Comment by adrian_b
2 days ago
In TFA it said that the US company that was shut down (Natron) pursued a solution quite different from lithium batteries (with an organo-metallic electrode), which may have been a reason for their failure.
On the other hand the 2 Chinese companies that now make sodium batteries "rely on sodium iron pyrophosphate (NFPP) cathodes, which are chemically and structurally similar to lithium-iron phosphate in an LFP battery".
This similarity probably enabled them to reuse much of their existing fabrication lines for LFP batteries.
It is unavoidable that in the long term the cost of sodium batteries will be much lower than of any lithium batteries.
That would have been enough for their adoption for stationary uses, but their much greater temperature range (which allows operation and charging at -40 degrees, both Celsius and Fahrenheit) and their longer lifetime are enough to make them replace lithium batteries in certain applications even without the price advantage.
Lithium batteries will always be used in mobile applications, because they will continue to have a better energy per weight ratio, but for high energy stationary uses and for vehicles in cold climates it is likely that they will be mostly completely replaced by sodium batteries.
> It is unavoidable that in the long term the cost of sodium batteries will be much lower than of any lithium batteries.
The question is, will it be meaningfully lower?
if processes are mature, and because of economies of scale the difference comes out to something like a few cents (or less) per cell... at that point it might become meaningful to ask if the density becomes in play again.
Sure for grid density is not an issue, but installing and setting up a pack still has a cost... so let's say the cost saved by sodium allows them to buy an extra pack... but lithium's density allows them to save the headache of installing that extra pack... won't it even out?