We have 2 bonus videos with ~40 minutes of extra content this time: 1. Breaking down fast charging tech: nebula.app/videos/techaltar-how-fast-charging-took-over 2. Interview with Counterpoint Research: nebula.app/videos/techaltar-interview-with-peter-richardson-counterpoint-research The Nebula / CuriosityStream bundle is no longer active. Instead, you can sign up for Nebula directly with my discount now for about $2.5 a month with a yearly plan, which includes Nebula Originals AND the whole Nebula Classes platform, too, including my own class. Sign up here: go.nebula.tv/techaltar
There is one element that wants to get rid of its electron and is lighter than lithium and it’s plenty abundant: Hydrogen Now if only there was a nice way of compacting lots of it in a tiny area without using extreme pressures.
I dont know why you say nebula is 15 dollars a year....from the links you shared its 80 dollars a year and 8 dollars a month. Basically its a really slightly cheaper netflix
I am a battery engineer, and I have to say that this was very well researched. With phone batteries in particular, they rely very heavily on cobalt because they are almost exclusively LCO-based chemistry. Compared with cars which are typically NMC, NCA, or more recently LFP as you mentioned.
I am honestly OK with the battery charge density as of now, but I think that the near term goal is to make them last at least twice as longer in terms of charging cycles. I am ok with charging my phone every day, but I am not ok with the battery degradation.
I think you're fine with it because companies have had to adapt to it. Try to imagine what companies could create if batteries were half as large and twice as dense. I think it could create new form-factors and greatly improve some of the stuff we have today.
@@willstikken5619 my point is that it's easy to be content. Before smartphones exusted people were content with the phones that existed because it's hard to imagine the stuff that hasn't been invented yet. Looking back smartphones might seem obvious, but at the time I don't think they were.
@@vanjagrigoriev1442 I have some difficultly reading that into your comments but it is valid. Right now, we live in a world where people have conflated regular marketing 'advancements' with real technical innovation. This leads to the effect swinging the other way. Companies have set an expectation that they will announce seemingly wondrous technologies every year at their respective events each year and on schedule. When this fails to happen, people have all sorts of irrational reactions. People in general lack the technological or scientific literacy to grasp what’s going on. They only know that their unrealistic expectations were not met. What we end up with is a situation where, as you noted, people’s imaginations are limited by their experiences but also their expectations are set by their perceptions. People are unable to envision the next big thing while also believing in magic nanobots and satellites that can zoom and enhance to check your eye color…
As a chemist (who is also interested in electronics) i have something to point out: - Not only sodium is heavier than lithium, but it also have a slightly lower (well actually higher, because it's a negative value) redox potential (talking about the Na / Na+ couple), and even more importantly it has a larger radius, which make it difficoult to intercalate it in a crystalline stucture, such as graphite (Na also forms dendrites when crystallizing). Na is also much more reactive than Li, exploding in contact with water instead of "just burning", but at least it doesn't burn in N2... - EVs are the devices which benefit the most from Li-ion tech: since they have to carry around the battery, the lighter this is the less energy you waste in carrying it around. Using a less energy dense battery type on EVs is ideally wrong. For stationary devices, on the other hand, weight is not an issue. - Silicon doesn't have any energy storage power, because it's not involved in the redox cycle. The sole responsible for energy storage in Li-ion batteries is lithium, and this is why you would want to use pure lithium as your anode, instead of using lithium ions intercalated in graphite / silicon. Unfortunately this is impossible, because of lithium's tendency to form dendrites, which then short the battery, triggering an explosion. This is ultimately due to lithium's crystalline structure (which cannot be changed). - Solid state batteries were thought to be a way to prevent dendrites formation, hence to use pure lithium as an anode, eliminating the need for an intercalating material (such as graphite / graphene or silicon), thus increasing energy density. However, solid electrolites looks to be ineffective to limit the formation of dendrites. - Making batteries more energy dense would be extremely dangerous: since batteries contain a full redox system they are essentially a fuel which already contain the oxidizer to burn it. In other words they're a lot like gunpowder, or thermite (which is the best analogy, due to its metallic nature). The fact that Li has the lowest (-3.07 V for Li / Li+ couple) redox potential of the entire periodic table doesn't help: it basically means it can burn in everything using everything as an oxidizer (apart from noble gases). It's also one of the two known metals (the other one being magnesium) capable of burning in a pure nitrogen atmosphere. This is why Li ion batteries are considered a dangerous good and can't be shipped on airplanes. In synthesis, Li ion battery technology has reached its full potential speaking of energy density. We have kinda reached the end of Moore's Law for batteries. If an improvement to battery life can be made, this will come from software optimization, SOCs specifically designed for mobiles (such as Apple A series), new manifacturing process nodes and more efficient displays.
@@cyan_2169 as a chemist with a chemist friend who's masters project was on solid state batteries I wouldn't say SS batteries are bunk science but they're not as close to creation as is stated by corporations and their benifits may not actually be as good as first predicted atleast for a long while
-Czechs-made HE3DA battery which you can shoot at and it will not start burning, though the cost will be higher, it may be a better choice for home solutions in places where house destroying natural disasters (tornados, earthquakes) are common like the US. The most useful will be HE3DA for aerospace & military though as dealing with lithium fire on diesel-electric submarines would be problematic, that's for sure. Currently, only a few mostly Asian submarines from early 2000 onwards use lithium batteries, and with further development when coupled to Sterling engine or hydrogen assisted energy storage like on German subs can possibly displace the need for nuclear subs even for larger nations in the future. -Solids state batteries are likely the future because they charge faster and presented models do not last as many cycles, which is perfect for car producers that want to sell you a new car every decade or two while claiming how they care about the environment. The fact that they can precisely time when you will need to buy a new car by using a battery with limited charging cycles which many will actually prefer just to shave off a few minutes from supercharging is pretty much the perfect way for guarantee planned obsolescence for people living in cities without own garage that will want such batteries in their cars. Batteries on current Teslas and South Korean passenger cars that can recharge from 20-80% under 20 minutes are already more than good enough from performance and service life standpoint for 95% of the population that have their own garage and do not need to tow heavy cargo on regular basis, it's more than plausible that future generation of car batteries would not last as long when there will be no ICE car alternatives anymore which would allow customers to protest against likely trend of cheaping out on future car batteries. -As a buyer of higher quality electronics I am personally far more interested in long-lasting batteries than ones that can charge a bit faster or adds 15-25% energy density improvements at the expense of service life, Mrwhostheboss made a video on bulging Samsung phone batteries that did not like European heatwaves, did Samsung used different chamistry for European market as they once used different chips compared to what the US got? Searching for replacement battery decade or two down the line is with the current rate of progress rather problematic, at least some producers allow you to purchase AA/AAA battery pack replacement for original li-ion battery so you don't need to horde lithium-ion batteries for various measuring and radio equipment that tends to last decades.
"we've reached the end of moore's law for batteries" Surprised how you know so much about current technology, but yet know nothing about future technology. I'm talking about the most mainstream future material, Graphene. A graphene battery could charge batteries up to 10x faster, whilst also being able to store more charge in a smaller form factor than lithium. It has the same issue that lithium batteries had, and that's becoming commercial. But yeah we're far from reaching the end of "Moore's Law".
Especially nowadays, when companies sell us 800e phones without replaceable batteries. Furthermore, without a way to buy an official battery down the road if you want to pay for a replacement.
It is mostly a problem for phone or laptop batteries. To make them fast chargeable and high energy density the cut alot of corners. Car and (local) grid storage batteries seem to have much better lifetimes in the range of 10-30 years. Of course with declining capacity but that is not such a massive deal.
@@Niiju Yes but they also use a different kind of Li-Ion Battery. Also they do not pack the batteries quite so dense in cars as weight and space is less of a problem. Also they always have extra unused battery cells that are used as backup for stressed or failing cells. Plus 100% charge in a car is not really 100% of the battery pack - probably more like 80-90. The car does not give you access to the full 100% possible charge. What is most taxing and wears your battery out very fast is charging beyond 80%. That is why it is recommended to hold your phone charged between 30-70%.
@@Niiju I think it is not hard at all. I let it rarely fall to 20% or less and try to unplug at 90% latest. Does not work all the time but often enough. Regarding your car you should inform yourself if that is needed. Since some(alot) car companies actually do that 80/90% max charge for you, there might be no need to do so yourself. And I am not talking that your car stops at 90% charge and displays it so like you can set as a setting in some phones. I mean that the 100% of your car might actually be 80-90% of the actual total charge.
When we look at Moores law of doubling number of transistors on chip every two years, we might feel tempted to think similar development is possible in other technologies, but its not.
@@4G12 He doesn't mean the efficiency of solar panels. He means the amount of solar panels installed is growing at an exponential rate, which is actually true we almost install double the solar PV capacity every year compared to the year before, and this trend has been steady since the 1990s up until 2022. If we continue at this exponential growth rate then by 2035 all electrical generation could come from solar PV. non-electric power usage would still come from fossil fuels though.
I mean, that's exactly what they are doing. Given that companies like Apple and Samsung are stuck with current battery technology, it would be foolish to not optimize the phones energy efficiency. When it comes to displays for example, OLED's are more power efficient than LCD's for most image content, variable frame rates save loads of energy without sacrificing performance. And an example for CPU’s is Apples A15 bionic chip's performance cores which improved energy efficiency by 17% on it’s peak performance versus the previous A14 chip. Furthermore; software is very much responsible for power consumption, not just hardware
Yeah that’s what they’re doing but that’s exactly what’s holding phones back. If you’re gonna reduce power consumption it’ll also reduce the speed of the phone (99% of the time). So the video was talking about how it’s the bottleneck in a ton of products reliant on batteries
@@monhi64 instead why don't you make the architecture so powerful and ahead of it's time and then underclock it's power so it will last like 5 years and will be efficient I mean that's what ARM architecture is and why apple went to that for their computers witj the M1 chips, but also CPU architecture needs to evolve
@@realspeedghxst Easier said then done. they have been trying to do that for 2 years, ARM CPU tech hasn't been able to improve density it has hit a brick wall where it can improve no further without using new materials.
@@Dada228822 bullshit!! You realise that Microsoft did the ARM thing first right!? The Microsoft surface RT almost a decade ago had an ARM chip but it was way too earlier for its implementation, you’re welcome!!
@@carholic-sz3qv Not like it is mater to the context but you do know, that Apple-ARM made the ARM RISC processor for Apple Newton in 1992 right? The lackluster support and investment from MS in Windows RT and later versions of "Windows for ARM" contributed hugely to the commercial failures. That only makes the success of Apple with ARM more impressive.
@@nobeltackful1 lame comment!!! Apple was only able to make ARM chips viable recently for their desktop, back then the Microsoft surface rt was way too early to the market and also windows also had to run on intel, nvidia, AMD cpu and GPU unlike Apple only intel and AMD GPU.
Perhaps the most significant problem is that batteries actually degrade, which means that their capacity slowly becomes smaller and smaller. Which means after a certain amount time you will need to replace it.
Potentially, there might be better charge carriers than lithium in the guises of beryllium and boron. Both elements are only slightly heavier than lithium, but carry more charge (electrons to give away) than lithium. Potentials issues though are availability of the element and how willing they are to give their electrons away in the battery.
@@manakmishra I know lithium has the highest potential in that regard. But I’m not sure how the potential power output compares, a higher voltage for Li vs. a higher possible current (more electrons to give away) for Be might make them comparable. My knowledge about that is however insufficient to make any claims here.
I think for mobile tech the other side of the equation might be as important as battery tech. Apple virtually doubled battery life in their MacBook range by switching from Intel to Apple Silicon. I think a shifted emphasis to efficiency across the market is pretty important. Obviously there's less room to squeeze in the smartphone market where efficiency has been a much bigger factor already but I expect there's still some room to move in that space. At the moment we seem to be getting bigger and bigger phones with hungrier processors and bigger batteries for steadily diminishing returns.
There isn't going to be much gains in terms of efficiency. Screens need energy to light up and modems need energy to send and recieve signals. Even if SoCs manage to do computations with fewer and fewer electrons there will still be other parts of the phone that are hard to make more efficient. I don't see a paradigm shift on the horizon. Folding phones are trying to change the form factor but are expensive, fragile and fail to impress. I believe that in 5 years from now phones will look similar as they do today, only more optimized.
As far as phones go, I've never understood why they don't just make them like 30% thicker. That should allow for maybe a doubling of battery size, and if it wasn't for this "form over function" obsession with getting ever slimmer electronics, it would be hard to even notice the difference. I would take double battery life in exchange for a few extra mm thickness any day. It's a much worse problem in other devices where you can't so easily just expand the battery - like a smartwatch for example. And this is why I think we are heading for a potential disaster with the rate at which we are carelessly using lithium/cobalt and those other very limited materials to power everything. For wearables we really have no other good options right now due to the density and weight needs - but it is a terrible idea to use lithium-battery tech for large-scale grid storage for example. We will already struggle to make all the lithium batteries we need for EVs (where weight is also crucial). Let's not waste these precious resources for static batteries too where size and weight is much less of a factor. The unfortunate reality is that very few people with real power over how the market develops care about sustainability. It's all powered by shortsighted greed. if there is profits to be made right now and lithium is marginally better suited right now, then they will use it even in cases where it's arguably not needed. Even if it will end up making the tech prohibitively expensive for later generations. Sure - we may have managed to create better alternative batteries at a reasonable cost before we hit the brick wall on this, but that's not guaranteed by any means - and it is very irresponsible to just assume that science will save us out of every pinch like this.
Something that is needed to included and considered is that the modern SOCs got incredibly smart with Power management. Drop voltage, control clock speed and activity, cut power of features that are not in use and the list goes on
I think the next step is to make much more efficient chipsets rather than more powerful ones + industries research alternatives to Lithium-ion/polymer not only in phones but for other specific applications (like lithium iron phosphate for drones) so the demand for components for lithium-ion/polymer is reduced
@@Arkan_Fadhila A, shall I say, "courageous" option would be to settle on a standard performance level for phones that has no need to be surpassed. This way any efficiency gains wouldn't be immediately offset by increased processing demands. For example, take the Raspberry Pi 4 whose processor is currently manufactured with a 28nm process (however that correlates to Intel and TSMC's process definitions). Imagine setting that as the performance target, but using a 7nm process. 1/4 the nanometers means 1/16th the chip surface area and theoretically about 1/16th the power consumption. I'm sure the math isn't that clean in practice, but the point is the triangle of tradeoffs for chips is basically power consumption, cost/size, performance. If we sacrificed performance, we could have incredibly small chips that use very little power. That's a tough sell marketing-wise, but I think plausible with the right branding as a "lifestyle" brand of product where owning a low-power phone signals detachment from the treadmill of endless tech consumption.
@@stormburn1 really agree with you. and hopefully people will realize that processor with higher efficiency is more needed compared to processor with just higher performance alone.
The least improved part of a smartphone is resistance. You used to buy a phone and that's it. Use it. Now you have to buy a screen cover, a phone cover. Phones used to drop on the floor and one piece got to each side of the room, you put them together and done. Now it scratches, breaks, etc. We are now using expensive fragile bricks made of glass rather than a decent piece of hardware that can stand day to day use.
Well, yeah, phones became multimedia powerhouses during that time. Phones are becoming more durable, though. I should know, I'm part of the small segment of the population funding them. My three most recent phones having been the Unihertz Titan, Pocket, and RAZR 5G. Flexible displays seem to be promising and I hope that cost of ownership continues to trend downward in years to come. What are your thoughts on foldables and their impact on durability?
@@saygoodnighttoghosts Yes there are indeed many hardcore brands (don't know if this is the right name for it). I even thought about buying one of those twice, but the hardware isn't impressive. I don't really like the idea of foldable phones. Its kinds of build an extra step to use the phone. But I really like the idea of slidable phones. I had once a Motorola that the keyboard slides and it was a physical keyboard. Was pretty good. No problem with durability and convenient to slide. A screen that expands would be much better. You use the phone in the regular way and if you need extra space just slide it. Foldable on the other side they make an even narrow rectangle, kind of makes you need to always open to use. Plus I think its less durable, but who knows. The idea of a screen that folds or slide is good, considering the current size of screen is too small for the amount of things we do in our phones. I have a Galaxy Note 20 Ultra and I think the screen is not large enough. I use desktop most of the time, specially for shopping. Phones are too small.
@@drac124 I'm on a Fold4 at the moment & the cover screen is actually really usable even with my big hands. I only do maybe 25% of my usage on the main screen. But the times where I do need the big screen, it's incredible
Well having an option to replace just the battery in my phone would be another way to make it better. Even if they managed to make it last double at new, what is the point if it doesn't last a day after two years of use.
@@palamidagheo4520 Yep that's pretty much the case if you notice with any product bought there always seems to be a weak spot and that's on purpose because they want you to buy another. Making a phone that lasts forever isn't profitable to these companies.
well, i tried this tactic a few years ago. i bought a phone with a replaceable battery. two years in, the battery won't last a single day so i tried to buy a replacement. problem is, phone model has been discontinued and i cannot find an official battery replacement being sold, so i had to resort with an off-brand replacement. it didn't last for a year.
@NTVEL Martynas It's not that easy to remove a glass/metal back glued on especially for someone with no experience in doing so not only that the price of those tools add up. Idc what the phone looks like I really don't I always put my phone in a case I'd much rather have a easily removable shell no tool required. I'll take functionality over form and day. Sure phones look pretty now but just imagine if I could easily hot swap my 5000 mah battery on the fly and also have a SD card slot. The look of the phone is the least important aspect to me and trust me they could make the phone look nice even with a removable back and they could probably make it out of metal if they wanted to as well it's just they want the general consumer to buy another whole phone rather then replace the battery themselves also the average consumer is probably more enticed by looks it would be nice if they at least made a version of the phones with these features just to see how they would sell in a more modern time.
@NTVEL Martynas That's what they say, but as far as I can remember, the Samsung Galaxy S5 was dust/water resistant, and also had a removable battery cover. There's also the Fairphone 4, which has some water and dust resistance, although admittedly not as much as some other phones, while also being the only modern smartphone I know of that has the classic removable back cover.
Since I was born in 1951 I remember in my young years that there were two main rechargeable battery technologies. One of them was the lead acid battery, such as used in cars. The other was nickel-cadmium battery known is the Ni-Cad battery. Now we have these lithium batteries that can hold a lot of energy for their size and weight.
I really like this video. I have seen a lot of videos claiming "the next big thing" is only a few years away. This is an honest overview which is a lot more useful
They are getting better in the way of being managed. I have set an alert when the battery is outside the 35-75% range, which helps prolong its life a lot.
I think the main problem with batteries is their decay. If they remained working correctly we could keep using them as-is. But they lose their properties quite fast and require replacement or at least an external charge at some point. The only reason I am replacing my iPhone 6S now is the battery, the phone works just fine for me, but the battery is pretty much gone after a little usage.
Yes, this old battery tech is holding more powerful gadgets back. BUT -hear me out- it also forces companies to make their processors and stuff more and more efficient to squeeze more performance out of every mAh the battery can deliver.
Such a good vid!! Been following for years and quality has always been impeccable But whilst I'm gushing... I'm so glad I'm a child of the walkman era - such a gamechanger to all of tech, and both Sony and Ninetendo used to feel so on it 👌 back then.
While I am glad battery tech are being improved, I really want to see batteries that can last longer and stays cool, especially when viewing video content, playing games or multitasking where the battery drops quickly, and it seems to get worse over the years as well. I'd like to see improvement in this aspect, that would be great! Less charging as well and waiting for the battery to get full.
batteries naturally degrade over time, you can’t avoid that! however, you can slow the degradation down yourself with various methods (keeping it out of strong heat/cold, keeping it in the 20%-80% range, not constantly keeping it at 100%, etc) and the manufacturer can as well, by making devices more power efficient and whatnot
It’s not the battery getting hot... it’s the stupidly overpowered cpu that nobody needs unless they are a hardcore gamer... high end phones now days have higher performance than a cheap laptop for no good reason.
I admire your graphs and visualization abilities even more than your great content and topics. Every time I'm watching your videos I'm taking screen shots to show people the beautiful graph I just saw in your video. Thanks a lot.
6:25 Can't help but notice that while average battery capacity improved by 39%, the Counterpoint's battery chart managed to increase by 364% 🤔also the exponential graph 😅
It seems like we have a few different paths to improving battery life: improve battery capacity, improve hardware efficiency, offload processing (to the cloud or to a paired personal computer), and develop longer-range wireless charging.
efficiently transmitting energy to a small patch of space (10cm) at a practical range (10m) without some physical (wave)guide is surprisingly difficult, you'll have to focus the energy accurately and keep an active tracking of the receiver's position, and yet there's still the orientation of the receiver.
true, but I don't think they would increase power consumption much., because modern phones are already close to overheating when the CPU or GPU is fully utilized and of course there is no reason to abandon power saving technologies when the hardware is not fully utilized.
You introduce sodium as an alternative because of humanitarian concerns, but why wouldn't we want to improve working conditions for the lithium mines, instead of hopping to a different material?
hard to believe youtube suggesting this video for months, as usual, i learn nothing from a heavily suggested video. one thing the industry or EU should implement is battery bypass so that a charger can fully power a phone without a battery or defective battery.
In the lab it looks nice, but an improved battery coming to market always seems three years away. Excellent video in any case. Good research and nice graphics. I subscribed. All good wishes.
{improved battery always three years away}. And it always will be. Until you get where you are going. And stop. The battery gets better all those (3 years). And a different goal is posted for the next (3 years). Just because there is also a (hopeful) goal posted in there. And it makes you feel like we failed. A person should back up and see that a lot of things have happened. And we are getting close to the (long goal. And by the time we get there, we will already have a better technology.
He just described how battery tech has been improving all this time. A huge quantum leap is always a possibility, but these kinds of changes are rare. There's no point being upset that not every promised improvement is actually delivered
I don't care about charge speed, I care about longevity. If I was forced to charge my phone at 5w for it to live 2 extra years, I'll take that any day than 120w charging
I am an electronic engineer, but I don't study batteries. From my limited knowledge the only tech discussed in this video that can improve the battery longevity is the solid state battery.
Luckily the scenario you describe is very possible. Charging at 5w will give you at least 2 more years than charging at 120w. Most Androids allow you to terminate charging at 85% nowadays also which will also help.
it's absolutely mind boggling to me that one of the biggest challenges for EVs is that we literally cannot trust humans around the globe to not abuse one another while extracting resources.
The billionaires paying the people extracting the resources don’t care whether humans are abused in the process. Only if the rest of the world will find out before they make all their money
Sad that a few years ago there was a supposing GRAPHENE Battery that was to come out it seems that has Poof from existence (not really but you get what I'm saying)
A lot of batteries are really promising as a single cell in a lab, but are unsuitable for some reason when you try and mass produce a full battery to use in real world conditions.
This has been a problem for a long time on computing tech, and it's a big part of why CPUs on desktop computers gave up on the "gigahertz" battle (which was literally lighting computers on fire) and moved to multi-core systems, and we haven't looked back, thankfully. But it still means CPUs and other processing systems are getting a lot more powerful than improvements in battery technology. And that's been true throughout the history of mobile computing.
The tipping point for batteries will be reached when the energy density of Li-Ion battery will be three times of the batteries currently in use. In practice, the battery of the size of a current petrol tank of an ICE car will allow the same 600+ miles for a single charge. This may take anything from five to twenty years, depending on the level of investment the battery manufacturers decide. The energy density improvements will not come from new material or chemicals used for the batteries; they will rather stem from new crystalline structures achieved with new manufacturing techniques. Regards, Anthony
You are a treasure. Elsewhere in comments there are engineers lauding the accuracy and comprehension of this video whilst I on the complete opposite end of the spectrum feel like I didn't get lost in your explanation once, not one bit. Just as an unusual bonus I rarely find an accent that makes it easier to understand someone. And when I say rarely I mean never.... Thank you.
In my opinion, I think we should try to optimize software more, than try to brute force more battery capacity. Cool video tho. It explains a lot in a manner that's easy to understand
I would agree with that - there's a lot of inefficient software and/or bloatware nowadays, just because the hardware is often powerful enough for it to "not matter". And as a developer myself I share the sentiment that it's nice not needing to actively optimize everything and focus on the business logic, what the software should do, but it does come with a price to pay. And when a news website (indicating: simple) takes long to load or is lagging when interacting with it, or when a supposedly simple operation, like opening a menu in a program, takes longer than an instant, something has gone pretty wrong.. But in the average company optimization probably* is not exactly a common topic and priority for stakeholders/product managers etc. and apps by a single dev are often enough built by inexperienced devs that don't have the knowledge or interest to optimize things, at least I assume that's the case for most software. (I don't exclude myself, I definitely have written some very inefficient stuff due to not knowing better and often enough don't pay much attention to it.) * I am fairly new in the professional industry and have a sample size of one unfortunately, but I've also heard from multiple people with similar experience.
Text renderers have gotten significantly bloated over time. Instead of doing full hinting as was originally intended in TrueType, they use lots of bloaty render techniques that make not only the performance but also the rendering quality even worse. Microsoft’s best renderer is the one they used before they introduced ClearType. So on Windows you have to disable ClearType to get the correct rendering (even then, it doesn’t work for DirectWrite which is even more bloated). And virtually no Unix systems provide ways to unglitch TrueType rendering.
That's what Apple does, not just with batteries. They heavily optimize memory usage, software, etc. and the result is less energy consumption and faster performance.
@@ronch550 No, their software is Unix based so it’s highly bloated. The real optimized software came from legacy Microsoft. They literally made a renderer called GDI that is the fastest renderer ever, so much so that I consider GDI to be the only hardware accelerated renderer ever. Of course, modern Microsoft software (as opposed to legacy) is highly bloated as well.
Silicon isn't all that abundant anymore. It is mostly extracted from beach sand. Humanity has already extracted most of the beach sand in the world to the point where we have to extract even more underwater - thanks to vanity projects like Dubai's artificial islands. The impact on the environment is very concerning.
The biggest sand consumer - easily taking places 1, 2 and 3 for itself - is concrete. It sucks up sand like nothing else. Construction mostly uses river sand because they don't have to deal with salt that way, but it also means that there's no new sand washing downstream.
@@Alhussainba I highly recommending reading about it online - it's quite an interesting topic. Desert sand is largely useless to us - I found this explanation online: desert sand grains are finer and smoother so their surface chemistry would not be able to offer sufficient number of multidirectional chemical linkages. They also have other undesirable contaminants. Basically: desert sand is the wrong shape and difficult and expensive to use.
Great video but you only talked about the energy density side of things. Wouldve been great if you included the efficiency of the batteries aswell! One of the biggest problems is cooling the batteries. Because of the high internal resistance of current batteries they tend to release quite alot of energy as heat and tesla found a great way to massively reduce the resistance by introducing the tabless design. This means higher amperage & less heat 😄
I have an idea. Why don't we make removable batteries in our smartphones. Just imagine how awesome it would be, if we could open our phones and take out the batteries by hand without special tools.
You can! You start by heating up the device and using priers to remove the glass. Taking care not to damage the glass. Or the battery. Or the mainboard. And you know what, the glass will probably break so just order a replacement screen alongside the battery. Also that new screen might have a fingerprint reader that isn't paired to the mainbo- oh yeah I think I see where you are going with this.
I think the comparison with Moore's Law is kind of stupid. There is nothing in physics that hinders this 'law' and has its focus merely on fabrication progress of structure size. Nobody expected something like this from batteries, since we already know what the energy densities of every single molecule is. And there is no combination of molecules that will lead to EXPONENTIAL energy density increase.
I like waterproof phones. But god I hate the non removable batteries. I tried living with it and what happens? "OOPS your phone screen is black and restarts and running it out of power doesn't work to reset it!" Solution turned out to be to disconnect the battery and reconnect it. Would have been simple with removable batteries, but nope, this sealed phone design has dug its heels in and how convenient that we need special tools or pay an exorbitant fee just to do something that used to be routine.
You didn't mention that Li-ion batteries can only be charged to 80% quickly and then have to be trickle charged. This why car companies only ever give 0 to 80% charge times. A friend of mine went to buy an electric car and they couldn't tell her the 0 to 100 % charge time !!!
@@TheZachary86 it's more chemical as charging your device to extreme ends of the battery i.e 0% and 100% is when the batteryis more stressed which is bad.
@@TheZachary86 Its physics. Squeezing out the last bit of toothpaste, accelerating to the last kilometer of your car’s top speed, cleaning up the last bit of trash from a park, etc. are all asymptotic processes, the closer you are to the goal, the harder it is to progress at all.
Don't apologize for giving us a chemistry lesson. We needed that. I have always felt that we should have gone to EVs long ago. I always just assumed that they were better for the environment. I didn't know that lithium was strip-mined. The electric Ford F150 pickup truck is in no way a compromise in speed or power. In fact, it is a much better vehicle. For a tradesperson, there are outlets that are even capable of powering welders. In a remote area, that is a huge feature. Even better, with an optional kit, this truck can reverse-charge your entire house for several days of normal use and over a week of conservative use. I want one! I'll find something to weld in the desert. Jay Leno's Garage has many EVs going back to the early 1900s. If you're interested, a lot of his videos are here on UA-cam. Some of the engineering is just fascinating.
We keep trying to improve the same pattern... Solar air charge will be the future. All you will need is a small receiver in the device, which will constantly draw energy from the source. No more charging needed...
Not one mention of John B. Goodenough, the inventor of lithium-ion batteries (won Nobel price with that), computer memory, and one of the main researchers right now of solid-state batteries while he's 100 years old right now? :(
@12:40 Graphite also expands during lithiation. The conversion of C6 to LiC6 has a volume increase of about 10%. Per lithium, the expansion differences between graphite and silicon are not THAT different. The issue is that silicon can hold a magnitude more lithium per unit of mass.
Impressed by this vid, subject is clearly important on many levels, and TA presentation style is reassuringly definitive. Sad that the exploitation really has not improved in the global supply chain and the same disgusting behaviours is rampant in tech as all the others, channels such as TA should keep reminding us of the harm we are causing. I love tech and my phone but hate that folks are dying for it. Same story with so much of our 1st world products, like cacao growers who have never tasted chocolate, or oil producing countries who's population remain poor due to corruption, or fast fashion enabling child workers....
0:53 Redmi just released 300w fast charging technology, which can be fully charged in 5 minutes. Absolutely mind-blowing and most certainly concerning in terms of safety.
This is an excellent piece of research, lots of new technologies are being trialed by our military and their research areas for future power and future green power.
no ones talking about how each software update is making phones draw more and more power. its really a pretty big problem. can never tell whether its battery degradation, or just software getting heavier
I can see ceramics working in grid-storage that doesn't have to move and flex like a car. In a car, as soon as you get out of the driveway, the flexing is going to crack that bad boy.
i feel like smartphone batteries are "good enough" for the average consumer already which may explain why there's not as much incentive to innovate on this front. my huawei p20 pro 2018 smartphone which has 4000 mah is still doing great in 2022, so i have no doubt anyone with newer smartphones or bigger batteries will be even better off
Regarding fast charging, the solution is very simple and right infront of our noses. Make the battery easily exchangeable and simply switch if the active one drains out.
When the battery is too good the sales of the new phone might plummet. That's why the manufacturer might increase the battery size but CANNOT increase battery reliability. Phones without an original charger like most phones sold lately also will make the battery broke faster
On the contrary. I think all the insane progress in technology in past is motivated by nothing but profits. There are sevral shady ways to make profits but being better than the competion is paramount.
You guys really see no profit in having superior battery technologies? :D i often read stupid things in internet, but this is up there with the best of them
ive always bought my iphones refurbished rather than new, and i also hold onto them for ages before upgrading. As a result, ive replaced the batteries in my iphones twice each. Ive had a 5C, 7, and 12mini (current). Replacing the batteries in these is piss easy and i don’t understand why people complain so much. The only difficulty is getting past the waterproof seal in the newer ones, but it’s still easy; just a bit of heat to soften it and gently using a pry tool.
I hate these arguments that we should avoid using certain metals for batteries because of concerns about labor practices in developing countries. It’s such a first world centered view of the problem, where you are just trying to clean your own conscience, rather than actually help poor people. Battery metals are a huge opportunity to escape poverty for many of the world’s poorest countries. You are literally depriving them of this opportunity by demonizing these metals. What we should do instead is to demand that international mining companies set up mining operations that have labor practices that corrospond to international standards. The western mining companies are already doing this. If you want to a conscientious consumer of batteries, you should demand that device manufacturers sources their materials from these companies. Not that they avoid using certain metals altogether because they have been narrowmindedly demonized as “problematic”.
There is no battery problem. The current batteries are perfectly suitable for the job. The big problem is actually the phone makers who insist on a tiny thin phone. I would be happy with a phone twice as thick with double the sized battery. The bonus would be you could then also fit sd card reader and audio jack back in the phone. In addition you could fit a decent telephoto lens as well.
pretty wild that, as a global consumer, I have to make up my mind about exactly how much child labor and environmental destruction is an acceptable amount to commit to building the devices I use every day.
We have 2 bonus videos with ~40 minutes of extra content this time:
1. Breaking down fast charging tech: nebula.app/videos/techaltar-how-fast-charging-took-over
2. Interview with Counterpoint Research: nebula.app/videos/techaltar-interview-with-peter-richardson-counterpoint-research
The Nebula / CuriosityStream bundle is no longer active. Instead, you can sign up for Nebula directly with my discount now for about $2.5 a month with a yearly plan, which includes Nebula Originals AND the whole Nebula Classes platform, too, including my own class.
Sign up here: go.nebula.tv/techaltar
No thanks. Very informative youtube video though.
There is one element that wants to get rid of its electron and is lighter than lithium and it’s plenty abundant:
Hydrogen
Now if only there was a nice way of compacting lots of it in a tiny area without using extreme pressures.
👌🏽👍🏼
I dont know why you say nebula is 15 dollars a year....from the links you shared its 80 dollars a year and 8 dollars a month. Basically its a really slightly cheaper netflix
Graphene batteries are the new lithium batteries. Sure no one wants to invest but you can't deny the insane advantages
I have a drawer full of old phones I can't use due to their dead batteries... You could say they're free of charge.
Ba dum tish
Can i have one?
Lol
You should recycle them so that the Li, Ni, Co can be used in new devices. Atleast the battery.
😂😂😂😂
I am a battery engineer, and I have to say that this was very well researched. With phone batteries in particular, they rely very heavily on cobalt because they are almost exclusively LCO-based chemistry. Compared with cars which are typically NMC, NCA, or more recently LFP as you mentioned.
Happy to hear!
And what happened to graphene batteries? I've been years hearing from them. I think even there is an expensive powerbank made with a graphene battery
@@jesuslcampillo1989 The technology is still in it's infancy.
I have no idea what you're saying but I'll toss a like anyway
@@Markel_A Is good the real deal is they need to find how to produce in large scale
I am honestly OK with the battery charge density as of now, but I think that the near term goal is to make them last at least twice as longer in terms of charging cycles. I am ok with charging my phone every day, but I am not ok with the battery degradation.
I think you're fine with it because companies have had to adapt to it. Try to imagine what companies could create if batteries were half as large and twice as dense. I think it could create new form-factors and greatly improve some of the stuff we have today.
@@vanjagrigoriev1442 While Boris is accepting reality and highlighting an actual problem you countered with "imagine if physics didn't exist"?
@@willstikken5619 my point is that it's easy to be content. Before smartphones exusted people were content with the phones that existed because it's hard to imagine the stuff that hasn't been invented yet. Looking back smartphones might seem obvious, but at the time I don't think they were.
@@vanjagrigoriev1442 I have some difficultly reading that into your comments but it is valid.
Right now, we live in a world where people have conflated regular marketing 'advancements' with real technical innovation. This leads to the effect swinging the other way.
Companies have set an expectation that they will announce seemingly wondrous technologies every year at their respective events each year and on schedule. When this fails to happen, people have all sorts of irrational reactions. People in general lack the technological or scientific literacy to grasp what’s going on. They only know that their unrealistic expectations were not met.
What we end up with is a situation where, as you noted, people’s imaginations are limited by their experiences but also their expectations are set by their perceptions. People are unable to envision the next big thing while also believing in magic nanobots and satellites that can zoom and enhance to check your eye color…
Oppo battery health engine promises 80% battery life after 1600 charge cycles. That's double the current standard of 800 charge cycles
As a chemist (who is also interested in electronics) i have something to point out:
- Not only sodium is heavier than lithium, but it also have a slightly lower (well actually higher, because it's a negative value) redox potential (talking about the Na / Na+ couple), and even more importantly it has a larger radius, which make it difficoult to intercalate it in a crystalline stucture, such as graphite (Na also forms dendrites when crystallizing). Na is also much more reactive than Li, exploding in contact with water instead of "just burning", but at least it doesn't burn in N2...
- EVs are the devices which benefit the most from Li-ion tech: since they have to carry around the battery, the lighter this is the less energy you waste in carrying it around. Using a less energy dense battery type on EVs is ideally wrong. For stationary devices, on the other hand, weight is not an issue.
- Silicon doesn't have any energy storage power, because it's not involved in the redox cycle. The sole responsible for energy storage in Li-ion batteries is lithium, and this is why you would want to use pure lithium as your anode, instead of using lithium ions intercalated in graphite / silicon. Unfortunately this is impossible, because of lithium's tendency to form dendrites, which then short the battery, triggering an explosion. This is ultimately due to lithium's crystalline structure (which cannot be changed).
- Solid state batteries were thought to be a way to prevent dendrites formation, hence to use pure lithium as an anode, eliminating the need for an intercalating material (such as graphite / graphene or silicon), thus increasing energy density. However, solid electrolites looks to be ineffective to limit the formation of dendrites.
- Making batteries more energy dense would be extremely dangerous: since batteries contain a full redox system they are essentially a fuel which already contain the oxidizer to burn it. In other words they're a lot like gunpowder, or thermite (which is the best analogy, due to its metallic nature). The fact that Li has the lowest (-3.07 V for Li / Li+ couple) redox potential of the entire periodic table doesn't help: it basically means it can burn in everything using everything as an oxidizer (apart from noble gases). It's also one of the two known metals (the other one being magnesium) capable of burning in a pure nitrogen atmosphere. This is why Li ion batteries are considered a dangerous good and can't be shipped on airplanes.
In synthesis, Li ion battery technology has reached its full potential speaking of energy density. We have kinda reached the end of Moore's Law for batteries. If an improvement to battery life can be made, this will come from software optimization, SOCs specifically designed for mobiles (such as Apple A series), new manifacturing process nodes and more efficient displays.
What is your opinion on solid state batteries as a future technology? Is it bunk science?
@@cyan_2169 the company ElecJet will build a 'test production line', which starts producing in Q1 2023. Here they'll build solid state batteries.
@@cyan_2169 as a chemist with a chemist friend who's masters project was on solid state batteries I wouldn't say SS batteries are bunk science but they're not as close to creation as is stated by corporations and their benifits may not actually be as good as first predicted atleast for a long while
-Czechs-made HE3DA battery which you can shoot at and it will not start burning, though the cost will be higher, it may be a better choice for home solutions in places where house destroying natural disasters (tornados, earthquakes) are common like the US.
The most useful will be HE3DA for aerospace & military though as dealing with lithium fire on diesel-electric submarines would be problematic, that's for sure. Currently, only a few mostly Asian submarines from early 2000 onwards use lithium batteries, and with further development when coupled to Sterling engine or hydrogen assisted energy storage like on German subs can possibly displace the need for nuclear subs even for larger nations in the future.
-Solids state batteries are likely the future because they charge faster and presented models do not last as many cycles, which is perfect for car producers that want to sell you a new car every decade or two while claiming how they care about the environment. The fact that they can precisely time when you will need to buy a new car by using a battery with limited charging cycles which many will actually prefer just to shave off a few minutes from supercharging is pretty much the perfect way for guarantee planned obsolescence for people living in cities without own garage that will want such batteries in their cars.
Batteries on current Teslas and South Korean passenger cars that can recharge from 20-80% under 20 minutes are already more than good enough from performance and service life standpoint for 95% of the population that have their own garage and do not need to tow heavy cargo on regular basis, it's more than plausible that future generation of car batteries would not last as long when there will be no ICE car alternatives anymore which would allow customers to protest against likely trend of cheaping out on future car batteries.
-As a buyer of higher quality electronics I am personally far more interested in long-lasting batteries than ones that can charge a bit faster or adds 15-25% energy density improvements at the expense of service life, Mrwhostheboss made a video on bulging Samsung phone batteries that did not like European heatwaves, did Samsung used different chamistry for European market as they once used different chips compared to what the US got?
Searching for replacement battery decade or two down the line is with the current rate of progress rather problematic, at least some producers allow you to purchase AA/AAA battery pack replacement for original li-ion battery so you don't need to horde lithium-ion batteries for various measuring and radio equipment that tends to last decades.
"we've reached the end of moore's law for batteries"
Surprised how you know so much about current technology, but yet know nothing about future technology.
I'm talking about the most mainstream future material, Graphene. A graphene battery could charge batteries up to 10x faster, whilst also being able to store more charge in a smaller form factor than lithium. It has the same issue that lithium batteries had, and that's becoming commercial. But yeah we're far from reaching the end of "Moore's Law".
My main problem with lithium ion batteries Is their health declining over time
Battery health degradation honestly gives me anxiety
Especially nowadays, when companies sell us 800e phones without replaceable batteries. Furthermore, without a way to buy an official battery down the road if you want to pay for a replacement.
This is a problem with all batteries...
It is mostly a problem for phone or laptop batteries.
To make them fast chargeable and high energy density the cut alot of corners.
Car and (local) grid storage batteries seem to have much better lifetimes in the range of 10-30 years.
Of course with declining capacity but that is not such a massive deal.
@@Niiju Yes but they also use a different kind of Li-Ion Battery.
Also they do not pack the batteries quite so dense in cars as weight and space is less of a problem.
Also they always have extra unused battery cells that are used as backup for stressed or failing cells.
Plus 100% charge in a car is not really 100% of the battery pack - probably more like 80-90.
The car does not give you access to the full 100% possible charge.
What is most taxing and wears your battery out very fast is charging beyond 80%.
That is why it is recommended to hold your phone charged between 30-70%.
@@Niiju I think it is not hard at all.
I let it rarely fall to 20% or less and try to unplug at 90% latest.
Does not work all the time but often enough.
Regarding your car you should inform yourself if that is needed.
Since some(alot) car companies actually do that 80/90% max charge for you, there might be no need to do so yourself.
And I am not talking that your car stops at 90% charge and displays it so like you can set as a setting in some phones.
I mean that the 100% of your car might actually be 80-90% of the actual total charge.
When we look at Moores law of doubling number of transistors on chip every two years, we might feel tempted to think similar development is possible in other technologies, but its not.
I'd say the growth of new solar photovoltaic installations is close
@@AlexFoster2291
1st law of thermodynamics: Allow me to introduce myself...
@@4G12 non sequitur = bot?
@@AlexFoster2291 Don't assume bots when stupidity is sufficient.
@@4G12 He doesn't mean the efficiency of solar panels. He means the amount of solar panels installed is growing at an exponential rate, which is actually true we almost install double the solar PV capacity every year compared to the year before, and this trend has been steady since the 1990s up until 2022. If we continue at this exponential growth rate then by 2035 all electrical generation could come from solar PV. non-electric power usage would still come from fossil fuels though.
They could also try to reduce the power that the phone needs. New displays or low energy CPUs could help to make the battery last longer.
I mean, that's exactly what they are doing. Given that companies like Apple and Samsung are stuck with current battery technology, it would be foolish to not optimize the phones energy efficiency. When it comes to displays for example, OLED's are more power efficient than LCD's for most image content, variable frame rates save loads of energy without sacrificing performance.
And an example for CPU’s is Apples A15 bionic chip's performance cores which improved energy efficiency by 17% on it’s peak performance versus the previous A14 chip.
Furthermore; software is very much responsible for power consumption, not just hardware
or RLCD screens which reduce energy needs by like 70%
Yeah that’s what they’re doing but that’s exactly what’s holding phones back. If you’re gonna reduce power consumption it’ll also reduce the speed of the phone (99% of the time). So the video was talking about how it’s the bottleneck in a ton of products reliant on batteries
@@monhi64 instead why don't you make the architecture so powerful and ahead of it's time and then underclock it's power so it will last like 5 years and will be efficient I mean that's what ARM architecture is and why apple went to that for their computers witj the M1 chips, but also CPU architecture needs to evolve
@@realspeedghxst Easier said then done. they have been trying to do that for 2 years, ARM CPU tech hasn't been able to improve density it has hit a brick wall where it can improve no further without using new materials.
Great video! Hope developers can focus on making computing more energy efficient since battery capacity has hit a plateau
Computing has also always evolved and to become more efficient, from the smallest 5nm node to, galium nitrite mosfets………
Hence Apple switching to ARM, and Microsoft soon copying.
@@Dada228822 bullshit!! You realise that Microsoft did the ARM thing first right!? The Microsoft surface RT almost a decade ago had an ARM chip but it was way too earlier for its implementation, you’re welcome!!
@@carholic-sz3qv Not like it is mater to the context but you do know, that Apple-ARM made the ARM RISC processor for Apple Newton in 1992 right?
The lackluster support and investment from MS in Windows RT and later versions of "Windows for ARM" contributed hugely to the commercial failures. That only makes the success of Apple with ARM more impressive.
@@nobeltackful1 lame comment!!! Apple was only able to make ARM chips viable recently for their desktop, back then the Microsoft surface rt was way too early to the market and also windows also had to run on intel, nvidia, AMD cpu and GPU unlike Apple only intel and AMD GPU.
Perhaps the most significant problem is that batteries actually degrade, which means that their capacity slowly becomes smaller and smaller. Which means after a certain amount time you will need to replace it.
This is a problem for consumers, not manufacturers though
Potentially, there might be better charge carriers than lithium in the guises of beryllium and boron. Both elements are only slightly heavier than lithium, but carry more charge (electrons to give away) than lithium. Potentials issues though are availability of the element and how willing they are to give their electrons away in the battery.
…but what if you ask them nicely? :D
@@andreirachko Lithium has the highest oxidation potential among all the elements in the periodic table.
It's not about availability of electrons but it's reduction potential
@@manakmishra I know lithium has the highest potential in that regard. But I’m not sure how the potential power output compares, a higher voltage for Li vs. a higher possible current (more electrons to give away) for Be might make them comparable. My knowledge about that is however insufficient to make any claims here.
@@egeyamak394 it should be cesium ?!!!! it has most shells ,there zeff is less ,it has more sheilding....!
I think for mobile tech the other side of the equation might be as important as battery tech. Apple virtually doubled battery life in their MacBook range by switching from Intel to Apple Silicon. I think a shifted emphasis to efficiency across the market is pretty important. Obviously there's less room to squeeze in the smartphone market where efficiency has been a much bigger factor already but I expect there's still some room to move in that space. At the moment we seem to be getting bigger and bigger phones with hungrier processors and bigger batteries for steadily diminishing returns.
Apple switched from X86 to ARM. Phones are already ARM so not much improvement is to be had
@@michaeljohnson89 The efficiency improvement largely comes from the density of chips.
@@michaeljohnson89 A15 was a pretty big efficiency jump?
@@michaeljohnson89 See the Risc-V instructions set
There isn't going to be much gains in terms of efficiency. Screens need energy to light up and modems need energy to send and recieve signals. Even if SoCs manage to do computations with fewer and fewer electrons there will still be other parts of the phone that are hard to make more efficient.
I don't see a paradigm shift on the horizon. Folding phones are trying to change the form factor but are expensive, fragile and fail to impress. I believe that in 5 years from now phones will look similar as they do today, only more optimized.
As far as phones go, I've never understood why they don't just make them like 30% thicker. That should allow for maybe a doubling of battery size, and if it wasn't for this "form over function" obsession with getting ever slimmer electronics, it would be hard to even notice the difference. I would take double battery life in exchange for a few extra mm thickness any day.
It's a much worse problem in other devices where you can't so easily just expand the battery - like a smartwatch for example. And this is why I think we are heading for a potential disaster with the rate at which we are carelessly using lithium/cobalt and those other very limited materials to power everything. For wearables we really have no other good options right now due to the density and weight needs - but it is a terrible idea to use lithium-battery tech for large-scale grid storage for example. We will already struggle to make all the lithium batteries we need for EVs (where weight is also crucial). Let's not waste these precious resources for static batteries too where size and weight is much less of a factor.
The unfortunate reality is that very few people with real power over how the market develops care about sustainability. It's all powered by shortsighted greed. if there is profits to be made right now and lithium is marginally better suited right now, then they will use it even in cases where it's arguably not needed. Even if it will end up making the tech prohibitively expensive for later generations.
Sure - we may have managed to create better alternative batteries at a reasonable cost before we hit the brick wall on this, but that's not guaranteed by any means - and it is very irresponsible to just assume that science will save us out of every pinch like this.
some extra thickness makes the devices more comfortable to hold
but please, make them narrower and shorter!
@@Z4KIUS So basically we are going back to their original form factor
@@TheMrLucasP well, I just want to safely handle my phone with a single hand
@@Z4KIUS True, the latest flagships became massive
I'm all for that, I like thicker. But it would also make it heavier
Something that is needed to included and considered is that the modern SOCs got incredibly smart with Power management. Drop voltage, control clock speed and activity, cut power of features that are not in use and the list goes on
I think the next step is to make much more efficient chipsets rather than more powerful ones + industries research alternatives to Lithium-ion/polymer not only in phones but for other specific applications (like lithium iron phosphate for drones) so the demand for components for lithium-ion/polymer is reduced
But improving chipsets efficiency become more and more difficult too as lithography process improvement become slower every years
@@Arkan_Fadhila A, shall I say, "courageous" option would be to settle on a standard performance level for phones that has no need to be surpassed. This way any efficiency gains wouldn't be immediately offset by increased processing demands. For example, take the Raspberry Pi 4 whose processor is currently manufactured with a 28nm process (however that correlates to Intel and TSMC's process definitions). Imagine setting that as the performance target, but using a 7nm process. 1/4 the nanometers means 1/16th the chip surface area and theoretically about 1/16th the power consumption. I'm sure the math isn't that clean in practice, but the point is the triangle of tradeoffs for chips is basically power consumption, cost/size, performance. If we sacrificed performance, we could have incredibly small chips that use very little power. That's a tough sell marketing-wise, but I think plausible with the right branding as a "lifestyle" brand of product where owning a low-power phone signals detachment from the treadmill of endless tech consumption.
@@stormburn1 really agree with you. and hopefully people will realize that processor with higher efficiency is more needed compared to processor with just higher performance alone.
Nah. I want more powerful chippers not ones that are more efficient. Efficiency is boring.
Also, if people make more efficient software, we can use less processing power and save even more battery life.
The consistency !!!
As usual, a well explained video. 🙂
Glad you liked it!
The least improved part of a smartphone is resistance. You used to buy a phone and that's it. Use it. Now you have to buy a screen cover, a phone cover. Phones used to drop on the floor and one piece got to each side of the room, you put them together and done. Now it scratches, breaks, etc. We are now using expensive fragile bricks made of glass rather than a decent piece of hardware that can stand day to day use.
Well, yeah, phones became multimedia powerhouses during that time. Phones are becoming more durable, though. I should know, I'm part of the small segment of the population funding them. My three most recent phones having been the Unihertz Titan, Pocket, and RAZR 5G. Flexible displays seem to be promising and I hope that cost of ownership continues to trend downward in years to come. What are your thoughts on foldables and their impact on durability?
@@saygoodnighttoghosts Yes there are indeed many hardcore brands (don't know if this is the right name for it). I even thought about buying one of those twice, but the hardware isn't impressive. I don't really like the idea of foldable phones. Its kinds of build an extra step to use the phone. But I really like the idea of slidable phones. I had once a Motorola that the keyboard slides and it was a physical keyboard. Was pretty good. No problem with durability and convenient to slide. A screen that expands would be much better. You use the phone in the regular way and if you need extra space just slide it. Foldable on the other side they make an even narrow rectangle, kind of makes you need to always open to use. Plus I think its less durable, but who knows. The idea of a screen that folds or slide is good, considering the current size of screen is too small for the amount of things we do in our phones. I have a Galaxy Note 20 Ultra and I think the screen is not large enough. I use desktop most of the time, specially for shopping. Phones are too small.
Nokia again.
@@drac124 I'm on a Fold4 at the moment & the cover screen is actually really usable even with my big hands. I only do maybe 25% of my usage on the main screen. But the times where I do need the big screen, it's incredible
What the fuck are you on m8?
I've dropped my old Samsung Galaxy countless times, and it has maybe one scratch.
Well having an option to replace just the battery in my phone would be another way to make it better. Even if they managed to make it last double at new, what is the point if it doesn't last a day after two years of use.
the point is to make you to buy a new phone every 2 years at least
@@palamidagheo4520 Yep that's pretty much the case if you notice with any product bought there always seems to be a weak spot and that's on purpose because they want you to buy another. Making a phone that lasts forever isn't profitable to these companies.
well, i tried this tactic a few years ago. i bought a phone with a replaceable battery. two years in, the battery won't last a single day so i tried to buy a replacement. problem is, phone model has been discontinued and i cannot find an official battery replacement being sold, so i had to resort with an off-brand replacement. it didn't last for a year.
@NTVEL Martynas It's not that easy to remove a glass/metal back glued on especially for someone with no experience in doing so not only that the price of those tools add up. Idc what the phone looks like I really don't I always put my phone in a case I'd much rather have a easily removable shell no tool required. I'll take functionality over form and day. Sure phones look pretty now but just imagine if I could easily hot swap my 5000 mah battery on the fly and also have a SD card slot. The look of the phone is the least important aspect to me and trust me they could make the phone look nice even with a removable back and they could probably make it out of metal if they wanted to as well it's just they want the general consumer to buy another whole phone rather then replace the battery themselves also the average consumer is probably more enticed by looks it would be nice if they at least made a version of the phones with these features just to see how they would sell in a more modern time.
@NTVEL Martynas That's what they say, but as far as I can remember, the Samsung Galaxy S5 was dust/water resistant, and also had a removable battery cover. There's also the Fairphone 4, which has some water and dust resistance, although admittedly not as much as some other phones, while also being the only modern smartphone I know of that has the classic removable back cover.
Would love to see some statistics on the median and variance of battery life :)
One of my favourite videos of yours!
Happy to hear!
Since I was born in 1951 I remember in my young years that there were two main rechargeable battery technologies. One of them was the lead acid battery, such as used in cars. The other was nickel-cadmium battery known is the Ni-Cad battery. Now we have these lithium batteries that can hold a lot of energy for their size and weight.
This is a better summary of upcoming battery technology than any other video I have seen discussing the topic.
I really like this video. I have seen a lot of videos claiming "the next big thing" is only a few years away. This is an honest overview which is a lot more useful
They are getting better in the way of being managed. I have set an alert when the battery is outside the 35-75% range, which helps prolong its life a lot.
Im a chemichal engineering student. More than half of my professors' areas of research are solid state batteries. Very hot right now.
I am very happy that story behind is now back and uploading regularly.
I think the main problem with batteries is their decay. If they remained working correctly we could keep using them as-is. But they lose their properties quite fast and require replacement or at least an external charge at some point. The only reason I am replacing my iPhone 6S now is the battery, the phone works just fine for me, but the battery is pretty much gone after a little usage.
“Batteries are holding progress back”…. Or focus on improving the energy efficiency of displays, processors, and antennas maybe…
Yes, this old battery tech is holding more powerful gadgets back. BUT -hear me out- it also forces companies to make their processors and stuff more and more efficient to squeeze more performance out of every mAh the battery can deliver.
Such a good vid!! Been following for years and quality has always been impeccable
But whilst I'm gushing... I'm so glad I'm a child of the walkman era - such a gamechanger to all of tech, and both Sony and Ninetendo used to feel so on it 👌 back then.
While I am glad battery tech are being improved, I really want to see batteries that can last longer and stays cool, especially when viewing video content, playing games or multitasking where the battery drops quickly, and it seems to get worse over the years as well. I'd like to see improvement in this aspect, that would be great! Less charging as well and waiting for the battery to get full.
batteries naturally degrade over time, you can’t avoid that! however, you can slow the degradation down yourself with various methods (keeping it out of strong heat/cold, keeping it in the 20%-80% range, not constantly keeping it at 100%, etc) and the manufacturer can as well, by making devices more power efficient and whatnot
@@Legority so if i happen to use my phone until the battery is at 10%, is that okay?
It’s not the battery getting hot... it’s the stupidly overpowered cpu that nobody needs unless they are a hardcore gamer... high end phones now days have higher performance than a cheap laptop for no good reason.
I'm glad you're back. These videos are some of the best that are out there!
I admire your graphs and visualization abilities even more than your great content and topics.
Every time I'm watching your videos I'm taking screen shots to show people the beautiful graph I just saw in your video. Thanks a lot.
Imagine a 1 week battery an a phone. 2022 and we still have to dream..
That would be amazing, yes please, 1 week battery sign me up!
6:25 Can't help but notice that while average battery capacity improved by 39%, the Counterpoint's battery chart managed to increase by 364% 🤔also the exponential graph 😅
It seems like we have a few different paths to improving battery life: improve battery capacity, improve hardware efficiency, offload processing (to the cloud or to a paired personal computer), and develop longer-range wireless charging.
efficiently transmitting energy to a small patch of space (10cm) at a practical range (10m) without some physical (wave)guide is surprisingly difficult, you'll have to focus the energy accurately and keep an active tracking of the receiver's position, and yet there's still the orientation of the receiver.
And make more efficient software.
the fundamental chemistry of this video 🤣
More battery capacity doesn’t necessarily mean longer battery life on a phone but it also depends on the phone’s power consumption and efficiency
true, but I don't think they would increase power consumption much., because modern phones are already close to overheating when the CPU or GPU is fully utilized and of course there is no reason to abandon power saving technologies when the hardware is not fully utilized.
Been waiting for these types of contents regarding battery technology
You introduce sodium as an alternative because of humanitarian concerns, but why wouldn't we want to improve working conditions for the lithium mines, instead of hopping to a different material?
For the same reason we can't stop making weapons and just promise to live in peace forever.
hard to believe youtube suggesting this video for months, as usual, i learn nothing from a heavily suggested video. one thing the industry or EU should implement is battery bypass so that a charger can fully power a phone without a battery or defective battery.
In the lab it looks nice, but an improved battery coming to market always seems three years away. Excellent video in any case. Good research and nice graphics. I subscribed. All good wishes.
{improved battery always three years away}. And it always will be. Until you get where you are going. And stop. The battery gets better all those (3 years). And a different goal is posted for the next (3 years). Just because there is also a (hopeful) goal posted in there. And it makes you feel like we failed. A person should back up and see that a lot of things have happened. And we are getting close to the (long goal. And by the time we get there, we will already have a better technology.
He just described how battery tech has been improving all this time. A huge quantum leap is always a possibility, but these kinds of changes are rare. There's no point being upset that not every promised improvement is actually delivered
I much preferred the sizes of those old phones you showed.
I don't care about charge speed, I care about longevity.
If I was forced to charge my phone at 5w for it to live 2 extra years, I'll take that any day than 120w charging
I am an electronic engineer, but I don't study batteries. From my limited knowledge the only tech discussed in this video that can improve the battery longevity is the solid state battery.
Luckily the scenario you describe is very possible.
Charging at 5w will give you at least 2 more years than charging at 120w.
Most Androids allow you to terminate charging at 85% nowadays also which will also help.
Get a 5W charger.
Right to repair is the better sollution I guess
@@SirFaceFone BASED
Love how you didn't shy away or gloss over the ethical factory for batteries, great video
Episode 86? Man, it feels like I saw Episode 1 a few weeks ago!
Writing a paper on batteries and this video cleared up some confusion I had, thanks!
it's absolutely mind boggling to me that one of the biggest challenges for EVs is that we literally cannot trust humans around the globe to not abuse one another while extracting resources.
The billionaires paying the people extracting the resources don’t care whether humans are abused in the process. Only if the rest of the world will find out before they make all their money
That was one Fascinating video. Amazingly explained 🔥
Sad that a few years ago there was a supposing GRAPHENE Battery that was to come out it seems that has Poof from existence (not really but you get what I'm saying)
The rich elite need to buy the land first before it can be mass produced.
It always happened
We need to kick Sony's bum and get them to pull the same move they did with li-ion.
A lot of batteries are really promising as a single cell in a lab, but are unsuitable for some reason when you try and mass produce a full battery to use in real world conditions.
@@attomicchickenthey announced in 2016 they would make lithium sulfur batteries commercial by 2020 but in 2017 they sold their battery business
This has been a problem for a long time on computing tech, and it's a big part of why CPUs on desktop computers gave up on the "gigahertz" battle (which was literally lighting computers on fire) and moved to multi-core systems, and we haven't looked back, thankfully. But it still means CPUs and other processing systems are getting a lot more powerful than improvements in battery technology. And that's been true throughout the history of mobile computing.
The tipping point for batteries will be reached when the energy density of Li-Ion battery will be three times of the batteries currently in use.
In practice, the battery of the size of a current petrol tank of an ICE car will allow the same 600+ miles for a single charge.
This may take anything from five to twenty years, depending on the level of investment the battery manufacturers decide.
The energy density improvements will not come from new material or chemicals used for the batteries; they will rather stem from new crystalline structures achieved with new manufacturing techniques.
Regards,
Anthony
You are a treasure. Elsewhere in comments there are engineers lauding the accuracy and comprehension of this video whilst I on the complete opposite end of the spectrum feel like I didn't get lost in your explanation once, not one bit. Just as an unusual bonus I rarely find an accent that makes it easier to understand someone. And when I say rarely I mean never....
Thank you.
I can only imagine the insane amount of research that went into making this video 🙌
Great video! Finally a clear description of battery tech
There's constant noise going on in the video, especially when talking - video is great, but I think the noise issue is something worth looking into.
It's the hissing from the transformer of my Neon sigh, which is a bit tricky to work around, but I have a plan to fix it eventually :P
I didn't notice it. But maybe it's because I use an external loudspeaker (Bluetooth).
Just record the video and sound separately, or insert thr neon light digitally
Glad you took the feedback and working on it quickly, really want to share the video with my bro, please reupload soon.
It was awesome!!
Naruto is ❤!
In my opinion, I think we should try to optimize software more, than try to brute force more battery capacity. Cool video tho. It explains a lot in a manner that's easy to understand
That's also happening simultaneously. I think so
I would agree with that - there's a lot of inefficient software and/or bloatware nowadays, just because the hardware is often powerful enough for it to "not matter". And as a developer myself I share the sentiment that it's nice not needing to actively optimize everything and focus on the business logic, what the software should do, but it does come with a price to pay. And when a news website (indicating: simple) takes long to load or is lagging when interacting with it, or when a supposedly simple operation, like opening a menu in a program, takes longer than an instant, something has gone pretty wrong..
But in the average company optimization probably* is not exactly a common topic and priority for stakeholders/product managers etc. and apps by a single dev are often enough built by inexperienced devs that don't have the knowledge or interest to optimize things, at least I assume that's the case for most software.
(I don't exclude myself, I definitely have written some very inefficient stuff due to not knowing better and often enough don't pay much attention to it.)
* I am fairly new in the professional industry and have a sample size of one unfortunately, but I've also heard from multiple people with similar experience.
Text renderers have gotten significantly bloated over time. Instead of doing full hinting as was originally intended in TrueType, they use lots of bloaty render techniques that make not only the performance but also the rendering quality even worse. Microsoft’s best renderer is the one they used before they introduced ClearType. So on Windows you have to disable ClearType to get the correct rendering (even then, it doesn’t work for DirectWrite which is even more bloated). And virtually no Unix systems provide ways to unglitch TrueType rendering.
That's what Apple does, not just with batteries. They heavily optimize memory usage, software, etc. and the result is less energy consumption and faster performance.
@@ronch550 No, their software is Unix based so it’s highly bloated. The real optimized software came from legacy Microsoft. They literally made a renderer called GDI that is the fastest renderer ever, so much so that I consider GDI to be the only hardware accelerated renderer ever. Of course, modern Microsoft software (as opposed to legacy) is highly bloated as well.
I have an iPad Mini from 2013, and the battery is still great.
Silicon isn't all that abundant anymore. It is mostly extracted from beach sand. Humanity has already extracted most of the beach sand in the world to the point where we have to extract even more underwater - thanks to vanity projects like Dubai's artificial islands. The impact on the environment is very concerning.
The biggest sand consumer - easily taking places 1, 2 and 3 for itself - is concrete. It sucks up sand like nothing else.
Construction mostly uses river sand because they don't have to deal with salt that way, but it also means that there's no new sand washing downstream.
Beaches and concert need coarse sand, why can't fine sand form desserts be used to make silicon ingots?
@@Alhussainba I highly recommending reading about it online - it's quite an interesting topic. Desert sand is largely useless to us - I found this explanation online: desert sand grains are finer and smoother so their surface chemistry would not be able to offer sufficient number of multidirectional chemical linkages. They also have other undesirable contaminants. Basically: desert sand is the wrong shape and difficult and expensive to use.
Everything wears out. Everything. You really can't escape entropy, not usually anyway.
Great video but you only talked about the energy density side of things. Wouldve been great if you included the efficiency of the batteries aswell! One of the biggest problems is cooling the batteries. Because of the high internal resistance of current batteries they tend to release quite alot of energy as heat and tesla found a great way to massively reduce the resistance by introducing the tabless design. This means higher amperage & less heat 😄
Battery tech isn't going well. Hope it changes rapidly.
I have an idea. Why don't we make
removable batteries in our smartphones. Just imagine how awesome it would be, if we could open our phones and take out the batteries by hand without special tools.
Hehe this made me giggle
You can! You start by heating up the device and using priers to remove the glass. Taking care not to damage the glass. Or the battery. Or the mainboard. And you know what, the glass will probably break so just order a replacement screen alongside the battery. Also that new screen might have a fingerprint reader that isn't paired to the mainbo- oh yeah I think I see where you are going with this.
As a Fairphone owner I feel obligated to yell FAIRPHONE HAS THIS!!!!
Lithium batteries are still and always be very flammable.
I think the comparison with Moore's Law is kind of stupid. There is nothing in physics that hinders this 'law' and has its focus merely on fabrication progress of structure size. Nobody expected something like this from batteries, since we already know what the energy densities of every single molecule is. And there is no combination of molecules that will lead to EXPONENTIAL energy density increase.
The asterisk correction 😂 top tier production here
I like waterproof phones. But god I hate the non removable batteries. I tried living with it and what happens? "OOPS your phone screen is black and restarts and running it out of power doesn't work to reset it!" Solution turned out to be to disconnect the battery and reconnect it.
Would have been simple with removable batteries, but nope, this sealed phone design has dug its heels in and how convenient that we need special tools or pay an exorbitant fee just to do something that used to be routine.
Excellent video, big man
Planned obsolescence is a very reliable employee.
Oh my god my phones at 2% right now I’m tired of constantly getting up and plugging it in
You didn't mention that Li-ion batteries can only be charged to 80% quickly and then have to be trickle charged. This why car companies only ever give 0 to 80% charge times. A friend of mine went to buy an electric car and they couldn't tell her the 0 to 100 % charge time !!!
Is this by design or is it the physics?
This isnt special to lithium. Thats kinda a general rule for all batterys.
Yeah cuz otherwise it will degrade the battery way quicker.
@@TheZachary86 it's more chemical as charging your device to extreme ends of the battery i.e 0% and 100% is when the batteryis more stressed which is bad.
@@TheZachary86 Its physics. Squeezing out the last bit of toothpaste, accelerating to the last kilometer of your car’s top speed, cleaning up the last bit of trash from a park, etc. are all asymptotic processes, the closer you are to the goal, the harder it is to progress at all.
This video was incredible. Thanks for bringing this to the world!
Right to repair should hopefully put an end to this shady practice of soldering batteries into phones.
Next battery breakthrough: making them user replaceable and create a good recycling program?
Don't dumb down your videos, chemistry is a good thing in your videos
Don't apologize for giving us a chemistry lesson. We needed that. I have always felt that we should have gone to EVs long ago. I always just assumed that they were better for the environment. I didn't know that lithium was strip-mined.
The electric Ford F150 pickup truck is in no way a compromise in speed or power. In fact, it is a much better vehicle. For a tradesperson, there are outlets that are even capable of powering welders. In a remote area, that is a huge feature. Even better, with an optional kit, this truck can reverse-charge your entire house for several days of normal use and over a week of conservative use. I want one! I'll find something to weld in the desert.
Jay Leno's Garage has many EVs going back to the early 1900s. If you're interested, a lot of his videos are here on UA-cam. Some of the engineering is just fascinating.
Great video overall, however QuantumScape as far as I know has not given up on solid state
Thanks! You are right, they haven't given up, it's just that they overpromised initially and our expectations had to be dialed back for later dates
We keep trying to improve the same pattern... Solar air charge will be the future. All you will need is a small receiver in the device, which will constantly draw energy from the source. No more charging needed...
Your videos are always brilliant; this one is exceptionally so. Very nicely done.
Very happy to hear!
Not one mention of John B. Goodenough, the inventor of lithium-ion batteries (won Nobel price with that), computer memory, and one of the main researchers right now of solid-state batteries while he's 100 years old right now? :(
@12:40 Graphite also expands during lithiation. The conversion of C6 to LiC6 has a volume increase of about 10%. Per lithium, the expansion differences between graphite and silicon are not THAT different. The issue is that silicon can hold a magnitude more lithium per unit of mass.
I wasn't expecting to learn so much so quickly... subbed.
Impressed by this vid, subject is clearly important on many levels, and TA presentation style is reassuringly definitive.
Sad that the exploitation really has not improved in the global supply chain and the same disgusting behaviours is rampant in tech as all the others, channels such as TA should keep reminding us of the harm we are causing.
I love tech and my phone but hate that folks are dying for it. Same story with so much of our 1st world products, like cacao growers who have never tasted chocolate, or oil producing countries who's population remain poor due to corruption, or fast fashion enabling child workers....
0:53 Redmi just released 300w fast charging technology, which can be fully charged in 5 minutes.
Absolutely mind-blowing and most certainly concerning in terms of safety.
This is an excellent piece of research, lots of new technologies are being trialed by our military and their research areas for future power and future green power.
no ones talking about how each software update is making phones draw more and more power. its really a pretty big problem. can never tell whether its battery degradation, or just software getting heavier
7:30 the resources are only valuable if they're used. Not "stripping" them would mean no money for them.
I can see ceramics working in grid-storage that doesn't have to move and flex like a car. In a car, as soon as you get out of the driveway, the flexing is going to crack that bad boy.
i feel like smartphone batteries are "good enough" for the average consumer already which may explain why there's not as much incentive to innovate on this front. my huawei p20 pro 2018 smartphone which has 4000 mah is still doing great in 2022, so i have no doubt anyone with newer smartphones or bigger batteries will be even better off
Regarding fast charging, the solution is very simple and right infront of our noses. Make the battery easily exchangeable and simply switch if the active one drains out.
When the battery is too good the sales of the new phone might plummet.
That's why the manufacturer might increase the battery size but CANNOT increase battery reliability.
Phones without an original charger like most phones sold lately also will make the battery broke faster
"fundamental chemistry of this video" i didnt even notice until the correction popped in
Because companies don't have a financial incentive to make them better, especially when people change phones every year essentially.
Thats just plainly incorrect lol
On the contrary. I think all the insane progress in technology in past is motivated by nothing but profits. There are sevral shady ways to make profits but being better than the competion is paramount.
@@trw1782 silly comment.
You guys really see no profit in having superior battery technologies? :D i often read stupid things in internet, but this is up there with the best of them
The auto industry is a two trillion dollar industry, if energy density can be solved it would have been long time ago...
ive always bought my iphones refurbished rather than new, and i also hold onto them for ages before upgrading.
As a result, ive replaced the batteries in my iphones twice each.
Ive had a 5C, 7, and 12mini (current).
Replacing the batteries in these is piss easy and i don’t understand why people complain so much. The only difficulty is getting past the waterproof seal in the newer ones, but it’s still easy; just a bit of heat to soften it and gently using a pry tool.
10:18 wouldn't that be hydrogen though I suppose lithium wants to give up its valence electron under any circumstances unlike hydrogen.
great to see a new story behind video. Bears looking sharp✌️
I hate these arguments that we should avoid using certain metals for batteries because of concerns about labor practices in developing countries. It’s such a first world centered view of the problem, where you are just trying to clean your own conscience, rather than actually help poor people. Battery metals are a huge opportunity to escape poverty for many of the world’s poorest countries. You are literally depriving them of this opportunity by demonizing these metals. What we should do instead is to demand that international mining companies set up mining operations that have labor practices that corrospond to international standards. The western mining companies are already doing this. If you want to a conscientious consumer of batteries, you should demand that device manufacturers sources their materials from these companies. Not that they avoid using certain metals altogether because they have been narrowmindedly demonized as “problematic”.
Western companies like Apple are worse than many local manufacturing companies when it comes to labour and profits.
There is no battery problem. The current batteries are perfectly suitable for the job. The big problem is actually the phone makers who insist on a tiny thin phone. I would be happy with a phone twice as thick with double the sized battery. The bonus would be you could then also fit sd card reader and audio jack back in the phone. In addition you could fit a decent telephoto lens as well.
pretty wild that, as a global consumer, I have to make up my mind about exactly how much child labor and environmental destruction is an acceptable amount to commit to building the devices I use every day.
there is no acceptable amount, but not the consumer not the seller cares about it