Battery made of aluminum, sulfur and salt proves fast, safe and low-cost.

Engineers at MIT have developed a new battery design using common materials – aluminum, sulfur and salt. Not only is the battery low-cost, but it’s resistant to fire and failures, and can be charged very fast, which could make it useful for powering a home or charging electric vehicles.

Lithium-ion batteries have dominated the field for the last few decades, thanks to their reliability and high energy density. However, lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive, and the cells can be hazardous, exploding or bursting into flames if damaged or improperly used. Cheaper, safer alternatives are needed, especially as the world transitions towards renewable energy and electric vehicles.

So the MIT team set out to design a new type of battery out of readily available, inexpensive materials. After a search and some trial and error, they settled on aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable, so there’s no risk of fire or explosion.

In tests, the team demonstrated that the new battery cells can withstand hundreds of charge cycles, and charge very quickly – in some experiments, less than a minute. The cells would cost just one sixth of the price of a similar-sized lithium-ion cell.

newatlas.com/energy/aluminum-sulfur-salt-battery-fast-safe-low-cost/

No mention of energy density though. But it’s implied as the article mentions they’d be good for home batteries, etc.

Found a video on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXVo9vt0ick

Spiny Norman said:

Battery made of aluminum, sulfur and salt proves fast, safe and low-cost.

Engineers at MIT have developed a new battery design using common materials – aluminum, sulfur and salt. Not only is the battery low-cost, but it’s resistant to fire and failures, and can be charged very fast, which could make it useful for powering a home or charging electric vehicles.

Lithium-ion batteries have dominated the field for the last few decades, thanks to their reliability and high energy density. However, lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive, and the cells can be hazardous, exploding or bursting into flames if damaged or improperly used. Cheaper, safer alternatives are needed, especially as the world transitions towards renewable energy and electric vehicles.

So the MIT team set out to design a new type of battery out of readily available, inexpensive materials. After a search and some trial and error, they settled on aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable, so there’s no risk of fire or explosion.

In tests, the team demonstrated that the new battery cells can withstand hundreds of charge cycles, and charge very quickly – in some experiments, less than a minute. The cells would cost just one sixth of the price of a similar-sized lithium-ion cell.

newatlas.com/energy/aluminum-sulfur-salt-battery-fast-safe-low-cost/

No mention of energy density though. But it’s implied as the article mentions they’d be good for home batteries, etc.

Intertesting.

On the last point, I think we need to have a bit of a technological split between batteries for different purposes:
portable devices
transportation
fixed installations for household/factory or even grid scale storage

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04983-9

Operating temperature might be a problem. Also, Al metal takes a lot of energy to create – which should be a consideration, too.

Spiny Norman said:

aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable

¿¡¿¿

SCIENCE said:

Spiny Norman said:

aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable

¿¡¿¿

How about “less flammable than some other stuff”?

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

Spiny Norman said:

aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable

¿¡¿¿

How about “less flammable than some other stuff”?

yeah with all these new green energy things can we interest you in a combination of all three, lithium, aluminium, and hydride, see what high power applications you can find for that

party_pants said:

Spiny Norman said:

Battery made of aluminum, sulfur and salt proves fast, safe and low-cost.

Engineers at MIT have developed a new battery design using common materials – aluminum, sulfur and salt. Not only is the battery low-cost, but it’s resistant to fire and failures, and can be charged very fast, which could make it useful for powering a home or charging electric vehicles.

Lithium-ion batteries have dominated the field for the last few decades, thanks to their reliability and high energy density. However, lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive, and the cells can be hazardous, exploding or bursting into flames if damaged or improperly used. Cheaper, safer alternatives are needed, especially as the world transitions towards renewable energy and electric vehicles.

So the MIT team set out to design a new type of battery out of readily available, inexpensive materials. After a search and some trial and error, they settled on aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable, so there’s no risk of fire or explosion.

In tests, the team demonstrated that the new battery cells can withstand hundreds of charge cycles, and charge very quickly – in some experiments, less than a minute. The cells would cost just one sixth of the price of a similar-sized lithium-ion cell.

newatlas.com/energy/aluminum-sulfur-salt-battery-fast-safe-low-cost/

No mention of energy density though. But it’s implied as the article mentions they’d be good for home batteries, etc.

Intertesting.

On the last point, I think we need to have a bit of a technological split between batteries for different purposes:

• portable devices
• transportation
• fixed installations for household/factory or even grid scale storage
  

Excellent point.

At the moment, lithium is best for all three, but for fixed installations that could and probably should change.

As for “lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive”, not sure:

• Currently, “Australia supplies about 60 per cent of the world’s lithium in the form of a mineral concentrate called spodumene”.
• “At a rate of production of 21.3 kt per annum, Australia’s current Ore Reserves of lithium are adequate for 79 years, increasing to 133 years when available EDR of lithium are considered”.
• “According the US Geological Survey (USGS), there are around 80 million tonnes of identified reserves globally as of 2019. That’s up almost 30% compared to a year earlier.”
• “Australia ranks fifth in world lithium reserves, after Bolivia, Argentina, Chile and US”.

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

Spiny Norman said:

Battery made of aluminum, sulfur and salt proves fast, safe and low-cost.

Engineers at MIT have developed a new battery design using common materials – aluminum, sulfur and salt. Not only is the battery low-cost, but it’s resistant to fire and failures, and can be charged very fast, which could make it useful for powering a home or charging electric vehicles.

Lithium-ion batteries have dominated the field for the last few decades, thanks to their reliability and high energy density. However, lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive, and the cells can be hazardous, exploding or bursting into flames if damaged or improperly used. Cheaper, safer alternatives are needed, especially as the world transitions towards renewable energy and electric vehicles.

So the MIT team set out to design a new type of battery out of readily available, inexpensive materials. After a search and some trial and error, they settled on aluminum for one electrode and sulfur for the other, topped off with an electrolyte of molten chloro-aluminate salt. Not only are all of these ingredients cheap and common, but they’re not flammable, so there’s no risk of fire or explosion.

In tests, the team demonstrated that the new battery cells can withstand hundreds of charge cycles, and charge very quickly – in some experiments, less than a minute. The cells would cost just one sixth of the price of a similar-sized lithium-ion cell.

newatlas.com/energy/aluminum-sulfur-salt-battery-fast-safe-low-cost/

No mention of energy density though. But it’s implied as the article mentions they’d be good for home batteries, etc.

Intertesting.

On the last point, I think we need to have a bit of a technological split between batteries for different purposes:

• portable devices
• transportation
• fixed installations for household/factory or even grid scale storage
  

Excellent point.

At the moment, lithium is best for all three, but for fixed installations that could and probably should change.

As for “lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive”, not sure:

• Currently, “Australia supplies about 60 per cent of the world’s lithium in the form of a mineral concentrate called spodumene”.
• “At a rate of production of 21.3 kt per annum, Australia’s current Ore Reserves of lithium are adequate for 79 years, increasing to 133 years when available EDR of lithium are considered”.
• “According the US Geological Survey (USGS), there are around 80 million tonnes of identified reserves globally as of 2019. That’s up almost 30% compared to a year earlier.”
• “Australia ranks fifth in world lithium reserves, after Bolivia, Argentina, Chile and US”.
  

and Lithium isn’t so profitable to recycle.

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

Intertesting.

On the last point, I think we need to have a bit of a technological split between batteries for different purposes:

• portable devices
• transportation
• fixed installations for household/factory or even grid scale storage
  

Excellent point.

At the moment, lithium is best for all three, but for fixed installations that could and probably should change.

As for “lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive”, not sure:

• Currently, “Australia supplies about 60 per cent of the world’s lithium in the form of a mineral concentrate called spodumene”.
• “At a rate of production of 21.3 kt per annum, Australia’s current Ore Reserves of lithium are adequate for 79 years, increasing to 133 years when available EDR of lithium are considered”.
• “According the US Geological Survey (USGS), there are around 80 million tonnes of identified reserves globally as of 2019. That’s up almost 30% compared to a year earlier.”
• “Australia ranks fifth in world lithium reserves, after Bolivia, Argentina, Chile and US”.
  

and Lithium isn’t so profitable to recycle.

Not so profitable as what to recycle?

And why isn’t it?

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

Excellent point.

At the moment, lithium is best for all three, but for fixed installations that could and probably should change.

As for “lithium is becoming scarcer and more expensive”, not sure:

• Currently, “Australia supplies about 60 per cent of the world’s lithium in the form of a mineral concentrate called spodumene”.
• “At a rate of production of 21.3 kt per annum, Australia’s current Ore Reserves of lithium are adequate for 79 years, increasing to 133 years when available EDR of lithium are considered”.
• “According the US Geological Survey (USGS), there are around 80 million tonnes of identified reserves globally as of 2019. That’s up almost 30% compared to a year earlier.”
• “Australia ranks fifth in world lithium reserves, after Bolivia, Argentina, Chile and US”.
  

and Lithium isn’t so profitable to recycle.

Not so profitable as what to recycle?

And why isn’t it?

In Australia, for example, only 2–3% of Li-ion batteries are collected and sent offshore for recycling, according to Naomi J. Boxall, an environmental scientist at Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). The recycling rates in the European Union and the US—less than 5%—aren’t much higher.

“There are many reasons why Li-ion battery recycling is not yet a universally well-established practice,” says Linda L. Gaines of Argonne National Laboratory. A specialist in materials and life-cycle analysis, Gaines says the reasons include technical constraints, economic barriers, logistic issues, and regulatory gaps.

All those issues feed into a classic chicken-and-egg problem. Because the Li-ion battery industry lacks a clear path to large-scale economical recycling, battery researchers and manufacturers have traditionally not focused on improving recyclability. Instead, they have worked to lower costs and increase battery longevity and charge capacity. And because researchers have made only modest progress improving recyclability, relatively few Li-ion batteries end up being recycled.
Most of the batteries that do get recycled undergo a high-temperature melting-and-extraction, or smelting, process similar to ones used in the mining industry. Those operations, which are carried out in large commercial facilities—for example, in Asia, Europe, and Canada—are energy intensive. The plants are also costly to build and operate and require sophisticated equipment to treat harmful emissions generated by the smelting process. And despite the high costs, these plants don’t recover all valuable battery materials.

https://cen.acs.org/materials/energy-storage/time-serious-recycling-lithium/97/i28

Supposedly

.

Global lithium production really has picked up a lot over the last ten years.

With the major manufacturers looking to transition to EV-only, here are some BOTE calcs of what that would require.

There are about 1.4 billion cars in the world. In places such as the USA, NZ, Canada, Australia there are about 0.7 to 0.9 vehicles per person.

Some of the wealthiest places on earth have relatively few cars, because they are so developed that they have universal public transportation systems. Hong Kong has about 0.1 cars per cap, Singapore 0.15, Denmark and Sweden about 0.5. We could conceivably hope that more of the developed world will reduce its car count but it’s hard to be certain about that. One thing that is likely is that car ownership in the Indian subcontinent and in subSaharan Africa will continue their upward trend.

So ballpark let us suppose 1.9 billion cars will be on the roads in the medium term. An ordinary EV needs about 50 kg of lithium. At the moment global production is around 135 million kg per annum. There are 30 million plug in electric vehicles on the road.

So that adds to 93.5 billion kg. This is about four times the current global lithium reserves. No doubt mining can improve and new bodies will be found but still that’s a big ask.

To get there over a 50 year period would require 1.87 billion kg per annum to produced: about 14 times the current level of production.

And that’s assuming we don’t use lithium for anything else: no Tesla walls, no propellents or electronics or anything like that.

So either the per cap car ownership would have to come down (perhaps due to increased public transport or reduced unnecessary travel) or average range expectations for city cars would have to come down so that smaller batts could be used, or some other technology would be used, perhaps air-derived hydrocarbons.

We need a battery chemistry based on sodium. The sea is full of it.

party_pants said:

We need a battery chemistry based on sodium. The sea is full of it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-ion_battery

dv said:

some other technology would be used, perhaps air-derived hydrocarbons.

Like using “excess” renewable generation to synthesise equivalents for existing fuel mixtures¿

party_pants said:

We need a battery chemistry based on sodium. The sea is full of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-ion_battery

Just Wait Until Yous Hear About Solid-State Batteries Then ¡

I know that sodium-ion batteries exist in the development stage, but none are yet have achieved comparably energy density with Lithium-ion batteries. For EV applications this means greater weight and/or lower range. None are yet at the commercial production stage for EVs.

But the long term future for EVs has to be a sodium and iron based chemistry. Those elements are super abundant and cheap compared to Lithium, Cobalt, and what-not.