Silicon Dioxide Batteries

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
MurrayM

MurrayM

Guru
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
5,946
Location
Canada
Vessel Name
Badger
Vessel Make
30' Sundowner Tug
Ahhh, the Internet. So many things to discover.....

Can anybody reference some independent third party testing of silicon dioxide batteries? So far all I can scare up is dealer and manufacturer information and some RV forum conversations.

Looks like they might be similar in many ways to Firefly's carbon foam batteries, but differ in that they can be charged at 14.7 rather than Firefly's 14.4 volts. It also appears they can take a full charge almost to 100% so don't need a smart three stage charging regime either. (Have emailed the company to confirm that one).

If it's true that three stage charging isn't needed, then it would save fuel if you needed a full charge...but if you didn't need a full charge, they don't suffer from sulfation either. Oh, and they only lose a tad over 1% of charge per month.

The 116 Ah Firefly G31 goes for $748.00 Cdn and the 108 Ah Si02 batteries from Azimuth Solar are on sale right now for $634.00 which makes for over $340.00 in savings over Firefly's when buying three batteries.

The savings over lithium batteries would be even more significant.

Sounding pretty good, eh? Too good to be true? This is why I would like to find a third party test!

Silicon Dioxide SiO2 Lead Crystal Batteries Extreme Temperature Deep Cycle Battery

Unique Chemistry

The SiO2 technology is unique. Standard Lead Acid batteries suffer from freezing, poor low & high temperature performance, sulfation/corrosion, water loss, off-gassing, transport safety issues and short life cycles. The non-corrosive electrolyte in SiO2 batteries forms crystalline salts when charged/discharged.

SiO2 batteries use 95% less sulphuric acid than Lead Acid batteries. They are essentially a “dry-cell” battery with no liquid to freeze, spill or off-gas. Eliminating most of the acid, means that the lead plates last longer and weigh less.

Sulphation does not build-up and reduce capacity over time. With the crystalline structure, they can also be used in any orientation.

Longer Lasting

SiO2 Batteries last 2-5X as long as Lead Acid batteries. Deep-cycle Lead Acid batteries are rated from 500 charge/discharge cycles (discount batteries) to 1200 cycles for premium batteries, at 50% depth of discharge levels (DoD). The SiO2 batteries offer a much higher cycle life of 2800 cycles at 50% DoD. Their lifetime cost per cycle averages 1/2 to 1/3 of most deep-cycle batteries.

High Current Discharge Ability

SiO2 batteries have excellent high-current discharge ability and will not suffer any capacity loss when discharged to 100%. The Ultra Long-Life batteries have a rapid charging time in comparison to conventional alternatives.

At 25C a 100Ah battery can be charged at 25A per hour resulting in a 4 hour charge time (20-40% faster than AGM and Lead Acid batteries, which typically charge at 15-20C which is 5-7 hours for a 100Ah battery). In practical terms, if you are using a fuel generator to recharge your batteries, you will need to run it 20-40% less with SiO2 batteries, than with Lead Acid batteries.
Click to expand...

https://soneil.com/products/battery/?swoof=1&product_cat=battery
 
Last edited:
They do sound too good:well priced,long lived,easy to charge,no sulfation risks, etc. Watching and interested.
 
It would be nice to know what the downside is. Anyone using them yet in industry?
There is another website Siliconebatteries.ca with contact info. No technical details at all other than size and AH.
I don't ever want to be a test guinea pig again since buying a first year GM car years ago.
 
Considering our 420 amp hour flooded lead acid battery bank cannot be taken below 50% without lasting harm, three of the G27 100 amp hour Si02 batteries should do the trick.

They are on sale now for $539.00 Cdn, which is a savings of $627 bucks compared to the Firefly batteries.

Still waiting for the an answer back about charging...would prefer to drop them in and connect them to our dumb as a rock but Steady Eddy self regulated Hamilton Ferris alternator...more savings :thumb:

12V 100Ah G27 SiO2 Lead Crystal Deep Cycle RV Battery
 
Last edited:
It all looks promising, but I am skeptical. We all know how new ideas come to market with crazy pricing until that product starts to become mainstream. I remember buying my first 12v AGM winch battery back in '93-95. I paid almost $400 with my company discount. It was massive compared to today's AGMs and less power. I don't remember the CCA or AH. It would run my 9000lb winch on my Jeep for about a minute and a half before getting to hot.




High Wire said:
It would be nice to know what the downside is. Anyone using them yet in industry?
There is another website Siliconebatteries.ca with contact info. No technical details at all other than size and AH.
I don't ever want to be a test guinea pig again since buying a first year GM car years ago.
Click to expand...

Did you fall for one of those 350ci gas engines converted to run on diesel?
 
Looks like silicon wins in the ability to handle engine room temps, but fireflys look to provide more recharge cycles.

I am installing now three L15 4 volts and 4 group 31s into a massive bank that will both start the engines but provide house current. I’ll report back in the fall how it is all working.
 
ben2go said:
Did you fall for one of those 350ci gas engines converted to run on diesel?
Click to expand...

Remember the 1980 Chevy Citation? Owned one for two weeks. It failed to start 3 times with less than 200 miles. Dealership said nothing wrong. Traded for a 1/2 ton pickup.
 
One of the principle advantages of the Firefly is the ability to run at partial states of charge for long periods with no damage. I wonder how the SiO2 batteries do in this regard? They are labeled in large print: "Recharge immediately after use" which suggests they do not compare well.
 
High Wire said:
Remember the 1980 Chevy Citation? Owned one for two weeks. It failed to start 3 times with less than 200 miles. Dealership said nothing wrong. Traded for a 1/2 ton pickup.
Click to expand...
Yep. When they worked, they were good little cars. I owned two '85 Cavaliers. They are a cousin of the Citation but a little better I think. I never had issues with the Cavilers. Both '85s went to 200,000 before being traded off. I also owned a '92 Cavalier and currently have a '98. '92 went to 180,000 before being traded my current '98 has 260,000+ and still going strong. She looks rough from the southern sun though. :thumb:
 
It sounds like marketing hype. From the descriptions these are simply gel cell batteries. Gel cel batteries gel the electrolyte by mixing it with fumed or colloidal silica (SiO2 - or silicon dioxide). There is nothing new about gel cells. You might want to consider Trojan gel batteries (Trojan Motive Gel). Their group 31 battery will likely be under $500 CDN. Trojan is one of the best names in deep cycle batteries with a long track record and good support for their products.
 
DDW said:
One of the principle advantages of the Firefly is the ability to run at partial states of charge for long periods with no damage. I wonder how the SiO2 batteries do in this regard? They are labeled in large print: "Recharge immediately after use" which suggests they do not compare well.
Click to expand...

They are supposed to not suffer from sulfation...so "they" say...
 
MurrayM said:
They are supposed to not suffer from sulfation...so "they" say...
Click to expand...

If not, then why the big label saying "recharge immediately after use"? Like to see some independent testing on them, such as Nigel Calder did on the Firefly.
 
The question I have is can you charge those batteries with a high amp alternator or can you “only” charge with a 220V genny? This has kept me away from some of the newer battery types. Also begs the question of solar panels as well?
 
Taras,

What type of battery are you asking about. I have programmed my Magnum charger to work with fireflys. Firefly L-15s boast 4500 cycles with a depth of discharge of only 50%. That number drops to 1500 or so if you take them down to 20 percent. I will be on the other side of the grass by the time i reach that many cycles.

However, being in a warm engine room does haves a detrimental effect on battery life. I have yet to find anything describing the loss. It appears the silicone batteries tolerate heat better.
 
Taras said:
The question I have is can you charge those batteries with a high amp alternator or can you “only” charge with a 220V genny? This has kept me away from some of the newer battery types. Also begs the question of solar panels as well?
Click to expand...


Why has this kept you away from newer battery types? What's the issue with alternator charging?
 
I think you are wise to approach this with skepticism. Not that I know of anything wrong or false about their claims, but just that it takes a very long time to really prove out any of the claims, and to learn how they really behave long term. Firefly's hold promise, but nobody has been running them for more than a couple of years, so nobody really knows how well they will hold up longer term. Even LFP batteries which have been around for a couple of decades are still coming up with little twists and turns. And nobody has run them long enough to prove out any of the theorized approaches to extending life, etc.
 
For my purposes, I think the battery chemistry that had the highest charge rate once full charging voltage was reached would give the most advantages. Is there difference between the different technologies in this respect?
 
dhays said:
For my purposes, I think the battery chemistry that had the highest charge rate once full charging voltage was reached would give the most advantages. Is there difference between the different technologies in this respect?
Click to expand...


I completely agree, and feel this is the big compelling reason for LFP (Lithium ion). In addition to significantly more lifetime cycles, you can charge them at full tilt right up until they are full. Gone is the long, drawn out absorb cycle as the last 20% of charge to drop-fed to the batteries. With LPF, you can feed it with a fire hose, and when it's full, it burps and you are done. I'm seeing a full charge cycle now in 2.5 hrs where it used to take 6 hrs. When you are on the hook and running a generator, that's HUGE.
 
dhays said:
For my purposes, I think the battery chemistry that had the highest charge rate once full charging voltage was reached would give the most advantages. Is there difference between the different technologies in this respect?
Click to expand...

Lithium Iron Phosphate would win in that category, I assume. Mine accept whatever I throw at them with the current acceptance only starting to drop in the last few minutes of charging. Attached is something I generated last year, data wise, that shows what I am talking about.
 

Attachments

  • Charge cycle.jpg
    Charge cycle.jpg
    53.8 KB · Views: 29
One SiO2 company claims up to 40% faster charging than AGM or flooded lead acid batteries, but nobody is getting back to me with independent third party test reports. One company asked for my phone number, but no call as yet.

What's intriguing to me is that I may be able to use my dumb alternator, no charge controller, no upgrade to the system at all, and get about halfway between flooded golf cart batteries and Delfin's whiz-bang ultra techy system. There's value in that, if doable.
 
MurrayM said:
One SiO2 company claims up to 40% faster charging than AGM or flooded lead acid batteries, but nobody is getting back to me with independent third party test reports. One company asked for my phone number, but no call as yet.

What's intriguing to me is that I may be able to use my dumb alternator, no charge controller, no upgrade to the system at all, and get about halfway between flooded golf cart batteries and Delfin's whiz-bang ultra techy system. There's value in that, if doable.
Click to expand...

As noted, the "charge immediately after" discharge should be thoroughly explored. As in, why should that matter of they don't sulphate? Something else bad happen?

IMHO, there are a limited number of characteristics that define the ideal marine battery.

1. Charge acceptance rate. If it is flat until the battery is full, then gen run time on the hook for a trawler or engine run time for most sailboats is minimized and this is a big deal. LiFePO4 is the only safe chemistry I know of that has this characteristic.
2. Flat voltage output through to deep discharge. This means a smaller bank can be used that is kind to electronics. Again, only LFP in the safe chemistries.
3. Relative indifference to partial states of charge. Carbon foam, LFP and maybe SiO2.
4. Cost, but this is complicated. If I divide the number of cycles I can get out of LFP by their cost, that are the cheapest over the life of use, but most expensive up front. Pick your poison.

Just one man's opinion, while acknowledging that "ideal" isn't the same thing as "quite serviceable". Flooded lead acid fail all of the above, but they are quite good enough for most people in most circumstances, so alternatives aren't really worth considering.
 
DDW said:
If not, then why the big label saying "recharge immediately after use"? Like to see some independent testing...
Click to expand...
"Recharge immediately after use" can`t be taken literally, if it was the battery would have to constantly under charge.
The advert link posted suggests these batts are "a work in progress", though I suppose that applies to many technologies,new and old.
 
Twisted tree,
A buddy of mine was suggesting a Tesla Powerwall as my house bank. Once I found out that the only way to charge them was off my 220V genny, that’s when I decided to just replace my old house bank with new flooded lead acid (old school) batteries. I honestly don’t know all the ins and out of all the newer batteries plus I was able to replace my whole house bank for $1000 with flooded lead acid. I figured since battery tech was changing so quickly and since the newer batteries were so expensive, I’d just go with what I know. Ultimately, I want a house bank that I can keep charged with the high amp alternator. Not sure what is out there now that can do that?
 
Delfin said:
Lithium Iron Phosphate would win in that category, I assume. Mine accept whatever I throw at them with the current acceptance only starting to drop in the last few minutes of charging. Attached is something I generated last year, data wise, that shows what I am talking about.
Click to expand...



Thanks. Interesting chart.
 
Taras said:
Twisted tree,
A buddy of mine was suggesting a Tesla Powerwall as my house bank. Once I found out that the only way to charge them was off my 220V genny, that’s when I decided to just replace my old house bank with new flooded lead acid (old school) batteries. I honestly don’t know all the ins and out of all the newer batteries plus I was able to replace my whole house bank for $1000 with flooded lead acid. I figured since battery tech was changing so quickly and since the newer batteries were so expensive, I’d just go with what I know. Ultimately, I want a house bank that I can keep charged with the high amp alternator. Not sure what is out there now that can do that?
Click to expand...


Old-school will remain the preferred choice for many people for a long time. And at the same time more and more people will venture into the LFP realm. Everyone has to pick what's the best fit for them. It's typical market evolution of new products/technologies.


The Tesla Powerwall comes up frequently, but is really not a good fit for a boat. As you point out, it's not chargeable from a DC source like an alternator. Plus it's a high voltage DC device, so can't directly power you typical DC devices like thrusters, windlesses, nav equipment, toilets, etc, etc,. And perhaps most importantly, it's not LFP, but rather one of the more power-dense, but also more dangerous forms of lithium Ion battery. I personally don't feel there is a place on a boat for anything other than LFP, simply because of safety.
 
LiFePo4 batteries have a legitimate claim when it comes to cost vs longevity, but how much (in a ballpark percentage of the whole) does a battery management system add to the cost?

I have an internally regulated alternator, so even changing to AGM would get expensive after a new alternator and some sort of charge controller.
 
MurrayM said:
LiFePo4 batteries have a legitimate claim when it comes to cost vs longevity, but how much (in a ballpark percentage of the whole) does a battery management system add to the cost?

I have an internally regulated alternator, so even changing to AGM would get expensive after a new alternator and some sort of charge controller.
Click to expand...


The answer is unfortunately all over the map, as is the quality and completeness of different BMSs. A BMS is a quality system would be in the $1k to $2k USD range. I'm thinking in terms of a Victron, MG, or Lithionics system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mac2
LifePO4 Battery storage voltage
Replies
4
Views
350
twistedtree
twistedtree
D
A "cheap" LiFePO4 drop-in update
Replies
10
Views
1K
Don L
D
L
Mainship 34 Pilot Electrical Questions
Replies
24
Views
2K
Bmarler
B
mvweebles
Charging LFP - Silent Mode/Re-Bulk?
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
eheffa
E
Nick F
Sad story - freezing batteries
Replies
24
Views
3K
ronobrien
R

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom