Knowledge interdependencies between lithium- and sodium-ion battery chemistries
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Battery technology presents a major economic opportunity, spanning diverse metal-ion battery chemistries with distinct material, performance and supply chain characteristics. How knowledge is shared across these chemistries is essential for industrial strategies informed by techno-economic forecasting but understudied. Here we report the use of advanced large language models for automated patent classification to map knowledge flows within and across lithium-ion and sodium-ion battery chemistries, based on patent citation networks encompassing over 15,000 patent families classified at the chemical structure level. We find substantial, persistent knowledge flows within and across chemistries for product and process innovation, with continuous directional knowledge flows from mature lithium-ion to emerging sodium-ion chemistries. For some lithium-ion chemistries, cross-chemistry knowledge flows even exceed within-chemistry flows. These results indicate that industrial strategies aiming to leap-frog to new chemistries without design and manufacturing experience in existing chemistries are unlikely to succeed, and battery chemistries should therefore not be treated as fully independent technologies in forecasting models.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Intellectual Property and Patents · Machine Learning in Materials Science · Extraction and Separation Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (60)
Show source-provided references
1. Ihlbrock, L., Sehnal, A., Gutsch, M. & Lux, S. Future energy demand for automotive and stationary lithium- and sodium-ion battery production towards a European circular economy. Energy Environ. Sci. 18, 8724–8743 (2025).10.1039/D5EE02287H ↗
2. Greitemeier, T. & Lux, S. The intellectual property enabling gigafactory battery cell production: an in-depth analysis of international patenting trends. J. Energy Storage 108, 115083 (2025).10.1016/j.est.2024.115083 ↗
3. Schlehuber, S., Hemmelder, A. & von Delft, S. Uncovering collaboration and knowledge areas in lithium-ion battery recycling. EES Batteries 1, 1128–1146 (2025).10.1039/D5EB00056D ↗
4. Stephan, A., Battke, B., Beuse, M. D., Clausdeinken, J. H. & Schmidt, T. S. Limiting the public cost of stationary battery deployment by combining applications. Nat. Energy 1, 16079 (2016).10.1038/nenergy.2016.79 ↗
5. Link, S., Schneider, L., Stephan, A., Weymann, L. & Plötz, P. Feasibility of meeting future battery demand via domestic cell production in Europe. Nat Energy 10, 526–534 (2025).10.1038/s41560-025-01722-y ↗
6. Hemmelder, A. et al. The geostrategic race for leadership in future electric vehicle battery technologies. Energy Environ. Sci. 18, 6117–6130 (2025).10.1039/D5EE00301F ↗
7. Hemmelder, A., Sehnal, A., Lux, S. & Leker, J. Big data analytics for strategic decision-making across the battery value chain: a review of status, trends, and future directions. Energy Strat. Rev. 60, 101797 (2025).10.1016/j.esr.2025.101797 ↗
8. Schmuch, R., Wagner, R., Hörpel, G., Placke, T. & Winter, M. Performance and cost of materials for lithium-based rechargeable automotive batteries. Nat. Energy 3, 267–278 (2018).10.1038/s41560-018-0107-2 ↗
9. Voß, P. et al. Benchmarking state-of-the-art sodium-ion battery cells—modeling energy density and carbon footprint at the gigafactory-scale. Energy Environ. Sci. 18, 8104–8129 (2025).10.1039/D5EE00415B ↗
10. Yao, A., Benson, S. M. & Chueh, W. C. Critically assessing sodium-ion technology roadmaps and scenarios for techno-economic competitiveness against lithium-ion batteries. Nat. Energy 10, 404–416 (2025).10.1038/s41560-024-01701-9 ↗
11. Liang, Y., Dong, H., Aurbach, D. & Yao, Y. Current status and future directions of multivalent metal-ion batteries. Nat. Energy 5, 646–656 (2020).10.1038/s41560-020-0655-0 ↗
12. Min, X. et al. Potassium-ion batteries: outlook on present and future technologies. Energy Environ. Sci. 14, 2186–2243 (2021).10.1039/D0EE02917C ↗
13. Malhotra, A., Zhang, H., Beuse, M. & Schmidt, T. How do new use environments influence a technology’s knowledge trajectory? A patent citation network analysis of lithium-ion battery technology. Res. Policy 50, 104318 (2021).10.1016/j.respol.2021.104318 ↗
14. Stephan, A., Bening, C. R., Schmidt, T. S., Schwarz, M. & Hoffmann, V. H. The role of inter-sectoral knowledge spillovers in technological innovations: the case of lithium-ion batteries. Technol. Forecasting Social Change 148, 119718 (2019).10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119718 ↗
15. Bekkers, R. & Martinelli, A. Knowledge positions in high-tech markets: trajectories, standards, strategies and true innovators. Technol. Forecasting Social Change 79, 1192–1216 (2012).10.1016/j.techfore.2012.01.009 ↗
16. Henderson, R. M. & Clark, K. B. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Q. 35, 9 (1990).10.2307/2393549 ↗
17. Beuse, M., Schmidt, T. S. & Wood, V. A ‘technology-smart’ battery policy strategy for Europe. Science 361, 1075–1077 (2018).10.1126/science.aau2516 ↗
18. Meng, J., Way, R., Verdolini, E. & Diaz Anadon, L. Comparing expert elicitation and model-based probabilistic technology cost forecasts for the energy transition. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e1917165118 (2021).10.1073/pnas.1917165118 ↗
19. Noll, B., Steffen, B. & Schmidt, T. S. The effects of local interventions on global technological change through spillovers: a modeling framework and application to the road-freight sector. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2215684120 (2023).10.1073/pnas.2215684120 ↗
20. Beuse, M., Steffen, B. & Schmidt, T. S. Projecting the competition between energy-storage technologies in the electricity sector. Joule 4, 2162–2184 (2020).10.1016/j.joule.2020.07.017 ↗
21. Schmidt, O., Hawkes, A., Gambhir, A. & Staffell, I. The future cost of electrical energy storage based on experience rates. Nat. Energy 2, 17110 (2017).10.1038/nenergy.2017.110 ↗
22. Yang, C., Liu, D.-F. & Liu, S.-M. Energy and cost analysis of automotive batteries based on learning curve and configuration design. Energy 328, 136648 (2025).10.1016/j.energy.2025.136648 ↗
23. Ziegler, M. S. & Trancik, J. E. Re-examining rates of lithium-ion battery technology improvement and cost decline. Energy Environ. Sci. 14, 1635–1651 (2021).10.1039/D0EE02681F ↗
24. Kittner, N., Lill, F. & Kammen, D. M. Energy storage deployment and innovation for the clean energy transition. Nat. Energy 2, 17125 (2017).10.1038/nenergy.2017.125 ↗
25. Way, R., Ives, M. C., Mealy, P. & Farmer, J. D. Empirically grounded technology forecasts and the energy transition. Joule 6, 2057–2082 (2022).10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.009 ↗
26. Battke, B., Schmidt, T. S., Stollenwerk, S. & Hoffmann, V. H. Internal or external spillovers—which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies. Res. Policy 45, 27–41 (2016).10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.014 ↗
27. Yavorskaya, V., Kriechbaum, M. & Spirk, S. Mapping the flow: knowledge development and diffusion in the global innovation system of flow battery technology. J. Energy Storage 99, 113093 (2024).10.1016/j.est.2024.113093 ↗
28. Batteries and Secure Energy Transitions (IEA, 2024).
29. Fleischmann, J. et al. Battery 2030: Resilient, Sustainable, and Circular. Battery Demand is Growing—and So Is the Need for Better Solutions Along the Value Chain (McKinsey & Company, 2023).
30. Jaffe, A. B. & Trajtenberg, M. Patents, Citations and Innovations (MIT Press, 2002).10.7551/mitpress/5263.001.0001 ↗
31. Huenteler, J., Ossenbrink, J., Schmidt, T. S. & Hoffmann, V. H. How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power. Res. Policy 45, 1195–1217 (2016).10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.014 ↗
32. Stephan, A., Schmidt, T. S., Bening, C. R. & Hoffmann, V. H. The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan. Res. Policy 46, 709–723 (2017).10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.009 ↗
33. Zhao, C. et al. Rational design of layered oxide materials for sodium-ion batteries. Science 370, 708–711 (2020).10.1126/science.aay9972 ↗
34. Abraham, K. M. How comparable are sodium-ion batteries to lithium-ion counterparts. ACS Energy Lett. 5, 3544–3547 (2020).10.1021/acsenergylett.0c02181 ↗
35. Duffner, F. et al. Post-lithium-ion battery cell production and its compatibility with lithium-ion cell production infrastructure. Nat. Energy 6, 123–134 (2021).10.1038/s41560-020-00748-8 ↗
36. Lee, K. & Lim, C. Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: findings from the Korean industries. Res. Policy 30, 459–483 (2001).10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00088-3 ↗
37. Goldemberg, J. Leapfrog energy technologies. Energy Policy 26, 729–741 (1998).10.1016/S0301-4215(98)00025-1 ↗
38. Winter, M., Barnett, B. & Xu, K. Before Li ion batteries. Chem. Rev. 118, 11433–11456 (2018).10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00422 ↗
39. Park, I. & Yoon, B. Technological opportunity discovery for technological convergence based on the prediction of technology knowledge flow in a citation network. J. Inf. 12, 1199–1222 (2018).
40. Choe, H., Lee, D. H., Kim, H. D. & Seo, I. W. Structural properties and inter-organizational knowledge flows of patent citation network: the case of organic solar cells. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 55, 361–370 (2016).10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.150 ↗
41. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M. & Henderson, R. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Q. J. Econ. 108, 577–598 (1993).10.2307/2118401 ↗
42. Hu, A. G. & Jaffe, A. B. Patent citations and international knowledge flow: the cases of Korea and Taiwan. Int. J. Ind. Org. 21, 849–880 (2003).10.1016/S0167-7187(03)00035-3 ↗
43. Dechezleprêtre, A., Ménière, Y. & Mohnen, M. International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators. Scientometrics 111, 793–828 (2017).10.1007/s11192-017-2311-4 ↗
44. Block, A. & Song, C. H. Exploring the characteristics of technological knowledge interaction dynamics in the field of solid-state batteries: a patent-based approach. J. Cleaner Prod. 353, 131689 (2022).10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131689 ↗
45. Ozcan, S. & Islam, N. Patent information retrieval: approaching a method and analysing nanotechnology patent collaborations. Scientometrics 111, 941–970 (2017).10.1007/s11192-017-2325-y ↗
46. Park, H. & Magee, C. L. Tracing technological development trajectories: a genetic knowledge persistence-based main path approach. PloS ONE 12, e0170895 (2017).10.1371/journal.pone.0170895 ↗
47. Asche, G. ‘80% of technical information found only in patents’ – is there proof of this [1]?. World Patent Inf. 48, 16–28 (2017).10.1016/j.wpi.2016.11.004 ↗
48. Breschi, S. & Lissoni, F. Localised knowledge spillovers vs. innovative milieux: knowledge ‘tacitness’ reconsidered. Papers Reg. Sci. 80, 255–273 (2001).10.1111/j.1435-5597.2001.tb01799.x ↗
49. Alcácer, J. & Gittelman, M. Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: the influence of examiner citations. Rev. Econ. Stat. 88, 774–779 (2006).10.1162/rest.88.4.774 ↗
50. Higham, K., Rassenfosse, G. de & Jaffe, A. B. Patent quality: towards a systematic framework for analysis and measurement. Res. Policy 50, 104215 (2021).10.1016/j.respol.2021.104215 ↗
51. Ernst, H. & Omland, N. The patent asset index – a new approach to benchmark patent portfolios. World Patent Inf. 33, 34–41 (2011).10.1016/j.wpi.2010.08.008 ↗
52. Block, A. & Song, C. H. Exploring the potential of material information in patent data: the case of solid-state batteries. J. Energy Storage 71, 108123 (2023).10.1016/j.est.2023.108123 ↗
53. Singh, J. Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Manage. Sci. 51, 756–770 (2005).10.1287/mnsc.1040.0349 ↗
54. Breschi, S. & Lissoni, F. Mobility of skilled workers and co-invention networks: an anatomy of localized knowledge flows. J. Econ. Geogr. 9, 439–468 (2009).10.1093/jeg/lbp008 ↗
55. Peiseler, L. et al. Globalising innovation through co-inventions–the success case of the Korean lithium-ion battery industry. Environ. Res. Lett. 19, 34025 (2024).10.1088/1748-9326/ad28da ↗
56. Dernis, H. & Khan, M. Triadic Patent Families Methodology (OECD, 2004).
57. Nitta, N., Wu, F., Lee, J. T. & Yushin, G. Li-ion battery materials: present and future. Mater. Today 18, 252–264 (2015).10.1016/j.mattod.2014.10.040 ↗
58. Alvira, D., Antorán, D. & Manyà, J. J. Plant-derived hard carbon as anode for sodium-ion batteries: a comprehensive review to guide interdisciplinary research. Chem. Eng. J. 447, 137468 (2022).10.1016/j.cej.2022.137468 ↗
59. Aaldering, L. J. & Song, C. H. Tracing the technological development trajectory in post-lithium-ion battery technologies: a patent-based approach. J. Cleaner Prod. 241, 118343 (2019).10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118343 ↗
60. Hemmelder, A. et al. Supplementary code: knowledge interdependencies between lithium- and sodium-ion battery chemistries. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18260735 (2026).10.5281/zenodo.18260735 ↗