Often in these sorts of articles, you can tell what the big problems are by the fact that they're not even mentioned. The big unmentioned problems here seem to be:
a) Cost
b) Cost
c) Safety, and
d) Cost
I'm not sure what materials they're making these things from, but would it be fair to guess that it's something exotic and hard to fabricate?
From the article: "The tech supposedly makes the batteries up to ten times more efficient than their traditional counterparts, and even more importantly, the new tech is cheaper to produce."
Cheaper is meaningless in this context. For example, if the traditional counterparts cost $1,000/mile then $100/mile is still cheaper but still far from being pratical. We have no idea what it's cheaper than and by how much it's cheaper by.
Of course, my numbers are completely made. It's just meant as an example.
I'm pretty sure it is saying 10x better and cheaper than a standard lithium ion for the same battery size. If they are not saying that then the sentence makes no sense.
Cost is a very complex thing, are you considering externalities?
In other words, we're paying a pretty damn high price for "gas" right now (including externalities like pollution, wars, and oil spills). Alternatives have not taken off due to chicken/egg problem of adoption<->economies of scale.
a) Cost
b) Cost
c) Safety, and
d) Cost
I'm not sure what materials they're making these things from, but would it be fair to guess that it's something exotic and hard to fabricate?