Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Search is on For Cobalt-Free Batteries As Metal Gets Increasingly Rare and Expensive (technologyreview.com) 153

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
An anonymous reader writes: Conamix, a little-known startup based in Ithaca, New York, has raised several million dollars to accelerate its development of cobalt-free materials for lithium-ion batteries, the latest sign that companies are eager to find alternatives to the increasingly rare and expensive metal. The problem: The price of cobalt has more than doubled in recent months, as global demand skyrockets for the lithium-ion batteries that power electric vehicles and smartphones. It's also being driven up by the fact that the metal is mined primarily in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where labor and corruption issues are rife. Earlier this year, the nation decided to raise royalties on cobalt and other metals.

Given the ambitious expansion plans of lithium-ion producers, the world will face cobalt shortages by the early 2020s, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. This is keeping prices of lithium-ion batteries high and preventing major automakers from lining up long-term supply deals on favorable terms. The mounting threat to electric-vehicle growth has prompted a growing number of companies to explore other solutions.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Search is on For Cobalt-Free Batteries As Metal Gets Increasingly Rare and Expensive More

Search is on For Cobalt-Free Batteries As Metal Gets Increasingly Rare and Expensive

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday June 21, 2018 @01:37PM (#56823110)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by torkus ( 1133985 )

      Yeah, that worked wonderfully in the middle east two decades ago right? Oh, right...we've been 'fighting terror' in the area ever since.

      Now, if the USA turned imperialistic and claimed these places as territories maybe.

      • How's that working out for Puerto Rico lately?

        • Seems to be OK given they have the highest GDP per capita [worldbank.org] in the Caribbean. Of course, recovery from the hurricane has been slow and terrible, but just like in the US that is more a State/territory issue - the Federal Government is limited in what it can do [wikipedia.org], and even then it must happen only with the express request and permission of the Governors.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rtb61 ( 674572 )

            Wow that idea of measuring against other nations in poverty, just so wildly corrupt. Yeah we know, as far as US corporation waiting to ruthlessly exploit Puerto Rico are concerned, why don't the Pureto Ricans just fuck off and die already so we can steal the land for cents on the dollar. Yeah they refused free money and assistance or are you seriously comparing that ludicrous loans with inflated interest rates as assistance.

            Rare earth mines are notoriously dirty and that is the reason for Africa not becaus

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by RevDisk ( 740008 )
              You do realize that Puerto Rico has done its own votes and so far has stayed a territory of the US, of its own accord? There is zero interest in keeping PR part of the US against their will. Mostly this is due to corruption and debt issues, and we really don't want to bail them out of repeated mistakes.

              There is only one major exploitation going on, which is that all ships must be US flagged (Merchant Marine Act of 1920). Trump waved this.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • You sound like you live in what they call 'the land of the free' and concern yourself with expanding that freedom to other nations. Touching.

  • not enough resources on the planet to meet demand (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lkcl ( 517947 ) <lkcl@lkcl.net> on Thursday June 21, 2018 @01:58PM (#56823300) Homepage

    i've mentioned this before, on other articles that mention lithium batteries and electric vehicles. cobalt is not the only element involved that's in short supply: there isn't enough copper, there isn't enough neodymium, and lithium is a material that explodes when brought into contact with air and water. copper piping and wiring is already stolen from buildings and from church roofs.

    neodymium, i don't know if you've ever investigated how it's refined, but it's a radioactive-decay byproduct, meaning that it's only found in amongst *radioactive* deposits (where do you think those are dumped?) and the actual refining itself requires a THOUSAND LITRES of boiling sulphuric acid per 1kg of neodymium. the black market factory photos from remote places in china are shocking... chimney stacks just dumping sulphuric acid fumes directly into the air, and the waste dumped in the nearest river, poisoning the local environment for hundreds of miles downstream.

    and we have western governments, whose populations of course do not live anywhere near these mines and factories in Congo or China, banning diesel cars on the basis that they "create pollution", i mean.. .i'm really shocked by the total lack of understanding and appreciation of the true consequences of tthese "environmentally-friendly" decisions.

    i've been trying for many years now, but i honestly have absolutely no idea how to get this across to people that we need to trim down the *amount* of materials needed in vehicles. Category L7e "Heavy Quadricycles" such as Riversimple's design concept, the Renault Twizzy and so on, these are perfect: tuned up these small sub-350kg vehicles can go nearly110km/h (70mph), just like some quad-bikes, and that's with only 25HP!

    the concept is called "Mass Decompounding", you don't need power-assisted brakes, you don't need power-steering, you can use cross-radial hard silicon compound tires which will last 80,000 miles and have a rolling resistance coeffficient three times less than a standard tire... *all because of the dramatically-reduced weight*. and that reduced weight means a smaller engine, and if it's hybrid or electric it means a smaller battery.

    • Aluminum can be substituted for copper.

      Neodymium is used in NiMH batteries, which are on the way out. Lithium batteries don't use it.

      Lithium in lithium ion batteries doesn't explode. That's usually the electrolyte, although if you overcharge them you can get reactive lithium to plate out.

      • Permanent magnet motors - which Tesla and many others either use or are moving to - use gobs of neodymium and dysprosium. Typically 2-3 kg of neo magnets per motor.

        • Sure, but if you claim batteries are the demand you look like you're ignorant. Also, if the neodymium gets too expensive you can always switch back to older technologies.

          • Switching back? Ah, no, not really you can't. But if chinese neodymium gets expensive, then it again becomes profitable to mine it elsewhere in the world, so no problem really. Material costs are marginal for high tech products, the cost is in the making, not the material.

            • Can't switch back to brush driven motors like have been used for hundreds of years and are still used in lots of places eh?

              The only reason they use Neodymium brushless motors is because the neodymium is so cheap, the second it gets expensive they'll be back to standard motors in no time at all. The rise of brushless motors was directly tied to Chinese subsidies in the rare earth production that cratered the price of rare earth material and made the neodymium so cheap they couldn't justify using brushes that

              • "Rare earth elements" are not rare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
                And particularly Neodymium is extremely common.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by Hodr ( 219920 )

                  Posted in every thread about batteries ever. Thanks for the insight!

                  Of course, the density of the material, location, and difficulty seperating it is where the cost comes in.

                  Like gold, for instance. Les than 0.003 parts per million in the earth's crust. Enough in the earth's core to plate the planet with a 13 foot blanket. It's not "rare", it's just hard to find in easily accesible form.

                • Although neodymium is classed as a rare earth, it is a fairly common element, no rarer than cobalt, nickel, or copper, and is widely distributed in the Earth's crust

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Agripa ( 139780 )

                Can't switch back to brush driven motors like have been used for hundreds of years and are still used in lots of places eh?

                There is no need for that. With electronic commutation being relatively cheap and already used for permanent magnet motors, brushless reluctance and induction motors are a better choice.

          • Also, if the neodymium gets too expensive you can always switch back to older technologies.

            http://business.financialpost.... [financialpost.com]

        • Permanent magnet motors - which Tesla and many others either use or are moving to - use gobs of neodymium and dysprosium. Typically 2-3 kg of neo magnets per motor.

          Add to that a big hunk of neodymium in every wind turbine.

          • And every new natural gas or coal plant

            • Most tend to be induction motors, because cooling is pretty easy when you're not space or weight constrained like in a car, and it can be cheaper and handle much higher temperatures (like you get with turbines).

              • Thanks - didn't know that.

                Still I don't think it's reasonable to say that the pollution caused in mongolia in refining neodymium is a function of "green energy". It's much more a function of the Chinese lacking sensible environmental regulations. If we wanted to start a useful trade war we could put tariffs on stuff that's made in ways that are needlessly damaging to the environment.

                • Fully agree! Unfortunately, many assign "external" costs for bad power use in China and such against power generation industries and consumers here. Reliable power is one of the best ways to increase the standard of living of any country.

                  And, unsurprisingly, when standards of living increase, people start to worry much more about their environment, their food, the work conditions of their friends and families, etc. I've spent about half of the last 20 years living in 2nd and 3rd world countries, working

                  • A few days of still air over an area as large as China? Same with sunlight?
                    I think they have bigger problems, maybe alien invaders put a dome over their whole country.
                    • Well, it's not uncommon to have clouds over a large (20%) chunk of the country. Or still air over just as much. I guess you can overbuild quite a bit everywhere, and upsize all the long-distance power lines... China is planning to double it's nuclear power capacity in the next 2 years. In 2017, China did about 246 TWh of nuclear power generation, more than solar and wind combined.
                    • Let me introduce you to WindBourne [slashdot.org]. He thinks China is focusing on coal and you think it's nuclear.
                      You can both argue with each other to see who is right.
                      Everyone else can laugh at you both, safe in the knowledge China is actually building solar and wind.

                    • They are actually focusing on both, putting large nuclear plants near big cities, and coal plants near up-and-coming smaller cities. Shanghai is essentially all nuclear powered, but go to Xi'an or even Shengzhou and it's mainly coal. China has a really poor power grid, and so distributing reliable power plants is common. China's building out the rest [world-nuclear-news.org] of it's new 23 GW of capacity planned to deploy in 2020, and will have another 30 GW in production at that point (probably completed by 2022 or so).

                      Now, for

                    • Must be a bit of a fluke that they have been doing this [wikipedia.org] then.
                    • They're trying to catch up. Consider that China is about the size of the US, geographically, with 4 times the population, and 1/3rd of that population living within a small, 100 mile wide strip of the East Coast. And power located all over. And you have a few dozen high voltage lines - and that includes the ones under construction.

    • In the 'Mass Decompounding' line but even better. The Ariel atom.

      You do want to cut weight, but you want to ADD power. Also sticky tires, not slippery ones.

    • Raw materials are pretty marginal component of battery cost and there is material shortages only at current prices. Plenty more available at higher cost, which battery manufacturers can take without much impact to end price. Currently we are exploiting raw materials that are so cheap, that batteries are not even worth recycling. And bullocks on Neodynium, it's not rare at all, it's just that China has eaten everyone else out of market by using cheapest possible methods to mine it and saturating the market.

    • Perhaps not as cheaply as the Chinese process, but my understanding of what MolyCorp are doing suggests that you can indeed refine Neodymium without dumping sulfuric acid into rivers.

      https://cen.acs.org/articles/9... [acs.org]

      This isn't so much an issue with Neodymium but with the fact that we tend to buy materials from wherever they are cheapest and without a second thought for the externalized costs that went into producing them.

      Radioactivity certainly is an issue if it winds up in wastewater, but if the radioactiv

    • Re:not enough resources on the planet to meet dema (Score:4, Informative)

      by schweini ( 607711 ) on Thursday June 21, 2018 @05:34PM (#56825024)
      Wikipedia doesn't seem to agree with you:
      "Although neodymium is classed as a rare earth, it is a fairly common element, no rarer than cobalt, nickel, or copper, and is widely distributed in the Earth's crust."
      There does seem to be illegal mining going on in China, but that's not a problem with the element, per se.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Sique ( 173459 )
      As far as I know, China refines the Neodymium with molten salt electrolysing similar to the Hall-Héroult-process used for aluminium.

      The other often used way is fractioned fluorid cristallization, which uses hydrofluoric acid, not sulphuric acid.

      And Neodymium like all Lanthanoids can be found in Rare Earth deposits, together with other Rare Earths like Praseodymium or Samarium. Maybe you are confusing Neodymium (atomic number 60) with Promethium (atomic number 61), which indeed was discovered as a f

  • Economies of scales does not ALWAYS work... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by superdave80 ( 1226592 ) on Thursday June 21, 2018 @01:59PM (#56823312)
    This is why I always wondered why electric car enthusiasts just automatically assumed that battery prices would just keep dropping and dropping. Sometimes as you use more and more of a material or resource, it may begin to become scarcer, thus actually RAISING the price.

    • Re:Economies of scales does not ALWAYS work... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday June 21, 2018 @02:33PM (#56823598) Homepage

      Because battery prices weren't close to their raw material costs. Even today they're well above their raw material costs.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Because battery prices weren't close to their raw material costs. Even today they're well above their raw material costs.

        Hey, come on now, stop that. We can't go having sane rational explanations littering up the place...

      • Raw materials for batteries are so cheap, that used batteries are not even worth recycling.
    • But it also drives research into alternatives. When doing something is rather inexpensive, there isn't a lot of incentive to invest money into exploring other ways of doing that thing. When it becomes increasingly expensive, suddenly the investment into new technology becomes much more reasonable. You wouldn't see nearly as much investment into electric vehicles if oil were still under $20 per barrel as it was in the late 90's and there wouldn't have been as much investment into fracking technologies and th

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by djinn6 ( 1868030 )
        While technology generally reduces costs, it's not as effective when the cost driver is the raw material itself. Jewelry is still very expensive, mainly due to the precious metals in it. Likewise, housing is growing ever more expensive, mainly due to limited quantities of land.

        Yes, you can build higher, but the cost of building skyscrapers hasn't improved at all. The Empire State Building, built in 1931, costs about $400 million in today's dollars. One World Trade Center costs $3.9 billion.

    • This is why I always wondered why electric car enthusiasts just automatically assumed that battery prices would just keep dropping and dropping.

      Because most major innovations recently have been in tech that have economies of scale, network effects, or negligible marginal costs. I mean, software and the various benefits of it scale really well, and that's what's been driving the economy forward for 30-odd years.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The thought is that as demand increases, production lines will be developed and drop the price.

      The upside is now that cobalt is becoming more expensive it is driving innovation to develop better batteries.

    • This is why I always wondered why electric car enthusiasts just automatically assumed that battery prices would just keep dropping and dropping.

      Because electric car producers understand the economics and actively work around them. Do you know *why* battery prices keep dropping? Mainly because of how each successive battery generation seems to have less cobalt than the last.

      Panasonic announced last month their aim to have cobalt free batteries very soon. As it is they have around 3% in their cathodes which is phenomenally low compared to the 20% in 2014.

  • Hey cobalt cant. But tin can (Score:3)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Thursday June 21, 2018 @04:40PM (#56824742)

    What does Uranium, Nickel, Cobalt, and Radon spell? UNiCoRn!

    What's the best formula for breakfast? Barium, Cobalt, and Nitrogen (BaCoN)

  • Cobalt is a NONE ISSUE (Score:3)

    by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Thursday June 21, 2018 @08:02PM (#56825668) Journal
    Right now, China is trying hard to control Cobalt by buying up mines all over (like they did with REMs) and spreading lots of lies.
    BUT, The Phillipines, along with Canada and Australia, all have plenty of Cobalt to last another decade for all batteries. IOW, if they took over 100% of all cobalt mining, they would still have an easy 10+ years. [statista.com] So, even with China trying to control this, they really can not. What is HAPPENING is that China is manipulating the stock prices and only idiots will buy into this garbage.

Slashdot Top Deals

Lots of folks confuse bad management with destiny. -- Frank Hubbard

Close