Breakthroughs for batteries could soon make them better(economist.com) |
Breakthroughs for batteries could soon make them better(economist.com) |
Battery production is now measured in multiple twh of capacity per year. That goes into vehicles of all types with any number and size of wheels, grid storage solutions, and domestic storage. People use them all over the world now. Including some developing economies.
There are many quality attributes you can look at with batteries: cost per kwh, weight per kwh, volume per kwh, charge/discharge rates, longevity in charge cycles, operating temperatures, robustness, chance of flammability (near zero with some cell types), etc. Better is a meaningless qualification unless you express it in those.
And what is best and what is optimal are two things. There's a reason LFP is dominating rather than NMC. It's good enough and a lot cheaper even though it has slightly less energy. For the same reason sodium ion is being put into some cars. It doesn't have the energy density. But it's cheap, operates in arctic and desert temperatures, and they last pretty long.
When it comes to new battery chemistries, it takes time to go from a lab breakthrough to mass production. Sodium ion is now being mass produced. A few years ago there was only low volume production. And before that, the technology was stuck in various stages of the R&D pipeline at various companies. From a lab prototype in a university to an actual proof of concept might take several years. And from there to production many years longer.
With solid state, there are about at least half a dozen technology companies that are moving from test samples to low volume production in the next years. Mostly the technology is proven and validated at this point. But it might still take until at least the end of the decade before we see any mass production. Building big factories costs billions and is super risky. Companies don't do that unless they are certain something will work.
Solid state will have to compete on quality and price. High density solid state in cheap cars is not likely to be a thing for cost reasons. But they might be popular with drone and sports car manufacturers. The press is unfortunately a bit sensationalist on this front and it creates unrealistic expectations.
And hey, can't blame labs for playing the game, but it does produce a lot of noise with little signal for the average reader.
That's absolutely fine and understandable. But then, why do we keep hearing the word "breakthrough" ? I hate this word with all my heart.
Batteries are still not ubiquitous. EVs are still expensive.
The "breaktrough" that would be worth mentioning will be when people can buy an EV and never, ever, ever manage to build a scenario where there is _any_ range anxiety.
Or when everyone has a battery in their garage, that's as inconsequential to buy as a fridge, and can store enough energy for them to go through the winter with 2 months of sunshine.
I know we're far away from that. Fair enough. Godspeed to you if you're working on that, in the lab or in the factory. You or your grandkids will get there.
Just, write the _breakthrough_ article then, please.
Anyway, catchy click bait news lines sell. And breakthroughs are worth reporting on by themselves. Anyway, the economist didn't do a great job here doing their job. They are all over the place mixing things that are basically on the market (sodium ion) or nearly on the market (solid state) with various scientific progress from research labs.
As for the rest of your comment, I don't think accurate information is your problem.
When exactly though? When the price of the "new" breakthrough technology that's been around for decades at that point drops from $101 per kwH to $100 per kwH?
I totally get your frustration but it seems kinda arbitrary to say a new technology isn't a breakthrough until it's ubiquitous.
Just like AI is changing the world before our eyes, this may be just such a technology. Maybe I will come to resent them when they are omnipresent, but a person-transporting drone (EVTOL) flying on a solid state battery would be transformative in connecting people, and I cannot wait to see it happen. The EU has committed 500bn in inter-european railway investment by 2050. Maybe it will be entirely disrupted? Who knows.
You'll need to get your hands on Greenland first.
I've even seen ceramic batteries being tested on YouTube as long as 7 YEARS ago [0], but I still can't actually buy one.
Lithium iron phosphate has quietly gotten price competitive with lead acid and its wildly better tech. Not particularly sexy but its having a real world impact (LFP is commonly used for solar storage among many other uses).
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2026/04/28/catl-secures-worlds-l...
I've been having this issue for years of everyone being so excited about things that I can't actually buy. I don't care! I would love to be excited too, but it's just tiring now.
I wish there were some kind of aggregator for exciting achievements that you can actually buy. I'm tired of all this premature hype!
I agree with you, I'm sick of hearing about the "developments" in batteries, nano materials, and fusion. Need an add blocker for these.
Silly headline. Just say solid state, yet again, the thing that's always been around the corner while lithium ion and sodium just ship ship ship on a massive scale.
If solid state works out, great, but it would no longer be a big breakthrough. Batteries are here and a major grid component today.
https://battery-tech.net/battery-markets-news/gotion-unveils...
What are you going to use them for?
Consumer batteries are already good enough IMO. Cheaper batteries in large quantities are what we need more of.
Any kind of consumer power technology can only ever be truly "good enough" if it never causes any inconvenience or significant cost.
Might not be an issue for long distance connection in sparsely populated countries like the United States, but I don't see it replacing trains in Europe until this is solved.
Rooftop helicopters were banned from Manhattan’s office buildings after a helicopter tipped over and decapitated waiting passengers, and then the blade fell to the street level where it killed another person.
A megawatt. To hover.
That really opened my eyes to the reality: unless we have unlimited, clean and nearly free fusion power, flying cars are not going to be a thing.
In any reasonable setup, hovering would be a rare, rare operation (like 30-60 seconds during takeoff and landing), with most of the time spent in wing-borne forward flight – which'd be _wildly_ lower power usage, more like 200-250kW tops. About ~par with staying in continuous acceleration in an EV. More for sure, but not nearly as insane as what you're pointing to.
... and this is exactly where better batteries would help – being able to hold that power level for longer so you could actually go places in earnest without untenable mass.
I think we are going to see a lot of fragmentation in modes of transport where we have jets going from international airports for long range, small electric planes in small airports for that 50-300km distance low-frequency destinations. And rail only for high-frequency destinations.
In fact I imagine that electric vs jet planes math will get so crazy that it might kill some international hubs that are too far inland, companies will want people off jets into electric propeller planes as fast as possible.
Why? If you have an existing rail network, trains are bound to be cheaper than planes and can get to more places (including convenient centrally-located stations in most major metro areas).
Plus, air travel is generally miserable unless you have a private / chartered plane. Crowds, long lines, security screenings, opaque and abusive pricing models, etc. This is not something we couldn't fix, but over the past 30 years, it's gotten a lot worse, not better; electric planes don't automatically change that. In contrast, rail travel in Europe is almost universally pleasant and hassle-free.
Better batteries do not impact energy usage, only the means of energy delivery.
There is one other issue with flying: it often isn't legal - for good reason - to fly and land where you want to be. For a 300km trip flying to an airport is fine (if there is one close - they are not evenly scattered around), but at 50km you may as well drive the whole way instead of transfer at the airport - unless you live very close to the airport (which you won't because of noise)
For instance, I will never have any desire to risk the air traffic clusterfuck of hundreds of EVTOLs with different computers from different brands with different levels of maintenance trying to land/take-off in a Costco parking lot to grab a rotisserie chicken on their way home from work.
It isn't a technology problem. EVTOL only makes sense where helicopters currently make sense.
A collision is less likely in 3D than in 2D, and obviously the chicken would be delivered to you via drone rather than the inverse.
Generally though I agree with you. Plus it will always use WAY more power than a wheeled vehicle, and have much worse failures.
It's definitely the case for me (and friends of mine), that between reasonably priced batteries, inverters,etc, doing good battery backup for the house (and peak demand shaving/etc, i use a lot of power and take advantage of time of use tariffs) is now less than half the price of a generator.
Most of my friends spent 35-45k on a generator.
I will have spent <20k on batteries + inverters. It would actually be even less, but i have 600amps of split phase for the house, and 150 amps of 480v 3 phase for the shop, so i need two different kinds of inverters.
It is all literally being installed right now.
I would actually go completely off grid, but i live in a historic area and have slate roofs so can't really do solar easily ;)
As for what changed - 12 months ago this setup would have been almost double the price, just because of the availability (or lack thereof) of the right kinds of products necessary to achieve it. I know because i priced it :)
Availability here isn't in terms of stock, but literally in terms of "variety and choice of product".
For example - the availability of UL certified low cost 48v batteries in various sizes has skyrocketed in the past year. Lots of states require UL certification, assuming you are doing this in a permitted/etc way) Additionally, a lot more outdoor batteries are now available (my setup is outdoors but mostly protected).
The availability of choices in higher kVA but still residential grade inverters has also skyrocketed, etc.
As for why the price was doubled - before i would have needed 2x the number of inverters, and you really couldn't get a good 480v inverter except with high volt batteries that are wildly less available and wildly more expensive. On top of that, the batteries you could use that were UL certified and outdoor rated or could easily be done in outdoor enclosures was much lower than it is now.
Honestly curious: why do you need a generator ? And more to the point, why do "most of you friends" need one (35-45k seems like a huge investment, so it would not be some vanity purchase, right ?)
Is that customary where you live, because the grid is unreliable ?
There's a reason all the EVTOL startups show individual vehicles landing in pristine fields, and it's the same reason car advertisements show one car on a closed course instead of I-95 at 3pm on a Friday
Laughs hollowly in German.
https://www.youtube.com/@mechanicalnightmare/videos
We already have fatal car crashes from people who neglect maintenance and don't get their car inspected. Now imagine instead of a 2D plane to cause a wreck, on a road where people are generally alert and paying attention for wrecks, they can fall out of the sky onto kids playing in yards, onto busy roads out of the sun, or just onto each other during the final approach/take-off.
Nope, air travel is only safe because we strictly regulate pilots and maintenance.
And sure you can contrive whatever clean-slate sci-fi setting you want to try and make it make sense, but we aren't going to be ripping up existing infrastructure for it. This isn't Popular Science cover art.
Collisions are more likely if there's hundreds going to/from the same place at the same time, and also they can just fail and fall out of the sky onto dwellings, roads and businesses in ways that cars can't.
Your vision will be killed politically the first time a child playing on their swing-set or shopping with their mother or driving down the road is killed by a poorly maintained EVTOL.