X
I see many "could" in the text, I have been burned by other articles claiming their specific thing will change established practicies for the better, most have failed.
Untill the tech has been proven useful I will remain sceptic
this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
131 points (96.5% liked)
Technology
59733 readers
3299 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's alright, fusion is only ten years away!
The year of the ~~Linux desktop~~ fusion power!
Hey, I thought it was the year of grapheme solving everything.
I think the comparisons against lithium ion are a bit pie in the sky, however they've apparently solved a number of issues that face lead acid batteries, eg dendrite formation and charge cycles (they did 500-700 with a reduction to 80% capacity, whereas lead acid typically can only do about 350 cycles). Zinc is typically much worse than lead acid for dendrites, but their bismuth oxide layer might make it perform better than lead acid.
Even so, I'm skeptical that such a process could be commercialised and compete with lead acid on cost. The way they seem to target their comparisons towards lithium batteries further suggests this.
Maybe there is some niche where lithium is overkill and this could be viable, though, who knows. BESS on the electrical network is massively growing, so there's probably some scope for people to try this there also - especially with regards to fire risk, which some people (particularly planning authorities) are getting nervous about.
The full paper can be found for free here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.202400237. It has smiley faces in the diagrams.
You should quadruple your skeptism if it has anything to do with battery technology.
Finally! Are these ones I can swallow?
Bite into an Aquafina!
Seems like Gatorade, a water based electrolyte, instead of an acid based electrolyte. It’s mostly about less toxic and cheaper which are pluses, but nothing really about how well they work
but nothing really about how well they work
There was a brief mention in the article about how they used a bismuth oxide layer to prevent dendrites from forming, that's novel and cool. However I think the bigger issue is material cost - bismuth costs much more than lead acid.
The full article is freely available here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.202400237
Hey I understood some of those words!
The last time something like this was posted (by a less reputable source admittedly) I was hopeful and defensive. From what I've read since then, essentially, show me the battery.
The managing director of Deakin University’s Battery Research and Innovation Hub, Dr Timothy Khoo, who was not involved in the research, said he was sceptical about any claims water batteries may one day replace lithium-ion, but said the protective layer developed by the RMIT-led team represents a “novel and quite unique” approach that solves “a key stability issue” with battery technology.
Pretty much my thoughts exactly when I read the article. The lead researcher of this project is bigging it up well beyond any rational scope, but they do have a novel invention here for dealing with dendrites in batteries.
Perhaps their technique could be applied to more conventional batteries, though I'm somewhat doubtful. Bismuth isn't exactly cheap, which is why lead acid dominates for most things.