Solid state battery's - a step closer!

[Adokforme]

Gotion begins pilot production of solid-state battery

At the initial presentation a year ago, Gotion claimed that the Gemstone cells would offer an energy density of 350 Wh/kg and 800 Wh/l – approximately 40 per cent more than conventional lithium-ion batteries with NMC cell chemistry. In the latest press release, the company now states that, “after 365 days of validation,” the Gemstone cells show a 150 per cent increase in capacity. However, it has not disclosed the new specific capacity value, nor clarified what the 150 per cent increase is measured against.

https://www.electrive.com/2025/05/19/go ... e-battery/

[Stinsy]

I’m very wary of these stories for a whole bunch of reasons.

It perpetuates the myth that we need better energy density. We don’t. We need to improve the efficiency of devices. In fact the world is going in the opposite direction with LFP being used in applications that previously would’ve used NMC.

Additionally LFP prices have fallen off a cliff. These spangly new technologies will be way too expensive in comparison, should they ever make it to market.

If I was going to bet on a technology, I’d back sodium batteries. They have the potential to be an order of magnitude cheaper than LFP.

[Countrypaul]

I’m very wary of these stories for a whole bunch of reasons.

It perpetuates the myth that we need better energy density. We don’t. We need to improve the efficiency of devices. In fact the world is going in the opposite direction with LFP being used in applications that previously would’ve used NMC.

Additionally LFP prices have fallen off a cliff. These spangly new technologies will be way too expensive in comparison, should they ever make it to market.

If I was going to bet on a technology, I’d back sodium batteries. They have the potential to be an order of magnitude cheaper than LFP.

It is very difficult to fight human nature, why do so many buy large SUVs to do little moe than he school run with one child and weekly shoppoing?

Havig a higher energy density battery is one way to improve efficiency, a smaller battery with the same energy will allow a smaller/lighter vehicle thereby being more efficient. It would of course allow a bigger battery in the same size vehicle to have a lerger range, but people wil choose what they want not what they need. A car with a 100 mile range may do nearly everything they need it for, but if one with a 400 mile range would do everything then for an easy life they will buy the one with a longer range despite it being heavier and less efficient.

Having cars with larger capacity batteries will help to convnce some of those that won't move to an electric vehicle that some of their arguents no longer hold true.

If the size of storing electricity is reduced that makes it easier to make many things smaller and more efficient, it makes transporting tose things less expensive (in energy terms), but it also allows more storage in the same size of container as previously used.

Perfection is the enemy of progess as the saying goes.

[Moxi]

Maybe the solid state technology will find its market with Trucks and Aircraft where range and weight are more critical factors?

Moxi

[Stinsy]

Maybe the solid state technology will find its market with Trucks and Aircraft where range and weight are more critical factors?

Moxi

Maybe.

[Stinsy]

I’m very wary of these stories for a whole bunch of reasons.

It perpetuates the myth that we need better energy density. We don’t. We need to improve the efficiency of devices. In fact the world is going in the opposite direction with LFP being used in applications that previously would’ve used NMC.

Additionally LFP prices have fallen off a cliff. These spangly new technologies will be way too expensive in comparison, should they ever make it to market.

If I was going to bet on a technology, I’d back sodium batteries. They have the potential to be an order of magnitude cheaper than LFP.

It is very difficult to fight human nature, why do so many buy large SUVs to do little moe than he school run with one child and weekly shoppoing?

Havig a higher energy density battery is one way to improve efficiency, a smaller battery with the same energy will allow a smaller/lighter vehicle thereby being more efficient. It would of course allow a bigger battery in the same size vehicle to have a lerger range, but people wil choose what they want not what they need. A car with a 100 mile range may do nearly everything they need it for, but if one with a 400 mile range would do everything then for an easy life they will buy the one with a longer range despite it being heavier and less efficient.

Having cars with larger capacity batteries will help to convnce some of those that won't move to an electric vehicle that some of their arguents no longer hold true.

If the size of storing electricity is reduced that makes it easier to make many things smaller and more efficient, it makes transporting tose things less expensive (in energy terms), but it also allows more storage in the same size of container as previously used.

Perfection is the enemy of progess as the saying goes.

We have an eGolf and an iD4.

You *CAN* take the eGolf on 300+ mile journeys to Cornwall or Aberdeen, but it wouldn't be much fun stopping for half-an-hour every hundred miles. However 95% of cars never do this kind of journey. Most cars are used for shopping, commuting, and local errands. The e-Golf does this just fine.

The iD4 smashes long journeys. The car goes much further than the passengers can. And it charges quicker than you can have a pee and buy a coffee.

Therefore EVs should be made in two categories IMO:
1) 95% of cars should be 100-mile EVs similar to our eGolf.
2) 5% of cas should be 200-mile EVs similar to our iD4

No one needs a 400-mile EV!

[Moxi]

I would back up what Stinsey advocates here, my EV6 can easily do 260 to 280 miles between charges and on a rapid charger it will be back at 80% before I have managed to get to the loo let alone grab a sandwich or drink. I drive 600 to 800 mile round trips in a day around 10 times a year and its much more common for me to stop every 100 miles or so and pop the car on a charger while I get a quick break from the driving so I tend to use the smaller chargers and leave the big units for people who really are on a splash and dash.

Locally in rural settings I think 150 to 200 miles is a comfortable range for us but that's personal preference and there's enough chargers in rural North Wales to make the sub 100 mile range cars do able if you have patience and plan, I couldnt have said that 2 years ago !

Moxi

[dan_b]

I have wondered for quite some time whether the whole concept of solid state batteries was a predatory delaying strategy by legacy ICE manufacturers- the ones who have gone the strongest on them (Toyota) have notably been the ones who have also spent a long time banging on about Hydrogen.

It’s becoming clear that there are different chemistries more suited for different types of vehicles, but the driving force is always cost. Electrochemistry must be a very interesting area of science at the moment

[MikeNovack]

It’s becoming clear that there are different chemistries more suited for different types of vehicles, but the driving force is always cost. Electrochemistry must be a very interesting area of science at the moment

In THIS case perhaps less about cost than solving the (initial) problems. This variant of "lithium" battery is not new, always offered higher energy density both weight and volume, but suffered from far shorter life (fewer cycles) and greater fire risk. Apparently they are making progress solving those two problems.

Consider the NiMH batteries we now use in flashlights, cameras, etc.A decade or so ago as bad/worse self discharge than NiCd. But since not having the "memory" problem of NiCd, they kept plugging away at solving the self discharge problem. Now they can hold 50% for a year and so have totally replaced rechargeable alkaline (held charge for years but very limited cycles (<25) and destroyed if slowly discharged all the way down)

Well like that with these "solid state" ones. Presumably progress on the limited cycles (about half of a regular lithium and a small fraction of the LiPO lithium) and greater risk of catching fire.

Remember, the fundamental chemistry of some of these batteries is not always new. The ancestor of NiMH was the NiFe battery well over 100 years old (high self discharge, low power <energy can't be taken out or put back in quickly>, low density, but very long lived and resistant to abuse). In other words, well suited to storage for solar (or factory floor motive power, which what it was originally used for. Costly mainly because few makers so little competition << now only used in rare applications where must tolerate abuse because unattended >>