The technology is awesome but the article is a mess of repetition and disjointed sentences.
I’m not sure if it was written by AI or just an incompetent human.
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
58 points (95.3% liked)
Futurology
3081 readers
123 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Seems like a copy-paste mess:
The company plans to scale to 50 GWh/year by 2030. The company has set an ambitious goal of 50 GWh/year by 2030. To get to this, Yilmaz shared, “First, we need to scale up production rapidly.
Oh right, to scale up you need to scale up first.
Whoever wrote this had no fucking idea what they're talking about
Where lithium-ion peaks at 4 to 8 hours of storage, Ore Energy’s iron-air battery holds power for 100 hours or more
What?
Ya, that doesn't make a lot of sense... we need more numbers.
A battery might have 100mwh of storage, but only be capable of outputting at 1mw, that's 100 hours.
A different battery might have 1200mwh and can output at 400mw, that's 3 hours.
It's meaningless without the proper numbers.
Yeah and a slow peak discharge rate is not really a positive.
We have some LiFePo batteries at work and we simply don't attach the full load they could serve, so they last around 10 hours instead of only 4. Going slower is never an issue I'd say.
Probably the real strengths are in the cost per Joule stored, but they are failing to make their argument properly.
Are we measuring energy in just hours now?
I'm assuming they're oversimplifying the unit of maH to just hours, but who knows without a sheet of the specs of one of these batteries.
I find it misleading that they call it "100 hour battery". What's the point?
I'd rather see information about the price per kWh or energy density.
Edit: It even sounds bad, when I think about it now. What would you rather have: A battery that can charge and discharge fast or one that is slow in this matter? If this startup wants to succeed, it needs to beat lithium-based batteries in cost.
energy density doesnt matter that much for a landbased stationary battery
You're right. But still, some hard specs would be interesting
Oh absolutely. An article like this useless babble of buzzwords sucks.
Pricing seems to be 10x cheaper than lithium per kWh.
The battery has no rare earth metal in it, just common iron, which dramatically reduces cost. The 100hr storage is also 10-20x what lithium is designed for. Downsides appear to be slow charge/discharge and size of the batteries.
It is most likely a hybrid "iron air for long term storage, lithium for spikes and fluctuations" grid battery makes the most sense. These combo setups wouls likely have drastivally better long term storage and pricing then the current norm of "just Lithium."
There is more info about them in this article about another company in the space called Form energy.
Watt hours the point
iron-air
what is this, alchemy?
This is a game-changer.