CATL sodium ion doesn’t have less energy density than LPF batteries.
It also works well at higher and lower temperatures than all lithium ion batteries. Charges faster. Safer than the safest LPF batteries. Materials are also abundant and inexpensive everywhere in the world.
Current sodium chemistries have a kinda shitty voltage curve. I expect it will get better, but right now a LOT of the power delivery happens with voltages below 3 volts. LFP batteries deliver most of their power at higher voltages which lets you use thinner conductors and cheaper/more efficient electronics.
Again, not saying that it’s necessarily an inherent flaw in sodium chemistries, just that the current generation that people can access and test right now is unsuitable for some tasks.
I think I’ll need a citation, from what I can find, the LFP chemistry still is more dense than CATL sodium, which makes sense because, well, the physics are what they are, sodium is about three times more massive than lithium. The best argument I could see on this point is debating whether there’s a space in the market between sodium and NMC for LFP (if you are already compromising on density, then what’s another further compromise to get the other qualities you mention for sodium).
LFP more energy dense, last longer (by a lot) and have lower self-discharge. Sodium are cheaper and work better in cold temps, but add significant weight to cars, which makes this a less efficient application.
I suggest people not learn science by press releases.
I think Americans liking giant cars are a bigger issue with that than the weight of the batteries themselves.
CATL claim 10,000 cycles for their sodium battery which is way more than your article. Is selectscience.net a trusted source? CATL at least makes batteries in the real world but the burden of proof is on them this year.
CATL sodium ion doesn’t have less energy density than LPF batteries.
It also works well at higher and lower temperatures than all lithium ion batteries. Charges faster. Safer than the safest LPF batteries. Materials are also abundant and inexpensive everywhere in the world.
Current sodium chemistries have a kinda shitty voltage curve. I expect it will get better, but right now a LOT of the power delivery happens with voltages below 3 volts. LFP batteries deliver most of their power at higher voltages which lets you use thinner conductors and cheaper/more efficient electronics.
Again, not saying that it’s necessarily an inherent flaw in sodium chemistries, just that the current generation that people can access and test right now is unsuitable for some tasks.
I think I’ll need a citation, from what I can find, the LFP chemistry still is more dense than CATL sodium, which makes sense because, well, the physics are what they are, sodium is about three times more massive than lithium. The best argument I could see on this point is debating whether there’s a space in the market between sodium and NMC for LFP (if you are already compromising on density, then what’s another further compromise to get the other qualities you mention for sodium).
https://www.selectscience.net/article/the-growing-debate-between-lithium-iron-phosphate-and-sodium-ion-battery-technologies
LFP more energy dense, last longer (by a lot) and have lower self-discharge. Sodium are cheaper and work better in cold temps, but add significant weight to cars, which makes this a less efficient application.
I suggest people not learn science by press releases.
I think Americans liking giant cars are a bigger issue with that than the weight of the batteries themselves.
CATL claim 10,000 cycles for their sodium battery which is way more than your article. Is selectscience.net a trusted source? CATL at least makes batteries in the real world but the burden of proof is on them this year.
Then why isn’t everyone doing it? CATL not wanting to share?
Patents. CATL leads the world in battery R&D, while US industry leads the world in executive compensation.