Sodium-ion batteries have started to appear in cars and home storage

The idea is not that Na-Ion batteries are better than LFPs, they are not. The main goal is to make them dirt cheap.

It seems that $15 per kWh of storage should be achievable with them. At this price, it's trivial to install enough grid-scale storage to completely move off fossil fuels in more southern areas.

> California batteries are constantly going up in flames.

What is the fraction of California batteries that went up in flames during the last year?

Sodium ion batteries are typically safer than lithium ion batteries. They operate safely over a wider range of temperatures, and have reduced risk of self-combustion.

Most boosters never provide lifecycle & toxicity statistics b/c it tends to run counter to their utopian narratives. What is the typical lifecycle & toxicity profile for these batteries?

Those are lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide batteries in your example, not sodium.

I’m not sure what your point is? All batteries are bad? Oil is good? What?

Yeah, yeah. Care to provide a list of burned batteries?

constantly = once

I like that you made a post complaining about people not sourcing their claims and then eight minutes later made a post declining to source your particular claim

> I don't really do research for random internet strangers

They weren’t asking you to do research for them, they asked if you had done research for yourself.

Link is right there. You're welcome to recover whatever stats are interesting to you instead of asking strangers to do free work.

I have all the data I need so let me know when you gather the relevant lifecycle & toxicity stats on your end.

There will be another one in less than 6 months¹. How much are you willing to bet?

¹https://newenergyrisk.com/battery-fires/

You already admitted that you would have to do research to back up your claim. Like if you had the data you wouldn’t need to “do research” to post it.

The information requested does not exist in the link you posted.

I said I don't do free work for strangers on the internet but like I said, let me know when you do your own research. It will be a much better use of time than wasting more keystrokes in this thread.

That's odd. I wonder why they wouldn't provide that information.

Exactly, you would have to do research to answer the question. You haven’t done it for yourself, so why should you do it for a stranger?

Which question would that be? The one about lifecycle & toxicity or percentage that goes up in flames every few months?

Most contrarians fail to compare their detractions against alternatives such as "maintaining the status quo". Maybe batteries with hazardous chemicals in solid state form inside solid housings aren't particularly net-negative by comparison to most existing casual energy storage alternatives such as internal combustion, at least to most laypeople?

They are better in cold and have higher charge rates. Eventually (10-20years) they’ll be cheaper than LFP. All while 15% lower volumetric density.

if YOU make a claim, you need to provide proof. simple as. anything else is a logical fallacy or malicious argument :)

You can just admit you exaggerated a lot.

You make a claim without a source and refuse to back it up when asked, yet you are doubling down on your confidence in the initial statement. There's an interesting discussion to be had, but this is not it.

There are several factors to be considered: the actual risk of older and newer systems, the impact, how to mitigate a fire and avoid the worst consequences, and weighing against the alternatives. Especially the latter is somehow always absent in denialist narratives. However, when the alternative is basically heating the planet into a dystopian hellscape, we may accept some negatives of any kind of technology that doesn't put our whole existence at risk.

We need to be real about the downsides yes, but let's also be real and accept we don't have any choice but push forward.

Here is my 1 minute AI powered 'research' btw:

"The fire risk for battery plant storage is not a single, universally agreed-upon percentage, but available data suggests a low and decreasing risk, especially for properly maintained and installed systems. For example, one study found the 2023 risk for home battery systems to be \(0.0049\%\), while another source reports a \(97\%\) drop in large-scale system failures between 2018 and 2023. The risk is influenced by factors like manufacturing quality, installation, and maintenance."

Doesn't seem all that alarming yet.

Na-Ion batteries are better than LFPs when considered the temperature range between 0C and 0f. In this [0] review, prof hobo demonstrates this is the only reason to by Na-Ion (right now).

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoZ_g_MShTw

The $15/kWh is misleading as it's only the cost of the raw materials.

They also produce much less harmful combustion products when they do catch fire.

This whole conversation with measurablefunc has been like seeing somebody get asked for a dollar, loudly yelling “And get a job?!” and then spending an hour trying to convince everyone in the room that they’re Bruce Wayne. I love this website.

Edit: or like seeing somebody get asked for a cookie and then saying “And go to the store? And buy sugar? And eggs? And flour? And drive home and bake them?! Hell no!” and then saying “obviously that meant I have a ton of cookies in my house right now”

> Which question would that be?

Probably the questions about all the batteries you claim are burning. The ones that you read earlier and then said that you can answer.

“I would have to do research to find a list of batteries that burned and the percentage of the batteries that burned and I do not want to do that research”

“I already did the research and have a list of burned batteries and know the percentage of them that burn but I will not share it until you research it and give your findings to me”

“With all this talk of ‘what batteries burned’ and ‘the percentage of the batteries that burned’ I have completely lost track of what anyone wants to know re: my statements about all of the batteries that I claimed are burning”

Your mixing of units is baffling, almost nobody knows both Celsius and Fahrenheit. For the rest of us:

-18°C to 0°C

0°F to 32°F

The article claims CATL have given bulk cell pricing at 19$/kWh.

That still leaves an Additional overhead due to power electronics and assembly but all in all it's a pretty impressive development.

I knew what 0°C is in °F since I know the °C to °F conversion rate, but my European self isn't able to assign any actual reference to that, which made it kinda useless to me :)

And you can admit you are uncritically supporting technology w/o understanding its safety & toxicity b/c it seems "cheap".

Data is readily available. You can do your own research or pay someone to figure it out for you if you can't.

You are welcome to follow the relevant the links & reach your own conclusions.

Those facts seem hallucinated so you should follow your own advice & post the actual sources.

Buddy the way it works when you don’t know something is you just say that you don’t know it. We all know that you don’t know how many batteries burned or what fractions of them both.

You are trying to do the “get the internet to do your homework for you by posting the wrong answer” Reddit meme trick but being so incredibly off putting that it isn’t working. Nobody is going to do your research for you because everyone can tell that’s what you’re asking them to do.