- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

PRX Energy

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Graphite Development From a Manufacturers Perspective: Processing, Formation, and Benchmarking

Elizabeth E. Oseland1, Teena S. Rajan1, Michael Lain1, Daniela Proprentner1, Harriet Dutton2, Andrew Bostwick2, Paul Siddy2, David Wilson2, and Louis F.J. Piper1,*

  • 1Warwick Manufacturing Group, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom
  • 2James Durrans & Sons Ltd, Phoenix Works, Penistone, Thurlstone, Sheffield S36 9QU, United Kingdom

  • *Contact author: louis.piper@warwick.ac.uk
PDF

PRX Energy 4, 043006 – Published 7 November, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/7j11-9rr5

Abstract

Graphite remains the most widely used anode material in lithium-ion batteries, and the initial formation of the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) largely dictates the long-term performance of commercial cells. Developing a new graphite anode to diversify the supply chain remains challenging due to proprietary formation protocols and inconsistent test formats. In this study, we evaluate a pitch-coated synthetic graphite developed by James Durrans & Sons against a commercial benchmark using a harmonized methodology across a coin, three-electrode PAT cell, and pilot line built single-layer pouch cells. By standardizing electrode morphology, formation procedures, and testing conditions, we isolate the influence of active material properties, e.g., how the first cycle loss is linked to SEI formation and how coatings and cycling conditions such as temperature can influence it. Under “like for like” comparative studies of NMC 811//graphite pouch cell, the modified synthetic graphite developed displayed higher rate performance and increased capacity retention at 1C over 200 cycles over established commercial counterparts.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Popular Summary

Graphite is the dominant anode material in lithium-ion batteries, enabling global electrification at terawatt-hour scale. Yet the “formation” process, where the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) first develops, remains one of the least understood but most critical stages governing long-term performance. New graphite innovations are needed to diversify supply chains and improve sustainability, but progress is hindered by proprietary formation protocols and inconsistent testing formats that obscure genuine material effects. As a result, there exists an academic-industry disconnect that hinders battery innovation and adoption. In this study, a promising pitch-coated synthetic graphite is evaluated against a commercial graphite anode. The authors employ a methodology that scales academic small-scale coin cells to industry-like, pilot-line produced pouch cells for “apples-to-apples” benchmarking. By linking surface chemistry, formation temperature, and first-cycle efficiency, this work establishes a robust framework for understanding how formation governs material behavior and bridges laboratory studies with industrial practices to accelerate the development of next-generation batteries.

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (30)

  1. K. R. Ngoy, V. T. Lukong, K. O. Yoro, J. B. Makambo, N. C. Chukwuati, C. Ibegbulam, O. Eterigho-Ikelegbe, K. Ukoba, and T.-C. Jen, Lithium-ion batteries and the future of sustainable energy: A comprehensive review, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 223, 115971 (2025).
  2. H. Zhang, Y. Yang, D. Ren, L. Wang, and X. He, Graphite as anode materials: Fundamental mechanism, recent progress and advances, Energy Storage Mater. 36, 147 (2021).
  3. A. D. Jara, A. Betemariam, G. Woldetinsae, and J. Y. Kim, Purification, application and current market trend of natural graphite: A review, Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol. 29, 671 (2019).
  4. L. Zhao, B. Ding, X.-Y. Qin, Z. Wang, W. Lv, Y.-B. He, Q.-H. Yang, and F. Kang, Revisiting the roles of natural graphite in ongoing lithium-ion batteries, Adv. Mater. 34, 2106704 (2022).
  5. M. Shi, C. Song, Z. Tai, K. Zou, Y. Duan, X. Dai, J. Sun, Y. Chen, and Y. Liu, Coal-derived synthetic graphite with high specific capacity and excellent cyclic stability as anode material for lithium-ion batteries, Fuel 292, 120250 (2021).
  6. D. L. Wood, J. Li, and S. J. An, Formation challenges of lithium-ion battery manufacturing, Joule 3, 2884 (2019).
  7. M. D. Bouguern, A. K. M R, and K. Zaghib, The critical role of interfaces in advanced Li-ion battery technology: A comprehensive review, J. Power Sources 623, 235457 (2024).
  8. H. Adenusi, G. A. Chass, S. Passerini, K. V. Tian, and G. Chen, Lithium batteries and the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI)—progress and outlook, Adv. Energy Mater. 13, 2203307 (2023).
  9. B. Li, Y. Chao, M. Li, Y. Xiao, R. Li, K. Yang, X. Cui, G. Xu, L. Li, C. Yang, et al., A review of solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) and dendrite formation in lithium batteries, Electrochem. Energy Rev. 6, 7 (2023).
  10. J.-F. Ding, R. Xu, C. Yan, B.-Q. Li, H. Yuan, and J.-Q. Huang, A review on the failure and regulation of solid electrolyte interphase in lithium batteries, J. Energy Chem. 59, 306 (2021).
  11. F. Schomburg, B. Heidrich, S. Wennemar, R. Drees, T. Roth, M. Kurrat, H. Heimes, A. Jossen, M. Winter, J. Y. Cheong, and F. Röder, Lithium-ion battery cell formation: Status and future directions towards a knowledge-based process design, Energy Environ. Sci. 17, 2686 (2024).
  12. P. M. Nogales, S. Lee, S. Yang, and S.-K. Jeong, Effects of electrolyte solvent composition on solid electrolyte interphase properties in lithium metal batteries: Focusing on ethylene carbonate to ethyl methyl carbonate ratios, Batteries 10, 210 (2024).
  13. C. Yan, Y.-X. Yao, W.-L. Cai, L. Xu, S. Kaskel, H. S. Park, and J.-Q. Huang, The influence of formation temperature on the solid electrolyte interphase of graphite in lithium ion batteries, J. Energy Chem. 49, 335 (2020).
  14. A. L. Michan, M. Leskes, and C. P. Grey, Voltage dependent solid electrolyte interphase formation in silicon electrodes: Monitoring the formation of organic decomposition products, Chem. Mater. 28, 385 (2016).
  15. S. Kranz, T. Kranz, T. Graubner, Y. Yusim, L. Hellweg, and B. Roling, Influence of the formation current density on the transport properties of galvanostatically formed model-type solid electrolyte interphases, Batteries Supercaps 2, 1026 (2019).
  16. J. Guo, Y. Xu, M. Exner, X. Huang, Y. Li, Y. Liu, H. Wang, J. Kowal, Q. Zhang, P. K. Kristensen, et al., Unravelling the mechanism of pulse current charging for enhancing the stability of commercial LiNi0.5Mn0.3Co0.2O2/graphite lithium-ion batteries, Adv. Energy Mater. 14, 2400190 (2024).
  17. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/7j11-9rr5 graphite powder characterisation, slurry mixing methods and additional electrochemical data.
  18. S. Bolloju, E. Bautista Quisbert, G. Bree, G. C. Pandey, G. J. Páez Fajardo, M. J. W. Ogley, A. S. Menon, P. Patiño Gutiérrez, D. D. Bobarin, S. Moharana, et al., From Salar to cells: Validating brine-sourced Li2CO3 from Salar de Uyuni for lithium-ion battery cell manufacture, Energy Environ. Mater. 8, e70053 (2025).
  19. A. S. Menon, N. Shah, J. A. Gott, E. Fiamegkou, M. J. W. Ogley, G. J. Páez Fajardo, N. Vaenas, I. Ellis, N. Ravichandran, P. Cloetens, et al., Quantifying electrochemical degradation in single-crystalline LiNi0.8Mn0.1Co0.1O2-graphite pouch cells through Operando x-ray and postmortem investigations, PRX Energy 3, 013004 (2024).
  20. S. H. Ng, C. Vix-Guterl, P. Bernardo, N. Tran, J. Ufheil, H. Buqa, J. Dentzer, R. Gadiou, M. E. Spahr, D. Goers, and P. Novák, Correlations between surface properties of graphite and the first cycle specific charge loss in lithium-ion batteries, Carbon 47, 705 (2009).
  21. H. Oka, H. Kadoura, N. T. Takahashi, and T. Ikawa, Effect of amorphous carbon coating on the formation of solid electrolyte interphase and electrochemical properties of a graphite electrode, J. Power Sources 543, 231850 (2022).
  22. S. J. An, J. Li, C. Daniel, D. Mohanty, S. Nagpure, and D. L. Wood, The state of understanding of the lithium-ion-battery graphite solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) and its relationship to formation cycling, Carbon 105, 52 (2016).
  23. N. Zhang, A. Eldesoky, R. A. Dressler, and J. R. Dahn, Surprising dependence of the exfoliation of graphite during formation on electrolyte composition, J. Electrochem. Soc. 170, 070517 (2023).
  24. Y. Yamada and A. Yamada, Review—superconcentrated electrolytes for lithium batteries, J. Electrochem. Soc. 162, A2406 (2015).
  25. J. C. Burns, R. Petibon, K. J. Nelson, N. N. Sinha, A. Kassam, B. M. Way, and J. R. Dahn, Studies of the effect of varying vinylene carbonate (VC) content in lithium ion cells on cycling performance and cell impedance, J. Electrochem. Soc. 160, A1668 (2013).
  26. C. Busà, M. Belekoukia, and M. J. Loveridge, The effects of ambient storage conditions on the structural and electrochemical properties of NMC-811 cathodes for Li-ion batteries, Electrochim. Acta 366, 137358 (2021).
  27. P. Verma, P. Maire, and P. Novák, A review of the features and analyses of the solid electrolyte interphase in Li-ion batteries, Electrochim. Acta 55, 6332 (2010).
  28. K. Bockwinkel, C. Nowak, B. Thiede, M. Nöske, F. Dietrich, S. Thiede, W. Haselrieder, K. Dröder, A. Kwade, and C. Herrmann, Enhanced processing and testing concepts for new active materials for lithium-ion batteries, Energy Technol. 8, 1900133 (2020).
  29. G. Bridgewater, M. J. Capener, J. Brandon, M. J. Lain, M. Copley, and E. Kendrick, A comparison of lithium-ion cell performance across three different cell formats, Batteries 7, 38 (2021).
  30. See Figs. 1–6 of this paper.

Outline

Information

PRX Energy 4, 043006– Published 7 November, 2025
  • Received 3 September 2025
  • Revised 6 October 2025
  • Accepted 10 October 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation