This ultra-cheap, water-based iron battery could last 16 years without degrading

midian182

Posts: 11,710   +177
Staff member
Forward-looking: Lithium-ion batteries are everywhere, but their cost, supply chain issues, and potential to fail in fiery ways make them less than ideal for grid-scale energy storage. Chinese researchers say they have taken a major step toward an alternative in the form of an all-iron flow battery built from cheap, abundant materials and a water-based electrolyte that cannot explode.

Researchers at the Chinese Academy of Sciences have developed an alkaline all-iron flow battery capable of more than 6,000 charge-discharge cycles without measurable capacity decay, according to a paper published in Advanced Energy Materials. The team estimates that performance is equivalent to around 16 years of daily use.

Iron is one of the most abundant elements on Earth and is nearly 80 times cheaper than lithium in its raw form. That doesn't mean a finished iron-flow system would be 80 times cheaper than a lithium-ion equivalent, though. Tanks, membranes, pumps, and power electronics still cost money, but it could slash one of the biggest material expenses in long-duration storage.

Flow batteries work differently from the cells in laptops, smartphones, or EVs. They use liquid electrolytes held in external tanks and pumped through a cell stack. Increasing capacity can be as simple as building bigger tanks, making the technology more attractive for solar and wind farms than anything that needs to fit inside a phone.

In February, we heard about another water-based battery concept, one that runs on tofu brine – the mineral-rich solution left behind after pressing soy curds.

All-iron flow batteries have been explored for years, but they have struggled with degradation, poor reversibility, and electrolyte crossover, where active materials migrate through the membrane and gradually undermine performance.

The researchers tackled the problem by redesigning the negative electrolyte at the molecular level. They started with 12 organic ligands, created 11 iron complexes, and identified a compound known as [Fe(HPF)BHS]^4- as the most stable candidate. Its bulky structure protects the iron center, while negatively charged groups help repel hydroxide attack and reduce crossover.

In testing, the battery ran at 80 mA cm⁻² for more than 6,000 cycles with an average coulombic efficiency of 99.4%. Under heavier loads, it reached a peak power density of 392.1 mW cm⁻² while maintaining 78.5% energy efficiency.

The water-based electrolyte avoids the flammable organic solvents used in lithium-ion batteries, removing the thermal risk responsible for battery fires and explosions.

As with most battery breakthroughs, caveats apply. Lab results don't always translate well into commercial systems, and there's no announced pilot project or manufacturing roadmap yet. However, if the chemistry scales, dirt-cheap iron could become a serious contender for storing renewable power when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing.

Permalink to story:

 
Nothing about how it should perform vs an equivalent LI battery (despite the other comparisons) to put the numbers into context?
 
Nothing about how it should perform vs an equivalent LI battery (despite the other comparisons) to put the numbers into context?
Cycling stability looks to be much better than Li-Ion, and volumetric power and energy density will be much worse, but won't really be factors for the intended application. The only real killer is energy efficiency: you're losing more than 20% of stored power each cycle, which is about 3X worse than Li-Ion.
 
Cycling stability looks to be much better than Li-Ion
I got that much.
and volumetric power and energy density will be much worse
I did also assume that. But by how much (projected) is what I'd be wondering.

The only real killer is energy efficiency: you're losing more than 20% of stored power each cycle, which is about 3X worse than Li-Ion.
And also, is there energy loss while idle? It's those sorts of answers that make these constant battery articles a bit annoying.
 
This is a pretty appalling article and the meaningless "sciencey statistics" given only demonstrate that the writer has no idea about the subject. For a grid scale battery I'd imagine you mainly want to know about capacity (MWh), output (MW), cost, size, number of cycles and safety. I'd also want to see a real example of where it's actually being used to store power. Test tube don't count.
 
Yeah, but TS is branching out. Different author this time, but still the same tune.
 
Anything battery with the word "flow" in the name is NOT a portable battery.

This is a grid scale battery intended to be used for wind or solar farms.

I haven't read the published report but I bet this will be the size of a cargo container.
 
I can't wait for these batteries to come out because my car battery dies in the winter because I don't drive much at all so it just sits and degrades
 
Back