Toyota's Battery 'Breakthrough' Can Lead To More Range, Longer Life (cnet.com)

Toyota thinks it's found a way to create more efficient EV batteries. The car company is calling its method, which allows a free flow of lithium ions from the cathode to the anode, the "world's first behavior observation method for lithium ions in electrolyte." CNET adds:Charging and discharging batteries can create lithium ion deviation. Some of these ions can get bunched up, which can affect a battery's performance over time. In order to help reduce that bunching, scientists need to see what's happening as the ions flow through the battery's electrolyte. That observation wasn't possible until now. Toyota made has replaced the phosphorous in a traditional lithium-ion battery electrolyte with heavier elements. These heavier elements, which ferry the ions through the electrolyte, are then bombarded with powerful x-rays, which allows researchers to observe how the ions flow through. So what does this all mean? By observing the lithium ions in the electrolyte, research and development dollars can be spent on preventing the bunching that degrades battery performance. Toyota believes its breakthrough can improve electric vehicle range by up to 15 percent and improve the battery's life simultaneously.

Comments

Another week another "battery breakthrough"

[Dorianny]

Every week there is at least one article in the news about a Lab "battery breakthrough." Wake me up when someone actually manufactures something.

Re:Another week another "battery breakthrough"

[justthinkit]

Seems like a good solid incremental gain -- 15% -- not some "ten times better" claim. I'll give it a chance.

Re:Another week another "battery breakthrough"

[fahrbot-bot]

Every week there is at least one article in the news about a Lab "battery breakthrough." Wake me up when someone actually manufactures something.

It's worse than that as this not about an actual battery breakthrough, but about a method of observation that might allow a breakthrough.

By observing the lithium ions in the electrolyte, research and development dollars can be spent on preventing the bunching that degrades battery performance. Toyota believes its breakthrough can improve electric vehicle range by up to 15 percent and improve the battery's life simultaneously.

So this is more akin to saying that space travel can be improved by some breakthrough in Physics that could lead to the development of a working Warp Drive.

Re:Another week another "battery breakthrough"

[bill_mcgonigle]

+1, Smackdown.

Re:Another week another "battery breakthrough"

[Namarrgon]

And every article there's at least one comment grumbling that they don't have it now.

You already have batteries that are triple the capacity of the 1050mAh Li-Ions used in old Nokia phones, and dramatically better than the 30-minute talk-times of the original DynaTAC bricks. "Breakthroughs" in the lab can take many years to reach consumer products; silicon nanowire anodes were developed in 2007, but are only now reaching factories - and will take a couple more years before they scale capacity enough to be usable by major phone vendors.

It's got ELECTROLYTES!

[Ashlan_1]

It's what cars crave.

Not exactly.

[Gravis Zero]

Toyota invented a research tool akin to a microscope for ion flows. This does nothing to improve battery life but rather enables them to observe the problems in our current batteries. While this will be a useful tool, it's important to remember that we have the tools to look at DNA but we haven't found the cure for cancer.

Re:battery flattery

[reboot246]

No, they are not the same. Battery is hitting someone. Flattery is complimenting them to excess.
Very different acts with very different results.

Imagine what Toyota could have accomplished

[haruchai]

if they hadn't stuck with NiMH for so long.

Eh...

[XSportSeeker]

Sounds great but, shouldn't we be seeking battery technology OUTSIDE Lithium these days?
I mean, if we're gonna take breakthrough battery research anyways, I'd rather go with something... less flammable. :P

Re:Eh...

[morethanapapercert]

My take on that is that, while lithium has its potential dangers, it seems like any other really power dense technology has the same fundamental problem. Whether it be chemical, electrical, electro-chemical or kinetic, storing a large amount of energy in a small package is going to be dangerous when (not if) power storage devices, or the devices which contain them, fail in certain ways.

For the sake of illustration, suppose we develop a better plastic that allows classic, well understood flooded lead-acid batteries to use a stronger solution of sulphuric acid and combine that with a way of making a reticulated lead foam. What you get is a lead-acid cell that can be up to half the size of the existing product, perhaps with a slightly better initial voltage or better cold cranking amps.

Only now: a) the risk of hydrogen build up explosions is higher b) the damage done by a leaking battery/acid spill is greater. c. Because a smaller form factor means closer terminal spacing, it is even easier for a mechanic to get a wrench or screwdriver caused short, shocking him and potentially welding the tool in place. d) Any hypothetical plastic that is resistant to very strong concentrations of sulphuric acid across a wide range of temperatures and internal pressures is likely going to be next to impossible to recycle.

Similarly, a kinetic system like a flywheel holds the potential to fail in entertaining (from a distance) ways if the bearings fail or if the base materials fail under load.

Beating by only 15% is not a breakthrough

[mark-t]

Not to diminish the importance of the development, because indeed any improvement here is most welcome, but 15% improvement strikes me much more as being in line with an incremental development than something worthy of the term "breakthrough".

Re:Beating by only 15% is not a breakthrough

[ThosLives]

Capacity is great, and so is total life, but where's all the breakthroughs (potential or real) to improve recharge time? I want a battery that can charge fully in 5 minutes. You could have vehicle-battery ranges no better than today (250-ish miles) but with 5 minute recharge times, you eliminate 95% of the complaints about electric vehicles.

Realistically I just don't see this happening - trying to charge even just a 50kW-hr battery in 5 minutes requires at least 600kW electrical power; a nice 100kW-hr battery would require at least 1.2MW. Mechanical battery swap systems seem like a non-starter, although I suppose they could be more feasible if maybe cars took more, smaller battery packs?

My hopes are still on liquid-air batteries for transportation, because you get the benefit of high-efficiency electric motors, the higher energy density of only having to carry the fuel (not the oxidizer, at least initially), and the benefit of fast recharge because liquids can be pumped quickly without high voltages and currents.

Re:Beating by only 15% is not a breakthrough

[cellocgw]

There's no doubt that fast-charging systems are not really going to happen. Not only is it tough on the battery management system, but the thought of connecting, say, a 10-kV, 50-amp source to your car in order to be able to charge at 500 kW rate (which would charge a 100 kWh battery in 12 minutes) is a bit scary.

Personally, I'd like to see development of fast-swap battery packs. But that would require standardization of battery modules, and undoubtedly a change in the glamourous body design of cars to allow quick access to the battery packs.

Re:battery flattery

[dgatwood]

Flattery will get you nowhere. Battery will get you fifteen to twenty.

we suck at batteries

[backslashdot]

Back when that Alessandro Volta dude made the first modern electrochemical battery in the late 1700s (over 300 years ago) he didn't know that none of us idiots in the future would be able to improve on it much.

Somebody out there better crack the battery problem. We need batteries to be capable of storing 15 times more charge per volume (and weight) than the best we have today. Admittedly, it seems fucking impossible.

We See These "Breakthrough" Every Few Months

[BrendaEM]

Hmm, we're not quite using memsisters for much either.

Re:Amen Namarrgon!

[Agripa]

In my classroom, I have 1980s D size Radio Shack NiCad batteries that are 1.2V 1200 Mah. My students are asked to compare them to modern NiMh AA batteries rated at 1.2V 2600 Mah. We then compare them to roughly AA sized LiPo batteries that are 3.7V 2000Mah batteries. To compensate for battery size, we calculate volume as well as wattage.

The bottom line is that if you have not noticed the steady progress of battery technology over the years, you are at fault.

The battery progress in this case is obscured by marketing. Consumer D size NiCd batteries were almost always C size batteries installed into a D size case (the same goes for most NiMH D cells produced now) which was easy to verify by just feeling the weight. Even in the 1980s, you could buy true 4000 mAH D cells if you knew where to find them and were willing to pay the price.

The standard AA sized NiCd cell in the 1980s was about 500 mAH and paste style high capacity cells up to 900 mAH were available even then.

Re:Amen Namarrgon!

[Namarrgon]

And now you can get an Eneloop Pro AA in 2500 mAh capacities, with far lower leakage & more lifetime cycles than anything from those days. And D-cells go up to 11,000 mAh.

Re:Amen Namarrgon!

[Agripa]

And now you can get an Eneloop Pro AA in 2500 mAh capacities, with far lower leakage & more lifetime cycles than anything from those days. And D-cells go up to 11,000 mAh.

The low discharge NiMH cells are pretty good and they have a higher capacity than any NiCd cell but they are still not as rugged and do not last as long as industrial (but not consumer) NiCd cells. The low discharge and high temperature NiCd cells which use a thicker and tougher separator seem to last forever.