SiC battery proponents think Samsung is hiding something: Are we all in for a conspiracy?

Social media talkers often choose unusual hills to die on. I’m not in a position to judge, but what I do know is that the latest proverbial hill involves Samsung and the silicon-carbon (SiC) debate.

The debate centers on one simple question: If silicon-carbon batteries promise high energy density and long battery life, why haven’t Samsung and other OEMs adopted the technology when a number of Chinese phone makers already have?

Interestingly, the answer already exists, at least according to industry leaders. However, the social media crowd did not stop, as many critics continued to challenge the industry’s narrative.

They seem to believe in a conspiracy that Samsung and other manufacturers are unwilling or unable to use SiC batteries in their phones. Are they right?

Well, here’s the thing. We will never know for sure. We are not battery manufacturers with degrees in chemical and electrical engineering. And I would argue that most people complaining about batteries on social media are not. Call it a gut feeling.

That being said, after spending a lot of time looking into this issue and talking to Samsung at MWC, I’m personally more inclined to believe the explanations put forth by industry experts over communications experts.

Basically, smartphone users will never say no to more battery life. We’re all used to recharging our phones at the end of each day, but few of us can make progress.

Silicon-carbon batteries promise a solution, at least in theory. They have a higher density than conventional Lithium-Ion batteries, which means they can store more energy in a smaller space.

A number of Chinese OEMs have adopted this technology. Samsung, Apple, and others have not.

This is where things start to get weird – and where conspiracy theories emerge.

First, what is a SiC battery? In layman’s terms, it’s still a Lithium-Ion battery, except it uses a silicon anode instead of a graphite anode.

Technical research actually began in 1976, even before graphite anodes were considered a solution to the silicon problem. The researchers ultimately chose to stick with graphite after seeing significant swelling and shrinkage of silicon anodes during charging and discharging. Over time, this intense swelling and shrinkage leads to rapid deterioration of the anode.

Guess what? That problem is still not fully resolved all these decades later. Physics, and the silicon-carbon anode has environmental limitations.

As a practice, EV manufacturers like Tesla have taken a slightly different approach by infusing graphite anodes with about 5% silicon.

In other words, simply replacing graphite anodes with silicon anodes in modern Lithium-Ion batteries is neither easy nor particularly smart. These batteries can degrade and overcharge – and possibly even catastrophically fail – much faster than conventional Lithium-Ion units.

Tesla, for one, decided that adding less silicon was worth the risk. But apparently, battery manufacturers still don’t have a cure-all solution. They try to find the right risk-reward balance. And, arguably, some species may be more willing to take greater risks than others.

Apparently, some Chinese smartphone makers believe they have found that balance. Samsung, Apple, Nothing, and others are not so sure.

There is also another potential problem, as highlighted by UniverseIce last year. US regulations classify batteries with a single cell over 5,000mAh as dangerous goods. This makes international shipping difficult and is probably why Samsung, Apple, and Google phones designed for the global market or the USA do not exceed 5,000mAh.

But while this may explain the 5,000mAh limit, it doesn’t explain why Samsung hasn’t switched to SiC yet.

At MWC, Samsung told us that while progress is being made in SiC battery development, the technology has not yet reached a level that is comfortably safe. It still doesn’t meet Samsung’s safety standards, which may be more stringent due to the company’s short history with catastrophic battery failures on the Note 7.

Also, considering that Samsung offers seven years of OS upgrades for most Galaxy phones, the idea that a battery can degrade faster than a lithium-ion one doesn’t seem to fit the company’s long-term vision.

All things considered, it’s understandable why people want better battery life in their phones. We do it too. And it is understandable that some want development to happen as quickly as possible.

But throughout this journey, I think some people may have gone too far with conspiracy theories. I think they come from a genuine desire for better consumer products, even if the sentiment can be completely selfish. However, such ideas often cloud the waters and hide the real truth.

So, are industry giants like Samsung hiding something from us? Are SiC batteries fully suitable to replace conventional Li-Ion cells? It’s unlikely, but to me, it sounds far-fetched and maybe too much on the paranoid side.

The most likely explanation is that, at this stage, after decades of research, the market is divided between OEMs who are willing to take risks or those who believe they have found a safe mixture of silicon and graphite, and OEMs who take a different approach to the matter and do not want to risk it.

There is no standard rate yet. Some OEMs are obviously more daring than others. Samsung, along with other leading brands in the industry, simply do not share that philosophy and want to be safe rather than sorry.

Thankfully, SiC development doesn’t seem to be standing still. Samsung is reportedly working on the technology as well – but really, it’s taking things slow and safe.

Don’t believe it? Still clinging to a conspiracy theory? Consider the fact that Samsung has taken a lot of risks over the years, even if the naysayers would say otherwise.

After all, Samsung was the first to venture into foldable display technology. It was one of the few major brands that tried low-profile cameras over the years. And now, it’s the only OEM that uses Privacy Display technology. None of these solutions are flawless – hence the risk-taking feature.

Undoubtedly, the company has not lost its spirit of innovation. However, some risks seem more calculated than others. A rapidly deteriorating battery could be a major threat to the global manufacturer of the Samsung brand. At least, for now.