Samsung Nanotech Breakthrough Nearly Doubles Li-Ion Battery Capacity 132
The Korea Times reports that Samsung researchers have published in Nature Communications the results of research (here's the abstract) that could lead to vastly greater storage capacity for lithium-ion batteries. The researchers, by growing graphene on silicon anodes, were able to preserve the shape of the anodes, an outcome which has formerly eluded battery designers: silicon tends to deform over numerous charging cycles. From the linked abstract: Here we report direct graphene growth over silicon nanoparticles without silicon carbide formation. The graphene layers anchored onto the silicon surface accommodate the volume expansion of silicon via a sliding process between adjacent graphene layers. When paired with a commercial lithium cobalt oxide cathode, the silicon carbide-free graphene coating allows the full cell to reach volumetric energy densities of 972 and 700Whl1 at first and 200th cycle, respectively, 1.8 and 1.5 times higher than those of current commercial lithium-ion batteries.
Also at ZDNet.
well then (Score:1)
So when will I be able to buy an electric supercar for $20K? Until then, I'm not interested, and neither are millions of people.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought a Marina was another name for a base that houses Marines...
Damn...my whole world view has changed...
Re:well then (Score:5, Insightful)
Top commercial li-ion capacities are about 30% more than they were 5 years ago. And today's batteries include some of the "advances" you were reading about 5 years ago.
I'm sorry if technology doesn't move forward at the pace you want. But it does move forward when you're not looking. Remember the size of cell phone batteries back in the day?
Re: (Score:3)
Remember the size of cell phone batteries back in the day?
Back when they lasted a week on a charge? Yes, they were larger. And lasted longer. Much longer. Of course the phones were lower-draw (though not as low as you'd think, as the radios were more power hungry).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember the size of cell phone batteries back in the day?
Back when they lasted a week on a charge?
"Back in the day" doesn't necessarily mean "the first mobile phone you had". Maybe he's referring to this [wikipedia.org], from 1973. Or maybe the Motorola DynaTAC [wikipedia.org], the first commercially available cell phone, from 10 years later, priced at $3995.. Both feature 30 minute talk time and 10 hours to recharge. At least the DynaTAC only weighed 1-3/4 lbs, down from nearly 2-1/2 lbs for the earlier prototype.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
That's nothing, mine was powered by a potato. And it was evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But at least it was sorry for trying to murder you.
Re: (Score:2)
It also has a very nice singing voice:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Debian Potato?
Re: well then (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Problem with lithium based batteries, in general, are two things:
1: Puncture them, they go boom unless engineering is done to prevent this.
2: If they are not discharged and charged correctly, they go boom.
One place where lithium batteries are starting to make an impact (namely LiFePO4 batteries) is RV-ing. However, Silverleaf controllers tend to be expensive, so if you want this and you like off-grid camping, expect to pay upwards of $120,000 just to play in this ballgame. More useful setups (800-1200 a
Re:well then (Score:5, Insightful)
By definition.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you looked at a smartphone lately? How about the ~100Wh battery I have in my 1.5kg laptop? A Tesla S?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The difference makes itself up quite quickly only *AFTER* the car is finished being paid for.... The point of getting a loan to buy a car in the first place is to get some immediate benefit for some longer term sacrifice (you pay more money overall)... but paying more money every month for a car that costs more than what you'd pay for a similarly sized conventional vehicle even *after* you factor in the cost of gasoline doesn't offer any immediate benefit at all..
The alternative is to just buy a new car
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I suppose it depends on the definition of "supercar."
However, I hope this means my android phones will start to get better battery life. Half the life of an iOS device would be a huge win.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem isn't "android" but the phones you are looking at. Target longer lives and you'll find options. My Samsung Galaxy S3 would last less than 30 minutes with a graphical game, or movie playing. I'll never go Samsung again. On the car charger, the GPS with screen off, giving directions would drain faster than it would charge, less than 20 minutes of GPS (off charger, about 30-40 on). If you went somewhere an hour away, you'd have
Re: (Score:2)
If you use JuiceDefender, you can prolong the life of almost any Android phone, just because you can schedule it to turn off all communications other than for a certain gap. This does help with some phones that have a short battery life.
200 cycles? (Score:1, Offtopic)
Wow very short life. Call me when it's 2000 cycles.
Re: (Score:2)
I saw that number written on the bathroom wall at the club I was at last night. You must get around.
Re: 200 cycles? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
no jenny would be (301) 867-5309
Re:200 cycles? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's not what it says. It says that the capacity at 200 cycles is 1.5x a current cell. No mention is made of the point at which the capacity of these cells drops below the capacity of regular cells, if indeed such a point even exists: it's entirely possible these cells have roughly the same performance vs cycle curve as current cells after 200 cycles, just with a generally higher capacity.
I suppose you might raise the question of why they limited their testing to 200 cycles rather than more, but I note that if each charge/discharge cycle takes 4 hours then 2000 cycles would take almost a year to complete.
Re:200 cycles? (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, if they're doubling capacity, then you only need half the number of cycles (it actually even works *better* than that, as li-ion cells prefer shallow charges and discharges rather than deep ones - but yes, fractional charge cycles do add up as fractional charge cycles, not whole cycles). If you have a 200km-range EV and you drive 20 kilometers a day, you're using 10% of a cycle per day. If you have a 400km-range EV and you drive 20 kilometers a day, you're using 5% of a cycle per day.
Re: (Score:3)
On the other hand, if they're doubling capacity, then you only need half the number of cycles
I'm pretty sure I saw an episode of Red Dwarf [imdb.com] where they made a similar trade off... It ended up with Lister playing pool with planets.
Don't be like Lister.
Re: (Score:2)
You would need half the cycles to do the same amount of work, but how long would "the same amount of work" really happen though? I think manufacturers would probably add features that are prohibitively expensive from a power budget standpoint today. That's an easier and more distinguishing selling point for competition than battery life. I mean, a flip phone will go for many days without needing to be recharged, if that's someone's primary consideration.
Re: (Score:2)
Because 200 cycles need about 200 days?
Re: (Score:2)
But if the capacity is double, won't each cycle last double the time? So 400 days.
Re: (Score:2)
I would say, yes! But that might depend on the usage pattern.
Re: (Score:1)
I learned something new. iPhones are seamless and this was touted as a *very* important feature. (Some stretching was made involving potential breakage and whatnot.) I wish I had thought about the sharpness of those seams. I could have helped them out by pointing out that, without seams, they would be less likely to cut themselves too. More so with them getting thinner and thinner all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, 200 cycles is too short. These don't even compare well with Panasonic's current NCA cells, which are reported [panasonic.com] as 675 Wh/l. After 300 cycles the Panasonics probably store more energy.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd take a 200 cycles more powerful battery over a 2000 cycles less powerful battery any time. I'm not sure why you view changing a battery once or twice a year as such a big deal.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure why you view changing a battery once or twice a year as such a big deal.
It's because it generally means replacing your whole phone these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. Anyone with sufficient skill and patience can cheaply replace their own battery, and manufacturers and third parties both offer that service if you'd rather not DIY. Whether it's worthwhile, of course, depends on how new your phone is, and the cost of an upgrade, but for many people in a 2 year contract, it's much cheaper to replace the battery, even through a service, than to upgrade or replace the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you get a free phone when you sign a two year contract.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, that's why you don't "purchase" a phone on a two year contract. The company gives you a "free" phone when you sign a two year contract, or a discount on a phone if you sign the contract (but the phone purchase is independent).
Maybe it's different with your company, but no cell company I've ever heard of warrants their phones for the entire contract period (unless it happens to be 1 year and the manufacturer's warranty is also 1 year).
I usually replace my phone batteries around 2 years, or a bit ear
Re: (Score:1)
Because lots of devices don't have user replaceable batteries - eg most tablets and many phones.
Also, for lots of devices the cost of those batteries is very high, to the point that lifetime cycle cost is significant. Eg electric vehicles or off-grid storage.
Re: (Score:3)
Keep in mind that for widgets like phones and tablets that they are not always cycling fully on a daily basis. Lithium Ion batteries degrade much faster being deep cycled from 100% to near 0% than if you are only going 80% to 20%, like an order of magnitude longer. Most applications do not ever fuly charge the cells, and shut down before hitting zero to trade off a little capacity for vastly longer useful lifetimes.
Wow! (Score:3, Informative)
And battery capacity just doubled last week! It's amazing that they can keep releasing breakthrough after breakthrough!
Re:Wow! (Score:4, Funny)
It was actually cost that decreased by 50% last week. So hopefully nobody remembers that, and they can double their battery capacity and their profits at the same time!
Now Li-Ion batteries can burn 1.5 to 1.8x longer (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That's Wh/l or Whl^(-1) (Score:1)
Watt-hours per liter. Units, stuff that matters.
And to think they'll misuse that (Score:5, Insightful)
to make half as thick phones, instead of phones that last twice as long...
Re:And to think they'll misuse that (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Where have you been? [technabob.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Not shaving, but does cutting a watermelon with a phone count?
Re: (Score:2)
I just want fm receiver, and dual sim cards in a smart phone in the USA.
Re: (Score:1)
I hope you are not serious... if you are:
Plenty (and i mean literally hundreds) of generic android phones from asian brands (including reputable ones like Lenovo or Xiaomi) that fulfill this criteria. You just need to stop drinking the Apple/Samsung/... et al. Kool-aid.
Just go to chinavasion, dx.com, etc etc and look at their phone sections.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a Moto G dual sim w/ FM radio. I use T-Mobile and pay $10/3 months or so ($3/month).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Back in the late nineties I had a phone that lasted 2 weeks on a charge. I ended up buying a second charger to have at work because twice a month my phone would die in the middle of the work day. Now I charge my phone every night and that doesn't happen anymore.
I'll take the thinner phone, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
You're joking, right?
Re: (Score:2)
The heavier the phone, the easier it is to break. Meanwhile, standby time is overrated.
Re: (Score:2)
The heavier the phone, the easier it is to break.
Did you mean "the lighter the phone," because if not, I've got a steel phone [neatorama.com] that begs to differ.
Re:And to think they'll misuse that (Score:5, Informative)
I had a HTC Wizard, with its dual-core TI OMAP puttering along at 200 MHz. Doesn't sound like much, but it did well with calls, and could run a week without having to be charged. This was about a decade ago. Now, most of my smartphones won't persist beyond 24 hours unless I have them plugged into an external battery, or like my HTC One M8, enable the extreme battery saving mode, which replaces the Android Launcher default, disables Wi-Fi, and cellular communication, and only runs the absolute minimum of processes. This probably would make the phone's battery last a week, maybe more.
I sort of wish the philosophy behind apps wasn't "lets make these as fast as a gaming computer or console", but the old PalmOS philosophy of "do the job done right, and if it doesn't need CPU cycles, don't do it." Because of demand for ever faster CPUs and GPUs, phones have to get bigger and bigger for heat dissipation reasons. It would be nice for CPU speed to lag a bit to allow for a better battery life, perhaps adding deeper caches. Adding more RAM to a phone might help things as well. This way, phone shape can be dictated by what users want, not having to have ever larger surfaces for engineering reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, it takes me having a communications device I can do a lot more communication with so I see the power bar more often.
Re: (Score:2)
Less pocket space. Not as heavy, so if dropped it's less likely to break.
Re: (Score:3)
What's the power density? (Amount of energy delivered over time)
That's not power density. That's just power. Power density is how much power (energy delivered over time) it can deliver per unit volume of battery. That's really only of concern for high power applications such as an electric race car. For most usages, energy density is far more valuable.
Tesla stock? (Score:2)
Any theories for why Tesla's stock price didn't pop on this news?
Re:Tesla stock? (Score:4, Funny)
Any theories for why Tesla's stock price didn't pop on this news?
Musk already had one big pop today.
Happens all the time (Score:4, Interesting)
Good. However.... (Score:2, Insightful)
There have been scores of purported breakthroughs in this subject over the last ten years, but nothing dramatic has as yet hit the market. There have of course been noticeable improvements - but I still have to recharge my phone every night, and a decent range in an electric car will still set you back to the tune of nearly $100K. We'll see whether this is really becomes a breakthrough, or whether it is just another incremental step forward.
Re: (Score:2)
Your phone nowadays does way more than the one you used 10 years ago... and if you want to get a flip phone with a long battery time, you still can.
You are apparently one of the VERY few people who needs to drive a LONG distance every single day. Even removing the subsidy, you can get electric cars that easily do double the average commuter distance for 1/4 of your
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a Samsung S6. It will charge from 10% to fully charged in a little over an hour on a car fast charger while navigating and playing podcasts. I learned this while driving cross-country last week, sharing a charger with 2 other s6 users. 30 hours each way - might not have survived without the podcasts!
That being said, there's no reason that I can see for keeping the batteries so small. Doubling or even tripling the size of the battery wouldn't seriously impact it's ergonomics, and it would allow y
Re: (Score:2)
Good math technique. 1.5 = 2.0 (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and 2.0 + 2.0 is 5 for large values of 2, we all know that!
Re: (Score:2)
Recharge seems to be bottleneck (Score:2)
Note that the paper says the capacity 1.8x at the beginning and 1.5x after 200 cycles. The smart phone batteries are rated at least 1000 cycles. Not sure what is the capacity after 1000th cycle. Until there are some numbers showing superior value at 1000th cycle, it will be hard to commercialize.
Re: (Score:3)
It's only your assumption that they aren't testing to 1000.
Re: (Score:3)
Plus of course, 1.8x at brand new means that all other things being equal, you'll have many fewer charge cycles.
Would be interesting to see someone do the math, but the battery decay curve on these should be much shallower overall (until some doofus uses it to make a smaller phone - which isn't really very likely, they're already reaching the limits of what you can do in terms of structural strength if you can bend them by sitting on them...)
Re: (Score:2)
Plus of course, 1.8x at brand new means that all other things being equal, you'll have many fewer charge cycles.
No, it doesn't.
a smaller phone - which isn't really very likely, they're already reaching the limits of what you can do in terms of structural strength
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Hmm, thinner than an iPhone, and they drive a car over it. Though I didn't see a bend test, they seem to be implying it's strong.
Re: (Score:2)
That's at least the third time you shilled for that phone in this thread. You have an impressive array of marketing videos.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because I'm happy with my purchase doesn't mean I'm a shill. Just trying to make the point that you can't judge every smartphone by the iPhone or Samsung de jour. So many complain about a specific flaw in a specific model
old trick (Score:3)
Without even reading the article, I can guess what they did from my own experience: use a hole punch and flip the battery over.