This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Or, better yet, they could provide the same range in smaller, lighter vehicles with less resource use.
From the article:
"Moreover, the silicon-gel electrolyte system demonstrated ion conductivity comparable to conventional batteries while achieving a remarkable 40 percent increase in energy density. This represents a significant leap forward in battery technology, offering a practical solution ready for immediate application."
So, same energy output, lower weight, similar range. Would be good if this soon becomes a drop in replacement option for older EVs that are nearing EOL on their batteries and require new ones anyway.
I've always said that about one of my big reasons for buying an EV several years ago. By the time I'm in need of a replacement battery, it will be better in virtually every way - safer, faster to charge, higher capacity, lighter, and (potentially) cheaper. The first replacement battery might not be much of an improvement, but my 3rd might be light-years ahead.
Looking at past actions of capitalism, it is more likely that same type of batteries will be sold for older cars and the new tech batteries will be only made for newer models, unless right to repair takes off, but who knows, still I do hope for a better and more sustainable future.
Lots of surveys show one of the primary barriers to EV adoption is range anxiety. I’ve seen people trying to “educate” potential customers out of this anxiety, but it’s pissing into the wind. You’re not going to convince most people to downgrade their current ICE experience while paying the same or usually even more. I think the inflection point is above real world range for ICE. For example my 2016 Honda Civic can get about 7-800km of range on a single tank, and stops are as quick as a few minutes. This provides a lot of flexibility about where and when one stops. The range needs to account for:
The 20-40 minute charge vs five minutes for gas.
The lack of chargers relative to gas stations.
The 30% drop in range in the cold.
Our annual Austria ski trip takes about 30% longer in our Model Y than the Civic. That’s hours extra on an already very long drive, and the Y costs a lot more. That’s a big downgrade in experience. An appalling experience with a family. We won’t be buying another EV until affordable range is above 1,000km (620 miles). I know many current, former, and non-EV owners who feel the same.
There is a market for commuter cars with poor range, but primarily in rich places where owning 2-3 cars is common. These rich places have already bought EVs as they are. Most of the world relies on just one car, if they own one at all. That one car needs to perform well in all conditions.
The concerns for range anxiety are well founded too. I had to rent a car the other day, and the only thing they had available was a Tesla model 3. Aside from the issues Teslas themselves have, the 90 miles I had to travel became an immediate concern because it was in a rural area and the town I went to literally had two chargers, and they were privately owned.
The 280 miles I was quoted as range quickly became 170, despite turning off the heat, not charging my phone, using cruise control at 3MPH below the speed limit, and changing all the settings I could conceivably find to turn down my power consumption. I wound up having to beg a private owner to let me use their charger because what would normally be a simple trip became a massive chore. My other option was waking up hours early to drive to a town 40 miles away where they had a super charger and leaving from there, also just barely making it back to the rental car return.
The time to charge the Tesla on a 220v charger btw was over 5 hours from 48%. Absolutely none of my experience matched that of the advertised and it's completely turned me off electric cars until they can start fixing some of these issues.
It would be useful for electric bikes and things that you could feasibly own alongside a car and use for 90-95% of trips.
Article states the use of an electron beam to enable this. So not currently scalable, but still a seemingly significant result.
Oh I know, just put it in an oven. Trust me, I saw one video on impossible blue LEDs, I know what I'm talking about.
A microwave oven? According to some YouTube videos, Apple had this tech in their phones years ago.
Can you expand on this? There used to be multiple electron beams in every house in America.
Ok, maybe it's possible that they aren't using a very focused electron beam, but usually when scientists think about using an electron beam they mean something inside of a machine like an SEM or e-beam lithograph. These only operate on small areas.
If an unfocused beam (and therefore lower energy density) can be used, then this could likely be scaled more easily. Even if a focused beam is needed, scaling may still be possible, but will likely require additional developments to create that process.
All of the beams in my house have electrons
Oooohhh, battery revolution claim #3515351657829, one of these days one of em MUST be true!
It’s not Toyota making the claim this time, it may not be bullshit for once.
1k mile or kilometer range? Which is it? I'm inclined to believe it's kilometers. Time to read the article, I suppose. It's enticing either way.
A bit misleading but yes, 1000km is what they are talking about. Also the article doesn't address scalability.
Well, there's a lot the article doesn't address. I can say this with complete confidence, even as someone who hasn't read the article
Edit: don't freak out, I eventually did read the whole article. Every word. And I was right.
You READ it? What kind of madlad are you?!?!
They demonstrated 40% increase in energy density.
The stuff about the range appears to be simply applying that percentage to common EV ranges, which is nonsense. It’s probably more likely that an increase in energy density would be used to decrease battery size, leading to cheaper and lighter EVs
The title says “1000 miles”, the the subtitle right below says “moving closer to 1000 kilometers” which is only 621 miles and pretty close to what we already could do with a ridiculously big battery in a Lucid Air or Tesla (if they didn’t bother with the plaid speed bullshit and just build for single motor range).
Stupid editorial work for maximum click bait.
I wish people would stop obsessing so much over range. Once we have decent charging infrastructure in place and people overcome all the FUD, this will simply cease to be relevant.
Some people don't want to feel like they have to stop every hour for 15-20 minutes. If I'm going on a long road trip I'm fine driving 300-400 miles without stopping. I'm probably a minority but I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Yea....no. Most of the USA is rural areas, range is a huge deal.
Exactly. Ideally in cities and surrounding suburbs we would want public transportation and no cars. Cars should really be reserved for the more rural places anyway.
Then you need to figure out the range issue.
I drive 82 miles a day on average according to my tracking, but that frequently involves days of 400+ miles. And since I drive in hill country and require air conditioning most of the years I know the range estimates are wildly optimistic versus real-world performance.
And charging a car isn't like filling up with gas. It's not a 3-minute stop. If a car can get me as far as I'm willing to drive in a day, then an overnight charge seems like an option.
But even then, since I'm a renter and always will be because of the shit going on with housing I can't get a fast charger.
All of this is to say that it's not 1 issue. It's all of them. Range, charging speeds, and availability of chargers ALL have to be addressed and essentially 100% reliable before I can risk owning an all-electric vehicle.
Once we have decent charging infrastructure in place
I think part of the range anxiety thing is that buyers think of their worst trip, target than the average trip.
On average, Canadians commute 8.7km to work. Those who commute for more than 60 minutes are averaging 40km. For these trips, drivers don't need charging infrastructure beyond what they have at home. (And yes, public transit would be an even better option)
There are always outliers, and every time this comes up, people talk about how far they drive on road trips and vacations. Those are not normal use, and they should probably be handled by renting an ICE car.
If anyone cares, I think this is the research paper. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/advs.202305298
Thanks for the source. I wish I understood it better
This research was focused on the lithium battery anode. Ideally we could just put a chunk of lithium in there but the stripping and deposition chemistry doesn't work well long term. Modern batteries use graphite instead. But of course you waste a significant amount of cell volume and weight with all of that carbon, and the potential is lower than Li metal. Alloying Li with silicon gets you properties more similar to Li.
So this paper talks about their efforts to make LiSi more viable as an anode. They gave it a coating to protect it from electrolyte side reactions and created a new gel electrolyte formation reaction. The capacity they report isn't remarkably higher than what's out there now since the cathode is the heaviest part of the cell.
As to the results I do have to say 60% capacity retention after 200 cycles is not nearly good enough for real world use. And I have no clue where they got the "1000 mile range" headline from.
That would go a long way towards solving the range anxiety barrier. 1000km is close to the maximum that same people can do in a single day. Yes, you could push further in a day in a pinch, but not comfortably unless you're rotating drivers. It's pretty close to the limits enforced on long haul truck drivers in Canada or the US (depends on speed limits and traffic density and a few other things).
Sodium is the future of batteries right now.
Projections from BNEF suggest that sodium-ion batteries could reach pack densities of nearly 150 watt-hours per kilogram by 2025. And some battery giants and automakers in China think the technology is already good enough for prime time. 1
+1 for them not exploding too.
