Named in honour of the late Sally Breidegam Miksiewicz, former CEO of East Penn Manufacturing, the BCI Innovation Award celebrates projects that reflect the battery industry’s core values of safety, cost-effectiveness, performance and impact. This award recognises not only the important contributions that the Grid Storage Launchpad (GSL) is poised to make in battery science and technology but also the efforts that PNNL has dedicated to advancing public-private partnerships in battery research. Vic Giles spoke with GSL director Vince Sprenkle after the ceremony.
Vince, tell us about the Grid Storage Launchpad and what the Innovation Award means to you.
The GSL is funded by the US Department of Energy (DoE) and looks at how we accelerate the development of next generation storage technologies. We looked at several issues, including what we need from a fundamental science level, to pilot prototyping of new designs, all the way through testing and validation of systems up to 400 kilowatt hours. We looked at all that can be done in-house – it’s really geared to help the industry accelerate the development of these technologies. And so, to receive an award like this from an industry group to say, “This is important, this is critical to us” is really reaffirming.
So, what does GSL look like?
The GSL itself is about 34 laboratories, ranging from transmission electron microscope and scanning electron microscopes, where we can carry out in-operando studies. We can take an anode material, start charging it under microscopes, see what the atomic expansion would be and if it leads to potential degradation. This is an example of the type of fundamental investigations we are involved in. There’s about a hundred people working there.
Right now, we are supporting 27 different project sponsors. We have almost 100 different projects, both within DoE and private industry. I believe we had 14 private companies that were utilising the capability for their own products – it’s a mix of longer-term DoE work where we are trying to address issues that are five to 10 years down the road, along with immediate work for the company’s next product launch. There are multiple ways to collaborate with the labs – whether through DOE-funded projects under GSL or via direct support.
What is the projects’ focus?
We’re developing and supporting lithium-ion, lead-acid and flow battery developments, while looking at next generation sodium-based systems and zinc technologies. Much of our focus is on early-stage testing – the researchers work with the anode material and test it under duty cycles so that we can determine whether it can move forward before we make multimillion-dollar investments and over many years.
How is the GSL project funded?
The actual facility was supported by the DoE’s Office of Electricity to build and construct the facility. Then there are research projects, which are for specific things – for example we may be working with the Office of Electricity on flow batteries or we might work with lithium metal for vehicle technologies.
Are you focused on storage rather than mobility?
The Grid Storage Launch Pad supports both, it is a DoE-wide asset for vehicle technologies and for the grid. The Office of Electricity really determined the need for it, and was the initial advocate, but it supports multiple programmes. And we support private industry and they work that they do.
What stages of technology development do you focus on?
I would say that we’ve developed it to a point where we’ve got opportunities to make an impact. We have the tools to work with the developers coming in and making a new anode or cathode material. They may leave the laboratory and work on the project and then come back to us when they want to put it into our new prismatic line, for example, where we can do 20Ah prismatic cells, or a pouch cell.
And there may be another point where they can come in and help scale that up and show that it works in industry relevant formats. Then there is the option to do their development and come back when they have a 40kWh or a 400kWh module.
We can do the validation testing and give information back to them that says, “here’s how it’s performing, under these conditions”. That’s something they can take out and look at using to get additional financing. They can take that to utilities and they have the benefit of independently tested data that has been carried out at a government facility.
The great thing is having everything under one roof. Now, if they see something amiss in their process, we have the analytical tools needed to understand why this information is being seen and what needs improving. It has been nice to be able to design a system like GSL from the ground up.
Where do you think the real hotspots are with the development cycles?
I think we’re still seeing a dynamic change from a grid perspective. We’re also seeing it from transportation and with that comes growth. But the way data centres and AI are going to be impacting our loads, duty cycles are being developed now, in order for us to start validating.
We are moving beyond traditional use cases like frequency regulation – areas where energy storage has already proven effective – toward the next generation of applications, as requirements for the storage systems are going to change dramatically.
We may still need long duration type assets for outage mitigation, for example, but we are also going to need fast response assets that can respond to ‘an AI training algorithm turning off in a data centre and then turning back on’. And that’s going to change the dynamics of what chemistries we’re developing for those future needs.
How important is industry collaboration?
I think it’s important to be able to work with industry to identify where the material is coming from. We can do a lot from the research side, but we need to work with organisations such as BCI, who can bring industry together and say, “Here’s what’s really happening”. This will save a lot of steps that are not typically seen on the research side. Research/industry collaborations are critical to getting a handle on the big picture.
What are the major hurdles that you see and do they differ with technologies?
Yes, and it’s a matter of getting the information. I think, overall, we have the capability, not just at GSL, but throughout the DoE system. But how do we speed up companies being able to access those capabilities? Because even if they’re paying for it, we have to go through the NDA process. We need to establish contracts to define the scope of work. So, we want to move fast, but we have to go through all these hurdles so that a company can come in and access capabilities, then get out. That’s a large part of what my concern is right now – how to institutionally get that down so we can have the greatest impact.
Six sigma manufacturing has been the standard for many years. Is it still an acceptable standard?
It depends where you’re looking at the six sigma. You’ve got it after the manufacturing process and so we can do all the quality control with capacity measurements on an individual cell. It’s a case of weeding out those that don’t meet the highest tier standards. Therefore, you’re not working with those cells that are a lower class or don’t meet the quality control standards before you start building a module.
And then you can do that same thing on the modules before you start building a system. So, there’s some self-weeding out of those as you build up until you get to the EV pack or a grid-scale system. Quality control and being able to manage that is going to be a critical aspect to the technology as we move forward.
Could systems like flow batteries – where extensive filtering isn’t required – prove to be the optimal solution?
They still need that too as they’re building the stacks. The kind of quality controls they have just on that stack need to be looked at, before you even introduce the electrolyte into it. It’s important to look at things that can handle wider variability and perform the same. That’s where close collaboration with industry is essential – to help them understand how to manufacture in a cost-effective way.
Design-for-recycling has been around for quite a few years, do you get involved in that side of it?
Yes, we are involved with recycling. It’s a consideration from the design standpoint. And a nice thing we’ve seen is end-of-life considerations moving into the development process. We work closely with the ReCell team that’s based at Argonne National Laboratory and the opportunities for recycling.
When you look at the international systems that you’re competing with, in terms of intellectual property, do you see any problems there?
Working around IP is often a barrier to being able to come in and utilise a national lab resource. But what we’ve tried to set up at GSL is to separate the work. If you’re coming in, you’ve developed the IP and all we’re doing is giving you validated information. So, we’re testing your system or we’re taking your new cathode material and showing how it performs. We’re not adding any IP to it. That is separate and can be much faster.
For processes that might typically take up to three months, we can significantly accelerate timelines by isolating tasks with no IP entanglements. In such cases, partners may gain lab access in under a month and begin receiving results shortly thereafter.
And so, do you generate your own IP?
We do. A lab like PNNL is run for the government through a contractor. In this case, our contractor is Battelle Memorial Institute. And I actually work for Battelle, for the Department of Energy. The contractors hold the IP and can license that to US companies.
Some things will go open source to help everyone in the form of a non-exclusive license. We have several technologies where there’s no exclusivity – you come in and there’s minimal or no fee to be able to use that. And then, other technologies can go through a semi-exclusive to exclusive type of license.
Sprenkle’s 24-year career at PNNL has given him a deep understanding of the current R&D development cycle and ability to recognise the importance of every role in deploying grid storage technology. He holds 32 U.S. patents on fuel cells, batteries, and high-temperature applications.
Sprenkle said, “I actually came to the lab to work on fuel cells and then, about 15 years ago, started working in the battery space. The first one I was working on was sodium metal halide, because they operated at higher temperatures. Much of what I’d done, working on higher temperature fuel cells, was strictly applicable to that. I then moved to flow batteries and we were hiring fuel-cell people working in polymer electrolyte membranes.
So, there’s a lot of crossover between the fuel cell world and battery world. I served the various research roles and then, more overall program management working closely with the Department of Energy, making sure our capabilities are filling DoE’s overall mission. And then, last year, was named Director of the new grid storage launchpad.
