The World's First Sodium-Ion Battery in Commercial EVs - Great at Low Temperatures (insideevs.com) 84
Long-time Slashdot reader Geoffrey.landis shared this report from InsideEVs:
Chinese battery giant CATL and automaker Changan Automobile are preparing to put the world's first passenger car powered by sodium-ion batteries on public roads by mid-2026. And if the launch is successful, it could usher in an era where electric vehicles present less of a fire risk and can better handle extreme temperatures.
The CATL Naxtra sodium-ion battery will debut in the Changan Nevo A06 sedan, delivering an estimated range of around 400 kilometers (249 miles) on the China Light-Duty Test Cycle. From there, the battery will roll out across Changan's broader portfolio, including EVs from Avatr, Deepal, Qiyuan and Uni, the company said. "The launch represents a major step in the industry's transition toward a dual-chemistry ecosystem, where sodium-ion and lithium-ion batteries complement each other to meet diverse customer needs," CATL said in a press release...
It delivers 175 watt-hours per kilogram of energy density, which is lower than nickel-rich chemistries but roughly on par with lithium ion phosphate batteries... Where the Naxtra battery really stands out, however, is cold-weather performance. CATL says its discharge power at -30 degrees Celsius (-22 degrees Fahrenheit) is three times higher than that of lithium ion phosphate batteries.
The CATL Naxtra sodium-ion battery will debut in the Changan Nevo A06 sedan, delivering an estimated range of around 400 kilometers (249 miles) on the China Light-Duty Test Cycle. From there, the battery will roll out across Changan's broader portfolio, including EVs from Avatr, Deepal, Qiyuan and Uni, the company said. "The launch represents a major step in the industry's transition toward a dual-chemistry ecosystem, where sodium-ion and lithium-ion batteries complement each other to meet diverse customer needs," CATL said in a press release...
It delivers 175 watt-hours per kilogram of energy density, which is lower than nickel-rich chemistries but roughly on par with lithium ion phosphate batteries... Where the Naxtra battery really stands out, however, is cold-weather performance. CATL says its discharge power at -30 degrees Celsius (-22 degrees Fahrenheit) is three times higher than that of lithium ion phosphate batteries.
Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:5, Interesting)
It's heavier, more expensive, and has a lower power density than any Li batteries. With lithium prices way down, sodium is no longer economically viable, at least for vehicles. Sodium's place is in whole home power systems, particularly in regions with very cold weather, where weight is not an issue and the longer cycle life helps offset the greater costs.
If you're in a cold weather climate you're better off with an ICE or Hybrid vehicle. You can always charge your hybrid from your home sodium reserve.
Re: Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:4, Insightful)
It literally says in the 3rd paragraph above:
"It delivers 175 watt-hours per kilogram of energy density, which is lower than nickel-rich chemistries but roughly on par with lithium ion phosphate batteries... "
Re: (Score:3)
LFP batteries for vehicle use are currently around 220Wh/kq, that's nearly a 25% power to weight difference. Every extra kg you have to haul around consumes more power so you need more of a charge to get the same distance, not to mention the additional tire wear due to the vehicle being heavy.
I stand by my position - if you want to electrify your vehicle in the north, your best bet is a hybrid.
Re: (Score:2)
LFP batteries for vehicle use are currently around 220Wh/kq, that's nearly a 25% power to weight difference.
Slightly more than. 220/175 = 1.257. Sodium ion batteries would have 26% more mass per unit of energy.
But it gets worse. You're also consuming additional energy to drag around that extra mass. About a quarter of the weight of a car comes from the battery, so by increasing the weight of the battery by 25.7% to get the same kWh capacity, the car probably weighs 6.4% more.
A quarter of your extra power consumption from the larger battery is wasted, which means you need to increase the capacity by at least 4
Re: Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly. But it definitely has a place in ground based power storage. Homes with solar or large scale solar farms that need to cycle reliably every day. The greater cycle reliability makes them very attractive for that. Especially true in the north of course, but attractive anywhere really.
Now if all that hype surrounding the new solid state batteries turns out to be true, the entire industry is going to be overturned.
Re: (Score:3)
Sodium-ion usually has more challenge with cycle life than li-ion as well, as it tends not to form durable SEIs the way that li-ion does. Though it's hard to make definitive statements about "sodium ion" as a whole because it's a range of very different chemistries, with no clear winner yet. Some are better in certain metrics but lose out in others, and there are so many metrics you have to consider (cost, cycle life, clock life, power density (gravimetric and volumetric) (both charge and discharge), energ
Re: (Score:2)
A quarter of your extra power consumption from the larger battery is wasted
You're kind of ignoring air resistance there. At highway speeds the rolling resistance from extra mass will be dominated by the air resistance. Around town you'll notice a difference.
Re: Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:5, Interesting)
You are greatly over-stating the effect of weight on efficiency. Yes, a heavier vehicle will be less efficient, but the effect is not that dramatic and virtually negligible for even a couple hundred pounds worth in a vehicle that's already 3000+ pounds.
I recall a test specifically with an F150 Lightning with a water tote in the bed, comparing efficiencies between an empty and full tote (~1600 lbs of water) and getting a difference in efficiency of only 5%.
So let's say the pack is 1000lbs and you need 25% more battery due to lower specific energy. 1250lbs. That extra 250lbs - which is basically equivalent to some passengers and/or cargo - is going to have a negligible impact on range. Well within the noise of day to day driving conditions.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:3)
You are greatly over-stating the effect of weight on efficiency. Yes, a heavier vehicle will be less efficient, but the effect is not that dramatic and virtually negligible for even a couple hundred pounds worth in a vehicle that's already 3000+ pounds.
I recall a test specifically with an F150 Lightning with a water tote in the bed, comparing efficiencies between an empty and full tote (~1600 lbs of water) and getting a difference in efficiency of only 5%.
I see this on a regular basis with ICE but it's less than that. My Suburban normally gets 19.6mpg at 65mph. I can add 500 lbs, or 2-3 people, and that doesn't noticeably change. Last December I took the whole family cross country, loaded to the hilt, and it dropped to just over 18 mpg. But that had more to do with the 80mph turnpike than the weight.
Re: (Score:2)
> I see this on a regular basis with ICE but it's less than that
19.6 -> 18.0 is an 8% drop in efficiency. 8% is more than 5%, not less.
Granted you'd need to account for speed as well, but considering similar tests are done with gasoline pickups and they also see 8% to 9% decrease in range - still less than 5% - I think you've just helped prove my point that a few hundred pounds extra is not a significant impact on a vehicle's efficiency, no?
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
> I see this on a regular basis with ICE but it's less than that
19.6 -> 18.0 is an 8% drop in efficiency. 8% is more than 5%, not less.
Granted you'd need to account for speed as well, but considering similar tests are done with gasoline pickups and they also see 8% to 9% decrease in range - still less than 5% - I think you've just helped prove my point that a few hundred pounds extra is not a significant impact on a vehicle's efficiency, no?
=Smidge=
Unless it's hilly or a major amount of weight I see little if any difference in mpg. Which that trip I was referencing had both. I had around 2000 lbs in the truck, which is approaching it's limit, and until I hit the turnpike I was still around 19mpg give or take. At 80+ mph it dropped, then I got into hills and curves to finish off the job. So it's not really a apples to apples comparison after that. Speaking of hills, an EV wouldn't have been bothered as much as it would pick some of that back up wi
Re: (Score:2)
You are greatly over-stating the effect of weight on efficiency. Yes, a heavier vehicle will be less efficient, but the effect is not that dramatic and virtually negligible for even a couple hundred pounds worth in a vehicle that's already 3000+ pounds.
I recall a test specifically with an F150 Lightning with a water tote in the bed, comparing efficiencies between an empty and full tote (~1600 lbs of water) and getting a difference in efficiency of only 5%.
Vehicle weight is a big deal. The more weight the more mass / cost needed to support it.
This translates into increased mass to support the added mass impacting struts, brake, tire and road wear, safety and efficiency.
So let's say the pack is 1000lbs and you need 25% more battery due to lower specific energy. 1250lbs. That extra 250lbs - which is basically equivalent to some passengers and/or cargo - is going to have a negligible impact on range. Well within the noise of day to day driving conditions.
Doing an experiment with an already 6000+lb vehicle and extrapolating costs to normal vehicles does not work, scaling is not linear.
In the context of new battery technology / vaporware SSBs are also right around the corner that proclaim to halve battery mass. It is in that environment sodium
Re: (Score:3)
> scaling is not linear.
With weight it literally is, though.
> This translates into increased mass to support the added mass impacting struts, brake, tire and road wear, safety and efficiency.
We're talking about an increase in mass equal to two, maybe three, passengers. You're adding an estimated 5% or so to the total vehicle mass going from LFP to Sodium to keep the same total energy store.
For comparison, 1600lbs to an F150 Lightning is over 25% more vehicle mass. Mass that it was already designed to
Re: (Score:2)
With weight it literally is, though.
No it isn't. You need to design the vehicle with margins for the added curb weight. Unlike cars trucks are explicitly designed to carry cargo and have commensurately higher gross weight ratings to facilitate this. If curb weight is 300 lbs higher this either means 300 lbs less loading of cargo and passengers or facilitating 300 lbs of additional gross weight rating which itself requires added vehicle mass to achieve.
We're talking about an increase in mass equal to two, maybe three, passengers. You're adding an estimated 5% or so to the total vehicle mass going from LFP to Sodium to keep the same total energy store.
Not only are you losing efficiency on the added mass of the battery and the added structu
Re: (Score:2)
> If curb weight is 300 lbs higher this either means 300 lbs less loading of cargo and passengers or facilitating 300 lbs of additional gross weight rating which itself requires added vehicle mass to achieve.
And that extra mass to accommodate is negligible. I'll use a 2020 Hyundai Kona as an example because that's the car I own and I know for a fact the ICE and EV versions are identical in basically every detail not directly related to the drivetrain.
ICE curb weight: About 3000lbs.
Weight of engine + tra
Re: (Score:2)
They will probably have applications in specialist vehicles. Construction equipment, trains, things where weight is less of an issue and performance is more important.
EVs work just fine in the north already. Lots of people living in the arctic circle get on with them just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Set aside the fact for the minute that Na batteries are on par with Li batteries as far as energy density goes...
Extra weight has little effect on efficiency or range. Any energy you use getting up to speed is returned to the battery via regen as you slow down. Same for going up and down hills.
Re: (Score:2)
Regenerative breaking only recovers some energy. The greater the weight, the more energy is lost to heat. Think about it - if what you say was true, that weight isn't a consideration, then lead acid batteries would be viable.
Re: (Score:2)
Not heat.
Hear's a real world example:
Today I drove 100 miles from my house elevation 6400 ft down to Reno el. 4450 ft the back up over Mt. Rose el. 9000 ft back down to home. Lots of energy use going the uphill parts and lots of regen going the downhill parts.
Average energy for the trip 254 Wh/mile.
My lifetime energy average for my EV is 276 Wh/mile.
So, the up and down was actually more efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
Today I drove 100 miles from my house elevation 6400 ft down to Reno el. 4450 ft the back up over Mt. Rose el. 9000 ft back down to home. Lots of energy use going the uphill parts and lots of regen going the downhill parts.
Average energy for the trip 254 Wh/mile.
My lifetime energy average for my EV is 276 Wh/mile.
So, the up and down was actually more efficient.
Comparison with lifetime energy average is invalid and so are the conclusions drawn from it. If one were to compare their experience driving at similar speeds for 100 miles over flat terrain in similar environmental conditions this would at least make some sense.
Re: (Score:2)
I get 275 Wh per mile on the flat
Re: (Score:2)
I get 275 Wh per mile on the flat
At what altitude and speed? Aerodynamic drag (what most of an EVs energy is spent overcoming) is massively reduced at altitude.
Re: Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:5, Informative)
CATL's LFP batteries hit 205 Wh/kg in 2024, so "roughly" is doing a lot of lifting there. It's 17% heavier for equivalent capacity. And it's not just a little lower than nickel-rich chemistries, it's a bit more than half as much.
It's also not clear how valuable cold weather performance is, newer EVs use heat pumps instead of resistance heating, and share the cooling loops between the powertrain, battery, and cabin, so that the heat removed from the motors can heat the cabin and battery. They're going to need that system in place (to heat the cabin and cool the powertrain) even if a new battery type can operate at colder temperatures.
Sodium batteries don't differ enough from LFP in cycle lifespan enough to matter (not for this sort of use case, anyway), and the density is lower, so the only way they'll be competitive is if they're sufficiently cheaper.
Re: (Score:3)
"It's also not clear how valuable cold weather performance is, newer EVs use heat pumps instead of resistance heating, and share the cooling loops between the powertrain, battery, and cabin, so that the heat removed from the motors can heat the cabin and battery. "
That clearly depends on where you live. What makes you think there is enough waste from the motors to do any good at all? Or that I^2 R losses in the battery will be enough to even keep that warm?
Google's Augmented Idiot has this to say about LFP
Re: (Score:2)
I think you missed the part where they switched from resistive heating to heat pumps, and *then* started scavenging waste heat. You don't lose efficiency in cold temperatures from the battery operating at cold temperatures, you lose efficiency from the energy spent keeping the battery warm. And moving to heat pumps and scavenging waste heat reduced the amount of energy spent keeping the battery warm.
I'm saying that cold weather performance of the battery itself is less relevant because modern EVs don't need
Re: (Score:2)
Heat pumps also stop working when it gets really cold. I have one, at -5 F it's really not doing any good. That's why Building Code in this area requires a backup for the heat pump which in my case is baseboards.
Even if it is technically working COP drops dramatically. At some point the only thing you get out is the energy the compressor is putting into compressing the gas.
Re: (Score:2)
"If you're in a cold weather climate you're better off with an ICE or Hybrid vehicle. "
But the planet isn't.
Re: Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:3)
Which is why RTO orders are evidence that while society talks a big game about caring for the environment, in practice, not so much.
Re:Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score:5, Informative)
It's heavier, more expensive, and has a lower power density than any Li batteries.
No, sodium is much cheaper than lithium in the form that is needed to make batteries; recent commodity prices for NaOH have been 10x to 20x cheaper than bulk LiOH, although this isn't all the cost. The technology development is now to a state where complete sodium batteries are cheaper the lithium ones and has been for a year or so, and the technology is improving fast.
You are correct that the energy density is indeed worse, but that gap has also been closing in recent years. Modern Na batteries have better energy density than the Li batteries in cars from six or seven years ago. If you're trying to build a lot of cheap electric cars then the lower price is very likely more important than the cars being somewhat heavier and thus a bit slower.
Re: (Score:2)
> sodium is much cheaper than lithium
Sodium USED to be cheaper... but the market is currently flooded with lithium which has completed eroded the economic advantage to sodium.
Take a look at the prices for consumer LFP right now - you can get 16kwh packs for under $2k.
Re: (Score:2)
Outside of very temporary glitches, there's no world in which sodium isn't vastly cheaper than Lithium. No one talks about sodium deposits or mining sodium because it's readily available all over 70% of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a global glut in lithium right now, and manufacturing facilities for these types of batteries are well established. It will be some time before even CATL can scale production to meet demand.
Sodium chemistries need to focus on what they're best at. Once they scale manufacturing they can start going after markets they aren't good at.
Re: (Score:3)
No, sodium is much cheaper than lithium in the form that is needed to make batteries; recent commodity prices for NaOH have been 10x to 20x cheaper than bulk LiOH, although this isn't all the cost. The technology development is now to a state where complete sodium batteries are cheaper the lithium ones and has been for a year or so, and the technology is improving fast.
What does 10x to 20x mean in the real world? Where can I get sodium batteries appreciably cheaper than LFP? When will reduced charge efficiency and terrible voltage curves be addressed?
You are correct that the energy density is indeed worse, but that gap has also been closing in recent years. Modern Na batteries have better energy density than the Li batteries in cars from six or seven years ago. If you're trying to build a lot of cheap electric cars then the lower price is very likely more important than the cars being somewhat heavier and thus a bit slower.
Yea well you are going to need to either double string voltages or use a lot more copper.
Frankly I'm tired of endless noise involving battery breakthroughs right around the corner that unless I can actually buy something better and cheaper I'm going to dismiss everything as noise including real products that fail to live up
Re: (Score:3)
Hmm, who do I place my faith in on this question, you or CATL? It's a tricky one, because on the one hand we have the world's largest traction battery maker with a long history of innovation in actually available products, but on the other hand there's this Slashdot poster who's got a lot of confidence.
Re: (Score:3)
Being snarky is usually a poor decision making strategy. You don't have to put your faith anywhere though, the market will reveal itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Blithely dismissing the value of a new tech by pointing out the wildly obvious without addressing the less-obvious is also not a great strategy for decision-making. See my other posts for details of why Na is likely to win in some segments of the EV market.
Re: (Score:2)
Power density is irrelevant in a traction application when the size is determined by the energy density.
The extra weight could matter since it is already a problem with lithium batteries.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, the OP has it the wrong way round. Sodium has better power density than LFP, by and large, although NMC is still better. It has lower energy density, which means it won’t be in premium EV traction batteries except in hybrid Na-Li double batteries any time soon. But it’s well suited for aux batteries that need a big surge of power and cold-start capabilities.
Re: (Score:2)
> Sodium has better power density than LFP
Sodium: 175Wh/kg
LFP: 220Wh/kg
LFP has 25% higher power density
Sodium's advantage comes in a broader functional temperature range. There was a time when sodium chemistry was also cheaper but with lithium prices plunging due to oversupply, that price advantage was erased.
Re: (Score:2)
Wh/kg or Wh/l is energy density, not power density. Power density is W/kg or W/l. It depends on internal resistance, ion mobility and electrode design. Sodium cells have better ion transport at low temperature than LFP and don't have the plating risk.
Lithium Titanate Oxide also worked for +10 years (Score:2)
Thousands of vehicles are running around with these batteries for +10 years.
Excellent. Now I need these for other devices (Score:2)
But even getting LiFePo4 (already much safer than Li-Ion and LiPo), is difficult and I found only a 100Wh power-bank. Nothing I use, including laptop and phone, actually needs Li-Ion or LiPo energy densities. They are either excessive or significantly too low.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are becoming more common. Anker uses LiFePO4 in their solix f3000. 3KWh and you can add a couple more 3KWh to it I think. https://support.ankersolix.com... [support.ankersolix.com] I got one last year, those things are heavy. 90lbs. Thank god for wheels.
Gweihir was talking about power banks rather than power stations. Basically all current model power stations from the major vendors are using LFP... it is the opposite story for power banks.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I was. I would like something in the 10...20Wh range with USB-PD using actually safe battery tech. But nothing seems available.
Re: (Score:2)
LFP batteries are pretty easy to come by. Power banks are getting easier. You do have to do careful research with the small power banks, as they seem to want to obscure the battery technology whether they use LFPs or not. I looked at a pack at Costco which could have been almost anything but turned out to be LiPo, I had to go to the manufacturer's website to figure out which product lines used which chemistry.
The pack I keep in my car is a LFP I got from Harbor Freight on sale for about $65 some few years a
Good approach. (Score:3)
industry’s transition toward a dual-chemistry ecosystem, where sodium-ion and lithium-ion batteries complement each other to meet diverse customer needs,
While you normally get less range from sodium-ion, it balances out the low-temperature discharge problem. As such, while you sacrifice peak range, you get a more stable stable year-round range in environments prone to very cold weather. If integrated correctly, it could also act as a bulkhead against thermal runaway destroying the entire battery pack. However, solid state lithium-ion batteries are on the horizon (2030-ish) so that's not a huge issue.
Regardless, sodium-ion battery technology needs to be developed further because we need all the battery chemistries we can get. Relying on any single battery chemistry is a way of creating an economic single point of failure which is ripe for exploitation.
Re: (Score:2)
While you normally get less range from sodium-ion, it balances out the low-temperature discharge problem. As such, while you sacrifice peak range, you get a more stable stable year-round range in environments prone to very cold weather.
Even in cold weather, it seems questionable. I've read that lithium ion batteries recover about 80% of the lost capacity when you bring them from -15C to 15C, not counting the energy wasted on heating the battery. The sodium ion batteries supposedly keep up to 85% of their capacity at ridiculously cold temperatures, but as far as I know, they still have to be heated to provide normal current levels on output. So maybe the sodium ion batteries lose 5% to 10% less range in the cold, but because they start
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does it matter? That's an operational extreme. Unless you are building electric vehicles for Siberia's population, the very low-temperature performance is largely irrelevant, as we don't have large populations living in these environments.
It's not relevant even there, because unless the car engineers are nuts, the first thing they are going to do is heat the battery up to operating temperature. This literally matters only if you don't do that.
Re: (Score:2)
I think we're likely to see segmentation in the EV market:
Na will win in:
1. low-range, cost-capped EVs. Exactly like this first model. City cars, superminis, two and three wheelers. It will be a chemistry of choice in emerging markets because it fits local needs.
2. Some types of commercial fleets, such as urban delivery vans, buses with depot charging, municipal vehicles. They have predictable routes, need cold tolerance, long calendar life, excellent safety, great reliability, low TCO.
Re: (Score:2)
low-range, cost-capped EVs. Exactly like this first model.
I've always believed the low-hanging fruit for EV adoption are people who meet this criteria -
1) Are a two-car family.
2) One of those cars is due for replacement in the next couple of years.
3) Live in a house or townhouse where they can charge at home
There are tens-of-millions of Americans who would meet this criteria. It allows them to have one EV car for driving around town and another car for those times when they want to drive to
Re: Good approach. (Score:2)
It also depends how easy a charger will be to install in that house. Some people have said that they pay someone $700 and it's done. Thats fine if you only have one car to charge. My house will need a lot more power cables to be run from the main panel end to the other end where the garage is, and other than putting a charger for each spot in the garage there isn't a place to put other chargers unless they are on a post outside next to the driveway.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you need a charger for each spot in the garage? Does everyone in your household commute 200 miles a day and need to plug in every single night?
They also made dual-cable EVSEs for exactly this reason. Two vehicles, one circuit. This is more a convenience than a necessity though.
I swear every time you post under one of these stories you come up with even more elaborate scenarios to claim that you - and by extension everyone else - simply can't make EVs work.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
I live with my mother in law and she has her side of the garage and I have mine. There is my wife and two daughters that park in the driveway. I park in the garage because it's my house and I get the garage. If I was to put chargers only in the garage than cars that get parked out on the driveway would constantly need to be swapped into the garage. We have an exact placement that allows everyone to use their car without having to rely on anyone else. If chargers were placed so that no longer worked tha
Re: (Score:2)
This is just so goddamn tiresome.
"EVs would never work for my peculiar, distinct use case, therefore they would never work for anyone, ever."
Re: Good approach. (Score:2)
I didn't say they wouldn't work for everyone. Seriously where did I say that? I said that they won't work for families with more than one or two EVs (which will be a lot of families if EVs go 90%) and you had nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
It also depends how easy a charger will be to install in that house
It also depends how far you drive each day and how long the car is parked at home. We've owned our EV since the summer of 2019 and we've only ever charged at home via a standard 110 volt electrical outlet. We've never paid any money to have an EV charger installed.
Our battery is 64 kWh.
110 volts @ 14 amps is 1.54 kilowatts (kW). If it's plugged in overnight for 12 hours (7pm - 7am) that adds around 18 kWh (12 hours x 1.54 kW).
Ou
Re: (Score:2)
Do those folks exist? Sure. But they are a tiny percentage of commuters.
So it's ok that they can't buy a vehicle for their purpose? Because they are a minority.
Re: (Score:2)
So it's ok that they can't buy a vehicle for their purpose? Because they are a minority.
You're asking an edge-case question about an edge case.
By the time we get to a day where there are zero ICE vehicles available to purchase for a scenario like this, there will be many, many EVs available that will address this use case.
The Sodium-Ion Batteries being discussed in this very post will provide the battery capacity that this person will need.
Re: (Score:2)
We are talking about a day where there are only 10% ICEs available right now. That will effectively make them 100% unavailable, because if 50% still want something that is artificially cut down to 10% than the price will be sky high.
Re: (Score:2)
We are talking about a day where there are only 10% ICEs available right now
Yes, we are talking right now about a day that is still decades away.
And by the time that day arrives there will be EVs available that address that edge use-case. Along with millions of used ICE vehicles that will continue to be available.
Re: (Score:2)
Do those folks exist? Sure. But they are a tiny percentage of commuters.
So it's ok that they can't buy a vehicle for their purpose? Because they are a minority.
This happens all the time.
I want a lightweight commuter vehicle. Something like an updated Geo Metro would be fine. I don't care what's under the hood, battery or ICE. I might be able to buy something like this in China, or maybe as a kei-class vehicle in Japan, but not in the West.
I want a phone with a QWERTY keyboard, removable storage and a proper headphone jack. Maybe not "impossible" to find, but I'd have to play kickstarter/aliexpress roulette to get one.
These two examples show that I am a minority. M
Re: (Score:2)
I hate capitalism, but for some reason we still have it. You are talking about conditions set by the market. People accept that as part of our economy. Totally different than a government setting a fake limit to achieve a result. Then they have an obligation to the people they may kill because they are trying to use an EV where they shouldn't.
Re: (Score:2)
I don’t disagree, but I think it’s going to be coming in markets outside the US first. Asia, emerging markets, then Europe — where small cars truly are small, and in particular where a small car is a big step up from a bike or a moped only.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not how this works. Yes, range "disappears" when a battery is cold, but it reappears as the battery warms up (which it does during operation); the only range actually lost due to a cold battery is that which you burn before the battery warms up. If you're plugged into the wall and you preheat your cabin enough in advance of departing, the car will preheat its battery as well and the amount lost
confusion reigns (Score:5, Informative)
In the summary, that's lithium iron phosphate, not lithium ion phosphate. I wish people would stop calling them that and instead call them lithium ferro-phosphate (from which comes the LFP acronym) because this is a mistake just waiting to happen.
The aux battery use case is almost as interesting (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm excited to see the impact of sodium in delivering ever-cheaper EVs, given that upfront costs especially at the low end of the market remain a major barrier. I'm hopeful that they may finally help to deliver on the promise of EVs for a new market tier that exploits the mechanical simplicity of the drivetrain and low-cost battery materials to undercut cheap new ICE vehicles.
But almost as interesting to me is the aux battery value. Li isn't well-suited to take over from Pb especially for heavier duty vehicles because it's more expensive, is more challenging for safety ahd thermal management, has poor cold cranking performance, has quite high fault sensitivity, and solves for the problem of volumetric density above all, which isn't the main issue for a starter battery -- starter batteries are all about peak power ie cold-cranking amps, which requires power density instead of energy density.
You need 5kW of power for two to five seconds, potentially at -20C. And that's what sodium can deliver just as well as lead. They will do great on safety and abuse tolerance, ie frequent shallow cycling, the odd deep discharge, long idle periods, and bugger all thermal management. They have the power density needed, and their lower gravimetric and volumetric density than Li is irrelevant. The get rid of Pb recycling liabilities and will have fewer warranty replacements and generally last much longer. They can do the job of being boring, forgiving, cheap and cold-tolerant.
Thanks for your aux battery use case insights! (Score:2)
Mod parent up! Been wondering for a while when new battery types will widely displace lead-acid. It seems like sodium has a lot of advantages there are you list. (No mod points right now, sigh.)
Structural cost decreases are *the* big Na thing (Score:2)
Li has behaved like other types of tech such as solar PV, wind or DRAM over the last 30 years, in that every year it's got better and cheaper. Everyone still has the expectation that this can continue, but LFP is getting close to its thermodynamic cost floor and may be reaching the maturity ceiling for process improvement. So we get further declines but they're more incremental and are delivered by scale, integration and financial engineering.
By contrast, sodium offers a path to a new round of structural co
Re: (Score:2)
Li has behaved like other types of tech such as solar PV, wind or DRAM over the last 30 years, in that every year it's got better and cheaper. Everyone still has the expectation that this can continue, but LFP is getting close to its thermodynamic cost floor and may be reaching the maturity ceiling for process improvement. So we get further declines but they're more incremental and are delivered by scale, integration and financial engineering.
What on earth is a "thermodynamic cost floor" ? What is the objective basis for believing sodium is going to make a substantive difference? Even if lithium were free it wouldn't dramatically impact overall battery cost.
By contrast, sodium offers a path to a new round of structural cost decline: a new S-curve. We get new learning rates and new capex cycles, which can deliver a path to substantially lower cost. I'm excited to see where it leads.
Yea well I'm still waiting for the MRAM SSD I was promised over a decade ago. Just because something is different doesn't mean jack.
Re: (Score:2)
A thermodynamic cost floor is the irreducible minimum cost set by the fundamental mass, energy, and material requirements of a chemistry.
The objective reason for believing that sodium is going to make a substantive difference is that the raw materials cost for sodium-based batteries are much lower than they are for lithium-based batteries. And while it’s true that pack cost includes much more than cell cost:
1. Cell costs are still 60 to 70% of pack costs, so cutting cell costs has a big impact on pack
Re: (Score:3)
A thermodynamic cost floor is the irreducible minimum cost set by the fundamental mass, energy, and material requirements of a chemistry.
Cost is not a fundamental quantity and current lithium batteries are nowhere near their maximum mass density. From what I remember it was at least 4x away.
The objective reason for believing that sodium is going to make a substantive difference is that the raw materials cost for sodium-based batteries are much lower than they are for lithium-based batteries.
If lithium inputs were free it would make little difference in terms of overall cost. Lithium is still a tenth of overall battery cost while prices have declined 90% over the last 15 years.
Cell costs are still 60 to 70% of pack costs, so cutting cell costs has a big impact on pack costs.
This is as useful as saying most of the cost of a battery is the battery.
Itâ(TM)s not just the cathode costs, many Na chemistries use hard carbon, have no graphite constraints, and thereâ(TM)s no Li plating risks, cutting anode costs.
Graphite ... carbon ...same shit. Hard carbon costs more than graphite.
Li pack costs came down substantially as the other systems within them beyond the cell, mainly pack structure, cooling, BMS, and safety, were optimised to suit the particular nature of different Li chemistries over time, and the same process can happen for Na packs.
BMS is a mature techn
Re: (Score:1)
Where did I say that cost is a fundamental quality? The answer: nowhere. So you’re arguing with a strawman. Pointlessly. Li is absolutely not going to be 4x more energy dense than today. To think you later accuse me of wishful thinking! This is argument for the sake of argument. You asked what a thermodynamic cost floor was, and I told you. That’s all there was to that particular exchange, except that you were aggressive and dickish throughout.
And of course you carry on in the same vein. Pretend
Re: (Score:2)
What on earth is a "thermodynamic cost floor" ?
Things have cost floors. You can't profitably make something below this floor, because even as the cost of your value-add approaches zero, the inputs still cost something: materials, electricity, etc. Lithium batteries, due to the volume of manufacturing and global competition, are approaching this point. However, despite the drop in prices over time, you can see it's leveling off in recent years. This is why. The same pattern is apparent is solar panels, displays, mobile phones, etc. All the things t
Re: (Score:2)
Things have cost floors. You can't profitably make something below this floor, because even as the cost of your value-add approaches zero,
I disagree with the rather Malthusian perspective on cost. Cost of inputs and ability to profit are not static. There is no actual "cost floor". I still have zero clue what the heck "thermodynamic cost floor" means. What does thermodynamics have to do with cost and profits?
Lithium batteries, due to the volume of manufacturing and global competition, are approaching this point. However, despite the drop in prices over time, you can see it's leveling off in recent years.
I'm not sure where this is going. The rate of improvement always levels off for everything.
All the things that are made in huge volume by aggressive competitors are driven towards some cost floor.
Much of the established industrial base is being leveraged to make sodium batteries. People seem to think sodium means starting over and bein
Re: (Score:2)
The rate of improvement always levels off for everything.
Thermodynamics at work! While understanding the concept, the word somehow flusters you..
ending streams of hype
I think we've all come to hate this. However, this news is about one of the rare instances of the hype cycle ending in an actual product, so you're impotent rage is misplaced.
nor fucked up voltage curves
This isn't real. Sodium's curves are not dissimilar from lead-acid; a solved problem for decades now. The Sodium-Ion curve follows a straightforward, nearly linear drop. This is actually easier to deal with than Lithium's curve from a battery m
Re: (Score:2)
Thermodynamics at work! While understanding the concept, the word somehow flusters you..
Nonsense is inherently not understandable. I asked a question "What does thermodynamics have to do with cost and profits?" ... the failure to respond speaks for itself.
However, this news is about one of the rare instances of the hype cycle ending in an actual product, so you're impotent rage is misplaced.
What actual product would this be? Where can I buy a sodium battery worth owning cheaper and better than LFP? What was that? Nowhere? ... Yea I thought so.
This isn't real. Sodium's curves are not dissimilar from lead-acid; a solved problem for decades now.
It most certainly is real. For comparison a common 12v lead acid battery is fully charged at 12.9 and fully discharged at 11.6. With lead acid if you actually use this and get anywher
Right on time for EVs in Canada? (Score:1)
Liars (Score:1)