Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Survival in the Battery Business
http://www.technologyreview.com/qa/538511/survival-in-the-battery-business/[font face=Serif][font size=5]Survival in the Battery Business[/font]
[font size=4]Backing from disparate investors such as General Motors and a vacuum maker has given the battery startup Sakti3 an unusual amount of momentum.[/font]
[font size=3]he advanced battery market has seen many companies stumble in recent years. Startups with promising technologies for storing renewable energy or powering electric cars failed to find customers quickly enough (see “Why We Don’t Have Battery Breakthroughs”). But Sakti3, the maker of a novel solid-state battery, got a big boost this year when the British appliance giant Dyson said it would invest $15 million in the company and incorporate Sakti3’s batteries into its products. Because it dispenses with the liquid electrolytes used in most batteries, which can cause chemical reactions that lead to overheating, a solid-state battery doesn’t require bulky cooling systems and thus can deliver the same amount of energy in a much smaller package. Given that this could lead to electric cars with longer ranges than the ones available today, Sakti3—one of this year’s 50 Smartest Companies—also counts General Motors as an investor. Founder Ann Marie Sastry spoke to MIT Technology Review’s senior editor for energy, Richard Martin.
Why would a vacuum cleaner company invest in a battery maker?
Because they need better batteries. What we’re doing is building batteries in a very different way, such that we’re able to generate very interesting properties. Our prototype systems today provide double the energy density of what’s on the market. Even more important is that our technology offers a platform on which to continuously improve.
Why couldn’t that happen with today’s dominant battery technology?
The liquid-electrolyte systems that have been selected up to this point by manufacturers and the marketplace have been pursued for one principal reason: high energy density. But they have clear limitations in terms of weight, expense, safety, and so on. The continuous improvement in lithium batteries has enabled safe operations (of an electric car, for example) but at a high cost, and provided energy density that’s appropriate for some ranges but is not equivalent to an internal–combustion engine. To continue to develop on that platform, as with any manufacturing process, is going to result in marginal gains at best.
…[/font][/font]
[font size=4]Backing from disparate investors such as General Motors and a vacuum maker has given the battery startup Sakti3 an unusual amount of momentum.[/font]
[font size=3]he advanced battery market has seen many companies stumble in recent years. Startups with promising technologies for storing renewable energy or powering electric cars failed to find customers quickly enough (see “Why We Don’t Have Battery Breakthroughs”). But Sakti3, the maker of a novel solid-state battery, got a big boost this year when the British appliance giant Dyson said it would invest $15 million in the company and incorporate Sakti3’s batteries into its products. Because it dispenses with the liquid electrolytes used in most batteries, which can cause chemical reactions that lead to overheating, a solid-state battery doesn’t require bulky cooling systems and thus can deliver the same amount of energy in a much smaller package. Given that this could lead to electric cars with longer ranges than the ones available today, Sakti3—one of this year’s 50 Smartest Companies—also counts General Motors as an investor. Founder Ann Marie Sastry spoke to MIT Technology Review’s senior editor for energy, Richard Martin.
Why would a vacuum cleaner company invest in a battery maker?
Because they need better batteries. What we’re doing is building batteries in a very different way, such that we’re able to generate very interesting properties. Our prototype systems today provide double the energy density of what’s on the market. Even more important is that our technology offers a platform on which to continuously improve.
Why couldn’t that happen with today’s dominant battery technology?
The liquid-electrolyte systems that have been selected up to this point by manufacturers and the marketplace have been pursued for one principal reason: high energy density. But they have clear limitations in terms of weight, expense, safety, and so on. The continuous improvement in lithium batteries has enabled safe operations (of an electric car, for example) but at a high cost, and provided energy density that’s appropriate for some ranges but is not equivalent to an internal–combustion engine. To continue to develop on that platform, as with any manufacturing process, is going to result in marginal gains at best.
…[/font][/font]
