Solid-State Batteries For EVs Move a Step Closer To Production (arstechnica.com) 35
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Solid Power, a Colorado-based battery developer, moved one step closer to producing solid-state batteries for electric vehicles on Monday. The company has completed an automated "EV cell pilot line" with the capacity to make around 15,000 cells per year, which will be used first by Solid Power and then by its OEM partners for testing. "The installation of this EV cell pilot line will allow us to produce EV-scale cells suitable for initiating the formal automotive qualification process. Over the coming quarters, we will work to bring the EV cell pilot line up to its full operational capability and look forward to delivering EV-scale all-solid-state cells to our partners later this year," said Solid Power CEO Doug Campbell.
Solid-state batteries differ from the lithium-ion batteries currently used in EVs in that they replace the liquid electrolyte with a solid layer between the anode and cathode. It's an attractive technology for multiple reasons: Solid-state cells should have a higher energy density, they should be able to charge more quickly, and they should be safer, as they're nonflammable (which should further reduce the pack density and weight, as it will need less-robust protection). It's one of those technologies that to a very casual observer is perennially five years away, but in Europe there are already operational Mercedes-Benz eCitaro buses with solid-state packs.
The tech is taking a little longer to get ready for passenger EVs, but it does appear to be maturing. Solid Power is one of the leading solid-state battery developers, having been established in 2012. Its approach is to use a sulfur-based solid electrolyte and an anode that's very high in silicon -- more than 50 percent, according to Solid Power. [...] This new line is designed to produce the same sized large-format pouch cells currently used by automotive OEMs in their EVs, with cell capacities ranging from 60-100 Ah. BMW and Ford will be the first carmakers to receive cells for testing by the end of this year.
Solid-state batteries differ from the lithium-ion batteries currently used in EVs in that they replace the liquid electrolyte with a solid layer between the anode and cathode. It's an attractive technology for multiple reasons: Solid-state cells should have a higher energy density, they should be able to charge more quickly, and they should be safer, as they're nonflammable (which should further reduce the pack density and weight, as it will need less-robust protection). It's one of those technologies that to a very casual observer is perennially five years away, but in Europe there are already operational Mercedes-Benz eCitaro buses with solid-state packs.
The tech is taking a little longer to get ready for passenger EVs, but it does appear to be maturing. Solid Power is one of the leading solid-state battery developers, having been established in 2012. Its approach is to use a sulfur-based solid electrolyte and an anode that's very high in silicon -- more than 50 percent, according to Solid Power. [...] This new line is designed to produce the same sized large-format pouch cells currently used by automotive OEMs in their EVs, with cell capacities ranging from 60-100 Ah. BMW and Ford will be the first carmakers to receive cells for testing by the end of this year.
Multiple Parameters to Optimize (Score:5, Interesting)
Solid-state cells should have a higher energy density, they should be able to charge more quickly, and they should be safer
"Should" is one thing the real question is do they deliver on this promise? Then there is the question of longevity, how many times can you recharge them? That's the problem with batteries: there are a huge number of parameters you have to optimize for and failing on any one of them makes your battery largely useless. So while I wish them luck, until they actually deliver a superior, working battery this is just one of a myriad of "promising but still not yet there" battery technologies.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Couldn't even make it to the second paragraph.
Re:Multiple Parameters to Optimize (Score:5, Informative)
"Should" is one thing the real question is do they deliver on this promise?
Yes. Li-ion is "unstable" and pure metal lithium is "stable". That stability means that out the gate it will be a higher energy density. Now at absolute worse case 101%, but odds are that it's closer to 190% to 210% density of Li-Ion.
As for charge quicker, absolutely. That's not even guessing. There's no chance of annealing in a solid state battery, unless we're pushing like a shit-ton energy wise into it. That alone will make it quicker. How much quicker. Well that's the catch, but it will absolutely be faster.
Safer. Sort of. More than likely. Should be. Again the metal is more stable, so it should resist rapid oxidizing leading to thermal runaway.
Then there is the question of longevity, how many times can you recharge them?
This is the catch of solid state. It absolutely will get fewer, without a doubt. Being solid state will make it more prone to dendrites. There's ways sort of around that, that's the thing that's keeping people working on it. But it'll will always be less in absolute numbers compared to li-ion/li-poly. So solid state might not be a good thing for say cell phones or what not that needs recharging every night. But with a solid state battery, the idea is that you'll get 500-600 miles per charge and thus, you'll charge once or twice a week. At least that's the working selling idea.
there are a huge number of parameters you have to optimize for and failing on any one of them makes your battery largely useless
Now that might be a bit extreme. Solid state will allow us to forego some of the conflict elements like cobalt. So there's something to say about it. Also, if we start ramping up lithium mining in the US, solid state will allow us to be full domestic only production and that's going to butter some political biscuits.
until they actually deliver a superior
Well let's just remember that different use cases mean different things are better than something else in that use case. I don't think it is wise to think we will have one battery to rule them all.
Re: (Score:3)
Solid state will allow us to forego some of the conflict elements like cobalt.
You don't need cobalt for LiFePo4 batteries. I'm generally in favor of solid batteries as a potential end to flammability concerns, even though LiFePo4 is relatively safe, but cobalt isn't necessarily a differentiator.
Re: (Score:3)
Now that might be a bit extreme
Not really when you consider all the other battery technologies which have gone nowhere because while they improved two or three parameters they were much worse in others.
As you mentioned the catch with this battery is the limited number of recharge cycles. Li-ion get ~300-500 cycles so if this has fewer, say 200, then you are looking at needing to replace the batteries in your EV every ~4+ years. This will make it any EV using it very expensive unless the battery is far cheaper to make than Li-ion.
Re:Multiple Parameters to Optimize (Score:5, Interesting)
Not really when you consider all the other battery technologies which have gone nowhere because while they improved two or three parameters they were much worse in others
I get it. But a lot of those other battery techs have a lot more steps to the end product. Solid state is "A" direction to go in. Solid state benefits that the vast majority of production for it relies on all the already established lithium battery industry. It's not a massive retooling to move to solid state. Li-Air is also another direction that uses a lot of preexisting tech of the industry. The biggest problem with Li-Air is it requires a bit more magic with the anode which we haven't really invented, but if we had then Li-Air would be likely what we were talking about.
As you mentioned the catch with this battery is the limited number of recharge cycles
Yeah. And I don't know, maybe they have ways of dealing with it.... It's absolutely one of the big draw backs to it. As I said, this would absolutely mean it would be horrible for small applications. But something where weight isn't so much of a concern, there are ways to slow that process down and get a few more recharges out of it. I'm not sure if there's been some massive break through, but last I checked some of these were able to squeeze another 40-50 cycles out.
unless the battery is far cheaper to make than Li-ion
Ah yeah, now that is a case there. Solid state has a lot fewer steps in recycling versus Li-ion. Basically you just need a lot of heat to get it to a point and then add a bit of an acid that will "burn off". So reprocessing "has potential", but I mean that is with anything with recycling, it's a crap shoot on if it will actually drive the cost down.
Another thing is there's less material going into solid state. Now the process might be overly complex, which means the cost stays high. But if the process of making solid state can be made cheap enough, the materials are going to be cheaper than Li-ion.
So it's hard to say if it will be cheaper in the long run. The cost to recycle and the steps to recycle are fewer than Li-ion. The absolute number of materials going in are fewer, but the process might be really complex. I don't know, good chance it might be cheaper. But man, I wouldn't bank on my word about it. My friend who used to be into all this stuff "left" the industry about six months into the pandemic, so I've not really had beer time with him to discuss the latest and greatest since he's gotten out.
Maybe your cynicism is well founded (which wouldn't make it cynicism then). I don't know, it feels incremental enough to pass my test, we're getting about twice the density, maybe 30%-40% fewer cycles, but is cheaper to recycle, but might be initially more expensive to make. Like none of it is any of those crazy grandiose claims like "300% capacity, charges in 5 seconds, last 4 trillion cycles!" that usually gets my eyebrow up. But I acquiesce that I may just be too hopeful with this tech. I'll be fine if I'm wrong on this. Cautiously optimistic.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe your cynicism is well founded (which wouldn't make it cynicism then). I don't know
I think really that's my point: we simply do not know whether this is going to work or not. There have been so many examples of new battery tech that has claimed that it will revolutionize our use of electrically powered devices because it is excellent in one or two categories, and which have delivered nothing (so far) because it gets completely derailed by a performance metric they had not considered.
I'm sure eventually someone, somewhere will come up with something great that will advance battery tech
Re:Multiple Parameters to Optimize (Score:5, Informative)
I suspect the cycle life of solid state batteries can be adjusted by altering the anode thickness, the cathode thickness, the electrolyte thickness, and the separator material, just like a Li-ion battery. Each of those parameters affects the energy density, the calendar life, the cycle life, and cost.
One study from January describes the recharge cycle of one type of solid state battery at 9000 cycles. Assuming an unrealistic complete charge and discharge cycle for each day, that equates to 24 years of daily cycles to get that particular battery down to the 80% mark. https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]
I'm sure managing the charge cycles are part of the design and cost equation just like they are for Li-ion batteries.
--
All generalizations are false, including this one. ~ Mark Twain
Re: (Score:2)
then you are looking at needing to replace the batteries in your EV every ~4+ years.
Interestingly, ICE car engines routinely last one or two decades or more, even though they cost about as much as an EV battery pack replacement.
And while I like EVs in concept, the reality is that the ICE is far more mature in terms of quality. Instead of buying exorbitantly expensive EVs, we could instead transition to carbon-neutral gasoline, or bio-diesel, and be done with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Carbon-neutral gasoline or bio-diesel, besides not really being carbon-neutral, don't solve two pollution issues:
- tailpipe emissions
- noise
And they mean we are still stuck with the following issues that EVs solve:
- vibration
- relatively poor and slow torque
- lack of linear response
- inability to refuel at home
- mechanical complexity
- brake pad wear
The cost issues are going to disappear as scale economies and learnings kick in.
Re: (Score:2)
Time to replacement depends on charge cycles till replacement point, miles per charge, average miles driven per year, and replacement point.
For my Li-ion EV:
- About 750 cycles till replacement point
- 250 miles per charge
- 4000 miles per year average (I don't drive very much)
- Replacement point of 80% of original range (this is the formal definition from Renault; I could live with less than 200 miles)
So 750* 250 / 4000 = 47 years...(I really don't drive very much!)
For a solid state battery EV, we know cycles
Re: (Score:3)
I saw no mention in the summary or the article about temperature stability - that's one of the things holding me back from considering electric cars. It gets darn cold in the winter around here, and pretty hot in the summers - neither condition is great for batteries.
I assume solid state would hold up to cold better - but that's just a guess. Any insights as to that?
Re: (Score:2)
So I called my friend during lunch about this. It was a quick call because you know "lunch". But yes, solid state should hold up better in varying temperatures and there's both chemical assumptions and actual studies done to back up the assumptions. The underlying principal is Li-Ion relies on ions flowing freely and temperature affects the flow. Solid state isn't reliant on the flow of ions, it's just a solid hunk of metal. It is still reliant on the band gap which can be affected by temperature, but
Re: (Score:1)
Awesome info - thank you sir!
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any clue what you're talking about or are you just making it up entirely?
Re: (Score:2)
after being in development for 8 years and on the road, they "should" have some measurable data
Re: (Score:2)
Plus he is taking down both Twitter and YouTube without spending a dime.
Looks like he's committed himself to spend either $44 billion to buy Twitter, or $1 billion to back out of the deal, or (whatever it's costing him to pay a team of lawyers to weasel him out of the contract he signed without thinking things through).
Any of those outcomes represents quite a lot of dimes.
Re:I trust Musk (Score:4, Informative)
If it all went wrong, and ended in scandal, at least we could call it Elongate. :)
Re: (Score:2)
That is *excellent*!
Ya, but ... (Score:2)
It's one of those technologies that to a very casual observer is perennially five years away, but in Europe there are already operational Mercedes-Benz eCitaro buses with solid-state packs.
With the current supply-chain issues, they'll spend five-years in shipping for the rest of us. :-)
(Either raw materials in or finished product out...)
15,000 cells per year? (Score:2)
Re:15,000 cells per year? (Score:4, Informative)
There are differing numbers of cells used to build Lithium packs. The ones that use a jillion little cells are actually in the minority, and mostly they are prismatic or pouch cells. Battery packs made up from cylindrical cells only make up about 15% of the market.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation needed.
Teslas - which comprise 75% of all EVs sold worldwide [interestin...eering.com] - use cylindrical cells for almost all of their vehicles (Chinese-made Standard Range Model 3 being the only exception) as well as for their Powerwalls. Most laptops and cordless tools appear to use cylindrical cells within their batteries, at least the ones I've either taken apart or saw being taken apart. Phones/tablets don't use cylindricals, but I ca
Re: (Score:2)
Teslas - which comprise 75% of all EVs sold worldwide
All-electric car sales in Q1 2022 (vs previous year):
Tesla: 310,411 and 21.6% share (vs 25%)
SAIC (incl. SAIC-GM-Wuling): 154,623 and 10.7% share (vs 17%)
BYD: 144,203 and 10% share (vs 5%)
Volkswagen Group: 98,455 and 6.8% share (vs 8%)
Hyundai Motor Group: 81,744 and 5.7% share
Top 5 total: 789,436 (55% share)
others: over 0.65 million (45% share)
Total: about 1.44 mill
P.S. (Score:2)
P.S. Musk has said he expects Tesla to transition to all LFP batteries [insideevs.com], not just for EVs (which is what we were talking about) but also powerwalls and megapacks. So they'd all be prismatic as well. There's no good reason to build LFP EV packs out of cylindrical cells.
Colorado is a very quiet battery R&D (Score:2)
Seems like QuantumScape is poised to lead in this (Score:1)
I've been following SS batteries for a decade at least. If I had to make a bet, it would be on them. Rumor has it that VWAG will be dropping a major announcement in the next month.
Re: (Score:2)
Over 30 years, I've learned that nobody has any clue whatsoever what the next actual proper commercially-successful, mass-market battery chemistry will be until the day you find yourself actually buying one by accident.
That's how I got NiCd, NiMH, Li-ion, Li-Poly, etc. I bought something that had them in and went "Oh, new battery chemistry... yeah this was one of the 20 I've heard of over the last decade".
Can you even buy solid state batteries? (Score:2)
I keep hearing about how they're going into cars, power grid solutions... does a battery exist yet that I can buy? Every six months or so I hop on ebay, alibaba, google etc and nothing comes up, just thousands of these articles.