Category: Academic Reportage

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael Slipenkyj, Postdoctoral Fellow, Math Lab, Department of Cognitive Science, Carleton University

Ontario’s 2024-25 Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) standardized test results were recently released, and almost half (49 per cent) of Grade 6 students in English-language schools didn’t meet the provincial standard in mathematics.

These unsatisfactory results should not come as a surprise, and they cannot be attributed to lost time during COVID-19.

Ontario students have been struggling in math for many years. For instance, in 2018-19 and 2015-16, respectively, 52 per cent and 50 per cent of Grade 6 students failed to meet the provincial standard. What can be done to change this situation?

Setting stronger foundations in early math

We know from research in mathematical cognition that children’s early number knowledge (for example, at four-and-a-half years old) predicts their mathematical achievement later in school.

---

Read more:
New research shows quality early childhood education reduces need for later special ed

---

Because later learned skills build on earlier ones, kids who fall behind early may never catch up. Just as children need to get comfortable putting their face in the water before they can learn the front crawl, they need to become proficient with counting before they can learn addition and subtraction.

The best ways to support math learning are to:

1. Provide lessons with clear skill progressions;

2. Conduct regular assessments so teachers know what their students are learning; and

3. Ensure that students get plenty of targeted practice on skills they have not yet mastered.

We should equip our students with solid foundational numeracy skills in the early years and check that they are on track before the first EQAO tests in Grade 3.

Roots of the problem, solutions

Clearly, policy initiatives like the $60 million “renewed math strategy”, making new teachers pass a math test and the “back to the basics” math curriculum, have done little to improve low math achievement.

After the 2024-25 results were announced, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario released a statement calling for EQAO funding to be redirected to classrooms, saying “EQAO assessments shift accountability from the government’s chronic underfunding of public education to educators.”

The province agrees that math scores are too low. In the aftermath of the results release, Ontario Education Minister Paul Calandra held a news conference to say the results weren’t “good enough.” He announced the formation of a two-person advisory committee to review the situation and provide “practical recommendations that we can put into action.”

Early universal numeracy screening

As researchers studying mathematical cognition and learning, we have an evidence-based recommendation to help improve children’s math scores: schools should use universal screening to identify and track students’ numeracy learning much earlier than Grade 3 (when the first EQAO tests are given).

Screeners that assess foundational numeracy skills and other forms of assessment are critical for evaluating gaps in students’ numerical knowledge and providing them with targeted supports before they start to fall behind.

Instead of waiting for provincial results at the end of Grade 3 to identify struggling learners, we need to equip students with necessary skills and knowledge earlier.

Measuring foundational skills is critical for mathematics because more advanced skills like geometry, algebra, calculus require students to have fluent access to foundational knowledge. For example, fluent division skills support converting fractions to decimals (for instance, one quarter equals 0.25).

Extensive store of knowledge needed

Children who lack foundational skills will continue to struggle across grades as the expectations become more advanced. Research has found that kindergarteners with lower counting skills are more likely to under-perform in math in Grade 7. These basic skills have also been linked to other metrics of academic success.

For example, children with strong foundational numerical skills are more likely to take advanced math classes in high school or pursue post-secondary education. Importantly, students who acquire foundational skills also develop more confidence in their mathematics abilities and are less likely to develop math anxiety.

By Grade 6, students need to have acquired a rich and extensive store of knowledge for learning the more complex math required in later grades.

The right to calculate

Human rights commissions have called for changes in education to ensure the “right to read” is protected for all students, including those with reading disabilities. We believe all students also have a right to high-quality math instruction — the right to calculate.

In efforts to connect math researchers and educators, we established the Assessment and Instruction for Mathematics (AIM) Collective. The AIM Collective is a community of researchers and educators, from universities and school districts across the country, committed to improving early math education in Canada.

Universal screening is one of the topics that AIM members have discussed in depth, because teachers often have mixed reactions to policies on screening.

However, educators we’ve partnered with have found that early math screening is a helpful teaching tool that helps educators target instruction to support children’s math learning.

Reaching full potential in math

Alberta now mandates universal numeracy screening. The Math Lab at Carleton University, where we are engaged in research, was involved in constructing grade-specific numeracy screeners for students in kindergarten to Grade 3 now in use in Alberta as well as other provinces.

Universal literacy screening is already mandated for students in Ontario from senior kindergarten to Grade 2. Initiating early universal numeracy screening is one step towards ensuring Ontario students reach their full potential in math.

Critically, screening must be accompanied by targeted support. Helping students reach their full math potential will contribute to a thriving Ontario.

As such, we call on the government to invest more in numeracy screening and earlier educational supports for struggling students.

Michael Slipenkyj is partly supported by a Mitacs internship with Vretta Inc., a Canadian educational technology company.

Heather P. Douglas has developed an early numeracy screener that is being used in four provinces in Canada. She collaborates with Vretta Inc., an educational technology company on a project to develop a digital version of the early numeracy screener. The project is funded by a Micas Accelerate grant.

Jo-Anne LeFevre has developed an early numeracy screener that is being used in four provinces in Canada. She collaborates with Vretta Inc., an educational technology company on a project to develop a digital version of the early numeracy screener, funded a Mitacs Accelerate grant.

Rebecca Merkley collaborates with Vretta Inc., a Canadian educational technology company. The project is funded by a Mitacs Accelerate grant titled: “A Research-Driven Approach to Assessment in Early Math Education”.

– ref. Increasing math scores: Why Ontario needs early numeracy screening – https://theconversation.com/increasing-math-scores-why-ontario-needs-early-numeracy-screening-273339

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Eugene Lang, Interim Director, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University, Ontario

“We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan, or this or that. And they did — they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” So said United States President Donald Trump recently, referring to America’s NATO allies, including Canada.

The comments have provoked outrage. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called them “frankly appalling,” especially the insinuation that soldiers from other NATO states avoided the front lines in Afghanistan, leaving the most dangerous heavy lifting to American forces.

Anyone moderately familiar with NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan knows Trump’s insult is rubbish — especially when it comes to Canada.

The Canadian Armed Forces were deployed in some of the most dangerous regions and complex situations in Afghanistan for more than a decade, paying a heavy price in casualties — the heaviest since the Korean War in the early 1950s, when Canada also supported the American-led war effort and more than 500 Canadians died doing so.

What is less commented upon is Trump’s claim: “We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them.” This, too, is rubbish as far as Canada is concerned.

A front-row seat to Rumsfeld’s request

Twenty-three years ago, in fact, the U.S. asked Canada for something substantive and specific in Afghanistan. And Canada delivered substantively.

The ask came from U.S. President George W. Bush’s secretary of defense, the late Donald Rumsfeld, in January 2003. Famous for being sharp and precise with language, Rumsfeld invited Canada’s defence minister at the time, the late John McCallum, to the Pentagon to make a request.

I was in the room that day, and I heard the ask from Rumsfeld’s own lips (I later wrote about this historic meeting in The Unexpected War: Canada in Kandahar in 2007 and again in 2025 in Chretien and the World: Canadian Foreign Policy from 1993-2003.

Rumsfeld asked Canada to lead the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), a multi-national stabilization mission then confined to Kabul, the war-torn capital city of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld’s request was an extremely significant one for Canada to digest. It meant providing the largest contingent of troops — about 2,200 — as well as a brigade headquarters and command of the operation.

Rumsfeld emphasized how critical the leadership of that mission was from his perspective, and how in his view Canada was better suited to take on the role than any other American ally. Gen. Richard Meyers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, was also present at the meeting and reinforced Rumsfeld’s point that ISAF was key to the Kabul region and Canada was the preferred nation to lead it.

American forces, the defense secretary argued, needed Canada to stabilize Kabul, which was awash in war lords and militia and had no real functioning government at that point.

American forces, meantime, would be otherwise engaged in the invasion of Iraq (which began a few weeks later) and holding the line in southern Afghanistan, where U.S. troops were concentrated.

The Canadian military was needed to hold Kabul together and pave the way for scheduled Afghan elections in 2004, Rumsfeld said. Kabul was an extremely important and vulnerable flank in the American war effort, and Rumsfeld needed Canada to cover that flank.

Canada answered the call

The U.S. needed Canada. The American military needed the Canadian Armed Forces. So Rumsfeld asked Canada for help. Following that meeting, McCallum returned to Ottawa and dutifully presented Rumsfeld’s ask to then Foreign Minister Bill Graham, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Canada’s military leadership and ultimately the federal cabinet.

It was not an easy ask for Canada to fulfil in terms of military capability, capacity and risk. Canada had never done anything like this before. It was, therefore, not an easy decision to make for the government of Canada and for the Canadian military to deliver.

But Canada answered the call from its closest ally, giving the U.S. exactly what it asked for and what it needed from Canada. And for the next couple of years, more than 2,000 Canadian Armed Forces soldiers were deployed into the dangers and instability of Kabul in what was known as Operation Athena Phase 1 Kabul, where they acquitted themselves exceptionally well — as Rumsfeld predicted they would. Three Canadian soldiers gave their lives during this phase from 2003 to 2005.

Trump needs to be briefed on Canada’s military heroism before he opens his mouth again on this file. And Americans should understand that in the case of Afghanistan, they needed Canada’s help, their government asked Canada for help — and Canada delivered.

Eugene Lang is affiliated with Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

– ref. Hey Trump: Here’s how Canada punched above its military weight in Afghanistan — from someone with a front-row seat – https://theconversation.com/hey-trump-heres-how-canada-punched-above-its-military-weight-in-afghanistan-from-someone-with-a-front-row-seat-274901

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Eugene Lang, Interim Director, School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University, Ontario

“We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan, or this or that. And they did — they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” So said United States President Donald Trump recently, referring to America’s NATO allies, including Canada.

The comments have provoked outrage. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called them “frankly appalling,” especially the insinuation that soldiers from other NATO states avoided the front lines in Afghanistan, leaving the most dangerous heavy lifting to American forces.

Anyone moderately familiar with NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan knows Trump’s insult is rubbish — especially when it comes to Canada.

The Canadian Armed Forces were deployed in some of the most dangerous regions and complex situations in Afghanistan for more than a decade, paying a heavy price in casualties — the heaviest since the Korean War in the early 1950s, when Canada also supported the American-led war effort and more than 500 Canadians died doing so.

What is less commented upon is Trump’s claim: “We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them.” This, too, is rubbish as far as Canada is concerned.

A front-row seat to Rumsfeld’s request

Twenty-three years ago, in fact, the U.S. asked Canada for something substantive and specific in Afghanistan. And Canada delivered substantively.

The ask came from U.S. President George W. Bush’s secretary of defense, the late Donald Rumsfeld, in January 2003. Famous for being sharp and precise with language, Rumsfeld invited Canada’s defence minister at the time, the late John McCallum, to the Pentagon to make a request.

I was in the room that day, and I heard the ask from Rumsfeld’s own lips (I later wrote about this historic meeting in The Unexpected War: Canada in Kandahar in 2007 and again in 2025 in Chretien and the World: Canadian Foreign Policy from 1993-2003.

Rumsfeld asked Canada to lead the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), a multi-national stabilization mission then confined to Kabul, the war-torn capital city of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld’s request was an extremely significant one for Canada to digest. It meant providing the largest contingent of troops — about 2,200 — as well as a brigade headquarters and command of the operation.

Rumsfeld emphasized how critical the leadership of that mission was from his perspective, and how in his view Canada was better suited to take on the role than any other American ally. Gen. Richard Meyers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, was also present at the meeting and reinforced Rumsfeld’s point that ISAF was key to the Kabul region and Canada was the preferred nation to lead it.

American forces, the defense secretary argued, needed Canada to stabilize Kabul, which was awash in war lords and militia and had no real functioning government at that point.

American forces, meantime, would be otherwise engaged in the invasion of Iraq (which began a few weeks later) and holding the line in southern Afghanistan, where U.S. troops were concentrated.

The Canadian military was needed to hold Kabul together and pave the way for scheduled Afghan elections in 2004, Rumsfeld said. Kabul was an extremely important and vulnerable flank in the American war effort, and Rumsfeld needed Canada to cover that flank.

Canada answered the call

The U.S. needed Canada. The American military needed the Canadian Armed Forces. So Rumsfeld asked Canada for help. Following that meeting, McCallum returned to Ottawa and dutifully presented Rumsfeld’s ask to then Foreign Minister Bill Graham, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Canada’s military leadership and ultimately the federal cabinet.

It was not an easy ask for Canada to fulfil in terms of military capability, capacity and risk. Canada had never done anything like this before. It was, therefore, not an easy decision to make for the government of Canada and for the Canadian military to deliver.

But Canada answered the call from its closest ally, giving the U.S. exactly what it asked for and what it needed from Canada. And for the next couple of years, more than 2,000 Canadian Armed Forces soldiers were deployed into the dangers and instability of Kabul in what was known as Operation Athena Phase 1 Kabul, where they acquitted themselves exceptionally well — as Rumsfeld predicted they would. Three Canadian soldiers gave their lives during this phase from 2003 to 2005.

Trump needs to be briefed on Canada’s military heroism before he opens his mouth again on this file. And Americans should understand that in the case of Afghanistan, they needed Canada’s help, their government asked Canada for help — and Canada delivered.

Eugene Lang is affiliated with Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

– ref. Hey Trump: Here’s how Canada has long punched above its military weight — from someone with a front-row seat – https://theconversation.com/hey-trump-heres-how-canada-has-long-punched-above-its-military-weight-from-someone-with-a-front-row-seat-274901

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Mallory Terry, Postdoctoral Fellow, Faculty of Science, McMaster University

Elite sport often looks like a test of speed, strength and technical skill. Yet some of the most decisive moments in high-level competition unfold too quickly to be explained by physical ability alone.

Consider Canadian hockey superstar Connor McDavid’s overtime goal at the 4 Nations Face-Off against the United States last February. The puck was on his stick for only a fraction of a second, the other team’s defenders were closing in and he still somehow found the one opening no one else saw.

As professional hockey players return to the ice at the Milan-Cortina Olympics, Canadians can expect more moments like this. Increasingly, research suggests these moments are better understood not as just physical feats, but also as cognitive ones.

A growing body of research suggests a group of abilities known as perceptual-cognitive skills are key differentiators. This is the mental capacity to turn a blur of sights, sounds and movements into split-second decisions.

These skills allow elite athletes to scan a chaotic scene, pick out the right cues and act before anyone else sees the opportunity. In short, they don’t just move faster, but they also see smarter.

How athletes manage visual chaos

One way researchers study these abilities is through a task known as multiple-object tracking, which involves keeping tabs on a handful of moving dots on a screen while ignoring the rest. Multiple-object tracking is a core method I use in my own research on visual attention and visual-motor co-ordination.

Multiple-object tracking taxes attention, working memory and the ability to suppress distractions. These are the same cognitive processes athletes rely on to read plays and anticipate movement in real time.

Unsurprisingly, elite athletes reliably outperform non-athletes on this task. After all, reading plays, tracking players and anticipating movement all depend on managing visual chaos.

There is, however, an important caveat. Excelling at multiple-object tracking will not suddenly enable someone to anticipate a play like McDavid or burst past a defender like Marie-Philip Poulin, captain of the Canadian women’s hockey team. Mastering one narrow skill doesn’t always transfer to real-world performance. Researchers often describe this limitation as the “curse of specificity.”

This limitation raises a deeper question about where athletes’ mental edge actually comes from. Are people with exceptional perceptual-cognitive abilities drawn to fast-paced sports, or do years of experience sharpen it over time?

Evidence suggests the answer is likely both.

Born with it or trained over time?

Elite athletes, radar operators and even action video game players — all groups that routinely track dynamic, rapidly changing scenes — consistently outperform novices on perceptual-cognitive tasks.

At the same time, they also tend to learn these tasks faster, pointing to the potential role of experience in refining these abilities.

What seems to distinguish elite performers is not necessarily that they take in more information, but that they extract the most relevant information faster. This efficiency may ease their mental load, allowing them to make smarter, faster decisions under pressure.

My research at McMaster University seeks to solve this puzzle by understanding the perceptual-cognitive skills that are key differentiators in sport, and how to best enhance them.

This uncertainty around how to best improve perceptual-cognitive skills is also why we should be cautious about so-called “brain training” programs that promise to boost focus, awareness or reaction time.

The marketing is often compelling, but the evidence for broad, real-world benefits is far less clear. The value of perceptual-cognitive training hasn’t been disproven, but it hasn’t been tested rigorously enough in real athletic settings to provide compelling evidence. To date, though, tasks that include a perceptual element such as multiple-object tracking show the most promise.

Training perceptual-cognitive skills

Researchers and practitioners still lack clear answers about the best ways to train perceptual-cognitive skills, or how to ensure that gains in one context carry over to another. This doesn’t mean cognitive training is futile, but it does mean we need to be precise and evidence-driven about how we approach it.

Research does, however, point to several factors that increase the likelihood of real-world transfer.

Training is more effective when it combines high cognitive and motor demands, requiring rapid decisions under physical pressure, rather than isolated mental drills. Exposure to diverse stimuli matters as well, as it results in a brain that can adapt, not just repeat. Finally, training environments that closely resemble the game itself are more likely to produce skills that persist beyond the training session.

The challenge now is translating these insights from the laboratory into practical training environments. Before investing heavily in new perceptual-cognitive training tools, coaches and athletes need to understand what’s genuinely effective and what’s just a high-tech placebo.

For now, this means treating perceptual-cognitive training as a complement to sport-specific training, not as a substitute. Insights will also come from closer collaborations between researchers, athletes and coaches.

There is however, support for incorporating perceptual-cognitive tasks as an assessment of “game sense” to inform scouting decisions.

The real secret to seeing the game differently, then, is not just bigger muscles or faster reflexes. It’s a sharper mind, and understanding how it works could change how we think about performance, both on and off the ice.

Mallory Terry does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The mental edge that separates elite athletes from the rest – https://theconversation.com/the-mental-edge-that-separates-elite-athletes-from-the-rest-273758

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Catherine Baillie Abidi, Associate Professor, Child & Youth Study, Mount Saint Vincent University

Over half a billion children are now living in conflict zones, according to a 2025 Save the Children report, and the world is turning its back on them.

At a time of unprecedented global insecurity, funding and resources to care for, protect and engage with children affected by armed violence continue to decline.

The Donald Trump administration’s recent announcement of unprecedented American cuts to funding for international organizations — including reductions to the United Nations Offices of the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General for Children in Armed Conflict and on Violence Against Children — further undermines an already fragile system.

Cuts like these can have a devastating effect on some of the world’s most vulnerable populations, undermining important work to identify and prevent violations against children, and to assist children in rebuilding their lives in the aftermath of violence. Canada cannot sit on the sidelines.

Preventing violence against children

Violence against children is a global crisis. Without a seismic shift in how states take action to prevent such violence, the costs will continue to impact people around the world.

As a global community, we have a collective responsibility to build communities where children are not only safe and thriving, but where their capacity and agency as future peace-builders, leaders and decision-makers in their families, schools and communities are built upon and nurtured in wartime and post-conflict societies. These are core responsibilities that the global community is failing at miserably.

As many as 520 million war-affected children deserve better.

Canada has a long history of serving as a champion of children’s rights in armed conflict. Canadians have led global initiatives, including leading the first International Conference on War-affected Children, championing the Ottawa Treaty to ban landmines and developing the Vancouver Principles on Peacekeeping and Preventing the Recruitment and Use of Child Soldiers .

Canada is also the founder and chair of the Group of Friends of Children and Armed Conflict, an informal but vital UN network focused on child protection.

Now more than ever — amid American economic and political disengagement from core child protection priorities — there is both an opportunity and an imperative for Canada to demonstrate active leadership in the promotion of children’s rights and enhanced safety for children impacted by the devastation of armed conflict.

Complacency threatens to perpetuate generational impacts of violence.

Global leadership required

The Canadian government must once again stand up and provide global leadership on children and armed conflict by bolstering strategic alliances and funding efforts to protect and engage children impacted by armed conflict.

As a community of Canadian scholars dedicated to studying children, organized violence and armed conflict, we are deeply concerned about the growing vulnerability of children worldwide.

We see an opportunity for Canada to reclaim its role as a global leader in advancing and protecting children’s rights, especially in a time of political upheaval and heightened global insecurity. Canada can reassert itself and live up to its global reputation as a force for good in the world. It can stand on the global stage and draw attention to a crisis with generational impacts.

Children need protection from the effects of war, but they also need to be seen as active agents of peace who understand their needs and can help secure better futures.

Investments of attention and funding today can make significant differences in the emotional and social development of children who are navigating post-conflict life.

---

Read more:
The lasting scars of war: How conflict shapes children’s lives long after the fighting ends

---

Canada must take the lead

These investments are critical to the social structures of peaceful communities. Canadian leadership is well-positioned to take on this role, not only because of the country’s history and reputation, but because Canadian scholars are at the forefront, are organized around this issue and can be leveraged for maximum impact.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent celebrated speech at the World Economic Forum’s annual conference at Davos signalled a possible and important shift in alliances, priorities and global moral leadership for Canada.

Canadian foreign policy can build upon this. Making the vulnerability of children affected by armed conflict and the capacity of children to be agents of peace a key foreign policy issue would positively affect the lives of millions of children globally. It would also signal to the world that Canada is ready to take on the significant global human rights challenges it once did.

---

The following scholars, members of The Canadian Community of Practice on Children and Organized Violence & Armed Conflict, contributed to this article: Maham Afzaal, PhD Student, Queens University; Dr. Marshall Beier, McMaster University; Sophie Greco, PhD Candidate, Wilfrid Laurier University; Ethan Kelloway, Honours Student, Mount Saint Vincent University; Dr. Marion Laurence, Dalhousie University; Dr. Kate Swanson, Dalhousie University; Orinari Wokoma, MA student, Mount Saint Vincent University.

Catherine Baillie Abidi receives funding from Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Izabela Steflja receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Kirsten J. Fisher receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Myriam Denov receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the Canada Research Chair Program.

– ref. Why Canada must step up to protect children in a period of global turmoil – https://theconversation.com/why-canada-must-step-up-to-protect-children-in-a-period-of-global-turmoil-274398

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alicia M. Battaglia, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto

As the world races to electrify everything from cars to cities, the demand for high-performance, long-lasting batteries is soaring. But the uncomfortable truth is this: many of the batteries powering our “green” technologies aren’t as green as we might think.

Most commercial batteries rely on fluorinated polymer binders to hold them together, such as polyvinylidene fluoride. These materials perform well — they’re chemically stable, resistant to heat and very durable. But they come with a hidden environmental price.

Fluorinated polymers are derived from fluorine-containing chemicals that don’t easily degrade, releasing persistent pollutants called PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) during their production and disposal. Once they enter the environment, PFAS can remain in water, soil and even human tissue for hundreds of years, earning them the nickname “forever chemicals.”

We’ve justified their use because they increase the lifespan and performance of batteries. But if the clean energy transition relies on materials that pollute, degrade ecosystems and persist in the environment for years, is it really sustainable?

As a graduate student, I spent years thinking about how to make batteries cleaner — not just in how they operate, but in how they’re made. That search led me somewhere unexpected: the ocean.

---

Read more:
Living with PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ can be distressing. Not knowing if they’re making you sick is just the start

---

Why binders are important

Every rechargeable battery has three essential components: two electrodes separated by a liquid electrolyte that allows charged atoms (ions) to flow between them. When you charge a battery, the ions move from one electrode to the other, storing energy.

When you use the battery, the charged atoms flow back to their original side, releasing that stored energy to power your phone, car or the grid.

Each electrode is a mixture of three parts: an active material that stores and releases energy, a conductive additive that helps electrons move and a binder that holds everything together.

The binder acts like glue, keeping particles in place and preventing them from dissolving during use. Without it, a battery would be unable to hold a charge after only a few uses.

Lessons from the sea

Many marine organisms have evolved in remarkable ways to attach themselves to wet, slippery surfaces. Mussels, barnacles, sandcastle worms and octopuses produce natural adhesives to stick to rocks, ship hulls and coral in turbulent water — conditions that would defeat most synthetic glues.

For mussels, the secret lies in molecules called catechols. These molecules contain a unique amino acid in their sticky proteins that helps them form strong bonds with surfaces and hardens almost instantly when exposed to oxygen. This chemistry has already inspired synthetic adhesives used to seal wounds, repair tendons and create coatings that stick to metal or glass underwater.

Building on this idea, I began exploring a related molecule called gallol. Like catechol in mussels, gallol is used by marine plants and algae to cling to wet surfaces. Its chemical structure is very similar to catechol, but it contains an extra functional group that makes it even more adhesive and versatile. It can form multiple types of strong, durable and reversible bonds — properties that make it an excellent battery binder.

A greener solution

Working with Prof. Dwight S. Seferos at the University of Toronto, we developed a polymer binder based on gallol chemistry and paired it with zinc, a safer and more abundant metal than lithium. Unlike lithium, zinc is non-flammable and easier to source sustainably, making it ideal for large-scale applications.

The results were remarkable. Our gallol-based zinc batteries maintained 52 per cent higher energy efficiency after 8,000 charge-discharge cycles compared to conventional batteries that use fluorinated binders. In practical terms, that means longer-lasting devices, fewer replacements and a smaller environmental footprint.

Our findings are proof that performance and sustainability can go hand-in-hand. Many in industry might still view “green” and “effective” as competing priorities, with sustainability an afterthought. That logic is backwards.

We can’t build a truly clean energy future using polluting materials. For too long, the battery industry has focused on performance at any cost, even if that cost includes toxic waste, hard-to-recycle materials and unsustainable and unethical mining practices. The next generation of technologies must be sustainable by design, built from sources are renewable, biodegradable and circular.

Nature has been running efficient, self-renewing systems for billions of years. Mussels, shellfish and seaweeds build materials that are strong, flexible and biodegradable. No waste and no forever chemicals. It’s time we started paying attention.

The ocean holds more than beauty and biodiversity; it may also hold the blueprint for the future of energy storage. But realizing that future requires a cultural shift in science, one that rewards innovation that heals, not just innovation that performs.

We don’t need to sacrifice progress to protect the planet. We just need to design with the planet in mind.

This research was supported by the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, and the Ontario Research Fund. Alicia M. Battaglia received funding from the Ontario Graduate Scholarship Program.

– ref. Lessons from the sea: Nature shows us how to get ‘forever chemicals’ out of batteries – https://theconversation.com/lessons-from-the-sea-nature-shows-us-how-to-get-forever-chemicals-out-of-batteries-273098