[HN Gopher] CATL Unveils First Generation of Sodium-Ion Batteries
___________________________________________________________________
CATL Unveils First Generation of Sodium-Ion Batteries
Author : MaKey
Score : 68 points
Date : 2021-07-29 16:24 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.catl.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.catl.com)
| webmobdev wrote:
| From an indian perspective, I'd like something like this to
| replace the lead-acid batteries we use currently in home UPS
| system. Lithium ones are too costly right now, and if they can
| make this cheaper and longer lasting than the gel or lead-acid
| batteries currently in use, they will have a huge market in
| India.
| baybal2 wrote:
| I doubt this will be dramatically cheaper than lithium. Lithium
| itself is fairly cheap considering how little of it a battery
| has.
|
| Basic LFP batteries can be made pretty much in a garage, both
| cells, and chemicals for cathode/anode.
|
| Most LFP cells were actually made exactly like that 10-8 years
| ago. People mixing cathodes, and anodes on a bucket, somebody
| smothering them on foil, and then somebody doing winding,
| packing, welding, and, finally, sealing all by hand.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I would have thought that by now LFP has mostly overtaken FLA
| for home use. I can pick up LFP cells for just over $100/kWh,
| which is about what it costs me to get FLAs, but with far
| longer lifespan.
| matmatmatmat wrote:
| Got a link to where I could pick up those LFP cells for just
| over $100/kWh?
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Head over to diysolarforum.com and look for the group buy
| thread (it's not really a group buy anymore, it's ongoing).
| I picked up four 280Ah cells for right at $400 (exact
| amount varies a bit on shipping destination). Rumor has it
| that shipping has gotten pretty slow in the last few
| months, however, so you have to be patient.
|
| Anyway, that gives you 3.36kW of capacity (assuming a 12V
| 4S config) for $119/kW. To be fair, it will be slightly
| more when you price in your BMS of choice.
| MaKey wrote:
| Key data:
|
| - Cathode material: Prussian white
|
| - up to 160Wh/kg (2nd generation targets 200Wh/kg)
|
| - can charge in 15 minutes to 80% SOC at room temperature
|
| - 90% capacity at -20degC
|
| - Pricing estimates: 26-46$/kWh at GWh production scale, 77$/kWh
| at smaller production scale [0]
|
| [0] https://twitter.com/DKurac/status/1402854199080099841
| algo_trader wrote:
| LFP is reported at ~$80/kwh for large Chinese buyers. Are those
| figures accurate?
|
| Sure its good to have alternatives, but seems LFP will takeover
| the world except for the premium uses (especially as we get
| chargers everywhere).
| baybal2 wrote:
| > LFP is reported at ~$80/kwh for large Chinese buyers. Are
| those figures accurate?
|
| Yes, automotive buyers were having it for less than $100 per
| kWh for at least 5 years now. Still not sure for which
| density range these prices are. 190wh/kg LFP cells are now
| available in retail, and 200wh/kg been around for at least 2
| years for automotive, and been used in EV busses from a few
| manufacturers.
|
| It wouldn't be a stretch to say that biggest, and longest
| term contracts can get it to $60 per kWh.
|
| Lowest end, storage class LFPs must also be quite cheap in
| lower volumes, and haven't looked at them for a long time.
| matmatmatmat wrote:
| Genuine question, as a private individual looking into
| residential storage, what kind $/kWh should I be expecting
| if I could get the system and install it myself, and why is
| it so much higher than the big manufacturers? Is it just
| volume?
| baybal2 wrote:
| The volume, and shipping hurdles are sure a part of
| thing, but there are persistent speculation about nearly
| every battery maker putting no resale clause on the
| contract, and enforcing them zealously to keep retail
| prices high, so their distributors can make a buck.
|
| Depending on your size. Inverter prices vary most
| dramatically for minor features, and options.
|
| For batteries only, with shipping, and duties, think of a
| double of alibaba.com price.
| algo_trader wrote:
| And yet Tesla Megapack volume priced at $280/kwh [1], for
| 2023 delivery!
|
| Argh. Where is the big cost? AC convertion? the cooling?
| pack isolation and protection ? The special logo ?
|
| [1] https://electrek.co/2021/07/26/tesla-reveals-megapack-
| prices...
| mrfusion wrote:
| What's LFP?
| diegocg wrote:
| lithium ferrophosphate
|
| Says Google
| baybal2 wrote:
| > - Cathode material: Prussian white
|
| Ferrocyanides -- not the cheapest compound to synthesize
| ajross wrote:
| That's what I'm interested in. And yes, it does seem that the
| use of the artist's pigment name seems intended to obscure
| the fact that this is a complicated material.
|
| Any solid state chemists here who can enlighten us?
| philipkglass wrote:
| Ferrocyanide anion has a complicated looking structure but
| it is easy to synthesize.
|
| The input materials are hydrogen cyanide (cheaply produced
| from methane and ammonia via the Andrussow process),
| calcium hydroxide, and iron(II) chloride. Combined, they
| form ferrocyanide.
|
| Despite the toxic hydrogen cyanide used in production,
| ferrocyanides are nontoxic because the cyanide is so
| tightly bound to iron. Potassium ferrocyanide is used as an
| anticaking agent in table salt.
|
| I have made Prussian blue before by roasting dried blood
| (organic fertilizer) with sodium hydroxide, extracting with
| water, and letting it partially oxidize in air. Blood
| provides both iron and nitrogen. This was an industrial
| process, historically, before artificial nitrogen fixation.
| baybal2 wrote:
| Indeed, I instantly recalled the same "blood and sodium
| hydroxide" stuff from high school chemistry class, and
| thought of it still being a thing.
|
| It doesn't seem to be too expensive, nor too cheap: https
| ://www.alibaba.com/products/sodium_ferrocyanide/CID8020..
| .
| dd36 wrote:
| So stationary?
| MaKey wrote:
| Tesla already builds Model 3s with LFP batteries which the
| announced 2nd generation of CATL Sodium-Ion Batteries will be
| comparable to in terms of capacity. So not only stationary.
| nicoburns wrote:
| Presumably the LFP batteries will still have quite an
| advantage in terms of density.
| ajross wrote:
| Not huge, if these numbers hold up. On paper this for
| sure looks like a really competitive technology,
| especially for grid storage and solar backup kind of
| applications. But we'll see.
| mrfusion wrote:
| Sounds competitive with Lion and possibly cheaper? What's the
| catch?
| akiselev wrote:
| The second anyone starts to order it in sizable quantities
| like for a utility installation or auto production run the
| prices spike and don't recover until they hit competitive
| scale (best case) or some yet unknown scientific breakthrough
| (worst), all the while trying to catch up to LiIon.
| anonuser123456 wrote:
| This is a feature, not a bug. If CATL can make a huge
| margin, that will incentivize them to scale much more
| rapidly, which will be good for everyone.
| MaKey wrote:
| The hard science part for the first generation seems to be
| done, what now follows is scaling up the production. CATL
| targets 2023 for mass production. As the same production
| processes for Lithium-ion batteries can be used this
| doesn't seem unrealistic.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Less energy density, can't find any information on power
| density, faster charge cycle degradation (i.e. maybe a third
| of the lifespan of lithium chemistries), lab results should
| always be treated with some skepticism.
| elihu wrote:
| The spider plot at the bottom of the page shows the "long
| life" axis being the same as LFP, which tend to have much
| better durability than most other lithium ion chemistries.
| So if that's not marketing fluff then degradation shouldn't
| be much of an issue.
|
| Energy density does seem to be the main weakness that
| they're acknowledging.
| pkaye wrote:
| I thought lithium is a light element so the Lion batteries
| are lighter. But sodium might be useful for non automotive
| applications like the power grid batteries.
| mrfusion wrote:
| Isn't lithium actually a small part of the battery?
| russli1993 wrote:
| density still lower than li batteries at 300wh/kg will
| probably never overtake li ion batteries. But sodium is much
| more widely available than lithium, and it doesn't need
| cobalt.
| baybal2 wrote:
| 300wh/kg is not where we will ever see any conventional
| lithium battery chemistry get.
|
| Best mainstream cells cars are made with today are all
| around 200wh/kg.
|
| 240wh/kg NCM cells are there, more or less widely
| available, but they are almost the same stuff with higher
| rating, and lower cycle life. Manufacturers basically
| nudging digits.
|
| If they reach same 200wh/kg, along with equal cycle life to
| LFP, it can be big.
| russli1993 wrote:
| yeah, I think the big information is CATL is
| industrializing NA ion batteries and specifically calling
| out supply chain partners to do so. Its one thing to have
| a lab result, another thing to industrializing, forming
| upper stream supply chain and its own manufacturing
| capacity. The latter will need serious cash, time and
| human resource investments. CATL is a public traded
| company, margins, revenue is crucial. They also have
| pretty good lithium ion NCM and LFP batteries, and are
| researching solid state Li batteries so they know a thing
| about battery chemistries. They also in pretty serious
| competition with other battery makers and supplies big
| name car brands. So for them to throw their own cash at
| this new technology means they see long term advantages.
| I think time will tell what it will end up with.
| sumtechguy wrote:
| If they can get them comparable in weight and power this
| could be neat for size size reasons. For the same weight
| but ~1/4th the size is interesting.
| baybal2 wrote:
| > Sounds competitive with Lion and possibly cheaper? What's
| the catch?
|
| All previous works on sodium batteries showed very low cycle
| lives for both cathodes, and anodes.
|
| Since they are not giving it out now, I guess that's it. And
| this may well be why they keep nailing solely on the point of
| it being operational at -20Cdeg (which is a big thing for any
| lithium battery, still)
| baybal2 wrote:
| Another thing I will note is them specifically comparing
| this to an LFP battery.
|
| CATL been very late to the LFP party, especially for the
| high-end automotive LFP cells.
|
| Companies which made a bet on LFP early are now coming with
| 200+wh/kg cells, which is already bigger than commodity
| automotive NCA, something which Foxconn (CATL) makes most
| money on.
|
| This is a kick below the waistline move to at least throw
| doubts about business expansion for LFP makers. Currently,
| 200wh/kg LFP cells are just only now hitting the market,
| and these LFP cell manufacturers are still making the lion
| share of their revenue, and profit on storage class, and
| low-end cells.
|
| If LFP manufacturers believe the new chemistry can wipe out
| their current cash cow, they will think twice about putting
| money to expansion in automotive cells.
| fnord77 wrote:
| so I'm a bit confused - lithium has a higher electronegativity
| than sodium.
|
| why bother with sodium at all? cost ?
| elihu wrote:
| Cost is a pretty big reason. Tesla has made somewhere around
| one and a half million cars. If you want to make a billion
| cars, that's a whole different situation. the resources needed
| to make the batteries could become pretty severe bottlenecks.
|
| I think that's something that's often missed in EV discussions
| that focus on range and who has the best 0-60 time and so on:
| luxury car features are nice, but in the end what matters more
| is who can actually make the cheapest good-enough battery at
| the highest volume, because that's what's going to be in most
| of the world's cars. Wherever those batteries are made could
| basically be what Saudi Arabia was to the era of gas-powered
| vehicles. (Though to be fair you can build a battery factory
| almost anywhere, whereas oil is something you either have in
| abundance or you don't.)
|
| Not sure what the inputs are to these sodium ion batteries, but
| most lithium ion batteries require cobalt, nickel, and lithium.
| Lithium iron phosphate has an advantage that it doesn't require
| cobalt or nickel.
| jsjohnst wrote:
| From the key data post someone made above, 90% capacity at
| -20oC is a huge win over lithium. Lithium batteries have a
| severely hard time in cold weather and must be heated to retain
| capacity.
| mrfusion wrote:
| So you could include a couple lb sodium battery to power
| heating your main battery.
| jeffbee wrote:
| They don't sell it very well on this page, do they? The weird
| diagram at the bottom seems to highlight faster charging and
| better low-temperature performance. I don't know if the world
| is clamoring for those. Perhaps also the ready availability of
| sodium compared to lithium?
| ehnto wrote:
| Cars are somewhat taken for granted in their ability to work
| in a wide temperature gamut, so I think improving extreme
| cold performance is something needed to make sure they stay
| on par or outperform internal combustion engines.
|
| As well, heavy industries around the world are looking at
| ways to electrify their fleets of vehicles working in remote
| sometimes extreme weather sites. This includes mining sites
| and marine operations, even consider that airplanes are an
| eventual target for EV.
|
| Also, charge speed is would surely be the number one gripe
| for EV ownership, range and performance is pretty much
| comparable to modern ICE but charge speed, not even close.
| kwhitefoot wrote:
| > charge speed is would surely be the number one gripe for
| EV ownership
|
| As far as I can tell this mostly only a concern among those
| who do not own an EV.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| Yes, exactly. It's the big bugbear of non-EV owners, but
| generally irrelevant to actual EV owners. Charger network
| size, reliability, locations, and pricing matters more.
|
| I am also not amongst the superhumans on the internet who
| can drive 300mi without my bladder/stomach/legs crying
| out for a break first.
|
| Being in NYC, the first hour of every trip is at 20mph,
| the second hour is average about 50mph, and then only if
| I am going beyond 70mi do I start to hit average speed
| about 60mph.
|
| Supercharging for ~100mi on the highway is a parallel
| operation to your bathroom/food break, so its 10 minutes
| you were already going to use. Gas fill ups are 5 minute
| serial operations that you either do before or after
| using the rest area. I suppose if you were on a
| cannonball run, you could pee in a bottle while pumping
| gas but I think we can exclude that edge case.
| mrfusion wrote:
| I hadn't thought of that point before. You really can't
| leave while pumping gas. So electric charging time is
| more productive.
| ajross wrote:
| Cars are also active devices with comparatively rapid cycle
| times that can spend a little energy to heat the batteries.
| EV batteries don't need to stay cold for very long,
| basically.
|
| Note that, contra the way it's often explained, cold
| batteries lose _capacity_ , not energy. If you take a full
| battery and put it in the freezer, you'll be unable to
| drain the full charge but it'll come back when it warms up.
| Think about it: the back of an envelope will show you that
| if that energy were actually being "lost" from a cold
| battery, then the battery must actually be _very, very hot_
| , because the energy would have had to go somewhere.
| steveBK123 wrote:
| Everyone has different use cases, but moving to a
| marketplace with a variety of cell types & corresponding
| tradeoffs (high range/moderate charge rate vs moderate
| range/high charge rate, etc) would be great.
|
| Less temperature sensitivity to the range & charge rate
| would be a huge win.
|
| Otherwise, personally charge rate hasn't been much of a
| problem because I'm not a big road tripper & have a charger
| at home.
|
| 300mi+ battery means I can drive 2 hours to see my parents
| & back 2 hours without charging, or drive down 4 hours to
| see my sister.. which means I'm going to be stopping along
| the way anyway, and charge 100mi+ while in the rest stop
| using the restroom, or more if I get a coffee or lunch.
|
| In everyday driving, charge at home off-peak starting 11pm,
| then its basically irrelevant whether I can unplug at
| 11:30pm vs 3am.
|
| Charging an EV takes longer, but generally its either at
| home or at a place you are already doing something else -
| shopping at Target, getting a coffee at Starbucks, making a
| pit stop on the highway, etc. Few regular EV drivers just
| sit in their car for 20min staring into space while they
| charge.
| detaro wrote:
| Cost plays a role, yes. Sodium is extremely common, which is
| helpful when Lithium is in high demand, the batteries
| apparently also don't need cobalt (which is also rare, and
| fraught with ethics concerns around the mining of the main
| sources in the Democratic Republic of the Congo).
| MaKey wrote:
| Mainly costs, but also: Better thermal stability, better
| performance at low temperatures, better cycle performance.
| Retric wrote:
| Nothing was said about cycle performance beyond an
| improvement relative to other sodium batteries. Which
| suggests it's at best similar to lithium ion, and possibly
| still falling behind.
| SigmundA wrote:
| Every time I see a sodium battery story I get excited and think
| increase in energy density, then I remember no, thats lithium-
| sulfur.
| Hypx_ wrote:
| At some point people will finally realize that hydrogen fuel
| cells are a type of battery. It's made from literally water and
| has the highest possible energy density of any chemical
| battery.
| audunw wrote:
| No, it does not have the highest possible energy density.
|
| "Energy density" generally refers to the volumetric energy
| density, where hydrogen is one of the worse methods of
| storing energy. Hydrogen has the best "specific energy
| density" or gravimetric energy density, IF it is compressed.
| You should include both if you want to be accurate.
|
| This is why hydrogen has lost when it comes to cars. Hydrogen
| has pretty bad energy density to start with, and then you've
| got to store it in cylindrical tanks which is hard to
| integrate efficiently, and can't easily be made into a
| structural member of the car itself.
|
| As a "battery" (with fuel cells) , it also doesn't have great
| power density. Power comes for free when adding batteries.
| Every battery added improves power capacity. Not so with
| hydrogen. You need to add both hydrogen and more fuel cells
| to get more power. That's why BEVs is also doing well for
| racing cars and hyper cars (see pikes peak race for instance)
|
| In places where volume and power isn't important, hydrogen
| could be promising. Trucks and ships are obvious candidates.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| As long as I can hook it up to the grid and charge in my
| garage, that sounds great.
| Hypx_ wrote:
| It's possible. A company called LAVO has made something of
| that sort.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-29 23:02 UTC)