Researchers have investigated fabrication and interface engineering strategies for lithium-ion solid-state batteries, comparing sulfide-based and oxide-based solid electrolyte systems for sustainable transportation and green energy applications. The study examines how processing choices, ionic conductivity, and interfacial resistance shape the performance of next-generation batteries.
Solid-state batteries, or SSBs, are widely viewed as an important direction for future energy storage because they can potentially improve safety, energy density, and long-term reliability compared with conventional liquid-electrolyte lithium-ion batteries. These advantages are especially relevant for electric vehicles and green energy systems, where batteries must deliver high performance while remaining durable and manufacturable. Yet the practical development of SSBs remains challenging because solid electrolytes, electrodes, and interfaces must be engineered together.
The new study addresses this challenge by comparing two major solid electrolyte routes: sulfide-based and oxide-based systems. According to the article, the researchers examined the characteristics and fabrication procedures of both types and tested ionic conductivity under external pressures ranging from 0 to 250 MPa. This is important because ionic conductivity is a critical factor in battery performance, and solid electrolyte behavior can depend strongly on pressure, processing, and contact quality.
For the sulfide system, the study used Li7P3S11, or LPS, as the solid electrolyte in an all-solid-state full cell. Cold pellet pressing was employed as the fabrication approach. The authors report that the all-solid-state sulfide full cell demonstrated excellent cycling stability at rates from 0.1C to 1.0C. This route highlights the potential of sulfide electrolytes for dry fabrication, while also providing a basis for comparison with oxide-based hybrid solid-state cells.
For the oxide system, the researchers used Li6.4La3Zr1.4Ta0.6O12, or LLZTO, as the solid electrolyte in a hybrid solid-state oxide full cell. The fabrication process incorporated advanced techniques including rapid heat radiation sintering, cathode wetting, and lithium-tin alloy anode soldering. These steps were designed to improve contact and interfacial behavior, which are often key limitations in solid-state battery performance.
The performance results suggest that the oxide-based hybrid approach offered notable advantages in the tested configuration. The paper reports a lifespan exceeding 200 cycles, with approximately 78% capacity retention at the 200th cycle compared with peak capacity. It also states that the hybrid cell displayed approximately 72% more capacity and more than 100 additional cycles of lifespan compared with the all-solid-state sulfide cell. These results indicate that interface-focused fabrication can substantially affect both usable capacity and durability.
A notable feature of the study is its focus on manufacturability as well as electrochemical performance. Many solid-state battery studies mix solid electrolytes into the cathode material to increase ionic conductivity, but the paper notes that this can limit energy density and add complexity for future mass production. In contrast, the authors used a cathode fabrication technique based on a commercial cathode with 93 wt% active material in the hybrid cell, aiming to maximize energy density while supporting a more practical production pathway.
The study also examined interfacial resistance by fitting equivalent circuits to full-cell impedance curves. This allowed the researchers to separate resistance contributions from the cathode and anode. Such analysis matters because poor solid-solid contact and unstable interfaces can reduce performance even when the electrolyte itself has favorable conductivity. By connecting fabrication procedures to impedance behavior, the work provides a more detailed view of where performance limitations arise in different solid-state cell designs.
Further work will still be needed to validate these fabrication routes under broader cell formats, operating conditions, and scale-up requirements. Even so, the study offers useful insights into how sulfide and oxide solid-state batteries differ in processing, interfacial behavior, and performance. For sustainable transportation and green energy systems, better understanding these trade-offs could help guide the development of safer, higher-energy, and more manufacturable solid-state batteries.
Reference
Author:
Haofeng Su a , Peifeng Li a b , Ningyue Mao a , Rongheng Li a , Xinru Zhao b , Yifu Li c , Weixing Zhou d e , Xuan Zhou a
Title of original paper:
Innovative solid-state battery fabrication and interface engineering for sustainable transportation and green energy systems
Article link:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773153725000866
Journal:
Green Energy and Intelligent Transportation
DOI:
10.1016/j.geits.2025.100336
Affiliations:
a Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, College of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan-Dearborn, Michigan 48128, USA
b Camel Energy USA, Michigan 48108, USA
c Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Kettering University, Michigan 48504, USA
d Computer and Information Science Department, College of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan-Dearborn, Michigan 48128, USA
e FCA US LLC, Michigan 48326, USA
Green Energy and Intelligent Transportation
Experimental study
Not applicable
Innovative solid-state battery fabrication and interface engineering for sustainable transportation and green energy systems
31-Jan-2026