IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v60y2013icp492-500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of lead-acid and lithium-based battery behavior and capacity fade in off-grid renewable charging applications

Author

Listed:
  • Krieger, Elena M.
  • Cannarella, John
  • Arnold, Craig B.

Abstract

The effects of variable charging rates and incomplete charging in off-grid renewable energy applications are studied by comparing battery degradation rates and mechanisms in lead-acid, LCO (lithium cobalt oxide), LCO-NMC (LCO-lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide composite), and LFP (lithium iron phosphate) cells charged with wind-based charging protocols. Poor pulse charge acceptance, particularly for long pulses, contributes to incomplete charging and rapid degradation of lead-acid cells due to apparent high rates of sulphation and resistance growth. Partial charging and pulse charging, common lead-acid stressors in off-grid applications, are found to have little if any effect on degradation in the lithium-based cells when compared to constant current charging. These cells all last much longer than the lead-acid cells; the LFP batteries show the greatest longevity, with minimal capacity fade observed after over 1000 cycles. Pulse charge acceptance is found to depend on pulse length in lead-acid and LFP cells, but not in LCO and LCO-NMC cells. Excellent power performance and consistent voltage and power behavior during cycling suggest that LFP batteries are well-suited to withstand the stresses associated with off-grid renewable energy storage and have the potential to reduce system lifetime costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Krieger, Elena M. & Cannarella, John & Arnold, Craig B., 2013. "A comparison of lead-acid and lithium-based battery behavior and capacity fade in off-grid renewable charging applications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 492-500.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:60:y:2013:i:c:p:492-500
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2013.08.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544213007044
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2013.08.029?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:60:y:2013:i:c:p:492-500. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.