Ehh… Lithium batteries are going to be around for quite a while even if sodium ion batteries take off. It’s just more energy dense than sodium ion, so it’s always going to be better for things like portable electronics.
Sodium ion might take over the market for heavier batteries like stationary power banks.
Consult a periodic table. Lithium will always out perform sodium. Sodium batteries only exist because lithium costs more, but these large deposits are being found worldwide every few months and lithium will drop in price as a commodity. At some point, recycling will require much less new lithium to be mined.
Wood is cheaper than steel. Which apparently is the most important way to be better in. But I wouldn’t build a skyscraper out of it.
Saying that energy density is not important in energy storage technology is as stupid as saying that material strength is not important in building materials.
Sodium-ion and maaaaybe iron are promising, with sodium-ion making the most headway.
https://batterycouncil.org/battery-facts-and-applications/about-sodium-batteries/
Not quite widely commercially available yet, but I wouldn’t invest heavily in lithium is it was me.
Ehh… Lithium batteries are going to be around for quite a while even if sodium ion batteries take off. It’s just more energy dense than sodium ion, so it’s always going to be better for things like portable electronics.
Sodium ion might take over the market for heavier batteries like stationary power banks.
Consult a periodic table. Lithium will always out perform sodium. Sodium batteries only exist because lithium costs more, but these large deposits are being found worldwide every few months and lithium will drop in price as a commodity. At some point, recycling will require much less new lithium to be mined.
Sodium is better in the more important ways than lithium.
Either state WTF you are talking about or find a better way to waste people’s time.
I wrote it on other comments. I’m not here to summarize the internet for you.
Fair, but how about you instead justify your point? That seems like a more reasonable ask.
I’m not here to aggregate your content for you.
Wood is cheaper than steel. Which apparently is the most important way to be better in. But I wouldn’t build a skyscraper out of it.
Saying that energy density is not important in energy storage technology is as stupid as saying that material strength is not important in building materials.
You know there are skyscrapers built out of wood, right? And they’re kind of awesome.
I searched for “tallest wooden building” there actually is a list in wikipedia of the tallest buildings.
The tallest of the list is not even a building, it’s a radio tower. At ~110m.
The closest city to me that has a skyscraper has a single skyscraper, and it is >150m tall.
I would not build a skyscraper out of wood.
This is HIGHLY dependent on use case