Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

DukeOfGeek OP t1_isypdqq wrote

So this is a big step forward for home/grid storage. Zinc is a safe, cheap widely available resource. We make pennies out of it.

12

John-pala t1_isyqr6l wrote

Tried to read up but could only find one downside, that it recharges slower. Is there any other downside compared to lithium?

5

DukeOfGeek OP t1_isys6zq wrote

Probably larger battery for same amount of storage. But if you're just bolting it to a concrete slab at a PV/windfarm that's not a big deal.

10

John-pala t1_isyu4vv wrote

So if sieze isnt an issue these types only have upsides? Im thinking energy storage for houses, villas and departementbuildings.

2

FellowConspirator t1_isz689l wrote

The zinc batteries have a volumetric energy density of 100 Wh/L, compared to, say, 450 Wh/L for the NMC lithium battery in a Tesla. you need 4.5x as much physical space to hold the same amount of energy.

That may not be a dealbreaker for many applications. Replace a Powerwall with a dorm-fridge sized one of these in your basement or garage and you’d probably be just as happy (and happier still if it’s cheap).

5

DukeOfGeek OP t1_iszhycj wrote

Also can't burn. It's even less of an issue if you are bolting them to the ground at a wind farm where land is dirt cheap.

2

Surur t1_isyqw30 wrote

>> “Salient Energy says its zinc-ion batteries are the solution to all those issues. They use no lithium, no cobalt, and no nickel. The zinc and manganese are obtained from North American sources. Furthermore, the risk of fire is eliminated. The manufacturing process emits 66% fewer greenhouse gas emissions than the process that makes lithium-ion batteries. And oh, yeah, they cost less as well. What’s not to like?”

>That’s all well and good, but the devil could be in the details. For example, a rechargeable energy storage system would be not likeable if it eliminated fire risks but took days to recharge, or lost capacity after only a few dozen charging cycles.

>> Apparently, Salient has that all figured out. The company pledges the same “power, footprint, and service life as lithium-ion based systems.”

7

Guano-Loco t1_iszvk6k wrote

They still need to bring the price down to under $1k plus install to grab the home storage market.

1

GarugasRevenge t1_isz1n7r wrote

Usually batteries are stuck in the lab stage, this officially moves this battery tech beyond that.

5

TerpenesByMS t1_isyzy3p wrote

Sick! Probably less fire hazard than sodium ion, too.

Large scale cheap batteries that still charge and discharge reasonably quick. As long as the energy density is on par with NiCd rechargeables, that's all we need.

If it's not powerful enough / stores enough charge, just scale it up some. Stationary batteries just don't have all the same constraints as mobile ones.

3

HiCanIPetYourCat t1_isz65nh wrote

I’m not seeing any downside here, this looks like a huge step forward for home backup and solar/wind gap filling.

2

mart1373 t1_it06j5u wrote

Well, finally a story about battery technology that’s not gonna end up in the “never reaches commercial viability” pile.

2