Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) have underpinned the growth of grid-connected energy storage for more than a decade. However, as Australia accelerates its renewable generation and demands longer-duration, safer and more cost-effective storage, a critical question is emerging: what comes next?
One technology gaining significant global momentum is sodium-ion batteries (SIBs). Increasingly viewed as a credible addition to the energy storage mix, SIBs offer the potential to enhance energy security and support greater utilisation of renewable power.
Global energy storage commitments are gathering momentum. The Green Energy Storage and Grids Pledge (opens a new window), launched at COP29, outlines a collective target to deploy 1,500GW of storage capacity by 2030 – more than six times the level achieved in 2022.
A system under pressure
LIBs will remain a core technology. However, lithium supply concentration and price volatility make sole dependency a challenge, particularly for markets like Australia seeking to balance energy security, resilience and cost.
Sodium-ion is emerging as a credible contributor to this mix, with forecasts suggesting up to 50GW of installed capacity globally by 2030, increasing as production scales and technology maturity advances.
Why sodium-ion is gaining interest
Consideration | Sodium-Ion Advantage | LIB Limitation |
Resource supply | Sodium is abundant and globally distributed | Lithium supply concentrated in key regions |
Thermal stability | Operates efficiently between -40°C to +70°C | Performance can decline in extreme climates |
Safety | Reduced risk of thermal runaway; can fully discharge for safe storage/transport | Requires partial charge storage and more sensitive to heat |
Charging performance | Rapid charge capabilities demonstrated in recent certification tests | Advances ongoing but thermal management is critical |
These characteristics are attracting particular interest in remote grid, utility-scale and temperature-variable environments, which are highly relevant across Australia’s geographic footprint.
Charging performance is also progressing rapidly. Recent third-party testing (opens a new window) has demonstrated that commercial SIB cells can achieve ~80% state of charge in around 15 minutes while maintaining structural and thermal stability. A key example is the CATL Naxtra sodium-ion cell, which passed China’s GB 38031-2025 national safety and performance certification - reinforcing confidence in SIB fast-charge capability for applications requiring frequent cycling or rapid response.
Future cost advantage
While early commentary positioned sodium-ion as a lower-cost alternative to lithium-ion, current pricing tells a different story. S&P Global Mobility data (opens a new window) indicates that SIBs are presently costing up to twice as much as LIBs, with lithium-ion achieving pricing around USD 80 per kWh. This gap has been shaped by:
Increased lithium output and temporary oversupply.
Greater manufacturing scale and process maturity in LIB production.
Technology learning curves that SIBs have not yet fully realised.
However, as sodium-ion deployment increases and commercial production scales, analysts project costs to fall to ~USD 40–45 per kWh, positioning SIBs as cost-competitive in the medium term.
In the near term, the value proposition is shifting from “cheaper lithium” to safer, more temperature resilient and geopolitically neutral energy storage.
What needs to be solved?
From an insurance and project risk standpoint, SIB technology’s greatest hurdle is not its chemistry - it’s data maturity. As with the early commercialisation of LIBs, insurers require a demonstrated operating track record to underwrite risk with confidence.
Key areas requiring further validation include:
Performance validation: longer-duration field data on degradation rates, cycling behaviour, capacity fade and gas evolution, alongside proven Battery Management System (BMS) integration.
Manufacturing concentration: although sodium is abundant, commercial-scale cell production remains concentrated in China, increasing supplier dependency risk and limiting diversification.
Construction and commissioning considerations: new technologies may introduce unfamiliar installation methodologies and contractor experience gaps, raising warranty and performance assurance questions.
Recycling and end-of-life frameworks: the absence of established material recovery pathways and regulatory structures introduces uncertainty around environmental liability and asset retirement.
Until these data gaps narrow, insurers are likely to maintain a measured and evidence-led underwriting approach, especially for large-scale or first-of-type deployment.
At Lockton, we support clients across the complete project lifecycle - from technology evaluation and procurement strategy through to project design, construction, commissioning and long-term operational risk management.
If you’re exploring the role of sodium-ion or scaling renewable storage capacity, we can help ensure your project is bankable, insurable and built for real-world performance.
The contents of this publication are provided for general information only. Lockton arranges the insurance and is not the insurer. While the content contributors have taken reasonable care in compiling the information presented, we do not warrant that the information is correct. The contents of this publication are not intended as a legal commentary or advice and should not be relied on in that way. It is not intended to be interpreted as advice on which you should rely and may not necessarily be suitable for you. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action based on the content in this publication.
© 2025 Lockton Companies Australia Pty Ltd.
