Slashdot Mirror
Li-Ion Battery Inventor Creates Breakthrough Solid-State Battery, Holds 3X Charge (fossbytes.com)
A research team led by John Goodenough at the Cockrell School of Engineering (Yes, this is a legitimate story) has created a new fast charging solid-state battery. Decades ago, American physicist John Goodenough co-invented the lithium-ion battery, which is now omnipresent in today's technology. The team has published a research paper in the journal Energy and Environmental Science. Fossbytes reports: The design limitations of lithium batteries containing liquid electrolytes don't allow them to charge quickly. If done forcefully, it would lead to the formation of metal whiskers (dendrites). Eventually, a short circuit would happen, or the battery would explode. However, that's not the problem with the solid-state batteries. The researchers have used a solid glass electrolyte in place of the liquid one. The glass electrolyte allows the researchers to use the alkali metal anode (negative side) which increases the charge density of the battery and prevents the formation of dendrites. Also, the glass electrolyte enables a battery to operate in extreme temperatures of -20-degree celsius. You can read more via The University of Texas at Austin.
I mean, yeah it's cold. But it's a perfectly normal temperature to see in winter in many places in the world.
captcha: boiling , really?
Until Jane Waybetter from Bulldaze School of Engineering comes out with an improved solid-state battery, winning the Valiant medal.
Are you morons even trying anymore?
Among battery researchers that I know, a key figure of merit is the amount of power you get after the thousandth charge-discharge cycle. There are plenty of great battery ideas out there, but they don't have the lifetimes to be commercially feasible. I wonder how this stacks up.
I wonder how the solid electrolyte holds up under rugged use/abuse.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
That's not Goodenough.
John has never won a noble prize, although he certainly is worthy.
I don't know where they get off calling -20C extreme cold. For about half they year that is a normal day.
But how economical is it to modify the existing multi-billion dollar battery factories to make these solid state batteries?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Welcome to Canada! It's EXTREME!!!
Unfortunately too extreme since the batteries won't work for several weeks a year up here.
I think this one differentiate from the rest in two aspects: first, this one looks much more production-ready than all the others I heard about (TFA says "has more charging cycles, supports fast charging, and isn’t prone to catch fire"). It may be necessary improve mechanical strength (the glass electrolyte can be too brittle for real world applications), maybe voltage or current throughput... what do you think?
And second, this one is from the man that did it once before. For me, it's good enough (^^).
Or Hot :-). I read a number of articles from analysts who thought it would take around 15 years for the technology to be produced in commercial volumes. But the fact that it looks like this is going to happen at all, even with a 10-15 year time-frame, is a BIG deal. 3x the charge will give electric vehicles a 600+ mile range.
-Matt
Goodenough’s latest breakthrough, completed with Cockrell School senior research fellow Maria Helena Braga, is a low-cost all-solid-state battery that is noncombustible and has a long cycle life (battery life) with a high volumetric energy density and fast rates of charge and discharge.
Is this carefully worded statement just a way of saying this battery weighs a ton, but doesn't take up much space?
Slashdot your i and slashcross your t.
I just watched a recent Nova that highlighted a similar technology, but using plastic rather than glass as the electrolyte. Check out a short clip about it here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/n.... Seems like it has the same advantages, but without issues of brittleness, given that his sample batteries are shown being flexed. On the other hand, the plastic might be more susceptible to cold than the glass electrolyte.
I'm pretty sure that volumetric density is the standard measure.
Usually, people care more about volume that mass for portability.
Probably not - no ingredient we've been told about is exceptionally dense.
From Wikipedia Li-ion batteries have 100-265 W.h/kg and 250-676 W.h/L, which implies density of about 2.5kg/L.
This page gives typical density of glass as 2.4 to 2.8 kg/L. Sodium metal has density 0.97 kg/L. So the new cell should have similar or better mass density than the Li-ion cells.
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
...well, John, goodenough
What are the chances that in, say, six months time everybody will have forgotten about this, and it will come nothing? For, that's what seems to happen with the vast majority of scientific/technological breakthroughs announced in this forum.
A few weeks ago, Nova showed a lithium-metal battery developed at Univ. of Michigan that uses plastic, has 2X the energy density of Li-ion, and doesn't explode or burn even when cut numerous times. Pogue showed such a battery continuing to produce power even when sliced many times with scissors.
I read "high volumetric ENERGY density" in your post, so I am confused, is energy that much heavy?
I certainly don't know if this particular approach will turn put great and we'll all be using glass batteries in a few years - but I don't think it matters. What I get from these stories, of various new battery technologies which include some which appear very practical is that *some* much better new technology will replace the current lithium-ion cells in a few years. I don't know or care if Goodenough's battery is the next big thing, I only care that there are enough highly promising ideas in the pipeline that one of them will probably end up in my pocket.
It's not a given that new, better batteries will come out every few years; nickelâ"cadmium reigned alone for 50 years. I'm glad to see some evidence that we won't beb using the same Li-Ion batteries 50 years from now.
On the other hand, cheap, plentiful solar electricity was five years away in 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015 ... So yeah maybe don't count your chickens before they hatch.
I always look forward to Slashdot's famous Battery of the Week stories. Each week we are introduced to the latest battery breakthorough that is just around the corner. Or maybe 10 years down the road. Or maybe never. Does it matter that it will never be produced, and never available for sale? Absolutely not!
This is about dreams, and visions. It has nothing to do with reality. I'm a dreamer. MLK was a dreamer. The Everly brothers were dreamers. Mexicans are dreamers. We are all dreamers!
Dream on, mis amigos! Dream on!
Where does this leave Elon Musk/Panasonic's Megafactory? He's churning out gazillions of old smelly batteries that nobody will want. His cars are full of dangerous old tech batteries that don't last long enough and take too long to charge. Can he buy this new tech and convert his factory? Stay tuned...
You can bet that Musk and Wall Street and many others invested in battery and energy storage tech are watching closely.
...omphaloskepsis often...
Actually, what's more important to the Slashdot member is not the watts, but the Volt*Amps, and power factor. That determines how many extension cords you can plug into a dorm room circuit. If you blow another fuse, the dorm daddy will get really pissed and blow his fuse.
Have I somehow stumbled into the Radio Shack "battery of the month" club?
Saw this episode of NOVA, Search for the Super Battery with David Pogue about Tufts University professor and engineer Mike Zimmerman and his solid plastic electrolyte, described here: New Damage-Proof Battery Has Higher Energy Density, Won’t Explode:
But Zimmerman’s battery can withstand repeated damage without risking explosion or fire. In fact, it can continue to power devices even after most of it has been chopped away.
Watched him hit the batter pack it with a hammer, drive nails through it and cut it up with scissors all while the battery kept producing power.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
the li-ion was not Goodenough after all.
put it on the pile of other 'breakthrough' research we've seen the last couple of years, and most still aren't on the market for years to come..
I'll be applauding once we see these things actually in our devices/cars..
E=MC^2. Yes, this means that a charged battery is heavier than an empty one, though it's so little as to be impossible to practically measure.
Learn to love Alaska
The man is 94 and still active. I remember Hans Bethe's colloquium when he was 94. I tip my hat to these people, they keep on going strong long after they made their major contributions to their fields.
Thought not. Not one, out of the hundreds of millions of Africans on the planet, is inventing stuff like this. Yet you think your country is going to survive if you just open the borders and allow them to outnumber you.
Please discuss. Rationally, if you can...
HAH. you should see my inbox.
Seriously, folks. What's up with you? Research and engineering are fucking hard. You got lots of false starts, but we're moving, at a good pace (heck, the pace is so high that society has a hard time to keep up: either we tackle *that* or we'll have shit hitting the fan soonish --oops-- correct myself: the shit *is* hitting the fan right now, look at what happened in Sweden!).
Of course, the current system is setting perverse incentives on R&D, that's why you see all those low-info, hi-gloss press releases. But we are doing our part of it, gobbling them up as they come and getting dumber at each step.
And now get off my lawn, while I polish my kWh per hour, or something.
There is a lot of applications for high discharge batteries, ie 20-30A discharges, would it also be able to handle such ?
Sounds a lot like a capacitor.
> Cockrell School of Engineering (Yes, this is a legitimate story)
Cockrell & Fils. was one of the earliest builder of steam locomotives, they started business just a few years after the 1829 debut of Stephenson's Rocket.
If its so real. Until then, it's all lab work.
That would be true for a capacitor, not for a battery.
In a battery you only shift the charge from one side to the other.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
There have been two major price drops in sixty years.
In the 1960s, a bunch of people were all excited about amazing solar breakthroughs - they'd all have solar-electric panels on the roof providing all their power needs in a few years. As you mentioned, ten and fifteen years later solar was still more than 100X times too expensive, and that on a sunny day.
According to the chart you linked, in the early 1980s, costs dropped enough that for a remote mountain cabin or other situation where utility power isn't an option, you could reasonably use solar to get a bit of expensive electricity. Heating, cooking, etc would use propane, wood, or some other type of energy - solar-electric was far too expensive to be your only power, even in a mountain cabin.
The change in the early 1980s got people all excited again though. Government and private investors threw billions of dollars at it because the next big breakthrough was just around the corner - for 30 more years.
30 years and 300 billion dollars later, prices dropped again. Now, 50 years (not 5 years) after it was "just around the corner", solar-electric can reasonably provide electricity for many people, on a sunny day. Still doesn't do so well in the morning or evening, but that's just around the corner.
The north central US and Canada are going to be a real surprise for this guy.
Any advances or development in battery technology is interesting, I hope this pans out into something consumer grade!
But this part made me smile: "extreme temperatures of -20-degree celsius." here in Canada in the winter we consider that 'bracing'... On a serious note, I have noticed that my Li-On power tools and iPhone (for music while I work) really do not like cold. A few degrees below freezing, they last no time at all when I do a bit of work in my garage. So anything that would not have a problem with that, would be nice.
Makes no sense.
You're still storing energy. Energy has mass. Always. It's not very much mass, but the GP pointed that out.
I was wondering where in the hell they were thinking -20C is extreme. That's around the temperature the balaclava comes out, especially if it's windy, but that's nowhere near extreme. That's winter.
Not just Canada. I live in Montana, and -20C is nowhere near as low as we experience. That's only -4F; we see -40F here often enough to have to be ready for it every winter. Which is also -40C, for you metric types. The low temperature record here is -56F, or about -48.8C. This year we only got to -29F/-33.8C, so it was a good year as far as that goes. Global warming, I guess.
Also, this.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Electrolytes! It's what batteries crave (and plants)!
A bit different to your new one isn't it?
Your new carefully shifted goalpost scores a win! Of course paying any price for a marginal shift is ridiculous if considered alone. However you didn't write marginal before and the article suggests the improvement is going to be game changing so I really do not know where you are getting that from unless it's just because you want to argue about something else.
A bit different to your new one isn't it?
No. They're exactly the same.
(Technically, But how economical is it to modify the existing multi-billion dollar battery factories to make these solid state batteries? is a specific instance of the general Is marginal (using the economic definition of "marginal") progress worth any cost, no matter how high that cost?)
However you didn't write marginal before
This hints that you don't know what the economic term "marginal" means. Tip: it does not mean "a little bit more".
the article suggests the improvement is going to be game changing
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
If I had a nickel for every article claiming "game changing improvements", I'd be a trillionaire traveling the globe in a battery-powered hypersonic flying car who vacations on the Moon and gets there via laser-powered carbon nanotube space elevator. Hint: I'm not, and I don't.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
No
Obviously not.
Why are you being so dishonest about this?
Is it because your unanswerable rhetorical question to push a luddite ideological barrow was pointed out?
How about you expel your toxic political agendas into places where they are a better fit instead of attempting to drive the enthusiasm out of the kiddies here?
You are seriously playing that "not educated enough" card as an adult? Do you really have that much contempt for the people around you?
Besides, "marginal" was not even mentioned until you engineered some petty "win" by moving goalposts. I did not question your use of it, I merely pointed out that you were changing the topic while claiming it was still the original topic.
"marginal" was not even mentioned until...
It was embedded in my original question.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
"marginal" was not even mentioned until...
It was embedded in my original question.
Really? Let's see that question again?
No - not there in any way at all.
What's with the transparent lies?
Your luddite problem? It's called a cargo cult - a love of technology but not giving a shit about how it gets there, as shown by your rhetorical deliberately unanswerable question you asked to sow doubt.
It's not a "hard question" as you well know. It's an utterly pointless question (for reasons other than sowing doubt to push an agenda) since it's not going to have an answer until a process is developed and costed. The last time I met someone acting like you they also went on at great length about healing crystals and pyramid power.
No - not there in any way at all.
Sure it is, because it's only viable to convert the factory if the marginal gain in performance is worth the expense of conversion.
Duh.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
since it's not going to have an answer until a process is developed and costed.
Then how do we know that it's a game changer?
See, I've read waaaaaayyyyy too many articles like this over the decades. Waaaaaayyyyy too rarely do they actually make it out of the lab.
That's because I'm jaded, not a Luddite.
Thus, I'm more than skeptical. Kinda like I'm skeptical of "make America great again", and was skeptical of "hope and change".
The last time I met someone acting like you they also went on at great length about healing crystals and pyramid power.
My children are vaccinated, and I rely on Big Pharma to prevent the seizures I'd otherwise have.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Your economic argument relies on the product being worth manufacturing somewhere, if not on current process lines, so your backtrack of pretending you never thought the product was worth considering is another blatant lie.
Why the fuck are you doing this? What is it to you?
Why do you want the kiddies to doubt based on numbers before the numbers are even available?
Which of course is something that is totally unknown at this point so is a ridiculous rhetorical question designed deliberately to push an agenda - as well as being wrong. If nobody is buying the old product the marginal gain is irrelevant. You adapt or die.
Why have you gone so far out of your depth on this one? Changing processes is not necessarily incredibly expensive. Shouldn't you be commenting about something you actually know something about instead? What's with the insults and "duh" when it's all incredibly speculative?
Why do you want the kiddies to doubt based on numbers before the numbers are even available?
So you've now decided that I'm not a Luddite?
Why the fuck are you doing this? What is it to you?
Why do you want the kiddies to doubt based on numbers before the numbers are even available?
Can't you read? See, I've read waaaaaayyyyy too many articles like this over the decades. Waaaaaayyyyy too rarely do they actually make it out of the lab.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
designed deliberately to push an agenda
My agenda is, "game changing hype is bad".
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Could someone who has a better understanding of battery tech clear up- is this battery tech potentially cheaper to produce and realistically something we can expect to see used everywhere within the next 5-10 years? This sort of technology would destroy the last barriers for me going for an EV: range, fast charging and "dang it, too cold to take the car out and expect decent mileage"..
Yet your "question" relied on the device being worth mass producing in the first place.
You can't have it both ways without being a liar.
Proof positive - cargo cult luddite that appears to assume that every successful product is born perfect instead of being the result of a process where less perfect stepping stones don't make it out of the lab.
The sort of mangled Chinese whispers from an MBA bullshit you were spouting initially isn't even taught to MBAs any more.
Clarify again what my alleged lie is.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
cargo cult luddite that appears to assume that every successful product is born perfect
I see now. You assume that I think "will it be?" is the same as "it'll never be!" It's just as obvious that you'll never believe otherwise.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
The very obvious one of pretending that a second very different question (with an obvious answer) was identical to the first one because you appeared to be unable to be critical of me without doing so. You pretended that I was denying the second undeniable thing you shifted the goalposts to.
Shame on you!
All for the sake of some mindless Eloi versus Moorlock shitfight.
Now shall I give you utter stupid advice on how to deal with databases in return or are you starting to get the idea of how ridiculous your initial post was?
You go on hyping each new laboratory discovery as game changing, and I'll wait for them to actually go into production.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
You didn't wait - you threw shit on it years before a process line is even designed.
No assumptions just what you have written, a cry of doubt railing against the dread spirit of innovation.
You can't tell the difference between "throwing shit" and "jaded caution".
(Don't even try to assert that you know what I "really" meant. I know what I meant a hell of a lot more that some /. weirdo who knows nothing about me.)
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
But you don't know a lot more and that is the problem. You are out of your depth and trying to drag others down.
Sigh. Obviously you can't convince me of your alleged rightness, and I obviously can't convince you how wrong you are...
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
You are still trying to defend your snarky little attack on progress?
The bit were you pretended to be stupid by bitching about costings for a process line for something that has only just been invented was the especially annoying insult to the intelligence of everyone here - most especially your own.
The largest irony is this thing is not breakthrough but incremental improvement, plus you are almost certain to have something powered by a battery based on the work of the inventor mentioned in the article already. This is no zero point energy scam or similar that turns up on this site from time to time.
This is no zero point energy scam or similar that turns up on this site from time to time.
Eyeroll. Shall I list for you 42 articles from /. about battery breakthroughs that haven't made it out of the lab? (No? I'll do it anyway.)
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/17/02/13/1923200/researchers-working-on-liquid-battery-that-could-last-for-over-10-years
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/17/01/31/209246/researcher-develops-explosion-proof-lithium-metal-battery-with-2x-power-of-lithium-ion
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/17/01/09/2034221/next-gen-samsung-ev-battery-gets-300-miles-of-range-from-20-minute-charge
https://science.slashdot.org/story/16/11/25/1937248/toyotas-battery-breakthrough-can-lead-to-more-range-longer-life
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/11/23/2255256/scientists-create-battery-that-charges-in-seconds-and-lasts-for-days
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/11/02/2219234/researchers-make-a-high-performance-battery-from-junkyard-scraps
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/08/17/2335227/solid-state-battery-could-extinguish-fire-risks
https://science.slashdot.org/story/16/04/22/1551209/researchers-accidentally-make-batteries-that-could-last-a-lifetime
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/03/04/2228252/scientists-have-created-batteries-using-carbon-dioxide-from-atmosphere
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/02/27/177251/new-super-battery-energy-storage-breakthrough-aims-at-54-per-kwh
https://science.slashdot.org/story/16/02/23/1920254/cheap-high-performance-green-battery-runs-on-rotten-apples
https://science.slashdot.org/story/16/02/16/215200/pollen-based-electrodes-could-boost-battery-storage
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/14/07/28/1427259/stanford-team-creates-stable-lithium-anode-using-honeycomb-film
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/14/05/14/0233227/new-battery-tech-from-japan-could-supercharge-evs
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/14/01/09/2221227/metal-free-rhubarb-battery-could-store-renewable-grid-energy
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
NONE of that is even related to your little luddite unanswerable doubt sowing comment of:
Why do you keep on trying to throw in all these distractions? None of it excuses the way you acted.