new battery from lithium ion inventor

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Dillpickle

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2014
Messages
330
Location
Piny Woods, Tx
we do have fantastic batteries,oh i dono ,say flying on mars,or running your phone,laptop,car
grid power leveling bank
heres the thing,they only get better
and the functional limit on power density is
real real big,basicly it is the actual weight and size of the electrons themselves that is the fundamental limit to how energy dense a cappacitor can be and how fine a fractal interface
for them can be made,or found
more zoom less fumes
its a good thing
Theory, and uber-expensive examples of $20,000 Mars batteries doesn't put a PRACTICAL battery in your car or plane. We've waited a LIFETIME for batteries to be " the next best thing, just three years away" to find that it isn't happening....yet. I read with interest the mother earth news articles, bought the UrbaSport Trimuter plans, visited the dude converting bugs to electric. And guess what. It's STILL ten years away. Just like it was 40 years ago. Elon proved that with enough money, and a few BILLION in subsidies, you can make a successful car for rhe upper middle class. But, Like Mohller and his Skycar, it hasn't happened for everyone else. Is it "Evil Big Oil?" GM ( who killed the electric car?) Or just immature technology? This article being discussed is FIVE YEARS OLD! I've read a few articles since on sodium glass batteries. But being that there is still a lithium race going on to develop sources for mining, I'm betting some smart people somewhere are hedging their bets.
 

Dan Thomas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,469
Ehhh...we can store it as deadly gas without the salt. We had giant tanks of chlorine gas at the pulp mill where I worked as a youngster in Eureka, CA. What's a little risk in the name of green progress, ehh?
The pulp mill where I grew up switched to oxygen bleaching years ago. The chlorine bleaching caused issues with the effluent treatment and release back into the river.
 
Last edited:

keithkrum

Active Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2021
Messages
41
This discussion is interesting, but all the proposals and theories don't address the elephant in the room. How much does it weigh, and how long does it take for a turn-around? Aviation related needs for batteries are completely different than those for ground transportation.
 

Jay Kempf

Curmudgeon in Training (CIT)
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
4,592
Location
Warren, VT USA
physics and chemistry are what spells the doom ,doom I say,doooooooooom,for most fossil fuels used in human transport.

chemical energy stored in batteries has orders of magnitude of greater energy density potential,gasoline does not.
Missed this post.

You have this completely backwards. Battery technology is near its energy density end.

Liquid fuels are still evolving and evolving in terms of making more thrust/torque and reducing cost per passenger mile.

Energy density is NOT evolving at any marked pace in either batteries or liquid fuels. Chemistry and safety are limiting and inversely proportional.

Battery powered vehicles have missions where they can work. Hybrid locomotives have been around a long time.

We aren't at any limit in terms of what we can do with fossil fuels or vehicle design. We may be at marketing and safety limits but we have been there for decades.
 

tspear

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
1,301
Location
Outside Boston
@Jay Kempf @dog

I am not sure where either of you are getting your assertions that liquid or battery tech has approached theoretical peaks.
Unless there are some new biofuels which take the world by storm, we likely will not improve the ICE engine much further. However, there were many technologies under development over the past decade which yet to make it into production which increased fuel efficiency. Examples include high pressure injection at ignition point (allows for much higher compression ratios which increase efficiency), dynamic compression, magnetic valves...

While on the battery side, there is a slow and steady progress for the basic LiOn NMC and LFP batteries. Well, actually the LFP batteries are advancing faster; largely because they are so far behind that there is more low hanging fruit to capture first.
What we are seeing now in battery tech is more and more focus on cost, attempting to eliminate rare earth minerals, scaling, longevity and safety. The reality is energy density and power density are after thoughts. Even from a marketing standpoint.

Unfortunately, this does not bode well for aviation to be electric powered.

Tim
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
1,172
Location
Martensville SK
Interesting to read the Na and Cl comments, as I sit in my process trailer at a Sodium Hypochlorite plant. They de-commissioned their Chlorine gas cells decades ago.

I can understand the desire to have BEVs for very limited low-power density demand uses. Golf carts and city core commuters make sense. NOTHING I have seen yet makes ANY sense in aviation, trucking or marine transport missions. Once again: I have to paraphrase that what this all amounts to is devising more ways to do more of the things that cause the problems in the first place. Common sense is that it is so much simpler to just do less of those things and keep working on SUSATAINABLE solutions (and using up the world's entire supply of certain rare earth elements to move maybe 1 or 2 % of transportation is sure not sensible in ANY way. So: why do we do it? Follow the gold. The next and the next, etc. thing to get funded from the investment community is the next thing that analysts say to throw money at. Problem is: it diverts nearly ALL of the money away to doing ridiculously irresponsible things instead of solving the actual problems (#1 being oceanic plankton killoff, WAY more important than CO2 emissions is the ability to ABSORB one and the same).

On the liquid fueled front, I can say what was mentioned in in Jay's post #45: there is still a lot more to come in making ICEs more fuel efficient. IF we agree that this is priority #2 behind reducing the overall use, we can be a lot more environmentally responsible by reducing the actual use for necessary tasks, and those technologies are slowly but ever so surely coming out of the world of theoretical science into becoming workable technology.
 

tspear

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
1,301
Location
Outside Boston
@PMD

I can recall as a kid in the 70s all the claims that we are going to run out of oil. The claims were repeated in the 80s, and again in the 90s... I recently saw some an academic paper stating it will happen in the next twenty years. Money made us find more, and find more solutions to both use it, and extract it.

The same will be true of battery tech and associated minerals. If you follow the BEV battery news, you will see a number of announcements are moving away from NMC. (Iron seems to be the most popular substitute). In terms of Lithium, you are now seeing the claims of leaving the lab (haha, give it a few years) and using sodium.

In terms of vehicles. BEVs will take over regional transportation for pretty much everything except large/heavy cargo. Think semi-trailers will be the last hold outs and a few niches like pickup trucks used to actually pull trailers. There are now bus systems that are starting to evaluate and run BEV based buses. Regional cargo vans.... And this is the early days in this technology.

For large scale; energy intensive transportation like trains, planes and ships. Trains will likely go electric with overhead wires (cheaper and easier to maintain then third rails), planes and ships will be the hold outs. I think bio fuels will be the winner here.

Tim
 

dog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
798
Missed this post.

You have this completely backwards. Battery technology is near its energy density end.

Liquid fuels are still evolving and evolving in terms of making more thrust/torque and reducing cost per passenger mile.

Energy density is NOT evolving at any marked pace in either batteries or liquid fuels. Chemistry and safety are limiting and inversely proportional.

Battery powered vehicles have missions where they can work. Hybrid locomotives have been around a long time.

We aren't at any limit in terms of what we can do with fossil fuels or vehicle design. We may be at marketing and safety limits but we have been there for decades.
and now you will kindly back up your assertation
regarding battery energy density reaching a wall
citations and plenty of them cause thats quite a claim
 

Jay Kempf

Curmudgeon in Training (CIT)
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
4,592
Location
Warren, VT USA
and now you will kindly back up your assertation
regarding battery energy density reaching a wall
citations and plenty of them cause thats quite a claim
What lighter reactive element are you going to exploit...?
?????

Anything you add to lithium is going to make it heavier for its unit volume but not add to its discharge rate. And that says nothing about containment.


1665024024905.png
 
Last edited:
Top