• SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    There actually is not a lot of room for improvement. Highest energy will still be limited to lithium chemistry because of the periodic table.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      That’s a limit on gravimetric energy density. There are plenty of other parameters that can be improved.

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        There are plenty of other parameters that can be improved.

        You don’t know that. This is chemistry, not Moore’s stupid law.

        • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          no, actually, we do know that… things like cycle time, lifetime cycles, their durability < 20% and > 80%, performance in the cold, sustained current

          lots of these are to do with heat and degradation, but these are all problems that can be solved to improve batteries in general… some of them are inherently to lithium chemistry and easily solved with others

          sodium batteries, for example, are better in most categories other than wh/kg making them not useful for portable electronics and cars etc but for stationary applications these benefits can significantly outweigh the major downside because wh/kg is not a useful metric (eg grid storage)… especially true when sodium batteries are able to deal with higher operating temperatures which means you don’t need as much if any extra cooling, which is getting close to making up for even energy density of the system in some situations

          flow batteries are also real things, as are hydrogen fuel cells