THE Battery Technology Thread pt 2 (merged)

[Revi]

I think the car will change. Why drive a monster around when a small, lightweight car would do? Why own a car at all? The idea of driving around in 2000 pounds of steel to get a jug of milk is crazy anyway. We should be getting around our towns in a small electric car and going further in a bus or a train. We use our small electric car every day. It cost around $5000, and it's made in the USA.

[TheAntiDoomer]

^A lot of the communities in Florida do just that. I have a relative that owns a couple golf carts down there and uses them to do all his grocery runs.

[Beery1]

We use our small electric car every day. It cost around $5000, and it's made in the USA.

I bet I can go faster and carry more on my vehicle, which doesn't need plugging in, runs on the same food I eat, keeps me fit and cost $600 15 years ago. They sell for around the same price today.

[TheAntiDoomer]

^Cool!

[SilentRunning]

New Energy-Dense Battery Could Enable Long-Distance Electric Cars

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ctric-cars

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md.—A company founded in the Palo Alto public library has taken a dose of government money and technology and turned it into the most energy-dense battery ever. Envia System's new lithium-ion battery packs roughly twice as much energy per gram as present batteries, the company will announce here at the third annual summit of the Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy (ARPA–e).

"We achieved 400 watt-hours per kilogram," explains materials scientist Sujeet Kumar, Envia co-founder and chief technology officer. "We have made a 40 ampere cell in a large format that automakers can recognize and use," and one that has been validated by independent energy density tests at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Crane, Ind.

Great. Let me know when the things are actually available for sale, as opposed to mere nice sounding claims. When they are, I'll be impressed. Until then, it won't actually propel a vehicle. Vehicles need BATTERIES, not PROMISES OF BATTERIES.

[JohnRM]

Great, so we can run our cars on coal and Uranium, instead of oil.

[ian807]

Lessee, a gallon of gas contains about 132 megajoules. There's about 7 gallons worth in a cubic foot, or about 924 megajoules per cubic foot. Got a battery with that energy density? Get back to me on that one, eh?

[dinopello]

There's about 7 gallons worth in a cubic foot, or about 924 megajoules per cubic foot.

Just about seven and a half. Doesn't seem like it should be that much but its always suprising with volume.

I do think that the cab drivers around here that are driving the Prius are feeling a little better about the extra lease fees they pay now that gas is going up.

The local government pushed the cab industry in that directionsimply by approving entry of a new all-hybrid cab company in the county. The other cab companies were losing market share as patrons wanted to feel they were supporting a 'green' alternative and now all the cab companies have a lot of the hybrids in their fleet.

[rockdoc123]

I think the car will change. Why drive a monster around when a small, lightweight car would do? Why own a car at all?

the fact of the matter is that in North America many people live in suburbs for a reason....the centre of the city is overcrowded, and often rife with crime. In many cities the public transport is either unreliable or overutilized. This requires commuting.

As to your choice of commuter vehicle that is fine and dandy if you live in southern California or Florida but for the greater population that live in areas where snowfall in winter months is common your sewing machine on steroids is a death trap and I wouldn't put my kids in one for all the tea in China.

[kublikhan]

Great. Let me know when the things are actually available for sale, as opposed to mere nice sounding claims. When they are, I'll be impressed. Until then, it won't actually propel a vehicle. Vehicles need BATTERIES, not PROMISES OF BATTERIES.

I can understand your frustration about reading about the latest and greatest research happening, but that should not detract from real advancements being made. Real progress takes time and takes place in stages. First you have basic research, where new ideas, ways of thinking, and a general increase in mankind's knowledge. It is not directly commercially applicable. Then comes applied research. This uses basic research to solve a practical problem. Then comes development. This uses applied research for the production of useful materials, devices, etc. Then comes engineering, which uses what you developed into marketable goods and services. You may be hearing about advances being made at many different points of this R&D spectrum. Some may be many years away from a commercial product. Some may be available next Christmas. And some may never see the light of day at all.

It sounds as if you are only interested in hearing about gadgets that will be available by next Christmas. To me, this seems like a rather disappointing attitude to have. Personally, I like to hear about advances being made at every point in the spectrum, from basic research all the way to new product development. One quote I heard said that if we ignored basic research, we would still be making better spears. I still like to hear about advances in commercial products too, such as this one I posted on a new electric motor that is 30% more powerful and runs 50% longer on the same charge: Electric motor. But I also like to hear about advances in basic and applied research, even if I have to contain my frustration that the advance won't be in my Christmas stocking anytime soon.

Objectives and Types of R & D

The objective of academic and institutional R & D is to obtain new knowledge, which may or may not be applied to practical uses. In contrast, the objective of industrial R & D is to obtain new knowledge, applicable to the company's business needs, that eventually will result in new or improved products, processes, systems, or services that can increase the company's sales and profits.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) defines three types of R & D: basic research, applied research, and development. Basic research has as its objectives a fuller knowledge or understanding of the subject under study, rather than a practical application thereof. As applied to the industrial sector, basic research is defined as research that advances scientific knowledge but does not have specific commercial objectives, although such investigation may be in the fields of present or potential interest to the company.

Applied research is directed towards gaining knowledge or understanding necessary for determining the means by which a recognized and specific need may be met. In industry, applied research includes investigations directed to the discovery of new knowledge having specific commercial objectives with respect to products, processes, or services. Development is the systematic utilization of the knowledge or understanding gained from research toward the production of useful materials, devices, systems, or methods, including design and development of prototypes and processes.

At this point, it is important to differentiate development from engineering, which can be defined as utilization of state-of-the-art knowledge for the design and production of marketable goods and services. In other words, research creates knowledge and development designs, and builds prototypes and proves their feasibility. Engineering then converts these prototypes into products or services that can be offered to the marketplace or into processes that can be used to produce commercial products and services.

Types of Research

[JRP3]

I think the car will change. Why drive a monster around when a small, lightweight car would do?

Until laws change it's not possible for many. I could use a NEV for most of my driving needs, but NEV's can't be used on roads with higher than 35mph speed limits, which means I can't leave my driveway. Also I'd need something that could deal with deep snow for some of the year, or at least I used to, since we've had almost none this winter.

[JRP3]

I bet I can go faster and carry more on my vehicle, which doesn't need plugging in, runs on the same food I eat, keeps me fit and cost $600 15 years ago. They sell for around the same price today.

How fast does it go up hill, do you like it in the rain and snow, and where do I put my dog? Yeah, bikes are cool, but let's not pretend they can replace enclosed, powered vehicles for much of the population.

[JRP3]

Great, so we can run our cars on coal and Uranium, instead of oil.

Or wind, hydro, solar, and thorium.

[pstarr]

I think the car will change. Why drive a monster around when a small, lightweight car would do?

Until laws change it's not possible for many. I could use a NEV for most of my driving needs, but NEV's can't be used on roads with higher than 35mph speed limits, which means I can't leave my driveway. Also I'd need something that could deal with deep snow for some of the year, or at least I used to, since we've had almost none this winter.

this is where I agree with you and rockdoc. While EV (and NG vehicles) are theoretically possible, they do not meet the particular transportation needs of the real world where work is done.

As for bikes many folks are old, have kids and pets, live in exurbia, on steep hillside. Some have long commutes. Winter. Summer. Rainstorms.

the-world-does-not-care-if-you-are-green-and-young.

As for EV and NG; many vehicles on the road are really multipurpose, and a typical commuter vehicle might also do work in a factory, pasture, farm field, wood lot, mine or timberland. They have to pick up and deliver materials. Many need to park and stay where electricity and NG are not available. The world does not run on apps. It is fine and nice to expect people to own many vehicles for different jobs but for most there is not the money or room to store them.

The answer; mass transit. the problem with that; we are too dispersed in american suburbia.that is our predicament, to which there probably is not solution.

[JRP3]

Lessee, a gallon of gas contains about 132 megajoules. There's about 7 gallons worth in a cubic foot, or about 924 megajoules per cubic foot. Got a battery with that energy density? Get back to me on that one, eh?

You forgot to do the rest of the math. ICE vehicles are maybe 20% efficient, EV's better than 80% efficient. Nor do we actually need to be able to travel 100's of miles on a whim. We don't need batteries with the same energy density of fossil fuels, ever. We can already do over 300 miles of range with existing technology, as Toecutter pointed out, and Tesla is already doing it in a luxury performance sedan. Further advances will just allow us to do it in less expensive vehicles.

[JRP3]

[ this is where I agree with you and rockdoc. While EV (and NG vehicles) are theoretically possible, they do not meet the particular transportation needs of the real world where work is done.

This is where I disagree with you. Though NEV's aren't the answer for many people, moderate range EV's can be. That's why I did an EV conversion, I get a road legal vehicle with full performance and a 50 mile range. If there is a market and OEM's see the light they can make a similar even more efficient vehicle at an affordable price, and if batteries improve and get cheaper it becomes even easier, and at some point my car will have 100 miles of range, or more.

[pstarr]

JP3 have you ever re-wired a house? Now imagine trying to rewire a concrete apartment garage, or a office-complex/shopping-center parking so the folks can recharge when they are out. Have you ever drove a vehicle for work. Not to work. But for work. I don't think the REAL WORLD is ready for EV.

I have come to believe that personal transport is not the answer. It is an indulgence of ours that will not last much longer.

[JRP3]

You don't need to rewire a complex, you add a single extra circuit for a single extra outlet for each dwelling. Most likely a separate feed to the parking area from the transformer. A 15 amp 120V circuit is all that is needed to replace an average day's commute over night. Same can be done at the work place to allow solar charging while parked at work. Fast charge stations can provide the extra when needed. More to your point apartment dwellers are more likely to have good access to public transportation and won't need a personal vehicle. Those of us in more rural areas will need personal transportation, and there is no reason it can't be made much more efficient and run mostly from daytime solar at very low cost per mile. The REAL WORLD drives less than 40 miles per day, how is that not ready for EV's? Many delivery and work vehicles drive less than 100 miles per day as well. EV's don't have to work for every situation to work well for many.

[JRP3]

I should add that I added a circuit to the outside of my home, including drilling through a concrete wall. Cost me less than $50 and about half an hour of time, and that was for a 240V 30 amp circuit.

[rockdoc123]

EV's don't have to work for every situation to work well for many.

I believe this is the important point. Too often people propose a given solution as being the one true solution for everywhere and everyone. This sort of myopia only creates further problems in trying to diversify away from intense hydrocarbon usage.
In reality the only way out of this mess (to my mind) is to use other technologies appropriately and encourage that application where it makes sense but not advocate for where it doesn't. As an example would it make sense to own a D9 Cat if all you had to do each year was dig a 100m square vegetable garden? Of course not you could do that with a spade and a bunch of food energy. On the other hand it would make no sense whatsoever in this day and age to construct a dam simply with spades. The right tool for the right task. Just as it makes no sense whatsoever for someone living in the country to attempt a 20 km commute through 2 feet of snow in windblown conditions in a little electric vehicle it also makes no sense for someone who lives in the city to be driving around constantly in a full size Range Rover.

My view is that if you mix the use of electricity from various sources including nuclear, wind, water along with traditional hydrocarbon sources while taking advantage of extensive natural gas to create GTL (diesel set off) and propane fuel sources a difference can be made. Run trains off of electric, use the GTL to power the trucking industry, propane for other commercial uses. Provide incentives for car manufacturers to make vehicles more fuel efficient (we know this is possible as BMW this past year came out with a new M5 that has more power but also better fuel consumption stats). It seems to me the problem is that everyone approaches the problem from a single solution perspective rather than holistically.