Researchers Make a High-Performance Battery From Junkyard Scraps (vanderbilt.edu) 117
Science_afficionado writes: A team of engineers and materials scientists at Vanderbilt University have discovered how to make high-performance batteries using scraps of metal from the junkyard and common household chemicals. The researchers believe their innovation could provide the large amounts of economical electrical storage required by the grid to handle alternative energy sources and may ultimately allow homeowners to build their own batteries and disconnect entirely from the grid. Vanderbilt University News reports: "To make such a future possible, Pint headed a research team that used scraps of steel and brass -- two of the most commonly discarded materials -- to create the world's first steel-brass battery that can store energy at levels comparable to lead-acid batteries while charging and discharging at rates comparable to ultra-fast charging supercapacitors. The research team, which consists of graduates and undergraduates in Vanderbilt's interdisciplinary materials science program and department of mechanical engineering, describe this achievement in a paper titled 'From the Junkyard to the Power Grid: Ambient Processing of Scrap Metals into Nanostructured Electrodes for Ultrafast Rechargeable Batteries' published online this week in the journal ACS Energy Letters. The secret to unlocking this performance is anodization, a common chemical treatment used to give aluminum a durable and decorative finish. When scraps of steel and brass are anodized using a common household chemical and residential electrical current, the researchers found that the metal surfaces are restructured into nanometer-sized networks of metal oxide that can store and release energy when reacting with a water-based liquid electrolyte. The team determined that these nanometer domains explain the fast charging behavior that they observed, as well as the battery's exceptional stability. They tested it for 5,000 consecutive charging cycles -- the equivalent of over 13 years of daily charging and discharging -- and found that it retained more than 90 percent of its capacity."
Junkyard stuff (Score:2)
If we find the Mark Wayne McGinnis scrapyard se would be set.
Bet they made it for mice (Score:5, Funny)
Those fuckers are always getting the latest and greatest stuff.
Not really. (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe in 1985, when plutonium is available in every corner drug store, but in 2016, it's a little hard to come by.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you find harpsichords nowadays?
Re: (Score:1)
Downstairs? or grab a kit from http://www.zhi.net/ [zhi.net]
If you're a little further north then you can get a new or used from http://www.claviersbaroques.co... [claviersbaroques.com]
Re:MacGyver (Score:5, Funny)
...unless one is interested in Railguns.
Anyone browsing /. that does not have an interest in railguns should be ejected from the site... using a railgun!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:MacGyver (Score:5, Informative)
Supercaps have their place. Even though they have a lot less energy density than batteries, they are useful to have with a solar array just because they can be charged up quickly, with less need of a precise charge controller with scaling voltages to SoC levels (especially lithium batteries that will go boom if they are not precisely charged/discharged). Supercaps can allow charging to continue for batteries for a little bit after the sun goes down as well as help maintain an even charge if a cloud passes over the panels.
It would be nice to see some advance to allow supercaps to have a better energy density per volume. The fact that they have a virtually unlimited charge/discharge life (as the charging is a physical, not chemical process) and they can handle a lot of incoming amperage is quite nice.
Re: (Score:2)
So? (Score:3)
Re:So? (Score:4, Interesting)
To make such a future possible, Pint headed a research team that used scraps of steel and brass - two of the most commonly discarded materials -
The obtained scrap carbon steel (1010 steel) and brass sheets (Yellow brass, 67% Cu/33% Zn)
So while the yard may be full of the materials, the majority probably needs to be refined in some way to be a particular form factor... brass sheets, and whatever shape the steel needs to be.
Re: (Score:1)
I found the paper. The electrodes are prepared with ammonium fluoride, argon, platinum/calomel, potassium hydroxide, and hydrochloric acid, not to mention the equipment (Metrohm Autolab controller and a Keithley sourcemeter).
I suspect that we will be able to replicate the results with similar materials in short order.
I found the paper on an Iranian server, of all places.
Re:So? (Score:4, Funny)
"The electrodes are prepared with ammonium fluoride, argon, platinum/calomel, potassium hydroxide, and hydrochloric acid"
"When scraps of steel and brass are anodized using a common household chemical and residential electrical current, the researchers found that the metal surfaces are restructured into nanometer-sized networks of metal oxide that can store and release energy when reacting with a water-based liquid electrolyte."
Common household chemical? Just checked. I'm flat out of Aluminum Fluoride and Platinum/Calomel. The Argon tank is empty too. I do, as it happens, I do have a bit of HCl in the garage. Can I substitute peanut butter and laundry detergent for the chemicals the experimenters used?
Re:So? (Score:4, Funny)
Common household chemical? Just checked. I'm flat out of Aluminum Fluoride and Platinum/Calomel. The Argon tank is empty too. I do, as it happens, I do have a bit of HCl in the garage. Can I substitute peanut butter and laundry detergent for the chemicals the experimenters used?
Aluminum Fluoride -> cut up pieces of aluminum foil and put in mouthwash then heat in microwave for 2 minutes
Platinum/Calomel -> put spark plugs in a twix and place over medium heat in a sauce pan.
Re: (Score:2)
Aluminum Fluoride -> cut up pieces of aluminum foil and put in mouthwash then heat in microwave for 2 minutes
Platinum/Calomel -> put spark plugs in a twix and place over medium heat in a sauce pan.
Someone's been reading The Anarchist's Cookbook recently.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll grant you that the stuff you need isn't exactly household standard, It's all pretty easily available You don't actually need a platinum foil electrode or a calomel reference electrode; those are just what they used so they could figure out what was going on in the anodization process. You could just about anything, I believe, as the electrode just supplies the electricity, but doesn't interact chemically. I could be wrong, however, but that was my understanding based on my knowledge of these things and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So? (Score:2)
I wouldn't want to be in the same building as hydrogen fluoride. Aluminum fluoride is available on eBay for $100/500g. While not exactly cheap, it's not exactly expensive or, apparently, hard to get. It's looks like something to try out more and more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's certainly a use, but it's mostly used for Ph adjustments.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also easy mode for cleaning the crapper.
Re: (Score:2)
Improved nickel iron battery (Score:4, Interesting)
The nickel iron battery in alkaline is an old, rugged battery chemistry. The nanostructuring the surface is new. The scrap bit seems like hype. Steel is easy to separate out by magnets, and copper is more expensive. So is nickel. I guess a cheaper substitute to nickel would also be an improvement.
Re:Improved nickel iron battery (Score:5, Informative)
NiFe batteries definitely have a place. Iron Edison batteries are used in stationary solar arrays because they are easy to take care of (built in watering system), and can handle a lot of cycles. Long life is crucial in this application. NiFe batteries also don't get damaged when their charge level is below 50%.
However, NiFe batteries have a relatively low energy per volume density compared to lead-acid or lithium batteries. You wouldn't want to use NiFe batteries as electrical storage in your campervan, for example.
Re:Improved nickel iron battery (Score:4, Interesting)
they are easy to take care of
To that I would add they can also take a lot of abuse unlike a lot of other batteries. They are easy to recondition which is good for those looking for a low total cost of ownership.
Re: (Score:2)
Are they? Seems a lot of marketing hype that only a few fools buy into. Sure they can possibly last 10X longer, but they cost 10X more, too.
Nor do lead-acid golf-cart batteries. Charge controllers which will prevent full discharge cost next to nothing, and spec'ing twice the capacity is still FAR cheaper than expensive special batteries.
NiMH batteries could last much longer
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly enough, this topic goes back and forth on RV forums. Say someone needs 200 ampere-hours for a weekend. They can either buy two lead-acid batteries (each being about a C-note), or go LiFePO4, which can go up to 20x the price. Most people just stay with the lead-acid ones. However, it seems that more people are moving to LiFePO4 batteries because of the higher energy density, and the fact that you can draw them to almost empty without damaging them, even though they have a huge price premium.
Re: (Score:2)
NiMH is probably as good or superior in every respect.
Re: (Score:2)
NiMH is probably as good or superior in every respect.
No way, not at all. NiMHs can be damaged by excessive discharge, and they definitely don't have the capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly know absolutely nothing of what you speak...
NiMH has just slightly lower energy (watt-hours) per volume (not weight) of Li-Ion, and LiFePO4 is lower power so the gap is even closer.
NiMH is absolutely NOT notably damaged by excessive discharge, nor does over-charging have significant effects. Li-Ion batteries, meanwhile, are SEVERELY affected by excessive discharge and over-charging, hence protected Li-Ion c
Re: (Score:2)
NiMH got a slow start as patents on the technology were held by car maker Daimler-Benz and not available to license at reasonable prices, which significantly limited adoption. Li-Ion came along not too long after, and the slightly higher capacity, as well as far lesser weight, made them preferred in mobile devices.
NiMH is extremely popular in the form of rechargeable AAA/AA/C/D batteries. The low self-discharge versions are far superior to disposable Alkaline batteries in nearly all use-cases, and prices
Only 20 wh per kg? (Score:2)
For comparison, current rechargeable lithium ion has anywhere from 100wh/kg almost 300wh/kg. Heck, even Ni-Cd is about 70wh/kg...
It's neat that it's got a fast recharge capability, but the energy density is still too low to be practical for anything major in this day and age.
Re:Only 20 wh per kg? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not really.
When storing energy for my *house* I don't give a rats about energy density as long as I can put it somewhere where it's not a total nuisance.
Re: (Score:2)
But how else will you power your roof mounted railguns?
Re:Only 20 wh per kg? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's neat that it's got a fast recharge capability, but the energy density is still too low to be practical for anything major in this day and age.
Not really: it's too low for where density is a serious concern, e.g. mobile applications. It is however super cheapass, and does not rely on rare, expensive or horribly toxic metals. It's fine for bulk storage.
Patent? (Score:4, Insightful)
"We're forging new ground with this project, where a positive outcome is not commercialization, but instead a clear set of instructions that can be addressed to the general public. It's a completely new way of thinking about battery research, and it could bypass the barriers holding back innovation in grid scale energy storage," Pint said.
So far, batteries have remained outside of this culture, but I believe we will see the day when residents will disconnect from the grid and produce their own batteries. That's the scale where battery technology began, and I think we will return there," Pint said.
I think Pint is a bit self deluded if he thinks the university isn't going to patent the hell out of any possible development from this and wring every copper they can in licensing fees. In addition, I really can't see most people building their own batteries of sufficient storage capacity to power a home during peak usage time. Maybe an "Almost Ready to Charge(ARC)" kit that you would just have to add electrolyte to before using.
Re: (Score:3)
Capacity would be mostly a function of mass, wouldn't it? And discharge rate would be based largely on surface area. Both can be increased if you have enough cheap material, although putting the cathode and anode near each other would be more of a problem. If I could build a powerful battery from cheap scrap, I probably would. Although lots of people would make a combination battery-deathtrap, with a weak container and a nasty electrolyte.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
In addition, I really can't see most people building their own batteries of sufficient storage capacity to power a home during peak usage time. Maybe an "Almost Ready to Charge(ARC)" kit that you would just have to add electrolyte to before using.
I can't see even that much. Messing with house wiring can be dangerous, both to the user and to people down the line (literally). Just plugging it in and letting it backfeed could get someone killed; there's a reason generators have to be installed with a cutoff switch to prevent that possibility.
Re: (Score:2)
Just plugging it in and letting it backfeed could get someone killed; there's a reason generators have to be installed with a cutoff switch to prevent that possibility.
Generator, inlet, breaker box, junction box, main junction box. I sourced the generator from harbor freight for around $500 for 7kW (8.75kW peak), inlet from Amazon for ten bucks-ish, breaker box and dual 30A breaker from a yard sale, breaker was bad but I got another one from a yard sale which was good, junction box from local hardware store. Installed in the pump house. There's another dual 30A breaker at the other end of the home run, in the main junction box. Water pumps tie into the junction box and ha
Re:Patent? (Score:4, Informative)
Here we go again - a 'private' institution garnering information and expertise from the PEOPLE's funds - NASA and other 'public' funded agencies - - - and NASA explicitly states that they release their information on a "NON-EXCLUSIVE" license - in other words, ANYBODY can ask for, and GET, authorization to use their research.
WHY in the hell is this information locked up behind a pay-wall ?
Best guess - money hungry, and with no morale compass.
Here's the link, provided by ???? for the actual article and data ---> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/... [acs.org]
More info can be garnered from ---> http://pubs.acs.org/ [acs.org]
and at ---> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/... [acs.org]
REALLY a pain to follow-up on, but worth the effort due to another /. contributor providing REAL information
Re: (Score:2)
I think Pint is a bit self deluded if he thinks the university isn't going to patent the hell out of any possible development from this and wring every copper they can in licensing fees.
They most certainly will - and Pint will happily go along with it. When he talked about everyone using the tech, he was definitely also thinking about the royalties involved should that happen.
This is how university research largely seems to function nowadays. Tax dollars pay for the research (an idea I am strongly behind), and then the researcher and the university turn around, lock it all up and reap the financial benefits (something that really needs to change, in my opinion).
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't patent everything possible, then somebody else does. Then they have to pay somebody else to use their own research! This has already been a problem. Don't forget the grants with deals which give a private party the rights.
Say somebody adds something small onto your work, then charges you to use it and you have nothing to bargain with because you didn't patent anything - so the free loader is then charging you!
Not that long ago we changed patents in the USA so you don't have to be the 1st inv
Temperature chart? (Score:3)
I'm curious how these cells perform in cold weather conditions.
I use 12VDC lead-acid SLA batteries on a mountain top for a wireless repeater but those are like 0.05kw/kg and $280-300/ea. Getting heavy batteries up the mountain can be extremely challenging (think snowshoes uphill in 5-6ft of snow carrying a 100lb replacement battery). I'm also at the 49th parallel so winter peak solar is like 3 hours/day and you need a large buffer in case it is effectively zero hours of solar for days in a row while keeping your radios up 24/7.
Something like this would be great for me since it's something like 1500x more energy dense by weight... That is, if it can survive cold weather, or with a heater it is still an effective alternative.
Re:Temperature chart? (Score:4, Insightful)
Something like this would be great for me since it's something like 1500x more energy dense by weight... That is, if it can survive cold weather, or with a heater it is still an effective alternative.
Put them in a vault in the ground, which is at a perpetual fifty degrees. (insulate the sides, but put the bottom in ground contact.) It will increase the cost of initial construction, but it may be worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Hrm, yes. In the abstract, it says "energy density up to 20 Wh/kg, power density up to 20 kW/kg". (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00295)
I suppose I'm getting tripped up on the difference between "energy density" and "power density".
I use VmaxTanks SLR155 AGM/SLA 155Ah 12VDC batteries (https://www.vmaxtanks.com/SLR155-AGM-Solar-Battery-_p_66.html).
These weigh 90lbs (40.9kg) and can store 2.1kWh of energy. (2.1kWh)/(40.9kg) = 51.3Wh/kg, which is about what you said.
So, you're right. 20
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but what kind of differences are there between battery chemistries at say 32F or 0F at different states of charge?
I generally don't consider LiPos for cold-weather deployment, for instance. Though, maybe that's wrong to do.
Re: (Score:2)
This battery has lower energy density(20Whr/kg) than your current SLA's at (50Whr/kg)..ref [acs.org]
The claim of room temperature processing is also somewhat misleading.. They included an annealing step at 350C under argon atmosphere for 1 hr for processing the iron oxide nanorods.
No mention of charge efficiency, should be bettery than the 60 to 70% for SLA's, (note: Lithium ion charge efff is ~95-98%)..
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I seem to be getting tripped up on the difference between gravimetric energy density and power density.
The abstract says an "energy density up to 20 Wh/kg, power density up to 20 kW/kg".
Do you have any suggestions on relating that power density quantity to other battery types?
I get 2-3kWh out of my 90lb 155Ah 12VDC AGM/SLA batteries sipping at a 60hr rate. But that battery is about 41kg, so what do they mean by 20 kW/kg?
Shouldn't I get 41kg/battery * 20kW/kg = 1800kW/battery? Reducing that to 1.8MW
Re: (Score:2)
That is actually pretty interesting, thanks.
I've heard of Exide but hadn't really been aware of some of those features, or hadn't yet run into the problems that would make those features interesting enough to remember. All I saw was a higher price tag but I can see the value now. :)
On the other side Samsung Galaxy 7... (Score:3)
Lets redefine 'High Performance' (Score:1)
What is the cost? (Score:1)
A team of engineers and materials scientists at Vanderbilt University have discovered how to make high-performance batteries using scraps of metal from the junkyard and common household chemicals. The researchers believe their innovation could provide the large amounts of economical electrical storage required by the grid to handle alternative energy sources and may ultimately allow homeowners to build their own batteries and disconnect entirely from the grid.
There is an important word missing there. That word is "economical". Academic researchers tend to forget this word. If they cannot make an economical high performance battery then it is a meaningless exercise. There are lots of valuable materials in scrap yards. The reason we don't typically go to scrap yards to source materials as a first choice is because doing that is expensive compared to alternative supply streams (mining, etc). There are lots of activities that are technically feasible but econo
Annodize iron? (Score:2)
Ok, this is cool I want to try it. Does anyone have the details from the paper behind the pay wall?
This would be fun to do with my daughter.
Re: (Score:2)
Annodizing aluminum results in a converted surface layer of Aluminum oxide. Just leaving a clean Aluminum plate out on your table causes a slow buildup of Aluminum oxide.
To put an Iron oxide layer on steel, just put your steel plate on wet grass and leave it there until it is rusted to suit.
Re: (Score:3)
The oxidation of Aluminum is practically instantaneous - and it's hard. Oxidation of iron happens much slower, and it's very soft and flakes off, exposing more iron for oxidation.
Aluminum oxide does not flake off, which
Re: (Score:2)
The oxidation of Aluminum is practically instantaneous
It isn't. It takes some three days for the oxide layer to be fully formed. That's why it's possible to remove the anodized layer and then weld. But you do it either mechanically or with KOH, and the electrolyte in this battery is apparently based on KOH, which is one reason why neither electrode in this battery is made of anodized aluminum.
Re: (Score:2)
The article says the trick to this battery is to anodize the components in a 'household chemical' but it doesn't say which one. They type and strength of the oxide formed would of coarse be quite different depending on which chemical. If I'm not mistaken.
The definition of anodize you used seems to be consistent on the internet but ammonization can be done with a specific chemical. I just want to know which one. Normally you would get iron oxide, but you might not if the metal was immersed in something e
Needs more duct tape (Score:1)
Assumptions ... (Score:1)
They tested it for 5,000 consecutive charging cycles -- the equivalent of over 13 years of daily charging and discharging -- and found that it retained more than 90 percent of its capacity."
That assumes you only charge once per day. My phone gets charged at least twice a day and frequently more often than that.
I'm not saying I'm not impressed - but I think equating 5000 charge cycles to 13 years because 5000/365=13.7(ish) is a bit of a stretch!
I suppose it depends on what sort of batteries they might buil
Crunching the numbers... (Score:2)
I have a 24V 10Ah 10C Lithium battery. Sold as multicopter battery. It weighs about a kg. (1200g IIRC, but lets round that to make the math easier).
100A*24V = 2.4kW. That's 8 times worse than the 20kW/kg for the metal scraps battery. As the power density is important for flying things, this would be great for flying.....
As to the energy densigty, I have 24V * 10Ah = 240Wh in about a kg. They have only 20Wh/kg. They are worse than my battery by a factor of 12....
Somthing fishy here.
Re: (Score:1)
Are they not? Apparently they charged them 5000 times. That seems pretty rechargeable.
Re: (Score:3)
What does a junkyard have to do with it? Is it because a steel-brass battery is a complete waste of steel and brass?
I suspect so. I mean, my car was largely built from scraps of metal from a junkyard, reforged into good steel, but really the source of a material has little to do with anything.
These batteries are not rechargable and a complete waste of time and effort.
Then how come they recharged them 5000 times with only 90% loss of capacity?
Re: (Score:1)
What does a junkyard have to do with it? Is it because a steel-brass battery is a complete waste of steel and brass?
I suspect so. I mean, my car was largely built from scraps of metal from a junkyard, reforged into good steel, but really the source of a material has little to do with anything.
These batteries are not rechargable and a complete waste of time and effort.
Then how come they recharged them 5000 times with only 90% loss of capacity?
With 90% of?
Re: (Score:2)
"These batteries are not rechargable and a complete waste of time and effort."
Of course they are rechargeable. They seem to be quite similar to NiFe Edison Cells which are used in a few applications because of their virtues -- long life and tolerance of overcharging and deep discharge. The Edison cells have some problems which discourage them from wider use including inefficiency and, IIRC, high self discharge rate.
Re: (Score:2)