Research in the United States suggests that lithium-ion batteries, which dominate the market, could hamper other energy-storage technologies

"Technology lock-in is going to be risky," said WilliamBonvillian, one of the study's authors and former director of MIT's Washington office, at a recent event hosted by the information technology and innovation foundation.

Bonvillian said the dominance of lithium-ion batteries in the market could hinder the entry of energy storage technologies that discharge for longer periods. "Some of the technology research that could improve energy storage could run aground," he said.

Technical locking occurs when this dominant storage design presents alternatives that perform the same function. This can be beneficial because it accelerates the innovation process and reduces the cost of the dominant energy storage technology, thereby expanding adoption. This is what has happened to the development of lithium-ion batteries.

According to a recent report by GTMResearch, lithium-ion batteries accounted for 98.8% of the U.S. energy storage market in the fourth quarter of 2017, making the technology the market leader for the 13th consecutive quarter. In another recent report, GTM predicted that the price of storage systems would fall by 8% a year by 2022.

Risk of technical lock-in

Technical lock-in, on the other hand, carries some risks. One risk is that markets become too concentrated. A more worrying risk, the report says, is that technological innovations that could improve energy-storage led designs will get bogged down and never fully mature.

Lithium ion batteries are suitable for electric vehicles and electronic products, but are not necessarily ideal for power grids, the report's authors said. This may prevent the introduction of alternative energy storage technologies that may have longer discharge times, longer cycle life, and greater optimization.

DavidHart is a senior fellow at the foundation for information technology and innovation and one of the authors of the study. There are already two signs, he notes. "The advantages of lithium-ion batteries have made it difficult to implement alternative energy storage technologies, and companies of global scale are expanding production of lithium-ion batteries." Hart said. The world's top five producers of lithium-ion batteries plan to triple production by 2020, according to the report.

Solar cells have a similar development model. Manufacturers of solar-power products have ramped up production of photovoltaic panels, putting pressure on manufacturers of alternative solar technologies and even forcing them out of the market.

In April 2017, two U.S. solar product manufacturers, Suniva and SolarWorld, complained to the U.S. international trade commission (ITC) about such trade practices. In January, the commission announced a 30 percent tariff on foreign photovoltaic panels.

"There are some issues that have happened," Hart said. "our competitors are not playing by the same rules." This refers to the improvement in the manufacturing capacity of lithium-ion batteries in some countries. "The us is not doing a very good job of that, and that puts companies at a competitive disadvantage," he said.

The risks of lithium-ion batteries

In addition, a lot of money has gone into expanding projects to produce lithium-ion batteries, increasing the pressure on competitors to compete on price alone. The lithium ion cost curve is the sum of various other applications, but it is mainly used in electric vehicles and electronic products, so it does not accurately reflect the cost of lithium ion batteries for practical applications.

The cost of utility-scale lithium-ion batteries has some unique characteristics that are not fully reflected in many lithium-ion cost curve projections, said DavidBradwell, co-founder and senior vice President of commercialization and chief technology officer of Ambri, a liquid-flow battery manufacturer.

Mr Bradwell points out that lithium-ion batteries are also vulnerable to the risks of raw materials because they use cobalt, which has recently doubled in price. Nickel could also be used as an alternative, but the trade-off would be to reduce the cycle life of lithium-ion batteries. "" that's fine for electric vehicle applications, but it doesn't apply to grid applications." " Bradwell said.

Other energy storage technologies

Many types of energy storage technologies are mentioned in the MIT research paper, such as compressed air energy storage and kinetic energy storage, but the technology seen as a major competitor to lithium-ion batteries is liquid-flow battery technology.

Fluid-flow batteries store and generate current through the exchange of electrolytes. Unlike lithium-ion batteries, liquid-flow batteries can charge and discharge almost indefinitely. By adjusting the size of the containers that hold the electrolytes, fluid-flow batteries are able to expand and contract more easily than lithium-ion batteries to meet discharge requirements.

However, unlike lithium-ion batteries, various liquid-flow batteries are still in fierce technological competition. The return efficiency of the flow cell is much lower than that of the lithium-ion cell because of the parasitic load of the pump needed to move the electrolyte between the cells. However, the main advantage of liquid-flow batteries is that they provide longer discharge duration by amplifying the electrolyte storage pool. Still, liquid-flow batteries have struggled to gain widespread acceptance in the market.

"It's definitely an uphill battle." PaulFerrera, business development manager for PrimusPower, a maker of liquid-flow batteries. He points out that lithium-ion batteries, which can discharge for up to four hours, are adapting to grid-scale applications. Liquid-flow batteries are a more viable option for many applications, he says, such as switching substations or shifting energy from the peak of solar generation to the evening rise.

"The biggest advantage of liquid flow batteries is the low cost of raw materials." Ferrera said. PrimusPower has reduced the raw material cost of its zinc-bromine flow battery to $50 to $60 per KWH, compared with about $125 to $150 per KWH for lithium-ion batteries.

Because Primus's liquid-flow battery technology does not require an ion-exchange membrane and can use a single flow circuit for electrolyte exchange, Ferrera claims that unique liquid-flow batteries are comparable in cost to lithium-ion batteries. "Our liquid-flow batteries can compete with lithium-ion batteries in price." He said.

Process advantage

Ferrera said he believes that as manufacturing becomes more efficient in the future, liquid-flow battery technology will rapidly overtake lithium-ion batteries on a cost basis. Flow batteries, he says, do not reduce utilization rates and reduce the need to replace batteries or the cost of building projects, thus reducing the lifetime cost of energy storage projects.

Ferrera said the fluid-flow battery is particularly suited for projects designed to help solve the "duck curve" problem, as it can store large amounts of power during the day and release it to its limit during peak hours at night. "Our flow battery is perfect for duck curves," he said. "it can do 100 percent discharge and infinite cycles."

But Ferrera acknowledges that lithium-ion batteries have some advantages in terms of market position, that the technology is 30 or 40 years old and that many companies are supported by large balance sheets and can withstand negative margins. "Our company is only nine years old, but we think the storage market is big enough." Ferrera said.

He said lithium-ion batteries will continue to be a winner in the short-term and mobile markets, and will still be of interest to customers with limited space and power density. But a growing number of utilities are beginning to understand the advantages of liquid-flow batteries for long-term storage.

Ferrera said PrimusPower was in transition from demonstration projects to commercial production. "We launched some commercial projects, five to eight in the quarter," he said.

Primus, a company that is also a recipient of government funding, and the authors of the MIT paper would like to see more efforts to encourage the development of diversity in energy storage technologies. The paper makes several recommendations for policymakers, such as expanding research and development funding, providing tax credits for energy storage focused on emerging technologies, and working with international Allies tospecial unfair trade practices.

The U.S. department of energy's advanced research projects agency (arp) has announced a $30 million long-term energy storage program aimed at providing 10 - to 100-hour storage facilities.

Creating a niche market creates a platform for growth, Hart said. For example, he cites the creation of a solar niche.

A few years ago, wind power was the dominant renewable energy technology. In a similar way that many states have deployed solar projects to encourage the development of solar energy, states can create a field for mature energy storage technologies rather than mature technologies. "I believe in the role of demand, but sometimes they have to be balanced," Hart said.

The page contains the contents of the machine translation.