this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
573 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
81869 readers
4484 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes, because battery technology stagnated years ago...
Oh wait
Great response, people just love to parrot easy dismissals without looking and the sheer magnitude on innovation and commercialisation going on in this sector
It doesn't really dispute it, though. Lithium-ion has seen a lot of improvement, yes, because it's already a giant industry; other battery chemistries have a hard time breaking through because they require entirely different processes to manufacture.
I'm still rooting for it, but it's not really the same thing.
This too is false, great progress has been made on for instance solid state batteries.
You can't buy anything with solid state batteries yet, and when you can, they will cost a fortune.
Uhh you know you can buy an external mag safe battery bank with a solid state battery for like 45 bucks on amazon as well as the big generator ones as well?
I agree that cost isn't amazing. You are essentially getting about half the capacity per dollar spent to a standard battery device but also these are in fact more stable for temp swings and damage. Soo... consumer available and not a fortune just need to have justification for it.
Some progress is being made, but it hasn't seen large-scale adoption yet. Which is the point, as I read it.
It takes time to scale up production, CATL is already building factories for it:
https://www.catl.com/en/news/6401.html
These press releases are weekly. Naxtra will be 30% cheaper, but also bigger and heavier. The problem here is the damn periodic table, someone should change it.
The "progress" is typical industry bullshit. See the absolute bullshit around the Donut SS battery.
Remember when Musk invented a battery with 30% better capacity? It was a 30% bigger battery.
SS batteries require manufacturing facilities with clean rooms on the order of chip fabs. You may see these in 2027, but only in expensive cars.
It takes time to scale production and even more time to adopt a new technology.
Well all those graphs show is that the cost of batteries has gone down and that as a result electric cars contain more batteries and therefore more range. It doesn't actually show that the individual battery capacity has increased.
The third graph that indicates battery performance vs battery chemistry doesn't really show incremental improvement it just shows general improvement but there's plenty of battery chemistries that are worse than pre-existing ones.
@Warl0k3@lemmy.world The hero we need!
Did you mean to tag me?
You are a literal scientist or something that always answers these questions. We need you!
Start of my villain arc right here. Like unidan, but with more buttholes.
(fat fingered the button one moment:)
This thread is a bit of a mess and I would caution taking anything being said (except by me, the absolute authority) without a large grain of salt - however mostly people aren't contradicting each other, it's just a hugely complex topic that quickly devolves into semantic-adjacent arguments about how we should be comparing battery chemistries (on market / in lab / cross-chemistry) and what degree we should be considering the "soft factors"; things like the number of recharge cycles, robustness of the cells to damage, cost of manufacturing and/or recycling the cells, etc.
Sodium batteries are a big deal, and as far as I've seen we're finally at the point where they're starting to become market viable, but they're still a largely unproven technology. Arguing that battery tech hasn't improved in the last decade is obviously wrong, but it's also not wrong to say that there hasn't been any dramatic improvement in the technology in the last decade. None of the many "miracle battery tech" that promises to have double-or-better the capacity of lithium chemistries has panned out, we've just been making slow gains across many chemistries and those cumulative 10% improvements to battery life year-over-year are finally starting to add up to where the average consumer can really notice them.
Uh yeah, not a good idea now that I think about it, apologies.
But since you are already here, the guy above me says batteries have not improved much, and I'm too dumb to argue.
I won't let it go to my head. I promise. Probably.
Anyways tho for an actual opinion:
This thread is a bit of a mess and I would caution taking anything being said (except by me, the absolute authority) without a large grain of salt - however mostly people aren't contradicting each other, it's just a hugely complex topic that quickly devolves into semantic-adjacent arguments about how we should be comparing battery chemistries (on market / in lab / cross-chemistry) and what degree we should be considering the "soft factors"; things like the number of recharge cycles, robustness of the cells to damage, cost of manufacturing and/or recycling the cells, etc.
Sodium batteries are a big deal, and as far as I've seen we're finally at the point where they're starting to become market viable, but they're still a largely unproven technology. Arguing that battery tech hasn't improved in the last decade is obviously wrong, but it's also not wrong to say that there hasn't been any dramatic improvement in the technology in the last decade. None of the many "miracle battery tech" announcements that promise to have double-or-better the capacity of lithium chemistries has panned out, we've just been making slow gains across many chemistries and those cumulative 10% improvements to battery life year-over-year are finally starting to add up to where the average consumer can really notice them.
Just to clarify, because I feel that I'm being impuned in some way, my only comment was that while there has been significant development in batteries in the lab up until now this is the first commercially available battery includement since we got off lithium polymer.
The original comment I was responding to was trying to suggest that battery technology over the last decade has significantly improved but realistically all we've done is being come clever with the technology we already have, and that this is the first time battery technology at a commercial level has improved. After all, a lot of ICE cars are still using lead acid batteries, and the remote control for my TV uses batteries that my grandparents would have recognised.
I remember while back when lithium oxygen batteries were the new hotness and that never went anywhere.
Oh man, I am so glad we finally have one of those. I was worried I was stuck in this confusing thread about semantics with just my own broken brain.
Oh absolute authority... When we will give rocks boobs?
Thank you hero!
Shhhh.....we're having a bullshit feel good moment...
Wow! Thanks for sharing that data. I had no idea.
Weird, I didn't know Lithium-Ion batteries were still in the lab. I thought for sure we were using those already. I thought the batteries in the labs were various solid-state batteries like graphene or like this sodium-ion battery, where there's been a rise in patents around it but not a lot delivered
There are a bunch of lithium ion chemistries that have come to market more recently.
LFP sits in the low cost marker while NCA is the highest performing of the mass market batteries, and NMC is somewhere in between.
Sodium might be coming for LFP's low cost position, and is already beginning mass production (some Chinese manufacturers expect those models to hit the road in a few months).
If you think rechargeable battery R&D from 10 years ago isn't making it into mass produced products today, you're just not paying attention.
Like what? [Citation required]
Please provide examples.
I mean, as much as a person who doesn't work in research and development of energy storage, or work in industries directly related to it, I personally feel I've kept up. The day Donut Labs announced their battery I was watching review videos about it, and I want to believe, but until I see it for purchase, I'm not going to call it a win.
I mean the first diagram is effectively useless without knowledge of battery density. They as well could compare the 2010 compacts with 2025s SUVs which have probably 2x the amount of total capacity.
For the other charts: Agreed.
TBF, there are a lot of "battery breakthroughs" that turn out to just be hot air. Battery technology has made tremendous progress though and there is still a lot of room for improvement.
No, that's a different type of battery.
No, this is Patrick.
There actually is not a lot of room for improvement. Highest energy will still be limited to lithium chemistry because of the periodic table.
That's a limit on gravimetric energy density. There are plenty of other parameters that can be improved.
You don't know that. This is chemistry, not Moore's stupid law.
no, actually, we do know that… things like cycle time, lifetime cycles, their durability < 20% and > 80%, performance in the cold, sustained current
lots of these are to do with heat and degradation, but these are all problems that can be solved to improve batteries in general… some of them are inherently to lithium chemistry and easily solved with others
sodium batteries, for example, are better in most categories other than wh/kg making them not useful for portable electronics and cars etc but for stationary applications these benefits can significantly outweigh the major downside because wh/kg is not a useful metric (eg grid storage)… especially true when sodium batteries are able to deal with higher operating temperatures which means you don’t need as much if any extra cooling, which is getting close to making up for even energy density of the system in some situations
All that data says is batteries got cheaper so they are putting more of them into cars. Also 100 to 300 wh/kg is in labs. No explanation why it went from 175 to 100 Wh/kg 08-10.
No explanation? You might want to get checked for color blindness
We've had 3 major changes in battery chemistry in the last 45 years. Energy density, lifespan, cost, and dangerous materials have all generally improved. We also have 2 new battery technologies in the process of becoming generally commercially available. Also, batteries went from 500 mAh batteries about the size of your smartphone to 3000 mAh as a minor component of that same smartphone, about an order of magnitude in energy density.