Slashdot Mirror
New All-Solid Sulfur Based Battery Outperforms Lithium Ion
olsmeister writes "The new all-solid battery design uses solid sulfur and lithium, and outperforms existing lithium-ion batteries with four times the energy density. The battery can maintain a capacity of 1200 milliampere-hours per gram after 300 charge-discharge cycles. More work needs to be done, but one would think this new technology could have applications in renewable energy storage, electric cars, and consumer electronics."
I use a 30 amp-hour 12 volt battery when camping, it's about 20 pounds (for fans, lights, bug zapper, , phone charger, electric blanket, inverter for laptop, etc). I've saved a ton of money not having to purchase D batteries and I can expect 5-8 years of use (hundreds of duty cycles).
"1200 milliampere-hours" is 1.2 amp hours. A battery of this type would weight 25 grams, or less than an ounce. If it's at 12 volts, which per the article (I read it!!!) doesn't sound like the case. But I bet a comparable 12 volt version would weight just ounces rather than pounds.
Battery tech is a primary lagging technology in my opinion.
Best hopes for this technology.
BlameBillCosby.com
They will figure out how to use that extra power somewhere, leaving us at around the same runtime as before.
"They"? Either the device is doing work four times more consuming, your device can stand by four times longer, or your device's battery is approximately four times lighter. Sure, retarded marketing drones are going to figure out a way to stuff four times the amount of adware onto a new laptop, but let's face it, they were going to do that regardless.
Assuming a 4 times increase in battery life at all scales and no size decrease, this would quadruple the range of electric cars - all for a simple battery tech switch. And the batteries are made partly from waste in another industry.
... whatever
Not a chemist, but the article specifically points out that the materials are not flammable, so I guess no?
... whatever
more smellily for sure
This is an impressive achievement, and interesting even if they report a relatively low (300) number of charge cycles. Too bad the article doesn't mention some other parameters:
- The article mentions power density "after 300 charging cycles". Is that the limit, or does it actually last for more cycles, and how fast does it drop off?
- How well do these batteries retain a charge? Li-Ion is quite good on that score; if I leave my cordless drill of the charger, it'll still be ready for use after a year.
- How well do these batteries deal with half-cycles (recharge when only half empty)? Is there a memory effect?
- What is the max rate of charge?
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
What explodes in an li-ion battery failure is usually the flammable electrolyte, fed oxygen by cathode decomposition products, and not lithium itself.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Don't get me wrong, I like the added features, but I hope nobody expects laptops that can be used for multiple days in a row without recharging (with sleep mode enabled between sessions of course) or next-gen smart phones that can go a week without recharging. They will figure out how to use that extra power somewhere, leaving us at around the same runtime as before.
I'm much more interested in it for electric cars.
Four times the batter life in a cellphone? Meh - mine already lasts for days.
Four times the range of electric cars? World-changing technology.
No sig today...
Battery runtimes have improved enormously in the past five years; the bottom-end machine I bought then could barely break two hours, my new low-end laptop easily manages four. However that's more due to improvements in the computer hardware's power efficiency than the battery's capacity.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
If the battery capacity increases as well then its a double win. Power efficiency in chip design is beneficial for all sorts of reasons, not just battery life, so will continue to improve. Having increased battery life will impact the current devices. It should also make others more practical as a given capacity battery will take up less space.
I think the GGP is overly pessimistic.
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
Don't get me wrong, I like the added features, but I hope nobody expects laptops that can be used for multiple days in a row without recharging (with sleep mode enabled between sessions of course) or next-gen smart phones that can go a week without recharging. They will figure out how to use that extra power somewhere, leaving us at around the same runtime as before.
If someone will finally make a netbook with an e-ink screen, we could get around to that kind of battery life. I know the refresh rates suck, but the equivalent of a Kindle Paperwhite with a full keyboard, a basic word processing app, and a battery that lasts for days on end would be a writer's dream.
what i really forsee is this would alow even smaller/lighter battery packs. with less space/weight devoted to power, devices can pack in other things, or simply be smaller lighter themselves.
course charging time is another factor. does this material have the same, more, or less time required for an equivalent charge? does it develop memory?
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
... but only for a short time, before user faints from the toxic smoke.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
I'm sure Elon Musk is paying attention to this. He thinks an electric jet would be possible, and this would make that a whole lot easier to achieve. If they can commercialize it in the next couple of years, it would also be just in time to help Tesla develop its next-gen "affordable" EV. I wouldn't be surprised if he and/or Tesla invest in whatever company gets to bring this tech to market.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
more smellily for sure
Oh, you discovered the "leakage alert" feature!
You know, I wouldn't mind it if my laptop smelled like fire and brimstone when I was grading papers. It would kind of help get me in the mood.
<sarcasm>Yes, that's why gunpowder is made of liquids.</sarcasm>
Sure, but it could be 4" screen and as thick as a deck of cards and still fit in your pockets. If not, stop wearing your wife's/girlfriend's jeans.
If you are only doing phone calls and text messages, you do not need a smartphone.
GENERATION 24: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
No, he actually means a jet. In fact, he thinks he can build a supersonic electric jet, and has said so many times.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
It may finally be enough to overpower "range anxiety."
Or on the other hand, to make cars lighter and/or cheaper. I considered EV-swapping my sports car late last year but went with another ICE because of the expense and weight. I figured I only needed 30 miles range, but it still would have added about 500lbs to the car and the battery alone would have been over $10k.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Try shorting that battery and watch how quickly that electrolyte turns liquid.
Stop that! I'm about to drop dead from laughing too hard!
There is no fricking way that a battery technology in this kind of shape will enter a mass-produced automobile in the next TEN years, never mind two. Portable devices, I'd give 7-8 years if everything goes well. Fifteen years for automobiles, minimum.
Let's count the issues here. The battery is tested only at 60 degrees C, which implies that its performance must suck at room temperature (not surprising--solid batteries tend to do really badly at low temperatures). The battery is showing horrendous wear--75% wear after 300 cycles--good enough to show promise, but nowhere near good enough to be considered for commercialization. The charge rate being tested is 1/10C. which probably means that the battery cannot be usefully charged/discharged unless you take at least 10 hours to bring it up to full charge.
All of these are incredibly hard issues, and only after solve all of them can you get down to the manufacturing process engineering. I'd be impressed if they get to this stage in six years. Then you get to manufacture, test, integrate--and finally you get your first shipping product. Automobiles are a different beast altogether, requiring much more testing, much bigger manufacturing capacity, different control mechanism, looooong design lead time--so add another five years.
>all for a simple battery tech switch
Not so simple, except in terms of the mechanic doing the battery replacement. (which of course is one of the beauties of electric vehicles - really easy aftermarket mods to the power system) Battery tech is *the* bottleneck for electric vehicles, and so far it's proved anything but easy to improve on significantly.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Regardless of how well it works or how safe it is you're just not allowed to use the word 'nuclear' with the public. That word is now contaminated.
"They"? Either the device is doing work four times more consuming, your device can stand by four times longer, ...
Just wait, till my pocket-warmer app comes out.
Just wait, till my pocket-warmer app comes out.
Lemme guess, Bitcoin/SETI@Home full screen client with 3D accelerated visualization?
... whatever
<sarcasm>Yes, that's why gunpowder is made of liquids.</sarcasm>
With "rarely" AC meant "only once"
I stand corrected, thanks. Perhaps I got an over-optimistic impression from the recent progress in liquid-metal batteries.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
Oh *hell* yeah.
Of course what I *really* want is a full-sized (15"+) laptop with a transflective or color e-ink screen, so that I could sit outside wherever I like when working, rather than having to hide away somewhere that I can actually see my screen. It doesn't even need very good specs, your average $300 crap laptop is already overkill for almost everything except games. Just give me a tool that lets me spend the day hiking and working in the woods and I'm sold.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Indeed. I think I've been saying for around a decade "There's nothing wrong with EV's that a battery that lasts twice as long for half the price wouldn't fix'. Assuming this battery is identical to LiIon in cost per pound, the 4X energy density would mean that you could get 'extended range' Model S range at less than the price of a baseline one.
As is, the extended range batteries add so much weight to the vehicle that it adversely affects kwh per 100 miles - the 60 kwh battery is 35 kWh/100m, the 85 drops that to 38.
If an additional 25 kwh of battery currently does that, what happens if you 'only' double the total capacity, cutting the size/weight by half?
I really, really hope this becomes reality. Because I'd like to get an EV or a hybrid without breaking the bank, and it's my opinion that this is the last push needed.
I don't read AC A human right
Yay, hydrogen based fuel cells and sulphur based batteries. If ever the 'twain meet - hydrogen sulfide... the future will smell like rotten eggs and fart!
;-p
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
While I can see a few niche cashes for extended use, laptop batteries have been getting longer and longer battery life over the past 10-15 years. Before that, 2 hours was considered a "typical" battery life (real usage: 1.5 hrs normally). These days, laptops that get 4+ hours aren't unusual at all, even 6+ real use hours.
Though, given the average person, a battery that lasts longer than 24 hours Is pointless - short of extended computing periods mobile with no breaks and such. After all, people need sleep, and sleep is generally a great time to put your devices on charge so they're ready to go when you wake up in the morning.
I've never understood the desire for week long battery life - for a smartphone, 2 days is generally reasonable (for the times you do accidentally forget to plug it in before bed). Even for a laptop more than 20-odd hours isn't generally as useful anymore.
Perhaps for a laptop the most useful thing would be to have a way to dock the adapter with the laptop - most are used near sources of power - it's just generally people don't want to haul piles of accessories at the same time. If the AC adapter came along, most needs for battery life vanish.
Considering the amount of sulfur that is being generated by oil production these days (http://folc.ca/sulphur_storage/waste_sulphur.htm) this could be a very good thing. ...but of course, ultimately, the sulfur needs to go somewhere.
Well 480 miles is fairly close to the 500 mile mark.
But if you figure it is going to take hours to recharge. You will need a larger capacity than a gasoline. Which can be filled up in a few minutes.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Without volts, amp-hours is completely meaningless. If I have a process that can create a battery that stores 1.2Ah/g at 0.3V and I'm trying to beat a process that stores 0.3Ah/g at 1.2V then I've done nothing useful. Both store 360mWh/g (1296mWh/joules). In fact, if you look at phys.org you'll find that the fourfold increase is not in Ah/g, but in J/g. It actually has an eightfold increase in Ah/g but the voltage drops by half. So the article is right, but does a really bad job of explaining why.
Well, no, they tell us in TFA that it's four times the energy density than a Li-Ion battery. We don't use the Li-Ion's native voltage (about 3.8v nominal for most of them) to power electric cars, either. The battery is made up of multiple cells connected in series (or series parallel for a big pack) such that the resulting battery voltage is what you need for your application.
What the article doesn't mention is what the 'C' rating for these batteries would be. Current lithium-ion technologies these days had very good C ratings, but early ones did not. The early batteries couldn't discharge at more than about 1C (so a 1 amp hour battery could only deliver a current of 1 amp without damage) but current lithium-polymer batteries often have C ratings >30. I have a Li-Poly battery for my RC gear that's about the size of two cigarette packs that can output enough current to easily start a car. Can Li-S batteries be built to have high C ratings for both charge and discharge? If not then they are only really useful in portable devices.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
>cutting the size/weight/and cost by half?
FTFY, assuming cost/pound stayed the same of course.
Now *that* would seriously kick-start the EV market. And start opening up the low end as well if you stuck with current ranges at 1/4 the cost, which are actually quite adequate for lots of people. Not to mention the effect it'd have on more city-friendly transportation like electric scooters, bikes, etc. which are currently right on the edge of widespread feasibility.
Of course that also brings up another factor - size. That's another significant factor in practical EV range, and they don't actually mention that in the article. If these batteries are considerably less dense than current tech (which micro-engineered materials makes a distinct possibility) then their kWh/liter capacity might not be as impressive as you would hope. Now you *could* make the car larger, but that carries a significant social cost anywhere that traffic congestion is an issue. There are ways to counteract that though, personally as gas taxes cease to be relevant I'd love to see them replaced with a milage tax applied to all vehicles, scaling nonlinearly with vehicle size and weight to reflect the specific vehicles impact on congestion (=new construction) and road maintenance costs (road damage increases super-linearly with vehicle weight)
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
>all for a simple battery tech switch
Not so simple, except in terms of the mechanic doing the battery replacement. (which of course is one of the beauties of electric vehicles - really easy aftermarket mods to the power system) Battery tech is *the* bottleneck for electric vehicles, and so far it's proved anything but easy to improve on significantly.
So...what you're saying is, once a whole bunch of stuff has been done, and Tesla has approved a new type of battery, someone could take their Model S to the shop and simply have their battery tech switched, right? Sounds pretty simple from the consumer point of view - no more difficult than changing to winter tires.
Really, for the end consumer, this is no different than the switch from NiMH to Li-Ion in laptops. If you can't do it for your current one, you can certainly get it for your next one. If the chargers are made even half-decently, they can probably be upgraded, too. All those huge hurdles that are passed first are invisible to the end user.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
Yes. As with anything it's very simple once all the work has been done.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Jets push mostly air out of the engine. That's the "gas being forced out of a small opening." An electric jet would continue to push air, but rather than combusting something to get the turbine to spin, it would use electricity.
You could also build an electric propeller plane, of course, which also pushes air. It just doesn't have the requisite small opening to be a jet.
Just wait, till my pocket-warmer app comes out.
Lemme guess, Bitcoin/SETI@Home full screen client with 3D accelerated visualization?
I was thinking of something even less useful. Something like the flashlight app but for heat generation:
You click on the "hand-warmer" icon and put the phone in your pocket. The app will run something like cpuburn (without giving credit of course) till the CPU hits 60C (adjustable in the premium version), then keep the phone at that temperature till the battery is dead, or till you take it out of the pocket and remember to shut it off (or once you enter a building with wifi in the premium version).
Four times the range of electric cars? World-changing technology.
Do we know for a fact that this new battery technology can be deep cycled, in addition to withstanding prolonged high current draw applications like in electric cars, boats, and planes? If so then yes it would be revolutionary, provided it doesn't cost four times more then the current technologies.
4x the density would come in handy for powering stealth drones, the military should be very interested in this...
Now explain to me why all that work, which the typical user figures has been done by fairies or elves anyway, has any relevance to said user when he goes to get his battery changed? All he is going to care about is how much will it cost, how long will it take, and how much better will it be.
We truly stand on the shoulders of giants. Even a "simple" hammer or wheel isn't simple any more. There is serious research in both of those. And yet, I can still take a cash equivalent of one to three hours of my time and buy this device which literally has thousands of hours of research applied to it. It really is quite simple. Just like the tech switch between two different battery technologies.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?