Slashdot Mirror


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.

6 of 118 comments (clear)

  1. Excellent rechargability? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    less than a 10 percent battery efficacy drop over 60 discharging/charging cycles of 120 hours

    How does this compare to current lithium batteries? I thought my phone's battery was better (I heard like 100 recharges without any significant drop)

    1. Re: Excellent rechargability? by nachtelfjeiu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is our monthly "revolutionary battery" news item. There's always something wrong. Too big, too heavy, too few charge cycles, too slow to charge, too expensive, etc. The batteries never actually get practically produced. The purpose of these news items is for the research group to get funding. Don't expect anything from this as a consumer.

    2. Re: Excellent rechargability? by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Aside from the "never actually get practically produced" bit, you've just described the media around every battery ever created since the dawn of electricity.

      I most certainly do expect something from it. I do often with promising research. If you want to feel silly start looking at Slashdot articles talking about revolutionary batteries like LiFePo4 from 15+ years ago, and then laugh at all the posts like yours claiming we'll never see them and it's just researchers wanting more funding.

      Because you know the best way of not getting something? Don't fund it.

    3. Re:Excellent rechargability? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The cells Panasonic makes for Tesla cars are rated for 3000 cycles. Standard lifetime for batteries is the point at which they retain less than 80% of their original capacity.

      Phone batteries tend to be closer to 500 cycles, which is why they are usually noticeably degraded after a couple of years, or even 18 months for heavy users.

      However, the other factor to consider is how easy it is to manufacture, repair and replace a given type of battery. If you can restore lost capacity just by adding water, say, it's not such an issue if it only lasts 50 cycles.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. Re:Five times by thesupraman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, I know you are just trolling, however..

    The actual amount of electrical energy in a battery is generally not a major hazard - the issue with LiIon batteries is much more closely related to the use of Lithium in a state that can then continue and amplify the reaction (the energy is not minor, however the two together is the major hazard). That is why the energy in a car lead acid (starting, not electric drive..) battery is not much of a concern in a crash - there is a ton of it, and it can discharge strongly (enough to melt steel), however it tends to do so in a way that doesnt create a sustained high temperature fire.

    The issues with this research however are more likely to surround what is not said.
    10% loss after 60 cycles is not particularly great - however that is a low number - does is stabilize or accelerate to a quick death?
    What does the self-discharge curve and time look like? (that is often a major factor).
    What is the discharge voltage curve like?

    The headline is f course throwaway - nothing of the sort is claimed.

    The safety issue of LiIon is already solved, LiFePO4 batteries are better in almost every way, however have a minor weight/size penalty.
    They last many more cycles, have a better charge/discharge voltage curve, react much less violently to failure, etc.
    Of course since they would cost just a bit more, no one talks about them - since then, you know, they may actually be pushed in to consumer devices..
    We couldn't have that.. you cannot compromise profitability with safety!

  3. Re:Five times by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As for reviews, let's go down the list. By all means, read the full reviews yourself.

    Motor Trend:

    What’s blanching, though, is the car’s ride and handling. If anybody was expecting a typical boring electric sedan here, nope. The ride is Alfa Giulia (maybe even Quadrifoglio)–firm, and quickly, I’m carving Stunt Road like a Sochi Olympics giant slalomer, micrometering my swipes at the apexes. I glance at Franz—this OK? “Go for it,” he nods. The Model 3 is so unexpected scalpel-like, I’m sputtering for adjectives. The steering ratio is quick, the effort is light (for me), but there’s enough light tremble against your fingers to hear the cornering negotiations between Stunt Road and these 235/40R19 tires (Continental ProContact RX m+s’s). And to mention body roll is to have already said too much about it. Sure, that battery is low, way down under the floor. But unlike the aluminum Model S, the Tesla Model 3 is composed of steel, too, and this car’s glass ceiling can’t be helping the center of gravity’s height. Nearly-nil body roll? Magic, I’m telling you. Magic. And this is the single-motor, rear-wheel-drive starting point. The already boggled mind boggles further at the mention of Dual Motor and Ludicrous.

    Top Gear:

    Gone are the Model S’s projecting doorhandles in favour of nicely crafted aluminium ones that project manually like those on an Aston when you poke one end. Open the door and slide in, and the interior is beautifully simple and uncluttered. The steering wheel features two buttons that adjust everything from the traditional (volume, radio frequency) to the more unique (door mirror adjustment and steering wheel positioning).
    ***
    The car we drove was a Long Range model with all the options list ticked, including the Premium Upgrade Package, featuring leather seats (base models come with fabric), a wooden dash inlay panel that spans the width of the cockpit and the aforementioned glass roof that infuses the interior with a huge feeling of light and space. It’s all simple, elegant, uncluttered and nicely crafted. Before we set off, I jumped in the back and with the driver seat positioned for my 6ft frame, there was still plenty of room in the back for three adults.
    ***
    Our short foray highlighted that the Model 3’s quoted 0–60mph time of 5.1 seconds in this Long Range spec might be underplaying its performance a bit: it’s rapid, and the acceleration is delivered with that lovely linearity and unwavering torque that EVs deliver. The overall feeling of peace and quiet is helped by the minimalist interior but by impressive sound deadening and insulation – the road noise is minimal.

    The Verge:

    I felt like I was driving in an Eames chair. That was my first impression as I climbed into the driver’s seat of the Tesla Model 3 at the Fremont Factory on Friday afternoon. It took a moment to orient myself — no gauges, no speedometer, no airplane cockpit cues. Instead, one continuous smooth line between myself and the road ahead, offset by natural, unfinished wood. The premium model of the Model 3 caught me off guard. After hearing so much hype about this car, I was surprised that my first reaction was a profound sense of delight. It wasn’t bland, nor sterile, nor cheap feeling. Here was something different. Here was an exercise in minimalism. Here was the car Elon Musk promised to make 14 years ago.

    --
    Ever since, I've been suspicious of Jesus and very careful around chlorine.