9 ms·

Maybe the next big disruption is not about making better batteries based on Li (Lithium) but to ditch Li for most mass use purposes and go with a different mate

Maybe the next big disruption is not about making better batteries based on Li (Lithium) but to ditch Li for most mass use purposes and go with a different material, e.g. Na (Natrium, vulgar name: Sodium)… which unlike lithium is extremely abundant. It would (at least in its early less optimized versions) have a slightly lower energy density at about 200 Wh/kg compared to the current best lithium-based state of the art batteries, but still be in a similar ballpark and easily enough for many applications, especially given the much cheaper price. Some manufacturers (e.g. CATL in China) are apparently already ramping up for Na battery mass production. https://archive.is/qJQPn https://archive.is/qJQPn

_8j50 3y ago
I am sure you're not the first person to not want dependency on foreign countries that have lithium deposits. Why is this not done already with sodium? Is it costly to manufacture with it? Durability?
- Lev1a 3y ago
  My guess as a layman would be that AFAIK the reaction of alkali ("group 1") metals with water is more violent the further down it's situated in that column in the periodic table. Since Na is one down from Li it should react more violently to any water contact (even water vapor in the atmosphere) which would make it inherently more of a safety concern.
canadiantim 3y ago
Lithium actually is super abundant
- kube-system 3y ago
  “Abundance” is kind of a tricky concept. 99.999%+ of earth’s resources are not yet within human’s ability to mine. Mostly either inaccessible or too sparsely concentrated or locked in compounds difficult to industrialize. Titanium for instance is also very abundant. But it hasn’t been until relatively recently that humans were able to mine and process it at industrial scale.
- EntrePrescott 3y ago
  depends by what measure… if it's just about how much lithium is theoretically estimated to exist in the earth crust, then one could twist together an argument for lithium to be somewhat "abundant" (even though even by that measure Sodium is, depending on the source, 1000 to 2000 times more abundant). But if it's in terms of practicably available (mineable or otherwise practicably extractable at a sub-exorbitant price) lithium reserves, it's quite bleak actually, and we are currently forced to either rely on a small set of limited reserves, mostly concentrated in a few rather uncertain countries of origin… or to resort to extremely expensive low-yield extraction methods. In contrast: Na (Sodium) is trivially and cheaply extractable from salt, which is readily available everywhere in much larger quantities (be it as sea water or from salt mines which are enormously more common than lithium mining) for cheap.
  - nasmorn 3y ago
    Also in Austria we have one of the oldest salt mines on earth and it is still very pretty there. Salt mining can be done with very little environmental impact.
ramesh31 3y ago
Sodium chemistries currently have intractable problems with dendrite growth, limiting the cycle life to a level not viable for use in commercial cells. It's an active field of research though, and probably the most promising lithium alternative if that problem can be solved.
- thinkcontext 3y ago
  Multiple companies in China report GWh scale production lines close to opening.
acyou 3y ago
That's correct about the specific energy, it's partly related to sodium's atomic mass of 23, vs lithium's atomic mass of 7.
- _hypx 3y ago
  It's weird that people have failed to notice that hydrogen has an atomic mass of 1. Far better than both of them. To quote what I said elsewhere: > It's bizarre how people refuse to accept that hydrogen fuel cells are technically batteries and have absurdly high energy densities. And if pressed, you usually hear some excuse like poor efficiencies, as if that isn't a powerful justification for pouring billions of dollars into the problem.
  - Gibbon1 3y ago
    Yeah hydrogen's energy per kg is definitely an attractive nuisance.
  - brokencode 3y ago
    I don’t think anybody has failed to notice this. Toyota and Honda have both had notable failures bringing Hydrogen fuel cell cars to market despite exciting claims along those lines. I think you’ll have to quote some more authoritative sources to convince people that it could be viable.
    - _hypx 3y ago
      This ignores the part where battery powered cars have existed for over a century and have "failed." But recent events have changed the needs of society, and now they have "succeeded." People are now claiming that this can never happen again or that no innovation is possible in the future for another type of battery chemistry.
      - stetrain 3y ago
        The needs of society changed but so did the technology. An EV built in 2020 is a completely different proposition to one built in 1990. > People are now claiming that this can never happen again or that no innovation is possible in the future for another type of battery chemistry. Who is claiming this?
Tagbert 3y ago
There are frequent articles talking about various researchers that are investigating that vulgar Sodium as a new chemistry for batteries.
- EntrePrescott 3y ago
  Different sodium based battery technologies have existed for quite a while (much longer than lithium based batteries actually), and research as well. And there were already a couple niches where some of them managed to establish some foothold, e.g. in the domain of high-temperature batteries. But most sodium based battery types either had a too low energy density to be competitive or they had other drawbacks that - while sometimes controllable in lab or industrial conditions, made them unsuitable for common mainstream mass uses where lithium batteries are established. Only quite recently have we reached a point where new Na battery types emerged that simultaneously 1. do not suffer of such problems, 2. have a sufficient energy density AND 3. have made it to a commercially viable alternative to the common Lithium-ion-batteries for mainstream uses. Let's hope this time is the right time for the Na battery revolution. We'll see.

_8j50 3y ago

I am sure you're not the first person to not want dependency on foreign countries that have lithium deposits. Why is this not done already with sodium? Is it costly to manufacture with it? Durability?

Lev1a 3y ago
My guess as a layman would be that AFAIK the reaction of alkali ("group 1") metals with water is more violent the further down it's situated in that column in the periodic table. Since Na is one down from Li it should react more violently to any water contact (even water vapor in the atmosphere) which would make it inherently more of a safety concern.

canadiantim 3y ago

Lithium actually is super abundant

kube-system 3y ago
“Abundance” is kind of a tricky concept. 99.999%+ of earth’s resources are not yet within human’s ability to mine. Mostly either inaccessible or too sparsely concentrated or locked in compounds difficult to industrialize. Titanium for instance is also very abundant. But it hasn’t been until relatively recently that humans were able to mine and process it at industrial scale.
EntrePrescott 3y ago
depends by what measure… if it's just about how much lithium is theoretically estimated to exist in the earth crust, then one could twist together an argument for lithium to be somewhat "abundant" (even though even by that measure Sodium is, depending on the source, 1000 to 2000 times more abundant). But if it's in terms of practicably available (mineable or otherwise practicably extractable at a sub-exorbitant price) lithium reserves, it's quite bleak actually, and we are currently forced to either rely on a small set of limited reserves, mostly concentrated in a few rather uncertain countries of origin… or to resort to extremely expensive low-yield extraction methods. In contrast: Na (Sodium) is trivially and cheaply extractable from salt, which is readily available everywhere in much larger quantities (be it as sea water or from salt mines which are enormously more common than lithium mining) for cheap.
- nasmorn 3y ago
  Also in Austria we have one of the oldest salt mines on earth and it is still very pretty there. Salt mining can be done with very little environmental impact.

ramesh31 3y ago

Sodium chemistries currently have intractable problems with dendrite growth, limiting the cycle life to a level not viable for use in commercial cells. It's an active field of research though, and probably the most promising lithium alternative if that problem can be solved.

thinkcontext 3y ago
Multiple companies in China report GWh scale production lines close to opening.

acyou 3y ago

That's correct about the specific energy, it's partly related to sodium's atomic mass of 23, vs lithium's atomic mass of 7.

_hypx 3y ago
It's weird that people have failed to notice that hydrogen has an atomic mass of 1. Far better than both of them. To quote what I said elsewhere: > It's bizarre how people refuse to accept that hydrogen fuel cells are technically batteries and have absurdly high energy densities. And if pressed, you usually hear some excuse like poor efficiencies, as if that isn't a powerful justification for pouring billions of dollars into the problem.
- Gibbon1 3y ago
  Yeah hydrogen's energy per kg is definitely an attractive nuisance.
- brokencode 3y ago
  I don’t think anybody has failed to notice this. Toyota and Honda have both had notable failures bringing Hydrogen fuel cell cars to market despite exciting claims along those lines. I think you’ll have to quote some more authoritative sources to convince people that it could be viable.
  - _hypx 3y ago
    This ignores the part where battery powered cars have existed for over a century and have "failed." But recent events have changed the needs of society, and now they have "succeeded." People are now claiming that this can never happen again or that no innovation is possible in the future for another type of battery chemistry.
    - stetrain 3y ago
      The needs of society changed but so did the technology. An EV built in 2020 is a completely different proposition to one built in 1990. > People are now claiming that this can never happen again or that no innovation is possible in the future for another type of battery chemistry. Who is claiming this?

Tagbert 3y ago

There are frequent articles talking about various researchers that are investigating that vulgar Sodium as a new chemistry for batteries.

EntrePrescott 3y ago
Different sodium based battery technologies have existed for quite a while (much longer than lithium based batteries actually), and research as well. And there were already a couple niches where some of them managed to establish some foothold, e.g. in the domain of high-temperature batteries. But most sodium based battery types either had a too low energy density to be competitive or they had other drawbacks that - while sometimes controllable in lab or industrial conditions, made them unsuitable for common mainstream mass uses where lithium batteries are established. Only quite recently have we reached a point where new Na battery types emerged that simultaneously 1. do not suffer of such problems, 2. have a sufficient energy density AND 3. have made it to a commercially viable alternative to the common Lithium-ion-batteries for mainstream uses. Let's hope this time is the right time for the Na battery revolution. We'll see.