago
    Are inverters costing more because of increased demand at the current production rate, or is there monopoly / price gouging happening?
    - zackmorris 9y ago
      I may have been off a little, grid tie inverters used to be too expensive but it looks like they've come down a lot in the last year or two. It's currently about $50/kW for computer power supplies and $100/kW for grid tie inverters: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+power+supply https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+power+supply https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+grid+tie+inverter https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+grid+tie+inve... So still a factor of 2x but there is room there for innovation. They will likely always be more expensive due to safety considerations for line workers etc though. IMHO this is the component that is most likely to bring renewables to the masses because they can convert any kind of power to the existing standard.
  - juliangoldsmith 9y ago
    Well, let me clarify my statement. At this point, I'd expect large solar and wind plants to be competitive with fossil fuels. The problem would be with storing power, so that it will be consistent. My previous post was referring to individuals, rather than businesses. For a homeowner to install a PV system, based on your link, it would cost around $18,000. You wouldn't break even on it for 20 years, and that's assuming that you're still tied to the grid. Once renewables are both cheaper than fossil fuels, and in reach for the average person, mass adoption will quickly follow.
dragontamer 9y ago
There are other cheap, abundant, and non-toxic rechargeable batteries. NiMH in particular fits all of those, the only downside is that its (slightly) heavier than the standard Lithium Ion. Indeed, NiMH used to be the standard before Li-Ion took over. NiMH can pack nearly the same energy as Lithium Ion, except do it in a safe, renewable, non-toxic way without any exotic, potentially non-ethical materials (like Cobalt). NiMH is still widely available as well, virtually every rechargeable AA cell out there is NiMH. What benefit does Iron have over NiMH?
- gravypod 9y ago
  NiMH needs venting. "One inherent risk with NiMH chemistry is that overcharging causes hydrogen gas to form, potentially rupturing the cell. Therefore, cells have a vent to release the gas in the event of serious overcharging" [0] [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93metal_hydride_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93metal_hydride_b...
- craftyguy 9y ago
  I thought nickel mining was a horribly destructive and toxic process?
  - marcosdumay 9y ago
    Besides, nickel is expensive and not really healthy to have on your environment in ionic form. I don't see where the GP is coming from.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  Is the only benefit of Li-Ion weight ? I don't mind heavier devices at all.. I'd swap in a minute.
  - pkolaczk 9y ago
    Li-Ion has extremely low self discharge rate and very high power efficiency. It can also reach thousands of recharge cycles as long as you don't discharge it too deeply and don't overcharge it and keep it cool. It has no memory effect, so it can be recharged frequently.
zafka 9y ago
I like this! Even if this route does not work, it gets several people learning more about the nitty gritty of batteries.
outsideoflife 9y ago
I like this idea. For many off grid situations energy density and weight is not that big of an issue compared to cost. If instead of the size of a 'Powerwall' you had to have something the size of a coal bunker or compost bin, that wouldn't really be an issue at all if the materials were very low cost and I could build it myself.
- extrapickles 9y ago
  You can build nickel-iron batteries yourself, and they use reasonably easy to source materials. The nickel is expensive though, so they can’t easily compete with lead-acid.
  - jws 9y ago
    You can beat lead acid on lifetime. I looked into that for a remote installation instead of a half ton of lead acid every 8 years. I elected to do lead acid once more and then hope for a suitable lithium solution. I swear that half ton feels heavier every 8 years.
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  Glad you like it, and what you described is what I think is the best potential use case for a DIY iron battery too.
stcredzero 9y ago
The "Allen Lab" YouTube channel is teeny-tiny, and has bare-bones presentation, but it has some of the best actual science content -- especially if you actually paid attention in science classes in school and are a bit tired of the "Mr. Wizard" level gee-whiz YouTube science stuff that covers material you already know. (That said, if you find those videos informative and fun, then knock yourself out! Each to their own.) (His channel's name is actually just "Peter Allen.")
- j_s 9y ago
  >jw1224: This seems like a good time to mention Captain Disillusion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15423432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15423432 (2017Oct)
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    It's always a good time to mention Captain Disillusion!
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  For the lazy: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-t9a7XVoH9lDJzhUF2nyHQ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-t9a7XVoH9lDJzhUF2nyHQ
- agumonkey 9y ago
  it's hyper tiny: 502 subscriber (#502 speaking). I like tiny channels like these. Just need a good sound and stable video and content. GreatScott, AvE, JeruGarcia lots are simple but they give a lot. Also there's guy like Robert Murray Smith but 1) he toys with you to make you search a lot 2) the framing is too wide and sound not smooth enough. Anyway.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    AvE is awesome!
    - 9y ago
larrydag 9y ago
I don't like it when people sell renewable sources of energy as "the cheapest source of energy available". If it were actually cheap then why do you need a community funded project? The problem with solar is storage but hardly anyone discusses that in the total cost of energy consumption. These projects need to be transparent up front. To achieve the "cheap" objective you need benchmarks such as existing technology vs future technology. For instance, i believe they should state "our goal is to achieve $X/Kwh compared to $Y/Kwh of existing technology". That way you can see something measurable, scientific, and objective oriented. I like the project so don't get me wrong. I just think they've worded it all wrong as what they are trying to achieve.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- sp332 9y ago
  Lots of things are cheap if you can amortize a large capital investment made upfront. You might need a lot of people to fund the project upfront so it can be cheap later. I agree transparency would be good though.
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  I think that's a fair criticism. However, it's probably too early to give a price per KWh just yet.
- TaylorAlexander 9y ago
  Your first question: “If it were actually cheap then why do you need a community funded project?” Seems a bit daft to me. They need $5000 to buy materials for their university research. If the project is successful the energy they store will be cheap. But doing the research and acquiring the energy are totally different things, so even if the latter is free the former is not.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jpm_sd 9y ago
I wish there was a text explanation, I don't have the patience for video most of the time. How does this technology compare to already-commercialized nickel-iron batteries? [0] https://ironedison.com/ https://ironedison.com/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93iron_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93iron_battery
- philipkglass 9y ago
  Unfortunately, there were no details about the proposed battery chemistry in the video either. From memory, nickel-iron batteries have the following limitations for stationary storage: - Relatively high self-discharge rate (though this isn't a big problem if you're buffering renewable electricity on a daily basis) - Comparatively low energy efficiency, ~70% - Hydrogen evolution by water electrolysis during charging -- a potential hazard, and one of the main loss paths driving the low efficiency - Electrolyte water loss from electrolytic evolution of hydrogen during charging requires regular compensation with additional water There have been a number of approaches to improve efficiency/suppress hydrogen evolution in nickel-iron batteries by the addition of organosulfur compounds. I don't think that any of those approaches are on the way to commercialization yet, though.
  - ZenoArrow 9y ago
    > "- Hydrogen evolution by water electrolysis during charging -- a potential hazard, and one of the main loss paths driving the low efficiency" On that point... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ8IcoHjFdk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ8IcoHjFdk Also, it's worth noting that this is a research project. Test cells have been produced, but experiments are ongoing, so the final design is not set in stone.
    - philipkglass 9y ago
      Oh, great! I see that the separate YouTube channel's videos discuss the chemistry though the fund raising page's video doesn't. That won me over -- $100 donated. It looks like I have a bunch of videos to watch this weekend :-)

84 points by ZenoArrow 9y ago

This could be a good stepping stone towards creating DIY batteries that have a useful level of power storage. Seems to tick a lot of boxes; cheap, abundant materials, non-toxic. Whilst it's not likely to be a good fit for all cases, it could help the growth of off-grid energy solutions, as well as being an interesting science project.

juliangoldsmith 9y ago

If there's any way to spur adoption of renewable energy, it's this. Once renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels, almost everyone will start to switch.

zackmorris 9y ago
Renewables are already cheaper than coal: https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+solar+cheaper+than+coal&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+solar+cheaper+than+coal... I saw a chart a decade ago that projected when the cost of rooftop photovoltaic panels would be be less than the install cost, and it was before now. Looks like that happened around last year ($3 per watt for panel, $3 per watt for install cost): https://www.solarpowerauthority.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to-install-solar-on-an-average-us-house/ https://www.solarpowerauthority.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to... With free energy all around us from the sun, the difficulty is no longer in collection. The next big opportunities from a profit vs effort descending perspective will be in areas that are causing friction in adopting renewables: * legalities * inverters (currently priced 2-10x higher than they should be for non-technical reasons) * storage (batteries, compressed air, gravity etc) * conversion (electrolysis and methane production) * distribution
- Zaak 9y ago
  Are inverters costing more because of increased demand at the current production rate, or is there monopoly / price gouging happening?
  - zackmorris 9y ago
    I may have been off a little, grid tie inverters used to be too expensive but it looks like they've come down a lot in the last year or two. It's currently about $50/kW for computer power supplies and $100/kW for grid tie inverters: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+power+supply https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+power+supply https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+grid+tie+inverter https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1000+watt+grid+tie+inve... So still a factor of 2x but there is room there for innovation. They will likely always be more expensive due to safety considerations for line workers etc though. IMHO this is the component that is most likely to bring renewables to the masses because they can convert any kind of power to the existing standard.
- juliangoldsmith 9y ago
  Well, let me clarify my statement. At this point, I'd expect large solar and wind plants to be competitive with fossil fuels. The problem would be with storing power, so that it will be consistent. My previous post was referring to individuals, rather than businesses. For a homeowner to install a PV system, based on your link, it would cost around $18,000. You wouldn't break even on it for 20 years, and that's assuming that you're still tied to the grid. Once renewables are both cheaper than fossil fuels, and in reach for the average person, mass adoption will quickly follow.

dragontamer 9y ago

There are other cheap, abundant, and non-toxic rechargeable batteries. NiMH in particular fits all of those, the only downside is that its (slightly) heavier than the standard Lithium Ion. Indeed, NiMH used to be the standard before Li-Ion took over. NiMH can pack nearly the same energy as Lithium Ion, except do it in a safe, renewable, non-toxic way without any exotic, potentially non-ethical materials (like Cobalt). NiMH is still widely available as well, virtually every rechargeable AA cell out there is NiMH. What benefit does Iron have over NiMH?

gravypod 9y ago
NiMH needs venting. "One inherent risk with NiMH chemistry is that overcharging causes hydrogen gas to form, potentially rupturing the cell. Therefore, cells have a vent to release the gas in the event of serious overcharging" [0] [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93metal_hydride_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93metal_hydride_b...
craftyguy 9y ago
I thought nickel mining was a horribly destructive and toxic process?
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  Besides, nickel is expensive and not really healthy to have on your environment in ionic form. I don't see where the GP is coming from.
agumonkey 9y ago
Is the only benefit of Li-Ion weight ? I don't mind heavier devices at all.. I'd swap in a minute.
- pkolaczk 9y ago
  Li-Ion has extremely low self discharge rate and very high power efficiency. It can also reach thousands of recharge cycles as long as you don't discharge it too deeply and don't overcharge it and keep it cool. It has no memory effect, so it can be recharged frequently.

zafka 9y ago

I like this! Even if this route does not work, it gets several people learning more about the nitty gritty of batteries.

outsideoflife 9y ago

I like this idea. For many off grid situations energy density and weight is not that big of an issue compared to cost. If instead of the size of a 'Powerwall' you had to have something the size of a coal bunker or compost bin, that wouldn't really be an issue at all if the materials were very low cost and I could build it myself.

extrapickles 9y ago
You can build nickel-iron batteries yourself, and they use reasonably easy to source materials. The nickel is expensive though, so they can’t easily compete with lead-acid.
- jws 9y ago
  You can beat lead acid on lifetime. I looked into that for a remote installation instead of a half ton of lead acid every 8 years. I elected to do lead acid once more and then hope for a suitable lithium solution. I swear that half ton feels heavier every 8 years.
ZenoArrow 9y ago
Glad you like it, and what you described is what I think is the best potential use case for a DIY iron battery too.

stcredzero 9y ago

The "Allen Lab" YouTube channel is teeny-tiny, and has bare-bones presentation, but it has some of the best actual science content -- especially if you actually paid attention in science classes in school and are a bit tired of the "Mr. Wizard" level gee-whiz YouTube science stuff that covers material you already know. (That said, if you find those videos informative and fun, then knock yourself out! Each to their own.) (His channel's name is actually just "Peter Allen.")

j_s 9y ago
>jw1224: This seems like a good time to mention Captain Disillusion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15423432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15423432 (2017Oct)
- stcredzero 9y ago
  It's always a good time to mention Captain Disillusion!
ZenoArrow 9y ago
For the lazy: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-t9a7XVoH9lDJzhUF2nyHQ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-t9a7XVoH9lDJzhUF2nyHQ
agumonkey 9y ago
it's hyper tiny: 502 subscriber (#502 speaking). I like tiny channels like these. Just need a good sound and stable video and content. GreatScott, AvE, JeruGarcia lots are simple but they give a lot. Also there's guy like Robert Murray Smith but 1) he toys with you to make you search a lot 2) the framing is too wide and sound not smooth enough. Anyway.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  AvE is awesome!
  - 9y ago

larrydag 9y ago

I don't like it when people sell renewable sources of energy as "the cheapest source of energy available". If it were actually cheap then why do you need a community funded project? The problem with solar is storage but hardly anyone discusses that in the total cost of energy consumption. These projects need to be transparent up front. To achieve the "cheap" objective you need benchmarks such as existing technology vs future technology. For instance, i believe they should state "our goal is to achieve $X/Kwh compared to $Y/Kwh of existing technology". That way you can see something measurable, scientific, and objective oriented. I like the project so don't get me wrong. I just think they've worded it all wrong as what they are trying to achieve.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
sp332 9y ago
Lots of things are cheap if you can amortize a large capital investment made upfront. You might need a lot of people to fund the project upfront so it can be cheap later. I agree transparency would be good though.
ZenoArrow 9y ago
I think that's a fair criticism. However, it's probably too early to give a price per KWh just yet.
TaylorAlexander 9y ago
Your first question: “If it were actually cheap then why do you need a community funded project?” Seems a bit daft to me. They need $5000 to buy materials for their university research. If the project is successful the energy they store will be cheap. But doing the research and acquiring the energy are totally different things, so even if the latter is free the former is not.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jpm_sd 9y ago

I wish there was a text explanation, I don't have the patience for video most of the time. How does this technology compare to already-commercialized nickel-iron batteries? [0] https://ironedison.com/ https://ironedison.com/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93iron_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93iron_battery

philipkglass 9y ago
Unfortunately, there were no details about the proposed battery chemistry in the video either. From memory, nickel-iron batteries have the following limitations for stationary storage: - Relatively high self-discharge rate (though this isn't a big problem if you're buffering renewable electricity on a daily basis) - Comparatively low energy efficiency, ~70% - Hydrogen evolution by water electrolysis during charging -- a potential hazard, and one of the main loss paths driving the low efficiency - Electrolyte water loss from electrolytic evolution of hydrogen during charging requires regular compensation with additional water There have been a number of approaches to improve efficiency/suppress hydrogen evolution in nickel-iron batteries by the addition of organosulfur compounds. I don't think that any of those approaches are on the way to commercialization yet, though.
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  > "- Hydrogen evolution by water electrolysis during charging -- a potential hazard, and one of the main loss paths driving the low efficiency" On that point... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ8IcoHjFdk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ8IcoHjFdk Also, it's worth noting that this is a research project. Test cells have been produced, but experiments are ongoing, so the final design is not set in stone.
  - philipkglass 9y ago
    Oh, great! I see that the separate YouTube channel's videos discuss the chemistry though the fund raising page's video doesn't. That won me over -- $100 donated. It looks like I have a bunch of videos to watch this weekend :-)