# Update on Solid State batteries



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Know this tech was posted recently; here is an article from MIT (the university, not the political-hack "technology magazine) on the Samsung / MIT initiative. Related article from ComputerWorld, both dated this week.

Bottom line: They believe they can get "hundreds of thousands of cycles;" batteries will be nearly immune to affects of cold temperature (within the bounds of human habitability, I would presume); and better energy/density than traditional LiIon. They also say it could be a game changer in cost, but don't provide anything to suggest why that would be true. Maybe simpler to assemble?


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

Regrettably the article was very long on claims and very light on explanations as to why this particular work is a breakthrough.

Solid state certainly sounds great. A lot of benefits would accrue from the fact that there is no liquid in the cell. A near-elimination of degradation mechanism would be good too. But I rather suspect that these devices would suffer on the specific drain rate front- they will be better cellphone batteries for long, slow draining applications than they will be as EV batteries. But the real benefit would be if they could be made cheaply for renewables storage, which is intermediate in drain rate needs between those two uses. Right now, inadequate cycle life is what kills the economics of renewable energy storage or even grid peak-shedding storage. A cell capable of hundreds of thousands of charge/discharge cycles without capacity loss would be a real game-changer.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Moltenmetal said:


> Regrettably the article was very long on claims and very light on explanations as to why this particular work is a breakthrough.


I thought they were clear enough. Instead of painting strips of polymer, then drying them in ovens, then rolling them with half a dozen other layers in an immensely expensive plant - these by contrast show the promise of being manufactured by the millions like computer chips.



> Solid state certainly sounds great. A lot of benefits would accrue from the fact that there is no liquid in the cell. A near-elimination of degradation mechanism would be good too. But I rather suspect that these devices would suffer on the specific drain rate front- they will be better cellphone batteries for long, slow draining applications than they will be as EV batteries. But the real benefit would be if they could be made cheaply for renewables storage, which is intermediate in drain rate needs between those two uses. Right now, inadequate cycle life is what kills the economics of renewable energy storage or even grid peak-shedding storage. A cell capable of hundreds of thousands of charge/discharge cycles without capacity loss would be a real game-changer.


If you can make them big enough, the C rate goes down and so eliminates your concern. I agree that initially they will go in small devices - it is a bigger market, with bigger profit margins.


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> and better energy/density than traditional LiIon.



"Such batteries provide a 20 to 30 percent improvement in *power density* — with a corresponding increase in how long a battery of a given size could power a phone, a computer, or a car."

Wat?

Sounds good otherwise, hope they transcribed it right though.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

dcb said:


> "Such batteries provide a 20 to 30 percent improvement in *power density* — with a corresponding increase in how long a battery of a given size could power a phone, a computer, or a car."
> 
> Wat?
> 
> Sounds good otherwise, hope they transcribed it right though.


Yes, I noticed the power density comment too. The Marketeers and spinmeisters like to bandy those words around; however, I did check a couple of sources and they also claimed higher energy density. I think their point was that power density works both ways, and implies a faster recharge time.

Truth be told we really don't need it for most uses if a) they can get the price down enough and b) they can eliminate a lot of the excess materials in production as in current LiIon cells.

Think about it. A railroad train pulling 100 cars could afford to add a whole boxcar of "battery" just to pull the train, and it would be cost effective. Trucks - same deal. Just dedicate a portion of each trailer, and when you switch trailers you are also "gassing up." Only cars are really space limited, and even there current technology could allow 400 mile range.

We are nearly at the finish line, we just don't recognize it because it has been such a long uphill run.


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

wonder if there will be a bms on the same chip as the battery, or maybe it is moot for some reason (run it into the ground, no prob, no major overcharge issue). Any speculation on plating and volatility/etc?

It will be a while before it is price competitive, probably.

Edit, I will hedge that statement with how amazing it is that SSD prices are what they are, took me by suprise. So these could be affordable rather quickly too.


----------



## sirwattsalot (Aug 27, 2012)

I would be happy with a lithium carbon battery with higher energy density than the LIFEPO4 cells that I am using. I have my car packed with 72 cells with a total of 140 Ah and they weigh 430 lbs. I recently test drove my car 62 miles with only a little energy left in reserve. I keep hearing about carbon nano tube batteries or carbon carbon batteries, aluminum air and even thorium powered batteries. The next better battery exists today but we might not be able to buy them for 10 years or more. Oil and gas are cheap and I have beed asked if I might consider converting my EV to burn gas. Of course the answer is no way! We won't see new batteries until the market exists for them.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

sirwattsalot said:


> I would be happy with a lithium carbon battery with higher energy density than the LIFEPO4 cells that I am using. I have my car packed with 72 cells with a total of 140 Ah and they weigh 430 lbs. .
> ... The next better battery exists today but we might not be able to buy them for 10 years or more.
> ....! We won't see new batteries until the market exists for them.


 You do know you could change to a similar LiCo cell pack as those Braille batteries, for a fraction of that cost.
Using "tesla" type cells for your pack spec would take 200lbs off the weight and give better performance.
Available now !


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

sirwattsalot said:


> We won't see new batteries until the market exists for them.


There is a market for them right now - at a lower price. That will come. Patience...


----------

