A Non-Academic Perspective On The Future of Lithium-Based Batteries

Perspective https://doi.org/10.
1038/s41467-023-35933-2
A non-academic perspective on the future of

lithium-based batteries
Received: 13 March 2022 James T. Frith1,4 , Matthew J. Lacey2,4 & Ulderico Ulissi3,4
Accepted: 9 January 2023
In the field of lithium-based batteries, there is often a substantial divide

between academic research and industrial market needs. This is in part driven
Check for updates
by a lack of peer-reviewed publications from industry. Here we present a non-
academic view on applied research in lithium-based batteries to sharpen the
1234567890():,;
1234567890():,;
focus and help bridge the gap between academic and industrial research. We
focus our discussion on key metrics and challenges to be considered when
developing new technologies in this industry. We also explore the need to
consider various performance aspects in unison when developing a new
material/technology. Moreover, we also investigate the suitability of supply
chains, sustainability of materials and the impact on system-level cost as fac-
tors that need to be accounted for when working on new technologies. With
these considerations in mind, we then assess the latest developments in the
lithium-based battery industry, providing our views on the challenges and
prospects of various technologies.
Lithium-ion batteries should be recognized as a “technological won- “decade of the smartphone” around 20079. Since then, demand for
der”. From a commercial point of view, they are the go-to solution for lithium-ion batteries has grown more than ten-fold, from ca. 30 GWh in
many applications and are increasingly displacing lead-acid and nickel- 2011 to 492 GWh in 202110. Demand is set to grow steadily and is
metal hydride (NiMH) systems1. At the same time, they represent a forecasted to reach 2–3.5 TWh by 203011. Growing demand for bat-
prime example of the successful results of joint academic and indus- teries can be expected to lead to further improvements in perfor-
trial research. mance and falls in prices, with lithium-ion technology becoming
Lithium-ion batteries are complex, multi-component devices with ubiquitous.
a long list of inventors, key inventions, and contributions2. According Cost and performance improvements have come from cell
to Akira Yoshino, lithium-ion batteries were born in 1986 after the chemistry/design changes, pack engineering, and manufacturing
successful safety testing of early prototypes3. Since then, the perfor- processes. Sony commercialized cells in 1991 using lithium cobalt
mance of lithium-ion cells (the fundamental building block of a battery oxide (LiCoO2 or LCO) “cathodes” and carbon-based “anodes”, in
pack) has improved substantially, and the specific energy and energy which the positive electrode active material is comprised of 60% cobalt
density have more than doubled from 120 Wh kg−1/264 Wh L−1 (Sony, by mass12. Note that from this point forward, we use “positive” and
1991)4 to today’s ≥270 Wh kg−1/≥ 650 Wh L−1 5. These values represent “negative” electrodes in place of the common terminology “cathode”
mass-produced commercial cells. Plants today typically produce over and “anode” to avoid ambiguity since the latter terms are only valid for
1–10 GWh annually. Suppliers need to demonstrate the ability to the discharge of a rechargeable battery.
manufacture at this scale to pass the stringent qualification tests of The current state of the art13 lies in cells with specific energy over
automakers and for the manufactured cells to be cost-competitive6. 270 Wh kg−1. These require a high nickel, low cobalt positive electrode
Mass production contributed to a sharp decline in cell prices, which active material, for example, lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide
fell 98% from ca. 5000 $ kWh−1 in 1991 to 101 $ kWh−1 in 2021 (Fig. 1)7,8. (LiNi1-a-bMnaCobO2 where a + b = 1, or NMCxyz where x:y:z reflects the
Low cost and high energy density cells resulted in the so-called molar ratio of metals Ni:Mn:Co). A particularly important example is
1
Volta Energy Technologies, 28365 Davis Pkwy, Warrenville, IL 60555, USA. 2Scania CV AB, 151 87 Södertälje, Sweden. 3Sphere Energy SAS, 250 Bis Boulevard
Saint Germain, 75007 Paris, France. 4These authors contributed equally: James T. Frith, Matthew J. Lacey, Ulderico Ulissi. e-mail: james.frith@volta.vc;
matthew.lacey@scania.com; ulderico.ulissi@live.com
Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 1

Perspective https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-35933-2
Research laboratory
TRL 1 – Idea formulated

10k-100k $
TRL 2 – Proof of Concept (µAh)
Estimated Capital Investment

TRL 3 – Coin cell (mAh)
1M -10M $
TRL 4 – Small prototype (mAh-Ah)
Pilot plant
Risk of Failure
50M-100M $
TRL 5 – Large prototype (Ah, pre-A-sample)
500M-1B $
TRL 6 – MWh-scale manufacturing (C-Sample)
GWh-scale battery manufacturing plant
TRL 7 – EV-grade prototype (Automotive part approval)

1B-10B $
TRL 8 – GWh-scale manufacturing, vehicle SOP
TRL 9 – System demonstration, production at scale
TRL 10 – Widespread adoption, no recall
Fig. 2 | Technology readiness level scale for EV battery application. The “Risk of
Failure” arrow indicates risks of project failure or technology not transitioning to
Fig. 1 | Observed lithium-ion battery cell prices 1991-2021. “Observed Consumer the next level. The scale starts with lab innovation and considers key milestones in
electronics” price data comes from ref. 8 and reflects the prices paid for cells used in cell manufacturing to reach EV qualification and vehicle Start-of-Production (SOP).
consumer electronics between 1991 and 2010. “Observed BNEF” price data comes The definitions of A- and C-samples are discussed later in the “Challenges in scaling
from ref. 197 and reflects the average price paid for cells used in electric vehicles and up” paragraph. Risk increases with decreasing TRL number. US dollar figures are
stationary storage applications. “Experience curve” shows the battery price decline ballpark estimates of the minimum investment required per project based on
trend as deployments increase. The relationship is described by Wrights-law and industrial data or publicly available press releases. The present TRL scale is based
shows that every time the cumulative volume of cells deployed doubles, prices fall on the consideration of energy storage innovation disclosed in ref. 198.
by 25%. Prices have been converted to real 2021 US $.
problem rather than develop a solution that needs to find a problem to

NMC811, which contains only 6% cobalt by mass. The low cobalt con- solve. We believe that lithium-ion batteries are an example of an
tent means that the raw material cost, excluding processing costs (for industrial product, and research should focus on solving existing
example, raw material refinement cost or active/inactive material and problems with the technology. However, a growing portion of research
cell manufacturing costs14,15), is less than half that of LCO: 54 $ kWh−1 published on lithium-based batteries today does little to solve the
compared to 135 $ kWh−1, based on January 2022 raw material prices industry’s challenges. Often this result from a lack of understanding of
from Shanghai Metals Market, SMM16. It is worth highlighting that the wider end uses and performance parameters required for lithium-
these are spot prices, which may not be representative of long-term based batteries in end applications.
contract pricing. In this perspective, we present a non-academic view on applied
Adopting new materials that increase energy content and research in electrochemical energy storage to help bridge the gap
decrease the raw material cost of cells has contributed significantly to between academic and industrial research. We primarily consider
reducing cell/pack costs ($ kWh−1). However, starting in 2020, similar lithium-based batteries, focusing on the automotive sector: a sector
improvements in both energy and cost have been obtained by that has driven technological development in recent years, dominates
employing existing positive electrode chemistries, such as lithium iron today’s demand and is expected to grow significantly in the coming
phosphate (LiFePO4 or LFP) in a cell-to-pack (CTP) configuration. In years. While we recognize that there are other emerging technologies,
this configuration, an LFP-based cell with a specific energy of ca. such as Na-ion batteries, as well as other application sectors, such as
160 Wh kg−1 and energy density of 330 Wh L−1 can lead to pack-level stationary energy storage, we choose to focus on electric vehicles
energies of ca. 135 Wh kg−1 and 210 Wh L−1. This represents a 64% (EVs), which are a core area of the energy transition. However, we
packing efficiency on a volume basis, compared to a 35–40% pack recognize that these other topics warrant their separate discussions.
efficiency for a standard pack17. These CTP systems have the additional To illustrate this perspective, we discuss technology maturity scales
benefit of using a comparatively safer and potentially cheaper18 posi- and what we believe are common pitfalls when evaluating perfor-
tive electrode active material than NMCxyz. mance requirements to bring a technology to market. We then select a
As lithium-ion batteries and the current generation of positive few technologies as case studies. We use these to discuss what we
electrodes, i.e., those based on intercalation reactions, are reaching believe the market will need and not need, provide practical, numerical
their theoretical performance limits, manufacturers and researchers examples, consider opportunities and barriers when scaling up, and
are focusing on other key components and processing techniques. ultimately explore which technologies currently show distinct
Negative electrodes with high silicon content, lithium metal negative promise.
electrodes, solid electrolytes, negative electrode pre-lithiation strate-
gies and dry electrode coatings promise decreased cost, increased Discussion
performance or both in the medium term (5–10 years). Looking further Technology readiness level from the lithium-ion battery
out, positive electrode active materials based on conversion reactions, perspective
like sulfur or oxygen, could present an opportunity for the further cost First proposed by NASA in 1974, the Technology Readiness Level
reduction of lithium-based batteries, although generally at the (TRL)20 is a scale used to estimate the maturity of a technology.
expense of cell performance. Although a specific TRL scale has been recently proposed for battery
However, particular attention must be devoted to the type of manufacturing20, in Fig. 2, we propose a different TRL scale that con-
research carried out to advance lithium-based batteries. Indeed, as also siders the steps required for EV adoption to help decision-makers
recently discussed19, researchers should consider the current trajec- assess the actual status of technology development on the pathway to
tory of battery technology, how to approach the industry and to pre- commercialization.
sent their work to provide the maximum benefit to the research Technologies at a lower TRL are associated with a higher risk of
community. project failure or technology not transitioning to the next level.
When carrying out research focusing on industrial product However, this risk is offset by lower capital investments required to
development, researchers should develop products that solve a complete a project, e.g., 10k-100k $ at TRL 1-2 for battery science.

Fig. 3 | Visual representation of the range of energy content of different battery LFP battery technologies. The symbols on the left chart are scaled based on cell size
technologies at the cell level and energy losses between theory and system in terms of Ah. The data on which this figure is based are reported in Supplementary
level. Left) energy density vs specific energy for selected Li-ion and “post-Li-ion” Note 1. Error bars are smaller than the data points for Fig. 3 right, and the reader is
cells from publicly available specifications; right) schematic of the reduction in referred to Supplementary Note 1 for the range of values used. “DoD” refers to
energy on a weight and volume basis between the theoretical maximum for the “depth of discharge”, the utilized fraction of the battery’s nominal capacity.
active materials and usable pack-level energy density for state-of-the-art NCA and
Moving across TRLs generally requires increasing levels of capital a specific application but also on other factors, such as legally man-
investments. For example, over 1–10B US $ are the typical investments dated safety requirements in target markets.
required to scale-up battery cell production to 4–20 GWh annually and Research into new battery chemistries (e.g., lithium-sulfur, solid-
reach vehicle Start-of-Production (SOP) at TRL 8 or to develop a new state, sodium-ion) and other concepts (e.g., redox flow, metal-air),
EV platform/powertrain and manufacture a vehicle at scale TRL 9-10. regardless of application, has for many years been heavily driven by
The capital figures are ballpark estimates of the minimum investment improving on these metrics, particularly (but not limited to) energy
required per project based on industrial data or publicly available density, cycle life and cost. These metrics have a complex relationship
press releases. between the material properties typically investigated at the funda-
Academic researchers usually operate at TRL 1–4, so they are mental research stage and the eventual application. We can take
generally less concerned with or unexposed to end-user requirements energy content on a weight or volume basis as a relevant example.
or criticalities that need to be considered when scaling up and man- The left panel of Fig. 3 presents the specific energy (Wh kg−1) and
ufacturing an energy storage device. Batteries in a research laboratory energy density (Wh L−1) for a broad selection of Li-ion and so-called
are often tested using conditions and parameters very far from com- “post-Li-ion” cells27 with publicly available specifications grouped by
mercial devices21. Moreover, scientific research in electrochemical chemistry type. A list of cell specifications used to construct this plot is
energy storage is generally plagued by misrepresentation of data and a given in Supplementary Table 1. Commercially available Li-ion bat-
lack of transparency. This leads to a high risk of over-extrapolation, teries range from as low as ~50 Wh kg−1, 80 Wh L−1 for high-power cells
exacerbated by a lack of reproduced or even reproducible studies. with a lithium titanium oxide (Li4Ti5O12 or LTO) negative electrode, up
Criticism of this situation is often kept within the community but has to around ≥270 Wh kg−1, ≥650 Wh L−1 for cells with high-energy layered
recently been spotlighted by various commentary and editorial oxide positive electrodes (e.g., NMC811) and blended graphite/silicon
articles22–24. composite negative electrodes28. Various prototypes of battery tech-
Within the battery industry, there have been several high-profile nologies under development, particularly those with pure silicon or
examples of companies investing in over-hyped technologies which lithium metal negative electrodes, show encouraging results in the
failed to meet the promised performance. For example, Envia, a spin- development of high-energy cells28. However, graphical representa-
out from Argonne National Laboratories (USA), was close to securing tions such as the left panel of Fig. 3 do not always allow us to under-
an investment from automaker General Motors to bring the technol- stand the practical hurdles to translating single-cell performance into
ogy to mass market EVs. However, the latter could not reproduce the expected system-level performance. Moreover, these graphs do not
results that Envia claimed, eventually leading to the demise of Envia25. necessarily predict where new battery chemistries may fall.
Similarly, in 2015 the consumer products company Dyson acquired the A schematic depiction of this in the context of energy is given in
US-based solid-state battery start-up Sakti3 for 90 million US $. Three the right panel of Fig. 3, which describes the reduction in specific
years later, in 2018, the company wrote off the investment26. energy (Wh kg−1) and energy density (Wh L−1) from the theoretical level
(“Theory”, which considers the calculable maximum energy release of
Practical evaluation of lithium-ion battery performance the electrochemical reaction of the fully charged active materials,
Battery research and development is strongly driven and judged on a assuming no other inactive component) to the installed device (“Pack”,
series of metrics with an often-complex connection between the which considers structural and auxiliary components, among other
requirements set by the application and the cell itself. For an EV, practical limitations). This comparison is based on two contrasting
requirements on safety, range, available pack installation space, cost, state-of-the-art battery pack concepts: one based on small, high-
power, and lifespan will heavily inform requirements at the cell level, energy-density cylindrical lithium nickel-cobalt-aluminium oxide
such as energy density, chemistry, cell design, as well as calendar and (NCA) or high-nickel NMCxyz, in 18650 or 2170 cylindrical format cells,
cycle life. These requirements will depend not only on the demands of as currently used by companies such as Tesla. The other is based on

Table 1 | Comparison of a few KPIs for a 2032 lab scale Li metal coin cell (1-10 mAh) with a commercial lithium-ion cell used in a
Volkswagen ID.3 electric car195
KPI Lab-scale Li metal coin cell (1-10 mAh) Automotive Li-ion pouch cell (78 Ah)
Pos. el. areal capacity (mAh cm−2) «2 5.02
Neg. el. areal capacity (mAh cm−2) »20 5.23
N/P ratio >10 1.04
Electrolyte loading (g Ah−1) »30 1
Pos. el. coating thickness (µm) <60 µm 87.3
Pos. el. porosity »40% 22%
The numbers for the 2032 coin cell are reported as an example, and similar values are discussed in the literature19. For this example, we consider a coin cell with a discharge capacity of up to 4 mAh,
uncalendered electrodes’ with a diameter of 1.6 cm, 100 µm thick lithium foil, and 100 µL of electrolyte. The greater/less-than symbols are used to stress that several examples of experiments deviate
even more from these values. Values such as electrode coating thickness and porosity are not often reported, but constitute a key metric that can mask battery rate capability and lifetime19. The
values reported in the table are for a single automotive cell. Values can vary depending on teardown methodology and actual cell design105,196.
large format LFP cells, such as those used in CTP concepts developed concepts, where the pack forms part of the vehicle structure)31,32 show
by companies such as BYD (“Build Your Dreams Co. Ltd.”) and CATL that we can expect significant advancements in system-level engi-
(“Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited”) in which packing neering in the coming years, hence increased “cell-to-pack efficiency”
efficiency is increased by eliminating the use of smaller modules within (i.e., cell energy divided by pack energy, either gravimetric or volu-
the pack. The calculations carried out to produce the graph in the right metric) for NMC/NCA-based battery systems.
panel of Fig. 3 are disclosed in Supplementary Note 1. The numbers Figure 3 also implies that lithium-ion cells have been continuously
should be interpreted as guidelines for these specific examples to optimized. Achieving today’s cell performance has been far from tri-
highlight the crucial differences and not as descriptions of the full vial, requiring a holistic approach to research and development and
range of possible systems. three decades of incremental improvements since market introduc-
These two pack concepts contrast significantly at each stage of tion. Because the positive electrode active material provides energy to
their implementation. From the right panel of Fig. 3, it can be seen that the system during discharge, ideally, the mass and volume of all other
NCA (with a small, e.g., 3.5 wt. % inclusion of silicon oxide in the components should be minimized while maximizing cell lifetime and
negative electrode) has approximately double the theoretical energy performance without compromising safety. To achieve these targets, it
density of the graphite||LFP chemistry due to a higher cell voltage, is essential to realistically acknowledge the state-of-the-art and what
capacity, and material density. However, the fraction of the theoretical are, or could be, practical constraints when conceiving a design of
energy content that can be reversibly obtained (repeatedly charged experiments. One should consider key variables, often referred to as
and discharged) is presently smaller for graphite-SiOx||NCA than gra- key performance indicators (KPIs), such as the ratio of the capacities of
phite||LFP. Constructing a functioning rechargeable Li-ion cell requires the negative relative to the positive electrode (“N/P ratio”), practical
the addition of inactive weight and volume, such as current collectors, electrode capacities, coating thicknesses, porosities and electrolyte
separators, electrolyte, and packaging, which can be 50% by weight or loadings (Table 1). Typical lab-scale cells generally fall short of this in
more of the cell and reduces the energy density accordingly. For large many respects: routine experiments use a large excess of Li metal and
systems such as EV batteries, comprising hundreds or thousands of electrolyte. These factors can readily mask practical performance and
cells, the cells must be installed into a pack with additional structural lifetime achievable at both cell and system levels.
components and auxiliary systems such as cooling and electronic
control. Other practical limitations might be required to realize certain The risk of excessive extrapolation. Over-extrapolation of early
requirements. For example, packs based on high-Ni-content NMC or findings in battery research and development presents risks to the
NCA chemistries are typically limited further in terms of charging appropriate direction of public and private funding and policy deci-
voltage (i.e., state-of-charge (SoC) and depth-of-discharge (DoD) ran- sions. In this context, over-extrapolation may often be fallacious
ges) to ensure an acceptable lifetime; the same limitations do not bind inferences of future performance related to new materials beyond the
LFP-based batteries. experiments’ scope. For example, from results obtained in proto-
System (pack)-level design considerations may differ con- typical laboratory coin cells using Li metal as a counter/reference
siderably with different chemistries; we can consider the comparison electrode33, a nanostructured positive electrode might indicate the
in the right panel of Fig. 3 as an example. Small, high-energy density possibility of batteries that fully charge in seconds, or a new negative
cylindrical cells using high nickel content positive electrodes, with electrode material might indicate better than state-of-the-art capacity
<20 Wh stored energy, are preferred by some original equipment retention. Such lab-scale cells are often free of several limitations that
manufacturers (OEMs) as thermal propagation in the event of thermal govern practical applications21. Over-extrapolation of this sort may be
runaway can be more easily managed. Here we consider OEMs to be made by journalists34, by university press offices35, and, in some cases,
companies that produce battery packs. Other companies can use these by scientists authoring peer-reviewed scientific articles due to the
packs as components to produce finished items, such as EVs, sold often extreme pressure to motivate research funding.
to users. A prominent recent example of excessive extrapolation is the
In contrast, the good thermal stability of LFP allows for relatively 2016 Energy & Environmental Science research article by Braga
large (300–1000 Wh) cells with lower energy density and less stringent et al.36 of a battery concept in which the alkali metal (Li or Na) was
thermal management requirements. This fact, coupled with innovation stated to reversibly plate and strip at both negative and positive
in cell design, has recently enabled the development of LFP packs with electrodes with an extremely high theoretical energy density,
improved packing efficiency, enabling pack-level energy densities despite the absence of an overall chemical reaction. The study
competitive with high-Ni-content packs with energy-dense cells. gained worldwide attention following a university press release37.
However, recent announcements by several companies on innovations However, the study also received strong criticism and was sub-
such as larger-format cylindrical cells (e.g., “4680”)29 and NMC-based sequently disputed on theoretical and experimental basis38,39. At
CTP systems30, as well as further integration (e.g., cell-to-vehicle the time of writing, the peer-reviewed results obtained by Braga

et al.36 have not been independently reproduced, and the papers already commercially available70,71, for example, in medical devices,
disputing their results have received far less attention. smart electronics and circuit boards. These thin film batteries are
It is critical to scientific integrity and appropriate use of public generally produced by vacuum/vapour deposition, a technique
resources that research funding organizations do not incentivize over- which generally leads to low cell manufacturing throughput, com-
extrapolation at any level and support initiatives to improve data pared to cell manufacturing for EV traction batteries72, and (ii) bulk-
availability and transparency. In this regard, since 201540, various sci- type, which are comparable, in principle, to current generation
entific publishers and journals have suggested the development of commercial lithium-ion batteries, i.e., with thick electrodes
standards in reporting experimental results and analysis in the broader (~100 µm) and sizes ranging between 2 and 200 Ah. Below we
field of energy research24,41–46. Another practice to support reprodu- summarise the various material approaches to solid-state
cibility and third-party validation is the publication of raw datasets. electrolytes.
Indeed, the creation of community-led, open databases has already
been considered in the battery field47,48. Another option could be to Inorganic solid-state electrolytes. Inorganic solid-state electrolytes
encourage the adoption of a “limitations of the study” section in peer- are already available in niche commercial electrochemical energy
reviewed scientific articles as a standard practice, similar to that storage devices such as high-temperature rechargeable, liquid elec-
applied in other fields, notably the social sciences49,50. In this way, the trode Na-S, Na-NiCl2 batteries used for stationary energy storage73 and
scientists can clearly discuss methodological limitations, and the primary Li-I2 batteries73. More recently, in 2019, Hitachi Zosen, a
authors can clarify what remains outside the scope of their study in the Japanese engineering corporation, showcased an all-solid-state 140
article itself. mAh pouch cell prototype for space-based applications that will be
trialled on the International Space Station (ISS)74,75. The Hitachi Zosen
Industrial development of lithium-based battery components cell uses a sulphide-based electrolyte with other undisclosed cell
Electrolytes. A. Volta51 first described the importance of the electro- components and operates between −40 and 100 °C74,75, retaining per-
lyte (i.e., an electron-insulating and ion-conductive layer, either liquid formance at environmental pressures of 0.01 Pa74,75. Although this
or solid, interposed between the negative and positive electrodes) in could be an advanced prototype in aerospace, sitting at least at TRL 7
an electrochemical energy storage device in 1800. Currently, the state- for this niche application, it would sit at TRL 4 (i.e., laboratory scale) for
of-the-art electrolyte for EV application52–54 is represented by solid EV application. Unfortunately, as of today, there is no off-the-shelf
lithium salts, e.g., lithium hexafluorophosphate, dissolved in non- product that meets the stringent requirements of the passenger elec-
aqueous organic-based carbonate solvents, e.g., ethylene carbonate tric vehicle market.
and dimethyl carbonate. Electrolytes generally represent, depending Nevertheless, some solid-state electrolyte technologies hold
on cell format and design, ca. 8–15 wt. % of a cell. Despite being con- much promise. For example, some inorganic solid electrolytes are
tinuously developed, these electrolytes are expected to continue lim- stable and retain high ionic conductivities at room temperature76,77,
iting cell safety due to their combustibility and limited cell operating e.g., > 10−2 S cm−1, while at the same time possibly improving safety due
temperature range of −10 °C to 60 °C in the most optimistic scenarios. to a lower risk of thermal events78. These advantages could lead to
Electrolyte chemistry plays a major role in determining cell safety, increased volumetric and gravimetric energy at the pack level, i.e., by
cycle life55, power capability, and reversibly accessible energy reducing the need for thermal management or engineering safety
content55,56. It plays a key role in determining the nature of the so-called components around the battery pack.
solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) forming at the interface between the The different nature of the electrode|solid electrolyte interface
electrolyte and the active material, especially at the negative might also enable long-term cycling of negative (e.g., lithium metal)
electrode57,58. For most commercial battery cells, these kinetically and positive (manganese- or sulfur-containing materials) electrode
stable interphases are critical for preventing the cell’s capacity and active materials, a performance hardly attainable with conventional
power degradation. non-aqueous liquid electrolytes today. Some solid electrolytes offer
Moreover, innovative electrolyte formulations are con- the possibility of thermodynamic stability (e.g., at the Li|LLZO inter-
sidered key enablers for next-generation negative (e.g., lithium face). In contrast, some others offer the possibility of better kinetic
metal59 and silicon60) and positive (e.g., Mn-rich and polyanionic stability by removing processes such as interface dissolution into a
compounds61) electrode active materials. Academic and industrial liquid or throttling solvent mass transport to the electrode
researchers are trying to develop tailored liquid electrolyte for- interface79–81. However, in certain conditions, solid-state electrolytes
mulations, e.g., using fluorinated solvents62 to enable efficient can also become electrochemically active74. Thus, it is paramount to
lithium metal cycling59,63. Room-temperature ionic liquids (RTIL, evaluate the electrode|solid electrolyte interaction during the devel-
i.e., a class of salts that are liquid at room temperature) are also opment of all-solid-state batteries82.
being considered53,64. Although RTILs are often touted as being
safer than standard non-aqueous carbonate-based Organic semi-solid and solid-state electrolytes. In the organic solid
electrolytes53,64, there is limited evidence of long-term stability at electrolyte category, we include commercially available, gel-type
TRL ≥ 5, particularly after an extended number of cycles. Start-up poly(vinylidene difluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene) (PVDF-HFP) elec-
Cuberg has recently shown a cycle life of more than 670 cycles trolytes and gel-type poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO)-based electrolytes,
for a 5 Ah cell prototype containing an IL-based electrolyte65. such as those commercialized by Bolloré83. Although this company
There is a strong push from the automotive industry to launched a pilot car-sharing program in North America, Europe and
consider organic or inorganic solid-state electrolytes and so- Asia to use this cell technology in electric city cars, this kind of lithium-
called “solid-state batteries” (SSB), arguably among the most metal-polymer (referred to as LMP®) battery never reached the mass
hyped technologies of this decade so far66. Unfortunately, despite market adoption in passenger cars84. One factor contributing to its
the large volume of work reported in the scientific literature67–69, poor commercial adoption is that they can only be used at relatively
no consistent and comprehensive classification is available for all- high temperatures (50 to 80 °C)85 and in a low voltage range (up to
solid-state batteries. For this reason, in Supplementary Fig. 1, we 4.0 V vs Li/Li+)52. However, these batteries are now deployed in com-
propose a classification to help guide the readers in what is being mercial vehicles like the Mercedes eCitaro city bus85. To the best of our
actively researched in the field. knowledge, there is no demonstration of prototype cells (e.g., at TRL 5)
We identify two main categories of all-solid-state cells: (i) thin that work at room temperature (i.e., at around 25 °C) using a purely
film, with capacities in the µAh-mAh (or µWh-mWh) range which are solid-state polymer electrolyte.

The semi-solid category includes highly viscous electrolytes, such temperature range (e.g., −30 to 100 °C) to compare with state-of-the-
as solvent-in-salt mixtures, i.e., electrolyte solutions with salt con- art lithium-ion batteries. Ultimately, it is necessary to understand the
centrations higher than the “standard” 1 M, which can reach as high as implications of integrating multiple single cells into a larger and more
4 M concentration or saturation points. A point of concern for con- complex battery system (Fig. 3).
centrated electrolyte mixtures is the relatively high content of fluori-
nated salts, which also brings into question the lithium content (i.e., Negative electrodes
kgLi/kWhcell) and environmental impact of such a class of electrolytes. While there have been steady advances in the performance of positive
Indeed, a holistic approach to understanding opportunities for com- electrode materials used in lithium-ion batteries over the past 30
mercialization would also require a comprehensive life cycle analysis. years, the negative electrode active material used in commercial cells
It is also important to consider semi-solid electrolytes that can be has remained relatively unchanged89,90. However, various negative
prepared using commoditized chemicals. They could be easier to electrode active materials have been proposed for use in lithium-ion
integrate into EVs versus cells comprising components that remain batteries; these materials are broadly summarised in Supplemen-
under development, such as ceramic separators. tary Fig. 2.
Hybrid electrolytes. Concerns about the manufacturability and scal- Insertion-based negative electrodes. Natural and artificial graphites
ability of solid-state electrolytes and requirements on stack pressure are the most commonly used negative electrode active materials in
continue to motivate the development of cell designs also incorpor- commercial Li-ion batteries91. Natural graphite is obtained from
ating non-aqueous liquid electrolyte solutions in hybrid solid-liquid mining and refining processes, while synthetic graphite is artificially
configurations. Liquids can be employed to improve cell performance, prepared via high-temperature pyrometallurgical processes91. In
e.g., by decreasing interfacial resistance or improving particle contact recent years, an increasing amount of artificial graphite has been
and Li-ion conductivity86. Hybrid solutions include solid-state cells used alongside natural graphite in negative electrodes91–94. Natural
using a mix of inorganic and organic electrolytes, as researched and graphite is a cost-effective material capable of delivering a specific
proposed by several start-up companies that employ “catholytes” (i.e., capacity close to its theoretical value of 372 mAh g−1 at moderate
electrolytes confined to the vicinity of the positive electrode) to specific currents (e.g., 100 mA g−1). In contrast, artificial graphite is
enhance battery performance87,88. more expensive and has a slightly lower specific capacity, but it
enables a longer cell cycle life95.
General considerations for commercial development of electro- Lithium titanate (LTO) has been used as an alternative to graphite
lytes. One of the greatest opportunities that solid electrolytes present in high-power applications. However, its adoption has been limited
is to improve safety, energy, and extend cycle life, e.g., by increasing due to its high cost per energy unit and low energy density. LTO’s
the voltage stability window in synergy with the electrode active higher operating potential, around 1.5 V vs Li/Li+, with a voltage cut-off
materials. However, evaluating the introduction of alternative liquid- above 1.0 V vs Li/Li+, minimizes low-voltage degradation at the nega-
or solid-state electrolytes should be done carefully23. tive electrode|electrolyte interface. However, at the cell level, the low
Whenever a solid-state electrolyte layer is considered for cell specific capacity (i.e., 170 mAh g−1)96 and a low nominal discharge
production, its manufacturing is not a trivial process. Indeed, regard- voltage (limited to around 2.3 V) of LTO-based negative electrodes
less of the battery chemistry, it is necessary to fabricate dense (~100%), limits cell specific energy <100 Wh kg−1 and energy density <200 Wh L−1
non-porous, and thin (e.g., <20 µm) solid electrolyte films at a high when coupled with NMC-based positive electrodes and “standard” 1 M
yield (e.g., >30 m/min)72. Laboratory-scale type cells generally consist non-aqueous liquid electrolytes.
of solid-state electrolyte pellets (or membranes) hundreds of microns Beyond LTO, companies such as Toshiba97, Echion Technologies98
thick produced via non-scalable manufacturing techniques using and Nyobolt99 are looking at innovating this cell concept with similar
single-side coated electrodes. These solid-state cells hardly represent materials. These new cell chemistries could find a niche in applications
the performance needed of a 10–100 Ah cell, which is considered the such as hybrid vehicles, e.g., for heavy-duty applications. For example,
required target for EV-grade cells. niobium-based negative electrodes, although still at TRL 5100, can have
A solid-state electrolyte generally acts as a separator, and its capacities as high as 225 mAh g−1 at 34.3 mA g−1 and promise average
weight and thickness (both larger compared to liquid electrolyte-filled cell discharge voltages of 2.3 V, which would result in higher energy
polyolefin-based Li-ion cells separators) are crucial variables that must densities than LTO-based cells101, but still lower than graphite-based
be tuned to reach specific energy and energy density of ≥350 Wh kg−1 cells. A near-monopoly of Nb supply could pose a risk to adoption102,
and ≥900 Wh l−1, respectively, as expected for the first generation of and it is important to consider which technique is used for ore
commercial products. For both liquid- or solid-state electrolytes, it is refinement and Nb purification103. Similarly to LTO, commercial
crucial to test cells using realistic electrolyte loadings, doable from TRL adoption of these cells could be hampered by the higher $ kWh−1 cost
4, and to provide clear safety and performance testing of scaled-up compared to cells with graphite-based negative electrodes. However,
prototypes, e.g., at TRL 5 or 6, both at the beginning and end-of-life, as these technologies mature, end users of batteries could be willing to
and different SOC. pay a higher upfront cost to access the performance requirements
Comprehensive safety testing is key to achieving higher TRL, as demanded by their specific application, in this case, power and cycle
batteries always present a certain degree of safety-related risk. Solid- life, currently not achieved with graphite-based cells.
state electrolytes are not necessarily incombustible since some polymer
and inorganic electrolytes can react with oxygen or water, generating Conversion-alloy and alloy-based negative electrodes. Another
heat and toxic gases, posing both a chemical and an explosion risk74. important class of materials are alloys and conversion-alloys, first
The amount of energy that can be released by a battery in single-cell commercialized in a battery called “Nexelion” by Sony in 20059,104,
format is a function of several factors, but primarily of the electrical and employing a negative electrode incorporating amorphous Sn-Co
thermal energy stored. A holistic, system-level view and safety testing nanoparticles. Despite this high-TRL cell not being a commercial suc-
are ultimately required, as in the event of a fire, plastic, casing and pack cess, the development attracted research interest in alloy-based
materials could contribute to uncontrolled combustion. negative electrodes89, such as silicon-based materials104.
It is also essential to provide a clear description of the thermal and Commercially available lithium-ion cells are now beginning to
mechanical requirements, e.g., applied stack pressure to make these use an increasing amount of silicon in the negative electrode in the
cells work at room temperature and ideally in an extended form of silicon oxide, SiOx91,105, where the high theoretical specific

capacity of silicon (up to 3579 mAh g−1 94 based on the mass of Theoretical, minimum volume change (lithium metal)
silicon) allows for improvements in energy density at the cell level

Cathode (4 mAh/cm2) Charge Cathode (4 mAh/cm2)
even when silicon compounds only comprises a small fraction of the
negative electrode (e.g., 2–10 wt. %105,106). However, this generally Electrolyte Electrolyte
Lithium (19 µm)
«Anode-free»
results in a trade-off with cycle life. Although there are no detailed
accounts of who first commercialized silicon oxide in lithium-ion
Theoretical, minimum volume change (silicon)
cells2, the material has been found in commercial cells manu-
factured as early as 2013, e.g., by Samsung105,107, and Tesla, which
Cathode (4 mAh/cm2) Charge Cathode (4 mAh/cm2)
was the first major automaker to include silicon, as silicon oxide, in
Electrolyte Electrolyte
EV batteries92. Today, the percentage of silicon oxide in graphite-
Silicon (6 µm)
based negative electrode materials is generally estimated at around Li15Si4 (18 µm)
2–10 wt. %105,106.

Fig. 4 | Theoretical volumetric changes upon cell charge of lithium metal (top)
Industry is working towards a gradual increase in silicon content
and silicon-based (bottom) cells. Volume change is visualized as a change in one
in the negative electrode, with GAC Motors claiming to be close to dimension, namely thickness. In general, materials can expand in all three dimen-
commercializing higher silicon content battery packs108. Companies sions. The top panel shows that the deposition of 4 mAh/cm2 of lithium metal would
such as Umicore109 have been developing the technology for over ten lead to an increase in cell thickness of about 19 µm per negative electrode layer,
years. Umicore claims that the next steps include the “activation” of based on a specific capacity of 3860 mAh/g and a density of 0.53 g/cm3, i.e., a
SiOx using lithium or magnesium to increase initial cycle efficiency. volumetric capacity of 2045 mAh/cm3. The bottom panel shows that at the end of
Further steps include the introduction of silicon-carbon (Si-C) com- charge, the same amount of lithium (i.e., lithium equivalents) in an alloying reaction
posite materials in the negative electrode, with blended graphite/Si-C with silicon to form Li15Si4 would lead to an increase in cell thickness per negative
electrode active materials having capacities in the range of electrode layer of 12 µm, and a comparable overall negative electrode thickness of
500–550mAhg−1(active material)109,110, values that suggest a moderate 18 µm. A density of 2.33 g/cm3 was used for pure silicon and a volumetric capacity of
amount of silicon, around 10 wt. %109, (we consider a moderate amount 2194 Ah/cm3 for Li15Si4. Positive electrode and electrolyte layer are assumed to have
a constant thickness. Volumetric capacity and density determine cell energy den-
of silicon up to 20 wt. %). In parallel, several start-ups, collaborating
sity, affecting how much space a cell would occupy, e.g., in a battery pack.
with suppliers and automotive OEMs29,111–114, have been developing
Increasing cell energy density can allow, for example, more electrode layers or cells
silicon-rich or silicon-dominant negative electrodes, i.e., up to 20–100
to be integrated into the same space.
wt. %, in which the largest capacity contribution comes from silicon.
Although some of these materials have been commercialized in niche
applications, such as consumer electronics115 or aviation and
aerospace116, no player has officially reached TRL 6 for supplying the electrode)|(sulfide electrolyte), (“anode-free” negative electrode)|(oxide
automotive sector. Companies working on silicon-dominant batteries electrolyte), (lithium metal negative electrode)|(polymer electrolyte),
are generally expected to reach TRL 6-7 by 202529,111–114. (lithium metal negative electrode)|(ionic liquid electrolyte), and many
Research on silicon-based negative electrodes focuses on buffering more, are also currently under development by several start-up com-
or reducing material volume changes upon lithiation and decreasing panies, battery suppliers and automotive OEMs9.
irreversible capacity loss during cell formation (e.g., via pre-lithiation) Concepts using a negative electrode where no lithium metal is
and cycling109,117,118. These drawbacks can be mitigated through several present during cell assembly and is extracted solely from the positive
different approaches. Strategies include silicon-rich, monolithic or 3D- electrode on the first charge are often referred to as “anode-free”124.
structured electrodes, such as those proposed by Enevate119, and These present the most advantages from an energy perspective and
negative electrodes prepared by vapour deposition, as developed by the largest challenges for cell cycle life since any unwanted side reac-
LeydenJar120. Vapour deposition can be used to grow silicon fibres and tion directly leads to a loss of capacity in the cell. “Anode-free” cells are
nanowires. Startup Amprius has used vapour deposition to deposit also subject to larger volume fluctuation between charge and dis-
silicon on carbon nanotubes; this negative electrode material has been charge (i.e., reversible and irreversible cell swelling, also termed
used in 3–10 Ah pouch cells121 with energies between 360–500 Wh kg−1, “breathing”)125, which can require high stack pressures, and also lead to
890–1400 Wh L−1, and cycle life between 200–1,200 cycles, with fast complex integration at the battery pack level. However, lithium metal’s
charging capability121. Pure silicon nanowires can also be grown by low density (0.534 g cm−3 at 25 °C) means that silicon, with a density of
vapour deposition; startup OneD Battery Science is taking this approach about 2.33 g cm−3 at 25 °C, does not necessarily carry any penalty from
to grow silicon nanowires on graphite122. Various (nano-)structured, an energy density perspective (Fig. 4).
porous or templated silicon-based active materials, which could be For this purpose, it is worth considering the theoretical uniaxial
integrated into standard lithium-ion manufacturing, are also considered volume change of lithium and silicon (Fig. 4). Both materials, upon
and referred to as ‘drop-in’ technologies (e.g., by slot-die coating), such lithiation, can undergo reversible cell stack volume changes of 10–20%
as those of Group14114. Automotive cells using silicon-rich anodes with (e.g., considering a positive electrode thickness of 100 µm and an
up to 30 wt. % silicon are at TRL 5 today, with A-samples being sent to electrolyte thickness of 20 µm or lower), which needs to be considered
automakers. We estimate that automotive cells using >30 wt. % silicon when battery cells are assembled and cycled in a battery pack. This
are at TRL 4. requires a volume buffering strategy to be in place. Interestingly, if
Unlike changing the positive electrode material, silicon-rich only the theoretical volume change is considered, lithium- and silicon-
negative electrode active materials may require a significant redesign based cells can experience different magnitudes of swellings but can
of the negative electrode and electrolyte system60,123, such as intro- have comparable energy densities. With a minimally viable N/P ratio of
ducing new binders and new electrolyte additives. Hence, silicon-rich 1, where the relative volume change would be highest89,126–128, a silicon
negative electrode materials can be considered a step change com- electrode would be expected to exhibit a uniaxial volume change of
pared to the gradual improvements represented by using SiOx123. 280% and an energy density of 2194 Ah cm−3 at the fully charged
state89,126. The uniaxial volume change for lithium negative electrodes
Lithium metal-based negative electrodes. In the last five years, there is higher than for pure silicon, as lithium metal has a lower density than
has been a move towards the commercialization of rechargeable cells that of lithiated silicon.
with lithium metal anodes, which have been proposed since the 1980s9. Manufacturability is an open issue that needs to be solved to
A variety of different concepts, such as (lithium metal negative enable the use of lithium metal electrodes for the battery industry

techniques can also be used for pre-lithiation (prior to cell assembly) of

negative electrodes that do not contain lithium metal118.
Regardless of the production approach, the handling and parti-
cularly shipping of lithium metal represents an additional major barrier
to the widespread adoption of the material129. Transport requires
additional measures in accordance with regulations regarding the
transport of dangerous goods, such as the Agreement concerning the
International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR)137 and the
International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods
Regulations (DGR)138. Currently, shipping lithium metal requires large
containers kept under a controlled inert atmosphere129. Higher logis-
tical costs or co-location of lithium foil manufacturing plants (e.g.,
adjacent to cell manufacturing plants) should therefore be considered
when envisioning manufacturing lithium metal battery cells.
General considerations for negative electrodes. To summarize,

there is no single solution to every technical concern related to
Fig. 5 | Production of lithium metal foils and electrodes. Top) Top-down lithium-based battery negative electrodes. Indeed, different cells pre-
method, i.e., extrusion of lithium metal ingots to produce lithium metal foils with a
sent challenges that cannot be fully resolved at once; instead, a com-
minimum thickness of 100 µm. Thickness can be reduced to a minimum of ca.
promise between safety, energy content, cost and cycle life needs to be
20 µm by roll pressing. The foil can then be laminated on current collectors, such
reached. So far, negative electrode improvements in large-scale bat-
as copper. Bottom) Bottom-up approaches. The upper part of the bottom panel
depicts a simplified scheme of a physical vapour deposition method for producing
teries have been marginal: graphite is still the material of choice,
lithium foil. A lithium source, such as an ingot or chips, is placed in a vacuum although the inclusion of silicon as a composite with graphite is
chamber. Mechanical, electromagnetic, or thermal energy is then applied to the already happening at the commercial cell level.
lithium source to vaporize the metal, which is deposited on a current collector, Arguably the push for higher-energy batteries has led to rapid
such as copper, to act as an electrode. The lower part of the bottom panel depicts a incremental developments of positive electrode active materials139,
method for lithium ink deposition, where stabilized lithium particles are dispersed while research on negative electrodes tends to lag behind. This is
in a liquid (slurry mixing), and the slurry is coated on a foil and dried. The lithium partly due to companies that have developed positive electrode active
metal electrode can then be thinned and laminated to homogenize and flatten the materials successfully managing the industrial risk of bringing a new
surface. product to market140. Indeed, replacing graphite-based negative elec-
trode material requires a “step-change”, meaning that the application
(Fig. 5)129. Conventional lithium metal foil manufacturing (Fig. 5 top, for specific negative electrode chemistry needs to be considered by
top-down approach), generally carried out under a dry or inert atmo- rethinking the whole system, i.e., with a holistic view of the cell, system
sphere (which can add to processing costs), includes an extrusion integration, and practical manufacturability. This also implies an
process, and leads to foils with a minimum thickness of 100 µm130,131. opportunity for a technology leapfrog. Companies developing these
This thickness constitutes a large excess at the cell level (100 µm ≈ solutions are generally start-ups, many of which have now attracted
21 mAh cm−2), particularly considering that the active lithium is gen- large investments from automotive OEMs. This is possibly because
erally already contained in the positive electrode material, with the cell start-ups are better placed to pursue high-risk projects and manage
assembled in a discharged state. A roll pressing procedure is com- fast-paced development cycles, compared to large manufacturing and
monly employed for thinning lithium metal foils. Currently, state-of- engineering firms.
the-art processes produce foils with a minimum thickness of 20 µm
and require the use of processing lubricants131,132. Positive electrodes
Moreover, freestanding lithium foil can be complex to handle due Insertion-based positive electrodes. LiCoO2, with a practical
to lithium’s mechanical properties, particularly ductility and electrode-level specific capacity of ca. 135 mAh g−1 141, was the first
adhesion130,131. Lithium metal can be laminated on current collectors commercial positive electrode active material used in lithium-ion
such as copper or stainless steel foils to increase the negative electrode batteries12 and the first lithium-ion based electric vehicles (Nissan
mechanical, electrical, and thermal properties. Current collectors are Prairie Joy EV, 1997)142. Despite the introduction of lower-cost materials
generally metallic foils that are mechanical support to deposit thin into consumer electronics, like LiFePO4 and lithium manganese oxide
films on and act as electric current carriers132. With lithium metal being (LMO), in 2008, Tesla used LiCoO2-based (LCO) positive electrodes in
a soft, highly reactive material, all of these steps are non-trivial. To the the cells used in its first EV, the Roadster143. These cells were available in
best of our knowledge, there are currently no manufacturing plants a 18650 format and offered higher energy densities than other cells on
capable of scaling-up lithium metal foil production for large-scale (e.g., the market at the time that used LFP or LMO as positive electrode active
EV-grade) cell manufacturing. materials. 18650 LCO cells were also easier to procure due to their
Bottom-up approaches (Fig. 5 bottom) include techniques such as widespread use in laptop battery packs. However, as the electric vehicle
physical vapour133,134 or ink depositions135. Vapour deposition borrows market began to take shape, the automakers outside of China (which
technologies either from the semiconductor or thin-film battery has the largest lithium-based battery manufacturing industry globally
industries. For this bottom-up approach, achieving high-quality, today)11 started to investigate the use of alternative cobalt-poor battery
homogeneous lithium layers with high throughput can be challenging. chemistries that better-suited EV requirements. At the time, this meant
However, vapour deposition is well-versed to minimize lithium excess looking for positive electrode active materials that enable a higher
where thin layers (<10 µm) can be deposited133–135. Ink deposition is energy content, with a lower raw materials cost, reasonable cycle life,
proposed by some suppliers, such as Livent136, but so far, the scalability and safety comparable to the standard LiCoO2-based electrodes.
and cyclability, particularly in large cell formats, still needs to be fully This led to the emergence of nickel and manganese-based che-
proven. Bottom-up approaches require a controlled atmosphere (e.g., mistries, such as NMC and NCA. These positive electrode active
low pressure and/or inert), and the resulting deposited lithium foil is materials replace (partially or completely) expensive cobalt for
expected to be highly reactive until the surface is passivated. These cheaper nickel (prices true as of August 27, 2021)144. The raw materials

containing these materials. For high-performance vehicle segments,

automakers are still targeting Ni-based chemistries with an increasing
nickel content and lower cobalt content. Finally, there is a concrete
opportunity for cells based on NMC active materials with an inter-
mediate Co content to be cost- and performance-competitive with
those based on Ni-rich NMCs153 by increasing the upper voltage cut-off.
This cell development trend has been observed for LCO-based con-
sumer electronic batteries141. EV adoption, however, could be further in
the future, as additional electrolyte and active materials’ developments
and demonstration at scale are still required.
Conversion-based positive electrodes. In parallel, a range of positive

electrode active materials are at an early stage of development (TRL 4).
For example, Solid Power, a US start-up developing solid-state bat-
Fig. 6 | Battery Cell/Pack price forecast. The figure shows the real average decline
teries, claims to have developed prototype cells using conversion-type
in the battery pack and cell prices for lithium-ion batteries from 2013–2021. Prices
are split between the cell and pack components. The 2022 and 2023 prices are
positive electrode active materials such as FeF3 or FeS2154. These
forecasted prices based on expected changes to critical battery raw materials. The materials are being developed due to a theoretical capacity in the range
forecasted projections are based on the state of the market in November 2021197. of 700–900 mAh g−1, with a lithiation potential in the range of 1–2.5 V
vs. Li/Li+ 155,156. If this class of materials (including also elemental sulfur
or oxygen, or other non-lithiated positive electrode materials157) are
used to produce Panasonic/Tesla’s Ni-rich (>90% nickel on a molar
eventually commercialized, they could result in a reduction in the mass
basis as a fraction of the transition metal in the positive electrode)
of positive active material required per kWh of cells from 1–2 kg kWh−1
NCA92 positive electrode chemistry are more than 50% cheaper than
(with the current generation of insertion layered oxide) to less than
those in LCO on a kg basis145. By substituting cobalt with nickel, it is
1 kg kWh−1 158. While these materials could be considered attractive on
possible to increase the practical capacity of these positive electrode
this basis alone, it is worth mentioning that conversion-type materials
materials, as the equivalents of lithium extracted from the positive
have drawbacks, which could greatly hinder their practical exploita-
electrode active material increase from 0.6 up to 0.75–0.8061. How-
tion. Drawbacks include: (i) capacity loss and large voltage hysteresis
ever, this can also lead to accelerated structural deterioration146.
during cell cycling, (ii) poor power densities due to sluggish kinetics
The current increase in raw material prices147 (true as of November
and multi-electron reactions, (iii) relatively high strain upon lithiation
2022) creates problems for cell manufacturers and automotive OEMs
and delithiation, and (iv) need for a large amount of lithium metal in the
at a time when they are trying to decrease the price of batteries and
negative electrode (i.e., potentially double the amount or more com-
electric vehicles. Based on current forecasts, 2022 may be the first year
pared to cells using Li-based layered oxides positive electrodes). The
since the widescale adoption of EVs started over a decade ago, that
lower average voltage of the positive electrode will require a higher
average lithium-ion battery prices increase (Fig. 6). This may influence
capacity loading (in terms of mAh cm−2) that will lead to higher local
OEM decisions when it comes to introducing new chemistries. For current densities at the negative electrode and higher costs, particu-
example, in 2018, when cobalt prices reached almost 100,000 $ t−1, larly considering complexities with handling and shipping lithium
companies quickly switched from high-Co-content to high-Ni-content metal foils. Moreover, cells would be assembled charged rather than
(with the minimum possible Co content) NMC positive electrode discharged157. It is unclear if this could add to the complexity of cell
active materials148. This was particularly evident within the Chinese manufacturing at a large scale.
battery industry, where NMC811 was introduced around two years
earlier than anticipated before cobalt prices saw their rapid rise149. Challenges in scaling up Li-ion batteries
Despite the higher energy of cells using high-Ni-content positive Lab-scale material development and engineering improvements can
electrodes, for much of the last decade, Chinese companies favoured be the primary hurdles in bringing new technology to market. While
LFP. The drivers behind China’s initial focus on LFP are complex and challenges such as scaling material production from grams to tons are
outside the scope of this article, but it is heavily related to the legal well understood, additional problems are often overlooked, such as
battle for LFP licensing that concluded at the beginning of the last the complex value chains, with dozens of suppliers required to source
decade. After a couple of years of testing batteries with Ni-rich positive all the materials and components (see Fig. 7, top). Building a manu-
electrodes, encouraged by generous government subsidies that facturing plant can take several years to commission from capital
favoured the development of high energy density batteries and long- expenditure (CapEx) to SOP (Fig. 7, bottom), and the time it requires
range EVs, Chinese cell manufacturers and automakers are again depends on the product being produced. A chemical plant producing
favouring LFP150. Chinese cell manufacturer BYD recently switched all layered oxide positive electrode active materials will be very different
its passenger EVs over to LFP using its Blade Battery technology151. from a plant that produces battery cells, which requires precision
Concerns over battery costs and raw material supply have been manufacturing and high automation to be cost-competitive. Here we
drivers in this switch back to LFP. It has also been enabled by innova- use a series of examples to illustrate how supply chain considerations
tive cell and pack designs that improve the specific energy of LFP and poor cost assumptions can de-rail technology development.
systems at the pack level while still benefitting from LFP’s low cost.
In the longer term, automakers and manufacturers still expect to The supply chain. Moving to positive electrode chemistries with
deploy new positive electrode chemistries tailored to specific high manganese content potentially offers a route to balancing
applications. manufactured cell costs with performance metrics such as specific
Some automakers are focusing their attention on high-Mn- energy159. A variety of established manufacturers and start-ups are
content chemistries152, such as LNMO, manganese-rich NMC, and pursuing these materials, e.g., Haldor Topsøe160 and Nano One
LMFP, e.g., for the volume vehicle segments152 as they balance raw Materials161 in the case of LNMO, BASF in the case of NMC 370,
material costs with vehicle range/performance, or for hybrid vehicles SVOLT162 in the case of NMx, and HCM163, SAFT164 and CATL165 in the
which will benefit from the high voltage, high power capability. To case of LMFP or LxFP (with x an undisclosed number of different
date, however, there is no clear evidence of battery cells with TRL > 5 substituents, such as CATLʼs “M3P”166). These companies are

Mine/Smelt The supply chains of oxide-based solid-state electrolytes (e.g.,

Li7La3Zr2O12, LLZO) face similar difficulties. Lanthanum, as used in
Recycling Refining LLZO, was estimated to have an annual production of around 50,000
Precursors tons in 2019169. We estimate that 1 GWh of batteries using a 20 µm thick
LLZO electrolyte with an 80 µm thick NMC811 positive electrode will
Battery reuse
require around 255 tons of lanthanum. Current lanthanum production
could therefore support around 200 GWh of all-solid-state battery
Active Mat.
Inactive Mat. production.
EV Use
The growing use of inorganic solid-state electrolytes and the
application of pre-lithiation technologies and lithium metal negative
electrodes promise to increase lithium demand significantly. If the rate
of demand increase is not properly understood with cooperation
Cell Mfg. amongst companies from across the value chain, this could lead to
EV Design further material bottlenecks. It is already difficult to forecast future
EV Mfg.
demand for lithium, and other battery raw materials, as forecasts for
Components
Battery
passenger EV sales and their associated lithium-ion battery demand
Systems vary wildly. In its 2021 electric vehicle outlook, BloombergNEF fore-
casted around 32 million passenger battery EV and plug-in hybrid EV
sales annually by 2030170. In contrast, the International Energy Agency
(IEA)11, for the same year, draws a few scenarios for EV sales. Their most
conservative forecast is at >30 million EV sales by 2030 but expects
that over 65 million EV sales would be needed in 2030 to meet the
requirements of the 2050 Net Zero Emissions scenario11. This uncer-
tainty alone creates difficulty in scaling up. However, material suppli-
ers can de-risk this to some extent by working closely with their
customers.
Cost forecasting. When developing new technologies, academic

researchers or start-ups need to forecast the cost of the new system
compared to the incumbent technology to justify commercialization,
win funding and pursue development. This aspect requires multiple
assumptions about existing manufacturing processes and supply
Fig. 7 | Circular EV battery value chain from mineral extraction to recycling
(top), and typical time required to reach SOP (bottom). The time in years from
chains and how they will change in the future. For academic
CapEx to SOP is estimated from capital expenditure to start a project/plant to when researchers and start-ups, it can be difficult to get an accurate repre-
production starts. We estimate both the typical minimum time (black bar), and sentation of what these costs are and how they will change. However,
maximum time (light grey). We assume technical maturity and further delays can be there are publicly available tools, such as BatPac6, which can be helpful.
expected if the technology is not developed or there is a lack of know-how. Most If the assumptions used are not reflective of the industry, then the cost
steps require high-precision manufacturing and can have different degrees of forecasts could result in unrealistic expectations of the competitive-
complexity for market entry. The values are indicative, sourced from public ness of the final product. This, in turn, will damage the business case of
announcements, and in-line with those disclosed by public organizations such as start-ups or lead to funding being allocated to academic lines of
EIT InnoEnnergy199. For scrap, we assume that the largest volume will initially come research that are unlikely to result in technology improvements that
from giga-factory ramp-up. will benefit the industry or result in technological advancements.
Difficulties in accurately forecasting production timescales can
advancing the large-scale production of, and claim to achieve, high- also damage the scale-up opportunities of new technologies. Overly
performing positive electrode materials160,161. However, the current aggressive timelines for introducing new technologies can make an
battery-grade manganese supply chain is insufficient to support investment attractive to naive investors, but in the end, may lead to a
these technologies’ widespread adoption today. Indeed, current final product that is more expensive than the incumbent technology.
projections for manganese sulfate supply show that demand will For example, a new cell design may be commercialized on the basis
outstrip supply as early as 2025 if chemical companies do not invest that when produced, it will be cheaper than the incumbent. However, a
in additional capacity (see Supplementary Fig. 3). To prevent man- delay in production could mean that gradual improvements to the
ganese sulfate availability from being a bottleneck, companies that incumbent cell design leads to the manufactured cost of the incum-
plan to use these positive electrode materials will need to work bent design passing below the forecasted manufactured cost of the
closely with chemical suppliers to ensure that production capacity is new design. While seasoned investors may be more cautious than
ramped up in line with their requirements. These issues are not only companies looking to raise capital, technology developers should be
a problem for the producers of the material but also potentially realistic about what is achievable. Overpromising and underachieving
disruptive for the plans of end-users, such as Norwegian battery will cause more harm to the industry as a whole.
manufacturer Morrow167 (who have partnered with Haldor Topsøe to
produce LNMO cells) and companies like Volkswagen who have Manufacturing processes and system design. We have mainly dis-
indicated manganese-rich chemistries as a key part of their future cussed the advantages and drawbacks of introducing new materials
plans152,168. into the battery industry. However, it can be equally difficult to
Batteries using inorganic solid-state electrolytes face similar introduce new manufacturing processes and techniques as well as
supply chain constraints. There is no existing supply chain for cells electrode and cell designs23. In the manufacturing space, companies
using sulfide electrolytes (e.g., Li3PS4) to provide the required lithium are exploring new processes such as pre-lithiation, dry electrode
sulfide materials. This means that companies have to develop their coating, and improved quality control processes. However, it is chal-
supply chains while also commercializing the batteries themselves. lenging to persuade cell manufacturers to adopt these technologies,

which, when initially introduced, are likely to lower yields and increase in the D-sample stage, the battery cells are produced at scale, ready to
CapEx. This generally leads to higher manufactured cell costs. Despite be implemented commercially, and ready to pass automotive part
these challenges, some companies are trying to commercialize these approval, e.g., undergo Production Part Approval (PPA) and
technologies reach TRL 7.
Prominent examples include 24M’s “SemiSolid” cell design, which Testing requirements can increase ten-fold, from hundreds of
Norwegian cell manufacturer Freyr is adopting171 among others172. cells for A-samples to tens of thousands for C-samples. The type of
While 24M’s technology is being commercially adopted, it is notable tests required includes performance and safety, with the latter being a
that a major cell manufacturer has not licensed the technology but is strict requirement at any stage. Tests are also rigorously defined in
instead being commercialized by a battery cell manufacturing start-up standards, guidelines and regulations (such as by the International
company, presenting venture on venture risk and reducing the like- Electrotechnical Commission, IEC 62660, by the United Nations,
lihood of commercial deployments to some extent. In some respects, UN38.3, UN ECE R100181,183) or routine testing (e.g., United States
this should be expected for large-step changes in manufacturing, as Advanced Battery Consortium LLC, USABC, guidelines)184. It is essential
established companies are typically more risk-averse than small start- to understand that most actors, academic or industrial, particularly
ups. The promise of leapfrogging incumbents and gaining market during the initial stage (where start-up companies are usually
share is often reason enough for a start-up to take on this involved), lack the resources to accurately carry out these tests or
technology risk. enter the supplier qualification step for the automotive segment. A
Start-up companies such as EnPower and Addionics are also in the lack of appropriate process control can also result in manufacturing
process of scaling and commercializing their proprietary electrode defects, potentially leading to costly product recalls2,185.
designs. These companies claim their products would enable the
development of simultaneous high-power and energy devices. How- Summary and recommendations
ever, Addionics is yet to start large-scale pilot production (>100 Taking into account all the various aspects of battery research dis-
MWh)173, and EnPower is having to scale pilot production internally to cussed in this perspective article, we summarize below the main take-
provide the volume of batteries required for customer qualification, home messages that we hope could be useful for expert, non-expert,
requiring significant CapEx investment from the company174. academic and industrial researchers when evaluating claims in the field
Finally, series, or bipolar, stacking175 is being actively researched of lithium-based secondary batteries and, energy storage research in
and scaled-up by companies such as ProLogium176 and Toyota177. general.
Advantages can include better thermal and electrical properties, and Remarkable improvements to cost and performance in lithium-
reduced packaging but at the expense of a more complex manu- based batteries owe just as much to innovation at the cell, system and
facturing process and system design. supply chain level as to materials development. Battery development is
The biggest system design adopted commercially over recent an interdisciplinary technical area with a complex value chain. For
years is the so-called “cell-to-pack” design, such as BYD’s Blade Battery. academic research to provide the largest benefit to these sectors, there
These systems have been quickly adopted as they improve perfor- needs to be collaboration across disciplines, with the industry actively
mance but do not fundamentally alter the chemistry of cells or require advising academia on specific end-customer requirements. This could
radically new manufacturing processes. be fostered, for example, by supporting industrial researchers taking
shared positions with academia, encouraging industrial researchers to
Qualification of parts in the automotive industry. Even with a mature publish more peer-reviewed papers, and increasing academic repre-
value chain, supplying parts to the automotive industry is non-trivial, sentation at industry conferences (and vice versa).
and the process can be time-consuming. Suppliers who wish to engage Metrics are important, but which metrics matter and how they
with the automotive industry must undergo a standardized, rigid translate from theory to system is case-dependent. A clear considera-
qualification process, which is regulated at the international level (see, tion of the bigger picture is vital for effective applied research. We have
e.g., International Automotive Task Force, IATF 16949178). The most evidenced how the high theoretical energy density/specific energy of a
common automotive standards for part qualification are the German positive electrode active material, like NCA, does not necessarily
Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA) production process and pro- translate to higher performance at the pack level. Many KPIs need to be
duct approval (PPA)179 and the Automotive Industry Action Group considered when scaling a material, as a battery with high energy and
(AIAG) Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)180. low cycle life could have limited applications. All KPIs need to be
Some considerations for serving the auto industry are discussed evaluated for devices at high TRL, and manufacturing itself can be the
in the literature181, with guidelines available from governmental and biggest challenge, particularly when innovative technologies are not
automotive standard bodies182. For example, let us consider the supply “drop-in”. In cell developer QuantumScape’s recent earnings call, when
of Li-ion battery cells to an automotive OEM for integration into a asked if the company needed to make perfectly uniform and totally
battery pack. In this case, battery cell suppliers, such as Samsung SDI, defect-free solid-electrolyte-based separators for its cells to work, CEO
CATL, and LG Energy Solution, are expected to reliably supply safe, Jagdeep Singh hinted at these challenges when he replied, “the key is
high-quality parts with minimum rejects, i.e., in a batch of cells sup- knowing which defects matter and which ones don’t and to focus on
plied to an automotive customer, where less than 10 cells in a million the former”186.
(10 ppm) could be defective. Parts need to be rigorously tested using Moving up in the TRL scale is an increasingly expensive and
robust processes. complex task. The ability to reach TRL 9 requires an understanding of
Following VDA guidelines182, qualification for new cells would start many requirements and a quick transition across lower TRLs. It is easy
at the A-sample, a prototype cell at TRL 5. The A-sample cell does not to over-simplify the factors involved in commercialising a technology,
need to be series produced, but it must be safe, functional, and close to subject to a vast and continuously changing global industry that
the final design both in terms of performance and geometry: cell naturally introduces uncertainty into economic viability. It is perhaps
footprint and size are fixed. This prototype can compromise on life- too easy for academic researchers to be overly optimistic about the
time and performance but should satisfy most of the requirements to ability of a certain technology to scale based on, for example, pre-
lead to the qualification of B-samples, where the cell design is unal- liminary performance data or raw materials costs, unaware of the
terable. Past the B-sample stage, the focus is on manufacturing. A exponentially increasing requirements on resources required to bring
larger number of trial modules/packs are assembled, and cells are a new technology to market. This is perhaps best exemplified by Tesla’s
series produced, which constitutes the C-sample stage (TRL 6). Finally, chief executive officer Elon Musk’s comments regarding “the machine

that builds the machine”, which references the difficulties companies In this regard, we consider the growth of the online battery
face in manufacturing at scale187. community during COVID−19 as an encouraging development. Hybrid
Hype, over-extrapolation and perverse incentives only risk harm conferences can be effective forums for experts and non-experts to
to the sector in the long run, and all participants should take respon- engage with each other and acquire a broader view. Open, inclusive,
sibility for fostering good communication and best practices. Within and cost-effective initiatives should be incentivized, starting from free
academia and industry alike, the battery field has unfortunately culti- access to scientific research and including accessible communication
vated a reputation for hype, false promises and unrealistic goals. Many platforms with academic and non-academic participation, such as the
other scientific areas have had to grapple with reproducibility or sci- Battery Modelling Webinar Series189, Battery Brunch190, and Battery
entific integrity crises in recent years, brought on by shortcomings Pub191. However, these initiatives come with some challenges and
which can just as easily be found in the battery scientific literature. In limitations, such as (i) a risk that misinformation may spread (mod-
this regard, the whole battery research community must support erators are needed); (ii) open data can be misused by entities with a
initiatives such as the adoption of standardised testing protocols, conflict of interest or misinterpreted by non-experts; (iii) risk of
standardisation of data collection, and requirement of publishing raw communities becoming self-referential;192 (iv) confidentiality issues,
data. Such developments promote transparency and transferability of where researchers working closely with industry can be restricted by
knowledge, especially considering the increasing importance of non-disclosure agreements. In addition, many scientists have found
research approaches based on machine learning or, more broadly, social media platforms, such as Twitter or LinkedIn, valuable venues
artificial intelligence. for networking and outreach193.
In particular, we strongly recommend that battery researchers A more rigorous approach to science is ultimately needed.
keep in mind the following aspects to improve material development The end goal should be accelerating innovations that directly
without neglecting the practical application aspect: improve battery systems and increasing the number of relevant,
1. The electrolyte effectively sets the electrochemical energy sto- reproducible, and openly accessible peer-reviewed scientific
rage system boundaries, including safety and cycle life, and articles. This is particularly important considering that the
electrolyte development is an exercise in compromise. For amount of time and non-time resources needed to drive the
example, cost has to be balanced with electrochemical stability energy transition are finite194.
and ionic conductivity. Improvements in cycle life are key for Nowadays, there is too much research that confuses, rather than
most applications, and research on new electrolyte systems adds to, progress, and we need joint action from stakeholders, indus-
should be incentivised. try, academia, and publishers to solve this issue. Resources should not
2. In recent years, the focus of the industry, and particularly auto- be squandered on the basis of (often unknowingly, potentially in good
makers, has been on achieving a step change in energy density, faith) biased and/or unreliable studies or well-sounding press releases.
which has sharpened the focus on introducing or switching to Indeed, a more critical, engineering-led, numerical, and transparent
silicon and lithium metal negative electrodes, thus, necessitating a approach to scientific research is certainly required.
re-thinking of cell design. These new concepts must, of course, As a closing message, the reader should bear in mind that trans-
meet minimum performance requirements. However, the con- parency is a key requirement, and the lack of adequate, impartial, and
tinued improvement to what could be considered ‘legacy’ battery exhaustive communication is usually the main reason for the divide
concepts, as well as increasing raw material costs, have seen some between academia and industry or, more broadly, for the failure of
companies achieving competitive performance from such ‘legacy’ collaborative research activities.
systems as graphite | |LFP batteries. Further improvements in
these battery systems could open up the possibility of business Data availability
model innovations, such as vehicle-to-grid (V2G) integration. Data is fully available on request from the authors
3. Targets in terms of cost reduction and increased energy and
lifetime can also be achieved with incremental improvements, References
e.g., by refining pack design and manufacturing processes such as 1. Raccichini, R., Qiao, M. & Dongare, P. The journey of an electrifying
BYD’s Blade battery and pack, but also active and inactive mate- (r)evolution. Nat. Commun. 12, 4153 (2021).
rials, e.g., electrolyte and additive optimisation as highlighted by 2. Blomgren, G. E. The development and future of lithium ion bat-
Professor Jeff Dahn (Dalhousie University)188. teries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 164, A5019–A5025 (2017).
4. Positive electrode active materials generally differentiate lithium- 3. Yoshino, A. The birth of the lithium-ion battery. Angew. Chem. - Int.
based batteries, and choice is driven as much by cost as by Ed. 51, 5798–5800 (2012).
performance; this is likely to continue in the short to medium 4. Mayer, S. T., Feikert, J. H. & Kaschmitter, J. L. Cycle Life Testing of
term. In the future, negative electrode material choice could lithium-Ion Batteries for Small Satellite LEO Space Missions. AIAA
similarly differentiate these batteries. Conference on Small Satellites https://www.osti.gov/servlets/
purl/10191068 (1993).
We would also remark on the strategic role of the supply chain. 5. Waldmann, T., Scurtu, R.-G., Richter, K. & Wohlfahrt-Mehrens, M.
This area is crucial in reducing cost and improving lithium-based bat- 18650 vs. 21700 Li-ion cells – A direct comparison of electro-
teries’ performance while strongly influencing the manufacturing and chemical, thermal, and geometrical properties. J. Power Sources
material production processes. Another equally important area is the 472, 228614 (2020).
need for data-driven environmental sustainability analysis, such as life 6. Nelson, P. A., Ahmed, S., Gallagher, K. G. & Dees, D. W. Modeling
cycle assessments, to understand the environmental impact of bat- the Performance and Cost of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric-Drive
teries from raw-material mining to recycling. Vehicles, Third Edition. http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/
As an increasing number of researchers with various scientific and 1503280/ (2019) https://doi.org/10.2172/1503280.
technical backgrounds turn their focus to the battery industry, it is 7. Ziegler, M. S. & Trancik, J. E. Re-examining rates of lithium-ion
important that they acquire a broader view of the research and battery technology improvement and cost decline. Energy
development landscape across the sector, not narrowing their vision to Environ. Sci. 14, 1635–1651 (2021).
only focus on their field of expertise. In doing so, it is possible to avoid 8. Kittner, N., Lill, F. & Kammen, D. M. Energy storage deployment
reaching misleading or ineffective conclusions that fail to advance the and innovation for the clean energy transition. Nat. Energy 2,
scientific understanding and progress of lithium-based batteries. 17125 (2017).

9. Ulissi, U. & Raccichini, R. Past, present, and future of electro- 32. Leapmotor. Leapmotor’s First Mass Production Model with CTC
chemical energy storage: A brief perspective. in 1–28 (2021). Technology, February 25, 2022. https://en.leapmotor.com/
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821434-3.00013-2. NewsRooms/news (2022).
10. McKerracher, C. Electric Vehicle Outlook 2022. Bloomberg New 33. Nölle, R. et al. A reality check and tutorial on electrochemical
Energy Finance https://about.newenergyfinance.com/electric- characterization of battery cell materials: How to choose the
vehicle-outlook/ (2022). appropriate cell setup. Mater. Today 32, 131–146 (2020).
11. IEA. Global EV Outlook 2022. IEA https://www.iea.org/reports/ 34. Williams, B. The father of the lithium-ion battery has a new design
global-ev-outlook-2022 (2022). that’s 3 times better. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/father-
12. Winter, M., Barnett, B. & Xu, K. Before Li-Ion Batteries. Chem. Rev. lithium-ion-battery-design-171913448.html (2017).
118, 11433–11456 (2018). 35. Cater, H. A spoonful of sugar opens a path to longer lasting lithium
13. Lacey, M. Cell Library. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ sulfur batteries. https://www.monash.edu/news/articles/a-
1uWUVmBCZ0_JTJ6E_bX5sBMGP0JEabwcorVHmc6S3tZE/. spoonful-of-sugar-opens-a-path-to-longer-lasting-lithium-sulfur-
14. Ziegler, M. S., Song, J. & Trancik, J. E. Determinants of lithium-ion batteries (2021).
battery technology cost decline. Energy Environ. Sci. 14, 36. Braga, M. H., Grundish, N. S., Murchison, A. J. & Goodenough, J. B.
6074–6098 (2021). Alternative strategy for a safe rechargeable battery. Energy
15. Ahmed, S., Nelson, P. A., Gallagher, K. G., Susarla, N. & Dees, D. W. Environ. Sci. 10, 331–336 (2017).
Cost and energy demand of producing nickel manganese cobalt 37. University of Texas. Lithium-ion battery inventor introduces new
cathode material for lithium-ion batteries. J. Power Sources 342, technology for fast-charging, noncombustible batteries. https://
733–740 (2017). news.utexas.edu/2017/02/28/goodenough-introduces-new-
16. Shanghai Metals Market (SMM). https://www.metal.com/. battery-technology/ (2017).
17. Yang, X.-G., Liu, T. & Wang, C.-Y. Thermally modulated lithium iron 38. Hanghofer, I. et al. Untangling the structure and dynamics of
phosphate batteries for mass-market electric vehicles. Nat. Energy lithium-rich anti-perovskites envisaged as solid electrolytes for
6, 176–185 (2021). batteries. Chem. Mater. 30, 8134–8144 (2018).
18. Wentker, M., Greenwood, M. & Leker, J. A bottom-up approach to 39. Steingart, D. A. & Viswanathan, V. Comment on “Alternative
lithium-ion battery cost modeling with a focus on cathode active strategy for a safe rechargeable battery” by M. H. Braga, N. S.
materials. Energies 12, 504 (2019). Grundish, A. J. Murchison and J. B. Goodenough, Energy Environ.
19. Ue, M., Sakaushi, K. & Uosaki, K. Basic knowledge in battery Sci., 2017, 10, 331–336. Energy Environ. Sci. 11, 221–222 (2018).
research bridging the gap between academia and industry. Mater. 40. A checklist for photovoltaic research. Nat. Mater. 14,
Horiz. 7, 1937–1954 (2020). An excellent paper that aims at 1073–1073 (2015).
bridging the gap between industrial and academic research, 41. Stephan, A. K. Standardized Battery Reporting Guidelines. Joule 5,
describes several technological parameters required for 1–2 (2021). This editorial, and the related battery checklist, is an
industrially relevant battery development. example of an essential move towards more transparent
20. Greenwood, M. et al. The Battery Component Readiness Level reporting of data.
(BC-RL) framework: A technology-specific development frame- 42. Arbizzani, C. et al. Good practice guide for papers on super-
work. J. Power Sources Adv. 14, 100089 (2022). capacitors and related hybrid capacitors for the Journal of Power
21. Liu, J. et al. Pathways for practical high-energy long-cycling Sources. J. Power Sources 450, 227636 (2020).
lithium metal batteries. Nat. Energy 4, 180–186 (2019). 43. Li, J. et al. Good practice guide for papers on batteries for the
22. Johansson, P. et al. Ten ways to fool the masses when presenting Journal of Power Sources. J. Power Sources 452, 227824 (2020).
battery research**. Batter. Supercaps 4, 1785–1788 (2021). 44. Mistry, A. et al. A minimal information set to enable verifiable
23. Pohlmann, S. Metrics and methods for moving from research to theoretical battery research. ACS Energy Lett. 6,
innovation in energy storage. Nat. Commun. 13, 1538 3831–3835 (2021).
(2022). 45. Cao, Y., Li, M., Lu, J., Liu, J. & Amine, K. Bridging the academic and
24. Zampardi, G. & La Mantia, F. Open challenges and good experi- industrial metrics for next-generation practical batteries. Nat.
mental practices in the research field of aqueous Zn-ion batteries. Nanotechnol. 14, 200–207 (2019).
Nat. Commun. 13, 687 (2022). 46. Clark, S. et al. Toward a unified description of battery data. Adv.
25. LeVine, S. Powerhouse, The: America, China and the Great Battery Energy Mater. 12, 2102702 (2022).
War. (Penguin Books, 2016). 47. Battery Archive—Resources. https://www.batteryarchive.org/
26. Collingridge, J. Sir James Dyson writes off £46m on battery maker resources.html.
Sakti3. The Sunday Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sir- 48. Shahrooei, A. Comparison of open datasets for lithium-ion battery
james-dyson-writes-off-46m-on-battery-maker-sakti3- testing. BatteryBits https://medium.com/batterybits/comparison-
qqws7j3sk (2018). of-open-datasets-for-lithium-ion-battery-testing-
27. Choi, J. W. & Aurbach, D. Promise and reality of post-lithium-ion fd0de091ca2 (2020).
batteries with high energy densities. Nat. Rev. Mater. 1, 49. Price, J. H. & Murnan, J. Research limitations and the necessity of
16013 (2016). reporting them. Am. J. Heal. Educ. 35, 66–67 (2004).
28. Eshetu, G. G. et al. Production of high-energy Li-ion batteries 50. Theofanidis, D. & Fountouki, A. Limitations and delimitations in the
comprising silicon-containing anodes and insertion-type cath- research process. Perioper. Nurs. 7, 155–162 (2018).
odes. Nat. Commun. 12, 5459 (2021). 51. Volta, A. On the electricity excited by the mere contact of con-
29. Tesla. 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Battery Day—22 ducting substances of different kinds. In a letter from Mr. Alex-
September 2020. https://www.tesla.com/en_gb/ ander Volta, F. R. S. Professor of Natural Philosophy in the
2020shareholdermeeting (2020). University of Pavia, to the Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph Banks, Bart. K.B. P. R.
30. CATL. EV battery technology innovation promotes comprehensive Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 90, 403–431 (1800). XVII.
electrification. https://www.catl.com/en/news/913.html (2022). 52. Xu, K. Electrolytes and interphases in Li-ion batteries and beyond.
31. BYD. BYD’s CTB technology makes its world premiere, and the first Chem. Rev. 114, 11503–11618 (2014). This review paper, and similar
model, the Seal, opens for pre-sale at the same time! https://mp. manuscripts and books published by Dr Xu, are invaluable,
weixin.qq.com/s/VgI2SvlROoW-0jMZY92lJw (2022). industrially relevant sources of information for electrolyte R&D.

53. Jow, T. R., Xu, K., Borodin, O. & Ue, M. Electrolytes for Lithium and 77. Duan, Y. et al. Research progress and prospect in typical sulfide
Lithium-Ion Batteries. 58 (Springer New York, 2014). solid-state electrolytes. J. Energy Storage 55, 105382 (2022).
54. Haregewoin, A. M., Wotango, A. S. & Hwang, B.-J. Electrolyte 78. Kim, K. J., Balaish, M., Wadaguchi, M., Kong, L. & Rupp, J. L. M.
additives for lithium ion battery electrodes: progress and per- Solid‐state Li–metal batteries: challenges and horizons of oxide
spectives. Energy Environ. Sci. 9, 1955–1988 (2016). and sulfide solid electrolytes and their interfaces. Adv. Energy
55. Xu, K. Nonaqueous liquid electrolytes for lithium-based Mater. 11, 2002689 (2021).
rechargeable batteries. Chem. Rev. 104, 4303–4417 (2004). 79. Zhu, Y., He, X. & Mo, Y. Origin of outstanding stability in the lithium
56. Johns, P. A., Roberts, M. R., Wakizaka, Y., Sanders, J. H. & Owen, J. solid electrolyte materials: insights from thermodynamic analyses
R. How the electrolyte limits fast discharge in nanostructured based on first-principles calculations. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces
batteries and supercapacitors. Electrochem. Commun. 11, 7, 23685–23693 (2015).
2089–2092 (2009). 80. Connell, J. G. et al. Kinetic versus thermodynamic stability of LLZO
57. Gauthier, M. et al. Electrode–electrolyte interface in li-ion bat- in contact with lithium metal. Chem. Mater. 32,
teries: current understanding and new insights. J. Phys. Chem. 10207–10215 (2020).
Lett. 6, 4653–4672 (2015). 81. Ye, L. et al. Toward higher voltage solid‐state batteries by
58. Peled, E. & Menkin, S. Review—SEI: Past, present and future. J. metastability and kinetic stability design. Adv. Energy Mater. 10,
Electrochem. Soc. 164, A1703–A1719 (2017). 2001569 (2020).
59. Wang, H. et al. Liquid electrolyte: The nexus of practical lithium 82. Popovic, J. The importance of electrode interfaces and interphases
metal batteries. Joule 6, 588–616 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j. for rechargeable metal batteries. Nat. Commun. 12, 6240 (2021).
joule.2021.12.018. 83. Mauger, A., Julien, C. M., Goodenough, J. B. & Zaghib, K. Tribute to
60. Ge, M. et al. Recent advances in silicon‐based electrodes: from Michel Armand: from Rocking Chair – Li-ion to solid-state lithium
fundamental research toward practical applications. Adv. Mater. batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 167, 070507 (2020).
33, 2004577 (2021). 84. Motavalli, J. Technology: A solid future. Nature 526,
61. Li, W., Song, B. & Manthiram, A. High-voltage positive electrode S96–S97 (2015).
materials for lithium-ion batteries. Chem. Soc. Rev. 46, 85. Werwitzke, C. “Actually, we are the pioneer of solid-state battery”.
3006–3059 (2017). https://www.electrive.com/2021/03/03/actually-we-are-the-
62. Fan, X. & Wang, C. High-voltage liquid electrolytes for Li batteries: pioneer-of-solid-state-battery/ (2021).
progress and perspectives. Chem. Soc. Rev. 50, 86. Weiss, M. et al. From liquid- to solid-state batteries: ion transfer
10486–10566 (2021). kinetics of heteroionic interfaces. Electrochem. Energy Rev. 3,
63. Ue, M. & Uosaki, K. Recent progress in liquid electrolytes for 221–238 (2020).
lithium metal batteries. Curr. Opin. Electrochem. 17, 87. He, S. et al. Design of a dual-electrolyte battery system based on a
106–113 (2019). high-energy NCM811-Si/C full battery electrode-compatible
64. Li, M., Wang, C., Chen, Z., Xu, K. & Lu, J. New Concepts in Elec- electrolyte. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13, 54069–54078 (2021).
trolytes. Chem. Rev. 120, 6783–6819 (2020). 88. Kane, M. 24M’s dual electrolyte system to enable 350 Wh/kg
65. Cuberg. Cuberg’s Cell technology reaches new major perfor- batteries. https://insideevs.com/news/343492/24ms-dual-
mance milestone for lithium metal battery development. https:// electrolyte-system-to-enable-350-wh-kg-batteries/ (2019).
cuberg.net/news/cuberg-lithium-metal-external-cell-cycle-life- 89. Obrovac, M. N. & Chevrier, V. L. Alloy negative electrodes for Li-ion
validation (2022). batteries. Chem. Rev. 114, 11444–11502 (2014). This review paper
66. Sapunkov, O., Pande, V., Khetan, A., Choomwattana, C. & Viswa- highlights the importance of considering volume as a key
nathan, V. Quantifying the promise of ‘beyond’ Li-ion batteries. variable when considering negative electrode active materials,
Transl. Mater. Res. 2, 045002 (2015). particularly alloy-type.
67. Varzi, A., Raccichini, R., Passerini, S. & Scrosati, B. Challenges and 90. Xie, J. & Lu, Y.-C. A retrospective on lithium-ion batteries. Nat.
prospects of the role of solid electrolytes in the revitalization of Commun. 11, 2499 (2020).
lithium metal batteries. J. Mater. Chem. A 4, 17251–17259 (2016). 91. Schmuch, R., Wagner, R., Hörpel, G., Placke, T. & Winter, M. Per-
68. Janek, J. & Zeier, W. G. A solid future for battery development. Nat. formance and cost of materials for lithium-based rechargeable
Energy 1, 16141 (2016). automotive batteries. Nat. Energy 3, 267–278 (2018).
69. Randau, S. et al. Benchmarking the performance of all-solid-state 92. Ruoff, C. Tesla tweaks its battery chemistry: a closer look at silicon
lithium batteries. Nat. Energy 5, 259–270 (2020). anode development. https://chargedevs.com/features/tesla-
70. Wu, T., Dai, W., Ke, M., Huang, Q. & Lu, L. All‐solid‐state thin film μ‐ tweaks-its-battery-chemistry-a-closer-look-at-silicon-anode-
batteries for microelectronics. Adv. Sci. 8, 2100774 (2021). development/ (2015).
71. Laszczyk, K. U. & Kobashi, K. Microbatteries. in Micro- 93. Schmid, R. & Pillot, C. Introduction to energy storage with market
supercapacitors 193–203 (Elsevier, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/ analysis and outlook. in AIP Conference Proceedings 1597, 3–13
B978-0-08-102888-9.00011-2. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4878476.
72. Liu, Y., Zhang, R., Wang, J. & Wang, Y. Current and future lithium- 94. Zhao, L. et al. Revisiting the roles of natural graphite in ongoing
ion battery manufacturing. iScience 24, 102332 (2021). lithium‐ion batteries. Adv. Mater. 34, 2106704 (2022).
73. Beard, K. W. Linden’s Handbook of Batteries, Fifth Edition. 95. Ohta, N., Nagaoka, K., Hoshi, K., Bitoh, S. & Inagaki, M. Carbon-
(McGraw-Hill Education, 2019). coated graphite for anode of lithium ion rechargeable batteries:
74. Suzuki, N., Watanabe, T., Fujiki, S. & Aihara, Y. Solid‐State Batteries Graphite substrates for carbon coating. J. Power Sources 194,
with Inorganic Electrolytes. in Encyclopedia of Electrochemistry 985–990 (2009).
1–62 (Wiley, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527610426. 96. Odziomek, M. et al. Hierarchically structured lithium titanate for
bard110015. ultrafast charging in long-life high capacity batteries. Nat. Com-
75. Hitachi Zosen. All-solid-state Lithium-ion Batteries. https://www. mun. 8, 15636 (2017).
hitachizosen.co.jp/english/business/field/functional/as-lib.html. 97. Toshiba. Next-generation SCiBTM supporting smart mobility in the
76. Bai, X. et al. Key issues and emerging trends in sulfide all solid age of MaaS. https://www.global.toshiba/ww/products-
state lithium battery. Energy Storage Mater. 51, 527–549 solutions/battery/scib/next/nto.html.
(2022). 98. Echion Technologies. https://echiontech.com/ (2022).

99. Nyobolt. https://nyobolt.com/ (2022). corporate-announcements/amprius-silicon-nanowire-lithium-ion-

100. Geary, H. Echion and iElectrolyte demonstrate li-ion battery cells batteries-power-airbus-zephyr-s-haps-solar-aircraft (2018).
with ultra-long cycle life. https://echiontech.com/echion- 117. Guo, J. et al. Silicon‐based lithium ion battery systems: state‐of‐
ielectrolyte-demonstrate-ultra-long-life-li-ion-cells/ (2022). the‐art from half and full cell viewpoint. Adv. Funct. Mater. 31,
101. Griffith, K. J., Wiaderek, K. M., Cibin, G., Marbella, L. E. & Grey, C. P. 2102546 (2021).
Niobium tungsten oxides for high-rate lithium-ion energy storage. 118. Jin, L. et al. Pre‐lithiation strategies for next‐generation practical
Nature 559, 556–563 (2018). lithium‐ion batteries. Adv. Sci. 8, 2005031 (2021).
102. Sanz, J., Tomasa, O., Sidki-Rius, N. & Sidki-Rius, N. Niobium (Nb) 119. Enevate. Enevate Technology. https://www.enevate.com/
[Z = 41]. Elements and Mineral Resources 147–150 (2022). https:// technology/hd-energy-technology-overview/ (2022).
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85889-6_36. 120. LeydenJar. LeydenJar Technology. https://leyden-jar.com/
103. Nzeh, N. S., Popoola, A. P. I., Adeleke, A. A. & Adeosun, S. O. technology/ (2022).
Factors and challenges in the recovery of niobium and tantalum 121. Amprius. Amprius Technology. https://amprius.com/technology
from mineral deposits, recommendations for future development (2022).
– A review. Mater. Today Proc. (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 122. OneD Battery Science Sinanode. https://onedsinanode.com/
matpr.2022.06.034. sinanode/ (2022).
104. Whittingham, M. S. History, evolution, and future status of energy 123. Chae, S., Choi, S., Kim, N., Sung, J. & Cho, J. Integration of graphite
storage. Proc. IEEE 100, 1518–1534 (2012). and silicon anodes for the commercialization of high‐energy
105. Lain, M., Brandon, J. & Kendrick, E. Design strategies for high lithium‐ion batteries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 59, 110–135 (2020).
power vs. high energy lithium ion cells. Batteries 5, 64 124. Louli, A. J. et al. Diagnosing and correcting anode-free cell failure
(2019). via electrolyte and morphological analysis. Nat. Energy 5,
106. Chen, C.-H. et al. Development of experimental techniques for 693–702 (2020).
parameterization of multi-scale lithium-ion battery models. J. 125. Louli, A. J. et al. Different positive electrodes for anode-free lithium
Electrochem. Soc. 167, 080534 (2020). metal cells. J. Electrochem. Soc. 169, 040517 (2022).
107. Sang-Min, L., Goo-Jin, J., Sung-Soo, K. & Yoshiaki, N. Negative 126. Iaboni, D. S. M. & Obrovac, M. N. Li 15 Si 4 formation in silicon thin
active material for a rechargeable lithium battery, a method of film negative electrodes. J. Electrochem. Soc. 163,
preparing the same, and a rechargeable lithium battery compris- A255–A261 (2016).
ing the same. US20130177813A1 (2004). 127. Niu, C. et al. High-energy lithium metal pouch cells with limited
108. GAC Motor. GAC MOTOR Brand Values | Understanding ‘Tech- anode swelling and long stable cycles. Nat. Energy 4,
nology Innovation’. https://www.prnewswire.com/ru/press- 551–559 (2019).
releases/gac-motor-brand-values-understanding-technology- 128. Wu, X. et al. Safety Issues in lithium ion batteries: materials and
innovation–841381795.html (2021). cell design. Front. Energy Res. 7, 65 (2019).
109. Choi, M. & Umicore. Charting the Development of Silicon Anode 129. Grady, H. R. Lithium metal for the battery industry. J. Power
Materials for Lithium-Ion Batteries and Rise in Investment and Sources 5, 127–135 (1980).
Manufacture. https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2022- 130. Duffner, F. et al. Post-lithium-ion battery cell production and its
05-26/the-battery-show-europe-reveals-conference-agenda-feat- compatibility with lithium-ion cell production infrastructure. Nat.
100-speakers-from-freyr-northvolt-solid-power-volkswagen- Energy 6, 123–134 (2021).
daimler (2022). 131. Yasunami, S., Honjo, H., Honjo, K. & Saito, K. Manufacture of
110. Vidal, D. et al. Si–C/G based anode swelling and porosity evolution lithium metal foil or lithium alloy foil. JPH1058007A (1996).
in 18650 casing and in pouch cell. J. Power Sources 514, 132. Albertus, P., Babinec, S., Litzelman, S. & Newman, A. Status and
230552 (2021). challenges in enabling the lithium metal electrode for high-energy
111. Renault Nissan Mitsubishi. Alliance Ventures invests in Enevate to and low-cost rechargeable batteries. Nat. Energy 3, 16–21
advance li-ion battery technology for electric vehicles. https:// (2018). This paper provides excellent guidelines for practical
alliancernm.com/2022/01/26/alliance-ventures-invests-in- development of cost- and performance-effective lithium metal
enevate-to-advance-li-ion-battery-technology-for-electric- batteries.
vehicles/ (2022). 133. Vanleeuw, D., Sapundjiev, D., Sibbens, G., Oberstedt, S., & Casti-
112. Volvo. Volvo Cars Tech Fund invests in battery technology pio- ñeira, P.S. Physical vapour deposition of metallic lithium. J.
neers StoreDot. https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/en- Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 299, 1113–1120 (2014).
gb/media/pressreleases/298545/volvo-cars-tech-fund-invests- 134. Fu, C. & Gao, Y. Method for preparing thin-layer lithium metal
in-battery-technology-pioneers-storedot (2022). anode for all-solid-state lithium-ion battery based on PVD. https://
113. Mercedes Benz. Mercedes-Benz and Sila achieve breakthrough worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/055676692/
with high silicon automotive battery. https://group-media. publication/CN105489845A?q=CN105489845A (2015).
mercedes-benz.com/marsMediaSite/en/instance/ko/Mercedes- 135. Schönherr, K. et al. Liquid lithium metal processing into ultrathin
Benz-and-Sila-achieve-breakthrough-with-high-silicon- metal anodes for solid state batteries. Chem. Eng. J. Adv. 9,
automotive-battery.xhtml?oid=53292784 (2022). 100218 (2022).
114. Group14 Technologies. Porsche AG Takes the Lead in Group14 136. Livent. Livent Announces LIOVIXTM, a Proprietary Lithium Metal
Technologies $400M Raise to Accelerate Global Production of Product That Can Improve the Performance, Safety and Sustain-
Lithium-Silicon Battery Materials. https://group14.technology/en/ ability of Lithium-Ion Batteries. https://ir.livent.com/news/news-
news/porsche-ag-takes-the-lead-in-group14s-400m-raise-to- details/2021/Livent-Announces-LIOVIX-a-Proprietary-Lithium-
accelerate-global-production-of-lithium-silicon-battery- Metal-Product-That-Can-Improve-the-Performance-Safety-and-
materials (2022). Sustainability-of-Lithium-Ion-Batteries/default.aspx (2021).
115. Sila. How Whoop landed a fancy new battery for its fitness track- 137. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Agreement
ers. https://www.silanano.com/news/how-whoop-landed-a- concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by
fancy-new-battery-for-its-fitness-trackers (2021). Road. https://unece.org/about-adr (2021).
116. Amprius. Amprius’ Silicon Nanowire Lithium Ion Batteries Power 138. International Air Transport Association. Dangerous Goods Reg-
Airbus Zephyr S HAPS Solar Aircraft. https://amprius.com/ ulations. https://www.iata.org/en/programs/cargo/dgr/ (2022).

139. Manthiram, A. A reflection on lithium-ion battery cathode chem- 161. Nano One Materials. Nano One Enters Agreement with Global
istry. Nat. Commun. 11, 1550 (2020). We regard this paper as an Automotive Company to Develop and Evaluate Manganese Rich
excellent technical and historical account of positive electrode Batteries. https://nanoone.ca/news/news-releases/nano-one-
active materials. enters-agreement-with-global-automotive-company-to-develop-
140. Chauhan, A. S., Nepal, B., Soni, G. & Rathore, A. P. S. Examining the and-evaluate-manganese-rich-batteries/ (2021).
state of risk management research in new product development 162. SVOLT. SVOLT NMx. https://www.svolt.cn/en/hexin_cailiao.
process. Eng. Manag. J. 30, 85–97 (2018). php (2021).
141. Wang, K. et al. Recent advances and historical developments of 163. Huang, H.-D. LMFP: The Future of Lithium-Ion Batteries. AABC
high voltage lithium cobalt oxide materials for rechargeable Li-ion Europe 2022, (2022).
batteries. J. Power Sources 460, 228062 (2020). 164. SAFT. A new incubator to energize the future of battery technol-
142. Nissan. Prairie Joy EV National Institute of Polar Research (1998: ogy. https://www.saftbatteries.com/media-resources/our-
PM11rev.). https://www.nissan-global.com/EN/HERITAGE/450_ stories?page=1 (2022).
prairie_joy_ev.html (2022). 165. CATL. February 14, 2022—Investor Relations Activity Record
143. Miao, Y., Hynan, P., von Jouanne, A. & Yokochi, A. Current Li-ion Sheet. https://www.catl.com/uploads/1/file/public/202203/
battery technologies in electric vehicles and opportunities for 20220301092621_t0is4stgfc.pdf (2022).
advancements. Energies 12, 1074 (2019). 166. Zhange, P. CATL’s M3P battery to be put into use next year, says
144. BloombergNEF. Bloomberg Terminal. https://www.bloomberg. chief scientist. https://cnevpost.com/2022/07/22/catls-m3p-
com/professional/solution/bloomberg-terminal/ (2021). battery-to-be-put-into-use-next-year-says-chief-scientist/ (2022).
145. Yamazaki, M. Exclusive: Panasonic aims to boost energy density in 167. Morrow. Morrow and Haldor Topsøe sign binding supply agree-
Tesla batteries by 20% - executive. https://www.reuters.com/ ment for pilot production of cobalt-free material. https://www.
article/us-panasonic-tesla-exclusive-idUSKCN24V1GB morrowbatteries.com/post/morrow-and-haldor-topsoe-sign-
(2020). binding-supply-agreement-for-pilot-production-of-cobalt-free-
146. Lin, R. et al. Hierarchical nickel valence gradient stabilizes high- material (2021).
nickel content layered cathode materials. Nat. Commun. 12, 168. Blome, F. EV Batteries: Challenges for the Mass Market. https://
2350 (2021). www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPXLo03s2sI (2021).
147. SMM. SMM - Lithium Carbonate (99.5% Battery Grade), RMB/mt. 169. Stavridis, J. U.S. Needs a Strong Defense Against China’s Rare-
https://www.metal.com/Chemical-Compound/ Earth Weapon. Bloomberg News https://www.bloomberg.com/
201102250059 (2022). opinion/articles/2021-03-04/u-s-needs-a-strong-defense-against-
148. Ritchie, M. & Stringer, D. Threat of Cobalt Shock Is a Top Risk for china-s-rare-earth-weapon.
Electric Vehicles. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ 170. 2021 Long-Term Electric Vehicle Outlook. https://about.bnef.com/
2018-05-21/threat-of-cobalt-supply-shock-is-top-risk-for-electric- electric-vehicle-outlook/ (2021).
vehicles#xj4y7vzkg. 171. FREYR AS. FREYR Selects 24M as Technology Partner for Mass
149. Robinson, C. BMW the first to confirm Ni-rich NMC 811 cathodes in Production of the Most Cost-competitive, Environmentally
updated X1 PHEV for China. https://members.luxresearchinc. Friendly and Safe Battery Cells. https://news.cision.com/freyr/r/
com/research/news_commentary/31559?hsp=true (2019). freyr-selects-24m-as-technology-partner-for-mass-production-
150. Fastmarkets. FOCUS: What’s the impact of China’s 2019 EV sub- of-the-most-cost-competitive–environmen,c3238150 (2020).
sidy policy? https://www.fastmarkets.com/insights/focus-whats- 172. Kane, M. GPSC To Build Battery Plant In Thailand For 24M Semi-
the-impact-of-chinas-2019-ev-subsidy-policy (2019). Solid Tech. https://insideevs.com/news/399802/gpsc-solid-
151. BYD. BYD ANNOUNCES ALL ITS PURE EVS WILL NOW COME WITH state-battery-24m/ (2020).
BLADE BATTERIES. https://en.byd.com/news/byd-announces-all- 173. Addionics. Addionics Technology. https://www.addionics.com/
its-pure-evs-will-now-come-with-blade-batteries/ (2021). technology (2022).
152. Volkswagen. Volkswagen Power Day. https://www. 174. EnPower. EnPower Announces U.S. Li-ion Battery Manufacturing
volkswagenag.com/en/events/2021/Volkswagen_Power_Day. Facility. https://www.enpowerinc.com/us-lithium-ion-battery-
html (2021). manufacturing-facility/ (2021).
153. Gent, W. E., Busse, G. M. & House, K. Z. The predicted persistence 175. Xu, L. et al. Toward the scale‐up of solid‐state lithium metal bat-
of cobalt in lithium-ion batteries. Nat. Energy https://doi.org/10. teries: the gaps between lab‐level cells and practical large‐format
1038/s41560-022-01129-z (2022). batteries. Adv. Energy Mater. 11, 2002360 (2021).
154. Green Car Congress. Solid Power unveils all-solid-state platform 176. ProLogium Technology. Prologium Products. https://prologium.
technology, transitions silicon cells to pilot line. https://www. com/products/.
greencarcongress.com/2021/05/20210525-solidpower. 177. Toyota Motor Corporation. Toyota to Launch All-New Aqua.
html (2021). https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/toyota/35584064.html#
155. Takada, K. Lithium iron sulfide as an electrode material in a solid bipolar.
state lithium battery. Solid State Ion. 117, 273–276 (1999). 178. International Automotive Task Force. International Automotive Task
156. Ulissi, U. et al. High capacity all-solid-state lithium batteries Force, IATF 16949. https://www.iatfglobaloversight.org/ (2016).
enabled by pyrite-sulfur composites. Adv. Energy Mater. 1801462 179. Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA). Securing the Quality of
(2018) https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.201801462. Supplies, Production process and product approval (PPA). https://
157. Wang, L. et al. Li-free cathode materials for high energy density webshop.vda.de/QMC/en/e-book-volume-2-ppa_042020_
lithium. Batteries. Joule 3, 2086–2102 (2019). eng (2020).
158. BloombergNEF. BloombergNEF, Lithium-Ion Batteries: State of the 180. Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG). Production Part
Industry 2021. https://www.bnef.com/insights/27271 (2021). Approval Process (PPAP) Manual. https://www.aiag.org/quality/
159. Li, W. et al. Enabling high areal capacity for Co-free high voltage automotive-core-tools/ppap (2006).
spinel materials in next-generation Li-ion batteries. J. Power 181. The Handbook of Lithium-Ion Battery Pack Design. (Elsevier, 2015).
Sources 473, 228579 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/C2013-0-23144-5.
160. Haldor Topsoe. Haldor Topsøe Battery Materials. https://www. 182. VDA QMC Publications. Maturity Level Assurance for new Parts
topsoe.com/processes/battery-materials (2021). https://vdaqmc.de/en/publications/ (2022).

183. Castillo, E. C. Standards for electric vehicle batteries and asso- Matilda Klett, and Pontus Svens at Scania CV AB for valuable discus-
ciated testing procedures. in Advances in Battery Technologies for sions. J.T.F. would like to acknowledge BloombergNEF, Logan Goldie-
Electric Vehicles 469–494 (Elsevier, 2015). https://doi.org/10. Scot, Albert Cheung, and Daixin Li for their general guidance and for
1016/B978-1-78242-377-5.00018-2. allowing the reproduction of data from BloombergNEF. J.T.F. would also
184. Christophersen, J. P. Battery Test Manual For Electric Vehicles, like to acknowledge the Volta team for continued relevant discussions
Revision 3. (2015) https://doi.org/10.2172/1186745. on the battery industry and technology commercialisation.
185. Park, K. Hyundai’s $900 Million Recall Shows How Costly EVs Can
Be. Bloomberg News https://www.bloomberg.com/news/ Author contributions
articles/2021-02-25/hyundai-s-900-million-recall-shows-ev- J.T.F., M.J.L., and U.U. contributed equally to conceiving and drafting the
glory-is-no-one-way-road (2021). article. Initially, J.T.F. pulled together a portion of the introduction, cost
186. QuantumScape. QuantumScape Corporation’s (QS) CEO Jagdeep discussion on supply chains and positive electrode sections. M.J.L.
Singh on Q2 2022 Results—Earnings Call Transcript. https:// curated the discussion on cell and cell-to-pack, including the analysis
seekingalpha.com/article/4526637-quantumscape-corporations- reported in the supplementary information sections. U.U. composed
qs-ceo-jagdeep-singh-on-q2-2022-results-earnings-call- part of the introduction, technology readiness, negative electrode, and
transcript%0A (2022). electrolyte sections. All authors reviewed and enriched the discussion in
187. LP. Tesla: Building the machine that builds the machine. https:// each section, with the final manuscript reflecting the view of all the
digital.hbs.edu/platform-rctom/submission/tesla-building-the- authors on each topic. Conclusions were conceived and put down on
machine-that-builds-the-machine/ (2017). paper jointly during meetings.
188. Harlow, J. E. et al. A wide range of testing results on an excellent
lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new Competing interests
battery technologies. J. Electrochem. Soc. 166, J.T.F. works for Volta Energy Technologies, an investor in Solid Power
A3031–A3044 (2019). and OneD Battery Sciences, which is cited in this article. M.J.L. works for
189. Baker, J. A. et al. Fostering a sustainable community in batteries. Scania, which is part of the VW Group. VW Group is an investor in several
ACS Energy Lett. 5, 2361–2366 (2020). companies, including for example QuantumScape, 24M and Group14,
190. Battery Brunch. https://www.batterybrunch.org/ (2022). cited in this article. Scania is an investor in Northvolt, which is an investor
191. Battery Pub. www.batterypub.eu (2022). in Cuberg, cited in this article. U.U. declares no conflict of interest. The
192. Singer, P., Flöck, F., Meinhart, C., Zeitfogel, E. & Strohmaier, M. views expressed in this perspective article are the authors’ views and do
Evolution of reddit. in Proceedings of the 23rd International Con- not necessarily represent the views of the affiliated institutions.
ference on World Wide Web 517–522 (ACM, 2014). https://doi.org/
10.1145/2567948.2576943. Additional information
193. Khoo, E., Lacey, M. J. & DeCaluwe, S. C. Social media platforms for Supplementary information The online version contains
electrochemistry. Electrochem. Soc. Interface https://doi.org/10. supplementary material available at
1149/2.F14194IF (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-35933-2.
194. Turcheniuk, K., Bondarev, D., Singhal, V. & Yushin, G. Ten years left
to redesign lithium-ion batteries. Nature 559, 467–470 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to
(2018). James T. Frith, Matthew J. Lacey or Ulderico Ulissi.
195. Günter, F. J. & Wassiliadis, N. State of the art of Lithium-Ion pouch
cells in automotive applications: cell teardown and characteriza- Peer review information Nature Communications thanks Karim Zaghib,
tion. J. Electrochem. Soc. (2022) https://doi.org/10.1149/1945- and the other anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer
7111/ac4e11. review of this work.
196. Waldmann, T. et al. Review—Post-mortem analysis of aged
lithium-ion batteries: disassembly methodology and physico- Reprints and permissions information is available at
chemical analysis techniques. J. Electrochem. Soc. 163, http://www.nature.com/reprints
A2149–A2164 (2016).
197. Bloomberg NEF. 2021 Lithium-Ion Battery Price Survey. https:// Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jur-
about.bnef.com/blog/battery-pack-prices-fall-to-an-average-of- isdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
132-kwh-but-rising-commodity-prices-start-to-bite/.
198. IEA. Clean Energy Innovation. https://www.iea.org/reports/clean- Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
energy-innovation (2020). Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,
199. Pavia, D. Investing in Building a Strong Pan-European Battery adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as
Industry to Capture a New Market Worth 250B€/Year in 2025. in long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the
Battery Show 2020 (EIT InnoEnergy, 2020). source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if
changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
Acknowledgements article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless
U.U. would like to acknowledge Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. Japanese team, indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
i.e., Tabuchi Yuichiro, Takaichi Satoshi, Hosaka Kenji, Aotani Koichiro, included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended
Kotaka Toshikazu, Nakayama Ken, for the enriching discussions during use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted
the writing process. U.U. would also like to acknowledge Prof. Dan use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright
Steingart from Columbia Engineering for the valuable discussions, holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/
particularly on the lithium and silicon energy contents, and the Rho licenses/by/4.0/.
Motion research analyst team for the valuable discussions during the
manuscript revision. M.J.L. would like to acknowledge David Raymand, © The Author(s) 2023

A Non-Academic Perspective On The Future of Lithium-Based Batteries

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Non-Academic Perspective On The Future of Lithium-Based Batteries

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Non-Academic Perspective On The Future of Lithium-Based Batteries

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Perspective https://doi.org/10.

A non-academic perspective on the future of

Accepted: 9 January 2023

In the ﬁeld of lithium-based batteries, there is often a substantial divide

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 1

TRL 1 – Idea formulated

Estimated Capital Investment

GWh-scale battery manufacturing plant

TRL 7 – EV-grade prototype (Automotive part approval)

problem rather than develop a solution that needs to ﬁnd a problem to

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 2

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 3

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 4

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 5

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 6

silicon) allows for improvements in energy density at the cell level

2–10 wt. %105,106.

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 7

techniques can also be used for pre-lithiation (prior to cell assembly) of

General considerations for negative electrodes. To summarize,

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 8

containing these materials. For high-performance vehicle segments,

Conversion-based positive electrodes. In parallel, a range of positive

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 9

Mine/Smelt The supply chains of oxide-based solid-state electrolytes (e.g.,

Cost forecasting. When developing new technologies, academic

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 10

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 11

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 12

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 13

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 14

99. Nyobolt. https://nyobolt.com/ (2022). corporate-announcements/amprius-silicon-nanowire-lithium-ion-

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 15

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 16

Nature Communications | (2023)14:420 17

You might also like