Slashdot Mirror


Stanford Develops Fast-Charging, Stable Aluminum Battery

An anonymous reader writes: Stanford researchers have announced the creation of an aluminum-ion battery that they say will charge quicker, last longer, and be generally safer than common lithium-ion batteries. "Aluminum has long been an attractive material for batteries, mainly because of its low cost, low flammability and high-charge storage capacity. For decades, researchers have tried unsuccessfully to develop a commercially viable aluminum-ion battery. A key challenge has been finding materials capable of producing sufficient voltage after repeated cycles of charging and discharging. ... For the experimental battery, the Stanford team placed the aluminum anode and graphite cathode, along with an ionic liquid electrolyte, inside a flexible, polymer-coated pouch." The researchers' main challenges now are getting the battery to produce a higher voltage and store energy at a higher densities.

19 of 142 comments (clear)

  1. The main challenges... by MasseKid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The researchers' main challenges now are getting the battery to produce a higher voltage and store energy at a higher densities."

    So basically, they're only challenges left are making it into a decent battery?

    1. Re:The main challenges... by Ken_g6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just because it's not a good battery for your laptop - yet - doesn't mean it's not a good battery for other applications.

      Compare it to lead-acid, for instance. It's lighter, it's probably non-toxic (the electrolyte is unknown), and I'd be surprised if it were much more expensive. And it charges fast, so it probably discharges fast too. Sounds like a great starter battery for cars or scooters, etc.

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
    2. Re:The main challenges... by savuporo · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but if your energy density is so low that a supercapacitor beats it, you have nothing useful, as they will always have superior power density.

      --
      http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
    3. Re:The main challenges... by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      So basically, their only challenges left are making it into a decent battery?

      If you RTFA, they mention that it puts out close to 2 volts.
      While that's almost perfect as a replacement for lead-acid batteries, it's not enough to replace two AA batteries (2.4v/3v) or one lithium-ion (3.6~3.7v)

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:The main challenges... by necro81 · · Score: 3, Informative

      While that's almost perfect as a replacement for lead-acid batteries, it's not enough to replace two AA batteries (2.4v/3v) or one lithium-ion (3.6~3.7v)

      I would argue that the cell voltage is largely irrelevant. If you need to put more cells in series, it doesn't matter much. What matters more is the energy density - if you end up with twice as many cells (to get voltage equivalent to li-ion), but have equal or better energy density (Whr/kg or Whr/L) at equal or better cost, then you still have a win.

  2. Re:Aluminium -- low flammability ?? by Skidborg · · Score: 4, Informative

    Practically any material can cause terrific explosions when powdered and airborne. Sawdust explosions have reduced more than one lumber mill to ash, but that doesn't mean we stop building houses from wood.

    --
    Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
  3. Re:Just what we need... by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't be stupid. We're fucking up our planet because of our addiction to fossil fuels. If this actually pans out, then it'll make electric vehicles very economical, and will completely obsolete gasoline-powered cars, which is easily the biggest source of our carbon pollution. We'll need more electric generation capacity of course, but that can be done with lots of different sources, including carbon-free ones such as solar, wind, tidal, and nuclear.

    With the obvious problems with our environment at this time, it's my opinion that replacing gas cars with EVs ASAP is a screaming emergency.

  4. Re:Aluminium -- low flammability ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's most certainly a lower flammability hazard than the Lithium and Magnesium being used in the current generation of batteries.

  5. Re:Aluminium -- low flammability ?? by frooddude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can light steel wool with a common cigarette lighter. We should definitely stop making firetrucks out of steel.

  6. Tweet today from Elon Musk by dixonpete · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Battery "breakthroughs" need to state power *and* energy density (not the same thing), plus how long they last. They usually fail on energy."

    1. Re:Tweet today from Elon Musk by pushing-robot · · Score: 3, Funny

      True, but an Al-ion battery definitely has potential*, even if this team hasn't achieved it yet.

      Al also has ~5x the physical density of Li at ~1/5th the price, so even if it doesn't outperform Li's energy density for a while it will still be better for many applications.

      * groan

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  7. Re:Where are all the exotic materials? by ganjadude · · Score: 2

    needs more brawndo

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  8. Re:Just what we need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, our addiction to reproduction is fucking up the planet.

    That addiction is not universal. Advanced economies don't over reproduce. Among indigenous 'muricans, population is at replacement. Most Western European nations are actually declining. The Japanese government is marketing parenthood to their youth because they've basically stopped breeding.

  9. Re:Just what we need... by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The 70s called and want you back. In every developed nation, we've reached zero population growth, except for immigration. Every time people get to a high enough state of wealth, they stop having lots of kids (except for a few wackos like the Duggars). All the other nations are developing pretty rapidly at this point; China has a huge and growing middle class, and labor rates have grown so much that they're going to be looking at outsourcing stuff to cheaper countries before long. Eventually, we're going to have to figure out how to get along in our societies without ever-increasing populations.

  10. Re:Aluminium -- low flammability ?? by zieroh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is one of the things we europeans do right -- we build our houses out of stone.

    That's awesome for regions that don't have appreciable seismic activity.

    --
    People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
  11. Re:Aluminium -- low flammability ?? by Skidborg · · Score: 2

    Practically every dollar store in North America has a box of lighters next to the cash register. They'll card you to buy them, but they're the universal method for setting things on fire.

    --
    Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
  12. Re:Just what we need... by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Heating and cooling the buildings that house billions of people, and doing things like farming and treating/transporting water and other important things are hugely more polluting than cars.

    Wrong. Most of those things (particularly HVAC) can be done with electricity, so it's at least highly feasible to move that to non-fossil-fuel energy sources.

    Electric cars are just going to move the pollution to another place.

    Wrong, they allow you to use non-fossil-fuel energy sources. They're also far more efficient than small ICE engines, so even if your energy source is fossil fuel it's still more efficient.

    That won't help until aging hippie hand-wringers stop getting their panties in a twist, and get out of the way of us building a lot more modern nuclear power plants. Nothing else will even put a dent in it.

    Wrong again. As I said above, EVs are so much more efficient that even if you stuck with fossil fuel power plants it'd be more efficient than millions of shitty, poorly maintained, inefficient gas engines. And solar power is being used more and more; Germany gets a huge amount of power from solar, and that's not a particularly sunny place unlike much of the US. Wind is also supplying a lot of power these days.

  13. Re:Just what we need... by DusterBar · · Score: 2

    Actually, the correlation of lower birth rates is usually related to education and occupation. Lower skilled, lower educated groups tend to have more children. Part of this could be explained by the actual need for "labor" in the family farm/business/etc if there was a conscious choice made in that direction.

  14. Re:Just what we need... by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 2

    > Most of those things (particularly HVAC) can be done with electricity

    And for most, georeturn HVAC is far, far more energy efficient than any other source.

    It's expensive when everyone has their own tubing, but it seems to me there's a lot of municipal greywater that could be serving this purpose.