Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Make a High-Performance Battery From Junkyard Scraps (vanderbilt.edu)
Science_afficionado writes: A team of engineers and materials scientists at Vanderbilt University have discovered how to make high-performance batteries using scraps of metal from the junkyard and common household chemicals. The researchers believe their innovation could provide the large amounts of economical electrical storage required by the grid to handle alternative energy sources and may ultimately allow homeowners to build their own batteries and disconnect entirely from the grid. Vanderbilt University News reports: "To make such a future possible, Pint headed a research team that used scraps of steel and brass -- two of the most commonly discarded materials -- to create the world's first steel-brass battery that can store energy at levels comparable to lead-acid batteries while charging and discharging at rates comparable to ultra-fast charging supercapacitors. The research team, which consists of graduates and undergraduates in Vanderbilt's interdisciplinary materials science program and department of mechanical engineering, describe this achievement in a paper titled 'From the Junkyard to the Power Grid: Ambient Processing of Scrap Metals into Nanostructured Electrodes for Ultrafast Rechargeable Batteries' published online this week in the journal ACS Energy Letters. The secret to unlocking this performance is anodization, a common chemical treatment used to give aluminum a durable and decorative finish. When scraps of steel and brass are anodized using a common household chemical and residential electrical current, the researchers found that the metal surfaces are restructured into nanometer-sized networks of metal oxide that can store and release energy when reacting with a water-based liquid electrolyte. The team determined that these nanometer domains explain the fast charging behavior that they observed, as well as the battery's exceptional stability. They tested it for 5,000 consecutive charging cycles -- the equivalent of over 13 years of daily charging and discharging -- and found that it retained more than 90 percent of its capacity."
Those fuckers are always getting the latest and greatest stuff.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Maybe in 1985, when plutonium is available in every corner drug store, but in 2016, it's a little hard to come by.
It seems the "scrap" element was just added as "junk science" clickbait. The fact that one source of metals is from recycling - well that's what metal recycling does. It turns cars and computers into ingots and back into cars and computers. I can turn mining trails into nuclear weapons using science too, but I haven't discovered anything.
The nickel iron battery in alkaline is an old, rugged battery chemistry. The nanostructuring the surface is new. The scrap bit seems like hype. Steel is easy to separate out by magnets, and copper is more expensive. So is nickel. I guess a cheaper substitute to nickel would also be an improvement.
What does a junkyard have to do with it? Is it because a steel-brass battery is a complete waste of steel and brass?
I suspect so. I mean, my car was largely built from scraps of metal from a junkyard, reforged into good steel, but really the source of a material has little to do with anything.
These batteries are not rechargable and a complete waste of time and effort.
Then how come they recharged them 5000 times with only 90% loss of capacity?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
...unless one is interested in Railguns.
Anyone browsing /. that does not have an interest in railguns should be ejected from the site... using a railgun!
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
"We're forging new ground with this project, where a positive outcome is not commercialization, but instead a clear set of instructions that can be addressed to the general public. It's a completely new way of thinking about battery research, and it could bypass the barriers holding back innovation in grid scale energy storage," Pint said.
So far, batteries have remained outside of this culture, but I believe we will see the day when residents will disconnect from the grid and produce their own batteries. That's the scale where battery technology began, and I think we will return there," Pint said.
I think Pint is a bit self deluded if he thinks the university isn't going to patent the hell out of any possible development from this and wring every copper they can in licensing fees. In addition, I really can't see most people building their own batteries of sufficient storage capacity to power a home during peak usage time. Maybe an "Almost Ready to Charge(ARC)" kit that you would just have to add electrolyte to before using.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Not really.
When storing energy for my *house* I don't give a rats about energy density as long as I can put it somewhere where it's not a total nuisance.
Never happened. True story.
Supercaps have their place. Even though they have a lot less energy density than batteries, they are useful to have with a solar array just because they can be charged up quickly, with less need of a precise charge controller with scaling voltages to SoC levels (especially lithium batteries that will go boom if they are not precisely charged/discharged). Supercaps can allow charging to continue for batteries for a little bit after the sun goes down as well as help maintain an even charge if a cloud passes over the panels.
It would be nice to see some advance to allow supercaps to have a better energy density per volume. The fact that they have a virtually unlimited charge/discharge life (as the charging is a physical, not chemical process) and they can handle a lot of incoming amperage is quite nice.
It's neat that it's got a fast recharge capability, but the energy density is still too low to be practical for anything major in this day and age.
Not really: it's too low for where density is a serious concern, e.g. mobile applications. It is however super cheapass, and does not rely on rare, expensive or horribly toxic metals. It's fine for bulk storage.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I'm curious how these cells perform in cold weather conditions.
I use 12VDC lead-acid SLA batteries on a mountain top for a wireless repeater but those are like 0.05kw/kg and $280-300/ea. Getting heavy batteries up the mountain can be extremely challenging (think snowshoes uphill in 5-6ft of snow carrying a 100lb replacement battery). I'm also at the 49th parallel so winter peak solar is like 3 hours/day and you need a large buffer in case it is effectively zero hours of solar for days in a row while keeping your radios up 24/7.
Something like this would be great for me since it's something like 1500x more energy dense by weight... That is, if it can survive cold weather, or with a heater it is still an effective alternative.
...is busy transforming your high performance battery (and smartphone) into junkyard scrap!
The oxidation of Aluminum is practically instantaneous - and it's hard. Oxidation of iron happens much slower, and it's very soft and flakes off, exposing more iron for oxidation.
Aluminum oxide does not flake off, which is why aluminum doesn't really degrade.
That said, if you put a bit of lithium on aluminum oxide, you will see the aluminum "melt" away because the lithium causes the aluminum oxide to fail and exposes fresh aluminum for exidation. It's one reason why lithium is controlled on aircraft - raw lithium will react and destroy the plane.