backtop


Print 25 comment(s) - last by JPForums.. on Jun 24 at 9:05 AM

Durable batteries are large, but cheap -- perfect for grid storage

You won't find this battery in your laptop or smartphone anytime soon, but it may help deliver steady power to those devices.

I. Wood Battery -- Inspired by Nature

As the world races forward towards intermittent alternative energy sources such as wind and solar power, a major looming power is how to prevent power shortages when the wind isn't blowing or the sun isn't shining.  A proposed solution is to use batteries to store up power during peak generation times, and discharge it during lulls (for example, at night, for a solar powered grid).  However, batteries tend to be expensive, hard to recycle, and often harmful to the environment if not properly disposed.

Researchers at the University of Maryland think they have found a fix for these issues -- make your batteries out of wood.


A team led by materials science Professor Liangbing Hu and mechanical engineering Professor Teng Li found that a thin sheet of wood-derived cellulose soaked in sodium ions and coated with a thin film tin (Sn) anode was more environmentally friendly, closer to the durability of, and most importantly drastically cheaper than lithium-ion batteries.
Cellulose
The Univ. of Maryland nanobattery is based on cellulose. [Image Source: Wikimedia Commons]

Professor Hu says the battery was inspired by observations of natural processes, stating, "The inspiration behind the idea comes from the trees.  Wood fibers that make up a tree once held mineral-rich water, and so are ideal for storing liquid electrolytes, making them not only the base but an active part of the battery."

II. Cheap, Durable -- Good for the Grid

The sheet used in the battery was thousands of times thinner than a sheet of paper.  It was composed of molecules of cellulose -- rigid sugar chains.  It offered 400 cycles of charging/discharging at an initial capacity of 339 mAh/g, making it among the most efficient nanobattery designs found to date, according to the researchers.  By contrast a lithium battery typically has a capacity of 3,860 mAh/g [source] and a similar cycle life of between 300 and 500 cycles [source].

The new battery's long life owes to a special property of the cellulose bundles that compose the ion storage layer.  When they lose their sodium they "wrinkle" assuming a flower-like cross section.  This wrinkling was shown in computer simulations to relieve stress, making the battery last longer.  Longevity is further improved due to the properties of tin -- a soft, pliable conductor.

Carbon process
The cellulose bundles can undergo many cycles soaking up sodium and releasing it without significant degradation. [Image Source: ACS]

That longevity, combined with low production costs make the new wood nanobattery an intriguing alternative to lithium for large storage, despite the fact that it takes more than 10 times as much material by weight to store an equivalent amount of energy to a lithium ion battery. 

Comments Hongli Zhu, a postdoctoral researcher who led the study, "Pushing sodium ions through tin anodes often weaken the tin's connection to its base material.  But the wood fibers are soft enough to serve as a mechanical buffer, and thus can accommodate tin's changes. This is the key to our long-lasting sodium-ion batteries."

The team published [abstract] their work last month in the peer-reviewed ACS journal Nano Letters.  The study was funded by grants from the University of Maryland and the U.S. National Science Foundation [grant].

Sources: Nano Letters [abstract], University of Maryland [press release]



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Hilariously tragic
By Solandri on 6/20/2013 2:52:19 PM , Rating: 2
We need to be chopping down more trees.

Think about it. CO2 leads to global warming. Why are CO2 levels increasing? Because we're taking carbon atoms which were locked up underground in fossil fuels, and releasing them into the atmosphere.

So to reduce CO2 levels, we need to do the reverse - extract carbon from the atmosphere, and bury it back underground. What removes carbon from the atmosphere? Trees - they remove CO2 and incorporate it into cellulose that makes up wood. So we need to be chopping down trees, burying them in landfills, and planting new trees to take their place. You don't want to leave them just standing there where a forest fire could release all that carbon back into the atmosphere.

If you can use the wood for something first, all the better. So chop down trees, make paper, and once the paper is used don't recycle it! Recycling paper just accelerates global warming. Throw it away in the trash so it can be buried in a landfill, locking up that carbon underground again. That will also create more demand for more new paper, meaning more trees need to be planted and chopped down, thus removing even more carbon from the atmosphere and sequestering it underground.

This demonstrates the fallacy of assuming that that because something (recycling) is good for the system in some cases, that means it must good for the system in all cases.


RE: Hilariously tragic
By Motoman on 6/20/2013 2:58:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
planting new trees to take their place


...I think this is the part that people typically forget to do.


RE: Hilariously tragic
By cyberguyz on 6/20/2013 5:34:39 PM , Rating: 2
And here I always thought CO2 levels was from all the cow farts.

Learn something new every day.


RE: Hilariously tragic
By Motoman on 6/20/2013 6:13:07 PM , Rating: 3
No...that's methane. Which is in fact a considerably worse greenhouse gas than CO2.

Someone give those cows some damn lighters.


RE: Hilariously tragic
By karimtemple on 6/21/2013 9:25:17 AM , Rating: 2
Makes sense! Assuming fledgling trees grow more (in cellulose mass per time unit) than older trees, which seems like it would indeed be true but I personally don't know.


RE: Hilariously tragic
By Strunf on 6/21/2013 11:11:33 AM , Rating: 1
The thing is that when you chop down tree you don't uproot it but when you plant a new one you have to clean up the soil and this process actually releases the CO2 that was stored in the soil, this is why old forests are Carbon negative as in consume more CO2 than they produce (part of the CO2 will be trapped in the soil), whereas forests that keep being chop down are at best CO2 neutral.


“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki