Dear battery technology claimant,
Thank you for your submission of proposed new revolutionary
battery technology. Your new technology claims to be superior to existing lithium-ion technology is is just around the corner from taking over the world. Unfortunately your technology will likely fail, because:
[ ] it is impractical to manufacture at scale.
[x] it will be too expensive for users.
[ ] it suffers from too few recharge cycles.
[ ] it is incapable of delivering current at sufficient levels.
[ ] it lacks thermal stability at low or high temperatures.
[x] it lacks the energy density to make it sufficiently portable.
[ ] it has too short of a lifetime.
[ ] its charge rate is too slow.
[ ] its materials are too toxic.
[ ] it is too likely to catch fire or explode.
[ ] it is too minimal of a step forward for anybody to care.
[ ] this was already done 20 years ago and didn't work then.
[x] by this time it ships li-ion advances will match it.
[ ] your claims are lies.
Battery technology announcements are always extremely over hyped. Mostly by media and PR departments rather than actual scientific or domain specific outlets.
Advancements happen, but even if they are technically and commercially viable, it takes years until anything becomes actually useful.
Right, except this announcement specifically isn't. It's a short description of a new technology with targeted use-cases, which explicitly points out the ways in which it's not ready to displace existing technologies.
You are correct that there is often unjustified hype around battery technology in general. But this article is absolutely not that.
Perhaps it could be better phrased to be clearer that it's "the highest of solid state batteries" and not "the highest of batteries, and also solid state".
You're correct, but eventually one of these announcements will live up to the promise. LiPo was basically stumbling due to a few manufacturing at scale issues at the time, and once those got solved (Sony released a standard LiPo cell in 1991) it wasn't long before it became the new standard.
I'm still sceptical of new battery tech announcements, but I still get excited by them!
1) "Hey, that's great, I hope it works out for them!"
2) "Can I actually pull out my visa card right now, and buy some individual units online?"
Re: #2, most batteries have very little relevance to me as an end user until they're commercially available to buy. For instance the Panasonic NCR18650GA (245-250Wh/kg) li-ion, the Molicell P42A (21700 size li ion that's capable of being discharged at 45A rate with appropriate cooling), and other state of the art technology. I can go buy those right now from some reputable online stores.
Until whatever other new battery shows up to actually purchase, it exists in a liminal, theoretical state only.
Yes, we just play our hyperbole with a straight bat.
Rule of thumb, if it sounds to good to be true. It probably is but the PR department needs to do something.
[x] your description uses milliamp hours and milliamps per hour interchangeably
[x] milliamp hours is a useless metric when we don't know how big/heavy said battery is
[x] milliamp hours is a useless metric when we don't know the battery's voltage
Still, it does make me cringe a little.
that only matters if you want a portable battery. there are alot of uses where it doesnt need to be portable at all. thats only for electric cars. same with crash resistance etc, and even affordability for average users.
it literally says "satellites and industrial machinery." in the article, neither of which needs to be very cheap or portable. especially because other batteries arent good under extreme temps
> ... applications in industrial machinery and space
In the first line
> ... making it a candidate for use in satellites and industrial machinery.
So 2/3 of your points don't really make sense
It seems inspired by this classic:
I'm sure people could have come with similar criticism for li-ion batteries, before them took over
[x] it lacks thermal stability at low or high temperatures.
[x] it is too likely to catch fire or explode.
Too many people think Li-ion is magic, when it just happens to occupy a particular niche of characteristics that let it get a good early jump in the race for portable power. Nothing about the chemistry involved mandates it remain in a position of primacy.
This particular alternative is useful in some very specific niches in which Li-ion will _never_ be competitive.
This is my litmus test for new battery technology. If they have a manufacturing process and it's already implemented then their proposition can(but doesn't necessarily have to ) be treated seriously.
Let's see how much capacity can be squeezed out of this. I don't suppose it's too impressive though - solid state batteries only recently started visibly improving in all the interesting parameters.
Actually that's 17 years ago:
Besides that, we can have 10 hours from a battery quite easily right now. If you need more, there are external batteries powerful enough to power a laptop over USB-PD. And after that you just charge it from any power outlet. It's a known technology, very mature, and doesn't run into any trouble at airports.
Hydrogen also either requires constantly buying new cartridges, or acquiring special hardware to fill them.
It's just late to the market. At this point the batteries are actually very good and a lot more convenient. There's probably some use case in which one can't have enough batteries, set up a solar panel, or use a generator, but it's got to be a niche.
An extremely well engineered piece of technology that may have been selling at a loss at $150. Only 26wh at up to 500ma, can't recharge it at home, have to drive to specific stores to pay £6 to swap the cartridge. Just completely impractical.
But now you're paying a good chunk of cash... for what exactly? The system is bigger than a battery, a lot more expensive, a lot harder to charge, much less powerful, and a lot more complex and delicate.
Apparently, after coverage in EVERY blog, news article, etc, they dropped it last year.
Capacity is measured as a product of current and time,
not current per time.
1 Wh = 3.6 kJ
The problem is that our system of timekeeping does not conform to SI's prefix system. Not many people have an intuitive grasp of what a kilosecond is.
They used the correct units earlier in the article.
For those who do not know, Toyota and it's battery partners have been announcing solid state batteries 'soon' since ~2010 .
Longer term, my read is that fluorine-ion batteries are the most promising potential generational leap. But that these are only likely to be viable in solid-state form, as fluorine is more dangerous than lithium.
It is easier/faster for the brain to compare 700mAh and 1000mAh than 700mAh and 1Ah