This report has been updated. Click here to view latest edition.
If you have previously purchased the archived report below then please use the download links on the right to download the files.
| 1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS |
| 1.1. | Comparison with batteries |
| 1.1. | Narrowing the gap. Energy density of supercapacitors/ lithium-ion capacitors and lithium-ion batteries 2015-2027 |
| 1.1. | Comparison of features of lithium-ion batteries and supercapacitors |
| 1.2. | Comparison of features of supercapacitors with electrolytic capacitors |
| 1.2. | Energy density roadmap supercapacitor vs Li battery 2016 - 2028 |
| 1.2. | Comparison with electrolytic capacitors |
| 1.3. | Focus on functional materials |
| 1.3. | Three basic options for supercapacitor technology |
| 1.3. | Some of the better advances in experimental capacitance density achieved by electrode materials |
| 1.4. | Specific capacitance for various electrode materials |
| 1.4. | Dialogue of the deaf |
| 1.4. | Options: operating principles |
| 1.5. | What needs improving? |
| 1.5. | Supercapacitor construction |
| 1.5. | Comparison of supercapacitor properties by material with problem areas in red |
| 1.5.1. | Replacing Li-ion batteries |
| 1.5.2. | Dramatic benefit from energy density increase |
| 1.5.3. | Example in action |
| 1.6. | Construction and cost structure |
| 1.6. | Graphene supercapacitor and supercabattery research results. Red equivalent to present or future lithium-ion batteries. Yellow equivalent to lead-acid and nickel-cadmium batteries. |
| 1.6. | Supercapacitor cost breakdown |
| 1.7. | Iterative improvement of energy density with cost - following the best bets. |
| 1.7. | Choices of material: important parameters to improve |
| 1.7.1. | Carbon is unassailable? |
| 1.7.2. | Metal-organic frameworks |
| 1.7.3. | How to improve cost and energy density |
| 1.7.4. | Voltage and area improvement |
| 1.7.5. | Highest power density |
| 1.7.6. | Series resistance |
| 1.7.7. | Time constant |
| 1.7.8. | Leakage current |
| 1.8. | Progress with electrode materials |
| 1.8. | A more detailed look at options for improving the materials used in supercapacitors |
| 1.9. | Some higher voltage organic solute and organic ionic electrolytes compared. |
| 1.9. | Electrolytes |
| 1.9.1. | Comparison of options |
| 1.9.2. | Higher voltage electrolytes |
| 1.9.3. | Aqueous electrolytes become attractive |
| 1.9.4. | Organic ionic electrolytes |
| 1.9.5. | Acetonitrile concern |
| 1.10. | Supercabatteries |
| 1.10. | Specific capacitance vs identified area for graphene-based supercapacitor electrodes |
| 1.10.1. | Graphene a strong focus |
| 1.11. | Graphene goes well with the new electrolytes |
| 1.11. | Features of life cycle |
| 1.11.1. | Other reasons for graphene |
| 1.11.2. | Graphene advance in 2015 |
| 1.11.3. | Stretchable supercapacitors in 2014-15 |
| 1.12. | Materials maturity and profit |
| 1.12. | Evolution matrix for supercapacitor materials |
| 1.13. | Capacitor and Supercapacitor players and estimated revenue |
| 1.13. | Market forecast 2017-2027 |
| 1.14. | Hemp pseudo graphene? |
| 1.14. | Competitive landscape |
| 1.15. | Market forecast (>100 Farad market - supercapacitor penetration by segment 2017-2027 |
| 1.15. | Supercapacitors on the smaller scale |
| 1.16. | Supercapacitor materials news |
| 1.16. | Supercapacitor focus for small wearable healthcare devices |
| 1.16.1. | ETRI Korea exceptional supercapacitors - April 2016 |
| 1.16.2. | FASTcap advances - September 2016 |
| 1.16.3. | Metal oxide frameworks - October 2016 |
| 1.16.4. | Candy cane supercapacitor could enable fast charging of mobile phones - August 2017 |
| 1.16.5. | Georgia Institute of Technology and Korea University's paper-based flexible supercapacitor - September 2017 |
| 1.16.6. | Design for new electrode could boost supercapacitors' performance - February 2018 |
| 1.17. | Candy cane supercapacitor |
| 1.18. | UCLA's long-lasting electrode for supercapacitors |
| 2. | INTRODUCTION |
| 2.1. | Where supercapacitors fit in |
| 2.1. | Some of the options and some of the suppliers in the spectrum between conventional capacitors and rechargeable batteries with primary markets shown in yellow |
| 2.1. | Parameters of production supercapacitors compared with electrolytic capacitors, pseudocapacitors and lithium-ion batteries |
| 2.2. | Aqueous vs non aqueous electrolytes in supercapacitors |
| 2.2. | Nippon Chemi-Con non-toxic supercapacitor used for fast charge-discharge in a Mazda sports car |
| 2.2. | Supercapacitors and supercabattery basics |
| 2.2.1. | Basic geometry |
| 2.2.2. | Charging |
| 2.2.3. | Discharging and cycling |
| 2.2.4. | Energy density |
| 2.2.5. | Battery-like variants: pseudocapacitors, supercabatteries |
| 2.2.6. | Pseudocapacitance |
| 2.2.7. | New supercabattery designs |
| 2.3. | Supercapacitors and alternatives compared |
| 2.3. | Symmetric supercapacitor construction |
| 2.3. | Properties conferred by aqueous vs non-aqueous electrolytes in supercapacitors and supercabatteries |
| 2.4. | Symmetric compared to asymmetric supercapacitor construction |
| 2.4. | Fundamentals |
| 2.5. | Laminar biodegradable option |
| 2.5. | Yunasko approach to supercabatteries |
| 2.6. | Summary of ultracapacitor device characteristics |
| 2.6. | Structural supercapacitors |
| 2.6.1. | Queensland UT supercap car body |
| 2.6.2. | Fiber supercapacitors |
| 2.6.3. | Stretchable Capacitors |
| 2.6.4. | Microcapacitors |
| 2.6.5. | Embedding with Flexible Printed Circuits |
| 2.6.6. | Electrical component hitches a ride with mechanical support |
| 2.6.7. | AMBER activity of the CRANN Institute at Trinity College Dublin |
| 2.7. | Electrolyte improvements ahead |
| 2.7. | Side view of a structural supercapacitor shows the blue polymer electrolyte that glues the silicon electrodes together |
| 2.7.1. | Aqueous vs non-aqueous electrolytes |
| 2.7.2. | Polyacenes or polypyrrole |
| 2.7.3. | New ionic liquid electrolytes |
| 2.7.4. | Prospect of radically different battery and capacitor shapes |
| 2.8. | Equivalent circuits and limitations |
| 2.8. | The engineers suspended a heavy laptop from the supercapacitor to demonstrate its strength. |
| 2.8.1. | Equivalent circuits |
| 2.8.2. | Example of fixing the limitations |
| 2.9. | Supercapacitor sales have a new driver: safety |
| 2.9. | Cambridge U. stretchable supercapacitor |
| 2.9.1. | Why supercapacitors replace batteries today |
| 2.9.2. | Troublesome life of rechargeable batteries |
| 2.9.3. | So where are we now? |
| 2.9.4. | What next? |
| 2.9.5. | Good cell and system design |
| 2.9.6. | Faster improvement |
| 2.9.7. | Complex electronic controls |
| 2.9.8. | The air industry benchmarks badly |
| 2.10. | Disruptive supercapacitors now taken more seriously |
| 2.10. | Micro capacitor by Cambridge University |
| 2.10.1. | Lithium-ion batteries still ahead in ten years |
| 2.10.2. | Supercapacitors first choice for safety? |
| 2.11. | Change of leadership of the global value market? |
| 2.11. | The structural supercapacitor as a flat laminate (top) and as a car trunk lid (bottom) that can light LED lights |
| 2.11.1. | Maxwell Technologies |
| 2.11.2. | Largest orders today: Meidensha |
| 2.12. | Battery and fuel cell management with supercapacitors |
| 2.12. | Simplest equivalent circuit for an electrolytic capacitor |
| 2.13. | Transmission line equivalent circuit for a supercapacitor |
| 2.13. | Graphene vs other carbon forms in supercapacitors |
| 2.13.1. | Exohedral and hierarchical options both set records |
| 2.13.2. | Aerogel doubles energy density |
| 2.13.3. | Hierarchical with interconnected pores: breakthrough in 2015 |
| 2.14. | Environmentally friendlier and safer materials |
| 2.15. | Printing supercapacitors |
| 2.16. | New manufacturing sites in Europe |
| 2.17. | Modelling insights |
| 3. | SEPARATORS |
| 4. | ELECTROLYTES BY MANUFACTURER |
| 4.1. | Introduction |
| 4.1. | Electrolytes used - acetonitrile solvent, other solvent or ionic liquid - by supercapacitor and lithium supercabattery manufacturers and putative manufacturers. |
| 4.2. | Toxicity |
| 4.3. | Gel electrolytes |
| 4.4. | Ionic liquids |
| 4.5. | Electrolytes compared by manufacturer. |
| 5. | ELECTRODE MATERIALS AND OTHERS |
| 5.1. | Introduction |
| 5.1. | Electrode materials, electrolytes and formation processes for supercapacitors and supercabatteries |
| 5.1. | Narrowing the gap. Energy density of supercapacitors/ lithium-ion capacitors and lithium-ion batteries 2015-2027 |
| 5.2. | Options for improving the materials used in supercapacitors |
| 5.2. | Comparison of features of batteries and supercapacitors |
| 5.2. | Electrodes and other materials compared by company |
| 5.3. | Materials optimisation |
| 5.3. | Comparison of features of supercapacitors with electrolytic capacitors |
| 5.3. | Some higher voltage organic solute and organic ionic electrolytes compared. |
| 5.3.1. | Requirements to beat batteries |
| 5.3.2. | Focus on functional materials |
| 5.3.3. | Rapid demand increase |
| 5.3.4. | What needs improving? |
| 5.3.5. | Replacing Li-ion batteries partly or wholly |
| 5.3.6. | Dramatic benefit from energy density increase |
| 5.3.7. | Materials aspects |
| 5.3.8. | Carbon is unassailable |
| 5.3.9. | 2D titanium carbide |
| 5.3.10. | How to improve cost and energy density |
| 5.3.11. | Voltage and area improvement |
| 5.3.12. | Materials for highest power density today |
| 5.3.13. | Series resistance |
| 5.3.14. | Time constant |
| 5.4. | Progress with electrode materials |
| 5.4. | Some of the better advances in experimental capacitance density achieved by electrode materials |
| 5.5. | Graphene supercapacitor and supercabattery research results. Red equivalent to present or future lithium-ion batteries. Yellow equivalent to lead-acid and nickel-cadmium batteries. |
| 5.5. | Graphene |
| 5.5.1. | Other reasons for graphene |
| 5.5.2. | Self assembling graphene |
| 5.6. | Higher voltage electrolytes |
| 5.7. | Aqueous electrolytes become attractive |
| 5.8. | Organic ionic electrolytes |
| 5.9. | Acetonitrile concern |
| 5.10. | Supercabattery improvement |
| 6. | COMPANY PROFILES |
| 6.1. | 2D Carbon Graphene Material Co., Ltd |
| 6.1. | The amount of composite materials used in recent airbus planes |
| 6.2. | The amount of structural weight of composites used in planes, in %, as a function of year |
| 6.2. | Abalonyx, Norway |
| 6.3. | Airbus, France |
| 6.3. | Effect of different nanomaterials in resin fracture toughness |
| 6.4. | Locations and products of Cambridge Graphene Platform |
| 6.4. | Aixtron, Germany |
| 6.5. | AMO GmbH, Germany |
| 6.5. | Improvement formulation with addition of GRIDSTM 180 |
| 6.6. | Schematic of the epitaxial process used to grow graphene |
| 6.6. | Asbury Carbon, USA |
| 6.7. | AZ Electronics, Luxembourg |
| 6.7. | Hotmelt-Prepreg-Production |
| 6.8. | LM graphene synthesis and processing R&D |
| 6.8. | BASF, Germany |
| 6.9. | Cambridge Graphene Centre, UK |
| 6.9. | The graphene microchip mostly based on relatively standard chip processing technology |
| 6.10. | Concept version of the photoelectrochemical cell |
| 6.10. | Cambridge Graphene Platform, UK |
| 6.11. | Carben Semicon Ltd, Russia |
| 6.11. | This filament containing about 30 million carbon nanotubes absorbs energy from the sun |
| 6.12. | The difference between dispersible graphene and non-redispersible graphene |
| 6.12. | Carbon Solutions, Inc., USA |
| 6.13. | Catalyx Nanotech Inc. (CNI), USA |
| 6.13. | Mazda car supercapacitor exhibited at EVS26 Los Angeles 2012 |
| 6.14. | Nippon Chemi-Con low resistance DXE Series priority shown in 2012 |
| 6.14. | CRANN, Ireland |
| 6.15. | Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI), USA |
| 6.15. | Exhibit by United ChemiCon at EVS26 Los Angeles |
| 6.16. | Nippon ChemiCon latest developments using CNT and carbon nanofiber CNF |
| 6.16. | Grafoid, Canada |
| 6.17. | GRAnPH Nanotech, Spain |
| 6.17. | Silicon carbide wafer |
| 6.18. | A new method for using water to tune the band gap of the nanomaterial graphene |
| 6.18. | Graphene Devices, USA |
| 6.19. | Graphene NanoChem, UK |
| 6.19. | A mesh of carbon nanotubes supports one-atom-thick sheets of graphene that were produced with a new fluid-processing technique. |
| 6.20. | A three-terminal single-transistor amplifier made of graphene |
| 6.20. | Graphensic AB, Sweden |
| 6.21. | Harbin Mulan Foreign Economic and Trade Company, China |
| 6.21. | CNT films from Rutgers University |
| 6.22. | Comparison of carbon fibre and graphene reinforcement |
| 6.22. | HDPlas, USA |
| 6.23. | Head, Austria |
| 6.23. | Taiyo Yuden ultra-small and can type supercapacitors |
| 6.24. | Making graphene supercapacitors |
| 6.24. | HRL Laboratories, USA |
| 6.25. | IBM, USA |
| 6.25. | High-performance laser scribed graphene electrodes (LSG) |
| 6.26. | Graphene supercapacitor properties |
| 6.26. | iTrix, Japan |
| 6.27. | JiangSu GeRui Graphene Venture Capital Co., Ltd. |
| 6.27. | Flexible, all-solid-state supercapacitors |
| 6.28. | Graphene OPV |
| 6.28. | Jinan Moxi New Material Technology Co., Ltd |
| 6.29. | JSR Micro, Inc. / JM Energy Corp. |
| 6.29. | The resulting film is photographed atop a color photo to show its transparency |
| 6.30. | Fabrication steps, leading to regular arrays of single-wall nanotubes (bottom) |
| 6.30. | Lockheed Martin, USA |
| 6.31. | Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA |
| 6.31. | The colourless disk with a lattice of more than 20,000 nanotube transistors in front of the USC sign |
| 6.32. | Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research, Germany |
| 6.33. | Momentive, USA |
| 6.34. | Nanjing JCNANO Tech Co., LTD |
| 6.35. | Nanjing XFNANO Materials Tech Co.,Ltd |
| 6.36. | Nanostructured & Amorphous Materials, Inc., USA |
| 6.36.1. | Nippon ChemiCon/ United ChemiCon Japan |
| 6.37. | Nokia, Finland |
| 6.38. | Pennsylvania State University, USA |
| 6.39. | Power Booster, China |
| 6.40. | Quantum Materials Corp, India |
| 6.41. | Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), USA |
| 6.42. | Rice University, USA |
| 6.43. | Rutgers - The State University of New Jersey, USA |
| 6.44. | Samsung Electronics, Korea |
| 6.45. | Samsung Techwin, Korea |
| 6.46. | SolanPV, USA |
| 6.47. | Spirit Aerosystems, USA |
| 6.48. | Sungkyunkwan University Advanced Institute of Nano Technology (SAINT), Korea |
| 6.48.1. | Taiyo Yuden |
| 6.49. | Texas Instruments, USA |
| 6.50. | Thales, France |
| 6.51. | The Sixth Element |
| 6.52. | University of California Los Angeles, (UCLA), USA |
| 6.53. | University of Manchester, UK |
| 6.54. | University of Princeton, USA |
| 6.55. | University of Southern California (USC), USA |
| 6.56. | University of Surrey UK |
| 6.57. | University of Texas at Austin, USA |
| 6.58. | University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA |
| IDTECHEX RESEARCH REPORTS | |
| IDTECHEX CONSULTANCY | |
| TABLES | |
| FIGURES |
| Pages | 212 |
|---|---|
| Tables | 15 |
| Figures | 65 |
| Companies | 58 |
| Forecasts to | 2027 |