Battery tech suitable for future iPhone promises 3x the power density, full charge in minu...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 47
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,519member
    ksec said:
    Solid Battery has been around for a VERY long time. What we keep hearing about these breakthrough are ways to make it cheaper. But it is still FAR from our normal Li-Ion Battery prices. Existing Battery cost less then $10 in BOM, a similar size Solid Battery would have cost more then $300 even when manufactured at scale.   

    The news and press didn't mention the cost saving. But even it is 50% cheaper, it would still be $150, on a cost per energy, ( Similar Li-Ion battery would be less then $30 ) it would still be 5x more expensive. And if you calculate the Margin in the end product, you will likely have to pay $300+ more for a phone with this tech inside. 

    I am no sure if consumer would spend $300 more for a Phone with 3x larger capacity at the same size.
    This isn't quite the same as existing solid battery tech, and it appears to have a much simpler and less costly manufacturing process. The study is at the link in the story, and is free if you have academic credentials.
    The last sentence of the abstract says: "The result is a safe, low-cost, lithium or sodium rechargeable battery of high energy density and long cycle life."

    I don't think they would say that if ksec's double-the-cost post were correct.
    randominternetpersonStrangeDayslostkiwiwaverboylolliver
  • Reply 22 of 47
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,278member
    linkman said:
    Apple might be drooling at the idea that they can make their devices even thinner with this battery but I need to state this clearly: THEY ARE THIN AND LIGHT ENOUGH RIGHT NOW. If this technology pans out then put this battery in and give us 24+ hour usage on most of our mobile devices.
    Using a denser battery tech to make a smaller device isn't the only benefit—you can also add more technology. I don't expect Apple to ever say with their iPhone, "let's keep the battery volume the same size to get 3x the usage on a single charge." No scenario I can think of makes that happen. Consider the iPhone 6S series which added the haptic engine which reduced the battery size. Then you have the iPhone 7 series which brought back the larger battery when they removed the headphone jack, and which also allowed for a barometric vent to be added in its place and everything at the top to be moved down so that considerably better camera tech could be added. Going with a smaller battery is going to happen once the technology allows for significant density growth. There's just no other reasonable solution for a CE company. Even on the Apple Watch—which is where I'd think a new, low volume, and expensive battery tech would be tested first in a shipping product, if not something even smaller, like AirPods—if they can get triple the density they'd very deduce that battery volume by at least half. I certainly would.
    edited March 2017 randominternetpersonMathieuWacowichStrangeDayslostkiwiedredshaminowatto_cobralolliver
  • Reply 23 of 47
    jonagoldjonagold Posts: 31member
    Fake news
  • Reply 24 of 47
    jdgazjdgaz Posts: 357member
    If its good enough for Goodenough, then its good enough for me.
    lostkiwi
  • Reply 25 of 47
    "A team from the University of Texas, led by 94-year-old John Goodenough"

    It appears the technology was largely developed in Portugal.From what I can tell, his entire input to the design is putting his name on it so its gets more recognition. Apparently another example of a woman's research getting covered by a man's name.

    "The glass, made from lithium, sodium, or potassium"

    The glass is not made from any of these. This refers to the electrodes. Current li-ion technologies used compound electrodes so the ions can be pulled off cleanly during charging. Those other elements lower the voltage of the reaction, and thus energy density. With a solid electrolyte the ions do not reach the electrode (not in the same manner anyway) so you can use all-metal electrodes and recover that voltage loss.
    edited March 2017
  • Reply 26 of 47
    MathieuWacowichMathieuWacowich Posts: 10unconfirmed, member
    Soli said:
    linkman said:
    Apple might be drooling at the idea that they can make their devices even thinner with this battery but I need to state this clearly: THEY ARE THIN AND LIGHT ENOUGH RIGHT NOW. If this technology pans out then put this battery in and give us 24+ hour usage on most of our mobile devices.
    Using a denser battery tech to make a smaller device isn't the only benefit—you can also add more technology. I don't expect Apple to ever say with their iPhone, "let's keep the battery volume the same size to get 3x the usage on a single charge." No scenario I can think of makes that happen. Consider the iPhone 6S series which added the haptic engine which reduced the battery size. Then you have the iPhone 7 series which brought back the larger battery when they removed the headphone jack, and which also allowed for a barometric vent to be added in its place and everything at the top to be moved down so that considerably better camera tech could be added. Going with a smaller battery is going to happen once the technology allows for significant density growth. There's just no other reasonable solution for a CE company. Even on the Apple Watch—which is where I'd think a new, low volume, and expensive battery tech would be tested first in a shipping product, if not something even smaller, like AirPods—if they can get triple the density they'd very deduce that battery volume by at least half. I certainly would.
    An iPhone SE with 3D Touch and all day battery life would be dope.
    lostkiwiedredwatto_cobraspheric
  • Reply 27 of 47
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,596member
    linkman said:
    Apple might be drooling at the idea that they can make their devices even thinner with this battery but I need to state this clearly: THEY ARE THIN AND LIGHT ENOUGH RIGHT NOW. If this technology pans out then put this battery in and give us 24+ hour usage on most of our mobile devices.
    I'd like a device as thin as the ones in sci-fi shows such as Expanse, thank you. You can't advance the state of the art if you stop with "good enough". The frontier must be continually pushed. This is what makes other devices and form factors possible. 
    edited March 2017 wonkothesanesphericlolliver
  • Reply 28 of 47
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,596member

    jonagold said:
    Fake news
    Proof?
  • Reply 29 of 47
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,898administrator
    jonagold said:
    Fake news
    Under no definition of "Fake news," even the asinine political ones, is this that.
    lostkiwiSoliwonkothesanewatto_cobrasphericlolliver
  • Reply 30 of 47
    Fatman said:
    If this is in fact a reality, the magnitude of this discovery cannot be underestimated - this is a game changer that will change industries and life as we know it.
    It will also lengthen the upgrade cycle, battery life being the number 1 reason to upgrade.
  • Reply 31 of 47
    axcess99axcess99 Posts: 36member
    ksec said:
    Solid Battery has been around for a VERY long time. What we keep hearing about these breakthrough are ways to make it cheaper. But it is still FAR from our normal Li-Ion Battery prices. Existing Battery cost less then $10 in BOM, a similar size Solid Battery would have cost more then $300 even when manufactured at scale.   

    The news and press didn't mention the cost saving. But even it is 50% cheaper, it would still be $150, on a cost per energy, ( Similar Li-Ion battery would be less then $30 ) it would still be 5x more expensive. And if you calculate the Margin in the end product, you will likely have to pay $300+ more for a phone with this tech inside. 

    I am no sure if consumer would spend $300 more for a Phone with 3x larger capacity at the same size.
    but would they spend $100 more for the same capacity that charges in minutes, doesn't wear out over its life, and is lighter and/or smaller?
    StrangeDayswatto_cobralolliver
  • Reply 32 of 47
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    A team from the University of Texas, led by 94-year-old John Goodenough…
    See, THIS makes me excited. Having the name behind it lets me think that it’s more than just a pipe dream or proof of concept. But it’s yet another breakthrough in battery tech, so I refuse to get any hopes up until I see a product that uses it.
    irelandSpamSandwich
  • Reply 33 of 47
    irelandireland Posts: 17,671member
    jdgaz said:
    If its good enough for Goodenough, then its good enough for me.
    If it's goodenough for goodenough, it's goodenough for me.
    edited March 2017 Soli
  • Reply 34 of 47
    davendaven Posts: 544member
    Soli said:
    The new technology uses glass electrolyte instead of a liquid solution, and eliminates the "metal whiskers" which can bridge the gabs between positive and negative plates when a cell is charged too quickly. The metal whiskers generated can short the battery and cause fires and explosions.
    1) Those "metal whiskers" are aptly referred to as dendrites. This isn't an old David Pogue article from the NYTimes, so I don't think we need it dumbed down that much for this audience.


    2) Is this tech a reality or simply one of many battery technologies that show promise in a lab environment? Mike Zimmerman's plastic battery tech shows great promise but I don't think his tech is ready for market.


    3) I'd love for the best battery on the market to be called the Goodenough battery.
    Here is a clip from Pogue's PBS special. Also very interesting as it has the potential to reduce manufacturing costs, increase energy density,  and shorten charging times.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/tech/new-damage-proof-battery-has-higher-energy-density-wont-explode/
    edited March 2017 Soli
  • Reply 35 of 47
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,172member
    Sounds great like all the other battery tech news sound sounds great and may not ever see, and if we do, will be years down the road before it can be mass produced.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 36 of 47
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,459member
    Fatman said:
    If this is in fact a reality, the magnitude of this discovery cannot be underestimated - this is a game changer that will change industries and life as we know it.
    It will also lengthen the upgrade cycle, battery life being the number 1 reason to upgrade.
    Really?  Where did you get that statistic from??
  • Reply 37 of 47
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,658member
    The new technology uses glass electrolyte instead of a liquid solution, and eliminates the "metal whiskers" which can bridge the gabs between positive and negative plates when a cell is charged too quickly. The metal whiskers generated can short the battery and cause fires and explosions.
    This most likely the reason Samsung batteries were catching fire. It had something to do how they were charging the batteries and it was producing internal shorts. Metal whisker growth is nothing new, this had been an issue for a long time especially when you have rapid current changes, the same thing can happen in a multilayer PCB board, any time you have layers of conductive material with insulators between metal migration want to happen.
  • Reply 38 of 47
    planktonplankton Posts: 108member
    I've been reading about battery breakthroughs for 20 years and they have all been like the Free Beer Tomorrow sign in a pub. (BTW, where is that fuel cell for laptops?)
    SoliSpamSandwich
  • Reply 39 of 47
    shaminoshamino Posts: 412member
    But you know that you'll never get a phone that can go 3x as long between charges.  If such a battery is invented and becomes practical and affordable, the phone manufacturers (including Apple) will shrink the battery to 1/3 its size and use the remaining space for something else (or just make the device even thinner, just for bragging rights.)  You'll still be unable to go a whole day between charges if you actually use it for running apps.

    https://www.eviscerati.org/comics/comic/hd/2016/09/Solving-Wrong-Problem

    tallest skilbeowulfschmidtwaverboy
  • Reply 40 of 47
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,229moderator



    But you know that you'll never get a phone that can go 3x as long between charges.  If such a battery is invented and becomes practical and affordable, the phone manufacturers (including Apple) will shrink the battery to 1/3 its size and use the remaining space for something else (or just make the device even thinner, just for bragging rights.)  You'll still be unable to go a whole day between charges if you actually use it for running apps.

    It wouldn't matter if they shrunk the battery down, external battery cases can make up for it for people who need the extra. Being able to charge in minutes would make charging a non-issue. Battery life is pretty good on mobile devices these days, it's pretty rare that someone runs completely out of battery during a day. The bigger deal with this kind of technology would be for vehicles. Being able to charge up so quickly, have the larger capacity, resilience to lower tempertaures and possibly lower cost will vastly accelerate the transition from combustion fuels to electric. Same for home batteries where they'd be the primary energy source charged by both solar and the grid and if any power source failed, the equipment in the home could run more than a full day so no worrying about desktop computers shutting down or fridges/freezers.

    The larger applications like these with fewer units will let them field test the technology and optimize the production to then scale it to billions of mobile devices. It might well take a few years to see it in mass production but it's nice to know there are improvements on the way. Making the batteries non-combustible would be a worthwhile improvement on its own.

Sign In or Register to comment.