I’m so desperate for home battery using sodium batteries. Safer and lower temperature it can operate at. Low energy density but I don’t care for home battery.
I want to have viable replacements for all the old school lithium ion battery packs so that I won't wonder when the day will come that one of the many we have will experience thermal runaway while nobody is around to deal with it. IMO a world where we no longer worry about spontaneous battery fires can't happen soon enough.
There is an aqueous variant of sodium ion batteries that are safer than lithium, but most sodium ion batteries are NOT that variant and are more dangerous than LiFePO4.
Tldr: while sodium thermal runaways are less dangerous than lithium, they are more likely to happen, and in particular charging a sodium battery to 100% SOC makes thermal runaway significantly more likely than in LFP batteries.
It's true that things like puncture or short circuit are much much less dangerous than with lithium. That is a big part of why the increased thermal runaway risk gets overlooked.
The main thing about LFP is people (stupidly) shove them in a basement or enclosed space because they are "safe".
But the "safe" part is that they outgas hydrogen when in thermal runaway, which, combined with enclosed spaces like basements (where people often have gas heaters or ....), is .... a super super bad idea.
Ironically, in this situation, sodium-ion is worse than LFP in almost every conceivable way - the gas is more flammable, toxic, etc.
People who think sodium-ion is "safer" are being sold a bill of goods.
There's a yttrium-containing variety of LFP that's supposed to work better at lower temperature (down to -45 C). But yttrium itself is quite expensive ($35/kg).
Discharging is not the issue with LiPo4 or other lithium tech. They can work up to negative temperatures without any issue. They can go down to -20°C (-4°F).
The problem is charging the battery at negative, as this damages the internal structure. So you need to heat up the battery (aka, you discharge by warming up heating elements), until you hit the right point. And then you can charge up, what will create heat and thus allow for non-damaging charging.
Some even have a fun trick, where if your going to a EV station with your car (end point route on your build in sat nav). They can start to pre-drain the battery if its really too cold, to warm up the batteries even more. So by the time your at the charger, the batteries are on temperature. I forgot what brand did it that way, seen that feature years ago.
What is different is that Sodium-Ion batteries can charge from negative (i think it was -10°C), as they do not suffer from the same damaging effect.
Nearly all EVs now do "battery preconditioning" when on the way to a charger. They would be pretty unusable without, I know one person had a model that didn't have it (this was a few years back) and he could barely pull more than 10kW in winter from public chargers, vs 100kW+ in summer at the exact same chargers.
So, I’m really hopeful that sodium batteries are going to come down in cost quickly, but if you can find a provider like Base Power or similar where it’s heavily subsidized, there’s a small upfront fee, and they can provide you the economic benefits until sodium batteries reach favorable economic success criteria, that’s a shim until you can replace that with sodium batteries you own outright at a favorable price. You’d have to model what you can get today with a sodium chemistry versus what you can get on offer from one of these battery service providers.
It’s fundamentally a modeling exercise in the forward economic returns curve in the context of your energy needs.
I switched the 12v lead-acid batteries on my EV to the 12v Lithium from OHMMU. Best upgrade I've done. I recently saw that they now offer 12V Sodium, and their warranty now went up to 3 years on the sodium, from 1 year. They have new data on its robustness.
Why? What do you notice? I was told the 12v fail in a few years and it will be swapped out at the 3rd year service and every few years there after for about $100. I will probably never see it as it three big bolts under the passenger seats that I have no interest spending my Saturday removing. What does this upgrade get you?
ALL the money that flew into "Fossil & Co" throughout the last, lets say, 50 or 60 years, including all implicit fundings, like state-building-streets or universities-masters-engineering-focus-ICE, all the money for lobbying, all the money for all the (counter)campaigns (from ALL sides), and all that money....
...WHAT IF we would have spent all of this money instead on Battery Research and all this Renewable Energy stuff?
We would probably be dramatically farther behind in the Materials Research conducted by the chemical companies underlying the fossil fuels industry, which has itself been necessary to the improvements in battery & semiconductor technologies we are now enjoying. Polyimides don’t invent themselves!
“What If?” history is fun, but there are always Tradeoffs.
You have it entirely backwards: Oil is refined to create feedstock chemicals for everything from beauty creams to jet engine ceramics to lithography intermediates to hydrogenated oils and decaffeinated coffee. It is these new and inventive uses which have continuously increased demand for the raw resources and driven research.
Ungodly amount of money was spent on battery research since 1945, at least $100-150B since 2000 alone. Every combination of anode, cathode and electrolyte was tried, tested and evaluated. We got silver-zinc, Ni-Cd, NiMH and finally Li-Ion batteries as the result.
I'd love to see a 'manhattan project' to get off of oil, in any way possible eg batteries or algae-produced diesel, whatever works, for geopolitical purposes.
In a very concrete way China has basically been running it. It's given us EVs, a massive PV cost reduction, cheap hydropower, cheap wind power, lots of battery cost reductions, and perhaps even enhanced competitiveness in the nuclear market. Also modern high speed rail which is readily fueled by non-ICE methods.
We would have inefficient and polluting engines, leaded gasoline, steam engines burning coal, no high performance plastics, and probably more even wars around oil and gas and slower economy leading to less resource to fund battery research...
I mean, batteries and solar panels are cool, but thinking about the future doesn't mean we should forget the present. The advance we could have gotten by diverting funding away from fossil fuels and towards renewables and batteries is to balance with the damage caused by using outdated fossil fuel technology before the transition.
Cities are breathable now thanks to all the progresses modern engines have made. They will be even more breathable with zero emission cars, but I prefer to wait a bit more in these conditions than waiting a bit less in a smog filled city.
We might have shaven off ~10 years from the current timeline.
Batteries are only a part of the equation. Practical EVs were enabled not just by Li-ion batteries but by IGBTs. And semiconductor development moved about as fast as possible.
And then there's a gulf between lead-acid batteries and Li-ions. I think only NiMH batteries would have been a reasonable midpoint, and even they would have been impractical for full EVs.
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2026/11/06/sodium-ion-batteries-...
Tldr: while sodium thermal runaways are less dangerous than lithium, they are more likely to happen, and in particular charging a sodium battery to 100% SOC makes thermal runaway significantly more likely than in LFP batteries.
It's true that things like puncture or short circuit are much much less dangerous than with lithium. That is a big part of why the increased thermal runaway risk gets overlooked.
The main thing about LFP is people (stupidly) shove them in a basement or enclosed space because they are "safe".
But the "safe" part is that they outgas hydrogen when in thermal runaway, which, combined with enclosed spaces like basements (where people often have gas heaters or ....), is .... a super super bad idea.
Ironically, in this situation, sodium-ion is worse than LFP in almost every conceivable way - the gas is more flammable, toxic, etc.
People who think sodium-ion is "safer" are being sold a bill of goods.
The problem is charging the battery at negative, as this damages the internal structure. So you need to heat up the battery (aka, you discharge by warming up heating elements), until you hit the right point. And then you can charge up, what will create heat and thus allow for non-damaging charging.
Some even have a fun trick, where if your going to a EV station with your car (end point route on your build in sat nav). They can start to pre-drain the battery if its really too cold, to warm up the batteries even more. So by the time your at the charger, the batteries are on temperature. I forgot what brand did it that way, seen that feature years ago.
What is different is that Sodium-Ion batteries can charge from negative (i think it was -10°C), as they do not suffer from the same damaging effect.
Charging it at or around 0C will destroy it extremely rapidly due to electroplating of lithium.
It’s fundamentally a modeling exercise in the forward economic returns curve in the context of your energy needs.
Byd dolphin, Thailand prices for above
ALL the money that flew into "Fossil & Co" throughout the last, lets say, 50 or 60 years, including all implicit fundings, like state-building-streets or universities-masters-engineering-focus-ICE, all the money for lobbying, all the money for all the (counter)campaigns (from ALL sides), and all that money....
...WHAT IF we would have spent all of this money instead on Battery Research and all this Renewable Energy stuff?
Where would we be today on techdev curve? ;-) ;-)
“What If?” history is fun, but there are always Tradeoffs.
Ungodly amount of money was spent on battery research since 1945, at least $100-150B since 2000 alone. Every combination of anode, cathode and electrolyte was tried, tested and evaluated. We got silver-zinc, Ni-Cd, NiMH and finally Li-Ion batteries as the result.
I mean, batteries and solar panels are cool, but thinking about the future doesn't mean we should forget the present. The advance we could have gotten by diverting funding away from fossil fuels and towards renewables and batteries is to balance with the damage caused by using outdated fossil fuel technology before the transition.
Cities are breathable now thanks to all the progresses modern engines have made. They will be even more breathable with zero emission cars, but I prefer to wait a bit more in these conditions than waiting a bit less in a smog filled city.
Batteries are only a part of the equation. Practical EVs were enabled not just by Li-ion batteries but by IGBTs. And semiconductor development moved about as fast as possible.
And then there's a gulf between lead-acid batteries and Li-ions. I think only NiMH batteries would have been a reasonable midpoint, and even they would have been impractical for full EVs.