The future of batteries: Q&A with the director of the national laboratory battery hub

Jul 04, 2014
George Crabtree, director of the Joint Center for Energy Storage Research

Everywhere you look, you see lithium-ion batteries. They're in your laptop, your cell phone, your power tools, maybe even your car. Lithium-ion battery research accounts for about 95% of all battery research and development, which has resulted in countless improvements to the technology. But lithium-ion batteries can only go so far.

The Joint Center for Energy Storage Research, or JCESR, based at Argonne, is a partnership of five national laboratories, five universities, and four private-sector partners. The goal is to develop technologies that take batteries beyond lithium-ion—to create storage systems with five times the energy density at one-fifth the cost within five years.

Currently a year into JCESR's five-year charter, George Crabtree, director of JCESR, talks about the vision, goals, and challenges on the leading edge of research.

Q: What is your vision for JCESR?

George Crabtree: Our vision is to transform two of the biggest energy sectors in the U.S., and those are transportation and the grid. We want to transform transportation by electrifying it. With better batteries, we can power more cars and trucks with domestic electricity rather than foreign oil. For the grid we want to increase the amount of wind and solar energy to at least 20% of the overall electricity supply. In order to do that we will need to more efficiently store the energy that is generated by these variable energy sources. JCESR is working on the breakthrough technologies that will make these two transformations happen.

Q: What are JCESR's goals?

Crabtree: We want to achieve three legacies that will change the battery R&D landscape. The first one is to create a library of fundamental knowledge about how the materials and phenomena of work at the atomic and molecular level. We understand many of the phenomena related to . But beyond lithium-ion is a wide horizon of virtually untapped potential, where we will achieve the breakthroughs and transformational goals we are pursuing. We need discovery science to explore this horizon, building the knowledge base that will enable the transformational batteries that we seek.

The second legacy is using this fundamental knowledge to deliver two rechargeable energy storage prototypes: a compact high performance battery for the and a large scale battery for the grid.

Our third legacy is embedded in the other two: we will introduce a new paradigm that, for the first time, combines discovery science, battery design, research prototyping, and manufacturing consulting into one highly interactive organization. This strong interaction across the entire R&D spectrum from discovery to prototyping to commercial manufacturing will accelerate the pace of discovery and innovation and shorten the time for commercialization of new ideas. It is exactly what the U.S. needs to develop a commanding competitive edge in battery science and technology.

Q: What's one of the ways you are accelerating discovery?

Crabtree: In the science community, we typically share information by publishing papers. So, after the information is created, it takes about a year for the paper to be peer-reviewed, for it to appear in the literature and for someone else to read and appreciate it. Then the recipient will think about it for a while before starting to act on it. By the time he or she starts a program to move the science to the next level or to apply the information to new technology, there could be a two-year delay.

In JCESR there is no delay. Results are communicated and adopted by other groups within the JCESR team instantaneously, well before the cycle of publication and incubation has time to act. This is one of the primary ways we increase the pace of discovery and innovation.

Q: How is JCESR research different from other battery research?

Crabtree: Typical battery R&D produces only incremental advances. Lithium-ion batteries, for example, will be improved by only a few percent per year by getting better performance from a particular battery component, often the cathode. In JCESR, we are doing something that is totally different. We're not incrementally improving an existing technology: we are inventing a whole new technology. So we are putting together the three components of the battery, the anode, the electrolyte, and the cathode, in ways that have never been done before.

In some cases, there may be a new idea or a certain component that shows promise. But in order for the new idea to work, it has to be used in a battery system where all the components within that system work together properly. So it's very important to take a systems approach and invent the battery from the bottom up: make it work as a system rather than simply improving one component of a system that already exists. So this is a different animal completely, and you need a different approach.

Q: What scientific challenges has JCESR faced?

Crabtree: One challenge is the complexity of the beyond lithium-ion space. First, we have three battery components; an anode, an electrolyte, and a cathode. Then, for the anode there are three or more types; there are two kinds of electrolytes, liquid and solid; and there are at least three kinds of cathodes. If you start trying to mix and match these, you quickly realize the number of possibilities is huge, and it's quite impossible to build and compare all of them.

That's one of the reasons technological modeling, building the battery on the computer, is so valuable. Computer modeling enables us to simulate a host of materials for the different battery components, many more than we can reasonably test. The range of things you can do on the computer without having to do it in the lab has increased dramatically.

In addition, at JCESR our scientists use their expert judgment to determine where the best research opportunities are for breakthrough discoveries. And they don't do that in a vacuum. JCESR scientists are informed by all of the fundamental science that JCESR is creating for our first legacy. Then they apply that knowledge to determine how a battery composed of these new components would work. At the moment, we are facing many, many conceptual options for putting a battery together. We need to filter that space both in the computer and in the laboratory, and after a couple of years we will have a much broader base of fundamental knowledge to work with and we can start to visualize the kind of a battery that will meet our goals.

Explore further: 'Double-duty' electrolyte enables new chemistry for longer-lived batteries

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Recommended for you

First-of-a-kind supercritical CO2 turbine

23 hours ago

Toshiba Corporation today announced that it will supply a first-of-a-kind supercritical CO2 turbine to a demonstration plant being built in Texas, USA. The plant will be developed by NET Power, LLC, a U.S. venture, together w ...

Drive system saves space and weight in electric cars

Oct 17, 2014

Siemens has developed a solution for integrating an electric car's motor and inverter in a single housing. Until now, the motor and the inverter, which converts the battery's direct current into alternating ...

Dispelling a misconception about Mg-ion batteries

Oct 16, 2014

Lithium (Li)-ion batteries serve us well, powering our laptops, tablets, cell phones and a host of other gadgets and devices. However, for future automotive applications, we will need rechargeable batteries ...

Turning humble seaweed into biofuel

Oct 16, 2014

The sea has long been a source of Norway's riches, whether from cod, farmed salmon or oil. Now one researcher from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) researcher hopes to add seaweed ...

User comments : 8

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

JonathanCole
4 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2014
Often the trouble with government laboratory efforts is that they inadvertently ignore what may be the most relevant approaches to solving problems. In this case, the most resilient, cost-effective approach to energy is not grid-scale systems, but distributed, micro-integrations of solar, battery storage, power electronics and information technology.
With distributed solar/storage systems, for example, many problematic issues are overcome. Less materials are required for wiring, much easier and less costly maintenance profiles and a much lower levelized cost of energy. The integrated product that is now in development by my group will, in mass production, produce electricity for less than $0.08/ kWh.
Lithium Titanate batteries already in mass production in Japan and China have similar life cycles to solar PV , are environmentally benign and extremely safe when used in a distributed architecture. Operating safely between -40 C. and +55C, these batteries can be deployed nearly anywhere.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (2) Jul 04, 2014
So this is a different animal completely, and you need a different approach…

The goal is to develop technologies that take batteries beyond lithium-ion…

In JCESR there is no delay…

We're not incrementally improving an existing technology: we are inventing a whole new technology. So we are putting together the three components of the battery, the anode, the electrolyte, and the cathode, in ways that have never been done before.


I think the ability convert room-temperature ionic kinetic energy, which is ubiquitous, directly into electrical energy, can be delivered to the masses (rather than the market) with the least delay.
See: Self-Charged Graphene Battery Harvests Electricity from the Thermal Energy of the Environment

Let the innovation developed by 'national laboratories and universities' belong to the nation of people, and let the private sector partners seeking profits license it after paying the people requisite fees.
h20dr
not rated yet Jul 04, 2014
"At the moment, we are facing many, many conceptual options for putting a battery together. We need to filter that space both in the computer and in the laboratory, and after a couple of years we will have a much broader base of fundamental knowledge to work with and we can start to visualize the kind of a battery that will meet our goals."

A couple of years? Well, that kind of negates the supposed claimed advantage they purport to have in bringing ideas to fruition.

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp
Nik_2213
5 / 5 (2) Jul 04, 2014
Well, one problem with current Li-Ion tech is battery packs are as proprietary as 'smart' inkjet cartridges, and priced to suit. Looking around, we have five devices, with very similar but incompatible battery packs and chargers.

Many power tools will be obsolete in 18 months because replacing the set will be cheaper than replacing their weary cells. Though NiCad or NiMH batteries can be safely re-celled using only due care and spot welding, Li-Ion batteries also need a bespoke temperature sensor and custom re-programming of their control chip...

The biggest problem with Li-Ion is, ironically, their 3.7V /cell (nominal), which does not match either Carbon-Zinc or 'Alkaline' consumables at 1.5V/cell, or NiMH/Nicad rechargeables at 1.2V/cell. Ironically, I've just had to invest in several sets of rechargeable Ni-Zn AA cells, as their 1.6V /cell is a match to the consumables. Of course, that 1.6V needs a custom charger, but they don't have on-board chips...
Mike_Massen
5 / 5 (1) Jul 04, 2014
h20dr offered a link but, is it the right one

A couple of years? Well, that kind of negates the supposed claimed advantage they purport to have in bringing ideas to fruition.

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp
This comes back to this same page surely you meant to link to something else to further support your propositional question above other than this article ?
Newbeak
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014

"With distributed solar/storage systems, for example, many problematic issues are overcome. Less materials are required for wiring, much easier and less costly maintenance profiles and a much lower levelized cost of energy. The integrated product that is now in development by my group will, in mass production, produce electricity for less than $0.08/ kWh."
I think it should also be kept in mind that distributed power generation is much more secure that relying on ever more complex grid power.Remotely located large power plants depend on high voltage transmission transformers that have to be custom built and cannot be replaced quickly,making them vulnerable to terrorism,geomagnetic storms,and plain aging related internal shorts.I've read that many of them are delicate condition,and their windings insulation could fail without warning.
gbgoble
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
Liviu Popa Simil

"Nano-structured Nuclear Radiation Shielding"

"Roadmap to Fusion Battery – A Novel Type of Nuclear Battery and Potential Outcomes and Applications"

"Method and Device for Direct Nuclear Energy Conversion in Electricity in Fusion and Transmutation Processes"

He has also authored the following:

"Advanced Nano-Nuclear Program Proposal"

Craig Steidle - of Seldon Technologies

"Methods of Generating Energy and/or he-4 Using Graphene Based Materials"

"Methods of Generating Energetic Particles Using Nanotubes and Articles Thereof"
HeloMenelo
1 / 5 (1) Jul 06, 2014
Don't fall off your rocker just yet, it's always been big talk and no show, see the
never ending list of promised battery technologies, that has been summoned into the abyss, echoes are sometimes heard, but none of them ever managed to escape the oblivion bestowed upon them.....sigh... sad... however so true:

http://www.rcgrou...28840514

"Wow!! I found the paper that was written about harvesting energy from ambient temperature. Came out of China. I'm tellin' ya' a New Age is about to begin. Hang on to your knickers we're goin' for a ride!!"