> "The battery has an energy density of 24 Wh/kg, meaning approximately 20 percent capacity compared to comparable lithium-ion batteries currently available."

> "The battery has an energy density of 24 Wh/kg, meaning approximately 20 percent capacity compared to comparable lithium-ion batteries currently available." > "The new battery has a negative electrode made of carbon fibre, and a positive electrode made of a lithium iron phosphate-coated aluminium foil." Really, it's more like 10% compared to something like the latest Tesla cells. Even when comparing to LiFePo4, recently modern cells I think are in the ballpark of 150 wh/kg versus the 120 wh/kg implied by the article. It's interesting work anyways, though. Even if the energy density isn't enough to be practical yet, it's progress. I don't expect structural batteries to be mainstream in cars anytime soon, but it does at least expand the set of available design options. (I'm currently working on a Mazda RX-8 conversion. If structural batteries were available and competitive in terms of energy density and I had unlimited funding and ability to fabricate one-off parts, one could imagine a structural battery replacing the front and rear subframe and the steel frame member that connects the transmission to the differential in the rear. You'd still need additional batteries to get a decent range, though. Realistically, you'd want to design a car from scratch to really take advantage of structural batteries.) I wonder how bad of an idea it would be to replace the front and rear bumper (by which I mean the steel bumper underneath all the plastic and styrofoam cushioning) with a structural battery?