Slashdot Mirror
MIT's Nano Storage Could Replace Hybrid Batteries
mattnyc99 writes "Last week we discussed Popular Mechanics' reporting from MIT, but missed one of the coolest breakthrough of all, something scientists have been working on quietly as Detroit spends money elsewhere. The Lab for Electromagnetic and Electronic Systems has been doing some mega-efficient work with ultracapacitors, which store drastically less energy than a battery but have essentially none of the drawbacks — especially via carbon nanotube arrays. Automotive experts say the new research is enough to start replacing batteries in hybrid cars, and plug-in vehicles might not be far behind. From the scientist who thinks ultracapacitors are potential competitors for the pack in his Toyota Prius: 'I try to contain myself, because it hasn't been proven yet, but it could be a real paradigm change.'"
Implications for Focus Fusion?
How we know is more important than what we know.
leave charged capacitors on the parts shelf to reinforce the "Don't Touch" rule? I bet one of these would reallllly hurt :-)
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
Another alternative - I'd be all for it ... and can we skip the format war? There are SO many new technologies that have to do with power storage ...
and I'm still upset about betamax vs vhs and minidisc vs cd. Please don't even MENTION Blu-ray (I thought I'd pick the non-sony format THIS time *sigh*)
Even discounting the problems getting very high capacity with low ESR, capacitors still have a drawbacks. The charge is proportional to the voltage which means that the voltage keeps going up with more charge. On the discharge side it means that the voltage keeps reducing as you discharge the capacitor. Thus, the power supplies that are powered by capacitors need to work with a wider range of voltages. This tends to make them less efficient and more complex.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
These hold less energy than batteries and yet they're going to be economically feasible? Can someone please explain to me how this is going to work, because it's not making sense to me right now. It sounds like they'll either have to add so many capacitors that it becomes counter productive, or else they'll have a short range and useless for road trips. Either way it won't work.
The reality is that it will take quite a few years to test such systems for pollution, crash resistance, flexibility, and so on if used on the quantity levels required to power plug-in hybrid 100 plus mpg vehicles.
During this time, it would be logical to buy one of the 2009 or 2010 model year plug-in hybrids that will be on the market - and then ten years down the road see if a battery pack replacement using this capacitor technology is on the market and cheap enough due to large scale production to implement.
Do now. Not ten years in the future.
(p.s. a cure for half of all cancers is being tested in the UK right now, but it takes almost a decade to do the trials before it comes to market)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I've been planning the initial works to convert my car ('91 Chrysler Daytona) to an Electric Plug-in.
My (tentative) plan is to use a hybrid Battery/UltraCapacitor design for "burstable" speed where batteries are lacking.
Perhaps if this new design works its way out into the wild, I will opt for a pure ultra-capacitor design? I doubt it, but it certainly would be cool. Recharge times would be very, very fast.
The implications are that it still won't work.
Dog is my co-pilot.
"And by avoiding the chemical reaction that drives traditional batteries, there's no real danger of a capacitor suddenly overloading--or exploding like a laptop's lithium-ion battery pack."
They won't explode like a lithium-ion battery pack, it will be a 100X worse.
If anything pierces the dielectric, all the energy stored in the capacitor will discharge violently in milliseconds.This is a question I've wondered about since a friend of mine was talking about the best chemical-battery replacement.
What is the theoretical limit of a capacitor? That is, if you could somehow place all the atoms exactly where you wanted, what's the energy/weight ratio you could obtain?
AccountKiller
You can't take the sky from me...
paradigm change Change for a pair of dimes
See also "nickel and dime you to death".
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Can someone please remind me how they differ?
No story about ultracapacitors would be complete without a reference to EEstor. As usual, they've shifted their delivery goal to late 2008.
Dog is my co-pilot.
I'm sticking with my 2006 GTO with the 6.0 V8 engine. Yeah it gets lousy mileage but I figure that if I go places really, really fast then I'm not polluting for as long as all those other people. Plus I'm helping to get rid of all that messy oil. As soon as that stuff is all used up we'll see real progress towards an alternative.
I'm doing it FOR the planet.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Don't you think a question as basic as yours would have been considered by the folks putting forth this research? /Obviously/, the article is lacking in sufficient detail to prevent such idle speculations as yours.
But give the freaking MIT scientists a break, eh?
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
What's the general characteristic for something to be called "nano" something?
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
In my rail gun?
This is one that has been in the back of my mind since I heard about an supercapacitor based bus they have going in Beijing. It charges at every bus stop from an inductive charger. I found that so conceptually attractive. And it also fits so well with the Chinese attitude towards life. I live in China and people are really into keeping it light and just getting by with what you need. My in-laws can't stand my love for clutter and collecting stuff like old PCs.
Anyhow, after seeing that, I couldn't help but think of the recent work on resonant inductive wireless electricity transmission. That was also being researched at MIT if I recall correctly. It made the rounds here at Slashdot. In summary, it's a matter of pulsing a current at a certain frequency in both the transmitter and reciever to enable inductive charging over distances of something like ten meters. Probably it could go further than that if it was engineered for a specific application.
So here's my 0.02. Rather than trying to get cars to carry enough charge to go hundreds of miles, how about just giving them enough capacity to go say fifty miles and then building inductive chargers literally embedded into the freeways. In order to charge up, you simply get onto the freeway and every hundred feet or so your capacitor can get zapped with charge at a nice high voltage.
You'd have a set of buried transmission lines on the side of every freeway that would feed the inductive chargers. Then, in the roadbed itself, you'd only need minimally invasive roadwork since you could do a hundred feet or more at a time. A crew should be able to do several miles of road per night.
Safety shouldn't be a problem. The system only transmits to conductors that are resonating at a certain set frequency so you don't have to worry about the road getting wet and causing a hazard to someone who happens to stop and fix a flat in the rain or some such scenario.
The biggest hurdles are, as usual, probably more political than technical.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They continue to miss major deadlines. If they're right, it's a huge game-changer. If they're wrong, they wouldn't be the first.
Dog is my co-pilot.
So, how is all the new demands for electricity going to be satisfied.
I know everyone likes Electricity and such, but current demands are taxing the existing power grid / infrastructure.
And with all the NIMBYs out there, nobody is willing to build new and needed Hydro Electric, Nuclear, Coal powered plants anytime soon. So, the result is "cool, electric cars, but I can't use them because of the blackouts". And I don't assume that somehow people will give up the NIMBY attitudes for an electric car.
Its easy to be an environmentalist, you don't have to think of the requirements to achieve whatever goals you might have. It just has to sound good.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
An alternative was to purchase existing 1 farad supercaps and build the required capacitance through series and parallel circuits to get the voltage and capacitance up. The cost was over $250,000 at the time. The last issue was building a charging circuit that could quickly charge the cap up within 30 minutes.
I also explored the design of making a 200 mph electric dragster. The issue was the megawatts of electrical energy that needs to be transferred within 6 seconds to the electric motors. It was the equivalent of a large electrical explosion. Here's the latest world record electric dragster at 160 mph: Dennis "Kilowatt" Berube
I find it amusing that the summary takes a jab at American automakers in light of the fact that Ford has an on-going partnership with MIT. Whether Ford's funding is supporting this specific project I can't confirm, but clearly they are funding these types of projects. A press release describing the partnership can be found here.
And just because they aren't investing specifically at MIT doesn't mean they aren't investing in this sort of research.
leave charged capacitors on the parts shelf to reinforce the "Don't Touch" rule? I bet one of these would reallllly hurt :-)
Especially if they're for photo strobes.
FalconShould there be a Law?
According to EEstor, their UCs hold about double the charge capacity of a good lithium battery. In addition, like any capacitor it can charge at, well, line rate, does not wear out. Best part of all, is that it will be cheaper than lithium. The price of the UC will only add about 1000 to the price of the car that goes 300 miles (assuming a family sedan; not a yukan).
Now, how does that compare to the MIT model? Well, MIT is in the open and is being tested by a number of folks. IOW, their current values are KNOWN by all (eestor is being quit and so far only a few companies really know about eestor true capabilities). But, MIT's UC has room to grow. It will also hold more charge than lithium batteries. But ending size and costs are not known.
Either way, one of these UCs will work and probably within 2 years, we will see loads of electric cars on the road because of either MIT or EEStor. IOW, your pessimism is way off.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
As for the person who asked about who would pay -- that's easy. Ever seen an EZ-Pass toll booth? :)
A bunch of people refuse to use those EZ-passes though. What about them? And who will run such a system, the government or a government granted monopoly? Then what could the data collected by whoever it is be used for?
FalconShould there be a Law?
Let's look at the actual paper from MIT:
Ultracapacitors or double layer capacitors (DLCs) are energy storage devices whose operation is based on the double layer effect [1]. By utilizing highly porous carbon material with a surface area up to 2000m2/g as electrodes (as in Fig. 3) commercial DLCs can achieve a energy density (6Wh/kg) much greater than the energy density of a conventional capacitor. However, this figure is much lower than the energy density reached by Lithium-Ion batteries (120Wh/kg).
Project Goals
Design and Implement an Ultracapacitor cell (see Figs. 1 and 3) based on Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) that can enhance the performance achievable by batteries. Our analysis shows that the utilization of a matrix of vertically aligned CNTs (see Fig. 2 - right) as electrode structure, can lead to an ultracapacitor characterized by a power density greater than 100kW/kg (three orders of magnitude higher than batteries), a lifetime longer than 300,000 cycles, and an energy density higher than 60Wh/kg.
So they're trying to make a capacitor with half the energy density of lithium-ion batteries. That's an achievement, but it won't replace batteries.
Great power supply for a dragster, at 100kW/kg. You only need a quarter mile of range, and you can get a few megawatts for a few seconds from a modest ultracapacitor bank.
(When posting Slashdot articles, please try to get better sources. And link the original paper, not some blog, please.)
They were suppose to originally release in mid 2007. They announced shifting to 1'st or 2'nd q 2008 last year. If you check the forbes article, it says "later to 2008", not "late 2008".
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So many ppl see problems rather than solutions. Amazing.
First, if the electric cars use UC, then no doubt filling stations will pop up ALL over. In fact, I suspect that regular gas stations will add these quickly (as in under a decade).
Second, as to the home recharging, there is little doubt that both gov AND utilities will work together to push this. WHy? Because it allows utilities to run larger base load plants (i.e. nukes). AE is difficult on Utilities unless they use something like Natural Gas. But if a utility is able to add extra base load plants in the form of nukes or perhaps geo-thermal, it really works for them. They like the idea of having a relatively stable demand.
Now, all that is needed is for a seasonal stable demand. Perhaps, the utilities will push to have electrical based agriculture rather than oil based tractors.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Vehicle occupants aren't vaporized because electricity tends to flow along the outside of conductive objects, and the occupants are inside. It may cause some heating, but the car's body has low resistance and most of the power is dissipated in the ground.
If the dielectric was pierced, one plate of the ultracapacitor would "ground" to the other plate, not the earth, releasing all the stored energy in an instant.
An ultracapacitor sufficient to power a car would have around as much energy as a lightning bolt (~500MJ). This is equivalent to about 120kg of TNT going off in your trunk.
someone will try to take their son in an "antique" 2008-model car and he will say, "But Dad! It's not safe! Gasoline explodes!"
What's the general characteristic for something to be called "nano" something?
The technology must involve constructing mechanical structures where the position of each atom in the structure and its bonds to its neighbors are all controlled - in a mechanical engineering rather than a chemical reaction sense. (Biochemistry is a "found nanotech" - and was the proof of concept.) Think of it as industrial Tinkertoys (tm) where the spools are atoms and the rods are chemical bonds.
It's called "nanotechnology" because you're dealing with feature sizes in the 1 to 100 nanometer range.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
the government or a government granted monopoly? Then what could the data collected by whoever it is be used for?
They drive regular cars
What if these questions?
FalconShould there be a Law?
A 30A circuit at 120V (the kind an oven might plug into) provides 3600W. A typical household might have a 150-200A service.
About 1/5 of diesel's energy is realized in a typical IC engine. Using electric motors at the actuation source avoids drivetrain losses, but has little impact on weight. The weight can't really be made up - consider 50L of diesel, having an energy of 1935MJ, or 387MJ realized. With lithium-ion batteries coming in at 0.23-0.28MJ/kg, that's 1382kg of lithium-ion batteries for the same range even before considering motor and drivetrain losses. Either your electric car is going to be very heavy or have short range. (source: Energy Density)
You don't have to tank in electricity, but the copper wires to deliver it aren't free. Let's say the price you pay reflects the cost of delivering each. For kWh/$ comparison, consider the same 50L diesel tank at $1.12/L, yielding a realized 108Wh, for 1.9Wh/$. Electricity is very cheap here at 6c/kWh, for 16.7kWh/$. Not many people powering their houses on diesel.
I've used pessimistic values for diesel/IC, very optimistic values for electric, and local prices. Your mileage may vary.
Why is it that whenever I see a Slashdot article which includes the word "nano," or more specifically "nanotube," all I ever think is: Oh, look. Yet another technology article about a product that I'll never, ever see.
Wake me up when any of this turns practical.
Kid-proof tablet..
From an engineering point of view this was a relatively straight forward system, and I could use an off the shelf waterproof DC motor sourced in the US. Unfortunately, adding in control gear, custom parts, my time and forecast engineer and technician time, I was looking at a total around $50000, versus $10000 all up for a new 30HP engine and gearbox. I imagine that fitting a much larger engine into a car with very limited space, heat problems, the difficulty of fitting very heavy wiring safely, the change to the vibration characteristics, you name it, you would probably want to budget several times as much. It is far from easy to drop an electric motor into a car power train, unlike a boat where the only deflection (in a steel hull) is due to engine vibration, not axle movement. If you are a sufficiently skilled engineer to do it yourself, factor in the loss of earnings. It is not just like dropping a different but similar engine into a car. (For instance, I have seen a gas to Diesel Rolls-Royce conversion, but turns out that it uses a like for like compatible engine block and is relatively trivial to implement.)
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
First, there are several ways to produce electricity cleanly and efficiently. Solar power being my personal favorite. There is no reason that a significant portion of the populace (particularly in sunny areas) couldn't tile their roof(s) with solar panels, and pump plenty of electricity into the grid all day, easily off-setting the cost of driving (as opposed to $3.40 a gallon, currently here in California, where we get TONS of sun). Tidal power plants also work in coastal areas regardless of sunlight, and there are also tons of places on the planet where geothermal energy is not being taken advantage of.
Saying there is not enough electricity is a cop out. Saying electricity production pollutes as much as fossil fuels is also a cop out, and also false, for the most part.
There are tons of different kinds of environmentalists, and I think many of them (myself included) are interested in engineering a cleaner way of life that is realistic and plausible, and offers as much convenience and comfort as available today, if not in fact more.
My guess is that the large corporations who run our economy and government aren't very interested in solar power and the like that get vastly cheaper with economies of scale, because currently they are raking in billions in profits every year by controlling oil, and control the market for power, transportation, and pretty much all goods and services short of air. If everyone had abundant and (nearly) free energy due to a deluge of solar panels, Exxon, et al would lose a LOT of money. As will SDG&E and every other power utility.
The real question is not whether we could power our lives and vehicles with free solar electricity, but how we're going to subvert the current political and economic power structure in order to do so. It is difficult for the layman to appreciate our current situation given that Viacom, AOL/Time Warner, Bertelsmann, News Corp, and Disney own every single television station, radio station, magazine, newspaper and ISP. It's no wonder people think "we're not ready for solar / solar is too expensive". The corporations who own your car, your house, your health, and employ you are not very interested in free electricity for the masses. In fact they are quite interested in stalling it and refuting it for as long as possible, and deceiving the populace into thinking that it is not realistic, when in fact the technology has been around for 40 years and only gets cheaper every single day.
They are also not very interested in the politicians who might talk about this stuff, also. Kucinich comes to mind as a perfect example. Obama/Clinton/McCain would get a lot less air time on CNN if they started talking about massive solar infrastructure investment. The corporations who own all of you, your property, your education, your information, and your legacy will stop at nothing to control all of us AND our "democracy" (with all the chicanery involving our last few elections (Diebold, Ohio, Florida, etc.) I refuse to consider this a democracy).
I for one do not welcome our new media mogul power company election stealing criminal overlords.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
>>> So, how is all the new demands for electricity going to be satisfied.
A lot more easily than you seem to think.
There are about 3T vehicle miles logged in the US each year. An electric car requires about 250Wh/mi, well-to-wheel. Using electricity to power the US's total yearly vehicle miles would require 250Wh/mi x 3Tmi = 750M MWh.
For comparison, the total amount of electricity generated in the US per year is 4,000M MWh, or 5-6 times as much. Converting every vehicle in the US to all-electric would add less than 20% to the electricity generation needs of the most car-happy country on earth.
For further comparison, note that the US used 115Mbbl of oil in 2006 to generate 41M MWh, meaning that existing generating facilities generate roughly 1M MWh per 3Mbbl. Accordingly, the 4,000Mbbl of gasoline and diesel the US consumes to run its vehicles for a year could be converted to 1,300M MWh, or nearly twice as much electricity as would be needed to run all-electric versions of those vehicles.
If getting enough electricity to run an all-electric fleet is the problem you're worried about, you simply haven't done the math.
when your chores are done.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com