THE Battery Technology Thread pt 2 (merged)

[JRP3]

You did see the part about lower costs right? Also, the test company, Exponent, is no joke, Toyota just used them for testing after the recent throttle issues. Of course we'll have to wait and see what actually comes to market but this one looks more promising than most.

[Mesuge]

I've to post a small addendum/correction, A123 seems to make up for the lost of Chrysler deal by signing it with SAIC Motor, mega chinese auto corp which bought Rover btw. And in January A123 managed to replace Enerdel as the core supplier for Fisker, a start-up, but deep pocketed at that. So, A123 will appear in some cars in the near term.

However, judging from the graymarket pricing of their brand new prismatic cells ~$1/Wh, they better last ~10.000cycles for 10-15yrs as promised (even considering large volume OEM discounts), otherwise it's not going to "make" money in direct comparison to modern diesels with 60-70mpg. Obviously another issue could be that in ~10yrs you can easily have a situation, where legal diesel purchases can be made only on limited gov. vouchers (to let the gov. and agriculture running), so if this is your top PO scenario, and you want to drive, even luxury EV purchase or diy project based on these components make lot of sense.

As mentioned before, this is the preferred battery of today for high end application, if you have the cash..

[JRP3]

Third party testing completed by Exponent on Ecolocap's Li-X LiFePO4 nanotube battery. This was a large 720ah 12 volt battery intended for stationary storage.
http://tinyurl.com/ybr6laf
http://www.ecolocap.com/site/en/documents/nano-lithium-x-battery/nano-lithium-x-battery-test-results.html

[TheAntiDoomer]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... voirs.html

A small prototype provided up to 20 times as much current as a lithium-ion battery - the kind used in portable devices and electric cars - from the same area of electrode, says team member Luis Ortiz. The materials used are much cheaper than lithium (New Scientist, 12 December 2009, p 23), making scaling to up to grid scale feasible, he says.

"Cost-effective storage is the holy grail of the electricity grid," says Matthew Nordan, a specialist in clean technology at venture-capital firm Venrock in Cambridge, Massachusetts, who has not invested in the technology.

The MIT team calculates that a battery the size of a shipping container could deliver a megawatt of electricity - enough to power 10,000 100-watt light bulbs - for several hours.

[efarmer]

This was originally tried with molten salts decades ago.

Would it make us corny?

Of course, if the top was flat like a grill, a skilled griller
could rain down hundreds of corn tortillas and chips
to the adoring crowds who gather round drawn by
the wonderful smell. For a festive touch, a handful of
popcorn tossed on top would pop off and shower those
nearby with fragrant warm kernels of wholesome popped
corn. Corny as all get out, and with a teflon coated top,
lean cuisine corny would be possible too.

If privately owned you could cook all white corn without
running afoul of any regulations.

[ian807]

Actually this is one of the few new energy technologies that might be worth a crap.

Both sodium and sulfur are cheap and plentiful. It's a proven technology with no new research needed. It's expensive, but not prohibitively so, especially compared with nuclear or geothermal. These things plus a network of small to medium sized hydropower generation facilities would at least keep us from going dark, and at best, allow us time to switch to a hydrogen economy (If electricity is cheap enough, hydrogen is too).

There's no technical problem here. It's a problem of political will and the ability of enough government officials to get together to adequately solve an extremely solvable technical problem.

And that is where we will fail. Politically.

[efarmer]

Quote:

Engineers led by Donald Sadoway at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology were inspired by the way aluminium is smelted
using electricity. They created a similar but reversible process
that can either consume or release energy.


Their batteries are simply tanks filled with three separate layers
of liquid at 700 °C that float on top of one another: the top one is
molten magnesium, the bottom antimony and the one in between
a salt containing magnesium antimonide, a dissolved compound
of the two metals.


When the battery is being charged, magnesium antimonide in
the middle layer breaks down into the pure elements and so
the upper and lower layers deepen. Discharging the battery
reverses the process and releases electrons to provide power.
Once heated up to its operating temperature, the battery
generates enough heat on its own to keep the liquids molten.

end of quote

Did you ever see magnesium burn?
There is a bunch of well placed work being done on storage
of power to offset peak demands and to temper the need for
peak generation of power by using stored power, but I don't
see how this dog is going to hunt.



Liquid magnesium and antimony wired up to the grid and
distributed around the countryside is a Popular Science
flying car, nuclear lawnmower, commode seat epiphany
of a solution, in my opinion.

Get the staff at MIT to go to the directors and ask if they
can put some molten magnesium and antimony casks
around campus to "go green" and see how that works.

[TheAntiDoomer]

http://www.heraldextra.com/news/article ... 002e0.html

Taking a load off the grid through electricity production and storage at home would extend the life of the system and avoid the expenditure of tens, or even hundreds, of billions to make it "smart."

The battery breakthrough comes from a Salt Lake company called Ceramatec, the R&D arm of CoorsTek, a world leader in advanced materials and electrochemical devices. It promises to reduce dependence on the dinosaur by hooking up with the latest generation of personalized power plants that draw from the sun.

[ian807]

Question: Can I go buy one for my solar array?

Answer: No.

Question: When will they be available for general purchase?

Answer: Unknown.

So far, this is a big yawn, which looks designed to pull in investors who will IPO and clean up on penny stocks. I'll be pleasantly surprised if we see a single battery. By the way, sodium sulfur batteries are anything but new, although room temperature ones are (assuming this claim hasn't been fabricated to attract investors).

[Daniel_Plainview]

http://www.heraldextra.com/news/article_b0372fd8-3f3c-11de-ac77-001cc4c002e0.html

Taking a load off the grid through electricity production and storage at home would extend the life of the system and avoid the expenditure of tens, or even hundreds, of billions to make it "smart."

The battery breakthrough comes from a Salt Lake company called Ceramatec, the R&D arm of CoorsTek, a world leader in advanced materials and electrochemical devices. It promises to reduce dependence on the dinosaur by hooking up with the latest generation of personalized power plants that draw from the sun.

That article is dated April 4, 2009 ... more than a year old.

[TheAntiDoomer]

^
Battery Breakthrough Technology Could Power Homes for Pennies Per Kilowatt Hour
Monday, April 12, 2010


http://www.naturalnews.com/028557_batte ... power.html

The batteries are currently being tested to see how many charge-discharge cycles they can support throughout their lifetimes. Currently the batteries have made it through 200 and are still going strong, and the scientists estimate a lifespan of 3,650 cycles -- or one cycle every day for 10 years. Since each battery costs approximately $2,000, this would translate into a cost of only three cents per kilowatt hour -- in contrast to the eight cents per kilowatt hour charged by the typical electric company.

[ki11ercane]

^
Battery Breakthrough Technology Could Power Homes for Pennies Per Kilowatt Hour
Monday, April 12, 2010


http://www.naturalnews.com/028557_batte ... power.html

The batteries are currently being tested to see how many charge-discharge cycles they can support throughout their lifetimes. Currently the batteries have made it through 200 and are still going strong, and the scientists estimate a lifespan of 3,650 cycles -- or one cycle every day for 10 years. Since each battery costs approximately $2,000, this would translate into a cost of only three cents per kilowatt hour -- in contrast to the eight cents per kilowatt hour charged by the typical electric company.

Anti, everyone wants to see one of these stories pan out, and the resulting waves of negative are easily brought on by proof in the pudding. One could go back 30 years and usher in examples from solar, (paper thin solar panels that produce several times more energy than the most current ones), batteries, and vehicles (EEstor is a GROSS example) that made promises that never came to fruition. These fanciful inventions are the anti-doomers Holy Grail just like the ones the doomers hold dear.

There's a reason why Bill Gates, Steve Balmer, or Sir Richard Branson won't decree an "Energy X-Type Prize," because they know it won't work. X-Prize themselves have "discussed" the matter for 2 years, but have not come to a decision on what to offer. (because they can't think up one that they know can be won)

And finally, the battery depends on there being solar panels and solar generation stations that can produce the same amount of energy our current power facilities that use fossil fuels produce, which doesn't exist either and won't exist until this "breakthrough" in smaller, thinner, more energy producing panels come into existence too. (which has been promised for 30+ years)

Sounds like this is making the bridle for a horse that is not born yet for a barn not built.

[davep]

Sounds like this is making the bridle for a horse that is not born yet for a barn not built.

To be fair, if this technology did become commercially viable, it would be very useful for evening out intermittent energy supply such as wind and electric solar.

[green_achers]

Well, it's not exactly room temperature. 90 C works out to about 190F. I don't know if that means it has to be maintained at about that temp, or if it generates that kind of heat itself. If the former, that could affect the EROEI. If the latter, it wouldn't be much of an issue, I don't suppose.

I thought this was sort of typical of articles of this sort:

Ceramatec says its new generation of battery would deliver a continuous flow of 5 kilowatts of electricity over four hours, with 3,650 daily discharge/recharge cycles over 10 years. With the batteries expected to sell in the neighborhood of $2,000, that translates to less than 3 cents per kilowatt hour over the battery's life. Conventional power from the grid typically costs in the neighborhood of 8 cents per kilowatt hour.

Re-read that last paragraph and let the information really sink in.

OK, that's 3 cents/kwh for storage. Generation would have to get down to 5 cents/kwh to be competitive using the numbers they present.

Edit: Make that 3 cents/kwh net present value.

[Graeme]

Scientists Home in on Lithium Battery Safety Flaws

Scientists at Cambridge have developed a simple, accurate way of "seeing" chemistry in action inside a lithium-ion battery.

By helping them understand how these batteries behave under different conditions the new method -- which involves Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy -- could help researchers solve the fire safety problems that have dogged the development of these batteries.

Lithium-ion battery technology has enabled the development of many electronic devices we now take for granted, such as laptop computers and mobile phones.

Lithium battery technology will also be crucial for the development of the next generation of electric cars such as the Nissan Leaf, due to be built in the UK from 2013.

But lithium batteries have one serious disadvantage: over several charge and discharge cycles, particularly if the batteries are charged quickly, minute fibres of lithium, known as dendrites, can form on the carbon anodes. These lithium fibres can cause short circuits, causing the battery to rapidly overheat and catch fire.

sciencedaily

[Jason111]

Hi ! Mate
What is the Difference between a Cell and a Battery?
Can you explain about the topic?
Thanks in Advance.

[Jenab]

This discussion is about the results of actual tests done by posters on how long their disposable batteries last. If you test a rechargeable battery, be sure to say it is rechargeable and how long it lasted on a single charge. The purpose of this discussion is to see for ourselves which battery brands are the best made, and which ones come up short, and in so doing help Peak Oil Forum users spend their money wisely when buying batteries. Or, if longterm storage space for batteries is at a premium, we can select the longest lasting batteries rather than the ones having the best money value.

I'll go first with a few tests of my own, just to give everyone else some idea of what information should be included. Of course, there will be circumstances of which we might not be aware. For example, a given battery might have been mistreated by being improperly kept in a humid environment or exposed to high temperatures (above 100°F), which might have leached some of the chemical energy out of the battery while it was still in the store package. To overcome that kind of problem, we'll just do lots of tests.

For my first time-to-drain tests, I purchased six CREE Q5 SA20 LED flashlights, said to emit 270 lumens (with a fresh battery) from a single LED. The ambient temperature during the tests varied from 70°F to 85°F, but staying in about the middle of that range most of the time. For each test, all of the flashlights being used were turned on within a span of 10 seconds.

Most people like to have a bright flashlight, but a fresh battery will only supply that bright light for a short while (about three hours with these LED flashlights), after which time the battery will have weakened to the point where the light output would be judged unsatisfactory and the battery replaced.

However, if you were stuck in a dark cave, even the puny glow of a depleted and most inferior battery would be much better than no light at all. In the kind of survival situation in which every bit of light is critical, you would not swap old batteries for fresh ones as long as the old battery was of any use at all.

And there a situations in which you might want a weak battery in your LED flashlight to emit only a weak beam. Such as if you were committing a burglary. Alkaline batteries will go on and on for quite a while at a reduced voltage, but what that sustained "tired" voltage is varies among battery brands.

Subjective judgments regarding weak flashlight beams are, in order of decreasing brightness:

* Inspect one's near vicinity, out to about 20 feet
* See one's own shoes with the flashlight held at shoulder height
* Read one's own watch with the flashlight a foot away


Battery Test #1.

This test was carried out in early November 2010. Tests on the following three alkaline batteries were done simultaneously:

1. Dollar General Home, AA, expiration 2015.
2. Dollar General Everyday, AA, expiration 2014.
3. Duracell Coppertop, AA, expiration 2013.

The main use times, bright to fairly dim, were DG Home: 3 hours, DG Everyday: 3.5 hours, and Duracell Coppertop: 5 hours.

Following the main use times, the Duracell Coppertop battery created a much brighter light than the DG Everyday Battery, which in turn was considerably brighter than the DG Home battery.

24 hours into test. The DG Home battery's residual glow is laughably feeble. The DG Everyday battery is a little better, but nothing to brag about. The Duracell Coppertop battery is by far the brightest of the three, though of course it was nowhere near as bright as it was at the start of the experiment.

31 hours into test. The DG Home AA battery is making feeble ghostly glow, not really useful, not quite extinct. The DG Everyday AA battery produces light sufficient for user's immediate surroundings in otherwise absolute darkness. The Duracell Coppertop AA battery, strongest of the three, makes a weak but serviceable beam.

47 hours into test. All batteries are at least somewhat weaker, but the Duracell Coppertop has suffered the biggest fall during the last 16 hours. Although it remains the strongest of the three batteries, the difference is now less than it was. The beam from the LED flashlight with the Coppertop battery is now at the "useful for immediate vicinity in total darkness" level.

78 hours into test. Both of the Dollar General batteries have become so weak that the light from their LED flashlights is useless for anything other than checking your watch (hold the LED real close). The Duracell Coppertop battery is still making a relatively brighter light that is sufficient to see your shoes in total darkness with the flashlight held at shoulder height.

About 90 hours into the test, all three of the batteries completely died, with no glow whatever coming from the flashlight LEDs.

The relative ranking of these three batteries is
1st place: Duracell Coppertop
2nd place: Dollar General Everyday
3rd place: Dollar General Home


Battery Test #2.

This test was carried out in mid-November 2010. Tests on the following three alkaline batteries were done simultaneously:

1. Dollar General Energy Super Plus, AA, expiration 2012.
2. Duracell Coppertop, AA, expiration 2014.
3. Energizer Max, AA, expiration 2014.

By 1h 30m into the test, the DG Energy Super Plus battery was already weakening, having become substantially weaker than either the Duracell or the Energizer battery.

By 6 hours into the test, it appears that the Duracell Coppertop battery is holding up better than the Energizer Max battery. Although both batteries have dimmed considerably, the Energizer has dimmed the more. The light from the DG Energy Super Plus battery is already quite feeble, by far the weakest of the three.

24 hours into test, the relative situation hasn't changed except that the difference between the Duracell Coppertop and the Energizer Max is greater than it was before. The Duracell Coppertop is by far the better battery. The Dollar General Energy Super Plus battery remains, of course, the very worst.

30 hours into test. The LED powered by the Energizer Max has faded so much that it is now equally bright with the Dollar General Energy Super Plus battery. The Duracell Coppertop battery LED outshines both of the other two.

64 hours into test. The Dollar General Energy Super Plus battery is dead and in the trash can. The Energizer Max is still putting out a "see your shoes in total darkness" feeble glow. The Duracell Coppertop is producing a somewhat brighter "inspect your near surroundings" weak beam.

72 hours into test. The Energizer Max is down to "check your watch in total darkness," and the Duracell Coppertop, still slightly brighter, has fallen to "see your shoes in total darkness."

80 hours into test. The Energizer Max and the Duracell Coppertop are producing about equally dim glows from their LEDs. You could check your watch with either of them.

88 hours into test. The Duracell Coppertop battery is dead. The Energizer Max battery continues to make the LED of its flashlight glow faintly. You could probably check your watch by it in total darkness.

92 hours. The Energizer battery is dead. Test over.

The relative ranking of these three batteries is
1st place: Duracell Coppertop
2nd place: Energizer Max
3rd place: Dollar General Energy Super Plus

The reason for the #1 ranking of the Duracell Coppertop is that its LED light was significantly brighter than that of the Energizer Max through most of the test. The Coppertop had a much higher integrated light output.

Jerry Abbott

[Jenab]

Battery Test #3.

Tests on the following six alkaline batteries were done simultaneously:

1. Duracell Coppertop, AA, exp. 2013
2. Kirkland Signature AA, exp. 2017
3. Energizer Max, AA, exp. 2014
4. DG Everyday AA, exp. 2014
5. DG Home AA, exp. 2015
6. DG Energy Super Plus, AA, exp. 2012

Initially, all flashlight LEDs are making equally bright, powerful beams.

3 hours into test. All three of the Dollar General batteries are making weaker beams of light than any of the other three batteries. It is difficult to say which of the stronger three beams is the brightest.

10 hours into test. The DG Energy Super Plus battery has fallen to "see your shoes" voltage. The DG Home is at "inspect your near vicinity" level. The DG Everyday is a little brighter than the DG Home. Of the other three, the Duracell Coppertop is making the brightest beam, with the Energizer Max running a close 2nd place. The Kirkland Signature is in third place, significantly brighter than the DG Everyday, but discernibly less bright than the Energizer Max.

45 hours into test. The DG Energy Super Plus battery is now barely sufficient to check your watch into total darkness. The DG Home battery has fallen to "see your shoes" level. The DG Everyday battery used in this test is holding up better than expected, in fourth place just behind third-place Kirkland Signature. The Duracell Coppertop, in first place, has a narrow lead over the 2nd-place Energizer Max.

53 hours into test. The DG Energy Super Plus battery is dead and in the trash can.

63 hours into test. The Duracell Coppertop, still in first place, making a useful beam of light. The Kirkland Signature battery, now in 2nd place, has fallen to "inspect your near surroundings." The DG Home is in 3rd place at "see your shoes." The Energizer Max has fallen far, now in 4th place at "check your watch." The DG Everyday has also fallen to "check your watch" and is in 5th place.

68 hours into test. The DG Everyday and the DG Home batteries are both dead. The Energizer Max is barely holding on with "check your watch (hold the LED real close)," while the Kirkland Signature is somewhere between "see your shoes" and "check your watch." The Duracell Coppertop continues to make a useful beam, but now at almost the "inspect your near surroundings" level.

69 hours into test. The Energizer Max battery is dead.

73 hours into test. The Kirkland Signature battery is dead. The Duracell Coppertop battery, the only one left in this test, remains at "inspect your near surroundings" level.

88 hours into test. The Duracell Coppertop has fallen to "check your watch" level.

91 hours into test. The Duracell Coppertop battery is dead.

The relative ranking of these three batteries is
1st place: Duracell Coppertop
2nd place: Kirkland Signature
3rd place: Energizer Max
4th place: DG Everyday
5th place: DG Home
6th place: DG Energy Super Plus

[Jenab]

Three times out of three, the Duracell Coppertop battery has consistently provided a relatively brighter light from the test instruments (CREE Q5 SA20 LED flashlights that emit 270 lumens with a potential difference of 1.5 volts) than any of the competing batteries did. Furthermore, the Coppertops usually kept going longer than the other tested batteries.

It appears that Duracell just makes a better battery, so one of the questions that I have now is whether the Coppertop is the best battery that Duracell makes. To partly answer that question, my next test will include a Duracell Procell AA battery as well as a Coppertop. I'll also include another Energizer Max and another Kirkland Signature in Test #4, which begins in 24 minutes.

[KingM]

Interesting about the Kirkland battery. I've found the Kirkland products to be surprisingly high quality, given that they are essentially a store brand.

As for Duracell vs. Energizer, I guess I'd bought into the ten billion dollars in Energizer Bunny advertising over the last 25 years and assumed that it would be "still going" after Duracell was dead. Nope.