<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-09-20T03:45:37Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/69797" metadataPrefix="dim">https://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/69797</identifier><datestamp>2022-01-13T07:54:33Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_1721.1_7582</setSpec><setSpec>com_1721.1_7581</setSpec><setSpec>col_1721.1_131023</setSpec></header><metadata><dim:dim xmlns:dim="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim http://www.dspace.org/schema/dim.xsd">
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="advisor" lang="en_US">Donald R. Sadoway.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="author" lang="en_US">Parent, Michael C. (Michael Calvin)</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="other" lang="en_US">Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Materials Science and Engineering.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="department">Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Materials Science and Engineering</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="accessioned">2012-03-16T16:04:01Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="available">2012-03-16T16:04:01Z</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="copyright" lang="en_US">2011</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="issued" lang="en_US">2011</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="uri">http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/69797</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="oclc" lang="en_US">777954576</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" lang="en_US">Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Materials Science and Engineering, 2011.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" lang="en_US">Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" lang="en_US">Includes bibliographical references (p. 90-92).</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="abstract" lang="en_US">In order to satisfy the growing demand for renewable resources as a supply of electricity, much effort is being placed toward the development of battery energy storage systems that can effectively interface these new sources with today's electric grid. To be competitive with the prices dictated by the sources currently in use, namely fossil fuels, these new systems must be able to deliver energy at a cost of about $100/kWh for the active materials. Several battery systems have been developed and that target has been slowly coming into focus. The liquid metal battery attempts to redefine the typical storage system by maintaining components in a molten state and seeks to do so using cheap, widely available materials. One of the biggest problems facing the future of the LMB is that of resource scarcity. There are several candidate materials that can satisfy the operating needs of an LMB, but not all are available in large enough quantities to meet the new LMB demand without significant impact to the supply/demand equilibrium and, ultimately, price. A detailed model was built to investigate the use of various metals in this new technology and measure the impact expected as a result of large-scale LMB adoption. The report explains why antimony is the most likely candidate for the positive electrode due to its large, mature market and the relatively high energy output compared to other candidates. Alkali and alkaline earth materials make excellent candidates for the negative electrode and the vast quantities available will be more than enough to support the LMB market many times over. The analysis has also revealed a substantial concern that is often overlooked in battery development: electrolyte costs. The current use of ultra-pure, anhydrous salts cannot be sustained if the LMB is to be profitable and competitive. Large savings can be anticipated from purchasing tonnage-quantity salts, but the only way to bring these costs down to reasonable levels is through the use of lower-purity materials. This study shows that a reasonable LMB can be built with an active materials cost of less than $62/kWh and total system cost of around $1,000/kWh for a 1 MW facility. In the most optimistic case, assuming electrolyte costs on par with those of current battery technologies, the total sytem cost can be reduced to under $300/kWh, much cheaper than many of the most recent technologies.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="statementofresponsibility" lang="en_US">by Michael C. Parent.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="degree" lang="en_US">S.M.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="format" qualifier="extent" lang="en_US">98 p.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="language" qualifier="iso" lang="en_US">eng</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="publisher" lang="en_US">Massachusetts Institute of Technology</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights" lang="en_US">M.I.T. theses are protected by 
copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but 
reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written 
permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights" qualifier="uri" lang="en_US">http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="subject" lang="en_US">Materials Science and Engineering.</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="title" lang="en_US">Economic assessment of candidate materials for key components in a grid-scale liquid metal battery</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="type" lang="en_US">Thesis</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dc" element="format" qualifier="mimetype">application/pdf</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dspace" element="authorsordered">false</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="dspace" element="entity" qualifier="type">Publication</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="others" element="access-status">unknown</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="others" element="access-status">unknown</dim:field>
   <dim:field mdschema="cerif" element="openaire" authority="" confidence="-1">&lt;Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="4c7fe9f8-0e93-40b9-ba32-597a6085e1d3">
	&lt;Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843&lt;/Type>
	&lt;Language>eng&lt;/Language>
   	&lt;Title>Economic assessment of candidate materials for key components in a grid-scale liquid metal battery&lt;/Title>
   	&lt;PublishedIn>
    	&lt;Publication>
      	&lt;/Publication>
   	&lt;/PublishedIn>
   	&lt;PublicationDate>2011&lt;/PublicationDate>
   	&lt;Authors>
      	&lt;Author>
        	&lt;DisplayName>Parent, Michael C. (Michael Calvin)&lt;/DisplayName>
         	&lt;Affiliation>
         		&lt;OrgUnit>
         		&lt;/OrgUnit>
         	&lt;/Affiliation>
      	&lt;/Author>
	&lt;/Authors>
   	&lt;Editors>
	&lt;/Editors>
    &lt;Publishers>
        &lt;Publisher>
            &lt;DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology&lt;/DisplayName>
            &lt;OrgUnit />
        &lt;/Publisher>
    &lt;/Publishers>
    &lt;License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582&lt;/License>
    &lt;Keyword>Materials Science and Engineering.&lt;/Keyword>
   	&lt;Abstract>In order to satisfy the growing demand for renewable resources as a supply of electricity, much effort is being placed toward the development of battery energy storage systems that can effectively interface these new sources with today&amp;apos;s electric grid. To be competitive with the prices dictated by the sources currently in use, namely fossil fuels, these new systems must be able to deliver energy at a cost of about $100/kWh for the active materials. Several battery systems have been developed and that target has been slowly coming into focus. The liquid metal battery attempts to redefine the typical storage system by maintaining components in a molten state and seeks to do so using cheap, widely available materials. One of the biggest problems facing the future of the LMB is that of resource scarcity. There are several candidate materials that can satisfy the operating needs of an LMB, but not all are available in large enough quantities to meet the new LMB demand without significant impact to the supply/demand equilibrium and, ultimately, price. A detailed model was built to investigate the use of various metals in this new technology and measure the impact expected as a result of large-scale LMB adoption. The report explains why antimony is the most likely candidate for the positive electrode due to its large, mature market and the relatively high energy output compared to other candidates. Alkali and alkaline earth materials make excellent candidates for the negative electrode and the vast quantities available will be more than enough to support the LMB market many times over. The analysis has also revealed a substantial concern that is often overlooked in battery development: electrolyte costs. The current use of ultra-pure, anhydrous salts cannot be sustained if the LMB is to be profitable and competitive. Large savings can be anticipated from purchasing tonnage-quantity salts, but the only way to bring these costs down to reasonable levels is through the use of lower-purity materials. This study shows that a reasonable LMB can be built with an active materials cost of less than $62/kWh and total system cost of around $1,000/kWh for a 1 MW facility. In the most optimistic case, assuming electrolyte costs on par with those of current battery technologies, the total sytem cost can be reduced to under $300/kWh, much cheaper than many of the most recent technologies.&lt;/Abstract>
	&lt;Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right" 
    >
    &lt;/Access>
&lt;/Publication>
</dim:field>
</dim:dim>
</metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>