A new lithium-air battery design promises unprecedented energy density [another attempt]

[AnotherReader]

Another lab result vs in real live LPG. Show me serial air-lithium battery vs LPG engine.

Lithium air batteries aren't in production yet so you're right to be skeptical. That figure is an example of the potential of the technology, but there are many obstacles to overcome before this goes into production. Wikipedia summarizes them:

However, the technical difficulties facing such batteries, especially recharging times, nitrogen and water sensitivity, and [15] the intrinsic poor conductivity of the charged Li2O2 species are major challenges

 

[ShiBDiB]

Lol, dude you clearly don't know how publishing articles in scientific journal works, do you?

I do, and most published articles are free if you reach out to the source. The journals are the ones charging you not the authors.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Liquid Propane engine?

No, ICE (internal combustion engine). Problem with translation.

 

[qubit]

That's why I said "take a number". I've been reading about lab breakthroughs for decades. Sure, the batteries got better overall, but if you were paying attention just to lab breakthroughs, you'd be wondering why we haven't flown past the Solar system by now. Pure research is very important, but until we can build those things for cheap enough, it doesn't mean all that much to the end user.

The articles did say that products were about a decade away though. I'd have expected a more steady stream of news to come out though, unless I've missed some of it.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

were about a decade

I read somewhere jokes for about this after 10 years.
Homology to nuclear fusion power plant will be after next 30 years.

 

[bug]

Its interesting and I am interested to see how much more range this could add on a vehicle with similar size pack. The big problem is lithium batteries in general are not great for the purposes we are trying to force them into (or at the very least their current incarnation). They work great in laptops, phones, portable electronics, etc, however as a solution for vehicles they are less than stellar. Currently, they still do not charge at a fast enough rate to be useful as anything more than the average commuter vehicle and the longevity of the pack is questionable. I will say the charge cycles part of this battery sounds the most impressive since it says it can survive 1000 charges and only lose 5% capacity which would give more credence to these packs lasting longer and costing less in the long run (Namely not having to replace the pack at 150k miles).

They may not be best suited for vehicles and such, but look what great fireworks show they can make.

Sarcastic remarks aside, love them or hate them, they're the best we have at the moment,

 

[TumbleGeorge]

The good thing about laboratories is that they will always cause excitement among the population, through demonstrations of efficiency that is not always observed in mass-produced products.
I had read somewhere that mass-produced solid-state lithium batteries are expected to reach a specific energy density of about 2-2.5X, compared to those with liquid electrolyte that we currently use. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean an increase in the range per charge of EVs in exactly that proportion. But it will not be soon. The most optimistic date for the first converted production facilities to produce (of a large size and capacity suitable for incorporation into EV battery clusters) solid-state lithium batteries is from 2025. This will be just the beginning. For real mass production to make a significant impact on the market to displace the current type of batteries, perhaps another 5 years should be added.

 

[bug]

The good thing about laboratories is that they will always cause excitement among the population, through demonstrations of efficiency that is not always observed in mass-produced products.
I had read somewhere that mass-produced solid-state lithium batteries are expected to reach a specific energy density of about 2-2.5X, compared to those with liquid electrolyte that we currently use. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean an increase in the range per charge of EVs in exactly that proportion. But it will not be soon. The most optimistic date for the first converted production facilities to produce (of a large size and capacity suitable for incorporation into EV battery clusters) solid-state lithium batteries is from 2025. This will be just the beginning. For real mass production to make a significant impact on the market to displace the current type of batteries, perhaps another 5 years should be added.

Here's the thing, labs always have to show progress, because they need to prove their research is sound and need to attract more funding. The problem here is when pop-sci websites report on these advancements, the public automatically assumes this is something that will impact them. It will actually only impact the labs. And it is something useful if you were an investor and needed to decide where to invest.

 

[GhostRyder]

They may not be best suited for vehicles and such, but look what great fireworks show they can make.

Sarcastic remarks aside, love them or hate them, they're the best we have at the moment,

Here's the thing, labs always have to show progress, because they need to prove their research is sound and need to attract more funding. The problem here is when pop-sci websites report on these advancements, the public automatically assumes this is something that will impact them. It will actually only impact the labs. And it is something useful if you were an investor and needed to decide where to invest.

Yea, I know they are the best we have at the moment. I just don't like that we are almost being forced to use the tech in purposes its not really suited for. I just hope we see more than just some articles talking about improvements and see some real world testing/new tech introduced into batteries that will make them more useable in vehicles if nothing else. Battery tech is definitely one of those things that we really need some major improvements on as the current style of lithium battery has started hitting its limits.

 

[bug]

Yea, I know they are the best we have at the moment. I just don't like that we are almost being forced to use the tech in purposes its not really suited for.

Most tech are used in ways their inventors didn't mean. Or didn't even think of. Not ideal, but that's how the world works.

I just hope we see more than just some articles talking about improvements and see some real world testing/new tech introduced into batteries that will make them more useable in vehicles if nothing else.

I've given up waiting to see anything but incremental improvements. And I haven't been disappointed in decades.

Battery tech is definitely one of those things that we really need some major improvements on as the current style of lithium battery has started hitting its limits.

Not only do we need improvements, we know we are barely scratching the surface of what's possible. For example, a teacher explained how, in any given material, we are only manipulating under 1% of its electric potential/charge. That really put things in perspective for me. The thing is, we really don't know how to improve on that significantly.

 

[GhostRyder]

Most tech are used in ways their inventors didn't mean. Or didn't even think of. Not ideal, but that's how the world works.

I've given up waiting to see anything but incremental improvements. And I haven't been disappointed in decades.

Not only do we need improvements, we know we are barely scratching the surface of what's possible. For example, a teacher explained how, in any given material, we are only manipulating under 1% of its electric potential/charge. That really put things in perspective for me. The thing is, we really don't know how to improve on that significantly.

Yea, same principal applies to Nuclear energy. Currently we can only extract maybe 5-10% of the power from a rod I believe. I am always hopeful we will see some major breakthrough on battery tech in the next 5 years. Maybe I am too optimistic because then I get majorly disappointed haha.

 

[AnotherReader]

Yea, same principal applies to Nuclear energy. Currently we can only extract maybe 5-10% of the power from a rod I believe. I am always hopeful we will see some major breakthrough on battery tech in the next 5 years. Maybe I am too optimistic because then I get majorly disappointed haha.

Breeder reactors could extract almost 100% of the energy in the original fissile material, but they aren't being built due to significant problems.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

Breeder reactors could extract almost 100% of the energy in the original fissile material, but they aren't being built due to significant problems.

Yes, but the most efficient systems only turn ~40% of the heat generated into electricity.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Nuclear energy. Currently we can only extract maybe 5-10% of the power from

0.005%

 

[AnotherReader]

Yes, but the most efficient systems only turn ~40% of the heat generated into electricity.

Combined cycle power plants have higher efficiencies: up to 65% for some recent attempts.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

Combined cycle power plants have higher efficiencies: up to 65% for some recent attempts.

Gas turbine =/= nuclear...

Still, that is a good sign. Gas turbines can be driven with renewable fuels in some cases.

 

[AnotherReader]

Gas turbine =/= nuclear...

Still, that is a good sign. Gas turbines can be driven with renewable fuels in some cases.

Combined cycle is independent of the type of fuel; it can be used to increase the efficiency of nuclear plants too. Still, it's probably a moot point for most of the western world as interest in nuclear technology is low there.

 

[GhostRyder]

0.005%

Ah I knew it was small, the article I was reading said over 90% of the rods power is still there for possible recycling in the future

 

[AusWolf]

The technology looks nice, but...

Phones and laptops are already okay-ish with Li-ion and Li-polymer technologies. Sure, they die after a couple of years, but most people upgrade by that time anyway (I don't, but that's besides the point). An energy density upgrade is always welcome, though.

As for cars, when someone shows me an electric car that has the same size, weight, range, acceleration, top speed, fun factor, refuelling (recharging) time and price as my Fiesta ST, we can speak. Until then, electric cars will only be toys for rich kids. Home charging is not an option for me as I live in an apartment, neither is twiddling my thumbs at a station for hours. I don't think this technology goes far enough to solve all this.

 

[AnotherReader]

Ah I knew it was small, the article I was reading said over 90% of the rods power is still there for possible recycling in the future

0.005% is incorrect. It is closer to 1%.

 

[80251]

No, ICE (internal combustion engine). Problem with translation.

In Battlebots there is a bot called ICEWave - the only battlebot to use an ICE to power its main weapon. Its main weapon has completely dismembered an opponent bot because of its superior KE and mass.

 

[R-T-B]

Downvote for the topic. The popular article does not include the energy density numbers, but it is emphasized in the title that it is the important parameter of the battery and is the means of attracting attention and clickbait. Reading the scientific publication(paper) is paid. Many people don't have a paid account in "Science.org" or a desire for a one-time pay to read it in the original. So i consider this a scam to make money from paid reading material.

Contact the authors if you are really interested. Most will send you their work for free, happily.

The journals in question have to get a vetting budget for their articles from somewhere, sadly. Membership fees is viewed as the least evil course.

 

[Space Lynx]

I think this stuff is interesting, it's just we have all read so many countless breakthroughs over the last decade and nothing ever manifests itself in the end user product, based on the first few comments here I can tell I am not the only one.

I am more at a point now I don't even care, it will come whenever it comes, out of my control.

 

[R-T-B]

I think this stuff is interesting, it's just we have all read so many countless breakthroughs over the last decade and nothing ever manifests itself in the end user product, based on the first few comments here I can tell I am not the only one.

I am more at a point now I don't even care, it will come whenever it comes, out of my control.

LiPo (Lithium Polymer) resulted in a real, albeit very minor capacity increase vs standard Lithium Ion.

Not much more than that though, yeah.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

LiPo (Lithium Polymer) resulted in a real, albeit very minor capacity increase vs standard Lithium Ion.

Not much more than that though, yeah.

I believe it allowed for lower size for higher discharge rates.