Contents

Talk:Lithium-ion battery: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:28, 21 February 2022

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Chemistry C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Energy C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Technology C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Climate change C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Elon Musk (10 February 2021). "The Joe Rogan Experience". If you read the Wikipedia article on lithium-ion, it is quite good.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2021 and 11 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Babak98.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignmentbyPrimeBOT (talk) 02:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The specific power is currently listed as ~250-~340 W/kg, according to a 7-year old reference to panasonic's website. This: https://na.industrial.panasonic.com/sites/default/pidsa/files/ur18650rx.pdf spec sheet from panasonic indicates a specific power up to 800 W/kg, based on a 46-gram battery providing 10 amps at 3.7 volts. Higher drain batteries exist, but I can't find a spec sheet as detailed or credible to indicate that.

It would be good to see some kind of breakdown as to current production of Li-ion batteries. Numbers made of various types / chemical technology, to get a feel for the way the market is going. Obviously there are varied applications - "horses for courses", but it would be useful to understand who is making what, especially those used in high density energy storage for power applications (rather than for powering portable electronic devices such as phones and toys, which are hobbled by fad physical size/design constraints). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.183.176 (talk • contribs) 29 okt 2017 10:30 (UTC)

"Handheld electronics mostly use lithium polymer batteries (with a polymer gel as electrolyte)"

There is nothing in the source cited to support this. This whole article and the one on Lithium Polymer spread the myth that "lithium ion in a pouch is lithium polymer". See the introduction of this article for discussion about the widespread myth that commercially used pouch cells are lithium polymer:

http://iaassconference2013.space-safety.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2014/06/JSSE-VOL.-1-NO.-1-JUNE-2014-PERFORMANCE-AND-SAFETY-OF-LITHIUM-ION-POLYMER-POUCH-CELLS.pdf

These polymer electrolyte cells were a specialized thing that never really caught on. Gigs (talk) 23:25, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All electrode combinations have a usual voltage at 3.something V. How does it make sense to top up any battery as high as at 4.05 V when all of them have a nominal voltage UNDER that level? Can anyone find a source for this information? "Top charging is recommended to be initiated when voltage goes below 4.05 V/cell"

From the Article:

Periodic topping charge about once per 500 hours. Top charging is recommended to be initiated when voltage goes below 4.05 V/cell.

In a lithium-ion battery the lithium ions are transported to and from the positive or negative electrodes by oxidizing the transition metal, cobalt (Co), in Li1-xCoO2 from Co3+ to Co4+ during charge, and reducing from Co4+ to Co3+ during discharge. The cobalt electrode reaction is only reversible for x < 0.5 (x in mole units), limiting the depth of discharge allowable.

In the discharged cell x=0, that is the material is LiCoO2. Not the depth of discharge is limited by (x<0.5) but the depth of charge. Overcharge means x>0.5 . The discharge limit would be an inequation like x>0 . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C9:8F1D:3C86:CEE0:8DEF:59EE:EC46 (talk) 07:54, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and marked the item as dubious. Constant314 (talk) 04:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It strikes me as a bit pointless to list the charge/discharge efficiency (coulombic efficiency) in the infobox. The CE is usually very close to 100% (otherwise the battery wouldn't be viable). Yes, under certain conditions like certain specific cutoff voltages, like some of those used in the quoted source, it can be lower, but the CE is generally used to evaluate individual cells or battery packs to spot potential problems, or when trying to improve performance in R&D - it's not used to compare one type of battery chemistry to another. Listing a CE range for all lithium-ion batteries seems like a not very useful figure. (Now that I think about it, it seems a bit pointless to list the CE for any battery, really, since as far as I know that value is always supposed to hew as close to 100% as possible.) Thoughts? --Tserton (talk) 22:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you confusing energy efficiency with something else? Constant314 (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly - I know charge/discharge efficiency as the discharge capacity divided by the immediately preceding charge capacity. That's how it's used in battery-related materials science papers. In that field it's often used synonymously with coulombic efficiency, although I know that word has a more narrow meaning in electrochemistry. I'm not familiar with the term energy efficiency - does that mean something different? --Tserton (talk) 23:04, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick read of the cited source. It discussed both coulombic efficiency and energy efficiency. I presume that the 80-90% indicated in the article is energy efficiency. Maybe not.Constant314 (talk) 23:10, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After more reading, it seems that the coulombic efficiency of viable batteries can be significantly less than 100%, so the item should probably remain in the info box. But there is still the question of what it means. I opened a discussion at Template talk:Infobox battery. We should probably continue the discussion there since it applies to all batteries. Constant314 (talk) 23:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t find any mention on Wikipedia of this massive price-fixing cartel story! That was widely covered in the news and courts.

https://www.justice.gov › ... › News Panasonic and Its Subsidiary Sanyo Agree to Plead Guilty in Separate Price-Fixing ...

https://www.reuters.com › article EU fines Japanese rechargeable battery makers over cartel | Reuters

Disappeared? Add/restore? 50.201.195.170 (talk) 01:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added: An antitrust-violating Price-Fixing Cartel among 9 corporate families, including LG Chem, GS Yuasa, Hitachi Maxell, NEC, Panasonic/Sanyo, Samsung, Sony, and Toshiba was found to be rigging battery prices and restricting output between 2000 and 2011. ^{[1] [2] [3][4]} The complaint lays out an overwhelming amount of evidence, e.g. "Defendants took various acts in furtherance of this conspiracy over the course of at least 110 illicit meetings and communications that began in 2000, evolved over time, and lasted until May 2011" Backups at archive.fo.--50.201.195.170 (talk) 03:12, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the part in the intro about the Samsung batteries on planes should be moved to a different section because I feel like the Intro is too bulky and I find it an unnecessary detail to be in its current section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.197.66.2 (talk) 16:58, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From batteryuniversity.[]com/learn/article/charging_lithium_ion_batteries Why the link is in global filter? Valery Zapolodov (talk) 13:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the third paragraph the initialisms NMC and LMR are used, but I don't see a preceding definition. 2A01:4C8:1429:8393:98E8:6ED9:7088:4930 (talk) 11:03, 18 July 2021 (UTC) AJF[reply]

In the Cathode section there is a table of cathode chemistries. It has a column titled "Date". Date of what? First proposal for use? First prototype? First commercial production? Anticipated commercial production? Anyway, none of the values have references. I'm inclined to entirely remove the column, after waiting a bit for comments here. Leotohill (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Support obviously history will get much longer in future Chidgk1 (talk) 15:46, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

specific power of『~250 – ~340 W/kg』is outdated and the peak value of newer cells can easly reach 2500w/kg continuous e.g. the US18650VTC5A — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DD:2702:8F00:908D:91E7:DA50:B174 (talk) 19:29, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thumperward I think just splitting out the biggest section (design?) would be enough Chidgk1 (talk) 13:38, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that splitting only that section would then mean about 80% of the article was about safety. The article as a whole is too long and really should be converted to summary-style. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok removed split suggestions Chidgk1 (talk) 14:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These sections are prolix and could make their point in a couple of paragraphs. Wikipedia is not a safety handbook. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]