[jillesvangurp]

Batteries are quite good already. You can wait for the next big thing, or get something that works and scales right now.

Battery production is now measured in multiple twh of capacity per year. That goes into vehicles of all types with any number and size of wheels, grid storage solutions, and domestic storage. People use them all over the world now. Including some developing economies.

There are many quality attributes you can look at with batteries: cost per kwh, weight per kwh, volume per kwh, charge/discharge rates, longevity in charge cycles, operating temperatures, robustness, chance of flammability (near zero with some cell types), etc. Better is a meaningless qualification unless you express it in those.

And what is best and what is optimal are two things. There's a reason LFP is dominating rather than NMC. It's good enough and a lot cheaper even though it has slightly less energy. For the same reason sodium ion is being put into some cars. It doesn't have the energy density. But it's cheap, operates in arctic and desert temperatures, and they last pretty long.

When it comes to new battery chemistries, it takes time to go from a lab breakthrough to mass production. Sodium ion is now being mass produced. A few years ago there was only low volume production. And before that, the technology was stuck in various stages of the R&D pipeline at various companies. From a lab prototype in a university to an actual proof of concept might take several years. And from there to production many years longer.

With solid state, there are about at least half a dozen technology companies that are moving from test samples to low volume production in the next years. Mostly the technology is proven and validated at this point. But it might still take until at least the end of the decade before we see any mass production. Building big factories costs billions and is super risky. Companies don't do that unless they are certain something will work.

Solid state will have to compete on quality and price. High density solid state in cheap cars is not likely to be a thing for cost reasons. But they might be popular with drone and sports car manufacturers. The press is unfortunately a bit sensationalist on this front and it creates unrealistic expectations.

[Recurecur]

All fair points.

It is worth saying that vehicles sporting next-gen solid state batteries are available right now.

Ever since the Goodenough solid state battery announcements years ago, I’ve been anticipating the benefits. According to his team’s research, they had the following attributes:

- Higher energy density than the best liquid electrolyte lithium cells.

- Non flammable.

- Much better resistance to cold temperatures.

- A sodium option that should be much less expensive.

I’m not sure where the Goodenough battery tech is at right now, I’ll have to do some searching and see if it’s progressed…

[scottLobster]

It also doesn't help that every "breakthrough" announcement is always about something that happened in a lab that may or may not be scalable, and is usually said lab or their sponsoring organization just trying to put itself out there.

And hey, can't blame labs for playing the game, but it does produce a lot of noise with little signal for the average reader.

[ErrorNoBrain]

If i recall, Toyota have said they'll make a car with solid state batteries, in 2027

ok maybe 28.

https://electrek.co/2025/10/08/toyota-aims-to-launch-worlds-...

they have tested this on the roads.

[jillesvangurp]

The question is in how much volume they will produce that car. Given how late they are to this market, I would not expect a lot of cars from them for a while.

Larger volumes would require bigger factories. And without going through some low volume initial production, that would be very risky for them.

The big question is how it will compare in price and quality to cars from other manufacturers.

[kristianp]

> weight per kwh

Is it weight/kWh or is kWh/weight more common?

Another question I have about buying a new electric car: if I buy a new BYD, for example, can I run it until it's done 150,000km? Like a gasoline car?

[nextweek2]

> can I run it until it's done 150,000km I'm not sure I get your question. My Mach-e will have 1000-1500 charge cycles before the battery drops to 80% capacity. On a full charge of normal use I'll get 250+ miles, so that's 250,000 to 375,000 miles.

But that's a little hard to pin down, because with good charge cycles (e.g. not going all the way to 100% each charge), it should last longer.

An EV has less moving parts, so it isn't as likely to shake itself apart like a combustion engine car.

A new BYD, that's probably a different question about the manufacturer and if their build quality will hold up over time.

[phtrivier]

> When it comes to new battery chemistries, it takes time to go from a lab breakthrough to mass production. Sodium ion is now being mass produced. A few years ago there was only low volume production. And before that, the technology was stuck in various stages of the R&D pipeline at various companies. From a lab prototype in a university to an actual proof of concept might take several years. And from there to production many years longer.

That's absolutely fine and understandable. But then, why do we keep hearing the word "breakthrough" ? I hate this word with all my heart.

Batteries are still not ubiquitous. EVs are still expensive.

The "breaktrough" that would be worth mentioning will be when people can buy an EV and never, ever, ever manage to build a scenario where there is _any_ range anxiety.

Or when everyone has a battery in their garage, that's as inconsequential to buy as a fridge, and can store enough energy for them to go through the winter with 2 months of sunshine.

I know we're far away from that. Fair enough. Godspeed to you if you're working on that, in the lab or in the factory. You or your grandkids will get there.

Just, write the _breakthrough_ article then, please.

[jillesvangurp]

A scientific breakthrough can happen and is news worthy. The consequence might be mass production of some thing enabled through decade of R&D that follows the breakthrough. But there are lots of reasons why that might never happen.

Anyway, catchy click bait news lines sell. And breakthroughs are worth reporting on by themselves. Anyway, the economist didn't do a great job here doing their job. They are all over the place mixing things that are basically on the market (sodium ion) or nearly on the market (solid state) with various scientific progress from research labs.

As for the rest of your comment, I don't think accurate information is your problem.

[stetrain]

There will be no single moment when that happens. It will be a stack of years and years of innovations and improvements each of which take time to roll out into mass production, start expensive, and get cheaper.

[phtrivier]

Of course.

Then, write your "breakthrough" article when they get to mass production. (Ok, you can write the article when they demo it as the consumer show six months before availability, if you really can't help. They won't ship it in six months, they will ship in a year, maybe that's fine.

I'm a software engineer, I'm not going to lecture anyone about optimistic release dates.)

Write another one when they find a way to make it affordable to the average consumer.

I m asking : don't write it when it's a proof of concept in the lab, or when you just started the workforce that's going to contemplate thinking about thinking of a plan to build a pilot plant for the alpha version of the prototype. I'm sick and tired of those.

Same thing if your "breakthrough" is in curing cancer or making fusion. Please stop using this word. It does not mean what you think it does.

[Ajedi32]

> Just, write the _breakthrough_ article then, please.

When exactly though? When the price of the "new" breakthrough technology that's been around for decades at that point drops from $101 per kwH to $100 per kwH?

I totally get your frustration but it seems kinda arbitrary to say a new technology isn't a breakthrough until it's ubiquitous.

[phtrivier]

When it gets from 1000 to a 100. Or from 100 to 10.

In production. On shelves. That the average consumer can buy.

Do you remember the time where hardly anyone had a mobile phone, and one year later everyone got one for christmas ? I was there. That's a breakthrough.

Then internet in your home. Two or three years from "none has it" to "of course I have it, here's my ICQ number".

Or the day the polio vaccine was announced.

Or when when a rocket booster landed on itself.

"Before / After" moment. They exist. They don't happen overnight - great. You may have "overcame one of the many hurdles on the path to reaching a credible plan that may lead to a before/after."

Write that ! It's not a "breakthrough", though.

Or, is "breakthrough" the word for "tiny incremental change", and there is another word that I should expect to read when something consequential happens ?

[samat]

I wish there were a media with articles like this