Could Atomically Thin Layers Bring A 19x Energy Jump In Battery Capacitors? (popularmechanics.com) 27
Researchers believe they've discovered a new material structure that can improve the energy storage of capacitors.
The structure allows for storage while improving the efficiency of ultrafast charging and discharging.
The new find needs optimization but has the potential to help power electric vehicles.
*
An anonymous reader shared this report from Popular Mechanics:
In a study published in Science, lead author Sang-Hoon Bae, an assistant professor of mechanical engineering and materials science, demonstrates a novel heterostructure that curbs energy loss, enabling capacitors to store more energy and charge rapidly without sacrificing durability... Within capacitors, ferroelectric materials offer high maximum polarization. That's useful for ultra-fast charging and discharging, but it can limit the effectiveness of energy storage or the "relaxation time" of a conductor. "This precise control over relaxation time holds promise for a wide array of applications and has the potential to accelerate the development of highly efficient energy storage systems," the study authors write.
Bae makes the change — one he unearthed while working on something completely different — by sandwiching 2D and 3D materials in atomically thin layers, using chemical and nonchemical bonds between each layer. He says a thin 3D core inserts between two outer 2D layers to produce a stack that's only 30 nanometers thick, about 1/10th that of an average virus particle... The sandwich structure isn't quite fully conductive or nonconductive.
This semiconducting material, then, allows the energy storage, with a density up to 19 times higher than commercially available ferroelectric capacitors, while still achieving 90 percent efficiency — also better than what's currently available.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 for sharing the article.
Bae makes the change — one he unearthed while working on something completely different — by sandwiching 2D and 3D materials in atomically thin layers, using chemical and nonchemical bonds between each layer. He says a thin 3D core inserts between two outer 2D layers to produce a stack that's only 30 nanometers thick, about 1/10th that of an average virus particle... The sandwich structure isn't quite fully conductive or nonconductive.
This semiconducting material, then, allows the energy storage, with a density up to 19 times higher than commercially available ferroelectric capacitors, while still achieving 90 percent efficiency — also better than what's currently available.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 for sharing the article.
We know thw answer (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, and it's too bad because the science seems really interesting. In fact, I'm surprised the peer reviewers didn't save themselves some work and just return their forms with "sorry, Betteridge says no".
Re: We know thw answer (Score:1)
This is the problem with science vs science reporting. The technical stuff is really interesting, but the application potential is basically marketing bait invented by someone with a bachelor degree in journalism, which only inserts to drive media metrics that may drive grant funding.
So the answer is, not like this, the tech allows for increased density at extreme cost and unproven at production, also, due to the scale, the electrical potential must be very small, thus it is probably great for electronics a
Re: (Score:2)
So the answer is, not like this, the tech allows for increased density at extreme cost and unproven at production, also, due to the scale, the electrical potential must be very small, thus it is probably great for electronics at extremely low voltages, like CPU, not for batteries. So your phone will consume less power and last longer with the same LiPo battery.
The lithium polymer batteries in a phone operate at a higher voltage (4.2V nominal per cell) than the lithium ion batteries in most cars (3.7V nominal per 18650 cell or 2170 cell, or 3.2V nominal per LiFePO4 cell). So I don't think that's necessarily a significant limitation if you have a hundred of them in series.
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you get that 4.2V? Just checked out a replacement battery fro a Galaxy Fold. 3.88V.iFixit sells iPhone batteries at 3.8V.
Re: (Score:2)
I think my Google search result summary lied to me and mixed up nominal and maximum. Either way, that's still higher than the voltage used in car cells. :-)
Re: (Score:1)
You don't use the raw power to juice the 0.3V of the CPU. 4.2V if it's full, it drops if it's nearing empty. An atomically thin capacitor has a breakdown voltage measured in millivolts, because physics. You apply 5V to that sucker and it explodes in a puff of smoke.
Leakage (Score:2)
Polyester X2 Capacitors (Score:2)
breakdown voltage (Score:2)
Wouldn't the breakdown voltage be very small for an atom thick layer of dielectric?
Re:breakdown voltage (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes it will.
Silicon dioxide is on the order of 2-3V/nm (it depends) so a 30nm thick layer of a similar dielectric would be on the order of 60-100V. You have to optimize the number of cells you can put in series versus the series resistance.
Silicon dioxide is a very, very good insulator, however this material system appears to be closer to a semiconductor, so the breakdown voltage is likely even lower.
This could still have significant application in electronics where having 2 or 3 V is enough voltage and where a very high value capacitor (100s of uF) with a very low series resistance (single digit milliohms) is a problem that still needs to be solved (it's currently done by combining different types of capacitors, consuming a lot of space and also by locating the low resistance capacitors in a package with the die, consuming a lot of space).
Looking a lot less likely to be applicable in EVs where a high voltage is important to keep the current low to prevent IR losses. it's also a lot less likely because it doesn't really seem that this process can be scaled up to make capacitors that have total surface areas measured in square meters.
I think the important take away from this , which is not obvious because the TFA is terrible and the Science article is paywalled, is that they've devised a new strategy to approach the problem of low loss and high capacitance.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: breakdown voltage (Score:2)
Yeah, that makes sense. But the physics gets weird when you have electron shells so close to the surface of your material. Seems like electrons would sometimes hop across like in a semiconductor band gap.
I'm just making wild guesses based on the very limited knowledge I need for my work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you talking about quantum physics effects like quantum tunneling? Those start being real at distances of 3nm and less if I remember my quantum physics lectures correctly. This story suggests they're at 10 times that, so that shouldn't be a meaningful source of a leak yet.
Re: (Score:2)
But if the layers are thinner, you can fit more of them in the same space. This could well offset the difference in breakdown voltage.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, you'd need millions (or more) to make them useful in an electric car. This technology, if it really works, won't have the applications discussed in the article; even if it can scale.
Probably really useful in CPU and sensor design, though.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. And that is why you always need to know both: Maximum voltage and capacity. For real understanding you also need a few more parameters, but unless you have these two, you have nothing.
sound great, just like thin film solar panels (Score:2)
Still waiting after 25 years for that revolution to start.
Re: (Score:2)
The revolution started about 25 years ago. It's possible you're too young to remember the pre-revolution days. Batteries are SOOO much better than they used to be.
"Battery Capacitors"? WTF? (Score:2)
"Batacitator" (sp?) is a term from Jules Verne, not a modern term. In modern terminology these are either batteries or capacitators, but not both and they have very different properties.
Some "journalist" asking an AI trained on Jules Verne novels?
Re: (Score:3)
They exist. They're called that as an alternative to ultra capacitors.
There are regular capacitors, we all know about them.
There are super capacitors, which offer increased capacity (in the Farads) but not a lot of voltage - most supercaps go around 1.5-2.7V max, so you generally need two in series to get the voltage you need.
Then there ar e"battery capacitors" aka ultra capacitors. These are very low capacity, high endurance Li-Ion type batteries, or ultra high capacity finicky capacitors. These offer a ri
Re: (Score:2)
I once had a cable router, actually on copper wire and not fiber, with something similar build in. ... perhaps not 3 or 4, but more than 1.
We had a power outage but internet kept working pretty long, hours
Re: (Score:2)
That is actually a marketing lie. These things are batteries.
Nice trick (Score:2)
Capacitors suck at energy storage, so a 19x improvement in capacity is useless except for weird applications.
Re: (Score:2)
Only according to some metrics - like the ones that are important for EVs or storing GWh for grid backup. But those use cases don't encompass all "energy storage". Every piece of electronics out there has tons of capacitors - from smoothing power conversion circuits to bypass caps on every IC to tuning RF circuits to, yes, providing short-term power backup - and they are excellent in their ability to store and release energy. A 19x improvement would be beneficial for lo
Capacitors, not batteries (Score:4, Interesting)
Capacitors store electric energy physically (in electric fields) and have far lower energy density and far higher costs than batteries, which store energy chemically.
Capacitors can be used for some niche operations, like storing braking energy in trucks, but last time I looked the prices were in the range of 10,000 USD/kWh. Their main advantage is they can discharge very fast, so if you need a little energy but in a very short time they can be useful.
They have never been, and will likely never be, a serious contender in energy storage. 19x increased storage density is not going to help, even before we consider whether this invention can be mass-produced and what its price would be.
That's not to say this is a small achievement, there are certainly plenty of uses e.g. in power electronics for this technology. But calling it "batteries" and dog-whistling people in thinking this is going to make it in their EV battery is disingenuous.