Waterloo’s silicon battery technology promises a 40 to 60 per cent increase in energy

[wdolson]

If you want to be pedantic, batteries existed long before the internal combustion engine. They even predate railroads.

However, lithium batteries first became available for large-scale commercial applications only in the late 90-s. It took them nearly 30 years to get there - the first Li-Ion cells were developed in early 70-s!

Batter. Development. Is. Hard.

However, we do know that the current battery technology is far from optimal - there are laboratory samples that easily have 3-4 more energy density, but that are not viable because of rapid degradation or chemical instability. Is it a stretch to believe that somebody managed to find a way to move technology from lab to actual production?

Yes, battery development does not follow Moore's Law. Semiconductors have doubled in density and capability on a very consistent pattern since the 1960s. Battery development has been much more lurching throughout history. Lead acid batteries were the only rechargeable batteries for almost a century. A lot of R&D money is going into batteries these days, so the rate of advancement is a lot faster than it's ever been, but there have been a lot of dead ends.

It's estimated that any new battery chemistry will take 10 years from discovery to production. I would agree with that, at least 10 years for any major new chemistries. A tweak to existing chemistry would probably take less time, but that would only be a marginal improvement instead of a game changer.

What everybody is looking for is the game changer chemistry that can be recharged many times without degradation, has a very high energy density, no memory problem (like NiCads), and being lightweight would also be a big plus.

 

[ScepticMatt]

This is one of a series of attempts to stabilize high silicon percentage anodes using graphene and/or some other carbon structure, in this case polyacrylonitrile.
As long as graphene remains prohibitively expensive, those advances are not market ready.

 

[Cyberax]

As long as graphene remains prohibitively expensive, those advances are not market ready.

Graphene is not that expensive, if you don't need large defect-free sheets of it. People are already using it in LCD displays.

 

[Cyberax]

I spoke today with a couple of VCs investing in batteries. They're saying that right now the market is in a curious situation, there are quite a lot of (relatively) low-hanging fruits in Li-Ion research. Getting even one of them to fruition will allow to increase energy density by 20-30% for the current crop of berriesbatteries.

Yet almost no independent companies are working on them - the risk is too high. Not the risk of failure, but the risk of becoming obsolete before reaching the market (and there are also some patent issues). So independent labs (and universities) are generally working on perspective technologies with high risk and time-to-market but even higher possible payoff. Large battery companies have a lot of R&D internally, but they just don't move fast enough.

So right now we have tons of "5-to-10 years from market" technologies promising huge gains, but a distinct lack of current advances.

 

[woof]

Batter. Development. Is. Hard.

Oh, I'm not so sure about that...some butter, a few eggs, flour, baking and cocoa powder, mix thoroughly...

 

[techmaven]

I spoke today with a couple of VCs investing in batteries. They're saying that right now the market is in a curious situation, there are quite a lot of (relatively) low-hanging fruits in Li-Ion research. Getting even one of them to fruition will allow to increase energy density by 20-30% for the current crop of berriesbatteries.

Yet almost no independent companies are working on them - the risk is too high. Not the risk of failure, but the risk of becoming obsolete before reaching the market (and there are also some patent issues). So independent labs (and universities) are generally working on perspective technologies with high risk and time-to-market but even higher possible payoff. Large battery companies have a lot of R&D internally, but they just don't move fast enough.

So right now we have tons of "5-to-10 years from market" technologies promising huge gains, but a distinct lack of current advances.

That's an interesting perspective. How does the silicon anode R&D fit into this picture? Obviously it has taken longer to develop, but there were basic research questions to answer as well as manufacturing difficulties. We are just seeing this technology start to hit the market. Is it the large battery companies moving too slow? Or was it just something that takes time even with large amounts of funding? ARPA-E as well as DoE's EERE both seem to fund a smattering of technologies for a wide range of risk/reward/timeframes.

 

[Cosmacelf]

@Cyberax, all of which means, Tesla's gigafactory strategy was the correct call.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Oh, I'm not so sure about that...some butter, a few eggs, flour, baking and cocoa powder, mix thoroughly...

Hilarious...thank-you!

 

[Electroman]

So right now we have tons of "5-to-10 years from market" technologies promising huge gains, but a distinct lack of current advances.

Now, that is disappointing

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Got a bit of press on this string:

Research: Efficient, Long-Lasting Lithium-Ion Batteries Via Covalent Synergy In Silicon-Sulfur-Graphene −

 

[Electroman]

"New research from the University of Waterloo is claiming to have overcome this (to a degree), though — through the use of observed covalent interactions between sulfur nanoparticles, sulfur-doped graphene, and cyclized polyacrylonitrile (with regard to the alteration of electrode structures)."


blab,., blah.... blah. Show me the cell!!

 

[Cyberax]

Or was it just something that takes time even with large amounts of funding? ARPA-E as well as DoE's EERE both seem to fund a smattering of technologies for a wide range of risk/reward/timeframes.

Si-based electrodes is one technology that is actually in production right now. There are batteries out there that incorporate a small amount of silicon to increase the density slightly.

I'm quite sure that big companies have secret R&D projects to improve the amount of anode-incorporated silicon.

- - - Updated - - -

Now, that is disappointing

Why? It just means we have to wait several more years to get a revolutionary (50%-100% improvement) advance. It's quite likely going to happen, given the amount of funding going into batteries.

- - - Updated - - -

@Cyberax, all of which means, Tesla's gigafactory strategy was the correct call.

It was a correct call anyway. Tesla can retool their factory easily enough before it's fully completed. And Tesla will still need a lot of batteries to produce Model 3.

 

[ScepticMatt]

I remembered that the Dalhousie University has a 5 year research deal with Tesla.
On July 30th, 2013, Professor Jeff Dahn of Dalhousie University delivered a lecture at Waterloo University about battery degradation.

Professor Jeff Dahn - WIN Seminar Series - YouTube

 

[muleferg]

Alevo: $1 Billion Battery Startup

 

[Discoducky]

I remembered that the Dalhousie University has a 5 year research deal with Tesla.
On July 30th, 2013, Professor Jeff Dahn of Dalhousie University delivered a lecture at Waterloo University about battery degradation.

Professor Jeff Dahn - WIN Seminar Series - YouTube

Fantastic talk and really highlights how hard it is to get the electrolyte cocktail just right

Alevo: $1 Billion Battery Startup

Will be interesting....once it ships