TheEEStory.com

News, Reviews and Discussion of EEStor Inc.
Sandia at it Again « Open Forum « News, Reviews & Misc
 
Mon, 20 Feb 2012, 9:06pm #1
Generic
EEcclesiastical
Schrodinger
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 1247

Seems like I see news out of Sandia weekly now a days; one of the few American institutes I genuinely take pride in.

http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandf...


┌─┐
┴─┴
ಠ_ರೃ

Why monocles? Why not.

Offline


Tue, 21 Feb 2012, 1:26am #2
DGDanforth
EESUrient
Palosparkfallavatar
Registered: Oct, 2008
Last visit: Sat, 02 Feb 2013
Posts: 2484

This is the kind of stuff that is uninteresting but very useful. I can see all of us coming to rely on such systems.


EEStor Hopeful.

"Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler" A. Einstein
"Alas, simplicity is rarely simple" curiositEE

Offline
Tue, 21 Feb 2012, 4:01am #3
Tec
EExhilarating
New_tec
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Sun, 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 8307

Looks messy to me. Three times ED is not enough for a good car battery. You need at least twenty or thirty times better. It can, however, rapidly charged by replacing the anolyte and catholyte which is a real advantage.

What are their freezing/boiling points? Will they work over the temperatures experienced by existing cars?

Offline
Tue, 21 Feb 2012, 8:53am #4
Generic
EEcclesiastical
Schrodinger
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 1247

Didn't post this with the auto industry in mind. Although it does seem to scale a lot better than previous efforts.


┌─┐
┴─┴
ಠ_ರೃ

Why monocles? Why not.

Offline
Tue, 21 Feb 2012, 9:20am #5
Tec
EExhilarating
New_tec
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Sun, 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 8307

Being able to recharge it like filling a tank is a BIG advantage.

Offline
Tue, 21 Feb 2012, 1:20pm #6
Cobraphx
EEcclesiastical
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Sat, 03 Aug 2013
Posts: 1171

Tec wrote:

Looks messy to me.

No more messy than a tank of highly flammable liquid sloshing around in your vehicle.

Tec wrote:

Three times ED is not enough for a good car battery. You need at least twenty or thirty times better. It can, however, rapidly charged by replacing the anolyte and catholyte which is a real advantage.

Why isn't three times ED good enough if it can be quickly refilled just like an ICE car? A Nissan Leaf with 3x storage would be 300+ mile maximum range and close to 200 worst case. Why on earth does an EV need to have a range of 1200 to 3000 miles per charge to be good enough?

I'm not saying that this will ever show up in a car. Nor do I think it is really practical for widespread adoption. The overhead and infrastructure for recycling the liquids makes it no better than Hydrogen for the daily driver. But the only practical car battery needs to have 20x-30x current ED is just silly. The Tesla model S will be practical for many people with a 40kWh, 160 mile range battery and many more with the 300 mile range 85kWh battery. It in no way needs a 6000-9000 mile range per charge battery.

Now I totally agree that EV's will dominate with a 20-30x reduction in $/kWh of storage improvement. If manufacturers can deliver batteries with 2x - 3x the ED for 1/10 the current price that have a 15 year lifespan, gasoline will be practically dead .

Offline
Tue, 21 Feb 2012, 5:37pm #7
Tec
EExhilarating
New_tec
Registered: Mar, 2009
Last visit: Sun, 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 8307

Its messy because you have two different fluids to replace which is worse than topping up one.

A Nissan Leaf with 3x storage would be 300+ mile maximum range and close to 200 worst case.

{Possibly true, provided you don't have the heater on and drive it gently. Driven like an ICE on a long journey it won't achieve anything like these figures.

My estimate came from comparing the ED of existing batteries with that of diesel (About 130 times that of Leaf batteries) and them making the generous assumption that EVs are four times as efficient as ICEs. You need something 33 times better to perform comparably. I generously degraded this to between 20 to 30 times better.

At about $70,000, I don't think the Tesla S will be 'practical for many people' either. You are neglecting the fact that the proud owners will spend more time charging it than driving it too. You may believe manufacturers hype about how far these things can go on a charge. I am a lot less convinced, however.

The point I was making is that a battery that can be charged as quickly as an ICEV is a BIG deal to the customer. It makes his car available 24/7 instead of being unuseable after a long journey because it has to be charged.

Offline