BETTER BATTERIES: Scientists are still striving to improve lithium ion batteries in a bid to make electric vehicles more viable.
Image: Photo courtesy of Argonne National Laboratory.
DOWNERS GROVE TOWNSHIP, Ill. -- With current battery systems reaching their performance limits, researchers are scrutinizing every component of lithium-ion cells in order to develop energy storage mechanisms that can make electric vehicles better competitors to fossil-fueled engines.
Lithium-ion systems have made tremendous strides since they were invented in the 1970s. The cells have matured beyond expensive, fire-prone energy systems, becoming the go-to chemistry to power new mobile devices and electric vehicles. Still, prices need to drop further and the batteries themselves need be more durable to drive electric cars into more driveways and garages.
Researchers at Argonne National Laboratory outside Chicago are now tackling this problem, from designing batteries by the molecule in computers to postmortem battery analyses. In the process, the facility hopes to create innovations that will drive the industry, giving American manufacturers an edge over other countries as these energy storage systems find their way under the hood.
Khalil Amine, senior fellow scientist and manager for the Advanced Lithium Battery Program at Argonne, noted that historically, the United States led the world in energy storage research, but other countries like South Korea, Japan and China were better at commercializing these technologies.
But with high gasoline prices and increased global competition, the U.S. government has taken a renewed interest in developing and producing next-generation batteries within its borders. "Energy storage now is very strategic, not only for Argonne, but for the country," Amine said. "Whoever develops the technology will become the Saudi Arabia of batteries, so obviously it's very critical to get the technologies."
Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Argonne received $8.8 million to build new labs to design battery components, test them, scale up their production, build prototypes, run them through tests and analyze them.
The cheaper, more powerful battery starts with molecules
Though some other countries have more manpower devoted to researching energy storage, Amine said that Argonne has its own advantages. "Here, we use our advanced supercomputer to design molecules for validation," he said, allowing engineers to create suitable molecules from the ground up rather than testing various materials to see what sticks. "It's a very powerful tool that companies do not have."
Once researchers find a candidate molecule for a battery component, they produce it in small amounts to see if it works as predicted, usually in 100- to 500-gram batches. However, many promising materials languished in the past, failing to make the jump from the test tube to the assembly line and attract interest from industry.
"Great research is being done, great materials are being developed, but not a lot of them are making it out of the lab," explained Gregory Krumdick, a researcher at Argonne. "When you're scaling up technologies, what works at the bench will not work at the industrial scale."
To bridge this "Valley of Death," Argonne is building the Materials Engineering Research Facility. The laboratory takes processes that produce grams of compounds used in electrolytes, cathodes and anodes, and ramps up the output by an order of magnitude or more. Krumdick is the principal systems engineer at this scale-up facility.
Scientists tend to craft their chemicals like artisans, using specialized tools and forming the products in tiny quantities. This gives them precise control over their work and lets them tweak the process, validating their results through experiments and computer models. The material is often sufficient for a button cell like the ones that power wristwatches, but to get manufacturers really interested, you have to make enough for large batteries while using cheaper, off-the-self hardware.
See what we're tweeting about
9 Comments
Add CommentI don't know, but I think I smell a skunk. Lithium has been used since the 70s and the improvements have been near zero, just like the ICE engine has been in use for over one hundred years and is still a crappy, dirty, stinking source of providing transportation. What does this company think that they can change about lithium in ten years that will make a difference? I think we should give up lithium and try thorium. 8 grams of thorium in a stainless steel encased battery - ignited by a laser can get you over 300,000 miles. So why are we still playing with children's chemistry sets and not advanced physics? I would rather have a battery that I can hand down to my great great grandchildren than I would a battery that will not even make it to my son's (and 'no', I do not have a daughter, so get off the politically correct bull sh**) 40th birthday.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLithium is not the technology that can replace the worlds fleet of one billion ICE vehicles with electric. "Analysis of Lithium's geological resource base shows that there is insufficient economically recoverable Lithium available in the Earth's crust to sustain Electric Vehicle manufacture in the volumes required, based solely on LiIon batteries."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswww.meridian-int-res.com/Projects/Lithium_Problem_2.pdf
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso:
"Two other battery technologies exist which could provide “Sustainable Mobility” in a world without oil, without the same resource constraints. These are:
● The “Zebra” Sodium Nickel Chloride battery
● The Zinc Air battery and Fuel Cell".
In addition to the above the Sodium Iron Chloride battery could power the world's fleet of vehicles.
All of the above are also much cheaper than Li.
In the computer industry, I've seen an improvement in both price and performance for lithium-ion -- though admittedly, not a large one.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI still hear rumors of ways to use lithium more efficiently -- particularly lithium-air. But who knows?
In any case, we have to move forward in research, rather than listening to the ever-present curmudgeons who are always claiming "it can't be done" and "you're wasting your time." If people like this ruled research science, we'd still be living in caves!
Don't know about the other two, but fuel cells require significant amounts of platinum to work efficiently. That's why they are a more dominant player already.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf research finds a substitute for platinum, though, fuel cells could be the answer.
"Grassahol" could be a solution to -- but it still has problems.
The point is, we must continue research on *all* possible fossil fuel substitutes until we find one (preferably more than one) that will keep civilization going.
Some fuel cells do require platinum as a catalyst but zinc air doesn't.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel-cells#Comparison_of_fuel_cell_types
I agree all areas should be investigated. However, as pointed out in the link I posted previously, the majority of research is in Li and not nearly enough in other more sustainable solutions.
One of the statements of this article caught my eye...that they(the battery) does not like to stay inactive...If I remember correctly, the ten year plus storage life of the original lithium batteries is what got them where they are today...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat study by William Tahil has been widely discredited. The article mentions a couple later studies, on in response to Tahill's that refers to it as both “alarmist” and “ludicrious.”
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.cleanbreak.ca/2009/01/26/lithium-glut-maybe-but-what-about-after-2020/#more-1471
". Lithium has been used since the 70s and the improvements have been near zero,..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat, sir, is an utterly false statement. Both energy and power density of lithium batteries have increased greatly in the past 10 years alone. Currently, lithium batteries increase in energy density about 8% a year with the very real prospect of that figure rising exponentially with the advent of lithium air, lithium sulphur or other promising configurations.