
How Long Before Sodium Batteries Are Worth Their Salt? - hliyan
https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/at-work/innovation/how-long-before-sodium-batteries-are-worth-their-salt
======
wimagguc
If price was the only factor that matters, we could be using nickel-metal-
hydride batteries. They also last longer.

A more important aspect where Sodium would be better than Lithium for
batteries is that it doesn't catch fire that easily. Lithium batteries are
prone to thermal runaway, where if you increase their temperature that makes
them release more energy and increase their temperature even more until they
combust violently.

A graphic example to this is where Grand Tour's Richard Hammond recently
crashed an electric car, which then continued to spontaneously catch fire five
days after the crash ([https://www.total-croatia-news.com/made-in-
croatia/23852-the...](https://www.total-croatia-news.com/made-in-
croatia/23852-the-grand-tour-season-two-episode-one-is-out-and-rimac-concept-
one-is-on-flames))

~~~
rpedela
Yes, but the reason for fire is the liquid electrolyte. Lithium batteries
don't have to catch fire. A short clip from PBS Nova:
[https://youtu.be/m9-cNNYb1Ik](https://youtu.be/m9-cNNYb1Ik)

~~~
karlkatzke
Sodium Carbon batteries have the same issue with flammable liquid organic
solvent electrolytes. There is research being done into using a solid
electrolyte and a metal anode though.

------
kilpikaarna
I like that the article doesn't answer or even ask the question in the title:
"How long?". But the tl;dr seems to be that while lithium is cheaper than
sodium, the performance is way worse and practical problems remain. And a
startup making a vaporware-ish promise of 2020.

Lithium batteries is 50 year old technology, so I guess one might be
optimistic and halve that. Unless there's a big, unforeseen lithium supply or
production crunch coming, I'd expect sodium batteries to be common in about 25
years then?

~~~
sremani
I agree with you, the bigger problem with Li-ion is that once they become
popular, there are about six countries with massive deposits of Li. Even among
them, the most are in Chile-Bolovia-Argentina triangle. The more popular Li-
ion gets the more scarce or expensive Li becomes (say 10 years from now), so
we have to move to batteries made of really abundant resources like Na
(sodium).

2040 seems to be about right time, Startfor science analyst predicted
something like that an year or so ago.

~~~
raverbashing
Wonder how cost effective nuclear transmutation of H into Li could become,
depending on demand

~~~
hliyan
I'm surprised it's not more abundant. Usually, the smaller the atomic number,
the more abundant the element is in the universe. But surprisingly, Lithium,
Beryllium and Boron are not that abundant (compared to, say, Carbon).

Edit: at least not in the Earth's crust...

~~~
taneq
I thought this was a good question so I looked it up.

While on average, lighter elements are more common, it looks like after
hydrogen and helium, the rest are far less common and not in atomic mass order
(
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_the_chemical_elem...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_the_chemical_elements)
). This seems to be due to matter being created in two phases, primordial
nucleosynthesis
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_nucleosynthesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_nucleosynthesis))
where hydrogen and helium formed out of protons and neutrons, and then later
stellar neucleosynthesis
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_nucleosynthesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_nucleosynthesis))
where heavier elements were formed inside stars via fusion.

This explains the distribution of heavier elements, because they were created
by specific fusion pathways rather than just hot stuff cooling down.

~~~
jessriedel
My guess is that that explanation doesn't provide even a good first
approximation to the abundances of element in the Earth's crust.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth%27s_crust)

I think there's just a lot of chemistry and geology going on.

~~~
taneq
I think neither chemistry nor geology can alter the relative abundance of
elements.

~~~
jessriedel
You'd be wrong. First, light gases escape from the Earth's gravity, which is
why there's no molecular hydrogen or almost any helium whatsoever. Second, the
crust is not the same thing as the Earth, and the distribution of elements by
depth depends a lot on the density and other properties of the material
elements are chemically bonded into.

~~~
taneq
Hm, those are actually pretty good points. I stand corrected.

------
Brajeshwar
What do you guys think of Vanadium Redox Batteries [1]?

Its primary advantage is, of course, in large installations. It cannot be used
in cars and anything smaller but seems to be a good solution for stationary
battery requirements.

I've been reading up a lot on it and would love to hear your thoughts and
learn more.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery)

~~~
HarryHirsch
Vanadium electrolyte batteries are a mature technology. Vanadium is plentiful,
cheap and (comparatively) non-toxic, and an accumulator can be built
arbitrarily large (just add another electrolyte tank). The disadvantage is the
energy density, but for grid storage other considerations, such as long-term
stability) are more important.

Whoever wants to sell you lithium accumulators for grid storage probably owns
a lithium battery factory.

~~~
woodandsteel
Sounds good, but that makes me ask, so why aren't they already widely
deployed? Makes me think there is some problem you aren't mentioning.

~~~
Brajeshwar
Actually, there are indeed at-least 5 big and established companies with
finished products operating right now. I was talking to a cousin at the World
Bank and got connected to a battery expert at the IFC. He calms me down that
Vanadium Redox batteries are well proven and are being used now. Improvements
are being advanced and announced regularly. In the next few years, I believe
this will become common terms, as another means of storage.

Some of the "problems" are huge initial capital investment required to start
up, the battery sizes start as big as (approx) 5x5x5 ft to get a 5kW output.

The recent bad news in the Vanadium Redox Battery is that of Imergy Energy
shutting down[1] and their assets liquidated (I read somewhere, Sherwood
Partners managed their liquidation).

For those interested, IFC recently released a 50+ paged Report on Energy
Storage[2].

1\. [https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/flow-battery-
as...](https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/flow-battery-aspirant-
imergy-has-let-go-its-staff-and-is-selling-its-assets)

2\.
[https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/ed6f9f7f-f197-4915-8ab6-...](https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/ed6f9f7f-f197-4915-8ab6-56b92d50865d/7151-IFC-
EnergyStorage-report.pdf?MOD=AJPERES)

------
ChuckMcM
I found the notion of hard carbon :
[http://jes.ecsdl.org/content/162/14/A2476.full](http://jes.ecsdl.org/content/162/14/A2476.full)
interesting too.

------
DaniFong
we really need an order of magnitude before these become exciting enough for
people to change what they do, and once you have an order of magnitude on
something like this the whole world changes.

