@Azimuth Shari
Gosh, I've seen these for more than a decade and also wonder why they aren't more popular.
I think poor marketing and dumbing down their tech explanations is what chases the curious away, at least in North America. The constant comparisons to "lead acid" in marketing are tiring. Those of us interested tend to want to know in comparison to WHAT? The average consumer couldn't care less. Us battery-nerds as prospective buyers want to know more details.
So when making comparisons to lead-acid, what type are you comparing to - is it:
Flooded Lead Acid ?
Sealed MF maintenance free (aka sealed FLOODED with extra electrolyte added) ?
Gel ?
AGM (conventional recycled or pure-lead) ?
So when looking at it, their biggest direct comparison is to an AGM battery. The charge / float voltages are very similar. The maximum of 0.25C charge rate is very similar. Their internal impedance is similar (except not to pure-lead!)
Ok. In marketing materials, the "near solid-state electrolyte" is very interesting and possibly key to some advantages. What exactly is this near-solid-state electrolyte tech, and how is it different from Gel's solidified electrolyte, or agm's absorbed glass mat?
Advantages I see:
Ability to discharge down to 0 volts without apparent \immediate\ harm.
Ok, that's good to know in case there is a catastrophic discharge that low, or perhaps a long parasitic drain. Very cool. But it's not something one does operationally. AC inverters will cut off at typically 10.7 to 11.7v, so that's not a huge advantage. Direct DC operations with most 12v nominal devices start to get funky, displays blank, and generally stop at say 10v and give up. But it implies with normal care, the lead-crystal should hold up well.
So again, the biggest advantage here would be being able to recover from an accidental catastrophic discharge, and not really anything operationally advantageous in normal operation. But that's cool nonetheless.
Not having to "top off" or maintain for up to 2 years according to marketing:
WOW! What this implies is that for some reason this battery resists sulfation. Is that true? Do you get full capacity after charging to full, and ignoring it for 2 years? Not suggesting anyone should, but if true, that would be a big plus if they are sitting in retail, or otherwise unused for a season or two and not hard sulfating.
Getting back to it's nearest competitor, AGM. They are notoriously UNDERcharged, especially in solar - simply because there is not enough time to do so in a cyclic situation, where an 8-16 hour float \after\ absorb is actually finished is ideal. So most owners tend to "walk down" their agm's capacity by never getting that last 1% of charge in cycle over cycle and it just hard sulfates.
If lead-crystal is resistant to sulfation, (based upon the topping-off claim) then that would be a great advantage to agm's which are usually under-charged especially in solar. Is this true? Is there data?
So we come back to the major question of WHY aren't these more popular in North America? Is it because nobody knows what the near solid-state electrolyte is? Is it a licensing or dealership issue? Any word on resistance to sulfation as compared to a competing agm?
More technical details like these, exposed in public would go a LONG way. No need to compare to pesky "lead acid". That's a turn off. Nobody cares about that. I think people would want to see something in public, rather than being told hypothetically to just trust them over the phone.
Gosh, I've seen these for more than a decade and also wonder why they aren't more popular.
I think poor marketing and dumbing down their tech explanations is what chases the curious away, at least in North America. The constant comparisons to "lead acid" in marketing are tiring. Those of us interested tend to want to know in comparison to WHAT? The average consumer couldn't care less. Us battery-nerds as prospective buyers want to know more details.
So when making comparisons to lead-acid, what type are you comparing to - is it:
Flooded Lead Acid ?
Sealed MF maintenance free (aka sealed FLOODED with extra electrolyte added) ?
Gel ?
AGM (conventional recycled or pure-lead) ?
So when looking at it, their biggest direct comparison is to an AGM battery. The charge / float voltages are very similar. The maximum of 0.25C charge rate is very similar. Their internal impedance is similar (except not to pure-lead!)
Ok. In marketing materials, the "near solid-state electrolyte" is very interesting and possibly key to some advantages. What exactly is this near-solid-state electrolyte tech, and how is it different from Gel's solidified electrolyte, or agm's absorbed glass mat?
Advantages I see:
Ability to discharge down to 0 volts without apparent \immediate\ harm.
Ok, that's good to know in case there is a catastrophic discharge that low, or perhaps a long parasitic drain. Very cool. But it's not something one does operationally. AC inverters will cut off at typically 10.7 to 11.7v, so that's not a huge advantage. Direct DC operations with most 12v nominal devices start to get funky, displays blank, and generally stop at say 10v and give up. But it implies with normal care, the lead-crystal should hold up well.
So again, the biggest advantage here would be being able to recover from an accidental catastrophic discharge, and not really anything operationally advantageous in normal operation. But that's cool nonetheless.
Not having to "top off" or maintain for up to 2 years according to marketing:
WOW! What this implies is that for some reason this battery resists sulfation. Is that true? Do you get full capacity after charging to full, and ignoring it for 2 years? Not suggesting anyone should, but if true, that would be a big plus if they are sitting in retail, or otherwise unused for a season or two and not hard sulfating.
Getting back to it's nearest competitor, AGM. They are notoriously UNDERcharged, especially in solar - simply because there is not enough time to do so in a cyclic situation, where an 8-16 hour float \after\ absorb is actually finished is ideal. So most owners tend to "walk down" their agm's capacity by never getting that last 1% of charge in cycle over cycle and it just hard sulfates.
If lead-crystal is resistant to sulfation, (based upon the topping-off claim) then that would be a great advantage to agm's which are usually under-charged especially in solar. Is this true? Is there data?
So we come back to the major question of WHY aren't these more popular in North America? Is it because nobody knows what the near solid-state electrolyte is? Is it a licensing or dealership issue? Any word on resistance to sulfation as compared to a competing agm?
More technical details like these, exposed in public would go a LONG way. No need to compare to pesky "lead acid". That's a turn off. Nobody cares about that. I think people would want to see something in public, rather than being told hypothetically to just trust them over the phone.
Last edited: