Batteries for Vehicular Applications
Venkat Srinivasan
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
Cyclolron Road MS 7oR 0108B
Berkeley, CA 94 720
Abstract. This paper will describe battery technology as it relates to use in
vehicular
applications, including hybrid-electric vehicles (HEV), electric vehicles (EV), and
plug-in-
hybrid-electric vehicles (PHEV). The present status of rechargeable batteries, the
requirements
for each application, and the scientific stumbling blocks that stop batteries from
being
commercialized for these applications will be discussed. Focus will be on the class
of batteries
referred to as lithium batteries and the various chemistries that are the most
promising for these
applications. While Li-ion is expected in HEVS in the very near future, use in
PHEVS are
expected to be more gradual and dependent on solving the life, safety, and cost
challenges.
Finally, batteries for EVS remain problematic because of the range and charging-
time issues.
TRODUCTION TO BATTERIES
Several electrical energy storage and conversion devices have been considered
for
use in vehicle applications. These are illustrated in Figure 1 in the form of a
Ragone
plot, wherein the abscissa is specific power (which can be thought of as
acceleration in
a vehicle) and the ordinate is specific energy (or range in an EV). The graph shows
these quantities for various batteries, electrochemical capacitors, and fue] cells.
Note
that this plot shows specific energy and power on a cell level for batteries made for
many different applications, from consumer electronic to vehicles. An additional
derating will need to be applied when analysis is done on the pack level. The figure
shows that lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries are superior to nickel metal hydride (Ni-MH)
batteries for all three applications from a performance standpoint. The figure also
shows that no battery system has the ability to provide energy close to what is
possible
with gasoline (Internal combustion, or IC-Engine). Finally, the figure suggests that
batteries are superior to capacitors for applications where the time of discharge is
greater than the order of seconds.
The United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC) has set the
requirements needed for batteries to be used in EV, PHEV, and HEV application.1
These requirements cover a wide range of issues and include energy and power.
In
order to compare the requirements to the performance of these devices illustrated
in
Figure 1, a few assumptions have to be made, which are done here for the sake o
2
simplicity. While the USABC requirements for power represent a peak power for a
lOs charge/discharge, the systems in Figure 1 show average power. Similarly, the
USABC requirements show energy as an available energy, which typically is less
than
the total energy of the cell. For a HEV, available energy can be as little as 20-3 0%
of
the total energy, while for an EV or PHEV, this could be as large as 7 0-80%.
Despite these differences, a superposition of the USABC requirements onto
Figure 1 is illustrative. The figure shows that while Li-ion batteries can easily satisfy
HEV requirements, the energy is much smaller than the requirements for EVs.
Similarly, the energy needs of a 40 mile PHEV (96 Wh/kg available energy) could
be
achieved by a high-energy Li-ion cell (similar to the batteries used in the Tesla
Roadster).a
However, while the plot captures the performance map of various batteries, other
criteria need to be considered, including cost, cycle and calendar life, and safety.
Moreover, these factors are connected to each other. For example, while PHEVs
appear possible with Li-ion batteries today from an energy standpoint, this would
require the use of batteries that are not made for EV applications and that are
cycled
over a very wide state of charge (SOC) range, thereby limiting cycle life. One could
increase the life by limiting the extent to which these batteries are charged,
however,
this would limit the energy of the cell, and thereby increase the cost, and the
volume
and weight of the final battery. lndeed, an analysis of presently-available EV
batteries
with characteristics that enhance cycle/calendar life suggests that meeting the
energy
requirements for a 40 mile PHEV is difficult. Finally, the importance of each of
these
factors changes ñom application to application. Therefore, while peak power could
be
an important criterion for a HEV, energy density would be a critical parameter in an
EV. Some criteria, like cost and safety, remain challenges in all applications.
3
While complicated, the interplay between these various factors is tractable and
suggests that Li-ion batteries remain the most promising candidate for use in
vehicular
applications. The three main reasons for this conclusion are the higher energy,
higher
power, and the potential for lower cost of Li-ion batteries when compared to Ni-MH
batteries. This conclusion has been the reason why significant research efforts
have
been directed toward Li-ion batteries. In this paper, we will explore the limitations
that Li-ion batteries face when used in each of the three applications (HEV, EV,
and
PHEV), the underlying technical challenges behind the limitations, and the
approach
taken by researchers the world over to address these limitations. We begin with a
brief tutorial on batteries.
Batteries typically consist of two electrodes, an anode and a cathode with a
separator between them to prevent shorting. The cell is filled with electrolyte.
Figure 2
illustrates a typical Li-ion cell sandwich consisting of a graphite anode and a lithium
cobalt oxide cathode (LiCo02).
The electrodes consist of active materials bound together with an electronically
insulating binder and conductive additives. Each electrode is pasted onto current
collectors. During charge, Li is removed from the cathode (or positive electrode),
transferred through the separator via the electrolyte and is inserted into the anode.
The
reverse occurs on discharge. The difference in voltage of the cathode and the
voltage
of the anode is the cell voltage. The amount of Li that is stored in each of these
materials is related to the capacity (often given in mAh/g). The product of the
voltage
and the capacity is the energy. How quickly the Li is transferred from one electrode
to
the other (or how quickly the energy is removed) is related to the power. More
details
on batteries can be found in references 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Figure 3 shows the typical steady-state charge of the anode and cathode of a Li-
ion
cell with a graphite anode and a LiCo02 cathode in an organic electrolyte
consisting o
a Li salt (lithium hexafluoro phosphate, LiPF6) in a solvent (e. g., ethylene
carbonate
4
voltage of each electrode is represented with respect to a Li-metal reference
electrode.
As the Li is removed from the cathode, its potential increases, while the potential 0
the anode decreases with insertion of Li. The process of Li moving in and out of the
electrodes is referred to as intercalation/deintercalation. The voltage of the battery
is
the difference in voltage of the cathode and the anode, which increases as charge
proceeds. The abscissa represents how much Li is stored in the cell, while the
ordinate
shows at what voltage the Li is inserted/removed from the materials. In order to
increase the energy of the battery three avenues can be pursued, namely (i)
increase
the voltage of the cathode, (ii) decrease the voltage of the anode, and (iii) increase
the
capacity of the cell. However, the thermodynamics of electrochemical reactions
other
than the intercalation of Li (referred to as side reactions) limit these quantities.
Electrolyte oxidation.
The three side reactions worth mentioning in this plot are the oxidation of the
solvent that occurs above N 4.2 V vs. Li, Li-metal deposition that occurs below 0.0
V
vs. Li, and solvent reduction that occurs below N1 V vs. Li. These three reactions
not
only limit the energy of the cell, they are also implicated in the life and safety
problems associated with Li-ion batteries. Staying within the voltage window allows
these problems to be minimized, at the loss of energy. The tradeoffs that are
needed to
balance these various parameters are captured by Figure 3.
5
Innovation in Li-ion batteries can occur in two ways, (i) via engineering advances
that reduce, e. g., the thickness of the separator and/or (ii) via innovation in the
materials used as the active material. For example, the chemistry used in present-
day
cell phone and laptop batteries (LiCOOZ/graphite) has a theoretical energy density
o
w360 Wh/kg (this accounts for only the weight of the active material and not the
weights of the other components in the cell such as the current collectors,
electrolyte,
binders, and cell packaging). The practical energy density of a packaged 18650
cell is
w190 Wh/kg. Fifteen years ago, in the early days of Li-ion, this number was N90
Wh/kg, using the same material sets.6 In other words, over the last 15 years,
engineering advances have resulted in a doubling of the energy density of Li-ion
batteries. It is expected that in the future, improvements in performance will occur
by
moving to new higher energy materials.
Fortunately, it has been observed that Li can intercalate into many different anode
and cathode materials. At present, three classes of cathodes, four classes of
anodes,
and four classes of electrolytes are being considered for use in Li-ion cells.
Depending on the combination of the anode, cathode, and electrolyte, one can
have a
completely new battery with changes to the energy, power, life, safety
characteristics,
low temperature performance, etc. These classes are illustrated in Figure 4 for the
three components of the battery.
FIGURE 4. Schematic of a Li-ion cell with the various anode, cathode, and
electrolytes that are
presently being considered. Changing the combination results in changes to the
energy, power, safety,
life, and cost.
Each of these classes is a collection of numerous specific materials with their own
different characteristics. For example, the LiCo02 electrode used today falls under
the
class of layered materials. Its capacity is 140 mAh/g. A new cathode emerging in
the
market is LÍN10_gCo0_15A10_0502 (NCA), also a layered material but with a
capacity o
185 mAh/g. This increase in capacity means a significant increase in the energy of
the
cell, reiterating that many different materials combinations can be used to tune the
battery to suit the application for which it is used. This behavior of Li batteries
makes
6
it very different from other classes of batteries, for example, the lead-acid system
where the material set is fixed. It also adds additional degrees of freedom for
researchers to find new materials and in effect make a new battery.
One issue worth mentioning is the concept of capacity balancing. Todayºs Li-ion
batteries are typically referred to as cathode limited. ln other words, the capacity-' 0
the cathode (140 mAh/g for LiCoO-;) limits the capacity-' of the battery, as it is
smaller
than the capacity of the anode (3 72 mAh/ g for graphite). What this means is that
the
cathode has a significantly higher impact compared to the anode in increasing the
energy of the cell. A quick calculation shows that an order of magnitude increase in
the anode capacity increases the capacity of the cell by only 35% (one would also
need
to see at what voltage this new anode operates in order to estimate the
improvement in
energy).
While the ílexibility of Li batteries provides the means to tune the battery-ºs
characteristics, it appears that no ideal combination has been found that satisfies
the
needs of vehicular applications. We now briefly look at the three applications, the
status of batteries in these applications, and the research that is being pursued.
BATTERIES FOR HEVS
Over the last 5 years enormous progress has been made in using Li-ion batteries
for
HEV applications. The most studied system typically consists of the N'CA cathode
with a graphite anode. With continuous improvements this system has overcome
many of the limitations and has come closer to satisfying a majority of the
requirements set out by the USABC. ln particular, the calendar life of this chemistry
has been projected to be greater than 15 years based on accelerated testing, when
the
SOC of the battery is controlled carefully. This promising development provides
hope
for use in vehicles.
Despite these advances, three main barriers remain before commercialization:
(i) cost, (ii) low-temperature operation and (iii) safety-'.7 It has been shown that a
large
proportion of the cost of HEV batteries is due to the separator (25%) and the
electrolyte (17%) (note that in a HEV cell, where the electrodes are thin, there is
more
separator area for the same size compared to an EV" battery).8 Therefore, efforts
to
make low-cost separators would help with the cost reduction in the cell. An ability
to
make low-cost separators thinner, without compromising safety, would enhance
power, and minimize cost simultaneously. In addition, lower cost electrolytes and
cathodes would also help in decreasing the cost of the battery. Finally, as the
important metric for a HEV is $/kW of power, a new chemistry that promises higher
power at the same cost per cell would result in a lower pack cost.
When operating Li-ion batteries at low temperatures (less than OºC), it has been
seen that the power capability decreases significantly because of increased
resistance
in the cell. It is thought that the increased resistance is caused by the reduction in
the
kinetic rate constants of the electrochemical charge-transfer reaction.9 This has
implications during regeneration where the anode in the Li-ion cell is accepting Li
at
high rates. It has been observed that instead of intercalating into the graphite
structure, the Li plates on the surface. The Li metal then reacts with the electrolyte
and gets consumed, leading to capacity fade. While it is known that the choice of
the
7
solvent can have a significant impact on the low-temperature performance, these
special solvents come at an additional cost. An alternative technique is to use an
anode that allows the lowering of the impedance without causing Li plating. This
can
be achieved if the voltage of the anode is much higher than the voltage for Li-
plating,
allowing a bigger window before plating occurs. Lithium titanate (Li4Ti5013) is a
candidate that allows this feature because its voltage is 1.5 V vs. Li. Companies
such
as Toshiba, Enerdel, and Altair Nano are pursuing this concept to allow low-
temperature operation and fast-charge capability (in addition to possible safety and
life
enhancements). However, the high anode voltage results in a low cell voltage and
therefore decreases the energy of the battery.
It also should be noted that if the HEV is designed so that the battery is not used
when cold but instead is allowed to warm up using the IC engine, then the problem
o
[mv-temperature operation could be circumvented. At present, it appears that the
HEVs of the near future will be using this strategy. A pure EV" would be prone to
have
a problem from this low-temperature limitation because no means exist to heat the
battery when it is not plugged into an electrical outlet. Here, again, the problem
could
be solved by not allowing regeneration until the battery warms, and by using the
battery to power the car (albeit at lower acceleration) until it self-heats.
The last limitation of Li-ion batteries is the safety of the pack, highlighted by the
recent incidents involving fires of consumer-electronics batteries. The main cause
o
safety limitations in Li-ion cells can be characterized by the three stages in which
thermal runaway occurs.10 In stage ], an unexpected failure occurs in the cell, e.g.,
internal shorting (e.g., due to metal particles) or malfunction of the overcharge
protection system. This results in the temperature of the cell increasing to around
125oC, where a reaction that involves decomposition of a passive layer on the
anode
(called the solid electrolyte interphase layer or SEI) occurs; an exothermic reaction
that increases the temperature further. As the temperature increases to above
180ºC,
in some cathodes, the oxygen from the lattice is released, resulting in a rapid
increase
in heat in a short time. This chain reaction results in the smoke and the fires that
have
been observed in Li batteries.
One can prevent/retard these reactions in different ways. For example, using a
cathode that does not release oxygen could help in suppressing the final
exothermic
step. Lithium iron phosphate is one such cathode that is being pursued by various
companies, notably, A123 systems and Phostech. A second approach is to prevent
the
cell from approaching these temperatures by preventing the decomposition of the
SEI.
Lithium titanate is an example of an anode where no SEI forms and so it has been
argued that this makes the battery safer. Finally, research efforts are underway to
develop overcharge protection mechanisms, such as redox shuttles, electroactive
polymers, and high puncture-strength separators to prevent internal short circuits.
These ideas are aimed at preventing the cell from reaching the temperatures
where the
anode reactions occur. Finally, electrolytes that are not flammable and nonvolatile
(e.g., ionic liquids) help minimize the impact of these incidents even if the reactions
do occur.
To summarize, three problems prevent the widespread commercialization of Li-ion
batteries for HEVS today, cost, low-temperature operation, and safety. However, in
the short-term, various engineering solutions can be adopted that can prevent the
latter
8
two. With cost being a highly socio-economic factor, it is thought that HEV's with Li-
ion will start reaching the marketplace within the next few years.
BATTERIES FOR EVS
We will now examine the use of Li-ion batteries for EV applications. As was
pointed out previously, Figure 1 suggests that the energy density of Li-ion batteries
is
not sufficient for use in present-day cars to provide the necessary range to make
them
cornrnercially viable. A typical rule-of-thumb is that a sedan can go 1 mile on 300
Wh
of battery. In other words, a car with 300 mile range requires a 90 kWh pack that
can
fit in the vehicle with little impact to passenger and luggage space. Presently
available
EV batteries have a specific energy of …110 Wh/kg and 160 Wh/l,” suggesting that
the 90 kWh battery will weigh 1800 lbs and have a volume of 148 gallons; far too
large for existing vehicles. These energy numbers are on a pack level and are
therefore smaller than those on a cell level. Further, note that these numbers are
not
meant to be precise, rather they are estimates to illustrate the challenges.
Arguments could be made that one may not need a 300-mile-range vehicle, that
one
could drive more than 1 mile with 300 Wh (for example, via the use of lightweight
materials and better body design), and that one could enhance the specific energy
on
the pack level using lightweight battery packaging.b All these would help make EVs
a
reality. However, the cost of such a vehicle would still remain large, and, arguably,
prohibitive. Por example, the battery pack in the Tesla Roadster is reported to be
$25,000. The fact that the Tesla batteries are made for consumer electronic
applications, where the cost of batteries is considerably lower than that for
vehicles,
highlights the rnagnitude of the problem. Similar to HEVS, the important quantity is
the $/kWh of the battery (a more comprehensive metric would be $/kWh/year or a
lifetime cost on an energy basisº). Therefore, a higher energy chemistry could be a
route to decreasing the cost of these batteries. Three ideas that are being pursued
are
discussed here.
As pointed out before, the capacity of cathodes used in consumer electronic
batteries are limited by the solvent oxidation reaction that occurs at N4.2 V vs. Li.
At
these limits, only w50% of the lithium is removed from the lattice of the cathode.
9
modification of the interface allows us to think of new ways to enhance the energy
0
the cell while maintaining cycle life and safety.
The second possibility is to change the anode to enhance the energy of the cell.
Two options are being pursued in this area, (i) the use of anodes that alloy with Li,
such as silicon and (ii) the use of Li metal. ln area one, anodes, such have silicon,
are
attractive because they have high capacity (N3 700 mAh/ g) when compared to
graphite
(372 mAh/g).lº Despite having a higher voltage compared to graphite (0.5 V" vs.
0.1 V), the use of Si results in an increase in energy density by …25_35%_
However,
several problems prevent alloys from being commercialized including a large
volume
change (w270% for silicon) with cycling that results in particle cracking/isolation, a
large lSt cycle loss in capacity that results in Li being consumed to make a passive
layer and not being active to provide capacity-', and a continuous consumption of Li
from cycle to cycle that limits the cycle life.14 Several approaches are being
pursued
to alleviate these limitations.
Two that are worth noting are the use of what is termed “active-inactive matrix”
where the active component (Si or Sn) is embedded in an inactive matrix (e.g.,
carbon),13 and the use of novel structures to accommodate the volume change. In
the
first approach, the carbon allows the expansion of the alloy without particle
cracking.
However, the added weight and volume of the inactive component limits the
capacity
of these anodes to …1200 mAh/g. This concept is used in the Nexilion cell
introduced
by Sony Corporation. In the second concept approach, micron-si2ed silicon pillars
that reversiny cycle with high capacity are used.10 A nano-si2ed analog of this
concept was recently reported by a group at Stanford University.17 While
interesting,
these structures require expensive and slow processing.
While these two approaches show promise in accornrnodating the volume change,
efforts need to be made to reduce the lSt cycle capacity-' loss (which scales with
surface
area) and the cycle-to-cycle loss of Li. Use of “in situ SEI-formers” like the SLMP
powder marketed by FMC Corporation could help with the former.“ The use o
additiyes could help with the latter.
ln area two, using Li metal as the anode brings the promise of a large capacity
(3 800 mAh/g) at a voltage of 0.0 V, thereby increasing the energy of the cell.
Lithium
metal has been used in primary Li batteries for decades, however, its use in
secondary
batteries have not been successful because of problems during charging. During
charge, Li plates on the anode and, similar to plating of other metals like zinc, does
not
plate uniformly. Instead, dendrites of Li grow on the surface and, with time,
penetrate
the separator and short the cathode. In addition, dendrites break and isolate Li
resulting in capacity fade.
There have been numerous efforts over the decade to stop the dendrites from
growing by placing the anode against a hard surface, such as a solid polymer
electrolyte. It has been hypothesized that the hard surface of the polymer would
prevent the dendrites from penetrating. However, it has been observed that as the
stiffness of the polymer increases, its conductiyity decreases, thereby limiting the
power capability of the cell. This interplay between conductiyity and stiffness has
resulted in the inability to effectively prevent dendrites. The use of block
copolyrners,
where one block is made of a Stiff material like polystyrene, and the second block
is
made of a conducting phase, like polyethylene oxide, has allowed the decoupling
of
10
conductivit_y and stiffness.19 However, as of today, these polymers operate at 80
C and
have significantly lower conductivity compared to liquid electrolytes. The use of
polymers for Li batteries is being pursued by companies such as Sion Power and
Seeo
Inc.
Another concept is the use of single-ion conducting glasses to isolate the Li. This
concept has been explored by Polyplus Battery Company where it has been shown
that
the Li can be completely isolated to the point where it can be dipped in water. This
concept is intriguing in that it enables the development of very high energy cells
like
Li-air and Li-sulfur. These glasses are not very conductive and are prone to defect
formation. Advances in the behavior of solid polymers and ionic glasses could
provide huge benefits in batteries.
While these approaches provide a pathway for enabling a higher energy cell that
could allow the development of EVs, they fail to solve one other problem, namely,
charging time. With typical battery charge times ranging from 3-8 hours, a change
in
lifestyle is needed when compared to using a gasoline car. While fast-charge
batteries
do exist (e.g., Altair Nano and Toshiba), these come at the expense of energy.
Further,
infrastructure questions arise concerning the ability of the grid to handle a pure
electricity-based transportation economy with fast-charge batteries. The issues of
range and charging are circurnvented with the use of a PHEV.
BATTERIES FOR PHEVS
The PHEV is an ideal compromise between the minimal fuel-saving advantage o
the HEV and the range/charging-time issue of the EV. With the addition of the
internal combustion engine for longer trips and a large battery pack to sustain 10-
40
miles of equivalent electric range, the PHEV captures the best of both concepts. As
suggested previously, the energy of the Li-ion cell is connected with the life and
enhancing one typically lessens the other. While high energy Li-ion cells, similar to
ones used in consumer electronic applications, could probably satisfy the range
requirements for a 40 mile PHEV, the ability of these batteries to last 15 years is
highly questionable. Typical EV batteries today do not appear to posses the energy
needed for a 40 mile range. However, recent reports suggest that battery
rnanufacturers are increasing moving to lightweight packaging that should allow
the
specific energy to increase. In addition, presently-available batteries.
11
the more
important question is the calendar life of these cells, particularly because these
batteries may spend a considerable part of the time at high SOCs, the state where
Li-
ion batteries are most prone to exhibit capacity fade. Strategies are being pursued
that
involve decreasing the maximum SOC of the battery in order to enhance the life;
however, these come at the expense of energy and therefore increase the cost of
the
pack. As of today, no clear data exists that shows the ability of Li-ion batteries to
sustain 15 year life under PHEV conditions. This is expected to become available
in
the near future.
Concepts that involve increasing the energy of the battery via new materials,
described in the EV section, will prove to be very effective in decreasing the cost
(by
decreasing the $/kWh). In addition, careful use of additives/coatings to modify the
electrode/electrolyte interface in order to retard side reactions in the cell can help
to
enhance the life of the battery, without sacrificing energy. Finally, new materials
that
show inherent stability could also be useful in improving the life of these
batteries.We end the discussion of PHEVS by reminding the reader that safety
remains aconcern for all three applications and that the ideas to enhance safety
suggested in the
HEV section are applicable for PHEVS (and EVS).
FUTURE OF BATTERIES
The energy density of batteries has been increasing at the rate of w5% per year
over
the last 15 years, well below the improvements that have been made in
semiconducto
devices (e.g., Mooreºs law). The question arises as to how batteries will improve
ove
the next 15 years. While difficult to predict, one can look at advances in the
literature
and project the impact these advances would have on energy. We choose to look
at
specific energy, although energy density is also important. This is summarized in
Figure 5 where the specific energy is captured at the cell leve]. We split the plot
into
“low risk” where two advances are expected. One involves the move to a NCA-like
cathode from LiCo03 (which is already underway) and the second involves the
move
to an active-inactive alloy (similar to the Nexilion cells, but with higher capacity-').
We
then describe higher risk systems that involve moving to high-voltage-transition-
metal-oxide (TMO) cathodes and to alloy anodes that have much larger capacity.
These are considered possible, if the concept of coatings work to enhance the
capacity
of cathodes without compromising safety and life and if alloys, like Si, prove to
meet
the cycle life requirements. While both these are far from certain, the literature
results
are encouraging.Ӽ20 Because of the uncertainty, we denote this as higher risk.
These
advances, if successful, would result in the doubling of the energy of present day
batteries; a significant increase.
Next, we address the issue of the theoretical limit of the energy of batteries. While
some use a periodic table to evaluate this number, we choose to highlight systems
that
are very far from reality-', but have been alluded to in the literature. Three of these
systems are listed in Figure 6 including zinc-air, lithium-sulfur and lithium-air. Note
12
that the numbers in this figure are theoretical energies (that do not include any
weights
except that of the active material). The figure shows that batteries today are very
far
from achieving the theoretically maximum-possible energy. Efforts are underway
both in the research community and in industry to examine these systems. For
example, the Zinc-air technology is being pursued by ReVolt Technologies in
Sweden
and the Li-S cell is the focus of Sion Power. However, note that while the figure
shows the theoretical specific energy, practical values are far below these
quantities.
For example, the target for Li-S cells is in the range of 350 Wh/kg; less than a
doubling of presently-available systems. This shows the difficulty involved with
these
chemistries and the long-term nature of the research for them to be comercial.
Finally, we examine the need for non-Li-based systems for energy storage for
vehicles. While systems are being researched (like magnesium and sodium), these
appear further away from commercialization. Considering the wide variety of
materials that Li can intercalate into, it appears that Li-based batteries (whether Li-
ion
or Li-metal) offer many opportunities for improvements that are worth pursuing.
While it can be argued that being dependent on a single cathode or anode material
(like being dependent on platinum in a fuel cell) would lead to resource limitations,
one should note that with the wide material set for the anode and cathode for use
in a
Li-ion cell, one has opportunities to spread the risk among many different metals.
The
one common metal that is needed for all Li-based cells is Li. Back of the envelope
13
being pursued to address this challenge. Safety will remain in the forefront of any
discussion of battery-powered vehicles and much care and attention is needed to
ensure that no incidents occur that undermine this concept.
The future of batteries remains very strong and one can be optimistic as to the
advances that will occur in this class of energy storage devices. Considerable
improvements can still be made to the concept of a Li-ion battery, both in terms o
finding new materials and in alleviating the limitations of existing systems. Batteries
exist that promise tremendous improvements compared to the ones presently
available; however there are significant challenges in commercializing these
systems.
The key to enabling these systems to operate with high energy, long life, and good
safety characteristics lies at the interface. Modification of the interface will play an
increasing important role in batteries in the near future.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Office of Vehicle Technologies of the U.S. Department of
Energy
under Contract No.DE-ACOZ-OSCH1123I.
REFERENCES
1. http://www.uscar.org/guest/article view.php?articles id=85
2. Chem. Reviews 104(10), (October 2004).
3. D.A. Scherson and A. Palsencsar, The Electrochem. Society lnte1face 17
(Spring 2006).
4. RJ . Brodd, et al, J. Electrochem Soc. 151, K1 (2004).
5. W. van Schalkwijk and B. Scrosati (ed.), Advances in Lithium-Ion Batteries, New
York,
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers (2002).
6. V. Srinivasan and L. Lipp, J. Electrochem. Soc. 150, K15 (2003).
7.
www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2008/energy_storage/
merito8_habib.pdf
8. http:// www.transportation.anl.gov/ pdfs/ TA/ 149.pdf
9. DP. Abraham, et al, J. Electrochem. Soc. 153, A1610 (2006).
10. http://www.prod.sandia.gov/cgi-bin/techlib/access-control.pl/2004/040584pdf
1 1 . http://www.saftbatteries.com/ 120-Techno/20-
10 produit.asp?sSegment=&sSegmentLien=&SSecteurLien=§eur=&lntitule
Produit=VLEmodule
page=2
12. J. Cho, et al, Angewandte Chemie 42, 1618 (2003).
13. J. Li and J .R. Dahn, J. Electrochem. Soc. 154, A156 (2007).
14. SD. Beattie, et al, J. Electrochem. Soc. 155, A158 (2008).
15. 1. Kim, et al, Elec. Solid State Lett. 7, A44 (2004).
16. US patent 20060097691.
17. CK. Chan, et al. Nature Nano. 3, 31 (2008).
18. http://www.fmclithium.com/products/pds/FMCOO3 EMTsht 3 06.pdf
19. M. Singh, et al. Macromolecules 40, 4578 (2007).
20. MN. Obravac and L. J. Kruase, J. Electrochem. Soc. 154, A103 (2007).
