Carolyn R. Mercer, Amy L. Jankovsky, Concha M. Reid, Thomas B. Miller,

and Mark A. Hoberecht

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Energy Storage Technology Development for

Space Exploration

NASA/TM—2011-216964

January 2011

AIAA–2010–8709
NASA STI Program . . . in Profi le

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role.

The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices 

of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, 

organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates 

NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access 

to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and 

its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports 

Server, thus providing one of the largest collections 

of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

Results are published in both non-NASA channels 

and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which 

includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major signifi cant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or theoretical 

analysis. Includes compilations of signifi cant 

scientifi c and technical data and information 

deemed to be of continuing reference value. 

NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal 

professional papers but has less stringent 

limitations on manuscript length and extent of 

graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientifi c 

and technical fi ndings that are preliminary or 

of specialized interest, e.g., quick release 

reports, working papers, and bibliographies that 

contain minimal annotation. Does not contain 

extensive analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and 

technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientifi c and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientifi c and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

Specialized services also include creating custom 

thesauri, building customized databases, organizing 

and publishing research results.

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question via the Internet to help@

sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk 

at 443–757–5803

• Telephone the NASA STI Help Desk at

 443–757–5802

• Write to:

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI)

 7115 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076–1320
Carolyn R. Mercer, Amy L. Jankovsky, Concha M. Reid, Thomas B. Miller,

and Mark A. Hoberecht

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Energy Storage Technology Development for

Space Exploration

NASA/TM—2011-216964

January 2011

AIAA–2010–8709

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Prepared for the

Space 2010 Conference and Exposition

sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Anaheim, California, August 30 to September 2, 2010
Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the support of NASA’s Exploration Technology Development Program for funding the Energy Storage 

Project to conduct this work, with particular thanks to Diane Hope and Frank Peri. We appreciate the many members of NASA’s 

Constellation Program for many fruitful discussions regarding technical goals and objectives, particularly to David Westheimer,

Rob Button, Pat George, Lisa Kohout, Josh Freeh, James Fincannon, Barb McKissock and Patricia Loyselle. Many thanks to 

the excellent technical staff at the NASA fi eld centers and Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). There are too many to name, but 

Ratnakumar Bugga, Judy Jeevarajan, Koroosh Araghi, S.R. Narayan, Bill Bennett, Marshall Smart, Ken Burke, and Ian Jakupca 

stand tall among their peers. The excellent managerial support from John Scott, Michelle Manzo and Subbarao Surampudi is also 

gratefully acknowledged. Finally, the success of our major contracts with Infi nity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, Inc. and Saft, America 

is due in large part because of the dedication and expertise of Bill Smith and Bob Staniewicz, respectively, and their capable 

teams, and our battery component work is ably led by Arumugam Manthiram at the University of Texas at Austin, Christopher 

Lang at Physical Sciences, Inc., Ganesh Skandan at NEI Corp., Justin Golightly at Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Gleb 

Yushin at the Georgia Institute of Technology, Robert McDonald at Giner, Inc., and Boris Ravdel at Yardney Technical Products.

Available from

NASA Center for Aerospace Information

7115 Standard Drive

Hanover, MD 21076–1320

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road

Alexandria, VA 22312

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov

Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by technical management. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 1 

Energy Storage Technology Development for Space Exploration 

Carolyn R. Mercer, Amy L. Jankovsky, Concha M. Reid, Thomas B. Miller, and Mark A. Hoberecht 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Glenn Research Center 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135 

Abstract 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is developing battery and fuel cell technology to 

meet the expected energy storage needs of human exploration systems. Improving battery performance 

and safety for human missions enhances a number of exploration systems, including un-tethered 

extravehicular activity suits and transportation systems including landers and rovers. Similarly, improved 

fuel cell and electrolyzer systems can reduce mass and increase the reliability of electrical power, oxygen, 

and water generation for crewed vehicles, depots and outposts. To achieve this, NASA is developing 

“non-flow-through” proton-exchange-membrane fuel cell stacks, and electrolyzers coupled with lowpermeability membranes for high pressure operation. The primary advantage of this technology set is the 

reduction of ancillary parts in the balance-of-plant – fewer pumps, separators and related components 

should result in fewer failure modes and hence a higher probability of achieving very reliable operation, 

and reduced parasitic power losses enable smaller reactant tanks and therefore systems with lower mass 

and volume. Key accomplishments over the past year include the fabrication and testing of several robust, 

small-scale non-flow-through fuel cell stacks that have demonstrated proof-of-concept. NASA is also 

developing advanced lithium-ion battery cells, targeting cell-level safety and very high specific energy 

and energy density. Key accomplishments include the development of silicon composite anodes, lithiatedmixed-metal-oxide cathodes, low-flammability electrolytes, and cell-incorporated safety devices that 

promise to substantially improve battery performance while providing a high level of safety. 

I. Introduction 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is developing battery and fuel cell 

technology to meet the expected energy storage needs of human exploration systems. Improving battery 

performance and safety for human missions enhances a number of exploration systems, including untethered extravehicular activity (EVA) suits and transportation systems including landers and rovers. 

Similarly, improved fuel cell and electrolyzer systems can reduce mass and increase the reliability of 

electrical power, oxygen, and water generation for crewed vehicles, depots and outposts. 

To achieve this, NASA is developing “non-flow-through” proton-exchange-membrane fuel cell 

stacks, and electrolyzers coupled with low-permeability membranes for high pressure operation. NASA is 

also developing rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, targeting cell-level safety and very high specific 

energy and energy density. The following sections outline representative human exploration mission 

needs for energy storage systems, and NASA’s technical approach and recent accomplishments in 

technology development for batteries and fuel cells. 

This work was based on the needs of NASA’s Constellation program to return humans to the Moon in 

preparation for the human exploration of Mars, (Ref. 1) and is broadly applicable to a variety of 

exploration missions including lunar outposts, crewed missions to near-Earth objects and Mars, and 

human exploration using real-time robotic operations. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 2 

II. Mission Needs for Energy Storage 

Energy storage technologies are critically important to human exploration. Improved battery 

performance in cells safe enough for human missions enhances a number of exploration systems, including 

extending the range, duration, or capabilities of un-tethered extravehicular activity suits and transportation 

systems including landers and rovers. Similarly, improved fuel cell and electrolyzer systems can reduce 

mass and increase the reliability of electrical power, oxygen, and water generation for crewed vehicles and 

planetary or lunar outposts. Reducing the number of ancillary parts in the balance-of-plant should result in 

fewer failure modes and hence a higher probability of very reliable operation, and reduced parasitic power 

losses enable smaller reactant tanks and therefore systems with lower mass and volume. NASA’s 

Constellation program identified critical mission needs for energy storage systems, targeting mission 

scenarios that included extended human presence on the lunar surface. These needs are described below. 

Note that these needs are relevant to a broad class of human exploration missions because they are also 

representative of the needs of crewed vehicles including landers and rendezvous craft, and mobile human 

operations including EVA suits, crewed rovers, and telerobotically operated systems. 

A. EVA Needs 

Lunar surface missions require an untethered space suit that is effectively a single person space 

vehicle which requires an independent power supply. Historical space suit designs and trade studies have 

indicated that batteries are the energy storage technology of choice. For Constellation, three requirements 

have very high priority: (Ref. 2) 1) 8 hr of continuous operation to allow for uninterrupted astronaut 

activity without swapping out batteries; 2) the provision of sufficient energy to power all of the 

components needed for an effective mission; and 3) human-safe operation, with cell-level safety highly 

desirable. The total energy required to power fans, pumps, processors, controllers, valves, heaters and 

sensors for life support, electronics and processors for communications, and auxiliary equipment such as 

lights and cameras, is estimated at 1155 Wh including component duty cycles, losses and margin. The 

desired mass allocation for a battery unit is 5 kg and the volume allocation is 3 liters. These batteries are 

expected to operate over the temperature range of 0 to 30 C in 1/6th of Earth’s gravity and be deployed 

Figure 1.—Advanced EVA 

suits require a substantial 

increase in battery energy 

density and specific energy 

relative to the state-of-theart, with safety features for 

human operations. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 3 

every other day for six months, requiring just 100 cycles for their expected lifetime. The resulting need is 

to deliver 231 Wh/kg and 373 Wh/l at 0 C and a discharge rate of C/10 (discharge of full capacity in 

10 hr). Current battery technologies do not meet these requirements. For reference, the lithium-ion 

batteries flown on the Mars Spirit and Opportunity rovers represent the state-of-the-art in flight-qualified 

secondary batteries, and their performance is 83 Wh/kg at 0 C and a C/10 discharge rate. 

B. Lander Needs 

The lunar lander as envisioned by the Constellation program will be capable of landing astronauts on 

the Moon, providing life support and a base for initial surface exploration missions, and returning the 

crew to the spacecraft that will bring them home to Earth. The lander will launch aboard a rocket into low 

Earth orbit, where it and the Earth departure stage will rendezvous with the crew vehicle prior to being 

propelled toward the Moon. The lander consists of two main modules: the descent module and ascent 

module. Power requirements for each are as follows (Ref. 3). 

For the ascent stage, advanced secondary (rechargeable) batteries are considered a critical need. The 

first design cycle for the lander project recommended a 14.2 kWh primary (nonrechargeable) battery with 

a 67 kg mass, but they assumed no faults, no redundancy, and minimum ascent duration. A second design 

cycle considered fault management which led to the recommended use of secondary batteries to address 

three key risks associated with primary batteries: 

1. Inability to verify proper battery function in-flight before critical use; 

2. Need for instantaneous power in case of mission abort during descent requires oversized primary 

batteries (increasing mass); and 

3. A power drop from the crew vehicle to the lander during a portion of the shadowed trans-lunar 

injection limits overall lander power availability. 

Figure 2.—A lunar lander concept would use advanced batteries to 

increase the ascent stage’s capability, and advanced fuel cells to 

provide power for the descent stage. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 4 

Operational requirements for the batteries are similar to those listed for the EVA mission: operability 

over 0 to 30 C over the range of 0 to 1 g, at a nominal full capacity discharge time of 7 hr, with only 

10 cycles required for the life of the battery. Human-safe operation is required, with cell-level safety 

highly desirable. The mass should be comparable to a primary battery to maximize payload capability. 

This yields a requirement of nominally 210 Wh/kg at 0 C and C/10. 

For the descent stage, proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells are considered enhancing. A key 

requirement is the ability to operate on propellant residuals while the descent stage serves as an initial 

lunar base for surface operations. The descent stage requires a nominal power level of 3 kW with 5.5 kW 

peak, operating for 220 hr continuously. For a sortie mission, the fuel cell must provide 9 days (216 hr) of 

power continuously to the lander (2 days during flight and 7 days on the surface). For an outpost mission, 

the fuel cell provides power for 3 days continuously (2 days in flight, 1 day on surface), then the lander is 

quiescent for 210 days awaiting launch. The quiescent power is supplied by the lunar surface power 

system, but only the ascent module needs to remain operative during that time. The lander’s fuel cell will 

be operated until all the propellant residuals have been converted into water and power. For comparison, 

the alkaline fuel cells currently being flown on the Space Shuttle fleet cannot be operated on residual 

fuels, and have a dwindling supplier chain in the face of newly developed PEM technology. 

C. Lunar Surface Needs 

Lunar surface systems consist of habitats, mobility systems, communications and navigation, in-situ 

resource utilization operations, and science experiments. Regenerative fuel cells are considered enabling 

for lunar surface power units to provide power above normal outpost operations and to store sufficient 

energy to meet power usage requirements during eclipse periods. The technology needs for energy 

storage are based upon the results of a NASA-sponsored study which assumed an outpost established at 

the lunar South Pole near the rim of the Shackelton Crater (Refs. 4 and 5). At this location, insolation is 

available 90 percent of the time with a maximum eclipse period of 122 hr occurring during the lunar 

winter (Ref. 6). In addition to providing energy storage to span this relatively long shadowed period, 

surface systems are expected to be robust and long-lived to minimize the number of maintenance 

operations and resupply launches for replacements. An operational life goal of 10,000 hr was set for the 

regenerative fuel cell. An additional requirement is compatibility with high pressure (2000 psi) reactant 

tanks to reduce the overall system volume. Low mass and operation from 0 to 1/6th g between 0 and 30 C 

round out the requirement set. For comparison, alkaline fuel cells’ 2,100 hr stack life is unacceptable in 

terms of maintenance requirements or operational constraints (Ref. 7). 

Figure 3.—Portable utility pallet concept 

includes a regenerative fuel cell to 

provide power for surface systems. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 5 

In addition to regenerative fuel cells for stationary power, mobility systems including crewed rovers 

require batteries and possibly fuel cells (Ref. 8). Human-safe operation and minimal mass are the driving 

factors, with probable cycle requirements of nominally 2000 cycles. Four classes of mobility systems 

were studied for the lunar outpost: short-duration outpost traverse; long-duration small-habitat sortie; 

long-duration habitat transport; and long-duration un-crewed science missions. Power requirements differ 

for each scenario, but a representative rover carrying 3000 kg during a short-duration outpost traverse 

requires nominally 5.9 kW peak power, 1.15 kW average power and 125 W standby power with a 

nominal drive time of 87 hr and stand-by time of 800 hr. Minimal power system mass is desired since 

there is an inverse relationship between battery mass and rover range and/or payload carrying ability. For 

batteries, this has been translated into the following goals: 150 Wh/kg, 10 hr discharge and 10-hr charge, 

80 percent capacity retention after approximately 2000 discharge/recharge cycles, full performance over 

the temperature range of 0 to 30 °C, and 5-year calendar life. As with every other human mission, safety 

is paramount and cell-level safety is highly desirable. 

III. Battery Technology Development 

Our technical objective for batteries is to improve the performance of secondary (rechargeable) 

lithium-ion cells to meet the energy storage requirements of the lander ascent stage, EVA, and lunar 

surface systems as described above. Our approach is to develop two types of secondary cells: a “High 

Energy” cell to meet lunar surface mobility needs, and an “Ultra-High Energy” cell to meet the needs of 

the lander and EVA suit. The former is focused on improving safety and specific energy for a mission of 

approximately 2000 cycles; the latter is focused on very high specific energy and energy density in a safe 

package for missions requiring much fewer cycles. In both cases we selected a lithium-ion chemistry 

because it has the best combination of safety, specific energy, technical maturity, and performance needed 

for the Constellation power subsystems. Whereas lithium-ion batteries are currently used for some 

aerospace missions, none has been qualified for use as the main energy storage element for human-rated 

vehicles. As such, our cell and component development efforts are directed toward improving the overall 

safety for lithium-ion battery systems, as well as improve their performance. 

Our approach for the High Energy cells is to develop lithiated mixed-metal-oxide formulations of 

Ni-Mn-Co (NMC) cathodes, electrolytes that are both stable with these high voltage cathodes and flame 

resistant, cathode coatings to reduce exothermic reactions while retaining performance, and a thermal 

switch to reversibly shut down the cell if internal temperatures rise beyond unsafe levels. Our expectation 

is that these components, when coupled with a conventional graphite anode, will provide a cell-level 

specific energy of 180 Wh/kg at a discharge rate of C/10 at 0 C when operated down to 3.0 V, with 

80 percent capacity retention after 2000 cycles. Furthermore, we have a goal for cell-level safety such that 

they will be tolerant to electrical and thermal abuse such as over-temperature (up to 110 C), overcharge 

(100 percent overcharge at 1C), reversal (150 percent excess discharge at 1C), external short circuit, and 

tolerant to internal shorts (pass simulated short test) with no fire or thermal runaway. 

Our approach for the Ultra-High Energy cells is to develop silicon-composite anodes to be used 

instead of the graphite anode in combination with the components being developed for the High Energy 

cells (Ref. 9). Our expectation is that this advanced anode will substantially increase the cell-level 

specific energy (to 260 Wh/kg at the same conditions and with the same level of safety) but will be 

operable for fewer cycles (only 200 cycles with 80 percent capacity retention). 

The corresponding battery-level performance expectations are 150 and 220 Wh/kg for the High 

Energy and Ultra-High Energy designs, respectively, assuming lightweight battery packaging. Figure 4 

shows how individual components are formed into battery cells. 

Figure 5 depicts the individual components that we are developing for the High Energy (all 

components shown except the anode) and Ultra-High Energy cell (all components). These components 

are being developed in a variety of specialized laboratories across the country, with the integration 

function being done by NASA with the help of Saft, America. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 6 

Figure 4.—Schematic showing components within a battery cell: 

negative plates (anode), positive plates (cathode), and separator. 

Electrolyte fills the void between electrodes. 

Figure 5.—Summary of component technology development for lithium-ion batteries. 

Early in the development cycle we are infusing the experience of a battery manufacturer to ensure the 

practicality of our products, including the ability to be scaled-up to sufficient quantities and to be 

incorporated into industrial processes. The integration function is particularly important because many 

elements of component performance cannot be determined in isolation. Tests in electrochemical half-cells 

provide baseline information about new component performance against pure lithium electrodes; 

components that look sufficiently promising move on to full-cell testing against the most representative 

components available. This information will help us downselect to the best components and build 

evaluation cells using those components to determine the best combination to meet exploration needs. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 7 

A. Technical Accomplishments 

Silicon-composite anodes were chosen because of their very high theoretical capacity. This theoretical 

capacity is possible because of the large amount of lithium that can be transported into and out of the 

material during charge and discharge. However, this same feature causes a large volumetric expansion and 

contraction that rapidly degrades the material and limits cycle life. Working with Lockheed Martin, a team 

from the Georgia Institute of Technology and Clemson University, and the NASA Glenn Research Center, 

we are developing functionalized nanoparticles, nanosilicon structures and elastomeric binders to retain high 

capacity performance even after cycling. Accomplishments to date include exceeding our target goal of 

1000 mAh/g at 0 C and C/10 for 10 cycles in half cells, and for 40 cycles at room temperature. Less than 

10 percent degradation in capacity was observed at 0 C relative to room temperature. Full-cell testing with 

an NMC cathode showed excellent performance (>1000 mAh/g) through all cycles tested to date (5 cycles) 

at room temperature. The challenge ahead lies in increasing the number of charge/discharge cycles to the 

goal value of 200 and decreasing irreversible capacity loss.

Lithiated mixed-metal-oxide cathodes were chosen because of their good thermal stability for high 

voltage operation. Working with the University of Texas at Austin, NEI Corporation, (Ref. 10) and the 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, (Ref. 11) we are determining the proper stoichiometry to provide a high 

specific capacity and low irreversible capacity loss, and the proper morphology to improve rate capability. 

Results to date show good stability over a wide operating voltage window (4.8 to 2.5 V), and a metal 

oxide coating that has increased the capacity and reduced the irreversible capacity loss. Initial batches of 

material have specific capacities that exceeded 250 mAh/g at room temperature and C/10, however their 

low tap density (0.8 g/cm3

) prevented their incorporation into a manufacturing process for cell fabrication. 

Subsequent materials have reasonable tap density (above 2.0 g/cm3

) but are so far limited to ~230 mAh/g 

at room temperature and C/10. Low temperature performance is a challenge, with ~30 percent capacity 

reduction observed at 0 C as compared to room temperature. Our goal is 280 mAh/g at 0 C and C/10; 

compare this to the state-of-the-art Mars Exploration Rover batteries which have 180 mAh/g at these 

conditions. 

Our requirements for electrolytes include compatibility with our electrodes, particularly providing 

stable operation up to 5.0 V for compatibility with the NMC cathodes. We also want reduced 

flammability to achieve our safety goal of tolerance to electrical and thermal abuse. Working with the Jet 

Propulsion Laboratory (Ref. 12) and a team from Yardney Technical Products and the University of 

Rhode Island, we are developing LiPF6-based materials with flame-retardant additives and nonflammable 

solvents. Accomplishments to date include a formulation that showed less than half of the heat release 

compared to a baseline electrolyte, resulting in a pressure rise of less than 25 percent compared to the 

baseline, and extinguished itself significantly faster than the baseline during a flame test. This formulation 

showed excellent electrical performance in a full cell fabricated with a nickel cobalt aluminum (NCA) 

cathode and graphitic anode, but the performance degraded when an NMC cathode was used. 

Performance with this representative cathode was restored with the addition of Lithium bis (oxalate) 

borate (LiBOB) to the electrolyte, and the LiBOB is expected to improve the self-extinguishing effect 

because it aids in the passivation of the electrode. 

Under electrical and/or thermal abuse conditions, exothermic reactions can occur between the cathode 

and electrolyte leading potentially to thermal runaway or other serious safety conditions. We are 

developing two devices purely to improve the safety of the cells: a cathode coating to improve thermal 

stability, and a composite thermal switch to break the electrical circuit if the cell’s internal temperature 

rises too high. Working with Physical Sciences, Inc. (Ref. 13) and the NASA Johnson Space Center, 

(Ref. 14) we are developing a lithium metal phosphate coating to increase the onset temperature of the 

exothermic reactions, or suppress them altogether. This coating has shown excellent exothermic 

suppression on lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2) cathodes, with robust adhesion and good capacity retention 

after 200 cycles. A recent test demonstrated that the coating can diminish heat release on high-voltage 

cathodes as well, without reducing performance. Work continues to determine the coating’s compatibility 

with the NASA-developed cathode and electrolyte. Working with Giner, Inc. and the Johnson Space 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 8 

Center we are developing a nanostructured thermal switch to reversibly “turn off” the cell if the internal 

temperature increases beyond a safe threshold. The switch consists of a coating deposited on either 

electrode’s current collector (see Fig. 5). The coating is normally electrically conductive, but its resistance 

rises very quickly when the coating is above threshold value. The basic principle for this device has been 

observed, but work is underway to develop reliable and repeatable operation. 

A cell/battery modeling tool has been developed to aid in component materials assessments. Projected 

cell level performance using data from the best components shows that the High Energy cell should reach 

199 Wh/kg at room temperature and beginning-of-life. Predicted performance at 0 C falls off 

substantially however, to 100 Wh/kg, primarily because of the poor low-temperature cathode 

performance. Similarly, the predicted Ultra High Energy cell-level performance is 213 Wh/kg at room 

temperature but drops to 100 Wh/kg at 0 C, again because of the cathode. Note that neither cycle 

performance nor safety can be predicted for either cell design. These results are summarized in Table 1. 

Note that the cell-level goal of 180 Wh/kg corresponds to 150 Wh/kg at the battery level, and 260 Wh/kg 

at the cell level corresponds to 220 Wh/kg at the battery level. 

TABLE 1.—CELL-LEVEL PERFORMANCE PREDICTIONS FOR ADVANCED LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES 

Cell type Cell-level performance goal 

(at C/10 and 0 C discharged to 3.0 V) 

Predicted cell-level 

performance 

(at C/10 and 23 C to 3.0 V) 

Predicted cell-level 

performance 

(at C/10 and 0 C to 3.0 V) 

High energy 165 to 180 Wh/kg 199 Wh/kg 100 Wh/kg 

Ultra high energy 180 to 260 Wh/kg 213 Wh/kg 100 Wh/kg 

IV. Fuel Cell Technology Development 

Our technical objectives for fuel cells are to: 1) increase system lifetimes and reduce system mass, 

volume and parasitic power loads; 2) enable the use of scavenged propellants as a fuel cell reactant; and 

3) ensure compatibility with high pressure reactants to meet the needs of the lunar surface systems and 

lander descent stage as described in Section I. Our approach is to develop advanced proton-exchangemembrane (PEM) fuel cells because they have the best combination of safety, technical maturity, 

compatibility with scavenged propellant, and performance needed for the Constellation power 

subsystems. 

To reduce system mass, volume and parasitic power, and increase system lifetimes for both primary 

and regenerative fuel cells, we are addressing the largest source of system failures and parasitic power 

losses: the balance-of-plant (Ref. 15). Because we will be operating in the space environment, we are 

using pure oxygen rather than air as a reactant. This frees us from having to remove the nonoxygen 

elements of air from the system, and permits the use of capillary action to remove product water. There 

are no recirculating reactants, and hence no requirement for providing either recirculation or external 

product water separation from two-phase reactant streams. Therefore, there is no need for the major 

components that provide these functions, and no resulting weight, volume, parasitic power, reliability, 

life, or cost penalties. These no-longer-needed components include water management pumps, water/gas 

separators, and injectors/ejectors for recirculation. As these are the system components most likely to fail, 

we are more likely to reach our 10,000 hr of maintenance-free autonomous operation without them. These 

components can also comprise 25 to 35 percent of total system mass, and contribute parasitic losses that 

reduce system efficiency and therefore require more reactants for a given mission. More reactants require 

bigger tanks which further increase the systems mass so their elimination offers a major advantage for 

launched systems. Since reactant recirculation is not required, this system is a “non-flow-through” design 

reminiscent of the fuel cell used during NASA’s successful Project Gemini missions in the 1960’s 

(Ref. 16). Figure 6 shows a progression of the space-flight fuel cell technology since the Space Shuttle. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 9 

Figure 6.—Progression of space-flight fuel cell technology development. Note that the right-most two 

schematics do not include cooling diagrams. 

Figure 7.—Non-flow-through hardware progression. Photo courtesy of Infinity 

Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, Inc. 

A. Technical Accomplishments 

Several non-flow-through fuel cell stacks have now been built by Infinity Fuel Cell and Hydrogen, 

Inc. and are shown in Figure 7. These stacks have been used to methodically buy down risks associated 

with this new technology. The first stacks had a small active area (50 cm2

 cross section) and only a small 

number of cells in the stack (Fig. 7(a) and (b) have 1 and 4 cells, respectively). These stacks were 

relatively inexpensive and permitted the fabrication and testing of several designs to determine initial 

feasibility and performance parameters. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 10 

Although non-flow-through technology will eliminate ancillary components associated with reactant 

flow management, the thermal management system for the primary fuel cell and electrolyzer also requires 

ancillary components. To increase their lifetimes, we have developed passive thermal management 

technologies to replace current active pumped liquid coolant loops. These technologies include pyrolytic 

graphite plates and flat-plate heat pipes for direct insertion into fuel cell and electrolysis stacks, replacing 

individual cell coolant cavities if necessary (Ref. 17). A stack (Fig. 7(c)) was built incorporating flat-plate 

heat pipes to test a passive thermal management concept. Although testing demonstrated that the heat 

pipes successfully cooled the stack, a new manufacturing technology that greatly reduces the thickness of 

each cell may preclude the need for the relatively expensive heat pipes. Stacks manufactured with the new 

process are shown in Figure 7(d) and (e), again with a small active area to test out new ideas. A stack with 

a 150 cm2

 active area is shown in Figure 7(f). This is the expected final cross-sectional size for use by the 

lander and lunar surface systems, designed for 120 V operation. 

Another area of emphasis is developing electrolyzers that operate effectively with both hydrogen and 

oxygen at pressures of ~2000 psi. This is being driven by the determination that high-pressure storage is 

necessary to meet the volume constraints for the worst-case requirement at the South Pole (120 hr eclipse 

at Shackleton crater with 200 kWh required from the regenerative fuel cell). Generating the gas at high 

pressure rather than compressing low-pressure products improves system round-trip electrical efficiency 

by avoiding inefficient gas compression, thereby reducing the requirements levied on the solar power 

units on the lunar surface. Architecture considerations require the electrolyzer to operate in a balanced

high-pressure state, placing severe constraints on stack designs; for instance, round cells rather than 

square may be required to minimize hoop stresses, pressurized containers or retaining rings are required

for strength, and high-pressure seals, tie rods and end plates are needed. We are paying special attention 

to the method of supplying reactant water to the individual electrolysis cells within a stack. Candidate 

options include water feed as either a liquid or vapor, on either the hydrogen or oxygen sides of the cell. 

These different options result in different requirements for ancillary components. Operational 

considerations, such as managing the humidity levels in the reactant product gases, are also being 

considered. 

Finally, Membrane Electrode Assemblies (MEAs) are a key electrochemical component within all 

PEM fuel cell and electrolysis stacks. The physical characteristics of the MEA, its chemical composition 

and catalyst formulations, all play a role in determining its electrical performance and durability. The 

better the electrical performance of any given MEA, the less reactants required to produce that electrical 

performance, and the lower the mass and volume requirements for the reactants and their respective 

storage tanks (e.g., every 5 percent improvement in electrical performance translates directly into a 

5 percent reduction in mass and volume of reactants and storage tanks). We are developing MEAs by 

improving catalyst formulations and are incorporating these membranes into primary PEM fuel cell stacks 

and electrolysis stacks. 

 

Figure 8.—High pressure electrolyzer in test stand. Figure 9.—MEA with platinum-black catalyst on 

hydrogen side and iridium oxide catalyst on 

oxygen side. 
NASA/TM—2011-216964 11 

V. Conclusions 

Advanced battery and fuel cell technologies are considered critical by NASA’s Constellation program 

to provide energy storage for EVA missions, the lunar lander, and lunar surface systems applications. 

Significant technical progress has been made in the development of lithium-ion battery components and 

non-flow-through fuel cell systems. These advancements offer the promise of greatly improving the 

specific energy and safety of batteries, and of substantially improving the reliability and efficiency of fuel 

cell and regenerative fuel cell systems for a variety of human exploration missions. These missions can 

include planetary outposts, crewed missions to near-Earth objects and Mars, and human exploration using 

real-time robotic operations. 

References 

1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, “Exploration Systems Architecture Study – Final 

Report,” NASA/TM—2005-214062, 2005. 

2. Kohout, L. and Schmitz, P., Battery Trade Studies for the Portable Life Support System (PLSS) Final 

Report, Sept 2008. Archived with the NASA Exploration Technology Development Program, 

Extravehicular Activity Technologies Project as ETDP-EVA-PCAI-004. 

3. Kohout, L.L. “Power System Trade Studies for the Lunar Surface Access Module,” NASA/TM—2008-

215179, 2008. 

4. Op. cit. NASA/TM—2005-214062, 2005, Chap. 4. 

5. Kerslake, T.W., “Electric Power System Technology Options for Lunar Surface Missions,” 

NASA/TM—2005-213629, 2005. 

6. Freeh, J.E., “Analysis of Stationary, Photovoltaic-Based Surface Power System Designs and the Lunar 

South Pole,” NASA/TM—2009-215506. 

7. National Research Council Committee on Space Shuttle Upgrades, Upgrading the Space Shuttle, 

National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1999, Chap. 4. 

8. Burke, K.A., “Small Portable PEM Fuel Cell Systems for NASA Exploration Missions,” NASA/TM—

2005-213994, 2005. 

9. Reid, C.M., “A Study on Advanced Lithium-Based Battery Cell Chemistries to Enhance Lunar 

Exploration Missions,” 11th Electrochemical Power Sources R&D Symposium, Baltimore, MD, 

July 13–16, 2009. 

10. Hagh, H.M., Moorthi, M., Skandan, G., West, W., Bugga, R., and Meg, S., “Structure-Property 

Relationship in Electrode Materials for Li-ion Battery Applications,” Materials Research Society Spring 

Meeting, San Francisco, CA, April 6–8, 2010. 

11. West, W.C., Soler, J., Smart, M., and Ratnakumar, B.V., “Li2MN03-LiMO2 (M=Mn, Co, Ni) Solid 

Solutions With Surface Coatings to Improve Li-ion Cathode Performance,” Materials Science & 

Technology Meeting, Houston, TX, October 2010. 

12. Bugga, R. Smart, M. and West, W., “Development of Materials for Advanced Lithium-ion Batteries for 

NASA’s Future Missions,” Materials Science & Technology Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, Octoboer 2009. 

13. Lang, C.M. and Newman, A. “Metal Phosphate Coating for Improved Cathode Material Safety,” 

Central Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Cleveland, OH, May 20–23, 2009. 

14. Jeevarajan, J., “The Use of Nanomaterials to Achieve NASA’s Exploration Program Power Goals,” 1st

International Symposium on NanoTechnology, Energy and Space Symposium, Houston, TX, October 

2009. 

15. Hoberecht, M.A., “A Comparison of Flow-Through Versus Non-Flow-Through Proton Exchange 

Membrane Fuel Cell Systems for NASA’s Exploration Missions,” NASA/TM—2010-216107. 

16. NASA Johnson Space Center, “Fuel Cell Technology Program Final Report,” Contract NAS9-11033, 

September 1971. 

17. Burke, K.A., “Advanced Fuel Cell System Thermal Management for NASA Exploration Missions,” 

NASA/TM—2009-215426, 2009. 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01-01-2011 

2. REPORT TYPE

Technical Memorandum 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Energy Storage Technology Development for Space Exploration 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Mercer, Carolyn, R.; Jankovsky, Amy, L.; Reid, Concha, M.; Miller, Thomas, B.; Hoberecht, 

Mark, A. 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

WBS 038957.01.01.03 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135-3191 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

E-17569 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Washington, DC 20546-0001 

10. SPONSORING/MONITOR'S

 ACRONYM(S)

NASA 

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 REPORT NUMBER

NASA/TM-2011-216964 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited 

Subject Categories: 20 and 44 

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov 

This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 443-757-5802

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is developing battery and fuel cell technology to meet the expected energy storage 

needs of human exploration systems. Improving battery performance and safety for human missions enhances a number of exploration 

systems, including un-tethered extravehicular activity suits and transportation systems including landers and rovers. Similarly, improved fuel 

cell and electrolyzer systems can reduce mass and increase the reliability of electrical power, oxygen, and water generation for crewed 

vehicles, depots and outposts. To achieve this, NASA is developing “non-flow-through” proton-exchange-membrane fuel cell stacks, and 

electrolyzers coupled with low-permeability membranes for high pressure operation. The primary advantage of this technology set is the 

reduction of ancillary parts in the balance-of-plant - fewer pumps, separators and related components should result in fewer failure modes 

and hence a higher probability of achieving very reliable operation, and reduced parasitic power losses enable smaller reactant tanks and 

therefore systems with lower mass and volume. Key accomplishments over the past year include the fabrication and testing of several 

robust, small-scale non-flow-through fuel cell stacks that have demonstrated proof-of-concept. NASA is also developing advanced lithiumion battery cells, targeting cell-level safety and very high specific energy and energy density. Key accomplishments include the development 

of silicon composite anodes, lithiated-mixed-metal-oxide cathodes, low-flammability electrolytes, and cell-incorporated safety devices that 

promise to substantially improve battery performance while providing a high level of safety.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Lithium batteries; Electric batteries; Storage batteries; Fuel cells; Hydrogen oxygen fuel cells; Regenerative fuel cells; 

Electrochemical cells; Energy storage 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF

 ABSTRACT

UU 

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

18 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email:help@sti.nasa.gov) 

a. REPORT

U 

b. ABSTRACT

U 

c. THIS 

PAGE

U 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)

443-757-5802 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18