StoreDot, the Israel-based developer of extreme fast charging battery technology for electric vehicles, has delivered cells that have exceeded 1000 cycles in production-ready EV form factor.
The 300Wh/kg, 700 Wh/l high energy density cells are being shipped in pouch format to StoreDot’s global automotive OEM partners for real-world testing. The cells exhibit the promised ‘100in5’ EV performance, allowing drivers to charge consecutively 100 miles of range for each 5 minutes of charging.
StoreDot’s ‘100in5’ cells repeatedly charged from 10 to 80% capacity in just 10 minutes and then discharged for one hour before recharging. The EV cells achieved more than 1000 of these extreme charging cycles consecutively before degrading below the 80% of the original capacity threshold. No noticeable degradation occurred within the first 600 cycles in which the cells were consecutively fast charged between 10 to 80%.
This achievement follows StoreDot’s announcement in March that it had set a world record of 1200 cycles for its extreme fast charging cells in prototype format. StoreDot continues to develop the XFC technology in both cylindrical and prismatic form factors with updates expected soon on shipping those to OEM partners.
Posted on 11 October 2022 in Batteries, Electric (Battery), Market Background | Permalink | Comments (22)
There is far too much of: 'An undertaking of great advantage, but no-one to know what it is' about StoreDot for my liking.
It is not readily apparent whether their claims have been independently verified, nor could I readily track down what chemistry they are using, whether cobalt heavy or what.
We seem to be little further along in being told exactly what they are up to than in this analysis from 2021:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/01/whats-the-technology-behind-a-five-minute-charge-battery/
' Unfortunately, the response to our inquiries fell a bit short of our hopes. "Thank you for your interest," was the reply, "we are still in pure R&D mode and cannot share any information or answer any questions at the moment." Apparently, the company gave The Guardian an exclusive and wasn't talking to anyone else.
Undeterred, we've since pulled every bit of information we could find from StoreDot's site to figure out roughly what it was doing, and we went backwards from there to look for research we've covered previously that could be related. What follows is an attempt to piece together a picture of the technology and the challenges a company has to tackle to take research concepts and make products out of them.'
It all sounds lovely, but then it would, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:14 AM
A radar chart would certainly be useful here. They are showing us a few characteristics where their cell excels, but none of the basic ones like price or behaviour in cold/hot weather.
Posted by: peskanov | 11 October 2022 at 03:24 AM
Hi Davemart, Ithis is StoreDot's PR agency. If you'd be interested in a chat with StoreDot's CEO then we could potentially set that up for you. He can answer any questions you may have around specifics. If that sounds of interest can you please email tom@influenceemobility.com and we can then process this for you. Thanks!
Posted by: Influenceemob | 11 October 2022 at 05:34 AM
Hi. Now that is the sort of response which really does engender confidence! I will email you of course, but wish to make clear that I am no sort of battery expert, just a guy who has followed developments somewhat over the last couple of decades.
Any issues are usually the criteria not mentioned, the 'dog that did not bark' So for instance we had fiery Blue cars, with their solid batteries which had to be kept molten, and umpteen others which improved one or more criteria, but only at the expense of others.
Peskanov nails it, so the questions are durability as well as cycle life, safety and use of critical materials such as cobalt, as well as others such as ease of manufacture, which is even holding up the redoubtable Toyota's solid state battery.
And until cells are tested by independent labs, then all criteria remain: 'Sez who?'
Of course there are very valid concerns about releasing too many details on proprietary technology, so there will always be reservations.
I will give you my email, and if other knowledgeable posters here could list here what concerns they would like me to bring up, that would be a real chance to open a window on what would be very exciting developments if they pan out.
So questions I should raise, here please, guys!
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 07:14 AM
@Davemart, This is information based on StoreDot patents and their partners. StoreDot and Group14 Technologies are partners for the Silicon Anode. https://group14.technology/en/news/storedot-and-group14-technologies-partner-to-enhance-extreme-fast-charging Last year Group 14 and Farasis Energy developed a battery with a a specific energy of 330 Wh/kg (750 Wh/L energy density) in typical automotive cells, and delivers more than 1,000 charge-discharge cycles. https://chargedevs.com/newswire/farasis-and-group14-say-their-silicon-carbon-anode-delivers-330-wh-kg/ StoreDot patent 20220285671 mentions a “Lithium sulfate coated anode active material” where a small amount of film forming additive added into the electrolyte may improve the performance of the battery. Another StoreDot patent 20220123574 describes “Charging battery cells using a booster unit” and references a 2005 article - (“Boostcharging Li-ion batteries: A challenging new charging concept. Journal of Power Sources. 145. 89-94. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.12.038). The article states; “Cycle life of Li-ion batteries, boostcharged and additionally standard charged to full capacity do not introduce any negative degradation effects. Boostcharging is shown to be very rapid. For example, a fully discharged battery can be recharged within 5 min to one-third of its rated capacity.” https://research.tue.nl/en/publications/boostcharging-li-ion-batteries-a-challenging-new-charging-concept In other words, the StoreDot ‘100in5’.
Posted by: Gryf | 11 October 2022 at 09:52 AM
Naturally as this discussion progresses I am becoming ever more impressed with StoreDot.
Do you see any issues that it would be worth raising with their CEO?
What do you think of the issues I have mentioned?
I am always looking for whatever bits companies DON't mention!
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 10:06 AM
Apropos of nothing in this thread, but as a continuation of previous discussions we have had, regarding the potential use of hydrogen in air transport, what is your take on this idea, of using metal organic frameworks for storing hydrogen on aircraft?:
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/global-leaders-use-hydrogen-to-reduce-aviation-emissions/
Looking at the websites of the companies themselves is not throwing much greater light on what they are up to, but I am a bit surprised that the link I have given is talking about hydrogen performing at similar levels to jet fuel for range etc, which is at least theoretically possible for cyrogenic tank but I would have imagined that an MOF would weigh way too much to make the comparison applicable.
Interestingly one brief link I did Google up said that heat is not as big an issue as in hydrides, but I did not really turn much up.
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 10:16 AM
The issues you have raised so far look good. There are some other questions,however, I need to do some additional work. It is based on another article which discusses electrolyte additives to improve Silicon anodes fast charging capability. “ Replacing conventional battery electrolyte additives with dioxolone derivatives for high-energy-density lithium-ion batteries” https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-21106-6#additional-information The questions come from the Peer Review File in the “Supplementary Information” https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41467-021-21106-6/MediaObjects/41467_2021_21106_MOESM2_ESM.pdf Check this out and later today I can forward additional questions mostly based on the electrolyte additives and the booster unit.
Posted by: Gryf | 11 October 2022 at 10:27 AM
TBF, although somewhat flattered by the invitation, I think that you would be likely to be a more appropriate interlocutor for the CEO.
At the end of the day, I don't have the technical chops to follow when arguments in detail, I am just an old cost and works guy who can often spot when an engineer's bright ideas sound a bit expensive and so I drizzle rain on them! ;-)
I'd be very happy if you took my place, then there are not likely to be 'Doh!' moments in case the CEO turns out to be Mr Burns! :-0
E-mail Tom if you are up for it, and if they agree to it, I would think it all good.
My own email is davemacloud at icloud dot com
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 01:21 PM
Davemart: The questions to StoreDot relate to the battery composition and the booster unit. 1. Was the Anode based on Group 14 SCC55 product or another Silicon anode or another metalloid anode,e.g. Ge, Sn. 2. Was an electrolyte additive used to improve fast charging performance? 3. Was the cathode a high Ni-rich cathode, e.g. NMC-811? We’re other cathodes investigated? 4.Was a booster or special Battery Management unit used to control the charging? 5. Was the battery assembled with commercially available anodes and cathodes or completely fabricated by StoreDot?
Posted by: Gryf | 11 October 2022 at 01:52 PM
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 01:55 PM
Davemart: Concerning the use of MOF for Aviation, you may want to revisit an older GCC post: https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/04/20200417-numof.html
You commented there, too. MOF may have better H2 storage by weight than Compressed H2 and are easier to maintain compared to Liquid H2 (operating at 77 K and low pressure. However, they still do not compete with either Ammonia or Jet-A fuel on a volumetric specific energy basis (MOF: 5,540 kJ/l, LH2: 8,491 kJ/l, NH3: 11,308 kJ/l, Jet-A: 35,300 kJ/l). Everyone likes to look at energy density by weight, when you are looking at Aviation volumetric is the important measure, particularly for long distance commercial travel.
Posted by: Gryf | 11 October 2022 at 02:03 PM
My memory ain't what it used to be, at any rate so far as I can recall! ;-)
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:09 PM
I do remember that we have discussed hydrogen storage on aircraft before, and the likes of Airbus are intending redesign to deal with the volumetric issue.
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:13 PM
I do however fully recognize that your opinion and evaluation of the issue is worth 'rather' more than my casual reading.
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:16 PM
The papers you linked on electrolytes etc are way above my head, which is why I think you would be a far better choice to discuss the issues with the StoreDot CEO
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:21 PM
I just had an email from a guy called Colin, who does not have an account here to post, but used to work on a battery R & D start up, and says:
' Some things to ask: - It appears to me that their gravimetric and volumetric energy densities, 330 Wh/kg and 740 Wh/L respectively, only include the electrodes and electrolyte. What is their definition of electrode? Does that only include the active material of the cathode and anode? Or does it include the current collector as well? As an extension, what are the gravimetric and volumetric energy densities if you include everything like the tabs and packaging for instance? - Also, are the gravimetric and volumetric energy densities calculated based on the theoretical values for each component? Or is this calculated based on what was observed in a test? - How do they define battery retention? Is that coulombic efficiency? If so, are they comparing it to the previous cycle? - Also, since it's a silicon anode, how did they overcome the structural difficulties associated with the expansion and contraction of the silicon during charge and discharge? - How many cells did they run in order to get this result? Does the graph show the result from 1 cell? Or is it aggregated and averaged data from 5 cells? 100 cells?'
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:37 PM
Some of the answers can be found in this Insideevs article: https://insideevs.com/news/615605/storedot-1000cycles-extreme-fast-charging/
It was a 30 Ah pouch cell with a 40% Silicon dominant anode. So it appears that StoreDot is trying to get information out on this development.
Posted by: Gryf | 11 October 2022 at 02:42 PM
I just posted the questions as given to me. I agree that some of the information is indeed out there.
I would also make the point that if I am the one discussing this with the StoreDot CEO, not someone way more qualified to do so, such as you, then I think that they are now clearly trying to get information out on this, as you say.
So there are then obvious issues of confidentiality and proprietary information, so I am well aware that it is likely to be impractical to answer all points, and I will fully respect that.
Not an interrogation then of any sort, just asking what more he can reasonably reveal, and how it integrated together.
Pouches being in the hands of the potential users are a sign that we are pretty far along, if this is a viable and honest endeavor, as it seems increasingly evident that it is.
I've raised issues with other developers, and they ran a mile from any hard questions!
So fronting them is a great indicator of something which works, to me.
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 02:54 PM
Davemart: You are doing an excellent job already. StoreDot probably will not disclose any proprietary information, so nothing really technical would be available. From what I have been able to determine StoreDot is working with Group 14. Porsche is a major investor in Group 14 and their battery supplier CellForce group will use Group 14 anodes and BASF NMC cathodes. So the real question then is StoreDot working with Porsche to get these into production in 2024? Maybe there is a NDA. The Porsche Taycan EV is already one of the best in the world. The 2024 Porsche Macan EV will probably benefit from this tech so maybe that is where this is headed.
Posted by: Gryf | 11 October 2022 at 03:08 PM
In fact some companies who I have discussed things with in PMs are surprisingly open and prepared to rely on inappropriate info not being passed on.
And in fact any info I pass on will be only by explicit agreement and authorized.
Great question about Porsche, and one we are very unlikely indeed to get an answer on, I would have thought.
Up above they mention OEM partners in the plural though.
Posted by: Davemart | 11 October 2022 at 04:21 PM
Just to recap where we are, and simplifying questions to the StoreDot CEO both so that we are not fishing for unrealistic info, and so that I can follow without getting lost in the reply, broadly what I am likely to ask, although of course he is perfectly at liberty to read this thread and answer any of the points raised in whatever technical detail he feels appropriate, I intend to ask:
1. Are the specs given audited by any third parties? ( not a killer anyway, as they are perfectly entitled to rely on their OEM partners to verify their stuff, but obviously it gives more immediate cred if the specs have been checked by reputable third parties.
2. Do the specs refer pretty much to the pouch supplied to OEMs, or maybe even including tabs and so on?
3. Any special sauce in the electrolyte? ( it would be unreasonable to expect much detail)
4. Are the specs NMC 811 or similar, or is it some cobalt heavy or something formulation?
5. Any durability as opposed to cycle life issues come up?
6. Did any metrics need sacrificing for the performance? I am especially concerned with safety, as a number of pushing the envelope 'solutions' have come a cropper in that respect.
Posted by: Davemart | 12 October 2022 at 01:07 PM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
(You can use HTML tags like <b> <i> and <ul> to style your text.)
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address
This weblog only allows comments from registered users. To comment, please enable JavaScript so you can sign in.