All "Future" battery technology thread

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Not sure what you mean. Any energy source used to drive an EV, which is what kikingas was talking about, would have to be high voltage. Capacitors would need to be connected in series to increase the voltage to a usable potential, hence, high voltage on the skin of a vehicle. Bad idea.
 
As Elon Musk says, "Send me a cell and I'll test it".

Any radical chemistry/ultracapacitor is years off.

Places a bet with Vegas - Lithium Sulfur
 
http://phys.org/news/2015-04-ultra-fast-aluminum-battery-safe-alternative.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yet another battery announcement (YABA-dabba-doo)
 
Perhaps more importantly, via GCR:
Patent Fight Erupts Over Next-Generation Electric-Car Battery Chemistry
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1097643_patent-fight-erupts-over-next-generation-electric-car-battery-chemistry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is based on an article in 'Quartz' by Steve Levine, on who owns the patent on NMC. I've just recently read Levine's book "The Powerhouse: Inside the Invention of a Battery to Save the World", http://www.amazon.com/The-Powerhouse-Inside-Invention-Battery/dp/0670025844" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

which describes the development of NMC, in particular as it relates to Envia and GM. I need to write a review and add it to my "EV Bibliography" page, as it sort of takes up where Seth Fletcher's "Bottled Lightning" left off, albeit more focused on a single subject.
 
GRA said:
Perhaps more importantly, via GCR:
Patent Fight Erupts Over Next-Generation Electric-Car Battery Chemistry
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1097643_patent-fight-erupts-over-next-generation-electric-car-battery-chemistry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is based on an article in 'Quartz' by Steve Levine, on who owns the patent on NMC.
Crap. This kind of silliness severely impaired A123, and separate fights negatively impacted a large portion of the LiFePO4 manufacturers over some of Phostech's patent claims. The last thing the nascent electrification revolution needs is Ovonic and Chevron, Part 2...or 6... :(
 
Argonne National Laboratory status at "halfway point":

http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=b90cb1c8e105f3ea1f191cf41&id=25e58b75d5
 
BioSolar is developing a novel Super Battery cathode material which uses an advanced, low-cost polymer to replace the intercalation cathode material in a LI-ion battery. Here are their claimed characteristics:

chart-5-may-6.png


Add to this very high cycle life and you have an extremely attractive battery. Here is some of the verbiage from their site:
BioSolar said:
Our novel high capacity cathode is engineered from a polymer, similar to that of low-cost plastics used in the household. Through a smart chemical design, we are able to make the polymer hold an enormous amount of electrons. Instead of conventional cathodes that use lithium-ion intercalation chemistry, which is inherently slow, we exploit the fast redox-reaction properties of our polymer to enable rapid charge and discharge.

Most lithium-ion batteries cannot retain more than 80% of its storage capacity after 1,000 charge-discharge cycles. The stable redox chemistry of our cathode material can enable much longer life. Our laboratory experiments have shown that our cathode can easily cycle over 50,000 times without degradation in supercapacitors, and we believe that it can be very effective in batteries as well.

By enabling higher charge-discharge cycles, we can extend the life of lithium-ion batteries and further reduce the total cost of ownership. In certain applications such as off-grid solar energy storage where the batteries are fully charged and discharged daily, it is not cost-effective to use current lithium-ion batteries due to short replacement life.
The only thing I don't see mentioned on the website is efficiency. Since current intercalation chemistries achieves very nearly unity efficiency, it is hard to imagine a redox-based approach achieving similar performance. OTOH, I'm not sure how they could hope to achieve charge rates over 5C if efficiency is significantly lower. We'll see.
 
200000 cycles without any degradation:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/new-technology-batteries-last-longer_us_571a8323e4b0d912d5fea36b

Of course not yet a battery. I like the fact that the tech was discovered accidentally.
 
Via GCC:
$50M Battery500 consortium targeting battery pack with specific energy of 500 Wh/kg
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/07/20160727-battery500.html

It's interesting to note that IBM is an adviser to this 5-year project, as their original "Battery 500" project in 2009 was to develop a Li-air battery pack capable of providing 500 miles of range, a 10-fold increase in specific energy, while this is for a li-metal battery pack providing 500 Wh/kg., a much smaller step from the 170-200Wh/kg. Li-ion batteries typical today.
 
Considered giving this its own thread, but it's really just a different type of advanced battery, and has been discussed before. Via GCR:
Electric-drive cars should fuel, charging is 'dead end,' says NanoFlowcell
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1105304_electric-drive-cars-should-fuel-charging-is-dead-end-says-nanoflowcell

. . . Zero-emission cars powered by electric motors shouldn't use batteries that can be recharged, because a public charging network is "a dead end." Instead, they should use flow-cell batteries that can be "refueled" in minutes at centralized filling stations. . . .

The "dead end" quote is part of a longer statement by Nunzio La Vecchia, the Chief Technology Officer of NanoFlowcell Holdings, and inventor of the NanoFlowcell technology for energy storage. It's contained in a blog post, Full Speed Ahead Up a Dead End, on the NanoFlowcell website. . . .
If this tech can ever be commercialized, it would provide a hopefully cheaper alternative to building an H2 fueling infrastructure for FCEVs, while also providing BEVs with the rapid 'refueling' capability that they lack.
 
Stoaty said:
Electric-drive cars should fuel, charging is 'dead end,' says NanoFlowcell
Obviously an objective, completely unbiased observer. ;)
That's right. As with all of these future battery promotions, it is most important to look carefully at the figures-of-merit which aren't mentioned. Flow batteries have very similar benefits and drawbacks to H2 fuel cells:

Benefit:
- Fast refueling

Drawbacks:
- Low energy efficiency
- High vehicle cost
- High fuel cost
- Non-existent, expensive refueling infrastructure
- No home refueling, which makes all customers captive to the refueling system

Flow batteries have one benefit over H2 fuel cells: liquid rather than gaseous fuel.
 
NanoFlowcell has been a long running scam that has never demonstrated anything, in my opinion.
 
JRP3 said:
NanoFlowcell has been a long running scam that has never demonstrated anything, in my opinion.
Pretty much what I figured, given the somewhat breathless nature of the claims. I've been following flowcell batteries for a while, so as with all new battery tech announcements (announced H2/FCEVs breakthroughs too) a large dose of cynicism is necessary.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
a large dose of cynicism is necessary.

I get into my BEV every morning, and drive to work.

It's nice.

No cynicism needed.
I imagine you were aware that I was referring to announcements of new battery (and Fuel cell) tech, especially those involving major breakthroughs in performance or cost. Envia, anyone? I rarely bother to post anything in this thread, because announcements of lab results showing improved battery performance come out several times a week, and most of them never go further than the paper the announcement's referring to. NanoflowCell's an actual company, at least, albeit one which so far hasn't actually produced anything more than renderings and hot air AFAIA. Still, flow batteries are of interest.
 
Back
Top