10X better Li-ion Anode

[PHEVadvocate]

I knew that a silicon anode could store more charge, but that it's life was short. It sounds like Nano Technology has come to the rescue:

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html (http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html)

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/gifs/battery-nanowires.jpg
Photos taken by a scanning electron microscope of silicon nanowires before (left) and after (right) absorbing lithium. Both photos were taken at the same magnification.


Add the new Exxon Mobile Separator Film and a Super Cathode and we will be flying!

I hope the new year will remembered as the year of the Super Battery!:)

Anybody know what's the best Cathode for a secondary Li-ion battery?

[Mark Tomlinson]

Yes, but it's still a proof of concept and a long way off from any production.

The good news is that every time we turn around, someone is announcing technology that leap frogs the last announcement. Many of these will die on the vine due to manufacturing issues or costs. But it does demonstrate that battery technology is the hot new research field. Something good has to come of all this.

[PHEVadvocate]

With so many good battery developments in progress, I’m sure we will see several improvements in the coming year. The old saying: “There are liars, damn liars, and battery manufacturers”, may still be true, but a lot of new highly motivated people are in the battery research area now. Look at the battery progress made in the last few years. Even the Lead Acid batteries are improving, just look at the work of Firefly Energy or Axion Power.
:)

[Billy]

Give it 10 years, just imangine what'll be like then? First was lead-acid, then Nickel Metal Hydride, then was Lithium Ion, then Lithium Polymer all over 10 years, and compare the capacities to each other, and we've gained a LOT!! Time will tell..

:rolleyes:<----(miracleman waiting)

[PHEVadvocate]

Hello Gents,

Here is some more information on the new Anode:

http://www.gm-volt.com/2007/12/21/gm-voltcom-interview-with-dr-cui-inventor-of-silicon-nanowire-lithium-ion-battery-breakthrough/#more-634


Note: He said that you would have to improve the cathode material to get the 10X performance improvement, but you still could get a several fold improvement with this anode. I hope anode life holds up, I guess time will tell.

:)

[PHEVadvocate]

Hello again,

Here is another article, notice how they say's finding a new cathode material is the Holy Gail!

http://www.technologyreview.com/Nanotech/20000/?nlid=785

[Billy]

i was just surfing the net, and I don't remember how I found this, but another new battery technolgy..

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h3IT6jqifbd8gEV5fjUArOw521SA

They're using ceramic..:eek:

[PHEVadvocate]

I always liked this company too. Read the Firefly technical white paper if you want to learn about why lead acid batteries fail.

If they get the corrosion issues fixed with the 3Dsquared battery, we are going to see some low-cost electric cars.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/01/firefly-energy.html#more

http://www.fireflyenergy.com

[esuorc2]

Looks like this may be the answer to EV's Low cost, fast refill and never wears out.
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/01/eestor_ultracap.html

[WarpedOne]

Seeing is believing...

So far, EESTOR only hot air.

[PHEVadvocate]

Here is a promising developmnet:

http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=5210.php

The problem is that it will take years for something like this to get into production. :(

[PHEVadvocate]

Here is another article showing how Nanotechnology can improve LI-ion batteries:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/nickel-silicide.html#more

It seems like China is really taking advanced battery research seriously and U.S. is government is letting us fall further behind. :(

Curse the hydrogen lobby! :mad:

Oh well, maybe low cost advanced technology LI-ion batteries from China is what the world needs.

[PHEVadvocate]

They must be doing this for energy density only.

Cobalt Oxide Anodes are the things that make the real nasty Lithium Ion battery fires! :confused:


http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/self-supporting.html#more

Oh, Well.

[PHEVadvocate]

Chick here for the article! (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/04/23/ancient-japanese-company-makes-modern-lithium-ion-battery-with-s/)

This does not seem as energy dense as a nanotechnology electrode, but it shouldn't be hard to make either. The improved cycle life is a plus too.

[RAN]

I saw that PHEV. If they can really start getting them out in 2 years, we may actually be able to get some EV's on the road.

Is anyone else getting a little tired of hearing "it should be ready in 2 years?"

[PHEVadvocate]

RAN,

It looks like this two year promise may come true. I have some hope with a Volt battery pack running on the road!

http://gm-volt.com/2008/04/24/breaking-first-lithium-ion-prototype-chevy-volt-running/

Also, 2 years is better than the 10 to 20 for Fuel cells. ;)

[Keldros]

I saw that PHEV. If they can really start getting them out in 2 years, we may actually be able to get some EV's on the road.

Is anyone else getting a little tired of hearing "it should be ready in 2 years?"

Despite my usual optimism, I have to express some scepticism in seeing this concept vehicle in a showroom floor in 2 years. GM has had a long history of dangling great new technology and then snatching it back. From the Lean Machine in the early 80's to their Electric Car project in the 90's, they've passed on countless opportunities in the past to advance the auto industry into the 21st century. More likely it will be delayed long enough for someone else to take the big first step out in front (with all the inherent risk), most likely an independent manufacturer. Then once there's a proven market and demand, they'll move on it.

[RAN]

Despite my usual optimism, I have to express some scepticism in seeing this concept vehicle in a showroom floor in 2 years. <snip> More likely it will be delayed long enough for someone else to take the big first step out in front (with all the inherent risk), most likely an independent manufacturer. Then once there's a proven market and demand, they'll move on it.

Keldros, I tend to agree with you. My dislike of GM is deep-seated and started back a couple of decades ago (more once I started reading up on their past). IF they come out with the Volt on schedule, and in the numbers they've talked about, it would be only the first step in GM starting to cover the grim tab that they've been running up for over half a century. I won't be holding my breath on the General, and I won't be buying any Volt made the 1st year either.

[PHEVadvocate]

Unfortunately Keldros and RAN, I have to agree with you to some extent. I think they will have to build some Volts to prove they can do it and I don’t see how they can back out of that. But, I think they might find some way to delay or wreck the launch of the car. My guess is that they will claim the batteries aren’t quite be good enough and then they will offer to lease us a Fuel Cell Volt or lease the Battery pack.

I would never buy the first year of a GM car especially one that was rushed to production.

The good news is that the Volt battery packs are being provided by a third party. They will have invested a lot of money to gear up for battery pack production. I just can’t see them not selling the batteries to someone else, if GM does not take them. I can't see them giving GM a exclusive on the battery packs or at least the cells knowing GM's past history either. They have to be leary of ending up like Cobasys.

[PHEVadvocate]

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=batteries&id=20570

[PBSmith]

Now why would a company like GM buy a battery technology that was no good, when they were using it in there own vehicle, the EV1? Why would an oil company like Chevron by that same technology from GM and sit on it, refusing to allow any use of it in EV's if it was no good? They are perfectly willing to let everyone go round and round with Lithium, Hydrogen, ethanol, etc., and refuse to admit the existance of the EV1, or RAV4-EV, the first of which were confiscated at the end of the leases and destroyed, and the second is still on the road, 100 mile plus EV range.
http://ev1.org/msg/19.htm
http://ev1.org/msg/33.htm
I know this site has a slant against GM but I have not seen a good counter argument yet.

[Derwin]

I know this site has a slant against GM but I have not seen a good counter argument yet.

I personally have absolutely NO slant against ANY company or industry. There are those that believe in various conspiracy theories, but I am not one of those. I find certain things a bit curious, but I don't take it any further than that. I have nothing against GM, Ford, Chrysler, or any other auto maker, except to say that they are doing a terrible job at getting REAL hybrid vehicles to market. I'm sure there are many reasons for this, one including that the technology is not there yet, but I still think they can do better.

Just thought I would share my thoughts.

Derwin

[PBSmith]

Sorry, I ment the site of the links I was posting (ev1.org). Being that GM crushed the EV1 they seem to be a little angry about it. I have certainly never seen any one on this site take a stance against any of the auto manufacturers.

[PHEVadvocate]

http://gm-volt.com/2009/03/11/100-fold-lithium-ion-battery-breakthrough/

http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090311/full/news.2009.156.html

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/03/lithium-breakthrough-could-charge-batteries-in-10-seconds.ars

I hope this is true and makes it out of the Lab! =y:

[RAN]

WOW! They've only tested it for 50 cycles though. Anything could happen above that number. It's also possible it could go for 10,000 cycles without much degradation.

Of course, it'll take years to get these out on the market <sigh>.

Yo! I'm not getting any younger over here! :taz:

[PHEVadvocate]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7938001.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7938001.stm)

http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2009/03/11/tech-090311-battery-recharge.html?ref=rss (http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2009/03/11/tech-090311-battery-recharge.html?ref=rss)

[PHEVadvocate]

Here is another article:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5891194.ece

Here is a picture describing how it works.

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/battery.pdf

With this power density anyone want to bet we could smoke a Tesla in a V1?
:burning:rubber:

[PHEVadvocate]

This one is not quite as positive, but is a interesting read. Still a safer battery and higher power desnity is not that bad. The higher energy materials tend to catch on fire, because most of them have oxygen in the electrode.

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22280/?nlid=1852

It seems to me that we are really begining to understand how to improve the batteries. A battery like this is good for power surges like regenerative braking and smoking the tires.

:burning:rubber:

[AZEqualizer]

Daily Tech (http://www.dailytech.com/Researchers+Create+Battery+That+Recharges+in+Secon ds/article14555c.htm) has this article on the MIT advancement in recharge rate using iron phosphate. Along with a slew of others including GreenCarAdvisor (http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencaradvisor/2009/03/mit-researchers-develop-lithium-battery-material-for-ultrafast-charging.html) etc.
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/10582_090310-coslog-battery-465px-730p.jpg

Speeding Things Up
Ceder and Kang (MIT researchers) used their technology to develop a small battery that can be fully charged or discharged in 10 to 20 seconds instead of the six minutes it would normally take, MIT said. It predicts this could lead to smaller, lighter, rapidly recharging batteries for cell phones and other devices, and faster recharges for electric car batteries.

Well, yes. Except for a few minor details. For one, recharging electric cars more quickly will be limited by the amount of power available through the power grid, according to MIT's own press release. In other words, the fast recharge will suck up huge amounts of electricity. Think about a brown-out.

[PHEVadvocate]

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/24/24greenwire-chemistry-change-in-batteries-could-make-for-s-34626.html

[Derwin]

Here's the entire article, which I think is VERY interesting...
(This article was originally posted to the NYTimes website)

<nyt_headline version="1.0" type=" "> Chemistry Change in Batteries Could Make for Safer Electric Cars </nyt_headline>

<script language="JavaScript" type="text/JavaScript">function getSharePasskey() { return 'ex=1408852800&en=8b4446f55a20cfbc&ei=5124';}</script> <script language="JavaScript" type="text/JavaScript"> function getShareURL() { return encodeURIComponent('http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/24/24greenwire-chemistry-change-in-batteries-could-make-for-s-34626.html'); } function getShareHeadline() { return encodeURIComponent('Chemistry Change in Batteries Could Make for Safer Electric Cars'); } function getShareDescription() { return encodeURIComponent('The powerful lithium-based batteries used in electric vehicle systems, laptops and cell phones are prone to overheating and e...'); } function getShareKeywords() { return encodeURIComponent(''); } function getShareSection() { return encodeURIComponent('business'); } function getShareSectionDisplay() { return encodeURIComponent('Business / Energy & Environment'); } function getShareSubSection() { return encodeURIComponent('energy-environment'); } function getShareByline() { return encodeURIComponent('By JENNY MANDEL of Greenwire '); } function getSharePubdate() { return encodeURIComponent('August 24, 2009'); } </script>

Sign in to Recommend (javascript:void(0);)
Sign In to E-Mail (http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/24/24greenwire-chemistry-change-in-batteries-could-make-for-s-34626.html)
Print (http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/24/24greenwire-chemistry-change-in-batteries-could-make-for-s-34626.html?pagewanted=print)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/article-sponsor.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/adx/images/ADS/20/71/ad.207170/adam_120x60_nowplaying.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=www.nytimes.com/gwire/yr/mo/day&pos=Frame4A&sn2=ee9f0b4/676630e&sn1=c5374327/880620b5&camp=foxsearch2009_emailtools_1011076c_nyt5&ad=Adam_120x60_c_nowplaying&goto=http://www.foxsearchlight.com/adam)



<nyt_byline version="1.0" type=" "> By JENNY MANDEL of Greenwire (http://www.greenwire.com/)
</nyt_byline> Published: August 24, 2009
The powerful lithium-based batteries used in electric vehicle systems, laptops and cell phones are prone to overheating and even blowing up, but adding less than a gram of a new substance could keep both temperatures and costs down, federal researchers say.
Skip to next paragraph (http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/24/24greenwire-chemistry-change-in-batteries-could-make-for-s-34626.html#secondParagraph) More News From Greenwire



Obama Nominees Could Reshape Industry-Friendly Judiciary (http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2009/08/20/1)
Advocates Renew Calls for Large-Scale Restoration of La.'s Coastal Wetlands (http://www.eenews.net/public/Landletter/2009/08/20/1)
Water Compromise Elusive in Calif. Debate Over 'Broken' Ecosystem (http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2009/08/19/5)
Chinese Solar Companies Report Weak 2Q Results, Rising Shipments (http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2009/08/21/5)
Company Taps Jet-Engine Technology in Bid to Cut Carbon-Capture Costs (http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2009/08/19/6)



<!--greeninc promo include for articles --> <!--green inc. --> http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs_v3/greeninc/greeninc190b.gif (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs_v3/greeninc/greeninc75.gif (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/)
<!--http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs_v3/greeninc/greeninc190b.gif (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/)
--> A blog about energy, the environment and the bottom line.

Go to Blog » (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/)




The molecule, developed by researchers Khalil Amine and Zonghai Chen at Argonne National Laboratory, is being tested as an additive in the electrolyte of lithium batteries to keep cell voltage from going too high.
The batteries used in hybrid and electric vehicles typically consist of 200 to 400 small cells, strung together into one powerful whole. Individual cells sometimes overcharge, emitting heat when they reach too high a voltage and pushing neighboring cells past the breaking point to set off a runaway thermal reaction.


Because electric and hybrid vehicles are constantly discharging and recharging during normal driving, overcharging problems are not confined to the garage but pose a real operational hazard.


In the lab, Amine and Chen discovered they could make a molecule based on boron and fluorine and add a tiny amount of it to each cell to control charging. When the cell exceeds the safe voltage level, Amine explained, the molecule picks up electrons and keeps the cell charge from going up.
Currently, expensive electronic controls are used to regulate each individual cell in a battery and shut it down if the voltage gets too high. But the control systems are expensive, making up as much as 20 percent of a battery's cost, and the electronics are prone to failing.


Amine said the new approach offers several advantages over current technologies. In addition to the lower cost, the molecule is more reliable, he said. Other systems that use some kind of molecule in a similar way cannot control more than one overheating cycle, he said, while his molecule will soak up extra voltage through 500 or more cycles.


The material is not easy to make, but only a small amount is needed -- 2 to 3 percent of the electrolyte by weight. Today, it costs about $1,000 per kilogram, but Amine said battery company EnerDel is leasing the technology and using an Energy Department grant to scale up the fabrication process. He believes that making large batches should bring the cost down to about $100 per kilogram.


The molecule could save $100 to $200 per battery, Amine said. Battery makers today are targeting a total price of $500 to $1,000 per battery.
One more advantage of the new molecule is that unlike the sophisticated electronic control systems, adding a new chemical to the battery pack is quick and easy. "The electrolyte is the last thing you fill in, so it's an immediate adaptation. Just add this 2 percent and you're ready to go," Amine said.

[PHEVadvocate]

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f

Looks like another contender in the great battery race!.:)

11 times the energy density of lithium may be pushing it a bit, but just even 2 or 3 times would be great. Even if it is cheaper to make than lithium batteries (1/3 the cost), no one is going to sell it for that price. But, all it takes is one of these new advanced battery technologies to be practical and electric cars will really take off. I hope this is not another false promise like EEStor or hydrogen "fool" cell powered cars.

[PHEVadvocate]

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/03/yushin-20100315.html#more thu:mbs:up:22