A modeling framework to assess specific energy, costs and environmental impacts of Li-ion and Na-ion batteries

Schneider, Šimon; Bauer, Christian; Novák, Petr; Berg, Erik J.

doi:10.1039/c9se00427k

Cited by 44 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Preliminary assessments of the potential life-cycle of NIBs have proven that NIBs already provide an ecological benefit in terms of materials compared to LIBs [337]. Finally, several works estimate that NIBs can be cost-competitive when taking into account the bill of materials, as avoidance of aluminium leads to substantial cost savings (also for cobalt and lithium, although to a much lesser extent) [7,128,338]. It should however be noted that, both for LIBs and NIBs, specific energy has the highest impact in the cell cost, as less materials are required for electrode, current collector foils, electrolyte and separator.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges of today for Na-based batteries of the future: From materials to cell metrics

Hasa

Mariyappan

Saurel

et al. 2021

Journal of Power Sources

224

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges of today for Na-based batteries of the future: From materials to cell metrics

Hasa

Mariyappan

Saurel

et al. 2021

Journal of Power Sources

224

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[26] Thus, RO has been recognized as one of the most promising seawater desalination technologies even though it is still energy intensive compared to wastewater treatment processes for clean water production. In contrast, the two representative capacitive deionization technologies, MCDI and FCDI, have shown relatively high SEC of 83.2 kWh m −3 (MCDI) [27] and 43.0 kWh m −3 (FCDI) [28] for seawater desalination. Although MCDI and FCDI have been extensively investigated for brackish water desalination, [29][30][31] the application of these processes to seawater desalination has been limited primarily because their SECs proportionally increase with feed salinity, and the salinity of seawater is often ≈35,000 ppm (total dissolved solids; TDS).…”

Section: Seawater Battery Desalination Versus Other Seawater Desalination Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The material cost of LIB was reported in the range of ≈88 to ≈200 $ kWh −1 . [ 22 , 42 , 43 ] Thus, the material cost of SWBs (150.8 $ kWh −1 for SWB coin and 216.4 $ kWh −1 for SWB Rect. ) is reasonable or even cheaper compared to LIB for ESS applications.…”

Section: Feasibility Of Seawater Battery Desalination Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous Energy Storage and Seawater Desalination using Rechargeable Seawater Battery: Feasibility and Future Directions

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rechargeable seawater battery (SWB) is a unique energy storage system that can directly transform seawater into renewable energy. Placing a desalination compartment between SWB anode and cathode (denoted as seawater battery desalination; SWB-D) enables seawater desalination while charging SWB. Since seawater desalination is a mature technology, primarily occupied by membrane-based processes such as reverse osmosis (RO), the energy cost has to be considered for alternative desalination technologies. So far, the feasibility of the SWB-D system based on the unit cost per desalinated water ($ m −3 ) has been insufficiently discussed. Therefore, this perspective aims to provide this information and offer future research directions based on the detailed cost analysis. Based on the calculations, the current SWB-D system is expected to have an equipment cost of ≈1.02 $ m −3 (lower than 0.60-1.20 $ m −3 of RO), when 96% of the energy is recovered and stable performance for 1000 cycles is achieved. The anion exchange membrane (AEM) and separator contributes greatly to the material cost occupying 50% and 41% of the total cost, respectively. Therefore, future studies focusing on creating low cost AEMs and separators will pave the way for the large-scale application of SWB-D.

show abstract

“…[130] Moreover, provided that new NIB materials exhibit increased voltage and specific capacity values similar to those of LIB materials, NIBs could become preferred to LIBs, both in terms of performance and cost, especially for high-power applications. [134] Also, as the portfolio of HCs grows, a further decrease in NIB price is very likely to occur. Even lower prices could be achieved by NIBs working with PBAs, which are based on abundant and low-cost elements.…”

Section: Cost Projectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Na‐Ion Batteries—Approaching Old and New Challenges

Goikolea

Palomares

Wang

et al. 2020

Advanced Energy Materials

349

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

are proving to be an emergent technology with potentially very attractive properties. They are potentially low cost and environmentally friendly with reduced supply risk. However, the development of NIBs faces various challenges such as low gravimetric and volumetric energy densities and difficulty in achieving broader voltage windows. Although early studies in NIBs date back to the 1970s, just like Li-ion battery (LIB) research, the commercialization of the former systems in 1991 by the team formed by Sony and Asahi Kasei marked a milestone not only in the field of energy storage technology but also in the evolution of the modern society. This technological breakthrough had been possible thanks to several preceding contributions, particularly the works by M. S Whittingham, [1] J. Goodenough, [2,3] and A. Yoshino [4] on the discovery of Li-ion intercalation materials (Nobel Laureates in Chemistry 2019). This important historical event polarized material science research toward Li-ion technology and slowed down considerably the advances in the field of sodium. However, at the end of the 2000s, mainly driven by the concerns about future lithium supply and the uneven worldwide distribution of its reserves and resources, the research on Na-ion reemerged and so did the number of articles published (Figure 1). The intercalation chemistry of both metal ions is very alike, and thus, the materials tested for NIBs could be similar to those used in Li-ion systems. Both systems share the same working principle, and therefore, in terms of manufacturing, the industry producing LIBs can be easily tuned towards NIB fabrication, which is an important asset to invest in and support this technology. NIBs started to reach the market in the early 2010s, about two decades after their Li counterparts. Nevertheless, the progress has been relatively fast due to the straightforward LIB equipment and facility transfer just mentioned. In the search of high performance, low cost, abundance, low environmental impact, long-term cyclability and safety, layered metal oxides, polyanionic compounds and Prussian blue analogues (PBAs) are among the most studied families of Na-ion cathode materials. On the anode side, metallic sodium exhibits the same operation and safety problems as lithium, and therefore, it cannot be considered an option in conventional NIBs. Thus, in this scenario, most of the research has been dominated by the use of disordered carbons, mainly hard carbons (HCs). Other prospective anodes

show abstract

A modeling framework to assess specific energy, costs and environmental impacts of Li-ion and Na-ion batteries

Abstract: Holistic assessment of Li-ion and Na-ion batteries through integration of physics-based battery model into economic and environmental analysis framework.

Cited by 44 publications

References 42 publications

Challenges of today for Na-based batteries of the future: From materials to cell metrics

Challenges of today for Na-based batteries of the future: From materials to cell metrics

Simultaneous Energy Storage and Seawater Desalination using Rechargeable Seawater Battery: Feasibility and Future Directions

Na‐Ion Batteries—Approaching Old and New Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About