Slashdot Mirror
Crushed Silicon Triples Life of Li-Ion Batteries In the Lab
derekmead writes "Batteries rule everything around us, which makes breakthroughs a big deal. A research team at Rice says they have produced a nice jump: by using a crushed silicon anode in a lithium-ion battery, they claim to have nearly tripled the energy density of current li-ion designs. Engineer Sibani Lisa Biswal and research scientist Madhuri Thakur reported in Nature's Scientific Reports (it has yet to be published online) that by taking porous silicon and crushing it, they were able to dramatically decrease the volume required for anode material. Silicon has long been looked at as an anode material because it holds up to ten times more lithium ions than graphite, which is most commonly used commercially. But it's previously been difficult to create a silicon anode with enough surface area to cycle reliably. Silicon also expands when it's lithiated, making it harder to produce a dense anode material. After previously testing a porous silicon 'sponge,' the duo decided to try crushing the sponges to make them more compact. The result is a new battery design that holds a charge of 1,000 milliamp hours per gram through 600 tested charge cycles of two hours charging, two hours discharging. According to the team, current graphite anodes can only handle 350 mAh/g."
get back in the car, this Safari is over!
As we know from recent experience, Lithium is flammable, and something flammable, even explosive, can NEVER replace Gasoline, which is safe and has never burned anybody.
Surely they realize the futility of their methods, and we can go back to our safe and harmless internal combustion engines?
In recent years I've read, right here on Slashdot, about a couple of new li-on breakthroughs that we were told would be giving us 10x improvements, And at least one was claimed to be easily applied to current manufacturing techniques. So why should I believe this? And why should I get excited about a 3X "improvement" when we;ve already been told about 10X improvements?
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Jacking it in the bathroom is nothing to be proud of.
My cellphone battery is nearly dead, so please may I squeeze it up between your lovely knockers, my dear? Oh, they're natural? Nevermind...
However, I was the only one who came!
I'm happy for you that you had a good time, but how many people were there?
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
If you are the only one who came, you need to be a more attentive and generous lover.
Breakthrough paradigm shifting innovative batteries have been around at least since 1901 and none of them worked.
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2010/05/the-status-quo-of-electric-cars-better-batteries-same-range.html
(ctrl+f -> miracle batteries)
Technology changes incrementally and not on public demand.
A lithium battery holding three times the capacity is significant. This could mean that the range of a EV could be three times, all else equal, or the battery could provide three times the voltage with the same capacity all else equal, or simply the size and weight of the battery could be 1/3rd the size leaving room for other components.
Thanks, Captain Obvious, for clearly explaining the ramifications of "3x" ... :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
First question that comes to mind. What voltage are these batteries at? 1000 amp-hours at 12 volts is a lot different than 1000 amp-hours at 120.
Gasoline gets 12,000 watt-hours as a reference.
As for these batteries, I am hoping for use in larger applications than just a skinner smartphone.
One amp-hour per gram is pretty good, assuming this is a twelve volt battery. Compare that to a deep cycle lead-acid battery that weighs about 18 kilograms and gives 150 AH or so. For the same amount of energy as that flooded wet cell, I'd just need a battery that weighed less than an ounce.
However, the big issue is energy stored per volume. Weight is one thing, but if we can get energy stored per volume even within an order of magnitude of gasoline, the game changes completely:
We can get rid of internal combustion engines completely for electric motors which do not have major energy losses due to exhaust and heat. Electric motors also have peak torque at 0 RPM.
Areas where fuel is wasted due to idling will be eliminated. A stopped electric vehicle only needs juice to keep the occupants comfortable and the computer systems going. The drivetrain needs no power unlike a gas or diesel engine which has to keep at a certain RPM level (unless stopped and started.)
Solar would become a lot more useful because there would be the ability to store that energy for use at night.
I'd choose 1/3rd the size and weight.
Forget that, I want a smartphone with battery life that is measured in days instead of hours.
Your making the assumption that the cost reduction in using fewer materials offsets the new manufacturing process – which we don’t know (could be high, lower, or the same).
For years we have been able to manufacture cars that get better gas mileage by switching from steel to aluminum, carbon fibers, etc – but we have never done it because the cost of the lighter materials (both in manufacturing and maintenance) are higher.