Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Metrics for evaluating safe electrolytes in energy-dense lithium batteries

Nature Energy volume 10, pages 1382–1390 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Lithium-ion batteries can fail catastrophically through thermal runaway, but the key trigger has remained unclear. Here we show that the most harmful cause is lithium oxidation reaction (LOR). This makes two types of high-energy-density battery surprisingly most dangerous: all-solid-state batteries with cracked solid separators, whether from manufacturing defects, high-pressure assembly or electrochemical cycling, and batteries with non-flammable liquid electrolytes. In both batteries, oxygen evolved from an oxide cathode passes directly to an anode, triggering highly energetic LOR. In contrast, traditional carbonate- and ether-based electrolytes are safer because they can consume O2 in transit, alleviating or avoiding LOR. These findings apply to both lithium metal and lithiated anodes such as graphite. Safe electrolytes are thus either solid ion conductors that stop O2 crossover under all conditions or materials that scavenge O2 through low-exothermic reactions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Single-layer ISC of lithium batteries.
Fig. 2: Internal short circuiting of solid cells with oxygen crosstalk blocked.
Fig. 3: Internal short circuiting of anode-free batteries filled with an IL and a HPCE.
Fig. 4: Internal short circuiting of graphite‖NCM811 LIBs.
Fig. 5: Metrics of safe electrolytes for lithium batteries.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and the Supplementary Information.

References

  1. Kamaya, N., Homma, K., Yamakawa, Y., Hirayama, M. & Kanno, R. A lithium superionic conductor. Nat. Mater. 10, 682–686 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Manthiram, A., Yu, X. & Wang, S. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2, 16103 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Janek, J. & Zeier, W. G. Challenges in speeding up solid-state battery development. Nat. Energy 8, 230–240 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Li, Y. et al. A lithium superionic conductor for millimeter-thick battery electrode. Science 381, 50–53 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wang, C. & Su, X. The promise of solid-state batteries for safe and reliable energy storage. Engineering 21, 32–35 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jarratt, E. New lessons from the epic story of Moli Energy, the Canadian pioneer of rechargeable lithium battery technology. Electric Autonomy Canada (18 September 2020).

  7. Doughty, D. & Roth, E. P. A general discussion of Li ion battery safety. Electrochem. Soc. Interface 21, 37–44 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feng, X., Ren, D., He, X. & Ouyang, M. Mitigating thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries. Joule 4, 743–770 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Longchamps, R. S., Yang, X. G. & Wang, C. Y. Fundamental insights into battery thermal management and safety. ACS Energy Lett. 7, 1103–1111 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bates, A. et al. A multi-scale framework for advancing battery safety through early calorimetric analysis of materials and components. Electrochem. Soc. Interface 33, 69–76 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Song, I. T. et al. Thermal runaway prevention through scalable fabrication of safety reinforced layer in practical Li-ion batteries. Nat. Commun. 15, 8294 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Inoue, T. & Mukai, K. Are all-solid-state lithium-ion batteries really safe? Verification by differential scanning calorimetry with an all-inclusive microcell. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 9, 1507–1515 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Johnson, N. B. et al. Assessing the thermal safety of a Li metal solid-state battery material set using differential scanning calorimetry. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 15, 57134–57143 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, R. et al. The thermal stability of lithium solid electrolytes with metallic lithium. Joule 4, 812–821 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bates, A. M. et al. Are solid-state batteries safer than lithium-ion batteries?. Joule 6, 742–755 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ge, S. et al. Quantification of lithium battery fires in internal short circuit. ACS Energy Lett. 9, 5747–5755 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Qin, K., Ge, S., Gupta, N., Sasaki, T. & Wang, C. Y. High heat tolerance and safety of lithium metal batteries using a high concentration phase change electrolyte. J. Power Sources 630, 236094 (2025).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ning, Z. et al. Dendrite initiation and propagation in lithium metal solid-state batteries. Nature 618, 287–293 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kamphaus, E. P. et al. Role of inorganic surface layer on solid electrolyte interphase evolution at Li-metal anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11, 31467–31476 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cui, Z., Liu, C., Wang, F. & Manthiram, A. Navigating thermal stability intricacies of high-nickel cathodes for high-energy lithium batteries. Nat. Energy 10, 490–501 (2025).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Xu, K. Nonaqueous liquid electrolytes for lithium-based rechargeable batteries. Chem. Rev. 104, 4303–4418 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jia, H. et al. Is nonflammability of electrolyte overrated in the overall safety performance of lithium ion batteries? A sobering revelation from a completely nonflammable electrolyte. Adv. Energy Mater. 13, 2203144 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hou, J. et al. Thermal runaway of lihthium-ion batteries employing LiN(SO2F)2-based concentrated electrolyte. Nat. Commun. 11, 5100 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee, S. et al. Interplay of cathode−halide solid electrolyte in enhancing thermal stability of charged cathode material in all-solid-state batteries. ACS Energy Lett. 9, 1369–1380 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Choi, J. K. & Joncich, M. J. Heats of combustion, heats of formation and vapor pressures of some organic carbonates estimation of carbonate group contribution to heat of formation. J. Chem. Eng. Data 16, 87–90 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Eshetu, G. G. et al. In-depth safety-focused analysis of solvents used in electrolytes for large scale lithium ion batteries. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15, 9145–9155 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Heat of combustion of the elements. Periodictable.com https://periodictable.com/Properties/A/CombustionHeat.al.html (2024).

  28. Pilcher, G., Pell, A. S. & Coleman, D. J. Measurements of heats of combustion by flame calorimetry part 2. Dimethyl ether, methyl ethyl ether, methyl n-propyl ether, methyl isopropyl ether. Trans. Faraday Soc. 60, 499–505 (1964).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Heat of combustion for sulfolane. Chemeo https://www.chemeo.com/cid/98-351-4/Thiophene-tetrahydro-1-1-dioxide#ref-joback (2023).

  30. Emmanuel, P. et al. An introduction to the combustion of carbon materials. Chem. Eur. J. 28, e202200117 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Heat of combustion for SOCl2. Chemeo https://www.chemeo.com/cid/63-179-4/Thionyl-chloride (2023).

  32. Haynes, W. M. (ed.) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 92nd edn (CRC Press, 2011).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Partial financial support from Nissan Motor Co. Ltd and William E. Diefenderfer Endowment is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electrochemical Engine Center (ECEC) and Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Chao-Yang Wang, Kaiqiang Qin, Shanhai Ge & Nitesh Gupta

  2. Nissan Research Center, Nissan Motor Co. Ltd, Yokosuka, Japan

    Tatsuro Sasaki & Koichiro Aotani

Authors
  1. Chao-Yang Wang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaiqiang Qin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shanhai Ge
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nitesh Gupta
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tatsuro Sasaki
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Koichiro Aotani
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

C.-Y.W., K.Q. and N.G. wrote the manuscript. S.G., N.G. and K.Q. designed and built the cells. S.G., K.Q., N.G. and T.S. carried out the experiments. C.-Y.W., K.Q., N.G., T.S. and K.A. participated in discussions and data interpretation. All authors contributed to the development of the manuscript as the project developed.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chao-Yang Wang.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

T.S. and K.A. are employed by Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. The other authors have no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Energy thanks Xiangming He and Atsuo Yamada for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Illustration of the physical problem and corresponding RISC experimental setup.

Left, Single-layer internal short-circuit in a multilayer battery. Middle, Experimental cell in RISC method. Right, Cell holder with controllable stacking pressure. Figure adapted with permission from ref. 16, American Chemical Society.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Internal short circuiting of liquid-electrolyte graphite/NCM811 LiBs at various state of charge (SOC).

a, Temporal variations of voltage, shorting current, shorting resistance and internal temperature at 100%, 65% and 50% SOC, respectively. b, Photographic images of LiB cells after ISC. The 100% and 65% SOC cells catch fires due to sufficient heat generated from electrolyte oxidation. In contrast, the 50% SOC cell, generating only half of reaction heat from electrolyte oxidation, emits light smokes only.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information (download PDF )

Supplementary Figs. 1–11 and Table 1.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, CY., Qin, K., Ge, S. et al. Metrics for evaluating safe electrolytes in energy-dense lithium batteries. Nat Energy 10, 1382–1390 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-025-01887-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-025-01887-6

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing