What do people think of this:
http://www.livescience.com/59052-new-battery-could-supersize-electric-cars-range.html
http://www.livescience.com/59052-new-battery-could-supersize-electric-cars-range.html
600 Mile Battery
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
I'll believe it when I see it in production. Until then every battery researcher and their mother has something that could revolutionize the battery industry...until someone actually does. And when that happens, then gimme, gimme, gimme. I'd like to supsersize my range on my volt please. Or better yet, slap some batteries onto a Subyukonade. I'll even live with half the 600 mile range. 300 miles would be fine with me.
We have come a long way in battery development. On the other hand being a high school student in the mid 1960's I would read in Popular Science about new propulsion systems on the way and I would have thought by now, 50 years later, we would not being driving internal combustion powered vehicles.
It seems we have to approach battery development in a different way. The facts are quite clear; electricity has no weight, a battery with 100 KWH fully charged , weighs the same as the same battery completely discharged. We need to think outside the usual thinking circle. I believe by using electricity to contain the electricity, may be the answer. As today's methods in storage are very heavy. If one could store 10,000 KWH in the area the size of a shoe box, that could be discharged and charged rapidly without any loss of longevity you would, for the most part, solved the storage problem.
The problem would then be where to get all the electricity. Of course the short answer is Nuclear Fusion, the way the sun works. Then the government will have to find a way to get tax revenue from the switch from petroleum to electricity.
Like I have said more than once; if I told you in 1968 when I graduated from high school that you could store 10,000 photo's in an area the size of your fingernail, you would immediately think I'm crazy. Today it is reality and nobody even gives it much thought.
It seems we have to approach battery development in a different way. The facts are quite clear; electricity has no weight, a battery with 100 KWH fully charged , weighs the same as the same battery completely discharged. We need to think outside the usual thinking circle. I believe by using electricity to contain the electricity, may be the answer. As today's methods in storage are very heavy. If one could store 10,000 KWH in the area the size of a shoe box, that could be discharged and charged rapidly without any loss of longevity you would, for the most part, solved the storage problem.
The problem would then be where to get all the electricity. Of course the short answer is Nuclear Fusion, the way the sun works. Then the government will have to find a way to get tax revenue from the switch from petroleum to electricity.
Like I have said more than once; if I told you in 1968 when I graduated from high school that you could store 10,000 photo's in an area the size of your fingernail, you would immediately think I'm crazy. Today it is reality and nobody even gives it much thought.
Joined
·
3,684 Posts
If this is true, no deal. High power usage and charging requires TMS.
Unless it's a Leaf, then warranty replacement happens due to accelerated degradation.
So this is saying that Tesla, with its thousands of individual dinky cylindrical cells, might not be using an ideal way of packaging a battery pack?
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
Someone needs to just perfect and sell Mr Fusion.
I'm a little surprised at the negativity associated with this type of development effort. To me this looks like a positive step in the right direction. Obviously nothing is real until it's in use, but this is how it starts. I think it's great that people are working to make electrification more mainstream, and the Volt is a pioneering step.
Is that really a surprise? One of Elon's methods of success is to realize how to utilize existing off the shelf parts and tech. I don't think he's really as innovative as some assume.If this is true, no deal. High power usage and charging requires TMS.
Unless it's a Leaf, then warranty replacement happens due to accelerated degradation.
So this is saying that Tesla, with its thousands of individual dinky cylindrical cells, might not be using an ideal way of packaging a battery pack?
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
Every day of every week there is a battery development just like the one linked to.
I enjoy reading about them but it's not negative to be critical, it's neat but only a fantasy until you can buy one
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
If you hear that the military has handed them a boat load of money then you can count on it being real. The military is VERY interested in high density energy storage for their high tech solders.
VIN # B0985
VIN # B0985
Joined
·
815 Posts
Yes, Elon is more Edison, less Tesla really.
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
There is a difference between "negativity" and skepticism. And believe me anyone who has been watching the EV scene for any amount of time has PLENTY of justification for being skeptical. We're "promised" at least three "major" or "revolutionary" breakthroughs a year and so far what have we seen for all those promises?
Tesla, Volt, Bolt and a whole lotta charging stations that STILL FREAKING DON'T WORK HALF THE TIME!
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
Also, let's just run a few numbers. Starting out with the fact that 1 Gallon of gasoline holds, approximately, 33 kWh of energy.
Under average-to-good real world conditions a typical Volt can get somewhere right around 4 miles per kWh.
So a battery with energy density equal to gasoline would take you about 132 miles.
Okay then. In order to run 600 miles you'd have to have a power cell with an energy density equal to 4.5 gallons of gas, or about 590 kWh.
that folks is a LOT of energy!
So I'm not saying it can't or won't happen, but it's a pretty major step up from where we are right now.
Under average-to-good real world conditions a typical Volt can get somewhere right around 4 miles per kWh.
So a battery with energy density equal to gasoline would take you about 132 miles.
Okay then. In order to run 600 miles you'd have to have a power cell with an energy density equal to 4.5 gallons of gas, or about 590 kWh.
that folks is a LOT of energy!
So I'm not saying it can't or won't happen, but it's a pretty major step up from where we are right now.
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Great! They have re-invented the Galvanic pile, with alternating reduction and oxidation parts in contact with electrolyte on both sides.
Now all they have to do is figure out how to seal the electrolyte between each stage of the battery pile. The solution adopted 200 years ago was ...to make each stage into a separate cell with its own electrolyte containment.
Let's see what a modern solution might look like!
Now all they have to do is figure out how to seal the electrolyte between each stage of the battery pile. The solution adopted 200 years ago was ...to make each stage into a separate cell with its own electrolyte containment.
Let's see what a modern solution might look like!
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
The innovation was making a vehicle with 200+ miles of range and supercharging well in advance of everyone else, and being able to produce a moderate number of them - sure not the quantities of ice vehicles, but more than anyone in 2008 expected for a startup company.
Tesla's batteries are some of the bulkiest in the business, so condensing them isn't a huge feat. In fact, if the Model 3 is released with updated prismatic cells, it will result in a massive reduction in battery size. Just to put it into perspective, the Tesla battery pack is over two feet longer than the entire Bolt EV (the car, not its battery). Given the same layout as the Model S100's battery, the Bolt EV's battery would likely have 120 kWh of usable capacity.
Still, I think the structural approach is a legitimate strategy to improve battery energy density. However, I think the chemistry approach needs to come first. The AGM sodium batteries that Professor Goodenough's team is developing will probably do far more for EVs.
Still, I think the structural approach is a legitimate strategy to improve battery energy density. However, I think the chemistry approach needs to come first. The AGM sodium batteries that Professor Goodenough's team is developing will probably do far more for EVs.
Well REX is the only real future except for commuters.
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
