James Snodgrass essays the BCI annual conference in the country music capital of the world while technical editor Mike McDonagh takes his pick of the technical papers
BCI 2026, the annual conference of the Battery Council International (BCI), took place in the Omni Hotel, Nashville, Tennessee, US, in May 2026, opening with an address from the president and executive director of BCI, Roger Miksad.
In his welcome greeting to the three-day conference, Miksad emphasised the role of the co-located Power Mart Expo, which, in his 13 years in the organisation is “the biggest, most vibrant, happy and exciting trade show floor I’ve seen in that time”.
Miksad then asked all delegates to stand up, under house lights, and introduce themselves to someone they had never met, and tell them the first concert they every attended, which led to some merriment, confusion and hubbub, before handing over to Mike Judd, BCI board chairman, and the CEO and president of Stryten Energy.
Judd used his address to frame the battery industry as increasingly central to both energy policy and national security, while urging members to focus on core operations and measurable improvements.
He highlighted two strands of recent industry advocacy: encouraging companies to “tell your story” at a local level, and promoting the broader economic significance of batteries in Washington. This has elevated engagement with agencies such as the Department of Energy, which he said is seeking closer collaboration as grid stability concerns grow alongside rising demand and the shift to intermittent renewables. Batteries, he argued, are now embedded across the entire energy system, “from large grid-scale installations … all the way down to the light bulb in your house”.
Judd pointed to increasing interest from defence stakeholders, reflecting the electrification of modern warfare and demand for high-performance battery capacity. These developments, he suggested, position the industry as a strategic partner across multiple sectors.
Looking to the future, he called for deeper engagement with national laboratories, universities and workforce development, alongside greater adoption of AI, machine learning and advanced automation in manufacturing. However, he stressed that innovation should not come at the expense of established product lines: “we make America start and run”, he said, urging companies to prioritise the core technologies that “pay the rent”.
On environmental, health and safety, Judd noted continued progress in reducing worker blood lead levels, but questioned whether existing metrics – such as airborne lead concentrations – remain adequate, suggesting a need for new benchmarks. He also raised the issue of global stewardship of lead, arguing that poor practices in some regions risk reputational damage for the entire industry: “There are other countries that really struggle in this category. Should we be steward of this?”
Despite rapid development in lithium-based chemistries, Judd concluded that traditional battery technologies remain resilient and growing, with opportunities across transport, industrial and military markets: “The future is very bright for this industry, and it’s not slowing down but getting bigger every day.”
2026 Innovation Award
GEM, a novel lead-acid battery plate architecture developed by Hollingsworth & Vose, in collaboration with New Zealand-based ArcActive, won the top 2026 Innovation Award, which was presented on the first day of the event.
The award, named in honour of Sally Breidegam Miksiewicz of East Penn Manufacturing, was presented by her son, Matt Miksiewicz. The GEM (Glass Engineered Material) technology was selected ahead of entries from companies including Silicon Joule – which received an honorary mention – as well as Etica AG and Terra Supreme Battery.
The technology represents a significant departure from conventional lead-acid plate design, replacing the traditional lead grid with a fibrous glass-based structure into which the active material is embedded. Developed jointly with ArcActive, the approach builds on earlier work using carbon veils, but substitutes a specially engineered glass nonwoven that offers both cost and performance advantages.
According to John Wertz, chief scientist at Hollingsworth & Vose, the concept originated with ArcActive’s work on carbon-based negative plates, which demonstrated substantially improved charge acceptance. “They could get two to three times the normal charge acceptance,” he said. “But carbon comes with drawbacks –cost, and catalytic gassing that leads to water loss.”
Hollingsworth & Vose proposed replacing the carbon veil with a coarse, acid-resistant glass nonwoven, manufactured using a papermaking process. The resulting structure is hydrophilic, allowing better penetration and retention of the active paste compared with carbon-based materials.
Nicolas Clément, R&D director at Hollingsworth & Vose, said early GEM prototypes confirmed that the glass-based structure could match the electrochemical performance of carbon systems while avoiding their limitations. “There was a strong belief that conductivity required a carbon backbone,” he said. “But once the lead network forms during battery formation, conductivity is not an issue. The glass actually improves how the active mass
is distributed.”
Testing has been extensive, involving dozens of cells across flooded and AGM configurations, with validation work extending over more than a year. The partners report consistent gains in charge acceptance and durability, alongside reduced water loss and improved stability compared with carbon-enhanced systems.
Beyond automotive start-stop applications, the developers see opportunities in motive power and emerging vehicle architectures. “We can put twice as much charge into the battery in the same time, or the same charge in half the time,” said Wertz, pointing to benefits for opportunity charging in forklift fleets and for auxiliary batteries in electric vehicles.
While the GEM material itself can be produced at scale, commercial deployment will require modifications to existing battery manufacturing lines, particularly in lugging and pasting processes. As a result, the technology is currently being evaluated at pilot scale, with samples supplied to battery manufacturers worldwide.
Clément described the award as an important validation for a technology that challenges long-established design principles. “It’s breaking more than 100 years of how we make lead-acid plates,” he said. “This gives credibility that it’s not just an idea – it’s something real.”
With backing from Hollingsworth & Vose and ongoing collaboration with ArcActive, the partners are now focused on scaling and industry adoption of GEM. “We’re past the high-risk phase,” Clément added. “Now it’s about patience and proving the value to customers over time.”
BCI Nashville 2026 –
technical editor’s personal pick of the papers
As regular readers are aware, after attending a conference I give a pick of the topics that touch on the most relevant aspects of current or emerging battery technology. These are my personal choices for this BCI conference.
Interestingly, I noticed that there was a distinct resurgence of interest in zinc-based electrochemical couples. As we are all aware there is great promise with zinc, with two valence electrons available for the coulombic contribution, and with the right partnering electrode the promise of reasonable energy densities. It is cheap, abundant, safe and readily recyclable. It can be used in all major battery types, i.e. conversion (Zn-Ni), insertion (Zn-MnO) and flow (Zn-Br2) variations. Theoretical energy densities can be as high as 700Wh/kg (zinc-air). However, many practical difficulties exist, both in defects originating during cycling and the commercial manufacture of these batteries.
For this reason, I have selected the presentations by Tim Lambert of Sandia National Laboratories, and Glen Austin Green of GP Energy Tech.
Sandia National Laboratories
Tim Lambert’s presentation covered an enormous range of zinc technologies. All factors pertaining to the manufacture and operational characteristics of several zinc-based couples were covered. Primarily aimed at the growing ESS market (Fig 1), it went into some detail on the challenges facing the use of zinc as an anode. These included: passivation, capacity loss on cycling, dendrite formation, hydrogen evolution, poisoning from Zn(OH42-) and then some. However, solutions were being evaluated and were discussed in detail in the presentation.
As with all of Sandia’s projects, they are never merely fact-finding missions; they are designed to provide answers and advice to the industry. In this paper there were solutions of additives, separators with selective membranes, engineered electrodes that have voids to seed dendrite growth from electrodes base, so that dendrites are confined within the anode during the plating reaction (Fig 2). This last measure brilliantly prevents the scourge of internal short circuits due to dendrite bridging. In my opinion, Sandia Lab’s contribution to the battery industry is invaluable.
GP Energy Tech
The pairing of zinc-based batteries with ESS applications was the theme of the presentation from GP Energy Tech’s Glen Austin Green. This was interesting for two reasons: it gave an ingenious solution to the zinc dendrite problem, and it also highlighted the total frustration of the hurdles that often prevent promising technology from reaching commercial reality.
Using an approach labelled the three-pillar method for zinc sustainability, innovation and manufacturability, a picture of a successful “design to manufacture” model was outlined. As an example, it explained its own work in developing a nickel-zinc battery design. Starting with a test for the sustainability of a potential chemistry, it continued to eloquently explain the process of highlighting the problems and finding the solutions required to reach commercial reality. In particular, I liked their solution to the zinc dendrite growth nemesis. That was to put a carbon-ring filter around the zinc particles of the active material Fig 3. This in fact was described as an “ion-sieving nanoshell”.
The stage-three approach of manufacturing at scale for commercial sales is usually the stumbling block for most emerging technologies. That period between prototype and full-scale manufacture with all the technical and engineering pitfalls, plus the seeking of investor interest and funding (known graphically as the valley of death), is where the majority of promising technologies are shipwrecked. GP Energy Tech’s methodology included planning for this stage.
The manufacturing unknowns were identified and addressed in advance of entering this phase (Fig 4). The financial requirements, the development and engineering obstacles, if addressed after the prototype and proof of concept stage, will in most cases be insurmountable. Trust me I know.
QuantumShield Technologies
Sodium-based electro-chemistry was also in evidence. The presentation by Shawn Peng of QuantumShield, representing the BCI Sodium Battery Industry Group (SBIG), made a case for a collaborative approach to installing a sodium-ion alternative to lithium-ion batteries. The USA has no credible reserves of the materials needed for lithium-ion manufacture.
Instead of relying on politically-sensitive agreements with major global suppliers of lithium technologies, it seems logical to develop an indigenous industry based on readily available, abundant and cheap, alternative materials. This presentation also raised awareness of the lack of a coherent national strategy to tackle this emerging battery chemistry. The aim of the SBIG is to provide the coordination required to enable a structured route to establishing a credible industry for manufacturing and selling future sodium-based technologies (Fig 5).
Octet Scientific
Another totally fascinating innovation was that of Octet Scientific’s Custom Electrolyte collaboration. Presented by Emily Dickens, the paper described how Octet would help you to find a bespoke electrolyte for your precise battery requirements (Fig 6). That makes complete technical sense.
Many battery manufacturers have many market applications. Consider a solar BESS with a steady battery drain, compared to a grid voltage regulation or diesel starter application. In order to have a bespoke rather than an off-the-peg electrolyte fit, Octet offer an exhaustive series of tests to ensure your battery has the most comfortably fitting electrolytic garment (Fig 7).
Enersys
The last chemistry-specific presentation I enjoyed was that of Enersys’ Creighton Brown. The intention was to persuade the delegates of the benefits of lead-acid chemistry over other types for BESS. It was reminiscent of a lone preacher at Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park, London. Yet he made valid points relating to low capex, safety, supply chain issues and recyclability. However, I think he missed a couple of tricks regarding cycle life, LCOES and a further cost benefit of recyclability.
The use of a higher capacity battery (around 30% higher) gives huge performance improvements without the need for the expense of AM additives and performance-related research. Higher capacity means lower DOD, and a reduced SOC after recharging. On offer from this simple expedient is a doubling of cycle life and higher percentage charge efficiency. This means better LCOES, better energy efficiency and ROI. The ROI looks even better when you consider that the scrap lead-acid has a sale value and not a cost, as with lithium-ion.
Jinkeli
Jinkeli once again showed its dedication to innovation and performance improvement. In the presentation by Zhang Ming, Jinkeli showed test results that proved the benefits of a recombination vent plug for VRLA batteries.
Described as a recombination catalyst, it did not employ the usual expensive platinum or palladium metals. Instead, the recombinant material was an expanded porous PTFE disc (branded ePTFE). This was built into a standard valve regulated vent plug (Fig 8).
The benefits of fitting a recombination catalyst to a VRLA have been known for some time. But this particular plug was far smaller than the usual group-10 metal versions. The recombination mechanism is shown in Fig 9.
The testing and research from Jinkeli is, and always has been, meticulous (Fig 10).This is due not only to its technical standards, but also to the accuracy of making choices that benefit the industry.
From my perspective, the most interesting contributions were on the last day. But, there was also plenty to get my teeth into in the exhibition hall. Further articles, based on innovations seen at various stalls, will be forthcoming. And as our readers are aware, in true BESTmag tradition we will review and critique any interesting technology before presenting it in the magazine.
