←back to thread

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

(cleantechnica.com)
160 points xbmcuser | 2 comments | 23 Oct 25 01:36 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
hoistbypetard ◴[23 Oct 25 03:55 UTC] No.45678022[source]▶
I hope it's on the way, but I don't think the Pioneer Na is yet a sign of this revolution. This detailed review didn't leave me in a hurry to go get one, anyway:

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

replies(3): >>45678396 #>>45678437 #>>45680342 #
cyberax ◴[23 Oct 25 05:21 UTC] No.45678396[source]▶
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.

replies(5): >>45678535 #>>45678602 #>>45679257 #>>45679956 #>>45680085 #
measurablefunc[dead post] ◴[23 Oct 25 05:56 UTC] No.45678602[source]▶
[flagged]
ZenoArrow ◴[23 Oct 25 06:06 UTC] No.45678678[source]▶
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.
replies(2): >>45678701 #>>45680202 #
1. measurablefunc ◴[23 Oct 25 06:09 UTC] No.45678701[source]▶
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?
replies(1): >>45679251 #
2. lelandbatey ◴[23 Oct 25 07:38 UTC] No.45679251[source]▶
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?