"Popcorn" particle paths promise better lithium-ion batteries

Researchers at Sandia National Laboratories confirmed the particle by particle mechanism by which lithium ions moving in and out of the electrodes of lithium-iron-phosphate (LiFePO4, or LFP), findings, the better performance in lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles, medical equipment and machines could do.

The research is reported in an article titled "Intercalation pathway LiFePO4Electrode revealed in n particles of nanoscale charge status mapping" in the journal of nano letters, 2013, 13 (3), pp. 866-872. Authors are Sandia physicist Farid El Gabaly and William Chueh from Stanford University.

LFP, a natural mineral olivine family is one of the newer materials in lithium-ion batteries and is known as safer and longer-lasting than the lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2) used composite in smartphones, laptops and other consumer electronics.

While LFP material for these reasons is of interest to researchers and battery maker, is the process by which ions and the LFP move lithium, battery saves and lifts his energy is not well understood. This proves to be an obstacle for the material wide-spread adoption.

Cathode materials such as LFP are critical in the search for higher capacity, long life, lithium-ion batteries for applications where no batteries to replace, in consumer electronics are as easy or as often as they. Larger applications where lithium cobalt oxide could be replaced by LFP battery cells are electric vehicles and aircraft.

Popcorn-like particle movements seen on microscopy technique

Complete observation battery cross sections, researchers have created important insights on a controversy over the process that limited unloading rates and charge the battery.

Previous attempts to speed optimizing charge/discharge included coating the particles to increase their electrical conductivity and to accelerate reduction of grain size to their transformation, but the initiation process that well may have overlooked the critical speed determining step in such a way that lithium without moving a particle to its interior.

Use X-ray microscopy, ultra-thin slices of a commercial battery review Sandia of researchers evidence found that recharge and discharge in LFP is limited by the introduction of PHASE transformation or nucleation and is independent of the size of the particles.

The LFP electrode forms a mosaic of homogeneous particles, the lithium-rich or lithium poor condition are. The Sandia research confirmed the particle-particle, or mosaic, way of the phase formation by adding lithium ions at the cathode. The results contradict previous assumptions.

"A theory of the spread said that if all particles were exposed to lithium, they would discharge all start slowly along in a concurrent PHASE transformation," said El-Gabaly. "We have now seen that the process rather like popcorn." A particle is completely discharged then the next, and they go one like popcorn, absorb the lithium."

Understanding lithium ion charge helps cut and dice

Lithium ions move and electrode materials battery are charged and discharged. A lithium-ion battery is charged, extracted an external voltage source lithium-ion from the cathode (positive electrode) material in a process known as "Delithiation." The lithium ions move through the electrolyte and inserted (unofficial) in the material (negative electrode) anode in a process known as "Lithiation." The same process in reverse order happens when energy from the battery discharged.

"We observed that there were only two phases, where the particles had either lithium or not," El Gabaly said. "Many previous studies researchers have focused a particle on the understanding of the charging within."

El-Gabaly and his colleagues Sandia took a piece just a bit thicker mapped as a human hair from a commercial battery, only a layer of LFP particles, and the locations of lithium in about 450 particles, when the battery to different States was free of charge.

He said "Our discovery was possible thanks to the mapping of the lithium in a relatively large ensemble of particles".

Many tools, facilities contribute to the research

The researchers could build a standard button cell battery from raw materials, the use of Sandias cell battery prototyping facility in New Mexico, equipped with the largest Department of energy plant for the production of small lots of lithium-ion cells. The battery was divided into Sandias Livermore, California, plant by a new method of slices layers, then charged and tested for normal behavior to get the spatial arrangement of the cathode to the anode.

The Sandia Researchers went to Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, the materials with State-of-art Scan national to characterize transmission X-ray microscopy (STXM) at advanced light source (ALS), and returned to Sandias California Web site for study by transmission electron microscopy (TEM).

"The x-ray spectroscopy from the ALS tells you what is inside a single particle or where the lithium, but it has low spatial resolution. We want to tell the electron microscopy of the same segment to us where the particles over the entire level of the battery, were distributed", said Cameron, former Sandia Truman fellow, that of energy is lead author of the journal article and assistant professors and Center fellow Precourt Institute at Stanford University.

Sandia research team and others presented their technical findings on the most recent materials research society spring meeting in San Francisco. As a result of this presentation El Gabaly, said other researchers are using the results to validate theoretical models. The team can also with industry partners, how a company has already indicated a strong interest in the implementation of similar studies on other, more complex battery materials Sandia.

The research team at Sandia was internally funded with support from the Sandia Truman Fellowship in national security science and technology, and by the Department of energy Office of science, which also supports ALS.

View the original article here

Is lithium-ion battery Borgia?

Is it a battery or a WMD?
On 11 April, five employees of advanced battery lab in general have been violated Motors (GM) Technical Center in Warren, Michigan, when extreme tests of a prototype-lithium ion battery pack from A123 systems (AONE) chemical gases released, which exploded in a test Chamber. Four were treated at the scene, and one was taken to a local hospital. The injuries were not life threatening.

About 1,100 employees who were Warren in the plant evacuated, while spent four hours take a HAZMAT team air samples inside and outside of the building. While most were the evacuees in the location, again to work, it is not clear, how long it take approximately $5 million and recovery of operation to repair damage to the battery lab.
GM got the media quickly, that the incident include no battery for the GM-Volt and technically there was no battery explosion at all. Engineers were simply carrying out extreme overcharge on a prototype battery and failed, that is exactly what you would expect.

Or is it?
The fact that it was a fault ventilated gases ignited surprised me not. The fact that the explosion was violent enough, lead to major structural damage to a special facility, which was designed, to the occasional battery explosion safely manage is very worrying. The chemical composition of the gas that supposedly the explosion a nightmare is caused. That is frightening, that these problems are ignored, or Volt is Vice at least under the carpet to protect the battered image of the GM.

On Friday of the 13th torque News reported:
"Not actually the battery involved in the Wednesday morning explosion gases in the test chamber explode but rather lit and the massive explosion created caused." While the extremes of collected in the field test testing process hydrogen sulfide gas and when the gas ignited - we had violated the massive explosion, the five clouds and Energy Center has significant damage on the alternative test surface, including Windows and at least a thick door 8 "blow out." "Then show the reports that the battery was still intact."

It may be just my lawyer fascination with words and sentence structure, but sentence 2 of this paragraph sounds sure one know unattributed direct quote from someone at GM.
I'm not a chemist, but I have disaster significant oil and gas experience, including three years as legal counsel for boots & coots, the largest oil field response company in the world. Based on experience, I know that gas hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is:

The reason smelly rotten eggs;Explosive at concentrations of 43,000 to 460,000 PPM; Known AndOne of the most deadly poisons to humans.In the United States ban occupational health and safety regulations exposure to H2S concentrations of 100 PPM without a fully face masterpiece pressure demand breathing apparatus.
A Wikipedia search shows that PPM olfactory, smell to slay; paralyzes a H2S concentration of 150 nerve 800 PPM is the lethal concentration for 50% of people with five minutes of exposure; and concentrations can cause over 1,000 PPM immediate respiratory arrest after a single breath.

H2S sudden death by poisoning in 2.3% of the concentration of an explosion requires.
If a comparable error in a driving car has occurred, the driver would be incapacitated for work in seconds, while his vehicle in a crowded bar bar click before you explode.

I know that nothing inherently dangerous in the anode and cathode materials for today's advanced lithium-ion batteries. In fact, was I surprised at the reports that a lithium-ion battery lead enough H2S gas to an explosion could generate. When I started to ask questions, but I have learned that the electrolyte could any number of accessories, separators, binders, fillers and additional cell materials very toxic fumes from a faulty cell or battery pack released.
The active materials can wonderfully in her own right, but everything, what in a cell goes for his ability, chemically interact with other cell materials and provide a serious threat to human health and safety carefully must be evaluated.

We know the process at least once failed.
GM's "Accident" may be a unique curiosity when it was examining an exotic lithium-sulphur battery or something else that fundamentally from conventional lithium-ion batteries. There may be only the tip of an iceberg, the first example of the unintended interactions between cell components that can make large-format lithium-ion batteries for use in cars or other closed areas too dangerous.

100 years ago, the Titanic as a miracle of technology was announced until in April 1912 forced engineers their basic assumptions in question make a completely unexpected turn of events. I believe that the explosion of the GM at least some soul searching should force.
For four years I have heard of lithium-ion battery talk nothing but security manufacturers, ideologues, politicians and would-be end users. This is the first report that I have seen that threatens, the bubble burst. When H2S is generated gas in the GM advanced battery lab, we need to know how much gas H2S was generated, how it was created and how long the process took. We need also a security to know whether similar problems in large-format lithium-ion can exist third-party batteries. I understand that each battery manufacturer in their secret sauce would keep proprietary recipe, but a time comes when customers is the safety priority competitive advantage.

I am the first to admit deep confusion about the facts that have been reported so far. But it seems a consensus that a poisonous gas was generated by a faulty battery, test concentrations at explosive levels in the Chamber rose and the resulting explosion 2009 built large structural damage to a plant that causes and developed to catastrophic battery failures.
In these circumstances I believe, that of a political, ideological or economic interest in the safety of lithium-ion batteries don't you have someone, most ball and run an extensive independent survey to find out what happened and whether there are similar risks in the battery packs used by Fisker motors, Ford (F), Tesla Motors (TSLA), Nissan (NSANY.)PK), Toyota (TM) and others. I can only hope that an upcoming NHTSA technical symposium with battery manufacturers and automakers more rigorous regulatory oversight at the beginning will mark.

Borgia battery? Inaccurate descriptions of reporters? Prototype test a truly unique battery chemistry? Or simply a conventional automotive grade lithium ion battery, the boundaries of the design and not spectacular? The difference is understood to be, before we go much further.

This article was first published in the edition of spring 2012 the batteries international magazine and Publisher thank Mike halls and cartoonist Jan Darasz for their contributions.
Disclosure: None.

Electric Vehicle and Lithium-ion Battery Investing For Imbeciles

Her 1969 best-seller "the Peter principle" student named Caesare quoted in Laurence Peter and Raymond hull Latin American Innocente, the defendant, "Professor Peter, I am afraid that what I want to know by my studies will be answered." "I do not know if the world is run, by intelligent men who say Americans like you put us on, or from idiots who really mean it." After just the events of recent weeks, think I agree with most of my regular readers that the idiots are steering clear of the ship.
In March of this year, I went at the Geneva Motor Show press day, a chance gave me that up to see cars up close and personal without a struggle of the masses. While I'm generally skeptical when it comes to electric cars, I left Geneva convinced, that which was Fisker karma of the most beautiful car I had ever seen. I promised even my inner geek, I secretly one would for a test drive once that began production. The last remaining mid-October was granted hurdle to the EPO its official fuel economy rating 52 MPGe for the electric field of 32 miles and 20 MPG for gas travels with the 2.0 litre onboard generator powered by.

I was crushed. How could such terrible fuel industry something so gloriously and green review?

The answer, it seems is that when the Karma on a scale it a few hundred pounds more than a Hummer H3 and a few hundred pounds less than a Cadillac Escalade weighs. That's right folks: it's a 5,300 pounds-behemoth, developed ATVM loan guarantees in California with $ 169 million from the Department of energy. While most of the long-term economic benefits from the production of this shocking green monstrosities outsourcing to Finland, at least, that the batteries in the United States from A123 systems (AONE) the car is a $ 23 million investment in Fisker to establish a strategic partnership and the battery supply contract.

If journalists and political experts questioned the appropriateness of the loan guarantee Fisker in question, the DOE says:

"The Fisker loan consists of two parts." In the first part to the Fisker 169 million to support the Fisker Karma developed the tools, equipment and production processes for Fiskers first vehicle, the engineers. The work took place Fisker of U.S. equipment, headquartered in Irvine, California, employs 700 employees and plans to continue setting. While the vehicles even in the Fisker overseas form workshop are mounted, the funding of the Department was used only for the US operations. The money may not be, and was not spent business. "The karma is also an extensive network of hundreds of suppliers in more than a dozen States."

To use to fund specific project jobs in California, while in the long term, jobs in production in Finland is of course create the sophistry taxpayer money. The problematic questions in my mind are:

How many $100,000 Karma must sell Fisker enough profit to 169 million in DOE loan pay back to earn?
A123 must as many battery packs Fisker to sell to, if it wants to recover his 23 million US dollar investment?
Gets just as sexy and expensive the lackluster sales and margins, Motors (TSLA) has carried out from his Roadster Tesla either result even in the remotest possible?
This was clearly a range of offerings from idiots who really mean it negotiated. The most outrageous defense of the penultimate paragraph of that says was part of the DOE:

"Keep in mind that plasma TVs, mobile phones, PCs, and many other common products were fabulously expensive luxury, but quickly became a staple for middle class Americans." "These price declines would be commercial marketing as premium products not have been possible without the scale of the first."

MUMPITZ! I expect that this type of Bafflegab of EVangelicals but not from government officials.

There is no way the electric vehicles always types of cost reductions that we deliver in the information and technology revolution to experience, since the basic scientific completely different. There are to move a 2.65-ton van on the road no Moore's law of physics. There is no Moore's law for electrochemistry. It is no good fairy world production of non-ferrous metals or increase control commodity prices. But discussing science, supply chains and energy instead of rational, reasonable questions we have with the DOE's path-folding mirror

A little over three years ago I started cautioning readers that Ener1 (HEVV.PK) was a disaster in the making. My cautions got more strident when Ener1 made a substantial venture capital investment in Th!nk Motors to strengthen their strategic relationship and retain a battery supply contract that was jeopardized by Th!nk's insolvency. While some readers took my words of caution to heart, many did not. This week they learned that analyzing battery and electric vehicle companies through rose colored glasses is a great way to end up with a stock that's listed on the Pink Sheets. While I generally like to be right, I hate being this right.

I wonder how the DOE feels about that $118.5 million ARRA Battery Manufacturing Grant they gave Ener1 in August of 2009.

My graph for this week is courtesy of Lux Research and appeared in their recent report "Using Partnerships to Stay Afloat in the Electric Vehicle Storm." The graph is particularly instructive because it overlays their forecasts for the electric vehicle and lithium-ion battery markets in a single graph.

The yellow lines represent total demand for lithium-ion batteries in automotive applications through 2020 using three different oil price scenarios. The blue shaded area represents the total planned production capacity of the global lithium-ion battery industry for the same period. The inescapable conclusions are that (1) without $200 oil, growth in electric vehicle sales will be tepid at best and certainly not robust enough to justify nosebleed market capitalizations for companies like Tesla, and (2) the glut of lithium-ion battery manufacturing capacity will be a crushing burden for all but the most efficient and financially sound battery manufacturers.

While Pike Research recently reported that demonstration projects have deployed 538 MW of lithium-ion based storage on the grid, all of the facilities I've read about report power based on a 15 minute discharge. That means the demonstration projects have used about 135 MWh of batteries to date, or less than 1% of the expected annual capacity glut. While grid-based storage may have significant long-term potential, it's not a big enough short-term opportunity to make a difference.

The takeaway for investors who are willing to remove their rose colored glasses is that the industry leaders in the electric vehicle and lithium-ion battery sectors are run by imbeciles who really mean it and their companies are doomed to underperform the market for years. Molly Ringwald was Pretty in Pink, but it's an ugly color for stock listings

Little more than three years began I warns readers that Ener1 (HEVV.)(PK) was a disaster in the making. More have my notes strident, if Ener1 is a significant venture capital investments in th! NK engines to strengthen their strategic partnership and keep a battery supply contract, which was endangered by th! NK insolvency. While some readers my words of caution to heart began, many do not. They learned this week that the analysis of the battery and electric vehicle is through rose colored glasses a great way to end up with a stock that is listed in the pink sheets. While I generally may be true, I hate this right.

I wonder how the DOE on this $ 118.5 million feels ARRA battery manufacturing grant she gave Ener1 in August 2009.

My chart for this week is courtesy of Lux Research, and appeared in their recent report "using partnerships stay afloat in the electric vehicle storm." The diagram is particularly instructive because it overshadowed their predictions for the electric vehicle and lithium battery markets in a single chart.

The yellow lines represent the demand for lithium-ion batteries in automotive applications by 2020 with three different oil price scenarios. Blue shaded part represents the planned production capacity of industry of global lithium ion battery for the same period. The inevitable conclusions are (1) excluding $200 oil, electric vehicle sales are lukewarm at best and certainly not robust enough, to nosebleed market capitalization for companies like Tesla, and (2) the tide of lithium-ion battery, the production capacity is a heavy burden for all but the most efficient and to justify financially sound manufacturer battery.

During Pike research recently reported that demonstration projects, 538 have deployed MW lithium ion-based storage on the grid, all the facilities I, the report on the basis of 15 minutes discharge read about the power. This means that the demonstration projects about 135 MWh batteries to date, or less than 1% of the expected annual capacity used glut have. Grid based storage have long-term potential, is not a large enough short-term way to make a difference.

The food for investors who are ready to remove their rose-coloured glasses is that the industry leader in the electric vehicle and lithium-ion battery run by idiots who really mean it and are their businesses to damn, exceed the market for years. Molly Ringwald was pretty in pink, but it's an ugly color for has offers

View the original article here