# IBM Creates 'Breathing' High-Density Lithium-Air Battery (12000 wh/kg)



## somanywelps (Jan 25, 2012)

http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/smart_grid/article/battery500.html

My dad works at IBM, maybe I can ask him for the inside scoop.

If there's one thing about IBM, it doesn't screw around on research.


----------



## Ziggythewiz (May 16, 2010)

No...ask for the inside discount!

Scramjet technology, wohoo!!!


----------



## Jason Lattimer (Dec 27, 2008)

12kwh per kg ?!  Holly crap! That is some huge energy density. You could have a car a range of a few thousand miles.


----------



## somanywelps (Jan 25, 2012)

Jason Lattimer said:


> 12kwh per kg ?!  Holly crap! That is some huge energy density. You could have a car a range of a few thousand miles.


They updated that to be the expected density of the batteries. To me, anything even remotely near that is awesome; hell, I'd be fine with 500wh/kg to start with.

Edit: One of the videos from 2009 (3 years ago) states a density of 1666wh/kg in a prototype cell. No idea what it is now...


----------



## lazzer408 (May 18, 2008)

Anything they manage to put to market would cost an arm and a leg. You all know how that goes. Would we have any problems with current technology if an EV worthy pack cost $200? I don't think the issue is so much the technology as it is the cost. What good is 100kw per kg if a kg of batteries costs killodollars.


----------



## Ziggythewiz (May 16, 2010)

A 100 kwh pack for $1000 sounds pretty good...


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

12kw/kg is about what diesel fuel is with no losses, 3x better then current teck diesel engines . wow !


----------



## lazzer408 (May 18, 2008)

Ziggythewiz said:


> A 100 kwh pack for $1000 sounds pretty good...


KillodollarS. More then one.  When I built my first EV, the only reason I could was because I got the batteries for free. If a pack is going to cost $1000s, I'll just buy a Civic. Point is, battery technology isn't as disapointing as the prices. I don't understand why people get so excited about battery news. If a battery were to come out that's "That good", the price won't be. Nothing will change as far as that goes.


----------



## somanywelps (Jan 25, 2012)

lazzer408 said:


> KillodollarS. More then one.  When I built my first EV, the only reason I could was because I got the batteries for free. If a pack is going to cost $1000s, I'll just buy a Civic. Point is, battery technology isn't as disapointing as the prices. I don't understand why people get so excited about battery news. If a battery were to come out that's "That good", the price won't be. Nothing will change as far as that goes.


The point is it's the price per kwh. a 12kwh cell can be up to $4k and still be very good. The weight is important.


----------



## Ziggythewiz (May 16, 2010)

If something amazing comes out that's uberexpensive, there is likely to be a derivative that's great but just expensive, and something that's affordable and still good.

Once the iPad 4 of lithium hits the market, we should all be running lithium 1.0 or better.


----------



## lazzer408 (May 18, 2008)

Ziggythewiz said:


> If something amazing comes out that's uberexpensive, there is likely to be a derivative that's great but just expensive, and something that's affordable and still good.
> 
> Once the iPad 4 of lithium hits the market, we should all be running lithium 1.0 or better.


Affordable is an opinion.  That's why so many DIY guys still use lead.


----------



## aeroscott (Jan 5, 2008)

every peace of teck I use was ounce very expensive . I have to scrounge to get it together with lots of failures but it works in the end .The concept of using outside oxygen instead of carrying oxides around . this is a game changer .


----------



## coulombKid (Jan 10, 2009)

The energy density is no real surprise. When I saw lithium burned in chlorine I really should have had on a welding hood as protection from the flash. It was real hard to breathe in there right after that.


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

I have to agree. It all comes down to cost. Even Lithium iron at about 120-140 wh/kg on the high end would be sufficient for 300 mile EV's if it were super cheap. The energy density hasn't been a major issue for a while. It's the cost that's been the holdup.


----------



## Tatsushige (Mar 24, 2011)

HOLY COW BATMAN! .... Oh please please come to the market NOW and NOT cost a arm and a leg!


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

So basically its a form of fuel cell. 

Zinc - air batteries were a big deal about a decade ago but not much came from it other than a small number of prototypes. I think Israel had a small fleet of delivery vans. It was a flop because it was essentially primary battery. They were either swapped at special stations, or (as in the case of metallic power) used a liquid electrolyte of potassium hydroxide to pump the depleted reactants out and fresh reactants in.

What I'm not seeing in the article is any claim of a working prototype. Nano tech is probably something IBM could get right if they wanted to however. The advancement of semiconductors is one example of how rapidly things can advance under the right conditions.

Did they test one of these things yet, or is it all hypothetical?


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

We have to remember though that they are in business to make a buck. If it's prohibitively expensive it can't be sold except for some governments. Even then if it's that expensive they will opt for alternatives. They won't make much on limited markets like that, not as much as they would selling lots of them at lower prices. 

One of the goals likely is to make something that is affordable as well as good so as to increase sales. When the car makers can sell them by the truck loads they will make money!


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Ziggythewiz said:


> A 100 kwh pack for $1000 sounds pretty good...


Need 400Kwh to replace 42 gallons in my plane...


----------



## somanywelps (Jan 25, 2012)

david85 said:


> So basically its a form of fuel cell.
> 
> Zinc - air batteries were a big deal about a decade ago but not much came from it other than a small number of prototypes. I think Israel had a small fleet of delivery vans. It was a flop because it was essentially primary battery. They were either swapped at special stations, or (as in the case of metallic power) used a liquid electrolyte of potassium hydroxide to pump the depleted reactants out and fresh reactants in.
> 
> ...


They demoed it. 

The theoretical press release was in 2009, this was the actual demo: 

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/04/ibm-supercomputers-battery/


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

somanywelps said:


> They demoed it.
> 
> The theoretical press release was in 2009, this was the actual demo:
> 
> http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/04/ibm-supercomputers-battery/


Thanks for the link.



> Wilcke’s group will soon publish a paper on the technology, but until then, the company is giving few details about its design. But Wilcke did say that his group does not believe that graphene and carbon are good materials for lithium-air batteries. Carbon had been used because it’s a cheap way to create surfaces, but, he says, it’s not stable enough for long-term use.


Sounds like they still have a ways to go. It should be noted the idea of Li-air batteries isn't exactly new, so maybe some completition will get the folks at Polyplus [and others] moving...

http://www.polyplus.com/liair.html


----------



## JRoque (Mar 9, 2010)

Hi. Here's the agenda and public documents from the 2009 launch meeting in Almaden

There's a lab prototype already with many challenges ahead before we can put it in our cars. But it's a game changer.

JR


----------

