[HN Gopher] Sodium-ion EV battery breakthrough delivers 11-min c...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Sodium-ion EV battery breakthrough delivers 11-min charging and 450
       km range
        
       Author : breve
       Score  : 71 points
       Date   : 2026-03-25 20:19 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (electrek.co)
 (TXT) w3m dump (electrek.co)
        
       | Grimblewald wrote:
       | BYD / Denza z9 gt claim 10-70% in 5 mins, 97% in 9 mins. With a
       | range of ~1000km this seems to crush these results? I don't know
       | enough about this space to know if I am missing something here,
       | but would love to know because something about this feels more
       | exciting than i think i am grasping. anyone know?
        
         | MisterTea wrote:
         | I see no charge rate numbers so there is no way to compare.
         | however, these sodium batteries are cheaper, do not require
         | lithium, and are operable at lower temperatures of -20C/-4F.
         | Sounds like a bit of a win and opens the door for battery
         | options in cars.
        
           | _aavaa_ wrote:
           | And the fire safety risks are significantly reduced (thermal
           | runaway is much harder). They can also be transported and
           | stored completely discharged, something not done with lithium
           | ion batteries because of it degrades them much more than
           | regular usage.
        
           | adrian_b wrote:
           | The sodium-ion batteries are said to work satisfactorily down
           | to -40 Celsius = -40 Fahrenheit.
           | 
           | -20 Celsius just happens to be a temperature for which a
           | retention ratio was specified in the parent article, and not
           | the limit of the operation range.
        
         | cbg0 wrote:
         | The range claims depend on the size of the battery pack. The
         | Denza has a larger pack than what is quoted in the article.
         | Also, the Chinese CLTC range ratings are overly optimistic with
         | 1000km CLTC being ~820km WLTP or ~700km EPA.
        
         | IneffablePigeon wrote:
         | This article is about a sodium-ion battery which is a different
         | chemistry to the one BYD claimed those results on (that was
         | LFP).
         | 
         | Sodium-ion is exciting because it has the potential to have
         | less degradation over time, much less sensitivity to cold and
         | less reliance on rare earth metals. Could also end up
         | significantly cheaper. However it has struggled to reach the
         | same energy densities and so hasn't been practical thus far.
         | 
         | This seems like a big step towards it being a practical
         | technology choice for certain models, if it bears out.
        
           | hunterpayne wrote:
           | "Sodium-ion is exciting because..."
           | 
           | Well it is exciting, but not for the reasons you think. More
           | like a Michael Bay movie exciting...there is nothing
           | practical about this design. Most of the cost will be safety
           | systems designed to prevent the battery from being exciting
           | and even then a crash will likely set them off. Pure Na-ion
           | probably isn't viable and certainly isn't viable in a car.
           | Maybe mixing in some Na into the Li-ion to stretch the small
           | amount of Lithium but even then you are significantly
           | increasing the volatility of the battery.
           | 
           | This isn't a practical step, its an act of desperation from
           | people who don't want to admit that large scale
           | electrification is a dumb idea. We electrified everything
           | that made sense to electrify a half century ago.
        
         | mbesto wrote:
         | > With a range of ~1000km this seems to crush these results
         | 
         | The 1000km range likely has more to do with the efficiency of
         | the drivetrain and the aerodynamics of the car more than the
         | battery tech. kWh is an absolute value that is fungible and the
         | Denza has a 122.5 kWh battery pack, which means its getting
         | 5mi/kWh. For perspective my Rivian R1S gets ~350 miles on a 135
         | kWh pack which is about 2.5mi/kWh (so about half that)
         | 
         | The only part of the battery tech that could affect range is
         | the weight. Sodium batteries are typically much heavier than
         | Li-on. I believe the Denza uses LFP, which means it's likely
         | somewhere else on the car that they're gaining improvement in
         | the range - not from the battery tech. That being said, the
         | battery tech definitely affects the charge/discharge rates.
        
       | readthenotes1 wrote:
       | Another better battery bulletin
        
       | WarmWash wrote:
       | I don't know what chemistry exactly these cells are using, but in
       | sodium-ion batteries, prussian blue analogs as they are called
       | are common anode materials. Overcharging these cells can lead to
       | a release of hydrogen cyanide gas, notoriously known as Zyklon B.
       | 
       | It has damped my enthusiasm for perusing it as a potential future
       | home energy storage solution.
        
         | cyberax wrote:
         | Just wait until you find out about hydrogen sulfide from
         | overcharged car batteries.
         | 
         | Also, I think HCN can be scrubbed by adding a special
         | absorptive cap onto the battery.
        
           | devwastaken wrote:
           | hydrogen sulfide is not anywhere in the same category. When
           | you consider failure you have to consider what is the most
           | catastrophic possibility and if that is "this battery
           | silently kills people" then you dont make it.
        
             | cyberax wrote:
             | > hydrogen sulfide is not anywhere in the same category.
             | 
             | It has the same LD50 dose as HCN. It literally _is_ just as
             | bad. It routinely kills people on oil rigs because in
             | lethal concentrations it immediately shuts off your nose.
             | 
             | How often do you hear about people getting poisoned by it
             | from lead-acid batteries?
        
               | zdragnar wrote:
               | The only people with any significant amount of lead acid
               | batteries on their property are off grid types who
               | typically store them away from their primary domicile as
               | a fire safety precaution.
               | 
               | Fast charging a car/chemical weapon in your garage isn't
               | terribly appealing.
        
             | wat10000 wrote:
             | We pipe methane into millions of homes. I don't think "this
             | can silently kill people in the worst case" is enough to
             | block something.
        
               | zdragnar wrote:
               | We also have to adulterate that methane with bitter
               | smelling agents too warn people of the danger when
               | there's a leak. The line into the house is also limited
               | by a regulator to ensure the pressure is very low. If gas
               | builds up in a battery, it's either going to leak out
               | slowly or build up and leak out all at once.
               | 
               | Very much not an equal comparison.
        
           | UncleOxidant wrote:
           | Or you could just have the batteries in a separate enclosure
           | away from your house. I think I would be inclined to do this
           | anyway, certainly for Lithium batteries given the possibility
           | of fire.
        
         | hunterpayne wrote:
         | Its metallic sodium. Its about 30 times more volatile than
         | Lithium. We don't use metallic sodium for almost anything
         | industrial because of this volatility. I assumed there would be
         | some mixed Li-Na-ion batteries. A pure Na-ion battery is an
         | explosive waiting to go off. Putting these in a car...seems
         | rather like a poor choice unless you are a personal injury
         | lawyer.
        
       | cyberax wrote:
       | Just remember, the US Na-Ion battery startup died last year with
       | _products_ _in_ _warehouses_ just because it couldn't get a UL
       | certification. All it needed was a bridge loan.
       | 
       | And the government did nothing.
        
         | btheunissen wrote:
         | Starting to think that the American century of humiliation meme
         | was prophetic.
        
         | iugtmkbdfil834 wrote:
         | One could argue that in that case, doing nothing was very much
         | a choice.
        
           | joe_mamba wrote:
           | "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake"
        
         | trynumber9 wrote:
         | >And the government did nothing.
         | 
         | Why didn't a private investment company, even venture capital,
         | extend them a bridge loan? It seems like the type of technology
         | that could have decent returns in licensing fees.
         | 
         | I ask this question because it seems odd to someone in the
         | software world so flooded with startups that the _government_
         | would be expected to intercede on behalf of a startup.
        
           | cyberax wrote:
           | Apparently, there were shenanigans from investors/creditors.
           | So the company got quietly carved up instead of going through
           | a bankruptcy auction.
           | 
           | I'm looking forward to the eventual investigational report.
           | 
           | BTW, the company was Natron Energy.
        
           | wat10000 wrote:
           | Decent returns aren't enough for a risky investment, they
           | need to be spectacular returns.
           | 
           | The benefit to the country as a whole is potentially large,
           | but most of it wouldn't show up as profit for the company
           | itself. I'm sure it would do quite well if it was successful,
           | but the benefits to car manufacturers and to having this sort
           | of technology on-shore would not translate into monetary
           | returns on private investment. That's the sort of thing
           | government intervention is good for.
        
           | tadfisher wrote:
           | In this case, Natron was focused on energy-storage for data
           | centers, a sector which is ordinarily a prime recipient of
           | government intervention.
        
         | simmerup wrote:
         | Think not,'what can my country do for me?', but, 'How can I
         | further enrich Trump'
        
       | thescriptkiddie wrote:
       | note that the quoted 170Wh/kg is about the same as currently
       | available LiFePO4 cells and half that of the best available NMC
       | cells
        
       | dboreham wrote:
       | People posting claims about EV charging time should be required
       | to also post the size of cable required. And the grid capacity
       | needed to provide their fast charging at a typical 8-bay charging
       | site.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-25 23:00 UTC)