7 ms·

Tesla researcher is 'excited' about new battery tech developed by the Army

106 points by laurex 8y ago

jokoon 8y ago
> impressive energy density of 460 Wh/Kg How does it compare with the best current battery technology? If it's significant enough that's big news, I'm sure this might trigger some intense attempts of industrial spying. Also I wonder why it's always the military and public funding making real progress in research, almost never private ventures.
- 8draco8 8y ago
  Tesla Model 3 have battery with estimate density of 250 Wh/kg so that would almost double current density
  - DFHippie 8y ago
    > double current density Humorous potential for confusion in an article about batteries :-)
    - amelius 8y ago
      Do you mean the potential at the cathode or the anode?
- i80and 8y ago
  Not an expert, but [1] states that current Lion batteries are at 260 Wh/Kg, with 400 Wh/Kg chemistry approaching commercial viability. [1]: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1803/1803.04317.pdf https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1803/1803.04317.pdf
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- lovich 8y ago
  >Also I wonder why it's always the military and public funding making real progress in research, almost never private ventures. Because it costs money, isn't guaranteed, and can take longer than a quarter which is a combination of aspects that private ventures hate. Private ventures can also easily pair up with universities to have the public pay the bill and then get IP protections over the innovation and sell it themselves
  - daenz 8y ago
    >Private ventures can also easily pair up with universities to have the public pay the bill and then get IP protections over the innovation and sell it themselves Can you elaborate more on how that works? Seems like something that should be illegal.
    - emiliobumachar 8y ago
      "It is common today for university researchers to get grants to develop a system, develop it nearly to the point of completion and call that “finished,” and then start companies where they really finish the project and make it usable. Sometimes they declare the unfinished version “free”; if they are thoroughly corrupt, they instead get an exclusive license from the university. This is not a secret; it is openly admitted by everyone concerned." https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf
- majkinetor 8y ago
  > I'm sure this might trigger some intense attempts of industrial spying. Nah, you don't know Dr. Kang Xu, he would never sell Americans.
- ihm 8y ago
  I think it’s because the profit motive is only sometimes incidentally aligned with the goal of technological progress while publicly-funded researchers have progress (and often actually bettering the world) as their primary goal.
  - jokoon 8y ago
    > only sometimes incidentally Why?
- bluGill 8y ago
  Private ventures have different motives. Private ventures are generally focused on getting to market: keeping quiet is important because they don't want their competition to know what is coming.
- paulirwin 8y ago
  Note that 460 Wh/kg is the density of the electrode, not the cell as a whole which given the aqueous electrolyte would be less but still higher than existing technologies. However, the key point is not just the density, but the density combined with the materials used, and (perhaps most importantly) safety. I think it's worth comparing to LiFePO4 as a baseline. It has the lowest density of common li-ion batteries (110Wh/kg), but it is very safe as it does not have the likelihood of thermal runaway. Other battery types have higher densities, like li-poly and other li-ions, but they can have thermal runaway if damaged or overcharged requiring battery management systems to prevent fire. (With LiFePO4, you also need a BMS, but mainly to prevent permanent damage to the battery to protect your investment, rather than fire.) From my understanding, if this can be commercially viable (as it should be with the lower material cost), this will achieve high density, low cost, and thermal safety, which puts it in a league of its own.
  - ksec 8y ago
    > From my understanding, if this can be commercially viable (as it should be with the lower material cost), this will achieve high density, low cost, and thermal safety, which puts it in a league of its own. And it would be perfect if we could get cycles beyond the current ~500 range. I would be happy if we could get one within next 5 years.
nagisa 8y ago
The article itself can be found at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1175-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1175-6
boh 8y ago
For those who believe governments only serve to stifle innovation, please take heed to this counter example(before the Silicon Valley PR machine recasts the research as a work of its own genius).
- ape4 8y ago
  Not even counting government research, roads and bridges and other infrastructure make innovation possible. Where would Uber, Amazon (deliveries) be without good roads and bridges.
  - sjwright 8y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that
    - akhilcacharya 8y ago
      It was hysterical to see Scott Brown and Mitt Romney attempt to use this as a gotcha...it backfired hard.
      - mrguyorama 8y ago
        Are you sure? Every party republican I know seems convinced that everything they've ever done is theirs and theirs alone, and has nothing to do with the 200+ years of work that the United States has put into education and infrastructure
        akhilcacharya 8y ago
        Considering both Romney and Brown lost in 2012, I'd say it failed. Trump, for all of his many failures and faults, pivoted away from this logic in 2016.
        mrguyorama 8y ago
ed_balls 8y ago
> opens a possibility to significantly increase the lithium-ion battery energy density while preserving safety due to the aqueous nature of the electrolyte. Wouldn't that be bad for car's stability?
- noir_lord 8y ago
  Only if there is free space over the liquid.
- gonzo41 8y ago
  You put baffles in the liquid so the sloshing is reduced. Or use a spherical container. There's a fantastic Engineering Connections where Richard Hammond explains essentially the same thing about LNG transport ships.
  - hobs 8y ago
    I loved Engineering Connections - his explanation of the free surface effect was so well done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d3gVypww6s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d3gVypww6s
- snarfy 8y ago
  Recharging could work the same as refueling. Pump used,uncharged electrolyte out and pump in fresh charged electrolyte.
  - et2o 8y ago
    Brilliant idea!
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  How do you think cars manage with gas tanks at the moment?
  - ed_balls 8y ago
    Battery packs weight more than 500kg. An order of magnitude more than ICE cars energy storage.
jorblumesea 8y ago
It's crazy how much technology comes from government investment, yet people continue to assert that private industry can somehow fill the gaps. With quarterly cycles being what they are, the only one thinking long term is the govt. They're the only ones who engage in fundamental scientific research or even near term research and are responsible for much of the innovation that private industry loves to claim.
- germinalphrase 8y ago
  Marianna Mazzucato did a nice talk at the Long Now Foundation about this exact point. http://longnow.org/seminars/02014/mar/24/entrepreneurial-state-debunking-private-vs-public-sector-myths/ http://longnow.org/seminars/02014/mar/24/entrepreneurial-sta...
nathan_long 8y ago
Can anyone give context on these statements? > When combined with their previous development of “water-in-salt electrolytes (WiSE)”, they claim that they can achieve an impressive energy density of 460 Wh/Kg. > Some soldiers have to carry between 15-25 pounds of batteries and this technology could significantly lower that weight What's the energy density of current batteries and how much lighter would equivalent batteries be using this technology? > while preserving safety due to the aqueous nature of the electrolyte What does this mean - why could the new battery be safer?
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  That’s a bizarre mix of units...
- AloeSanitizer 8y ago
  New battery energy density in this article: 460 Wh/kg This is from an older article looking at model 3 energy density: 207 Wh/kg Tesla Model 3 Battery Cell Has World's Highest Energy Density https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/bo27ia/tesla_battery_researcher_is_excited_about_new/enblk39?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/bo27ia/tesla_b...
  - JackFr 8y ago
    Gasoline 12,888 Wh/kg (I don't post this to be annoying contrarian in a discussion of battery tech. The externalities of burning carbon aside, it's just astonishing how effective gasoline is a relatively safe, stable means of transporting energy.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
    - i80and 8y ago
      Not to detract from your point since gasoline is amazingly useful, but there's a gap between energy density and usable energy density. An Otto cycle has a maximum theoretical efficiency of up to 61%, but in practice, friction and powering auxiliary system result in closer to 35% efficiency for a gasoline engine. VERY rough spitballing not to be cited: ~4500 usable Wh/kg. Permanent magnet motors achieve upwards of 92% efficiency under optimal load, from the numbers I can find with quick googling.
detritus 8y ago
It is an interesting advance (and one far beyond my technical ken) but the main point that stood out for me when this was first posted on HN a few days back is the so far untested longetivity of the system, with it so far only having been tested for 150 dis/charge cycles. This doesn't at all preclude improvement, but the military's needs and budgets don't necessitate very long-life uses, unlike consumer items - especially expensive battery on wheels items like cars. Here's hoping though!
- WhompingWindows 8y ago
  It may be that the new batteries simply haven't had the time to be thoroughly tested. My great uncle worked on batteries in the 60's and we are still running experiments on them today to examine their life cycle.
bluntfang 8y ago
Does anyone know the company that was commissioned to research and/or manufacture this for the Army?
- deckar01 8y ago
  > The researchers, led by Chunsheng Wang, R.F. and F.R. Wright Distinguished Chair Professor in UMD's Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry; Kang Xu, ARL Fellow, and Oleg Borodin, ARL scientist, developed the battery into a testable stage... https://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?article=3445 https://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?article=3445
jimrandomh 8y ago
There is a tradition among mainstream press outlets of taking battery-related research, misreading it in a way that makes it sound more impressive than it really is, and publishing breathless articles about how revolutionary it is. This article continues the tradition. The Electrek article claims that the researchers made a cell with "an impressive energy density of 460 Wh/Kg". But the Nature paper says that they made a cell with "460 watt-hours per kilogram of total composite electrode". These are not the same; a cell contains other components besides the electrode: the anode, the electrolyte, and the package. The paper doesn't state the overall energy density (at least in the abstract), but it will surely be much lower when other components are counted.
Sutanreyu 8y ago
The future is with solid-state batteries.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

106 points by laurex 8y ago

> impressive energy density of 460 Wh/Kg How does it compare with the best current battery technology? If it's significant enough that's big news, I'm sure this might trigger some intense attempts of industrial spying. Also I wonder why it's always the military and public funding making real progress in research, almost never private ventures.

8draco8 8y ago
Tesla Model 3 have battery with estimate density of 250 Wh/kg so that would almost double current density
- DFHippie 8y ago
  > double current density Humorous potential for confusion in an article about batteries :-)
  - amelius 8y ago
    Do you mean the potential at the cathode or the anode?
i80and 8y ago
Not an expert, but [1] states that current Lion batteries are at 260 Wh/Kg, with 400 Wh/Kg chemistry approaching commercial viability. [1]: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1803/1803.04317.pdf https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1803/1803.04317.pdf
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
lovich 8y ago
>Also I wonder why it's always the military and public funding making real progress in research, almost never private ventures. Because it costs money, isn't guaranteed, and can take longer than a quarter which is a combination of aspects that private ventures hate. Private ventures can also easily pair up with universities to have the public pay the bill and then get IP protections over the innovation and sell it themselves
- daenz 8y ago
  >Private ventures can also easily pair up with universities to have the public pay the bill and then get IP protections over the innovation and sell it themselves Can you elaborate more on how that works? Seems like something that should be illegal.
  - emiliobumachar 8y ago
    "It is common today for university researchers to get grants to develop a system, develop it nearly to the point of completion and call that “finished,” and then start companies where they really finish the project and make it usable. Sometimes they declare the unfinished version “free”; if they are thoroughly corrupt, they instead get an exclusive license from the university. This is not a secret; it is openly admitted by everyone concerned." https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf
majkinetor 8y ago
> I'm sure this might trigger some intense attempts of industrial spying. Nah, you don't know Dr. Kang Xu, he would never sell Americans.
ihm 8y ago
I think it’s because the profit motive is only sometimes incidentally aligned with the goal of technological progress while publicly-funded researchers have progress (and often actually bettering the world) as their primary goal.
- jokoon 8y ago
  > only sometimes incidentally Why?
bluGill 8y ago
Private ventures have different motives. Private ventures are generally focused on getting to market: keeping quiet is important because they don't want their competition to know what is coming.
paulirwin 8y ago
Note that 460 Wh/kg is the density of the electrode, not the cell as a whole which given the aqueous electrolyte would be less but still higher than existing technologies. However, the key point is not just the density, but the density combined with the materials used, and (perhaps most importantly) safety. I think it's worth comparing to LiFePO4 as a baseline. It has the lowest density of common li-ion batteries (110Wh/kg), but it is very safe as it does not have the likelihood of thermal runaway. Other battery types have higher densities, like li-poly and other li-ions, but they can have thermal runaway if damaged or overcharged requiring battery management systems to prevent fire. (With LiFePO4, you also need a BMS, but mainly to prevent permanent damage to the battery to protect your investment, rather than fire.) From my understanding, if this can be commercially viable (as it should be with the lower material cost), this will achieve high density, low cost, and thermal safety, which puts it in a league of its own.
- ksec 8y ago
  > From my understanding, if this can be commercially viable (as it should be with the lower material cost), this will achieve high density, low cost, and thermal safety, which puts it in a league of its own. And it would be perfect if we could get cycles beyond the current ~500 range. I would be happy if we could get one within next 5 years.

nagisa 8y ago

The article itself can be found at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1175-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1175-6

boh 8y ago

For those who believe governments only serve to stifle innovation, please take heed to this counter example(before the Silicon Valley PR machine recasts the research as a work of its own genius).

ape4 8y ago
Not even counting government research, roads and bridges and other infrastructure make innovation possible. Where would Uber, Amazon (deliveries) be without good roads and bridges.
- sjwright 8y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that
  - akhilcacharya 8y ago
    It was hysterical to see Scott Brown and Mitt Romney attempt to use this as a gotcha...it backfired hard.
    - mrguyorama 8y ago
      Are you sure? Every party republican I know seems convinced that everything they've ever done is theirs and theirs alone, and has nothing to do with the 200+ years of work that the United States has put into education and infrastructure
      - akhilcacharya 8y ago
        Considering both Romney and Brown lost in 2012, I'd say it failed. Trump, for all of his many failures and faults, pivoted away from this logic in 2016.
        mrguyorama 8y ago

ed_balls 8y ago

> opens a possibility to significantly increase the lithium-ion battery energy density while preserving safety due to the aqueous nature of the electrolyte. Wouldn't that be bad for car's stability?

noir_lord 8y ago
Only if there is free space over the liquid.
gonzo41 8y ago
You put baffles in the liquid so the sloshing is reduced. Or use a spherical container. There's a fantastic Engineering Connections where Richard Hammond explains essentially the same thing about LNG transport ships.
- hobs 8y ago
  I loved Engineering Connections - his explanation of the free surface effect was so well done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d3gVypww6s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d3gVypww6s
snarfy 8y ago
Recharging could work the same as refueling. Pump used,uncharged electrolyte out and pump in fresh charged electrolyte.
- et2o 8y ago
  Brilliant idea!
chrisseaton 8y ago
How do you think cars manage with gas tanks at the moment?
- ed_balls 8y ago
  Battery packs weight more than 500kg. An order of magnitude more than ICE cars energy storage.

jorblumesea 8y ago

It's crazy how much technology comes from government investment, yet people continue to assert that private industry can somehow fill the gaps. With quarterly cycles being what they are, the only one thinking long term is the govt. They're the only ones who engage in fundamental scientific research or even near term research and are responsible for much of the innovation that private industry loves to claim.

germinalphrase 8y ago
Marianna Mazzucato did a nice talk at the Long Now Foundation about this exact point. http://longnow.org/seminars/02014/mar/24/entrepreneurial-state-debunking-private-vs-public-sector-myths/ http://longnow.org/seminars/02014/mar/24/entrepreneurial-sta...

nathan_long 8y ago

Can anyone give context on these statements? > When combined with their previous development of “water-in-salt electrolytes (WiSE)”, they claim that they can achieve an impressive energy density of 460 Wh/Kg. > Some soldiers have to carry between 15-25 pounds of batteries and this technology could significantly lower that weight What's the energy density of current batteries and how much lighter would equivalent batteries be using this technology? > while preserving safety due to the aqueous nature of the electrolyte What does this mean - why could the new battery be safer?

chrisseaton 8y ago
That’s a bizarre mix of units...
AloeSanitizer 8y ago
New battery energy density in this article: 460 Wh/kg This is from an older article looking at model 3 energy density: 207 Wh/kg Tesla Model 3 Battery Cell Has World's Highest Energy Density https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/bo27ia/tesla_battery_researcher_is_excited_about_new/enblk39?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/bo27ia/tesla_b...
- JackFr 8y ago
  Gasoline 12,888 Wh/kg (I don't post this to be annoying contrarian in a discussion of battery tech. The externalities of burning carbon aside, it's just astonishing how effective gasoline is a relatively safe, stable means of transporting energy.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
  - i80and 8y ago
    Not to detract from your point since gasoline is amazingly useful, but there's a gap between energy density and usable energy density. An Otto cycle has a maximum theoretical efficiency of up to 61%, but in practice, friction and powering auxiliary system result in closer to 35% efficiency for a gasoline engine. VERY rough spitballing not to be cited: ~4500 usable Wh/kg. Permanent magnet motors achieve upwards of 92% efficiency under optimal load, from the numbers I can find with quick googling.

detritus 8y ago

It is an interesting advance (and one far beyond my technical ken) but the main point that stood out for me when this was first posted on HN a few days back is the so far untested longetivity of the system, with it so far only having been tested for 150 dis/charge cycles. This doesn't at all preclude improvement, but the military's needs and budgets don't necessitate very long-life uses, unlike consumer items - especially expensive battery on wheels items like cars. Here's hoping though!

WhompingWindows 8y ago
It may be that the new batteries simply haven't had the time to be thoroughly tested. My great uncle worked on batteries in the 60's and we are still running experiments on them today to examine their life cycle.

bluntfang 8y ago

Does anyone know the company that was commissioned to research and/or manufacture this for the Army?

deckar01 8y ago
> The researchers, led by Chunsheng Wang, R.F. and F.R. Wright Distinguished Chair Professor in UMD's Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry; Kang Xu, ARL Fellow, and Oleg Borodin, ARL scientist, developed the battery into a testable stage... https://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?article=3445 https://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?article=3445

jimrandomh 8y ago

There is a tradition among mainstream press outlets of taking battery-related research, misreading it in a way that makes it sound more impressive than it really is, and publishing breathless articles about how revolutionary it is. This article continues the tradition. The Electrek article claims that the researchers made a cell with "an impressive energy density of 460 Wh/Kg". But the Nature paper says that they made a cell with "460 watt-hours per kilogram of total composite electrode". These are not the same; a cell contains other components besides the electrode: the anode, the electrolyte, and the package. The paper doesn't state the overall energy density (at least in the abstract), but it will surely be much lower when other components are counted.

Sutanreyu 8y ago

The future is with solid-state batteries.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]