Swedish Carbon-Fiber Battery Could Revolutionize Car Design (arstechnica.com) 97
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Tesla is known to be working on designing new battery modules that also work as structural elements, but the California automaker is fashioning those structural modules out of traditional cylindrical cells. There's a more elegant approach to the idea, though, and a group at Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden led by professor Leif Asp has just made a bit of a breakthrough in that regard, making each component of the battery out of materials that work structurally as well as electrically. The structural battery combines a carbon-fiber anode and a lithium-iron phosphate-coated aluminum foil cathode, which are separated by a glass fiber separator in a structural battery electrolyte matrix material. The anode does triple duty, hosting the lithium ions, conducting electrons, and reinforcing everything at the same time. The electrolyte and cathode similarly support structural loads and do their jobs in moving ions.
The researchers tested a couple different types of glass fiber -- both resulting in cells with a nominal voltage of 2.8 V -- and achieved better results in terms of battery performance with thinner, plain weave. The cells using this construction had a specific capacity of 8.55 Ah/kg, an energy density of 23.6 Wh/kg (at 0.05 C), a specific power of 9.56 W/kg (at 3 C), and a thickness of 0.27 mm. To put at least one of those numbers in context, the 4680 cells that Tesla is moving to have an energy density of 380 Wh/kg. However, that energy density figure for the cylindrical cells does not include the mass of the structural matrix that surrounds them (when used as structural panels). Speaking of structural loads, the greatest stiffness was also achieved with plain glass fiber weave, at 25.5 GPa. Again, to put that number into context, it's roughly similar to glass fiber-reinforced plastic, whereas carbon fiber-reinforced plastic will be around 10 times greater, depending on whether it's resin transfer molding or woven sheets pre-impregnated with resin (known as pre-preg). Professor Asp's group is now working to see if swapping the cathode's aluminum foil for carbon fiber will increase both stiffness (which it should) and electrical performance. The group is also testing even thinner separators. He hopes to reach 75 Wh/kg and 75 GPa, which would result in a cell that is slightly stiffer than aluminum (GPa: 68) but obviously much lighter.
The researchers tested a couple different types of glass fiber -- both resulting in cells with a nominal voltage of 2.8 V -- and achieved better results in terms of battery performance with thinner, plain weave. The cells using this construction had a specific capacity of 8.55 Ah/kg, an energy density of 23.6 Wh/kg (at 0.05 C), a specific power of 9.56 W/kg (at 3 C), and a thickness of 0.27 mm. To put at least one of those numbers in context, the 4680 cells that Tesla is moving to have an energy density of 380 Wh/kg. However, that energy density figure for the cylindrical cells does not include the mass of the structural matrix that surrounds them (when used as structural panels). Speaking of structural loads, the greatest stiffness was also achieved with plain glass fiber weave, at 25.5 GPa. Again, to put that number into context, it's roughly similar to glass fiber-reinforced plastic, whereas carbon fiber-reinforced plastic will be around 10 times greater, depending on whether it's resin transfer molding or woven sheets pre-impregnated with resin (known as pre-preg). Professor Asp's group is now working to see if swapping the cathode's aluminum foil for carbon fiber will increase both stiffness (which it should) and electrical performance. The group is also testing even thinner separators. He hopes to reach 75 Wh/kg and 75 GPa, which would result in a cell that is slightly stiffer than aluminum (GPa: 68) but obviously much lighter.
Environment (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
this also means all those millions of electric cars with the old batteries are now worthless for recycling
This is unlikely to actually be used because "even at their best, structural battery cells may never approach the performance of dedicated cells."
Re:Environment (Score:4, Interesting)
> THere needs to be laws that make it a requirement that all batteries are recycled.
The free market already solved this issue long ago. Cars require high VA to weight ratio for efficiency. Stationary batteries don't.
Old cells can be repurposed into power station buffers.
https://www.sciencealert.com/r... [sciencealert.com]
Re: (Score:3)
> THere needs to be laws that make it a requirement that all batteries are recycled.
The free market already solved this issue long ago. Cars require high VA to weight ratio for efficiency. Stationary batteries don't.
Old cells can be repurposed into power station buffers.
https://www.sciencealert.com/r... [sciencealert.com]
Indeed. I doubt any EV cells escape recycling. These things are the most valuable item in a crashed or past-it's-useful-life car. They get stripped and pushed into service elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact you had to invent a statement which does not appear in the article confirms that the situation claim is not actually a reality. The vast majority of retired EV car batteries are not recycled in any form.
Re:Environment (Score:5, Insightful)
The vast majority of retired EV car batteries are not recycled in any form.
The vast majority of retired EV batteries have 70%+ capacity and are used in secondary projects. Only a small percentage of them are currently recycled. Reuse counts as recycling, though. The prices on used EV batteries have actually gone UP since I started looking at them because of this reuse. A percentage of these batteries actually go back into EVs, too. They replace damaged cells.
Tesla packs made out of tons of little cells aside, individual cells are actually tested and resold from EV packs. Even some Tesla packs have been repaired now and then, but it's generally considered to not be worth it as you need a battery tab spot welder and most people don't have one.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you tell me of which secondary projects will require 70% of the lithium in the crazy numbers that will happen when todays batteries are retired.
> The prices on used EV batteries have actually gone UP since I started looking at them because of this reuse. A percentage of these batteries actually go back into EVs, too. They replace damaged cells.
Yet again you completely skipped addressing the poin
Re: (Score:3)
Can you tell me of which secondary projects will require 70% of the lithium in the crazy numbers that will happen when todays batteries are retired.
They can be used to build utility-scale battery banks. So yes, yes I can.
Yet again you completely skipped addressing the point i was making.
Because it was wrong and I didn't feel like berating you. But since you insist...
New battery technologies will make todays battery core components effectively worthless.
No, they will not, and the idea that they will do so is ridiculous. We still use sealed lead acid batteries even though we have superior designs and chemistries because they are cheap and good enough. If we develop new batteries that don't use the lithium or the cobalt then that only means that the lithium and cobalt recovered from existing batteries will
Re: (Score:2)
CAN is a v different word from they ARE. Nobody does what you claim and its been getting close to 10 years for somethnglike you mention to happen.
> The idea that new battery chemistries will cause us to stop using them cold turkey is laughable, and wholly unsupported by history.
History supports my statement completely. Where are the recycling facilities for todays EV car batteries?
Re: (Score:2)
New battery technologies will make todays battery core components effectively worthless.
Please offer alternatives. Also, how do you choose between slightly-better technologies that create new issues for the future vs waiting and using existing inferior ones? I cannot grasp the logic here.
Re: Environment (Score:1)
I cannot grasp the logic here.
The one you replied to has a consistently low signal-to-noise ratio, too low even for mere stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh look, your usual incompetent attempt at Ad Hominem.
You are shit even at being a shit.
Re: (Score:2)
yes dont travel so much.
I know its hard to comprehend, but driving a few hours a day to work is fucking stupid. Many people can work from home. MANY not all. Many can also work closer to home, eg banks. Banks sould be penalised for sending employees to a far branch when theres a closer one. There are
Re: Environment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fantasy ?
Living in a nice country town is far better than living in a mega city.
If you cant see that - well i dont know what to say. if you really think your job is your life, well then i pity your empty life.
People living in the countryside may have less money, but they are happy far more often and have fa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You sure do sound off loudly until someone fact-checks you. The anticipatory alarmism is a just thinly-veiled agenda. Is that agenda to not use electrochemical power storage? IDK, just state it outright.
Do us a favor and post some refutations to your arguments, then argue with the claims - all on your own. We'll sit back and watch and perhaps guide this sorely-needed moment in your personal growth.
Using the internet as a passive-agressive driveby debate mechanism is so last-century, dude. Just ton
Re: (Score:2)
You are stupid , you are the one planed for as a fool by people who arent your friend and only trying to sell your their warez. You can enjoy your life doing what i suggest and guess what without wasting all that time travelling you get more time for a real life.
Re: Environment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yet again you fail to appreciate that we as humans cant have it all, and we also have to appreciate we share the planet with other humans and other creatures and plants and the future. We cant continue our selfish ways of complete self selfishness and never thinking about anyone else but ourselves.
I know that others dont agree with my philosophy, im just saying they need to wise up. They also
Re: Environment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People in the big city are far more isolated than a small town or city you just dont see because you are blind. Most people in the big city rarely if ever walk, they wouldnt have a clue what half their neighbours on their own block look like, and they probably have barely said hello to a few out of the hundreds on said block.
You simply cant see that with all your time wasted driving or bussing or training or planes or waiting in traffic you have significantly less time to have a real
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have given many, problem is you dont ave a brain cell upstairs.
There are many examples of stupid unnecessary travel, if you bother to stop and think. With covid it has been shown many not all, but many can work from home. Secondly take banks or any large org, companies should be forced to pay for their commute time, then you will find they will send employees to the closest branch to their home instead of something significantly further.
Youa re a prisonr of the s
Re: (Score:2)
There's no "defeat" here. There's the real world, and then there's your smug derision of it. No skin off my back. I lose no sleep based on your silly anger about automobiles. Nothing in your posts is a workable solution, still. Listen to the word "workable" - details.
Re: (Score:2)
I already gave examples and you didnt argue that they were wrong.
> There are entire subcultures devoted to the wonder and excitement of travel and cultural exchange. What is your solution to this?
Where will those sites and culture be when the world is severly damaged ?
Sometimes its not always about you, sometimes you have to take one for the team, just like you cant drink and drive because it might hurt others.
> Emergency services, public utilities
Re: Environment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually its worse. Because batteries dont grow on trees, crazy amounts of oil are required to mine, process and manuf those batteries. Those battery chemicals are also extremely toxic. If they leak into the environment they poison the water and soil for thousands of years.
Fucking idiot,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Banana skins have a perfect recycling but we arent talking about bananas or lead acid batteries. Stay on topic.
> while most vehicle batteries haven't even reached their end of second-use life yet, and are quite valuable on the secondhand market for home storage and DIY vehicles.
Show me real life examples of this wh
Re: Environment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop bullshitting we know very well that the the percentages of recycling are basic single digit. Saving one or two batteries isnt going to solve or save the environment when 99.9% get dumped.
> You said emissions form battery mining were worse. I showed you that they weren't.
You didnt show anything, the conversation is not a scienti
Re: Environment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Im going to quote back you a website you reviously quoted when you made a statement about lead battery recycling. > https://youmatter.world/en/are... [youmatter.world] > 99% of lead-acid batteries (the ones running in fossil fuel powered cars) are recycled in the US >
Re: (Score:2)
The free market already solved this issue long ago. Cars require high VA to weight ratio for efficiency. Stationary batteries don't.
Old cells can be repurposed into power station buffers.
https://www.sciencealert.com/r... [sciencealert.com]
Not if they are in the oddball shape of the structural A-frame of a car. And not if they use a weird chemistry that requires a proprietary charging interface that is unique to the car. Since these aren't standard cells and the structural component is essentially a giant cell, the manufacturer should commit to accepting crashed or scrapped vehicles to recover the battery components for recycling.
Re: (Score:3)
No. When you recycle, there's no need to require that the new product uses the exact same materials in the exact same proportions as the old ones. The point of recycling is that you separate the battery into its constituents, and you can reuse each of those individually.
This new battery type still needs most of the same materials used in current battery types. And there will inevitably be a market for non-structural batteries, so if that simplifies things current batteries can be recycled into those.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeh just like plastic we all know how well that has gone.
Re: (Score:2)
Not comparable. Plastics are long polymer chain molecules that you want to preserve if you want optimal recycling.
In a battery, you don't care about the molecular structure so much so you can recycle by breaking down into individual elements.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course its comparable because the same bullshit about recycling was told about plastics. Not discussing chemisty here, discusing truth in science, advertising the reality of what has actually happened.
> In a battery, you don't care about the molecular structure so much so you can recycle by breaking down into individual elements.
Precisely why a carbon fibre battery has no littl
Re: (Score:2)
So in your wild post-a-thon here - what alternatives are you actually suggesting? Hemp-cloth/waste bio-mass/algae bags & boxes for replacement of plastics? (Already active and has it's own flaws) I truly cannot figure out your angry disregard for current technology without offering alternatives.
If you
Re: (Score:2)
Just pointing out the lies about recycling that keep repeating. Stop trying to bullshit and be honest.
> So in your wild post-a-thon here - what alternatives are you actually suggesting?
Are you taht pathetic you have to throw childish insults ? > Hemp-cloth/waste bio-mass/algae bags & boxes f
Re: (Score:2)
How do you figure that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It seems to be quite difficult to effectively legislate uneconomical recycling. Plastics for example. On the other hand, you don't have to legislate economical recycling... like car batteries.
But my real question is why you think using structural batteries would make old batteries worthless for recycling? Are you under the impression that these batteries have a different chemistry or something?
Re: (Score:2)
yet again you fail to appreciate that plastics should also be banned / minimized just like travel.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah Slashdot. Illustrating that it takes all kinds....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Environment (Score:1)
Im all for technology but this also means all those millions of electric cars with the old batteries are now worthless for recycling.
I don't know why I'm replying to the Chinese sockpuppet but I'll take the bait: upgrading the batteries on an older model EV would surely be impossible.
Re: (Score:2)
Typical loser, cant write like an adult so they fill their reply with insults. I guess that shows the only skill you have is what 5 yo bullies do, call people names. Shame on you. Not discussing upgrading discussing what happens to the old batteries you fucking embecile. Learn to read befor eyou call people names.
Still in the lab. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is actually excellent progress but this breakthrough happened recently in a lab setting. Nobody (credible) is claiming it will be part of batteries next year but maybe in a decade or two. It could indeed revolution car design... just not before 2030.
Re: (Score:2)
I think when we evaluate these reported advances, we should keep in mind that a laboratory demonstration of greater energy density is not necessarily and apples-to-apples comparison. Making a battery out of many small, cylindrical, non-structural cells makes it heavier, but you get something for that weight: safety.
Every cell has its own rugged metal jacket, its own individual thermal runaway protection, its own robust physical fail-safes. If a cell does fail, most likely it outgasses rather than ignites
Re: (Score:1)
Could, should, would... (Score:5, Interesting)
TL:DR New tech is great, but these kinds of things are solving problems that shouldn't be problems.
New battery tech is always just a few years away, then doesn't appear (or is "too hard" to make a bunch of quick cash)
Lithium has had many iterations and continues to do so, there is already safer, longer lasting cells than Tesla et al use, already in mass production.
The question is not about needing better/faster batteries, it is about using what we have and stop being such wusses about it. "Oh no, my car will be too heavy to get to 100kmph in 3 seconds" or "I can't get 400km range when I have the seat warmers/aircon/gps/kids videos"
Re: (Score:2)
The three biggest players at the moment are Panasonic, LG and CATL. So one Japanese, one Korean and one Chinese company.
To maintain their positions they need to innovate. Cost reduction is a major goal but so are new kinds of battery that can charge faster or last longer, and the holy grail of a solid state battery that would increase energy density and improve safety.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
New battery tech is always just a few years away, then doesn't appear (or is "too hard" to make a bunch of quick cash)
That's the nature of research: you try several different approaches to improve on existing tech, and eventually you find one that's commercially viable. The others aren't viable for a variety of reasons including production difficulty (can't scale up), lack of longevity (not enough cycles), safety etc.
At one point a few decades ago, Li-ion was "a few years away" and the first producers certainly didn't make a bunch of quick cash. New technology requires patience and deep pockets to develop. Our experience i
Re: (Score:3)
The biotech industry would like to have a word with you about that.
Re: (Score:2)
So, not a Tesla with 'ludicrous mode' then. And by can't get 400km what you mean is can't get something over 400Km because the Tesla X can go 560Km so I expect it'd manage 400Km easily.
Re: (Score:3)
The question is not about needing better/faster batteries, it is about using what we have and stop being such wusses about it. "Oh no, my car will be too heavy to get to 100kmph in 3 seconds" or "I can't get 400km range when I have the seat warmers/aircon/gps/kids videos"
A part of the reason is because cars are essentially made by committees and the joke about design by committee is that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. No single person or visionary for that matter is wholly responsible for key decisions, as a result, the business behind automotive manufacture tries to play the safe route. They engage marketers to do studies to try to find out in covert ways what customers want, and consistently fail to make it.
In the case of electric vehicles, I think the attitu
Re: Could, should, would... (Score:1)
New battery tech is always just a few years away, then doesn't appear
Don't I know! If only we had better tech than these fucking Leyden Jars, we couldpower horseless carriages... and flying things! Alas, as you sad, it'll never happen.
Low density (Score:5, Insightful)
30wh/kg is 1/10th the industry going rate. You can't hand wave and say "but batteries don't include structural materials around them!" but not tell readers what the apples to apples density would be for a cylindrical battery plus body structure. I don't know what the answer is but Tesla's sandwiched cells with a thin sheet of metal on top and bottom can't possibly be 10x heavier than the cells between them so this doesn't pass the napkin math test.
Re: (Score:3)
What makes this stuff interesting is that it sidesteps the whole Wh/kg measurement. One of the examples in the article was replacing a car's traditional 12V battery with a piece that replaces an existing sheet metal part. Functionally that means an infinitely higher energy density because its marginal weight is zero and it doesn't use any interior volume.
As long as it's not fantastically expensive, it really could open up new possibilities in design. If the shell of an electronic device can serve as its bat
Re: (Score:3)
So when the 12V battery fails, you scrap the whole car? Sign me up!
Re: (Score:2)
So when the 12V battery fails, you scrap the whole car? Sign me up!
I would assume you'd just replace the one "sheet metal part" that is the 12V battery, but if you'd like to give the car to me instead, I'll take it.
Re: (Score:2)
More important, how does it perform in a crash? If the car catches on fire? How do emergency responders handle a fully charged car frame without being electrocuted? Has anybody even thought about the questions, much less the answers?
Re: (Score:2)
"Sir, you need a new 12V battery in your car."
"How much?"
"$15,000 to replace the driver side structural members".
Re: Low density (Score:3)
Do these new structural cells react as violently to water ingress as current lithium batteries?
I would think that's something they've thought about since they're in Sweden where they spray salt on the roads half the year, which makes cars prone to develop holes underneath. Must be fun welding such a structural member slash battery shut in spring.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't hand wave and say "but batteries don't include structural materials around them!"
That's my thought as well. You're not going to make the body of the car out of this.
Re: (Score:1)
> "You're not going to make the body of the car out of this."
That's just what the plan to do.
A consequence of that is replace whole car if there is a problem with the battery part and/or structural damages.
The time (Score:3)
It must be after midnight on the east coast because here we are, another day another battery major breakthrough we'll only hear of once.
Wow (Score:3)
9w/kg power density
They'll only need 10 tons of it for a 100hp car.
Does it catch on fire when it breaks?
Battery Swelling - puncture fire risk (Score:3)
The premise is already nonsense. (Score:2)
Batteries do not need to part of the chassis at al.
That's a lie that Musk made up, to make people think batteries need to be non-removable. With the entiry sucky chain of consequences, like no automated quick-swap with fresh and young batteries in 30 seconds at every gas station, behind it.
It's analogous to the lie Microsoft told about Internet Explorer being an "integral" part of the Windows operating systen.
It's a Paradigm Thing (Score:2)
1. The need to keep the (significant) weight of the battery pack as low as possible, to avoid spoiling the handling characteristics of the vehicle
2. The need to keep the battery safe from collisions, impacts and fires.
I'll venture t
Re: (Score:2)
Having said that, I've long wondered whether or not any car manufacturer has ever experimented with an automated "quick swap" battery technology...
Wonder no more! Tesla did. There are even photos of their battery swap robot floating around out there. The Model S was originally designed for battery swap and they built prototypes that could do it. Tesla did all of the work you outlined. Then Tesla asked its customers if they would use battery swap. Tesla's customers said no. And that was pretty much the end of it.
Lots of people are pretty damn dumb, but even not too bright people can understand that the battery pack is the single most expensive p
Re: (Score:2)
That's fascinating.
But I kind of see your explanation as a missed opportunity that could have helped distinguish Tesla from all the competition. If they were able to apply stringent quality checks on batteries at the swap stations - and send marginal units back for refurbishment [because, let's be honest, you could probably recycle 95%+ of the chemical content] - then what that could have meant would have been that Tesla drivers got to have battery packs that were essentially never more than
Re: (Score:2)
Musk is unquestionably a dick, but let's not forget that when he came along, the whole auto industry, along with the fossil fuel sector, was patting itself on the back for successfully killing off the idea of electric cars. GM even went so far as to refuse happy EV-1 users (not owners...their cars were lease-only) the opportunity to buy their vehicle. They took them all back and destroyed them.
Musk intruded on this happy little circle jerk like a skunk at a garden party. So while I might not like the man
Remember folks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Plastic - flammable. Magnesium - flammable. Oil - flammable. Gasoline - flammable.
Anything else I can help you with?
Re: (Score:2)
Almost everything is flammable if you flam it hard enough.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think the lithium in a Lithium ion battery is what burns?
zzzz (Score:2)
It could, but then this is what, about the 75th "new battery tech that could revolutionize the industry" touted on slasdot in the last 10 years, no?
Snake oil 2021 = battery tech.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a tech site. If you don't want to read about the bleeding edge go to walmart.com.
Significant progress has been made in battery technology in those 10 years, by incorporating many individual results, and variations thereof. You're not going to see this precise technology suddenly replace everything else, but you may well see some aspects of it incorporated into new batteries in a few years.
Wow, the 923. battery major breakthrough this year (Score:2)
And now this one only "made a bit of a breakthrough".
What's next? Thinking of a breakthrough?
Fantasizing about a breakthrough... (Score:2)
Throw-away cars?! (Score:1)
the replacement job would be much more of a major undertaking, i.e. replace the frame (or structural part thereof)?
Seems a bit more expensive than swapping out batteries.
What am I missing here?