Not the first time a promising technology dies in infancy, or doesn't even get out of the "womb". Back in the late 50s, and early 60s, the Esaki diode (aka tunnel diode) was going to revolutionize electronics, universally. But these damn things called ICs (integrated circuits), went and pissed on their birthday cake. Yes, tunnel diodes still found a use, but only in niche areas. Later, in the late 70s to early 1980s, bubble memory was going to be the big thing. But improved hard drives on the higher capacity side, and solid state non-volatile memories, such as EEROM (not EPROM) and Flash, killed it in small portable applications.
Imagine you have two types of very small, cute monsters: tiny ants and microscopic cats. Tiny Ants: These ants ooze out jumping beans. Microscopic Cats: These cats love to eat jumping beans. Think of a battery as a container split into two halves. One half is filled with these tiny ant monsters (the anode), and the other half is filled with the microscopic cat monsters (the cathode). When there's a path for the jumping beans (electrons) to move from the ant side to the cat side, they will naturally want to flow to the hungry cats. This movement of jumping beans from ants to cats can be harnessed to do work, like turning a mill or turbine. Similarly, in a battery, the movement of electrons from the anode to the cathode through an external circuit powers electronic devices. So, in summary: Ants (Anode) release Jumping Beans (Electrons). Cats (Cathode) eat the Jumping Beans. The movement of these jumping beans can be used to power things, just like the flow of electrons powers electronic devices
Then you should try building some - it's the best way to learn! It can be done with very simple materials - like coins, salt, water, and cardboard... or a lemon and different strips of metal. Have fun and play with all sorts of different materials - it's a great way to learn!
Great Video Ryan! I love the point you make that solid-state isn't the goal, its higher density batteries and lithium anodes... It's fascinating in science and engineering when we develop one type of technology for decades, only to see it surpassed by some new contender no one sees coming.
Thanks Ricky! Exactly, I think this could be a dark horse! CATL have spent more time than anyone on solid state, so I trust them when they take a new direction! 💯
"Never saw it coming" should be the motto of the vehicular battery industry. So much money is flowing into research, that the unexpected should be the expected from now on.
@@praxeological Yes, quite common nowadays, 10 minutes of dribble, 1 minute of information, and don't get me started on the channels that are editing out any gaps when talking so its 10 minutes of continuous words without a pause.
Wow! That is genuinely huge news. 500Wh/Kg! No degradation in five years?? If the price can be made affordable, then this is the first 'game changing' tech, I've seen in a while. Needed two videos. Thanks.
True, there’s actually evidence that a lot scientific breakthroughs are slowing down a so our technical evolution is also slowing down. Good to see something like this ones in a while
Never assume they are simply unable to create such longevity, we are desperately in need of a strategy that supports device permanence and deters planned obsolescence.
Ryan, another good video! I'm 73 years old, studied Physics in college, and have always been interested in renewable energy, non-fossil fuel vehicles, energy storage, and climate change. I am both amazed and thankful for all the research being done to wean us off of fossil fuels to hopefully stop climate change before we hit the unrecoverable tipping point. Keep up the good work!
Energy production - Distribution - But most of all my interests are storage above all. While we wait for fusion or thorium molten salt reactors, a clean simple high performance battery technology would go a long way. I would even claim that it´s more important than fusion reactors.
@@teklife We hit the tipping point in 2015. According to the metrics set up 25 years ago. We have just peaked 427 ppm. And the tipping point is established as 400 ppm. The temperature goes up by 1 Hiroshima bomb per second now. And if we stop the global warm up, we have already baked in so much heat into the system. That temperature will go up until 2075. You will experience the full blunt of climate change in your lifetime-. Not our kids only.
@@urduib that is depressing. i've been living in a country, where, shockingly, the people all over the country seem to be addicted to burning things every day, they burn their trash, they burn all their "yard waste" (rather than composting), they burn green wood and green leaves, they cook with smoky smoky wood fires... the burning, it's not well ventilated, or not ventilated at all really, so the "burning" is just smoky smoldering, and almost all of the vehicles are diesels, and they're obsessed with gigantic SUV and pickup truck things, and most vehicles are old and not well maintained and blow huge clouds of thick smoke out of the tailpipes. everywhere u go there is smoke, day and night. at night u can see the haze from all the smoke in the headlights and streetlights, everything has a halo around it from the insane amounts of smoke. despite the EV revolution, you don't see any such thing there, in fact, they keep on building new gas stations, and there are already so many. and nothing is regulated. this is the philippines, and i imagine there are probably many more places like it around the world, and where i don't see change coming any time soon, if ever, so, sadly, i don't see much hope for OUR future, and the profit hunters are always going to be pushing something "eco" and "green" and "sustainable", and while i'm all for sustainable and green solutions, we're not going to consume our way out of this mess, but that's what our growth models require, and that will lead to our eventual demise even faster. it's like we're driving full speed into a wall, and we see the wall coming at us, and it will wreck us really bad, but we're not stopping, we won't stop, we can't stop.
@@urduib yea, i know we are already experiencing the full brunt of a changing, more extreme climate already, as i'm writing this, we're experiencing a heatwave here in new york, my dad said he's never experienced a summer as hot as this one ever before, this year in Mecca over 1300 people died at the Haj pilgrimage, the last i saw. this is already a big deal, but not every day is a disaster all over the place, so, it's hard to get things to change the way they need to. people in the philippines are not going to give up their smoky dirty diesels no matter how old they are, unless the hyper rich of the world and the big banks create some kind of cash for clunkers program to get those horrible things off the road, and their clean air laws actually get implemented. they need carrot and stick solutions.
Lmfao, I've seen gaurav thakur from india , he was telling about using Capacitor and Battery to create something like hybrid which can charge quickly and will not degrade like battery but Will be able to store energy like it
@@Wolf_D._FuryyThat is probably useful for solar panels charge, which generate some non stable current, a capacitor hybrid will absorb the surge. But not much useful for online power grid.
The only (and important problem ) is still the Lithium supply chain. It is not really abundant, really dirty to mine and to recycle and it is linked with unethical acquisition and exploitation so still we need research in all technologies
UK work shows that lithium can be extracted from Geothermal power wells ..giving a 95% Li Carbonate purity.. and no need for slow expensive toxic stuff at the surface by comparison. The other options center on Na ... Al and Sulpher ... even if they use Li as a component the volume is vastly reduced. There are ways.... plus it's cheaper and easier to recycle old batteries than extract from ores currently.
with this technology, despite using another more part of lithium, will make every kilogram of lithium capable of storing more energy, which means an actual reduction in lithium need. Specially that when you consider that it will enable smaller batteries in cars, the less weight from the battery itself means you can move the car even more for the same amount of energy, which means the battery can be further reduced
Bonjour from France and thank you for an educational video. My EV is only 5 years old and is already way off the pace, such is the rapid pace of battery technology...pouch cells, NMC chemistry, 147 Wh/Kg, 75 kW Max charging speed ...having said that nothing has gone wrong in 103,000 km and no discernible loss of range.
@@gregandark8571 What vehicle dismantling? You mean at the end of its life? That will be the same as ICE cars. Junk Yards will disassemble them and sell the parts. Batteries might be used as stationary storage, or else they'll be recycled, as they contain valuable metals. The rest of the car will be recycled much like an ICE car.
I am disappointed that the video begins with an improper statement regarding electron flow. Electrons flow from the negative terminal of a battery (cathode), through the circuit, and into the positive terminal (anode). To state otherwise diminishes your credibility.
There are two types of theories regarding electron flow. One is electron flow theory and the other is conventional. How this came about is some guy got it wrong a hundread years ago with conventional theory. Then eventually someone figured out that electrons actually is - to +. Unfortunately, by then it was too late and everyone kept using conventional theory. They also didnt want to admit their mistake and the conventional theory carried on where most technicians use conventional flow and engineers use electron flow. Its confusing as hell but thats the story.
I love how you broke down the complexities of battery technology! The future looks bright for EVs with these innovations. Keep up the great work Ziroth!
Electricity is the way to go, like it or not. Ans as electrical engineer, I can tell you those who'll live long enough (for the technology to mature) will love it and never consider going back to thermal.
Solid state would need to begin before it can end. I'm sorry, but I'll believe a battery breakthrough when it's actually commercialized, in production, in products and affordable. I've been reading about these breakthroughs for literal decades, and none have made it to market in any meaningful way, if at all.
Rubbish. A lot of progress has been made up to production levels. Just compare battery specs now and 10 years ago. There is a very steep, continious, performance curve for commenrcially available batteries. No matter what you look at: Energy/mass or energy/$.
The technology is always improving and is always being upgraded, but it is not available to the general public for reasons known only to them. So it is not surprising that they have high-performance batteries that will be available only after 10 years 😅
This is an interesting development and I hope the information the company has provided is accurate, but a couple of points: 1. Another benefit of a solid state electrolyte is that it won't be flammable and almost impossible to put out in case of fire, and that issue remains in the discussed battery even if it should be very stable under standard conditions. 2. If the metals used are still the same rare ones with their large environmental impact, unless they could use this technique to speed up the development of the more appealing alternatives that currently underperform this will also remain an issue. 3. Regarding energy density for large planes as is suggested in the video - jet fuel has an energy density of about 12,000 Wh/kg, so it's still around 24 times as energy dense by mass. Even though theoretical jumbo electric planes would use a completely different type of engine, let's still put it in this perspective: a Boeing 747 is quoted as burning 10 to 11 tons of jet fuel per hour of flight, so a flight from London to NYC at around 8 hours burns more than 80 tons of jet fuel. The plane would not be able to fly using ~2,000 tons of batteries, as that is 12 times as heavy as the empty plane is. Even for much shorter flights I don't see how it is viable in planes built to carry hundreds of passengers, because even if the flight is short enough to require energy that can technically be carried by the engines, maximizing the weight at every short-haul would make short flights _much_ more energy intensive than they ideally should be.
Regarding 1, while this is certainly a benefit it's often overstated. Batteries don't really catch fire that often, and consumers have already decided that it's an acceptable risk with current technology. Not much different from carrying around large amounts of explosive liquid.
@@TLguitar You missed the point the OP was making, which was that the risk of battery fires is exaggerated. As for battery weight concerns, the 500Wh/kg threshold has been determined by industry to be viable for large aircraft demands.
@@PETERJOHN101 I didn't miss it, I simply replied to the more important point he was trying to make. Online statistics do claim ICE cars catch fire much more often, but I need more context. Regarding the "500 kWh threshold", these batteries are 500 Wh/kg, not kWh/kg, and either way I explained their energy density is a far cry from that of jet fuel, so large electric planes need to have engines well over 10 times more energy efficient than jet engines in order for this to make sense.
@@TLguitar Also jet fuel loses weight as you use it up, unlike batteries. I suppose if you're a bad neighbor you can throw dead batteries out of the plane, though. 😉
I've lost count of all the amazing new battery technologies I've heard about in the past several years yet practically none of them have resulted in any commercial products.😕
When you look into this at a deeper level you realize because it's not better in any meaningful way from what currently exists. Because of it was other people also working on it have also likely stumbled upon it, did some rudimentary tests and dismissed it as too expensive, too impractical, or too dangerous vs what you can currently buy. Nobody is going to buy a battery 3x more expensive that delivers 20% more capacity/life. Of course some might, but you could also just buy a 20% bigger battery in the first place. Don't get me wrong various material and dimension tweaking has enabled super fast charging, higher capacity, and lower degradation. But it's more like going from 1x to maybe 1.3-1.5x in 20 years of progress. We're not going from 1.3x to 50x. That ain't happening like it did in the electronics world. It's theoretically possible to hit maybe 7-9x but we don't know how to make those batteries last more than 1 charge if we can get them charged in the first place without falling apart. When that problem is solved (if it can be solved) you'll see week long battery life phones and actually viable EVs happen over night.
Why? wrong studies or just capitalist investors waiting to make x10 profit before allowing a new tech being mass produced ? like they did with microelectronics and the fake Moore Law ! You can make a lot more money selling 20 batteries generations, with people renewing each time and paying to recycle, than going straight to the best technology.
I'm glad to see a video from people involved at a high level with the development of battery technology review the CATL condensed battery technology. With CATL's reputation to deliver what it is promoting and a review from an independent source it gives me confidence that CATL condensed battery at around twice the current energy mass density is a real possibility for the aviation market. The aviation market could have costs ten times what would be viable for the automotive market. It would certainly replace any large batteries used in aviation currently. If all the other criteria for the CATL condensed battery are as good as LFP batteries with more cold tolerant chemistry they would allow a near doubling of BEV range which would make long haul semi travel BEVs viable and able to economically be driven faster than Diesel.
“We won’t get into the other components”. Fail! I have no doubt that if it does work as stated, this will increase energy density a bit. BUT: The main weight in a cell is the cathode. Lithium metal anodes only improve the weight of the anode. They do nothing to the cathode. Also, this new structured gel electrolyte will be heavier than current gelled/polymer electrolytes, and I seriously doubt if it can maintain its structural stability over thousands of charge cycles - side products will inevitably build up and degrade its delicately balanced structure over time. Also, the energy density is nowhere near that required for aircraft. Maybe a city taxi service would work, but that’s it. Just read up on international aircraft regulations regarding emergency fuel loads for long haul flights - we’re still a factor of 10 or more away from making that happen. Ask those PHDs you ‘interviewed’ about these issues, and if they disagree, check where they’re being sponsored from! Lastly, CATL has spent enormous amounts on expansion in recent years, and faces an uncertain future in China due to lacklustre domestic sales, reducing CCP support and flagging volume sales internationally. They’re in a bit of a tight spot. I wonder if this is a ploy to generate investment? After all, they haven’t demonstrated any of this yet - just white paper hype so far. I remain highly suspicious.
While CATL is a well know and reputable company, this is a huge jump in battery tech. There have been countless “industry disrupting breakthroughs” from all sorts of companies, only for them to not be commercially viable. So I’m with you on being skeptical. I’ll believe when “Great Scott” has a cell in his hands.
How so? when China's EV car market is going up in flames. And huge areas of the country has EV cars rotting in them. You can see it online. Batteries going on fire is insane. CATL has also lost money.
@@stefanpredl6849 dry cathode has nothing common with solid state.. its a production technology of ordinary anode/cathode... instead of wet process, which takes too much time/investment/effort they have a patented dry plating of powder material to anode/cathode surfaces..
People acting like CATL is random lab in the basement that managed to write article by luck. Lmao. They don't realize who they discrediting. "Wake me up when it's commercially available." they don't know the only one that has resources to make these batteries commercial is CATL. lol
Inspiring that advances in material science and chemistry keep progressing to allow for better solutions! And it's exciting that problems keep getting solved. Thanks for all the research you do to produce such great videos.
Nice video, but as an electrical engineer, I feel I should point out a couple of minor mistakes. At 2:11 you show a battery consisting of, anode, cathode, and electrolyte -- which is fine -- but you show it connected to another battery, like when jump-starting a car. I think you meant to show the battery in normal operation, so it should've been connected to a load, not another battery. Also, you got the flow of electrons backwards. The negatively charged electrons are attracted to the positive anode, so they come out of the cathode, go through the load, then return to the anode. Conventional current flow is in the opposite direction, from plus to minus.
If we can't fight the dendrites, we can control their growth. It is necessary to create a closed road for each dendrite. When the dendrite grows to another wall, it closes an electrical contact and the electric current through it is turned off. And the electric current begins to flow through another dendrite along another road.
I never understood why the formation of dendrites couldn't be used as a feature rather than bug. These branches create an enormous amount of surface area. Perhaps some day a smart engineer out there can figure out how to use these trees to store vast amount of charge rather than run away from them.
There's an problem, its like making an holes in your house for more entryway. But it degrade the structural integrity of the house. So, your idea would make the battery much faster to degrade.
The breakthrough for air travel would be for structural CATL batteries to be built into the carbon-fibre structure of an aeroplane. Making the gross weight of the aeroplane up to 60% lighter, allowing for a greater range. A more aerodynamic fuselage and a wider wingspan would allow for the final 40% of a flight to be predominantly glide-only with deployable air-resistance to regenerate the batteries.
Very interesting video. I just wonder where all your high frequency audio went. I'm hearing good audio, but with very little high end. Your microphone in particular. What's happening?
FWIW, I noticed the audio mix is really quite bass heavy! and nicely produced by my Teac speakers, but ....voices don't sound like that right? so made it a little harder to listen naturally to... I found myself wishing this PC had any EQ to nerf the bass & boost the mids! also, it's fricken amazing that the honycombishness is on that scale... I scrolled back to see, but the images shown didn't come with a reference although they were individually lettered...
Hi Ryan @ZirothTech, great job on this very exciting development in battery tech. Just one note from someone covering flight applications. I think an important distinction to make about all the references to the ton-scale aircraft test was that it was, in all likelihood, in non-motive roles. In other words, it was tested for systems other than propulsion. It could be avionics, cabin lights, whatever. But it was not to move the aircraft based on what you disclose and my own reading of the CATL website and other sources. To be very clear: These non-motive systems are still very weight sensitive and increasingly electrified so should this technology reach commercial, FAA-approved application, that is a big win. It would be an even bigger win if the above occurs with application as part of the propulsion system. Nothing I've said above precludes that. I just feel that the thumbnail and video content imply incorrectly that the testing and initial application are aimed at heavy aircraft propulsion and that is a very long way away. Candidates for early adoption in propulsion would be Urban Air Mobility (UAM) / Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), flight training (really ideal application), Light Sport Aircraft, etc. Hopefully regional airline and business turboprop-class aircraft would follow soon thereafter.
ALICE is an electric commercial commuter plane in flight tests since 2022. It's expected to enter service in 2027. The 500 KWh threshold has been agreed upon by industry experts to be viable for large aircraft propulsion.
People keep saying that batteries are too heavy for Boeing 747's. But why would you you want to keep flying in Jumbo's? If you can make an electric plane for say 50 passengers that can fly 2000 kilometers, you can fly from Europe to New York with two or three extra stops. It would be like taking a present day coach that offers you a ride of 1500 km's or 1000 miles to your holiday destination. Many people use these coaches, they are the cheapest way of travel.
@@DekkerVinc I don't recall anyone here saying that. They are saying that testing was being done in an existing, licensed to fly aircraft, with known performance characteristics. Which provides a reliable way to measure results. Future aircraft designs, including those intended for low to zero emissions propulsion technologies are emerging all the time. The ALICE is mentioned above, and in my comment I outlined the various roles with potential, including regional airline travel. 🤷🏻♂
@@aerospacenews I am also thinking that ALICE may expand from its 8 passenger prototype to 16 passengers due to advances in battery tech by the time they reach certification. Thanks for your post.
Lithium ion batteries have a larger problem long term. Even if we converted all known global lithium reserves and turned them in to batteries, the total capacity is less than 1% of global energy demands. Unless we discover new (cost effective) sources of lithium an order of magnitude larger than what currently exists, it doesn't make sense to place so much emphasis on Li-based batteries for large scale consumers like transport or infrastructure.
Another great video. Gives you hope that one day soon even the most ardent anti-EV folks will have no leg to stand on when it comes to range and time spent "filling the tank."
@@WolfeSaberEVs after 30k miles are better for the enviroment. On top they also last 100k more miles. With newer models with the newest batteries being suspected of double that. We shall see. (Although EVs aren't as reliable. ) One of the reasons why lithium seems so dirty is look who is mining it. China and Chille don't care about what they dump. So it can easily be cleaner with regulations although that would add some cost. Newer technologies are already being prepped for better mining practices. Especially in the US who keeps finding huge deposits. We have the single largest deposit of lithium in Mount McDermett or whatever. To produce the lithium needed for a 64 kWh battery pack, for example, Fichtner stated that about 3840 liters of water are evaporated according to usual calculation methods. This is roughly comparable to the production of 250 grams of beef, 30 cups of coffee, or half a pair of jeans, according to the researcher. So EVs are much better than ICE. Even if they use cobalt which many try not to these days.
I wouldn't hold my breath. The anti EV crowd does not listen to reason, and make up reasons to not like them. Act like charging at home while you're sleeping to get 350 miles isn't convenient for all but a tiny portion of the population. They won't like them no matter how much better performance they have. They use statistics from 10 years ago, make crap up, or don't understand how much better batteries are getting year in and out. They also don't understand we only produce enough power as necessary. So they say the grid will never be able to handle the 25-30% increase in demand if we switch. Thing is... If there is demand. Supply will come. Capitalism will do its thing. Unless you're Texas, than you'll just suffer with outages. I swear they don't like it since their vehicles don't make toddler noises with "vroom vroom."
@@dianapennepacker6854 As California's power grid is being overloaded thanks to all the EVs. Besides, are electric semi trucks yet? Or something bigger and more powerful than the piece of scrap Cybertruck?
@@WolfeSaber Does it, I think you'd have to site some sources. And Let's not forget that the oil has to be pulled from the ground and gets burned releasing CO2 and other stuff; you can't just pick one of those two ends and ignore the other. That said, annually 23T gallons of seawater goes into desalination plants and leave behind about 14T gallons of brine. Within that brine is about 17000 tons of lithium. If 20-50% of that lithium could be recovered, that is enough to make 400k to 1M 55kWh EV battery packs. So, just from mining the waste we already creating while making drinking water from sea water we can take a decent sized bite out of lithium needs. And I think the expectation is that the amount of water we get from desalination plants is likely going to rise in the future, so that should scale a bit with rising lithium demand. But, maybe you'd say that 5-8k tons of lithium per year isn't anywhere near as much as we need... well, there are already plans to mine the existing ecological disaster, the Salton Sea, which is expected to have about 2.5 million tons deemed recoverable. Enough to make several hundred million 55 kWh batteries. And when the batteries are no longer useful in cars... they are still useful for fixed storage. When they are no longer useful for that, near 100% of the lithium in the pack can be recovered and go into brand new packs.
By definition, the cathode is the negative pole of the battery, irrespective of point of view i.e. charging or discharging. Discharge, the electrons flow out of the cathode battery pole and flow into the cathode pole during charging. Unless science has been redefined now!?
@@peterbrown172 Oh mate, now you’ve stepped in a bit of a rabbit hole! Unfortunately, we defined anode and cathode for an electrochemical cell, like an electroplating bath. It is true that in that case, the cathode is the negative terminal. Unfortunately, chemistry had another definition. They defined the cathode as the electrode where reduction was taking place, and the anode as the one where oxidation was occurring. That meant that strictly speaking, the anode and cathode of a rechargeable cell swap places when charging vs discharging. It’s a total mess. This is why several scientists have proposed dropping the whole anode/cathode thing altogether. They suggest names such as positrode and negatrode instead, where the polarity defines them rather than the oxidation or reduction. Personally, I think it is an excellent idea.
Next Generation Batteries for electric flight is a great way to learn emergency gliding when batteries run out or create spectacular mid-air explosions.
If you make the seperator with a conductive layer and wire it to the appropriate side dendrites do not cause short circuits they act as greater surface area for energy storage and transfer.
I thought that solid state batteries were supposed to be safer than traditional liquid electrolyte batteries. The liquid electrolyte is very inflammable which results in fires if the cell short circuits.
Solid states are supposed to be more stable on paper at least. However it looks like solid state batteries may never reach commercial production. The current batteries marketed as "solid state" aren't really a true solid state battery. It's more of a hybrid design using semi solid materials and gels. The problem with SS batteries is that they can't seem to overcome the internal resistance problems with them. For some reason SS batteries have a wide range of electrical resistance levels even when tightly controlling production variables.
The CATL site says "2024-04-09. On April 9 2024, CATL unveiled TENER, the world's first mass-producible energy storage system with zero degradation in the first five years of use in Beijing, China. Featuring all-round safety, five-year zero degradation and a robust 6.25 MWh capacity, TENER will accelerate large-scale adoption of new energy storage technologies as well as the high-quality advancement of the sector."
Excellent video! However, the first battery diagram has an error. The cathode is negative inside the battery, but positive on top. The reverse is true for the anode. Inside the battery, the cathode is negative, and electrons leave it to neutralize Li+ ions flowing to it, so electrons are pulled down into the outside cathode terminal.
Even if you stop the dendrites, they build up a thick resistive layer on your anode and consume a lot of electrolyte because of their huge surface area. Honestly, I see way too many papers trying to physically block the dendrites and it's just not a good plan. You need to prevent them from forming at all, which is what I believe this cell-membrane thing does. It's like a "water"proof film that lets lithium ions pass but keeps out the electrolyte solvents so they don't react with the metal.
I think that as well as analysing past matches , the channel ought to analyse upcoming matches...i for one would love to see the options for the upcoming Spain game.
Being on a bitter end of state oppression pushing for installing a lithium ore mine and refinement facility in one of the lush countrysides of Serbia, I am interested in supporting technologies which would obsolete the usage of Lithium altogether or at least reduce demand for it, such as Sodium-ion (), or even Hydrogen-ion batteries. Since this invention is mainly in domain of nano-geometric structures, I hope they would bring alternative chemistries into more close competition with Lithium, and beating it down with lower price for marginally lower (or why not even better) performance and much, much better availability.
6:48 skeptical, the "ball" type spheres will (like a filter) collect a lot of ions and show immediate charge time quick but slow down as they ions need to work around those. also it seems a lot of wasted space even though it appears high surface area. maybe the ions shoot through the space, I don't know. I'll wait for it to be "production ready" then see how it works over long periods, seems they are bragging for funding/investments.
it has been tried and failed The company was literally called "Honeycomb Batteries", lost 95% of it's value early this year after years of promises and nothing to show. It has now rebranded itself to Solidion Technology Inc It's another example how overhyping technology leads to financial disaster
Seeing that conventional jets are totally demolishing the entire atmospheric envelope and massively overheating the frigid stratosphere, cool clean electric jets will make a gigantic difference to our weather and air quality. Many companies are working on better batteries, so breakthroughs will come on many fronts. We must get the current jets replaced fast.
@@JensSchraeder A great storm begins with a little breeze. These recent hurricanes are almost certainly made worse by overheating the stratosphere. Someone needs to say that jets are almost certainly completely unsustainable, a climactic catastrophe. Factual knowledge is better than luck.
This is good, we need this tech ASAP! Especially with all the lithium fire we get. I hope this gets rolled out soon, but the cost of it still concerns me.
The energy density of diesel is 12 700 watt hours per kg and of these "fantastic" batteries 500. Thus the energy density of diesel is more than 25 times higher. We will not see any airlines flying battery driven planes. They actually want to fly cargo - not batteries.
@@iota-co7369 This is actually a quite complex question to answer. Firstly, jet propulsion is done with a jet-engine driven by jet fuel (essentially diesel) - a diesel engine is not used. The overall propulsion efficiency of a jet engine may be like 20-40%. This should be compared to a propeller plane driven via a battery and an electric motor. The efficiency of an electric motor is quite high - let say 90% and the propulsion efficiency of a propeller plane might be maybe 70% so the overall efficiency would be about 60%. Thus, an electric airplane might be 1.5 - 3 fold more efficient energy wise but on the other hand, a propeller driven plane can't fly at as high altitude as a jet plane and would be considerably slower and the weight of the batteries would reduce the cargo to be carried tremendously. The bottom line is therefore that electric planes with present batteries can't be economically viable for long distance and bulk transportation. Perhaps electric planes can be use over short distances as a commuter plane for transportation of good paying customers.
Dendrites have NOT been the only focus of solid state. It's the main reason they haven't been adopted, but the solid state idea was to address the major undesirable shortcomings of Lion. Such as pollution in mining, charging time inversely proportional to battery life, intense fires that spread to everything around them and can flare up again weeks later, and as a result of that aforementioned fire hazard, entire cars being junked after accidents or 3-4 years of driving with nobody willing to purchase such vehicles. None of that even begins to touch on battery pricing. Or the insurance pricing. Or the fact that the infrastructure in the US simply won't deal with the power consumption required during peak charging times, regardless of the technology used. So, will CATL address these issues? Introduce new ones? The technology is amazing but like so many potential commercial attempts, will it end up being a great idea on paper? Perhaps limited to stationary backup power supply but not useful in EVs?
Not even sure what the game is anymore there’s been so many game changers. Solid state batteries are barely out of the laboratory and still unproven to do anything but provide TH-cam content. Is that the game?
Nothing changes? The cost per kWh of Lithium batteries has fallen to 18% of what it was 10 years ago, and during the same period, the energy density has doubled. This is down to thousands of breakthroughs.
I think he means a new battery chemistry. Weve received a lot of accumulative improvements on Li-Ion but no new breakthrough batteries we kept hearing about@JonS
@@JonGZBOS Exactly! So many claims, yet nothing really new. Same thing on internal combustion engines. "Revolutionary new designs" never heard from again. Liquid piston leaps to mind.
@@JonGZBOS there are already cars with Sodium batteries, and redox flow batteries are being used in some installations. Of course not everything comes to fruition and materials science and manufacturing can take years to perfect. Hardware is hard, and new processes are even harder. Hell! Even raising funding is slow. People expect everything to be like new apps with short development cycles.
If true, huge, but we are talking about a chinese company with close ties to the chinese government and we are talking of unverified claims of a grandiose already flying battery powered passenger airliner that no one has ever seen. I remain sceptical until third parties can verify any of these claims.
I'm not going to dismiss CATL just because they're a Chinese company. I look at their performance, and it has been good. They are clearly a quality company doing amazing work.
We will completely solve the energy problem when large capacitors can hold their storage charge as long as batteries. I have seen things are looking up with some new developments in this area.
Without extensive distributed grid storage and power generation expansion, the grid is not ready, anywhere, for 2x capacity car batteries that charge significantly faster.
Great video! I continue to learn more about batteries as I read more articles like this. I never was a fan of the solid state battery. And watch out for an investment in QS as they do seem to be a victim of the introduction of the solid state battery moving away from them as each year progresses. I wonder what your analysis of GMG's Aluminum Graphene battery is. They make great claims. Richard Mastromatteo
As enthusiastic as i am for new WORKING batteries without the downside of Li-Ion batteries, this might mean resurgence of the EV madness. But the point that we produce so much "green" energy is far away. Solar and wind are way more polluting than ppl think as the EOL recycling is never mentioned. And that goes for the most polluting part of the EV, battery too. It costs as much energy to disassemble a battery as it is to make it. The batteries, if affordable, can be used in home systems and make energy greener. The "greenest" energy form is nuclear AND the safest with the least deaths per kW of all energy sources.
Interesting idea, been reading reports from Sinonus (not involved) but they are making battery using carbon fibre as the negative and postive anode with a glass fiber separator so the strength of the unit and weight is so much better than any other design. Ok the Wh/kg for the time being is low but if the structure of unit, say plane is part to the battery then size of battery can be bigger with out costing weight as the battery itself is structural.
even if it makes it obsolete, everything can be still used. and might be easier to use or manufacture or some other factory. one of the points of solid batteries is that they are solid and not electrolytic like capacitors. ie no liquid related problems. lithium does not matter, it can be anything else.
Excellent video, however you have one important thing wrong (I believe). Electricity does not travel from PLUS to MINUS, but the opposite direction! The CATHODE is Negative and the ANODE positive, and electrons being NEGATIVE, travel from the CATHODE to ANODE (minus to plus).
I wish people would stop reporting on breakthroughs and focus on getting them commercially available. Tired of hearing about crazy cool stuff that'll never be made available to buy. Solid state batteries never made it out the gate. What are the chances this will?
Hate lithium mainly because it's mining and processing hindrances. Sodium would be a better option because it's an abundant element and could be a byproduct of water desalination, if electrolytic process is used. Steam refining would still be needed but greenhouse evaporative pools shows promise🎉
No matter how much we research, no matter what we do, biomimetic is always the best technically, nature, God, is really perfect. Nature designing skills are so well developed that we still try to copy it
Finally some real world, non lab only, non vapor ware progress. But it sounds like it will still take quite a while to trickle down to the average consumer. And unfortunately, we don't have very long as the earth's magnetic field strength continues to weaken at an ever faster and faster rate as time goes by.
At the rate these new battery videos come out, we'll have the final battery in a few years. Immune to cold, 10 million discharges, zero self discharge, 1,000x energy density... and still nobody will make it and sell it. It won't be in your phone or your car. We'll still be on lithium ion.
I'll never buy a full EV until the battery tech has matured. I have hope this is a breakthrough. But I'll believe it when it's mass produced and in hundreds of thousands of autos.
Solid states are supposed to do a lot more than that, they are supposed to be more reliable, more powerful, a lot safer if you look at grapheme ones and so much more. The point of solid state isn’t to use lithium metal anodes, it’s to create a battery that solves all current battery problems including thermal runaway. What this guy is talking about is a hybrid solid state not a solid state. There is a difference.
Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code Ziroth for an extra 4 months free at surfshark.deals/ziroth
China has sold snake oil in the past
TDK has a new super solid state battery in japan
pin the comment below this
Surfshark is as dodgy AF. A quick google search demonstrates this.
But hey, YT creators need to make a buck.
Video starts at 5:20
>The End of Solid State
the Solid State hasn't' even begun.
My thoughts as well
There is Taiwanese company already manufacturing its solid state battery, and building another factory in France.
I read the news about 3 months ago.
Not the first time a promising technology dies in infancy, or doesn't even get out of the "womb". Back in the late 50s, and early 60s, the Esaki diode (aka tunnel diode) was going to revolutionize electronics, universally. But these damn things called ICs (integrated circuits), went and pissed on their birthday cake. Yes, tunnel diodes still found a use, but only in niche areas. Later, in the late 70s to early 1980s, bubble memory was going to be the big thing. But improved hard drives on the higher capacity side, and solid state non-volatile memories, such as EEROM (not EPROM) and Flash, killed it in small portable applications.
Solid state batteries are already in several commercial applications. Even electric buses.
End before the beginning
That's how efficient they are
No matter how many times I learn how batteries work, I still don't fully understand it lol.
Power goes in, some of it is stored, the other portion is "lost" as heat/other. Then you can draw from the power that was successfully stored.
Imagine you have two types of very small, cute monsters: tiny ants and microscopic cats.
Tiny Ants: These ants ooze out jumping beans.
Microscopic Cats: These cats love to eat jumping beans.
Think of a battery as a container split into two halves. One half is filled with these tiny ant monsters (the anode), and the other half is filled with the microscopic cat monsters (the cathode).
When there's a path for the jumping beans (electrons) to move from the ant side to the cat side, they will naturally want to flow to the hungry cats.
This movement of jumping beans from ants to cats can be harnessed to do work, like turning a mill or turbine. Similarly, in a battery, the movement of electrons from the anode to the cathode through an external circuit powers electronic devices.
So, in summary:
Ants (Anode) release Jumping Beans (Electrons).
Cats (Cathode) eat the Jumping Beans.
The movement of these jumping beans can be used to power things, just like the flow of electrons powers electronic devices
Then you should try building some - it's the best way to learn! It can be done with very simple materials - like coins, salt, water, and cardboard... or a lemon and different strips of metal. Have fun and play with all sorts of different materials - it's a great way to learn!
just pay attention to class lmao
it's not that hard to understand unless all u do is watch science videos for info
A chemical reaction occurs in the enclosed battery producing useable DC power.
Great Video Ryan! I love the point you make that solid-state isn't the goal, its higher density batteries and lithium anodes... It's fascinating in science and engineering when we develop one type of technology for decades, only to see it surpassed by some new contender no one sees coming.
Thanks Ricky! Exactly, I think this could be a dark horse! CATL have spent more time than anyone on solid state, so I trust them when they take a new direction! 💯
"Never saw it coming" should be the motto of the vehicular battery industry. So much money is flowing into research, that the unexpected should be the expected from now on.
@@ZirothTech I think he goes by "The Ricker" ;)
there are now nanoionic wood batteries that can recharge from water vapor in the air. also tdk of Japan new super batteries
thot the goal was safety lol
Skip to 5:27 for actual battery info
There was a lot of fluff and filler before getting to the real info.
Thank you
@@praxeological Yes, quite common nowadays, 10 minutes of dribble, 1 minute of information, and don't get me started on the channels that are editing out any gaps when talking so its 10 minutes of continuous words without a pause.
Don't you mean "hyperbole"?
@@pompeymonkey3271
Potato patato…..
Wow! That is genuinely huge news. 500Wh/Kg! No degradation in five years?? If the price can be made affordable, then this is the first 'game changing' tech, I've seen in a while. Needed two videos. Thanks.
True, there’s actually evidence that a lot scientific breakthroughs are slowing down a so our technical evolution is also slowing down. Good to see something like this ones in a while
Never assume they are simply unable to create such longevity, we are desperately in need of a strategy that supports device permanence and deters planned obsolescence.
Material cost is lower. Only time for affordable long lasting batteries. I hope they can have EV batteries replacements for the current cars.
They should be cheaper than lithium batteries
Ryan, another good video! I'm 73 years old, studied Physics in college, and have always been interested in renewable energy, non-fossil fuel vehicles, energy storage, and climate change. I am both amazed and thankful for all the research being done to wean us off of fossil fuels to hopefully stop climate change before we hit the unrecoverable tipping point. Keep up the good work!
Energy production - Distribution - But most of all my interests are storage above all. While we wait for fusion or thorium molten salt reactors, a clean simple high performance battery technology would go a long way. I would even claim that it´s more important than fusion reactors.
Pretty sure we're not going to be able to not hit the tipping point you and I might not see it but our kids will
@@teklife We hit the tipping point in 2015. According to the metrics set up 25 years ago. We have just peaked 427 ppm. And the tipping point is established as 400 ppm. The temperature goes up by 1 Hiroshima bomb per second now. And if we stop the global warm up, we have already baked in so much heat into the system. That temperature will go up until 2075. You will experience the full blunt of climate change in your lifetime-. Not our kids only.
@@urduib that is depressing. i've been living in a country, where, shockingly, the people all over the country seem to be addicted to burning things every day, they burn their trash, they burn all their "yard waste" (rather than composting), they burn green wood and green leaves, they cook with smoky smoky wood fires...
the burning, it's not well ventilated, or not ventilated at all really, so the "burning" is just smoky smoldering, and almost all of the vehicles are diesels, and they're obsessed with gigantic SUV and pickup truck things, and most vehicles are old and not well maintained and blow huge clouds of thick smoke out of the tailpipes.
everywhere u go there is smoke, day and night. at night u can see the haze from all the smoke in the headlights and streetlights, everything has a halo around it from the insane amounts of smoke.
despite the EV revolution, you don't see any such thing there, in fact, they keep on building new gas stations, and there are already so many. and nothing is regulated.
this is the philippines, and i imagine there are probably many more places like it around the world, and where i don't see change coming any time soon, if ever, so, sadly, i don't see much hope for OUR future, and the profit hunters are always going to be pushing something "eco" and "green" and "sustainable", and while i'm all for sustainable and green solutions, we're not going to consume our way out of this mess, but that's what our growth models require, and that will lead to our eventual demise even faster.
it's like we're driving full speed into a wall, and we see the wall coming at us, and it will wreck us really bad, but we're not stopping, we won't stop, we can't stop.
@@urduib yea, i know we are already experiencing the full brunt of a changing, more extreme climate already, as i'm writing this, we're experiencing a heatwave here in new york, my dad said he's never experienced a summer as hot as this one ever before, this year in Mecca over 1300 people died at the Haj pilgrimage, the last i saw. this is already a big deal, but not every day is a disaster all over the place, so, it's hard to get things to change the way they need to. people in the philippines are not going to give up their smoky dirty diesels no matter how old they are, unless the hyper rich of the world and the big banks create some kind of cash for clunkers program to get those horrible things off the road, and their clean air laws actually get implemented. they need carrot and stick solutions.
Video 4 weeks ago: *_"Solid state batteries coming sooner that we think."_*
This video: *_"The end of solid state batteries."_*
Lmfao, I've seen gaurav thakur from india , he was telling about using Capacitor and Battery to create something like hybrid which can charge quickly and will not degrade like battery but Will be able to store energy like it
@@Wolf_D._Furyy same bro and I was even believing it but we just need to wait what happens
@@Wolf_D._FuryyThat is probably useful for solar panels charge, which generate some non stable current, a capacitor hybrid will absorb the surge. But not much useful for online power grid.
@@Wolf_D._Furyy believing an indian was your first mistake
The only (and important problem ) is still the Lithium supply chain. It is not really abundant, really dirty to mine and to recycle and it is linked with unethical acquisition and exploitation so still we need research in all technologies
UK work shows that lithium can be extracted from Geothermal power wells ..giving a 95% Li Carbonate purity.. and no need for slow expensive toxic stuff at the surface by comparison.
The other options center on Na ... Al and Sulpher ... even if they use Li as a component the volume is vastly reduced.
There are ways.... plus it's cheaper and easier to recycle old batteries than extract from ores currently.
with this technology, despite using another more part of lithium, will make every kilogram of lithium capable of storing more energy, which means an actual reduction in lithium need. Specially that when you consider that it will enable smaller batteries in cars, the less weight from the battery itself means you can move the car even more for the same amount of energy, which means the battery can be further reduced
They're moving to cheap and unlimited sodium ion starting with energy storage
Its definitely cheaper than most metals
Lithium is fairly abundant. You probably mean cobalt or nickel.
Bonjour from France and thank you for an educational video. My EV is only 5 years old and is already way off the pace, such is the rapid pace of battery technology...pouch cells, NMC chemistry, 147 Wh/Kg, 75 kW Max charging speed ...having said that nothing has gone wrong in 103,000 km and no discernible loss of range.
Ok good, but than - Who will pay for your vehicle dismantling ????
The government or you - from your pocket?
@@gregandark8571 What vehicle dismantling? You mean at the end of its life? That will be the same as ICE cars. Junk Yards will disassemble them and sell the parts. Batteries might be used as stationary storage, or else they'll be recycled, as they contain valuable metals. The rest of the car will be recycled much like an ICE car.
@@gregandark8571a new record has been set for the depths that people will go to try to shit on the future
@@gregandark8571 Schooled!
My French 10 years car... is 79000km... and the 89cv engine is like a new.
I am disappointed that the video begins with an improper statement regarding electron flow. Electrons flow from the negative terminal of a battery (cathode), through the circuit, and into the positive terminal (anode). To state otherwise diminishes your credibility.
I was looking at that and wondering…I had always known it to be the other way around.
Thank you for pointing that out.
There are two types of theories regarding electron flow.
One is electron flow theory and the other is conventional.
How this came about is some guy got it wrong a hundread years ago with conventional theory. Then eventually someone figured out that electrons actually is - to +.
Unfortunately, by then it was too late and everyone kept using conventional theory. They also didnt want to admit their mistake and the conventional theory carried on where most technicians use conventional flow and engineers use electron flow.
Its confusing as hell but thats the story.
@@Emphasis213 EE here. This is the correct answer. The video isn't "wrong", just using the conventional explanation.
I love how you broke down the complexities of battery technology! The future looks bright for EVs with these innovations. Keep up the great work Ziroth!
Electricity is the way to go, like it or not. Ans as electrical engineer, I can tell you those who'll live long enough (for the technology to mature) will love it and never consider going back to thermal.
Solid state would need to begin before it can end. I'm sorry, but I'll believe a battery breakthrough when it's actually commercialized, in production, in products and affordable. I've been reading about these breakthroughs for literal decades, and none have made it to market in any meaningful way, if at all.
Rubbish. A lot of progress has been made up to production levels. Just compare battery specs now and 10 years ago. There is a very steep, continious, performance curve for commenrcially available batteries. No matter what you look at: Energy/mass or energy/$.
The technology is always improving and is always being upgraded, but it is not available to the general public for reasons known only to them. So it is not surprising that they have high-performance batteries that will be available only after 10 years 😅
@@bestofalllifewhat do you mean? I bought LFP cells direct from China to build my own 6.7kWh battery for our motorhome.
Can't go a single day anymore without at least 1 astonishing breakthrough.
China started battery development decades ago now they are ahead India just started the same so in next 5 years will see amazing results 😊
This is an interesting development and I hope the information the company has provided is accurate, but a couple of points:
1. Another benefit of a solid state electrolyte is that it won't be flammable and almost impossible to put out in case of fire, and that issue remains in the discussed battery even if it should be very stable under standard conditions.
2. If the metals used are still the same rare ones with their large environmental impact, unless they could use this technique to speed up the development of the more appealing alternatives that currently underperform this will also remain an issue.
3. Regarding energy density for large planes as is suggested in the video - jet fuel has an energy density of about 12,000 Wh/kg, so it's still around 24 times as energy dense by mass. Even though theoretical jumbo electric planes would use a completely different type of engine, let's still put it in this perspective: a Boeing 747 is quoted as burning 10 to 11 tons of jet fuel per hour of flight, so a flight from London to NYC at around 8 hours burns more than 80 tons of jet fuel. The plane would not be able to fly using ~2,000 tons of batteries, as that is 12 times as heavy as the empty plane is. Even for much shorter flights I don't see how it is viable in planes built to carry hundreds of passengers, because even if the flight is short enough to require energy that can technically be carried by the engines, maximizing the weight at every short-haul would make short flights _much_ more energy intensive than they ideally should be.
Regarding 1, while this is certainly a benefit it's often overstated. Batteries don't really catch fire that often, and consumers have already decided that it's an acceptable risk with current technology. Not much different from carrying around large amounts of explosive liquid.
@@Rhaegar19 There aren't any real alternatives on the market right now. The consumers take what is dawned on them.
@@TLguitar
You missed the point the OP was making, which was that the risk of battery fires is exaggerated. As for battery weight concerns, the 500Wh/kg threshold has been determined by industry to be viable for large aircraft demands.
@@PETERJOHN101 I didn't miss it, I simply replied to the more important point he was trying to make. Online statistics do claim ICE cars catch fire much more often, but I need more context.
Regarding the "500 kWh threshold", these batteries are 500 Wh/kg, not kWh/kg, and either way I explained their energy density is a far cry from that of jet fuel, so large electric planes need to have engines well over 10 times more energy efficient than jet engines in order for this to make sense.
@@TLguitar Also jet fuel loses weight as you use it up, unlike batteries.
I suppose if you're a bad neighbor you can throw dead batteries out of the plane, though. 😉
I certainly appreciate the clarity of your presentations.
I've lost count of all the amazing new battery technologies I've heard about in the past several years yet practically none of them have resulted in any commercial products.😕
Like this one, presumably.
When you look into this at a deeper level you realize because it's not better in any meaningful way from what currently exists. Because of it was other people also working on it have also likely stumbled upon it, did some rudimentary tests and dismissed it as too expensive, too impractical, or too dangerous vs what you can currently buy. Nobody is going to buy a battery 3x more expensive that delivers 20% more capacity/life. Of course some might, but you could also just buy a 20% bigger battery in the first place.
Don't get me wrong various material and dimension tweaking has enabled super fast charging, higher capacity, and lower degradation. But it's more like going from 1x to maybe 1.3-1.5x in 20 years of progress. We're not going from 1.3x to 50x. That ain't happening like it did in the electronics world. It's theoretically possible to hit maybe 7-9x but we don't know how to make those batteries last more than 1 charge if we can get them charged in the first place without falling apart. When that problem is solved (if it can be solved) you'll see week long battery life phones and actually viable EVs happen over night.
Why? wrong studies or just capitalist investors waiting to make x10 profit before allowing a new tech being mass produced ? like they did with microelectronics and the fake Moore Law !
You can make a lot more money selling 20 batteries generations, with people renewing each time and paying to recycle, than going straight to the best technology.
Like the nuclear Dimond battery that uses nuclear waste to make a battery that lasts over 1000 years.
@@Colorado-Coyote with little power
I'm glad to see a video from people involved at a high level with the development of battery technology review the CATL condensed battery technology. With CATL's reputation to deliver what it is promoting and a review from an independent source it gives me confidence that CATL condensed battery at around twice the current energy mass density is a real possibility for the aviation market. The aviation market could have costs ten times what would be viable for the automotive market. It would certainly replace any large batteries used in aviation currently. If all the other criteria for the CATL condensed battery are as good as LFP batteries with more cold tolerant chemistry they would allow a near doubling of BEV range which would make long haul semi travel BEVs viable and able to economically be driven faster than Diesel.
“We won’t get into the other components”. Fail!
I have no doubt that if it does work as stated, this will increase energy density a bit. BUT:
The main weight in a cell is the cathode. Lithium metal anodes only improve the weight of the anode. They do nothing to the cathode. Also, this new structured gel electrolyte will be heavier than current gelled/polymer electrolytes, and I seriously doubt if it can maintain its structural stability over thousands of charge cycles - side products will inevitably build up and degrade its delicately balanced structure over time.
Also, the energy density is nowhere near that required for aircraft. Maybe a city taxi service would work, but that’s it.
Just read up on international aircraft regulations regarding emergency fuel loads for long haul flights - we’re still a factor of 10 or more away from making that happen. Ask those PHDs you ‘interviewed’ about these issues, and if they disagree, check where they’re being sponsored from!
Lastly, CATL has spent enormous amounts on expansion in recent years, and faces an uncertain future in China due to lacklustre domestic sales, reducing CCP support and flagging volume sales internationally. They’re in a bit of a tight spot. I wonder if this is a ploy to generate investment? After all, they haven’t demonstrated any of this yet - just white paper hype so far. I remain highly suspicious.
While CATL is a well know and reputable company, this is a huge jump in battery tech. There have been countless “industry disrupting breakthroughs” from all sorts of companies, only for them to not be commercially viable. So I’m with you on being skeptical.
I’ll believe when “Great Scott” has a cell in his hands.
Solid state was vaporware... it couldn't even get out of lab... CATL is a true innovative company... Kudos for them....
If i did understand it right tesla uses already dry catode and a gel sort of on the other side of the battery
How so? when China's EV car market is going up in flames. And huge areas of the country has EV cars rotting in them. You can see it online. Batteries going on fire is insane. CATL has also lost money.
Search China EV junkyard.
I doubt it.
@@stefanpredl6849 dry cathode has nothing common with solid state.. its a production technology of ordinary anode/cathode... instead of wet process, which takes too much time/investment/effort they have a patented dry plating of powder material to anode/cathode surfaces..
People acting like CATL is random lab in the basement that managed to write article by luck. Lmao. They don't realize who they discrediting. "Wake me up when it's commercially available." they don't know the only one that has resources to make these batteries commercial is CATL. lol
ALL ORIGINAL CURRENT TECH CAME FROM LG AND SAMSUNG SDI... KOREANS JUST DO. CHINESE COPY AND TOUT.... WAIT FOR KOREANS TO PERFECT IT. AS ALWAYS
@@michaelr7670 Now go search the number of battery innovation patent register number while crying in your ignorance. google it. lmao.
@@michaelr7670 the fact that it triggered your sorry ass is funny. can't get enough of your breed crying about china.
Inspiring that advances in material science and chemistry keep progressing to allow for better solutions! And it's exciting that problems keep getting solved. Thanks for all the research you do to produce such great videos.
Nice video, but as an electrical engineer, I feel I should point out a couple of minor mistakes. At 2:11 you show a battery consisting of, anode, cathode, and electrolyte -- which is fine -- but you show it connected to another battery, like when jump-starting a car. I think you meant to show the battery in normal operation, so it should've been connected to a load, not another battery.
Also, you got the flow of electrons backwards. The negatively charged electrons are attracted to the positive anode, so they come out of the cathode, go through the load, then return to the anode. Conventional current flow is in the opposite direction, from plus to minus.
If we can't fight the dendrites, we can control their growth. It is necessary to create a closed road for each dendrite. When the dendrite grows to another wall, it closes an electrical contact and the electric current through it is turned off. And the electric current begins to flow through another dendrite along another road.
Thanks for creating and sharing this informative video. Great job. Keep it up.
I never understood why the formation of dendrites couldn't be used as a feature rather than bug. These branches create an enormous amount of surface area. Perhaps some day a smart engineer out there can figure out how to use these trees to store vast amount of charge rather than run away from them.
There's an problem, its like making an holes in your house for more entryway. But it degrade the structural integrity of the house. So, your idea would make the battery much faster to degrade.
🤡
So the Apter could have a 2000 mile range with this?? Sign me up!
The breakthrough for air travel would be for structural CATL batteries to be built into the carbon-fibre structure of an aeroplane. Making the gross weight of the aeroplane up to 60% lighter, allowing for a greater range. A more aerodynamic fuselage and a wider wingspan would allow for the final 40% of a flight to be predominantly glide-only with deployable air-resistance to regenerate the batteries.
Flying wings are amazing and under utilized as airports are not designed or retrofited to use them.
Very interesting video. I just wonder where all your high frequency audio went. I'm hearing good audio, but with very little high end. Your microphone in particular. What's happening?
Yes it sounds like an Ai
FWIW, I noticed the audio mix is really quite bass heavy! and nicely produced by my Teac speakers, but ....voices don't sound like that right? so made it a little harder to listen naturally to... I found myself wishing this PC had any EQ to nerf the bass & boost the mids!
also, it's fricken amazing that the honycombishness is on that scale... I scrolled back to see, but the images shown didn't come with a reference although they were individually lettered...
start to watch video from 5:30 at least
-Has science channel
-Keeps saying Tezla instead of Tesla
The track you could barely hear was Francis Wells: "April Will Be Cold".
It's a nice track and you can grab it from Epidemic Sound.
Hi Ryan @ZirothTech, great job on this very exciting development in battery tech. Just one note from someone covering flight applications. I think an important distinction to make about all the references to the ton-scale aircraft test was that it was, in all likelihood, in non-motive roles. In other words, it was tested for systems other than propulsion. It could be avionics, cabin lights, whatever. But it was not to move the aircraft based on what you disclose and my own reading of the CATL website and other sources.
To be very clear: These non-motive systems are still very weight sensitive and increasingly electrified so should this technology reach commercial, FAA-approved application, that is a big win.
It would be an even bigger win if the above occurs with application as part of the propulsion system. Nothing I've said above precludes that. I just feel that the thumbnail and video content imply incorrectly that the testing and initial application are aimed at heavy aircraft propulsion and that is a very long way away.
Candidates for early adoption in propulsion would be Urban Air Mobility (UAM) / Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), flight training (really ideal application), Light Sport Aircraft, etc. Hopefully regional airline and business turboprop-class aircraft would follow soon thereafter.
ALICE is an electric commercial commuter plane in flight tests since 2022. It's expected to enter service in 2027. The 500 KWh threshold has been agreed upon by industry experts to be viable for large aircraft propulsion.
People keep saying that batteries are too heavy for Boeing 747's. But why would you you want to keep flying in Jumbo's? If you can make an electric plane for say 50 passengers that can fly 2000 kilometers, you can fly from Europe to New York with two or three extra stops. It would be like taking a present day coach that offers you a ride of 1500 km's or 1000 miles to your holiday destination. Many people use these coaches, they are the cheapest way of travel.
@@PETERJOHN101 Yes, as I said I cover the topic. I produced an article and video about the ALICE effort in October 2022.
@@DekkerVinc I don't recall anyone here saying that. They are saying that testing was being done in an existing, licensed to fly aircraft, with known performance characteristics. Which provides a reliable way to measure results. Future aircraft designs, including those intended for low to zero emissions propulsion technologies are emerging all the time. The ALICE is mentioned above, and in my comment I outlined the various roles with potential, including regional airline travel. 🤷🏻♂
@@aerospacenews
I am also thinking that ALICE may expand from its 8 passenger prototype to 16 passengers due to advances in battery tech by the time they reach certification. Thanks for your post.
Lithium ion batteries have a larger problem long term. Even if we converted all known global lithium reserves and turned them in to batteries, the total capacity is less than 1% of global energy demands. Unless we discover new (cost effective) sources of lithium an order of magnitude larger than what currently exists, it doesn't make sense to place so much emphasis on Li-based batteries for large scale consumers like transport or infrastructure.
Fine. Use sodium then.
Another great video. Gives you hope that one day soon even the most ardent anti-EV folks will have no leg to stand on when it comes to range and time spent "filling the tank."
Just hope it isn't lithium, as mining for it destroys the environment more than internal combustion engines.
@@WolfeSaberEVs after 30k miles are better for the enviroment. On top they also last 100k more miles. With newer models with the newest batteries being suspected of double that. We shall see. (Although EVs aren't as reliable. )
One of the reasons why lithium seems so dirty is look who is mining it. China and Chille don't care about what they dump. So it can easily be cleaner with regulations although that would add some cost.
Newer technologies are already being prepped for better mining practices. Especially in the US who keeps finding huge deposits. We have the single largest deposit of lithium in Mount McDermett or whatever.
To produce the lithium needed for a 64 kWh battery pack, for example, Fichtner stated that about 3840 liters of water are evaporated according to usual calculation methods. This is roughly comparable to the production of 250 grams of beef, 30 cups of coffee, or half a pair of jeans, according to the researcher.
So EVs are much better than ICE. Even if they use cobalt which many try not to these days.
I wouldn't hold my breath. The anti EV crowd does not listen to reason, and make up reasons to not like them.
Act like charging at home while you're sleeping to get 350 miles isn't convenient for all but a tiny portion of the population.
They won't like them no matter how much better performance they have.
They use statistics from 10 years ago, make crap up, or don't understand how much better batteries are getting year in and out.
They also don't understand we only produce enough power as necessary. So they say the grid will never be able to handle the 25-30% increase in demand if we switch.
Thing is... If there is demand. Supply will come. Capitalism will do its thing. Unless you're Texas, than you'll just suffer with outages.
I swear they don't like it since their vehicles don't make toddler noises with "vroom vroom."
@@dianapennepacker6854 As California's power grid is being overloaded thanks to all the EVs. Besides, are electric semi trucks yet? Or something bigger and more powerful than the piece of scrap Cybertruck?
@@WolfeSaber Does it, I think you'd have to site some sources. And Let's not forget that the oil has to be pulled from the ground and gets burned releasing CO2 and other stuff; you can't just pick one of those two ends and ignore the other.
That said, annually 23T gallons of seawater goes into desalination plants and leave behind about 14T gallons of brine. Within that brine is about 17000 tons of lithium.
If 20-50% of that lithium could be recovered, that is enough to make 400k to 1M 55kWh EV battery packs.
So, just from mining the waste we already creating while making drinking water from sea water we can take a decent sized bite out of lithium needs. And I think the expectation is that the amount of water we get from desalination plants is likely going to rise in the future, so that should scale a bit with rising lithium demand.
But, maybe you'd say that 5-8k tons of lithium per year isn't anywhere near as much as we need... well, there are already plans to mine the existing ecological disaster, the Salton Sea, which is expected to have about 2.5 million tons deemed recoverable. Enough to make several hundred million 55 kWh batteries.
And when the batteries are no longer useful in cars... they are still useful for fixed storage. When they are no longer useful for that, near 100% of the lithium in the pack can be recovered and go into brand new packs.
Current flows from positive to negative and electron flows from negative to positive. At least it did when I was at school.
It is true (for electron) outside of the battery.
Yep. During discharge, that’s correct. The opposite is true when charging. What’s your point?
Yep for me too,……!
By definition, the cathode is the negative pole of the battery, irrespective of point of view i.e. charging or discharging. Discharge, the electrons flow out of the cathode battery pole and flow into the cathode pole during charging. Unless science has been redefined now!?
@@peterbrown172 Oh mate, now you’ve stepped in a bit of a rabbit hole! Unfortunately, we defined anode and cathode for an electrochemical cell, like an electroplating bath. It is true that in that case, the cathode is the negative terminal.
Unfortunately, chemistry had another definition. They defined the cathode as the electrode where reduction was taking place, and the anode as the one where oxidation was occurring. That meant that strictly speaking, the anode and cathode of a rechargeable cell swap places when charging vs discharging.
It’s a total mess.
This is why several scientists have proposed dropping the whole anode/cathode thing altogether.
They suggest names such as positrode and negatrode instead, where the polarity defines them rather than the oxidation or reduction.
Personally, I think it is an excellent idea.
Next Generation Batteries for electric flight is a great way to learn emergency gliding when batteries run out or create spectacular mid-air explosions.
At 0:50 -- are solid state batteries even available on a commercial level? How can they be leapfrogged if they aren't even routinely available?
If you make the seperator with a conductive layer and wire it to the appropriate side dendrites do not cause short circuits they act as greater surface area for energy storage and transfer.
Nice video. You do a good job taking things that are complicated and making them interesting.
yo that is a huge capacity upgrade
I thought that solid state batteries were supposed to be safer than traditional liquid electrolyte batteries. The liquid electrolyte is very inflammable which results in fires if the cell short circuits.
Solid states are supposed to be more stable on paper at least. However it looks like solid state batteries may never reach commercial production. The current batteries marketed as "solid state" aren't really a true solid state battery. It's more of a hybrid design using semi solid materials and gels. The problem with SS batteries is that they can't seem to overcome the internal resistance problems with them. For some reason SS batteries have a wide range of electrical resistance levels even when tightly controlling production variables.
So interesting - great to see a battery technology that feels feasible for the future!
The CATL site says "2024-04-09. On April 9 2024, CATL unveiled TENER, the world's first mass-producible energy storage system with zero degradation in the first five years of use in Beijing, China. Featuring all-round safety, five-year zero degradation and a robust 6.25 MWh capacity, TENER will accelerate large-scale adoption of new energy storage technologies as well as the high-quality advancement of the sector."
Excellent video! However, the first battery diagram has an error. The cathode is negative inside the battery, but positive on top. The reverse is true for the anode. Inside the battery, the cathode is negative, and electrons leave it to neutralize Li+ ions flowing to it, so electrons are pulled down into the outside cathode terminal.
Ho-hum, just another revolutionary breakthrough in battery design.
Wake me when one of these magical technologies hit the market....
Wake up and learn what is CATL then try to discredit them.
Can't wait for oppo find x8 series to release with this battery tech! I'm increasingly dubious about solid state batteries too. Great video
Even if you stop the dendrites, they build up a thick resistive layer on your anode and consume a lot of electrolyte because of their huge surface area. Honestly, I see way too many papers trying to physically block the dendrites and it's just not a good plan. You need to prevent them from forming at all, which is what I believe this cell-membrane thing does. It's like a "water"proof film that lets lithium ions pass but keeps out the electrolyte solvents so they don't react with the metal.
I think that as well as analysing past matches , the channel ought to analyse upcoming matches...i for one would love to see the options for the upcoming Spain game.
Being on a bitter end of state oppression pushing for installing a lithium ore mine and refinement facility in one of the lush countrysides of Serbia, I am interested in supporting technologies which would obsolete the usage of Lithium altogether or at least reduce demand for it, such as Sodium-ion (), or even Hydrogen-ion batteries. Since this invention is mainly in domain of nano-geometric structures, I hope they would bring alternative chemistries into more close competition with Lithium, and beating it down with lower price for marginally lower (or why not even better) performance and much, much better availability.
Brilliant delivery of info
Thank you. Just subscribed.
Good luck continuing forward!
6:48 skeptical, the "ball" type spheres will (like a filter) collect a lot of ions and show immediate charge time quick but slow down as they ions need to work around those. also it seems a lot of wasted space even though it appears high surface area. maybe the ions shoot through the space, I don't know.
I'll wait for it to be "production ready" then see how it works over long periods, seems they are bragging for funding/investments.
Again a brilliant video. Thank you
Thanks for explaining this.
it has been tried and failed
The company was literally called "Honeycomb Batteries", lost 95% of it's value early this year after years of promises and nothing to show. It has now rebranded itself to Solidion Technology Inc
It's another example how overhyping technology leads to financial disaster
Seeing that conventional jets are totally demolishing the entire atmospheric envelope and massively overheating the frigid stratosphere, cool clean electric jets will make a gigantic difference to our weather and air quality. Many companies are working on better batteries, so breakthroughs will come on many fronts. We must get the current jets replaced fast.
Good luck with that 😂
@@JensSchraeder A great storm begins with a little breeze. These recent hurricanes are almost certainly made worse by overheating the stratosphere. Someone needs to say that jets are almost certainly completely unsustainable, a climactic catastrophe. Factual knowledge is better than luck.
I can't hardly wait to see these new batteries (including qenxing plus battery) in action in the real world
This is good, we need this tech ASAP! Especially with all the lithium fire we get. I hope this gets rolled out soon, but the cost of it still concerns me.
The energy density of diesel is 12 700 watt hours per kg and of these "fantastic" batteries 500. Thus the energy density of diesel is more than 25 times higher. We will not see any airlines flying battery driven planes. They actually want to fly cargo - not batteries.
Now do the efficiency of diesel engines
@@iota-co7369 This is actually a quite complex question to answer. Firstly, jet propulsion is done with a jet-engine driven by jet fuel (essentially diesel) - a diesel engine is not used. The overall propulsion efficiency of a jet engine may be like 20-40%. This should be compared to a propeller plane driven via a battery and an electric motor. The efficiency of an electric motor is quite high - let say 90% and the propulsion efficiency of a propeller plane might be maybe 70% so the overall efficiency would be about 60%. Thus, an electric airplane might be 1.5 - 3 fold more efficient energy wise but on the other hand, a propeller driven plane can't fly at as high altitude as a jet plane and would be considerably slower and the weight of the batteries would reduce the cargo to be carried tremendously. The bottom line is therefore that electric planes with present batteries can't be economically viable for long distance and bulk transportation. Perhaps electric planes can be use over short distances as a commuter plane for transportation of good paying customers.
Technology is moving so fast that we get a new breakthrough before we can industrialize the previous one
Fascinating, double the current best capacity surely will put an end to the worry about charging stations and so called 'range rage'
Dendrites have NOT been the only focus of solid state. It's the main reason they haven't been adopted, but the solid state idea was to address the major undesirable shortcomings of Lion. Such as pollution in mining, charging time inversely proportional to battery life, intense fires that spread to everything around them and can flare up again weeks later, and as a result of that aforementioned fire hazard, entire cars being junked after accidents or 3-4 years of driving with nobody willing to purchase such vehicles.
None of that even begins to touch on battery pricing. Or the insurance pricing. Or the fact that the infrastructure in the US simply won't deal with the power consumption required during peak charging times, regardless of the technology used.
So, will CATL address these issues? Introduce new ones? The technology is amazing but like so many potential commercial attempts, will it end up being a great idea on paper? Perhaps limited to stationary backup power supply but not useful in EVs?
I guess the highest Li battery should be Li metal.
If batteries start to be square, it could be really cool
Not even sure what the game is anymore there’s been so many game changers. Solid state batteries are barely out of the laboratory and still unproven to do anything but provide TH-cam content. Is that the game?
Wow. Now they even make trees for bats. "Bat Trees" . Who knew?
Batteries is a topic that supports many youtubers. Meanwhile nothing changes despite hundreds of "Breakthroughs" and counting,
I'm always sceptical of the idea that "it's not happening" I have a hunch that Westerners don't get access to advanced tech because of corporations
Nothing changes? The cost per kWh of Lithium batteries has fallen to 18% of what it was 10 years ago, and during the same period, the energy density has doubled. This is down to thousands of breakthroughs.
I think he means a new battery chemistry. Weve received a lot of accumulative improvements on Li-Ion but no new breakthrough batteries we kept hearing about@JonS
@@JonGZBOS Exactly! So many claims, yet nothing really new. Same thing on internal combustion engines. "Revolutionary new designs" never heard from again. Liquid piston leaps to mind.
@@JonGZBOS there are already cars with Sodium batteries, and redox flow batteries are being used in some installations. Of course not everything comes to fruition and materials science and manufacturing can take years to perfect. Hardware is hard, and new processes are even harder. Hell! Even raising funding is slow. People expect everything to be like new apps with short development cycles.
If true, huge, but we are talking about a chinese company with close ties to the chinese government and we are talking of unverified claims of a grandiose already flying battery powered passenger airliner that no one has ever seen. I remain sceptical until third parties can verify any of these claims.
this prick is sold to the chineese
I'm not going to dismiss CATL just because they're a Chinese company. I look at their performance, and it has been good. They are clearly a quality company doing amazing work.
I hope Tesla will be able to implement this type of tech into their cars 2 years from now
CATL? 🐄
Edit: Great post, thank you!
We will completely solve the energy problem when large capacitors can hold their storage charge as long as batteries. I have seen things are looking up with some new developments in this area.
Thx for the explanation👍
Great report 👍
We can't get these to mass production soon enough. I want to purchase now for my microlight aircraft conversion to electric..
Cheers
Without extensive distributed grid storage and power generation expansion, the grid is not ready, anywhere, for 2x capacity car batteries that charge significantly faster.
Great video! I continue to learn more about batteries as I read more articles like this. I never was a fan of the solid state battery. And watch out for an investment in QS as they do seem to be a victim of the introduction of the solid state battery moving away from them as each year progresses. I wonder what your analysis of GMG's Aluminum Graphene battery is. They make great claims. Richard Mastromatteo
I'm really glad you didn't say the word graphene this entire time
sorry if I missed what is energy density and the cost per Kwh
"500Wh:Kg"
Wh:$? 🤷
He has no idea
I'm just going to wait for the next next innovation
Sounds excellent! Why did we not invent that? We better get our act together!
10/10 video. Thank you!
As enthusiastic as i am for new WORKING batteries without the downside of Li-Ion batteries, this might mean resurgence of the EV madness.
But the point that we produce so much "green" energy is far away. Solar and wind are way more polluting than ppl think as the EOL recycling is never mentioned. And that goes for the most polluting part of the EV, battery too. It costs as much energy to disassemble a battery as it is to make it.
The batteries, if affordable, can be used in home systems and make energy greener.
The "greenest" energy form is nuclear AND the safest with the least deaths per kW of all energy sources.
Interesting idea, been reading reports from Sinonus (not involved) but they are making battery using carbon fibre as the negative and postive anode with a glass fiber separator so the strength of the unit and weight is so much better than any other design. Ok the Wh/kg for the time being is low but if the structure of unit, say plane is part to the battery then size of battery can be bigger with out costing weight as the battery itself is structural.
even if it makes it obsolete, everything can be still used. and might be easier to use or manufacture or some other factory. one of the points of solid batteries is that they are solid and not electrolytic like capacitors. ie no liquid related problems. lithium does not matter, it can be anything else.
Excellent video, however you have one important thing wrong (I believe). Electricity does not travel from PLUS to MINUS, but the opposite direction! The CATHODE is Negative and the ANODE positive, and electrons being NEGATIVE, travel from the CATHODE to ANODE (minus to plus).
I wish people would stop reporting on breakthroughs and focus on getting them commercially available. Tired of hearing about crazy cool stuff that'll never be made available to buy. Solid state batteries never made it out the gate. What are the chances this will?
Thank you
Hate lithium mainly because it's mining and processing hindrances. Sodium would be a better option because it's an abundant element and could be a byproduct of water desalination, if electrolytic process is used. Steam refining would still be needed but greenhouse evaporative pools shows promise🎉
Sodium for home, lithium for phone
@@kkrolik2106 graphene for phone
Interesting , Thank you , I hope they work
No matter how much we research, no matter what we do, biomimetic is always the best technically, nature, God, is really perfect. Nature designing skills are so well developed that we still try to copy it
Hay COUZIN ~ Contemporary Chemistry has surpass the Ceramics Technology WE learnt in pottery🇨🇦
Finally some real world, non lab only, non vapor ware progress. But it sounds like it will still take quite a while to trickle down to the average consumer. And unfortunately, we don't have very long as the earth's magnetic field strength continues to weaken at an ever faster and faster rate as time goes by.
Membrane science (the biometric part) is so cool.
At the rate these new battery videos come out, we'll have the final battery in a few years. Immune to cold, 10 million discharges, zero self discharge, 1,000x energy density... and still nobody will make it and sell it. It won't be in your phone or your car. We'll still be on lithium ion.
"The end of solid state batteries" would imply they started being a thing at some point.
As long as it's not in my smartphone I'll be crying
I'll never buy a full EV until the battery tech has matured. I have hope this is a breakthrough. But I'll believe it when it's mass produced and in hundreds of thousands of autos.
Solid states are supposed to do a lot more than that, they are supposed to be more reliable, more powerful, a lot safer if you look at grapheme ones and so much more. The point of solid state isn’t to use lithium metal anodes, it’s to create a battery that solves all current battery problems including thermal runaway. What this guy is talking about is a hybrid solid state not a solid state. There is a difference.
A real game changer would eliminate the need for lithium