• CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 hours ago

    AFAIK sodium chemistry batteries are the worst for mobile applications as they’re much less energy dense meaning you’ll have a heavier pack that needs to be charged more frequently, though it is cheaper for manufacturers to produce. I recall that these work best for grid power storage where size and weight aren’t an issue.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The packs CATL makes now are 175Whr/kg which is very close to LFP. They’re already EV-worthy.

      • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        47 minutes ago

        That’s great but emerging technologies are shooting for double or triple that amount, so why switch to something thats just barely reaching the equivalent potential of what’s already old news?

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          34 minutes ago

          I imagine vastly lower cost would be one reason. 450km range chargeable in 11 minutes would be enough for a significant proportion of people and likely desirable if the cost is low enough. I don’t think it’s likely that lithium would match the price/perf ratio of sodium so I think we’re likely to see a lot more sodium in applications that don’t require the absolute best energy density. So in a way, sodium might be the front runner, ahead of advanced lithium, in terms of what’s going to be adopted. 😅

          E: Also we’re talking sodium batteries in production. If and when double-triple density lithium or another shows up, it might change the calculus depending on price, safety, etc.