
Scientists say new material can triple lithium-ion battery energy density - Osiris30
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/scientists-say-new-material-can-triple-lithium-ion-battery-energy-density/525772/
======
Animats
Actual paper [1].

They don't have a battery yet. Just a "half-cell".[2] They have the cathode
side, but not the anode side, apparently.

This group has access to all the good toys. They're doing X-ray
crystallography with a synchrotron beam line. They have a scanning tunneling
microscope with a 3-axis nano-manipulator.

[1]
[https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04476-2](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04476-2)
[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-
cell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-cell)

~~~
plaidfuji
I believe in battery research a half cell is a perfectly acceptable test bed
for quantifying cathode performance, given that the anode material is not the
bottleneck in the device. Researchers shouldn't have to spend their time doing
full-device optimization every time they want to demonstrate improvement in a
material.

------
solarkraft
Please don't let this become news until there's a production ready design.

There are lots of these battery innovations promising multiple x of
improvement, yet never delivering anything. Maybe it's actually interesting to
battery chemistry enthusiasts, but you can't give them headlines like this
either.

Bring the down votes.

~~~
amelius
Agree, but I would be interested to know whenever they have a working
prototype, rather than wait for a production ready design.

------
cutler
Is it just me or have we been fed stories about potential improvements in
battery life for over a decade now with no real improvements? There seems to
be a vortex out in space where all these promises about CPU and battery
improvements somehow get swallowed up. Take graphene, for example. Discovered
in 2004, it was touted as something which was going to change the world and
replace silicon in CPU production. Yet a recent article
([https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/what-is-graphene-
and...](https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/what-is-graphene-and-how-will-
it-shape-the-future-of-tech/)) concluded: "Unfortunately, this is all
theoretical. Current graphene cells are not yet up to par with silicon cells".

~~~
princekolt
Another thing to keep in mind: It makes no difference if battery capacity
grows but power consumption goes up as well. When you have hungry apps (say,
Chrome) hogging resources with no regard to the user's device, there is little
to be gained from having denser batteries.

~~~
mathw
There is if those resources are being used to do more stuff... or you put the
battery in a car.

------
AngryData
The problem is even though we have gotten miraculously stable lithium
batteries, they still aren't 'bulletproof' enough that explosion and fire
risks are negligible. Add 3x more energy to it and it starts becoming a really
big problem. This is what has kept 99.9% of these miraculous battery
technologies we always hear about, too dangerous to use in consumer devices.

If it is as stable, or preferably more stable, than current tech, great! If it
is anything less, you will never see it except in maybe industrial
applications.

~~~
roryisok
Petrol is fairly flammable and explosive too, but we still drive around with
big tanks of it under the back seat

~~~
phyller
Gasoline is not explosive, it requires oxygen to burn. We wouldn't allow
normal passenger vehicles to drive around with big tanks of explosives.

~~~
roryisok
Yes, it requires oxygen, which happens to be all around and inside a vehicle
typically. I'm not sure what your point is. If a fuel tank is ruptured it can
lead to fire and/or explosion. If a battery is ruptured the risk of fire is a
lot less. Maybe batteries carry a greater risk of spontaneously combusting,
but I don't think that makes them more dangerous than carrying a tank of
flammable liquid around

~~~
FloatingVertex
Petrol is very safe for the energy density it has due to the relatively slow
rate at which outside oxygen gets fed into the flame causing a burn rather
than explosion. TNT is far less energy dense (1/5 iirc) but because it
contains oxygen it is far more dangerous and explosive. A very high energy
density battery is likely to be closer to TNT in its reaction and not have the
requirement of needing outside oxigen to keep the reaction speed in check (but
really this depends on the exact technology of the battery)

------
linsomniac
If even half of these amazing battery technologies had come true, my car would
be driven by a D cell battery.

But I'm ok that it hasn't, because I once heard a battery chemistry guy say
that "the higher capacity a battery is the more it resembles a bomb." I can't
find the reference any more, but with all the Samsungs and Teslas catching
fire, it rings true.

~~~
hn_throwaway_99
> "the higher capacity a battery is the more it resembles a bomb."

You mean like gasoline?

~~~
overcast
Gasoline only explodes under very specific environmental conditions, otherwise
it just burns.

~~~
givinguflac
One could say the same about lithium :).

~~~
ksec
When was the last time you read about a Car carrying tank of fuel sudden burst
into frame?

When was the last time you read about battery explosion?

~~~
gregpilling
U.S. fire departments responded to an estimated average of 152,300 automobile
fires per year in 2006-2010. These fires caused an average of 209 civilian
deaths, 764 civilian injuries, and $536 million in direct property damage.

Facts and Figures

Automobile fires were involved in 10% of reported U.S. fires, 6% of U.S. fire
deaths. On average, 17 automobile fires were reported per hour. These fires
killed an average of four people every week. Mechanical or electrical failures
or malfunctions were factors in roughly two-thirds of the automobile fires.
Collisions and overturns were factors in only 4% of highway vehicle fires, but
these incidents accounted for three of every five (60%) automobile fire
deaths. Only 2% of automobile fires began in fuel tanks or fuel lines, but
these incidents caused 15% of the automobile fire deaths.
[https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/By-topic/Property-
type...](https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/By-topic/Property-type-and-
vehicles/Vehicles)

~~~
mastax
Thank you for being the only person willing to do research in these threads.

------
plaidfuji
I see the Silicon Valley mentality of "it's not news until the product ships"
is pretty prevalent here. News flash: this is how R&D works on physical
products. Most advancements are incremental. Some are larger than others, but
are always built on years of other incremental advancements. This one appears
to be larger than usual, so it's news. Your phone battery will continue to
grow incrementally in energy density in order to run the increasingly bloated
software shipped by the "true innovators". Life goes on.

------
mrfusion
I always found it confusing that the lithium solution is most of the mass of
the battery but all of the energy is in the anode and cathode.

~~~
neltnerb
The lithium is also in the anode and cathode, the electricity is generated by
lithium traveling from one to another through the electrolyte. The electrolyte
is heavier and bulkier but is picked for the ability to let lithium get
through without letting electrons get through. I guess you could call it a
lithium solution since lithium passes through it to get between the anode and
cathode.

The anode and cathode need to be electrically insulated from one another
requiring a substantial gap, or else the battery will short out internally or
self-discharge if the electrical resistance is too low. That's why it's so
big. Of course, reducing that gap is a big area of research. Solid
electrolytes in principle might be easier to do this with since they stay put,
but stuff cracks when lithium concentrations go up and down. The materials
literally swell with lithium at the nanometer scale and then break apart. It's
pretty hard, you can't unfortunately just vapor deposit a thin film of a solid
electrolyte on the cathode since the materials are a bit too fragile to
maintain the electrical resistance required for it to work.

------
jwatte
Isn't there a new cathode material promising manyfold improvement announced
about every three weeks or so?

I'd like to see one of them actually deliver in new batteries. But instead,
the 50% or so improvement we've seen over the last ten years have all been
because of incremental refinement.

Color me skeptical until it's proven in production.

~~~
Gibbon1
There has been an enormous amount work on battery technology for the last 30
years. Probably 99% of it leads to dead ends.

Standard rule of battery development, if everything goes right it takes ten
years to market. And another ten to get market share. In the late 90's early
2000's there was paper after paper published on lithium iron phosphate
batteries and dick all nothing for sale until ~2010. And ten years later
market share is growing slowly.

~~~
ethbro
Are there any main reasons for this?

I'd assume conservative and long-design time downstream users mean there isn't
a volume market for new battery tech.

~~~
Gibbon1
I'm assuming twofold; engineering for scale and marketing.

Once you've sort of proven something in research you need to develop processes
for manufacturing at scale. Those processes are often radically different than
the one used during initial development. 10X rule applies. Take ten times the
resources to bring something into production than to just design it. And worse
with batteries you're dealing with primary materials. You may have needs for
material inputs that simply do not exist at scale. No one makes material X in
100 metric ton quantities. The only source is a post doc making 100 gram
batches. Sometimes the batches are bad for reasons unknown.

------
curiousgal

      revolutionary_battery_tech_news++

~~~
bootlooped
error: integer overflow

------
frankus
I wonder what the effect is in specific energy. Weight is at least as much of
a concern as volume for a lot of mobile applications.

~~~
philipkglass
In the parlance of this space, energy density usually means specific energy.
"Volumetric energy density" is the term normally used if research is
highlighting a material that achieves high energy-per-liter storage from its
high specific gravity.

------
adrianmonk
> _By adding cobalt and oxygen atoms to iron fluoride nanorods_

Could someone who knows this area comment whether this sounds expensive to
manufacture?

~~~
neltnerb
"Typically, FeF3∙3H2O and CoF3 were ball milled at a molar ratio of 9:1 for 30
min to reduce the particle size and get a homogeneous reactant mixture. Then,
170 mg of such mixture was dispersed in 1-propanol (75 ml) and stirred
vigorously at room temperature for half an hour. The resulting suspension was
transferred into a Teflon-lined 100 ml stainless-steel autoclave reactor, and
subsequently sealed and heated at 210 °C for 24 h in an oven. For comparison,
FeOF was also synthesized by the same procedure using pure FeF3∙3H2O as the
starting material dispersed in butyl-alcohol. FeF3 was prepared by ball
milling the as-purchased FeF3 for 6 h. The pre-lithiation of Fe0.9Co0.1OF is
synthesized by ball milling Fe0.9Co0.1OF and LiH at a molar ratio of 1:2 for
10 h."

This is standard ceramic slurry processing, they mix the powders with some
liquid and then heat the two ceramics together to do a solid state reaction. I
am somewhat impressed that the reaction went suitably at 210C, but that's not
particularly hot. I'd think that the raw material costs would dominate here.

EDIT: Ball milling is when you spin a jar on rollers with the ceramic powder
and big teflon beads that crush it gradually over a long period of time. It
can be done dry or wet, but it's not a fancy procedure.

------
theweb1
How's that even possible ?

------
tzahola
First law of battery tech headlines: it’s all vaporware unless it’s shipping
in laptops.

------
m3kw9
Keep saying but let us know when a real world product can be achieved

------
WheelsAtLarge
I'm thinking the battery explosions will be more spectacular too.

~~~
the8472
Consider the energy density of a cup of water when viewed as fuel for fusion
reactions.

~~~
anonuser123456
Zero? A cup of water doesn't typically contain tritium.

~~~
slavik81
You can fuse anything lighter than iron and it will release energy. The
process with tritium is just easier. Stars can extract the nuclear potential
energy from hydrogen and oxygen just fine.

~~~
inteleng
I'd love to see someone fusing water at sea level.

~~~
slavik81
The oxygen would be the hard part. You'd want a temperature of about 2 billion
degrees Kelvin and have it compressed to a density of about 4 million kg/ml.

That's a lot of activation energy, but it takes money to make money. Err,
takes energy to make energy.

~~~
the8472
> activation energy

Which was the very point of my example.

------
bhnmmhmd
It's was about time we moved on to the next energy-storage technology for
mobile devices. I can't believe in 2018, battery is still the main issue of
all flagships.

~~~
jdavis703
Won't it always be an issue? I have a feeling they'll just put in more and
better power-hungry hardware and software and we'll be back in the minimally
acceptable battery life range.

~~~
function_seven
Right. And if they don’t do that, then the phone will just get thinner. We
already have incredible energy density compared to a decade ago, but that
budget is used up by shaving millimeters off the thickness.

~~~
packet_nerd
> used up by shaving millimeters off the thickness

I wish they didn't do that, I would gladly carry around a slightly bigger
phone if it had much better battery life.

~~~
bdamm
Many phone models do have expansion options like this, even iPhones. I for one
am appreciative of “low power mode” so I get to choose efficiency over app
freshness.

~~~
function_seven
Yeah, but that (1) feels like the hardware equivalent of DLC, and (2) the
resulting unit is much thicker than it would be if the battery were designed
into the device from the start.

I get why some people prefer thinness over battery life. Not all use cases are
the same. Just wish that there was an option when choosing a model to go with
svelte or chunky.

------
stephengillie
> _A conventional graphite cathode, in a process known as intercalation, can
> only transfer a single electron. But compounds like iron trifluoride can
> transfer multiple electrons._

Flourine is difficult to work with, so these batteries may cost more.
Hopefully the energy density offsets the cost.

~~~
rini17
This is not nastiness like pure fluorine or hydrofluoric acid, but a salt. It
may be somewhat toxic, but it does not require extraordinary handling
precautions.

~~~
greglindahl
I wonder what happens when it catches fire?

~~~
sverige
I'm sure it burns just like regular lithium-ion batters.[0] The addition of
FeF3 probably doesn't change the correct response to the hazards much -- put
out the fire if you know how to safely do so with the proper personal
protective equipment, otherwise get the heck away.[1]

[0]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLc74Qpvweg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLc74Qpvweg)

[1] [http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-
documentation/appli...](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-
documentation/application-notes/hdr202li_hd220rli_battery_msds.pdf)

