Slashdot Mirror


Silicon As the New Lithium

hduff writes "While lithium-ion batteries offer better performance than lead-acid or ni-cad batteries, the supply of lithium is limited and the batteries can pose problems. Researchers at the Technion-Israel Institute are building a better battery with easily obtainable sand and air."

52 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. "Turn the desert green" backfires by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wouldn't you know it. You turn the desert into an environment that supports agriculture and the very thing you got rid of in mass quantities turns out to be the main ingredient in the technology of the future. Doesn't that just rub you the wrong way.

    1. Re:"Turn the desert green" backfires by SirLoadALot · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually at the moment things are going from green to desert. Desertification is a major problem around the world, including Africa and China, where arable land is being lost to the expansion of major deserts.

  2. Re:What about copper? by somersault · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just use gold instead!

    But really, we have a lot of otherwise useful metals being punted around in the form of money at the moment. We should use digital money and put the metal stuff to better use.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  3. Marketing/advert submissions by lanner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While new battery technology is very important in our current time, the sheer number of duplicate stories and borderline advertisement/marketing stories on Slashdot about these new batteries, WITH a combines lithium FUD scare at the same time no less, sours these stories.

    1. Re:Marketing/advert submissions by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 4, Informative

      While new battery technology is very important in our current time, the sheer number of duplicate stories and borderline advertisement/marketing stories on Slashdot about these new batteries, WITH a combines lithium FUD scare at the same time no less, sours these stories.

      Seconded. Does anyone else remember when Slashdot stories linked to journals and essays rather than blogs and press releases? Hopefully the click-through counts reflect the /. reader's ability to avoid anything with "blog" or "gadget" or perhaps these days even "google" in the URL.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    2. Re:Marketing/advert submissions by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Just a thought...

      I had that thought once but when I tested it I found UID's and IQ's are not inversely related.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  4. Natrium batteries by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Chemically very similar to Lithium. Plenty of Natrium around.

     

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Natrium batteries by captainpanic · · Score: 5, Informative

      Natrium is called SODIUM in English. (Not sure, but I think that English is the only language that does not use the word "natrium" for Na).

      And it might not be able to form the components that you need for the battery (it's not pure lithium).

      Read more here.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery#Electrochemistry

      Also, if it would work, sodium is much heavier than lithium.

    2. Re:Natrium batteries by pmontra · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not sure, but I think that English is the only language that does not use the word "natrium" for Na.

      Natrium was the original Latin name for the element but it's Sodium in English http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium, sodio in Italian http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodio, sodium in French http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium, sódio in Portuguese http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%B3dio, sodio in Spanish http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodio and I stop here because I don't want to enter into languages I don't know.

      Google gives 12,500,000 occurrences of Sodium and 730,000 of Natrium.

    3. Re:Natrium batteries by Marcika · · Score: 4, Informative

      Natrium is called SODIUM in English. (Not sure, but I think that English is the only language that does not use the word "natrium" for Na).

      No, both are used very widely, actually: "Sodium" (from arabic suda: soda headache tablets) is used in most Romance and Slavic languages and "Natrium" (from ancient Egyptian natron: baking soda/soda ash) is used in Germanic languages and Hungarian/Serbocroatian, mostly due to the influence of Berzelius (who was a Swede).

    4. Re:Natrium batteries by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hmmm yes but no.

      And yet it's being worked on.
      e.g.
      http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2006.08.029

       

      --
      Deleted
    5. Re:Natrium batteries by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, Spanish word for sodium is "sodio". Funny thing, as one would have expected it to be "natrio" instead (just substitute "o" for "um" and there you have a Spanish version of a Latin word). Which makes me wonder if someone at sometime forgot that sodium probably comes from Arabic, as per Wikipedia, and thought it was Latin instead.

      Perhaps Spanish was influenced by the Arab presence in Spain during the Middle Ages?

    6. Re:Natrium batteries by pmontra · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems that sodium is a newer name for natrium. Some languages kept the old one and others switched to sodium.

      I found an explanation at http://takimika.liceofoscarini.it/sostanze/etimelementi.phtml?periodo=3&gruppo=1 I translate it from Italian:

      Sodium derives from modern Latin sodium, coined by Davy [probably this guy] from middle ages Latin soda of arabic origins. The origin of the element symbol is different. It comes from natrium, the middle ages name for sodium carbonate, Na2CO3, derived from Latin nitrum and Greek nítron (salpetre), that is potassium nitrate, KNO3, which looks like sodium carbonate and was often confused with it in the old ages.

      By the way, "kaustik soda" is "soda caustica" in Italian.

  5. Lithium limited? by MojoRilla · · Score: 5, Informative
    According to the All Cars Electric blog there is no looming shortage of lithium. From the article:

    Gerson Lehrman Group, a New York consulting firm, estimates that even if 500,000 cars powered by lithium ion batteries were produced in 2015, they would use less than 10 percent of last year's global lithium output. And global output continues to climb.

    And there is the fact that salt water has lithium. In fact, some startups are trying to extract it now. If the price goes high enough, it will be practical to extract lithium from the ocean.

    1. Re:Lithium limited? by 7-Vodka · · Score: 2

      To say that the supply of lithium is limited, is like going back 150 years ago and saying that the supply of oil is limited.

      --

      Liberty.

    2. Re:Lithium limited? by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Informative

      depends. right now were're surface mining lithium salts from exposed salt flats. theres no telling how many rich veins of lithium salts are hiding in valleys or near aquifers. i'm sure someone is working on that, but until someone runs analysis on where those veins might be i doubt anyone could tell you. more than likely battery technology will move beyond lithium long before (100 years?) we run out of lithium "ore" you can just shovel off the ground and into the back of a truck (Seriously, do a google image search for "lithium ore" - they literally shovel it right off the ground into piles, and later into pickup trucks)

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    3. Re:Lithium limited? by MtHuurne · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are some important differences though. Oil is used as an energy source, while lithium is used to store energy. When a battery reaches its end of life, the lithium can be extracted and used to make a new battery.

      Also, a rising price of lithium means more lithium ore will become economical to mine. Because extracting oil takes energy, there is a point at which it is not worthwhile to extract the oil since you would have to burn more oil than you extract.

      Besides, the price of lithium is currently a very small portion of the price of a battery. The price of lithium could rise to 10 times its current level and batteries would still be affordable. If the price of oil would rise to 10 times its current level, the impact would be huge.

    4. Re:Lithium limited? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The situation is completely different.

      A non-renewable energy resource such as oil is consumed by the process of using it as fuel -- i.e. it is destroyed (unless you're willing to wait millions of years for the carbon cycle to do its job). It also has a well-defined theoretical endpoint that would never be crossed: once it takes more energy to extract it than the oil contains, there's no point in extracting it. It's simple physics. And the practical economic threshold will be reached well before that point.

      By contrast, a non-renewable material resource such as lithium is not destroyed during use, and it can be recycled. This prolongs the availability of the resource immensely. The challenge becomes recovering as much of it as possible rather than trying to manage its inevitable depletion. Furthermore, as a non-energy resource, we can keep mining it from geological sources of ever-diminishing concentrations. There is no practical limit to the resource as long as the price/demand goes high enough. Although it is unlikely it would ever be necessary, we could extract it from average rock if we had to. Oil isn't like that at all.

      Thus, by recycling efficiently "peak lithium" might never happen. The worst that would happen is increased expense. "Peak oil", however, is inevitable as long as we keep using it, and no matter how high the price goes. Well, unless you stopped using it as a fuel and only sold it as perfume or something.

  6. Summary by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

    Still in prototype (seems he might have only made one, and he tested it for 600 hours ). Not rechargable. More powerful than current hearing aid batteries. May be made rechargable in 10 years (how on earth do people estimate this stuff? How can you estimate how long it will take to do something no one has ever done? It might not even be possible). Rumors abound. If it works out it will be great, but don't hold your breath.

    Still, it's kind of cool that you can make a battery out of sand.

    --
    Qxe4
    1. Re:Summary by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Informative

      First of all (I'm a researcher in power MEMS/micro power sources), I must say that a battery that has been tested for 600 hours count as an excellent proof of concept. Most of the stuff we develop we're happy if it works for minutes, let alone hundreds of hours. This is in advanced stage. Second: so what if it's "only" a primary battery? The market for primary batteries is HUGE and because they are disposable, making them cheap and environmentally friendly is just if not more important, than with secondary batteries.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    2. Re:Summary by AGMW · · Score: 4, Funny

      Still, it's kind of cool that you can make a battery out of sand.

      Yep, and to charge it you just turn it over!

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    3. Re:Summary by phoenix321 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My car still burns non-rechargeable hydrocarbons and one tank barely lasts 600 hours.

      If the energy-to-weight and energy-to-cost ratios of that battery could reach even the general vicinity of gasoline, everything else concerning click-in systems or replacement is peanuts and will be invented less than one second after the battery itself. Of course we will have BluBattery and HD-Battery warring for dominance, but that's only a minor nuisance compared to the fact that we now could power cars, trucks, boats and airliners without needing to pay or liberate more 17th century cleptocracies somewhere in the deserts.

  7. does this mean by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny

    they'll be treating manic depression with silicone?

    Then again, I guess they've been doing that for years with breast implants...

    1. Re:does this mean by rcamans · · Score: 2, Funny

      And what's this sexism bs? Why not femic depression? Or Femalic?

      --
      wake up and hold your nose
    2. Re:does this mean by bilbobob · · Score: 2, Funny

      More to the point, in 10 years time my girlfriend will have implants that can recharge my ipod. Obviously contactless power would be best; not sure USB piecings would go down too well. I might even start saving for my own pec implants now.

  8. Re:What would be fun by montyzooooma · · Score: 2, Informative
    Sand is everywhere.

    Chile has half the world's lithium and they're gearing up to play hardball over it. This will hopefully deflate those plans.

  9. Understand how it works - and then applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The article does not help understand how it actually works, so I read around and went to the Technion-friends website.

    Basically normal sand is Silicon-Dioxide. If you take pure silicon and build a battery from it, and expose the battery to air, the silicon will interact with the oxygen in the air. So the pure silicon will become silicon dioxide - sand. In the process, it releases energy.

    The neat trick in the battery - is that they set it up so that the energy is released NOT as heat (which is the usual thing), but some of it as electricity. They do this with some kind of membrane that allows oxygen ions to flow through, but electrons must come the other way - hence an electric flow.

    Like any innovation, will take some years to be fully researched and commercialized. Small batteries will probably come first, bigger ones (for cars) later. And how to recharge does not seem obvious - at least not from the description so far.

    A lot of people above are skeptical - but really this kind of innovation is what science and engineering are all about. Innovation goes hand in hand with raising ever more questions; we should be used to that by now.

    Really really cool. And smart. My hat off to the Israeli guys and their collaborators in USA & Japan.

  10. (Electro-)Chemistry is quite fuzzy by Jack+Malmostoso · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have read the original publication (doi:10.1016/j.elecom.2009.08.015) and cannot understand much of the (electro-)chemistry of it.
    The electrode potential is strongly dependent on the doping of the silicon, which makes sense, but the I/V curve looks less than impressive. It's mostly a bad fuel cell, at the moment.
    Also, the chemistry of the electrolyte is not clear to me. In principle the battery should work according to dissolution of Si from the anode, transport through the electrolyte (an ionic liquid with fluorine) and reaction with oxygen at the air cathode. The researchers claim that they observe a white deposit at the cathode, and that this deposit is SiO2.
    Silicon-fluorine chemistry is quite complicated, IIRC, and I cannot for the life of me imagine transport of Si4+ ions in the electrolyte. Also, HF as such does not dissolve Si, but it need some strong acid to start the etching. How this phenomenon can happen in the ionic liquid is beyond me.

    Also, in the introduction, the researchers claim that the battery has an "infinite shelf life", but then talk about corrosion currents in the paper. If there is corrosion (i.e. self discharge), then the shelf life is quite limited.
    Cherry on top, they claim that SiO2 is easily reducible to reobtain Si. I am not familiar with silicon metallurgy, but I am not sure it is easy to do it electrochemically, let alone replate Si at the anode upon recharge.
    On the plus side, they used metallurgical grade Si, which is dirt cheap when compared to semiconductor grade Si.

    I would love for this to work, but at the moment the authors have omitted quite a bit of information. If I were the referee, I would have asked at least the questions above. Think of it, there is a corresponding author for a reason.

    Disclaimer: I work in battery research, and I am hence jealous that they made it to the front page of Slashdot.

  11. Re:What about copper? by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's so little gold in the entire world that even if we spun all of it unto wires the contribution would be negligible.

  12. Figuring out how it works by giladpn · · Score: 5, Informative

    (sorry may be some confusion - a double post since the previous one inadvertently was anonymous)

    To better understand how this works, I went to the Tehnion website.

    Sand is actually Silicon-dioxide (combined silicon and oxygen). Pure silicon interacts with oxygen form the air to create sand. That's first-year normal chemistry. Usually such an interaction produces heat not electricity.

    They built the battery from pure silicon, and the trick is that Oxygen from the air has to pass through a membrane to get to the silicon and oxidize it. The membrane will allow only oxygen ions through, so electrons have to flow the other way to match up with the ions and maintain overall neutrality. Hence you get a current instead of only heat.

    Of course it will take some years to commercialize. Small applications will come first (small batteries), only later will we get big batteries (for cars?) and even later rechargeable stuff (if at all). I noticed many people are skeptical - but this is normal in science and engineering. Any real innovation raises new questions that must be answered. Kudos to the Israeli team, and their collaborators from USA & Japan.

  13. Re:What about copper? by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Funny

    A wire shortage.. People can work up a fear about just about anything I think.

    http://xkcd.com/605/

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  14. English is wrong. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 3, Funny

    Natrium is called SODIUM in English.

    The chemical name is Natrium. Clearly English is wrong.

     

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:English is wrong. by phoenix321 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The chemical name for mercury is "hydrargyrum" and I'm glad nobody uses that regularly. "Quicksilver" could follow the latin word best without bending the tongue of scientists and technicians beyond repair.

    2. Re:English is wrong. by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 2, Funny

      You must be from München.

      I'm from Munich, and I call it Sodium.

  15. Re:What about copper? by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 5, Informative

    Aluminum is OK as a transmission medium, but it's not too good in end use applications. Turns out aluminum has a property called "cold flow", when you put it under pressure (like a screw or clamp terminal) the metal literally moves away and creates a loose connection which causes heat and often fire.

    Next, greatly varying expansion/contraction properties make aluminum still more likely to work loose when terminated to a dissimilar metal like a lug or screw of brass, steel, etc..

    Lastly, all aluminum has a coat of oxide that has high electrical resistance, and it reforms very quickly when it is cleaned off. Proper cleaning and antioxidant paste are critical to avoid failures in such home applications as the line dropping from the service weather head to the meter socket of a dwelling (a common application).

    Once the circuits are in the walls of a dwelling you do not want aluminum because of the fire danger. While it has been used for mobile home wiring in the past during times of high copper prices, it is currently hard to insure one of those homes. If you DO have aluminum wire inside your walls you should be checking the torque (but don't over tighten) of every connection at six month intervals... forever...

    To sum up, you only want aluminum where you can easily inspect and adjust any connections on a regular basis.

    --
    You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
  16. Re:What about copper? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Once the circuits are in the walls of a dwelling you do not want aluminum because of the fire danger. While it has been used for mobile home wiring in the past during times of high copper prices, it is currently hard to insure one of those homes. If you DO have aluminum wire inside your walls you should be checking the torque (but don't over tighten) of every connection at six month intervals... forever...

    No, you retrofit it with copper ENDS (which attach with conductive epoxy) which don't have this problem. Guess what? We no longer use wires poked into holes in automotive applications anyway; all connectors are terminated somehow.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. But notice the caveats by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wonderful, but there are an awful lot of warning signs that this thing is not a world-beater:

    * It's not rechargeable. And I don't know of any simple electrochemical process that reverses the oxidation of silicon.

    * It requires a Flourine-carrying electrolyte! Lithium is bad enuf, but Fluorine is really bad stuff.

    * Usually "air-powered" batteries are limited to very low current, slow discharge applications, such as hearing-aids.
    So it's very unlikely these could ever work like in a laptop or car, where you need amps, not microamps.

    * Any practical and competitive battery would have to have a good power-density and be stable and manufacturable at a reasonable price.

    1. Re:But notice the caveats by Jack+Malmostoso · · Score: 4, Informative

      It requires a Flourine-carrying electrolyte! Lithium is bad enuf, but Fluorine is really bad stuff.

      All Li-ion batteries carry a fluorine containing electrolyte. In particular, LiPF6 is the salt used, dissolved in organic solvents. Plus a whole bunch of additives. The ideal salt would be a perchlorate, but being explosive it's not allowed.

  18. Re:What about copper? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There was a (temporary) setup along those lines at one point.

    For Uranium isotope separation, they needed some large electromagnets. Unfortunately, WW2 was weighing rather heavily on the copper supply. Instead, they borrowed 13,000 tons of silver from the treasury.

  19. Re:What about copper? by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No?

    I grew up a few hundred miles from a mine that shut down because other mines were more economical. As the price goes up, that sort of mine can start operating again (if they can convince people in the area to put up with the environmental impact).

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  20. Re:What about copper? by phoenix321 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lithium in mineable concentration is pretty rare as it is and highly priced because of Lithium-Ion batteries - that's why everyone is searching for another battery type in the first place.

  21. Re:What would be fun by Jack+Malmostoso · · Score: 3, Informative

    Oh and the commies are back already. And finished nationalizing the critical mining industries several years ago.

    I think you're confusing Chile with Bolivia. Chile has one of the strongest growing economy in South America and is a capitalistic country alright. Bolivia, on the other hand, has a socialist government and has been playing hardball with their lithium reserves.

  22. Re:Information by Lars+T. · · Score: 2, Funny

    Paper at http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1388248109003889 The capacity of the prototypes was very small, but they are hoping to acchieve 10 Ah/g.

    So how much is that in potato batteries?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  23. Re:What about copper? by macson_g · · Score: 3, Informative

    Is'nt the world reserve of copper basically mined out?

    According to Wikipedia, "total amount of copper on Earth is vast (around 1014 tons just in the top kilometer of Earth's crust, or about 5 million years worth at the current rate of extraction)". Of course only small fraction of this is available using _today's_ technology.

  24. Re:What about copper? by Turzyx · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, look at it this way, when we've eventually all switched to renewable energy, we can finally clear those pesky stockpiles of coal and oil.

  25. Re:What would be fun by phoenix321 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Of course we can always wait for the socialist dictatorship to snuff some *millions* in their inevitable joy camps and then just build a memorial. This would be sensible, cheap, safe, environmentally-friendly, politically-correct and deeply respecting the local culture and religion.

    You can still do a lot wrong when you're doing nothing. I suggest we print more money and send it to them, that's what my great European Union does all the time - and boy, it works sooo well, just look at Somalia, where an entire new industry with thousands of jobs was created by paying hundreds of millions to free a few ships.

  26. Re:What about copper? by phoenix321 · · Score: 3, Informative

    These alloys were cheaper if they are so easily obtainable, but I think there's a reason behind the price of stainless steel, which could be simple scarcity or high production costs.

    A cursory glance at Wiki Grandma tells me that stainless steel requires a chromium content of 10 percent or more. And of course we have a singular dominant reserve: chromium is mined primarily in South Africa, harboring half the world's mineable reserves.

    Not only that, but stainless steel is an even worse conductor than plain vanilla steel, having a resistance that is more than 30 times higher.

  27. Specialty by zogger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If this is your specialty, then please contribute more good articles about new batteries. It's hard to sort through the "coming soon in 10 years to never" from "coming soon, works pretty dang good now, perhaps on sale as early as next year" from "on sale now, here is a link" stuff.

    Battery tech to me today is sort of like solar PV tech. I've read hundreds of articles of new amazing break throughs, yet when I go check prices, the PV panels I got ten years ago are still a deal compared to what I see offered for sale today. They are marginally more efficient today, but at twice the price. Same with ancient tech lead acid batteries for bulk stationary storage, or short range urban electric vehicles, still the best deal out there. As soon as you go to anything else, zooba, whip out the platinum card and prepare to pay as much for a battery bank as a new mid range conventional car.

    That's what people are looking for, the currency unit to watts or amphours deal.

    Except for the smallest portable gadgets using lithium ion, I am just not seeing any affordable and practical major breakthroughs hitting the market with either solar PV or batteries, compared to say the advances in the last ten years with computers/cellphones, what you can get for the same or less dollars.

  28. Re:What about copper? by gr8_phk · · Score: 3, Informative

    I once heard that Emerson (motor maker) uses 10-20 percent of the worlds electrical copper. Motors are a huge user of copper. I work in electric vehicles, and when we pump 100kW through a motor we're losing some 1.6 percent to heat in the windings. Change that to aluminum and the losses will only increase - and then the cooling solution becomes more complex, the weight goes up, the range goes down. Then there are the previously mentioned issues with aluminum. And to the GGP, all the easy copper has been mined, but I believe there is still plenty available to meet the inceasing demand. If handled properly it can be easily recycled too.

  29. Re:What about copper? by tom17 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ahh, I thought 1014 tons didn't sound like much. The copy/paste was bad.

    It's 10^14 tons. That's more like it!

    Tom...

  30. Re:What about copper? by maczealot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not only is there lots of research being done about copper replacing aluminum, but this particular scientist has done some himself.

    His faculty page
    Stuff his group has done regarding copper

    Although it looks like he has done stuff to do with corrosion, most of this is over my head... go go Physics Nerds!

  31. One question by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 3, Funny

    Will it spontaneously combust the way some lithium batteries do? If not, then it's hardly a replacement!

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell