New Cobalt-Free Silicon EV Battery Is The Best Thing Ever - eviltoast

“This breakthrough development translates into a remarkable improvement in cell-core energy density, reaching 2,000Wh/L in batteries and approximately 1,700Wh/L in full-size EV batteries – more than double the performance of current state-of-the-art technologies,”

“Sienza’s 3D pure silicon anode has demonstrated an average gravimetric capacity of 2,941 mAh/g,” Professor Gharib said. “This means that for every gram of silicon, our batteries can store 2,941 milliampere-hours of electricity, significantly higher than the industry standard for graphite, with a gravimetric capacity of 372 mAh/g.”

Aside from completely avoiding the cobalt issue, Sienza notes that its manufacturing process does not rely on the solvent-based coating systems deployed for producing conventional lithium-ion batteries. Sienza cites one commonly used solvent in particular, N-methyl-pyrrolidone (NMP).

  • Ducky@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    Weight isn’t as big a concern with EVs because they require more energy to accelerate, but they get more energy back when regeneratively braking. The biggest impact on EV range is aerodynamic, by a long shot. The F-150 lightning, for example, has the same efficiency with the standard and extended range batteries, even though the extended range battery is 500 lbs heavier.

      • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t think that’s what the op was arguing with. I think they were just saying that weight is not the first thing that needs optimized here.

      • Ducky@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah absolutely. I never said anything to the contrary. There are reasons to reduce EV weight, but range ain’t one of them.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      230 miles on 98 kWh capacity = 0.4260 kWh per mile

      Vs

      300 miles on 131 kWh capacity = 0.4366 kWh per mile

      Is that significant? Eh… But at the same time I wouldn’t throw 500 lb weights in the back and drive around claiming it didn’t impact performance.

      • weew@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        But at the same time I wouldn’t throw 500 lb weights in the back and drive around claiming it didn’t impact performance.

        Yeah, you put it in the driver’s seat

        Ayyyoooooooo