Australian Scientists Figure Out How Zinc-Air Batteries Can Replace Lithium-Ion Batteries (gizmodo.com.au)

Researchers at the University of Sydney has figured out how to solve one of the biggest problems standing in the way for zinc-air batteries to replace lithium-ion batteries. The reason zinc batteries are so sought after is because they're powered by zinc metal -- the 24th most abundant element in Earth's crust. Not only are they cheaper to produce than lithium-ion batteries, they can theoretically store five times more energy, are much safer and environmentally friendly. The problem with zinc batteries stems around them being difficult to charge because of the lack of electrocatalysts needed to reduce and generate oxygen during the discharging and charging of a battery. labnet shares a report from Gizmodo: "Up until now, rechargeable zinc-air batteries have been made with expensive precious metal catalysts, such as platinum and iridium oxide. In contrast, our method produces a family of new high-performance and low-cost catalysts." These new catalysts are produced through the simultaneous control of the composition, size and crystallinity of metal oxides of earth-abundant elements like iron, cobalt and nickel. They can then be applied to build rechargeable zinc-air batteries. Researcher Dr Li Wei, also from the University's Faculty of Engineering and Information Technologies, said trials of zinc-air batteries developed with the new catalysts had demonstrated "excellent rechargeability" -- including less than a 10 percent battery efficacy drop over 60 discharging/charging cycles of 120 hours. The research was published in the journal Advanced Materials.

Comments

Re:24th most abundant element?

[dfsmith]

Here you go. According to the link, Zn is about 75ppm and Li 20ppm in the Earth's crust.

Re:24th most abundant element?

[sl3xd]

For which Zinc has a good thing going: it's so cheap we use it for everything, and so easy to refine and reuse its been used since antiquity.
.
Zinc costs $0.20 for 100g; at a similar purity, 100g of lithium is nearly $10

Being ~50x less expensive, and being much easier to use are pretty big wins for Zinc.

Zinc batteries are nothing new - it's in the same alkaline batteries we've been abusing for generations.

So 2x the power density and 50x cheaper? That can be historic.

Real problem with Zinc

[Khyber]

Looks like these guys didn't learn from PowerGenix and their nickel-zinc batteries.

The problem with every fucking zinc battery is that it WHISKERS LIKE MAD when you discharge/recharge it.

Stop the micro/nano-structures which form nilly-willy on the Zinc side of things after the battery has been manufactured and put into use, and you literally solve the charge degradation problem, charge cycle count problem, and the variable energy density problem all in one go.

Now how do you stop the Zinc from whiskering?

Re:Real problem with Zinc

[Rei]

Solid electrolytes are a big promising tech in this front, where you have an ion-conductive glass that functions both as electrolyte and separator membrane. The separator is harder than the dendrites and so there's little damage during charge / discharge.

I'm sure dendrites will be overcome eventually. And that will help a lot of different techs, not just zinc (lithium metal is also bad with dendrites).

Re:Five times

[Rei]

it's much more similar in refinement to a Dacia or a Hyundai

Not according to literally every reveiwer who has been in in the vehicle, which is over a dozen. A base Model 3 is also more feature-rich than its competitors such as the 3-series (there are also comparisons to the A4 and C300 if you'd like)

Now, you can spout nonsense that doesn't correspond at all to any reviews, but that's not to your credit. Seriously, the concept that a soft-touch sports sedan with a 5,6 second *base* 0-60, eight cameras, a dozen ultrasonic sensors and a radar *standard*, automatic crash avoidance *standard*, and a ton of other things is equivalent to a Dacia... why not just call it a used Yugo while you're at it?

Tesla Model 3: 1740kg (claimed)

Wrong. The base curb weight of the Model 3, according to the official press kit, is 3549 lbs, which is 1610kg. 1730kg is the LR version, the heavier version. The BMW 3-Series ranges from 1475-1770kg. The A4 ranges from 1410-1695 kg. I can't find an official total range for the C300, but find values ranging from 1630 kg to 1688kg to 1695kg to 1715kg. While the 1630kg is described as the "base weight" (analogous to the M3's 1610kg), I have no clue what the heaviest C300 config is, there could easily be configurations heavier than the 1715kg one.

To sum up:
Tesla Model 3: 1610-1730kg
BMW 3-Series: 1475-1770kg
Audi A4: 1410-1695kg
Mercedes C300: 1630-1715+kg

I'll repeat: The Tesla Model 3's curb weight comes in at pretty much the same as its ICE competitors in its class (BMW 3-Series, Audi A4, Mercedes C300, etc).