Tips & Tricks for a successful HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07 proposal
Opening
15 December 2026
Deadline
Keywords
Cluster 5
next-generation batteries
BATT4EU
IAM4EU
advanced materials
RIA
two-stage
Your microfluidic SME partner for Horizon Europe
We take care of microfluidic engineering, work on valorization and optimize the proposal with you
HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07: Novel approaches towards next-generation battery concepts, leveraging the enabling role of innovative advanced materials (BATT4EU and IAM4EU Partnerships)
Why can a solid-state battery lose contact as it cycles?
Removing lithium from a metal anode can leave voids at its interface with the solid electrolyte, reducing contact for ion transfer. Using electron microscopy during operation, Zhao and colleagues observed voids merging into a gap with lithium metal, while a lithium–magnesium alloy partly recovered contact in laboratory cells with a sulfide electrolyte. [1] This illustrates why advanced battery materials must preserve functional interfaces during use. HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07 addresses this wider challenge through innovative battery concepts for mobility and stationary storage.
Download the MIC Horizon Europe 2026/2027 Calls Calendar:
Discover more!
Administrative facts: what do we know about the HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07 call?
Which call is it, and when is the opening and the deadline?
- Call name: BATTERIES and MOBILITY
- Call identifier: HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage
- Destination: Cross-sectoral solutions for the climate transition
- Topic: HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07
- Opening: 15 December 2026
- Deadline first stage: 14 April 2027
- Deadline second stage: 7 October 2027
- Type of action: Research and Innovation Action (RIA)
What about the budget and estimated size of the project?
- Topic budget: EUR 48.00 million, of which EUR 10.00 million from the Digital, Industry and Space budget
- Indicative number of projects: 10
- Budget per project: EUR 4.80 million
What are the key eligibility and evaluation conditions?
- TRL 4 to 5 by project end. Activities may start at any TRL
- First stage evaluated blind: no organisation names, acronyms, logos or personnel names in the abstract or Part B
- Lump sum funding
- JRC may join as beneficiary with zero funding or associated partner, taking no part in preparing the proposal
- Portfolio clustering: at least one highest ranked proposal per area funded, if thresholds are met
Scientific range: what does the Commission expect from the HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07 grant?
What outcomes are expected?
By the end you need a working cell concept, benchmarked against the state of the art, with numbers that survive scrutiny. The stated aim is safeguarding European competitiveness through innovative battery materials. Publication series are not what the Commission is after.
What is within scope?
You pick one area. Not two.
- Area A: low-cost chemistries for passenger electric vehicles and/or stationary storage. Minimised Critical Raw Materials, main component cost below EUR 35 per kWh. Lightweight or simplified casing and cooling concepts encouraged.
- Area B: high-performance chemistries for aviation and maritime. Energy density above 500 Wh/kg and/or power density beyond the benchmark. Structural integration, multifunctional materials.
- Area C: durable materials and cell-level concepts for grid or energy-intensive industry. Grid case, system cost below EUR 50/kWh, multi-hour duration. Industry case, continuous high load, harsh cycling.
What are the specifically proposed research directions?
- Benchmark first. Area A explicitly wants a Design-to-Performance lithium-ion and sodium-ion baseline, then your gains against it.
- Scalability, manufacturability, market relevance. Assessed in every project, whatever the area.
- Extended cycle life, cost-efficient recyclability, sustainability under the Safe and Sustainable by Design framework.
- Safety, thermal management, performance monitoring, predictive diagnostics.
The advanced materials wording stays loose. Room to frame your material story your way.
Scientific strategy: how can you enhance your chances of being funded through HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07?
What scientific choices matter most?
- Choose your area on day one. A proposal hedging between A and B reads unfocused.
- Own the benchmark. An optimistic baseline is the fastest way to lose Excellence points.
- Write the first stage blind. Really blind.
- Build techno-economic and life-cycle work in from the start, not as a work package bolted on later.
- Show the material actually enables something. IAM4EU is in the title for a reason.
- Say what happens if the chemistry underperforms. Risk sections admitting nothing read as naive.
Consortium & proposal-writing plan: what works best with this type of call?
- Somewhere between eight and twelve partners, a couple more if you need a second cell line.
- Materials chemists, a cell manufacturer, modelling people, an end user from the application you picked. Without the end user, market relevance stays a claim.
- At least one innovative SME. They usually carry the process innovation, and evaluators like a route to market that is not a spin-out promise.
- JRC can join with zero funding for performance or safety testing. Worth an early call.
- Lump sum. So the work package split has to be defensible before submission.
- First stage is short. Say what is new and why it matters, nothing else.
How should next-generation battery concepts be validated?
Connect each material innovation to a measurable cell function and an application need. A useful validation plan separates three questions: does the material deliver its intended property, does that benefit survive integration into a complete cell, and what evidence supports its relevance to the selected application? Keep measured cell results separate from projected system performance.
Define the comparison protocol before testing. Record electrode loading, electrolyte quantity, temperature, voltage limits and charge–discharge conditions, including operating pressure where relevant. Report results across replicate cells, the spread between them and reasons for failure. Include duty cycles that reflect the selected use: passenger vehicles or stationary storage in Area A, demanding mobility in Area B, or grid and industrial operation in Area C.
The topic’s cross-cutting assessment requirements also cover manufacturability, scalability, market relevance, cycle life, recyclability, safety, thermal management, monitoring and predictive diagnostics. Translate these into specific evidence: repeatable fabrication steps, identified process constraints, appropriate safety tests and diagnostic models checked against independent measurements. Use the Safe and Sustainable by Design framework to examine consequences across the material’s life cycle. Define acceptance criteria and alternative research routes for properties that do not survive cell integration.
The MIC already brings its expertise in microfluidics to Horizon Europe:
H2020-NMBP-TR-IND-2020
Microfluidic platform to study the interaction of cancer cells with lymphatic tissue
H2020-LC-GD-2020-3
Toxicology assessment of pharmaceutical products on a placenta-on-chip model
About the author
Julia Sepulveda Diaz, PhD
Chief Executive Officer, Microfluidics Innovation Center
Julia holds a PhD in glycobiology and neurobiology from Université Paris-Est Créteil. Before moving into microfluidics, she spent several years as a postdoctoral researcher at the Paris Brain Institute, on Parkinson’s disease, neuroinflammation, and the role of heparan sulfate in protein aggregation. Today she leads the Microfluidics Innovation Center as CEO, steering its researchers and engineers and its collaborative research and innovation projects.
FAQ - HORIZON-CL5-2027-04-Two-Stage-D2-07
Scientific questions about battery measurements, experimental conditions, ageing and the interpretation of next-generation cell results.
How should a battery’s specific energy be reported?
Report energy in watt-hours per kilogram with an explicit mass basis: active material, cell or complete system. List excluded components and distinguish measured energy from estimates. Cho and colleagues calculated lithium–sulfur pouch-cell values excluding external packaging; those values therefore do not represent packaged-cell or battery-pack specific energy. [2]
Why does the electrolyte-to-sulfur ratio matter in lithium–sulfur cells?
The ratio describes electrolyte volume per mass of sulfur. Reducing it lowers inactive mass but can increase dissolved polysulfide concentrations and hinder transport and reaction kinetics. Cho and colleagues investigated an electrolyte additive under lean-electrolyte conditions. [2] Compare formulations at the intended electrolyte inventory; a result with excess liquid may not transfer.
Why distinguish fabrication pressure from operating stack pressure?
Fabrication pressure compacts materials during assembly; operating stack pressure acts on the cell during use. Zhao and colleagues used distinct pressures for these stages in their solid-state cells. [1] Report both: cycling at low stack pressure does not establish that the cell can also be manufactured at low pressure.
How can capacity retention be compared fairly?
Use the same reference-test conditions and state which initial measurement defines 100% retention. Keep temperature, charge–discharge rate and voltage limits consistent at each check-up. Maccor’s performance-metric definitions distinguish this controlled comparison from routine cycling, whose operating conditions may differ. Report absolute capacity alongside the retained percentage.
Can cycle count alone predict battery service life?
No. Batteries also age with elapsed time, including periods without cycling. Luh and Blank studied storage, continuous cycling and driving profiles in one commercial lithium-ion cell type. [3] Their work also highlights that diagnostic check-ups introduce cycles into storage tests. Report time, temperature and state of charge alongside cycle count.
Why measure impedance as well as capacity?
Capacity measures recoverable charge; impedance characterises the cell’s electrical response and helps assess resistance-related performance changes. Luh and Blank measured both during ageing of commercial lithium-ion cells. [3] Compare impedance at stated temperatures and states of charge, with the measurement method specified; capacity retention alone does not describe every aspect of degradation.
Is coulombic efficiency the same as energy efficiency?
No. Coulombic efficiency compares discharged and charged ampere-hours; energy efficiency compares discharged and charged watt-hours over the same cycle. Their measurement definitions differ because energy also depends on voltage. A cell can return nearly all the charge while returning less energy because its discharge voltage is lower than its charging voltage.
Does stable cycling establish battery safety?
No. Cycling within normal limits does not establish behaviour under electrical, thermal or mechanical abuse. The JRC battery-testing programme distinguishes performance tests from abuse testing and describes thermal and evolved-gas analysis. Select safety tests for the chemistry, cell format and intended application; a long cycling curve cannot replace that evidence.
How can predictive battery diagnostics be validated?
A useful approach is to reserve complete cells and operating conditions for validation, keeping them out of model fitting. Compare predictions with independent measurements and report errors, tested ranges and failure cases. This turns the topic’s predictive-diagnostics objective into a testable research task; fitting recorded ageing curves alone does not establish predictive performance.
Does reducing critical raw materials guarantee a sustainable battery?
No. Material sourcing is one part of the assessment. The Safe and Sustainable by Design framework considers health, climate and environmental impacts across sourcing, production, use and end of life. Assess substitutions across that whole chain, including processing demands and recovery routes, rather than treating a lower critical-material content as a complete sustainability result.
References
[1] Zhao, L.; Feng, M.; Wu, C.; Guo, L.; Chen, Z.; Risal, S.; Ai, Q.; Lou, J.; Fan, Z.; Qi, Y.; Yao, Y. Imaging the evolution of lithium-solid electrolyte interface using operando scanning electron microscopy. Nature Communications. 2025;16:4283. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-59567-8
[2] Cho, H.; Jung, J.; Kim, I.; Kim, J.; Kim, S.; Hyun, J.; Lee, C. H.; Kwack, H.; Oh, W.; Lee, J.; Kim, H.-T. Interconvertible and rejuvenated Lewis acidic electrolyte additive for lean electrolyte lithium sulfur batteries. Nature Communications. 2025;16:6805. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-62169-z
[3] Luh, M.; Blank, T. Comprehensive battery aging dataset: capacity and impedance fade measurements of a lithium-ion NMC/C-SiO cell. Scientific Data. 2024;11:1004. doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03831-x