this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2026
519 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

87124 readers
3843 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been hearing about these for a few years now. Huge if they work out at a large scale.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lime@feddit.nu 39 points 2 days ago (4 children)

idk about that, the regularly cited reason Na-ion batteries are mainly being looked at for grid storage rather than vehicle applications is their bad Wh/l and W/kg numbers compared to Li-ion. the table in the Na-ion article seems to use "1000W/kg" without a source, and it shows lithium as being about a third of that even though the Li-ion article quotes figures up to 10kW/kg.

seems the editors of the two articles aren't cross-checking eachother.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The "1000W/kg" figure appears to be from Wikipedia, which claims https://www.idtechex.com/en/research-article/sodium-ion-batteries-will-diversify-the-energy-storage-industry/30405 as a source. Wikipedia has the information in a table flagged as "Needs update".

Anyway, most of the lithium-ion chemistry variations drop off relatively fast in capacity over repeated charge cycles (the exception being LiFePo4). If the sodium-ion chemistry is better that way, and drops off less in the cold, it's still worth exploring for vehicle use even if the energy density is a little lower.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago

In colder climates, the lower density could be offset by better performance in cold. This is why sodium has made it to large mining trucks.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

from other comments it seems the energy density of batteries currently on the market is about 2/3rds that of lithium cells.

there's also the asymmetry to worry about: with a max discharge rate of 8C but a charge rate of 3C there could potentially be limits on regen braking. if i'm understanding it correctly, sodium cells degrade quickly at higher charge rates.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just put condensers/a small lithium break battery in.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 2 days ago

i think bmw was working on something like that.

[–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Interesting, but from what I understand limited charging would only be a problem if you do not have large enough battery capacity. So for heavier vehicles with larger capacity this might not matter much.

PS: This video about the CATL NaFePO4 battery also mentions a "half sodium half lithium" battery pack for cars to combine the best of both.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Googling says 175 whr/kg for catls sodium car battery that's already in production cars vs 270 whr/kg for Tesla's lithium.

[–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago

Probably numbers for the raw cell though, not the balancing and cooling which could make sodium a bit more competitive.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

W/kilo? Isn't there a h missing or something?

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

one is energy density, the other is power density.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

Aah, makes sense. I have seen soo many people confounding power and energy I thought it was the same here, my excuses.

[–] Anivia@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago

ion. the table in the Na-ion article seems to use "1000W/kg" without a source, and it shows lithium as being about a third of that even though the Li-ion article quotes figures up to 10kW/kg.

seems the editors of the two articles aren't cross-checking eachother.

No, it seems like you have zero idea what you are talking about and are confusing W/kg with Wh/kg, which are very different metrics