Slashdot Mirror


IBM Creates 'Breathing' High-Density Lithium-Air Battery

MrSeb writes "As part of IBM's Battery 500 project — an initiative started in 2009 to produce a battery capable of powering a car for 500 miles — Big Blue has successfully demonstrated a light-weight, ultra-high-density, lithium-air battery. In it, oxygen is reacted with lithium to create lithium peroxide and electrical energy. When the battery is recharged, the process is reversed and oxygen is released — in the words of IBM, this is an 'air-breathing' battery. While conventional batteries are completely self-contained, the oxygen used in a lithium-air battery comes from the atmosphere, so the battery itself can be much lighter. The main thing, though, is that lithium-air energy density is a lot higher than conventional lithium-ion batteries: the max energy density of lithium-air batteries is theorized to be around 12 kWh/kg, some 15 times greater than li-ion — and more importantly, comparable to gasoline."

582 comments

  1. Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Funny

    Your move, range anxiety crowd.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Recharge in less then 5 minutes?

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but bbut charge time. I routinely drive 1500million miles in one sitting.

    3. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said. Gasoline doesn't self-ignite easily. Lithium-O2 does if there is any cell damage that causes an internal short. And it goes boom just like the cars in movies (which seem to have nitroglicerin-coated stuffing or something the way they always catch fire and explode for no reason).

    4. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by loufoque · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How expensive is it?
      How long does it take to charge?
      How long can it hold its charge before it leaks?
      How many recharge cycles can it do?

    5. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Rhywden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Solved by standardized connectors and form factors.
      Instead of charging the battery in the car, exchange the empty battery for a loaded one.

    6. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Funny

      Drat you've got me. God forbid you have to take a half-hour break to get an 80% recharge after driving for over 8 hours at highway speed. You might even have to choke down a snack to bury your sorrows.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    7. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This idea is going to seem ridiculously silly in the future when batteries can charge faster than a tank can fill (Even Gen. X'ers will live to see it, I'm sure). I will seem incredible forward-thinking B-)

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    8. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Great... now if they can build an infrastructure of recharging stations or at least be able to promise to build one, all over the country where you can juice up your car to 90% full or better inside of 5 minutes, we'll have a winner.

    9. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      tfs says that the energy density is like gasoline and 10x lithium ion. but it's talking gravimetric density, i.e. kwh per kg. The only thing that matters is volumetric density, i.e. kwh / liter. This is because cars are space constrained, not weight constrained. So nothing to get excited about for vehicle range, because we have not data on it. For all we know, it could be worse. likely it's about the same as li-ion, because most of the battery volume is taken up by packaging and cooling, not the active material itself.

    10. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If made of lots of small cells that recharge in 5 minutes and then charge them all at once - imagine the current, the red wires, the bbq you can make on the charging station - then sure.

    11. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      IBM has stated they dont expect any kind of production until 2020 on this battery, how is it their move?

    12. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Goes boom? It'll catch fire but I don't know of any battery that can go up in a movie-style explosion. And just like a gas tank, if you manage to damage your battery you've just been in one helluva accident and the track crew should be by with extinguishers shortly.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    13. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not an absolute requirement by any means. Current cars can do an 80% recharge in half an hour, more than adequate for most people. Remember that in the future the idea will be to charge your car in the car park or at home, not just on the road. If you manage to hit the 500 mile range then half an hour to recharge your own body is probably a good idea.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mark-t · · Score: 1

      A nice idea, but what if you didn't want to do a complete charge up for whatever reason? It would be a significant headache for swapping stations to have to carry batteries of many different levels of charge.

    15. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by WillAdams · · Score: 0

      The problem there is the number of charging stations needed at a busy station --- fuel pumps already don't make much money for a station, increasing the time to 30 minutes would require a much higher profit margin.

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    16. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Enough that it will be a better deal than gas in the future, for sure

      Current cars are doing an 80% quick charge in half an hour, use your imagination

      If it's anything like today's lithium batteries, many months

      See first answer

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    17. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by digitalsolo · · Score: 1

      500 miles on one charge would solve the vast majority of issues. It's slightly beyond the maximum distance I travel at once (I visit family out of state regularly, about a 420 mile drive, which is generally about as far as a single driver is likely to go in a single "sitting" without a substantial break).

      If they can A) get cost reasonable and B) get a decent amount of infrastructure for 3-4 hour charging of the pack, it's a pretty valid contender for viable replacement of the ICE for the average driver.

      Of course, I'd miss my high powered sports car, but it runs on alcohol anyway, so I can always distill my own fuel for that out of biowaste if I really want to.

      --
      Just another ignorant American.
    18. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by camperdave · · Score: 2

      Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      Do you have a "jerry can" equivalent? Because sure as Monday, somebody is going to run out of juice in the middle of nowhere.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    19. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So what's wrong with more charging stations? Have one at each parking spot at the station, once the infrastructure is there the individual terminals are relatively cheap.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    20. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      Still can't take me from Maryland to California in 3 days, because of the time-to-recharge issue. Your EV would need to include a gasoline generator to recharge the battery as you're driving, and then it's a hybrid.

      Now:

      What about the danger of explosion? As it recharges it release oxygen. You wouldn't want to leave your Lithium-oxygen EV in your garage but outside so the O2 can safely escape rather than build up.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    21. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice, so in 5+ years this should be viable, and well move from oil dependance to Lithium dependance. Yes, I see this completely makes sense!

    22. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mlts · · Score: 1

      Nail, hit hit. Weight is an important factor, but what is important is how much space the battery takes up with all its cooling and safety systems. If it still is competitive (or heck, within an order of magnitude) with gasoline, we have something revolutionary.

      Otherwise, it will go on the shelf with supercaps and many other battery technologies that had promise, but couldn't deliver.

    23. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is because cars are space constrained, not weight constrained.

      Citation please.

      I'm sorry, but this remark is just so absolutely hilarious...

      Do you know anything about physics?

    24. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      With this battery, sure why not. The only thing preventing it now is energy density, you couldn't carry anything of meaningful capacity. At this energy density you could carry extra packs that wire up to terminals in the trunk.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    25. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Rhywden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You'll most likely still need to drive to a "fuel station", regardless. Filling such a high capacity battery inside of five minutes requires an incredibly high current.
      While certainly not impossible, the strain on energy distribution and the amount of wiring (the wire has to be thick to withstand the current!) will make it cheaper to have a few dedicated charging station rather than every house on its own.

    26. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      >>>God forbid you have to take a half-hour break to get an 80% recharge

      Batteries don't charge from 10% to 80% in just 30 minutes. And for good reason: They got very hot and the internal components become damaged, dramatically shortening the battery's life. (And then you have a $5000 replacement... equivalent cost to buying a whole new engine.)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    27. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course when 95% of charges happen at home, how many charging stations will there really be? Would there be a gas station at every corner commuters topped off with gas at home every night

    28. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      What about the danger of explosion? As it recharges it release oxygen. You wouldn't want to leave your Lithium-oxygen EV in your garage but outside so the O2 can safely escape rather than build up.

      Garages might need an extractor fan but I guess it depends on how quickly the oxygen is released. If it's not too high it should be able to safely dissipate.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    29. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by who_stole_my_kidneys · · Score: 1

      Of course, I'd miss my high powered sports car, but it runs on alcohol anyway, so I can always distill my own fuel for that out of biowaste if I really want to.

      considering the performance of properly tuned electric car utilizes energy better than any ICE, im sure your sports car can be sold for nice vinyl decals on your electric sports car.

    30. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Garble+Snarky · · Score: 1

      Put 12 cells in each car. Replace 1-12 as needed.

    31. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Lithium can be recycled, pulling gasoline out of the air isn't so easy.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    32. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by caution+live+frogs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not tenable. Do you really want to trade the brand new battery in your brand new car for a used one with an unknown number of duty cycles? If so, I'd be happy to trade the fully charged battery in my MacBook for your brand new but empty one. Sure mine says "replace battery now" in the health indicator but it is fully charged and compatible with other laptops with the same battery form factor.

    33. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not an absolute requirement by any means. Current cars can do an 80% recharge in half an hour, more than adequate for most people. Remember that in the future the idea will be to charge your car in the car park or at home, not just on the road. If you manage to hit the 500 mile range then half an hour to recharge your own body is probably a good idea.

      Or maybe not

    34. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Rhywden · · Score: 1

      Why? The charge level for a battery can be determined and is an easily solvable problem.
      Also, we already have rechargable batteries with the AA form factor which have capacities from 1600 mAh to 2200 mAh (last time I looked).
      Just add some kind of conversion factor at the station, something akin to "equivalent to 60 liters of gas" and you're done.

    35. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Definitely true, we're not going to see anything more powerful than a 220V charger at home for the foreseeable future, you'll need to go to a station for a charge. But consider that there isn't even a low-flow gasoline tap on your house right now...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    36. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dalias · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, increasing the time to 30 minutes would mean insane profits from your customers being stuck there for 30 minutes with nothing to do but drink your coffee and eat your food.

    37. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      Include an unfoldable solar panel in the car and a small pole to put a mini wind turbine on ;)
      Actually with solar panels getting better that options is actually pretty viable. You could charge up enough in an hour to get to another town most likely.

      Or you could just do what everyone else does and call AAA or hit the onstar button for assistance.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    38. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      They do charge that fast but it does shorten the battery's life. One quick charge is the equivalent of 10-20 220V charges in wear IIRC.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    39. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cpu6502 · · Score: 0

      >>> If you manage to hit the 500 mile range then half an hour to recharge your own body is probably a good idea.

      Nah. I drive 800 miles w/o stopping. I have food in the car that I eat as I'm going (or make a quick stop at McDonalds for take-out). Fie on taking breaks and wasting precious time.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    40. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 2

      See, I seldom drive a car when I'm asleep.

      Rather than fill a battery up in five minutes, I'd prefer to just plug it in when I drive it back into my garage at the end of the day. That covers almost every situation (except for those crazy road trips - but even then, it's unlikely we're driving non-stop for days on end.)

    41. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      True for autocross/drift/drag and other sports with short runs, but for track use gasoline will have an advantage for quite a bit longer.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    42. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also, remember that electric motors are 3x more efficient that gas engines (80% thermal efficiency vs. 25%), so batteries don't need to get parity with gasoline in order to be comparable.

    43. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by necro81 · · Score: 2

      Cars are both space and weight constrained. If the car weighs a lot more (and hybrids and electrics certainly do) it takes more power to accelerate it. It also takes more power to keep it moving on the highway due to increased rolling resistance. More power required implies more battery (or sacrificing power density for energy density), larger power electronics, heavier motor, etc. Cutting the weight of the battery pack by a factor of 2, let alone 10, would be tremendous.

      But, to your point, I agree that if the resulting battery is 2x the volume, let alone 10x, it may yet be a deal killer. Creating a network of channels, tubes, and pores to get the oxygen in and out will be tough to accomplish on a tight space.

    44. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have natural gas taps in my house. Some people have fuel oil delivered. Anyway, even if a car can be recharged in minutes at a station, it could also be charged overnight when needed.

    45. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Rhywden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ah, but that's the beauty of it: You don't need to know the number of duty cycles.
      You exchange your empty battery for a charged battery with the assurance of the fuel station that this battery carries the charge you just paid for.
      And if that one's empty, you'll replace it again.
      Furthermore, you can insert some electronics to store and display statistics - no need to sell a dumb battery.

      Again, a solvable problem.

    46. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      so every new electric car gets a not-a-new battery from the common pool at a discount. perception problem solved.

    47. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by wcrowe · · Score: 1

      I think I read somewhere that an Israeli company was working on this. Their idea was to use the same connections to hold the battery as those for aircraft ordinance. The idea was that you would pull up to a station, pay a fee, drop your battery, and the old one would be removed and replaced with a fresh one, robotically. Off you go.

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    48. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 2
      I saw a fast charger (level 3, it's called) at the san diego gas and electric headquarters. Both of your issues - grid impacts and amount of wiring are not a concern. The level 3 charger dumps 50kVA into the car, and can charge a leaf from 20% to 80% in less than ten minutes. The charger has a built-in 30kWh battery pack to act as a buffer, so it only pulls 20kVA from the grid. This keeps it below a threshold that limits high-power applications. Not sure what you mean by thick wires. The cable that plugs into the car looks like a gas pump tube.

      the goal of fast charging is to use it in combination with home charging. most people can charge at home, but fast charging is available as well. it takes a village! (of chargers, that is).

    49. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

      home charging is fine for most uses. A 220 V connection can charge a leaf in 3 hours, and a 110 connection can charge one in less than 8 hours. So for home overnight charging, this is fine. level three fast charging is a complimentary technology for when you need to get topped off quickly.

    50. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Junta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair, it may represent a different business model entirely.

      Gas stations mostly operate on thin margins on the gasoline itself, with the profit center being trying to get people to walk in the door to by some snacks/drink/whatever. Generally only items that can be browsed and purchase comfortably in a minute or so, since the store doesn't want a car consuming a spot more than that.

      However, having vehicles that require a lot longer to charge and can be safely recharged without the operator in attendance changes the dynamics. No longer do you have businesses that are places to replenish vehicle range primarily, but you have a wider variety of businesses where they want people to sit around for a lot longer time away from their car. Some may provide metered charging as a way to augment their revenue or recover cost of the service, some even may provide it for 'free' to draw people in the door. You can already see this happening. In my area, there are shopping malls with currently free charging access. There are also restauraunts with metered chargers. A number of employers are starting to mention free charging as a perk, in part to draw people in and in part to show off how 'green' they are.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    51. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      wtf? why wouldn't you want a complete charge? It's like going to exchange your propane tank but requesting a half-full tank. perhaps you're worrieda bout the weight of all those electrons?

    52. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 2

      Its electricity. Make a few large stations to capture economy of scale, and run charging cables to each parking spot.

      5 mins per car with a four pump station could serve 48 cars per hour. At 30 minutes you only need 24 parking spaces to serve the same quantity.

      Without all complexity of pumps, you could put a 3 storey parking garage in the footprint of a regular gas station and serve 180 cars per hour at max capacity.

      Pull up, swipe credit card, the machine says go to space 34, park, plug in, and have a coffee at the attached cafe.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    53. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by benjfowler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Flywheel storage. Under existing service station forecourts, are massive fuel tanks. Replace them with flywheel energy storage systems (which can be trickle-charged from the grid and discharged very fast if need be), and we may yet be in business.

      Flywheel storage are used to augment the National Grid in powering the Joint European Torus, and can deliver many tens of megawatts of power on demand.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus

    54. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by stdarg · · Score: 1

      Right now a station with 6 double-sided pumps can service 12 cars at a time. 12 cars every 5 minutes is 144 cars per hour. If charging takes 1/2 an hour, you'd need 72 chargers to maintain the same number of customers. How many gas stations have room for 72 parking spots?

      I think the quick change approach is better, though it'll probably mean the return of full-service gas stations, tips and all.

    55. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      Yo dawg, I hear you like batteries

    56. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Junta · · Score: 1

      The challenge is that is 80% of a realitvely low capcity. If ayou can get 80% of a current 100 mile range vehicle in half an hour, that may amount to 16% of a 500 mile battery.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    57. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 2

      sorry, no. cars aren't really weight constrained, at least within reasonable bounds. more wieght means your MPGs are lower, but it's not a hard cap. my accord weighs 3,000 lbs. if you design a lighter car at 2,500, you still have plenty of room to add heavy batteries. on the other hand, space constraints are real and fixed. you only have so much space based on wheel base, frame, other needs, etc, so any changes for space considerations have significant and possibly fatal design tradeoffs, while weight considerations have less impact.

    58. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Rhywden · · Score: 1

      High currents require thick wires - conductivity correlates linearly with the diameter of a wire.;)

    59. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 4, Informative

      Liability of the swap station. Large propane cylinders are leased and are not cheap to buy. Return one undamaged and get a certified good one. If it dies outside of an accident the swapping company replaces it.

      Solvable.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    60. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mk1004 · · Score: 2

      I think physics is going to limit charging times to way longer than that. IIRC, 1HP is roughly equivalent to 770 watts. So drive for 5 hours using 1HP. Now replace that energy. As a comparison, imagine placing you hand on a 100W incandescent bulb (which converts all but a fraction of its power input into heat). See how long you can hold your hand on that bulb. Now think about the heat produced by 770W, multiplied by the actual number of HP that your electric car needs to use to actually drive at reasonable speeds. No way that you can convert all of that energy into a chemical reaction without serious heating. Unless you can get 99%+ electrical to chemical conversion efficiencies.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    61. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      OK You stick to gasoline cars. If the majority of the car owners switch to home charging of their electric vehicles, the gasoline supply infrastructure will shrink a lot. You could still refill your tank in 5 minutes. But you will spend 25 minutes looking for a gasoline dispensing stations. And those who charge their electric vehicles in half an hour during their lunch/dinner breaks will laugh at you as they pass you.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    62. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Surt · · Score: 1

      The wire only has to be thick if it isn't superconducting.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    63. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by michael_cain · · Score: 2

      Include an unfoldable solar panel in the car and a small pole to put a mini wind turbine on ;)

      Or, for those rare occasions when you're going to be driving 500 miles in a day, rent a small fifth-wheel add-on trailer with a fuel tank and generator set. The amount of power needed to maintain highway speeds is rather small, on the order of 10-15 horsepower. Several gallons of alcohol or a modest tank of compressed biogas can be refueled quickly during long trips. For the large majority of driving, though, you don't have to drag around the extra weight. Renting makes sense for people whose need is infrequent; if you're one of the people who have to make long-distance trips regularly, you can buy your own.

    64. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Oswald · · Score: 2

      See, I seldom drive a car when I'm asleep.

      Lunesta script run out?

    65. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

      Build a coolant system into the quick-charge station. Have the connector also pump ice-water or something to the car, and back out to take the heat. Leave it out of the 'normal-speed' charge stations, and charge more for the quick-charge. A compatible car and battery would then be able to do a quick-charge without damage.

      At the end of the charge cycle, pump in air to remove the water, and off you go.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    66. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Teancum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This idea is going to seem ridiculously silly in the future when batteries can charge faster than a tank can fill (Even Gen. X'ers will live to see it, I'm sure). I will seem incredible forward-thinking B-)

      For a website filled with electrical and computer engineers, the entire notion that you can recharge an electric battery quick with enough energy to be able to send an automobile over 500 miles in less than 15 minutes should seem totally ludicrous.

      What are you expecting to have happen, somebody figure out how to discover news laws of physics akin to discovering how to travel faster than light?

      The sheer amount of energy to perform this kind of action is going to require connectors to the recharging equipment to be in the kiloVolt range, or perhaps MegaVolt and have amperage with that voltage that can only be supplied by a direct power line to a nuclear power plant. What you are talking about doing here is to deliver a huge pile of energy in a very short period of time and then claiming that delivering that energy is not going to be lethal to the people who are performing the recharging.

    67. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      So? just get 4 220 connectors.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    68. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      It works out in the consumers favour because your not going to need to replace the batteries every 10 years, even if you don't get that couple of extra volts for the first year. But i doubt the big companies will do that for a while at least not untill life span goes up or price goes down. http://www.betterplace.com.au/ is setting up a battery rental/recharging business.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    69. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Emergency supply port. Call AAA and they send a truck with a charged 20 mile capacity battery to get you to the next station. Drop off the pack at the station and recharge there.

      Or just have AAA tow you to the station. Next time pay attention to your meters. Do you run out of fuel so often that this is a concern? My gas needle has been broken for years. I just reset the trip meter and fill up every 300 miles. Never had to hike yet.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    70. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Of course when 95% of charges happen at home, how many charging stations will there really be?

      They will be common. I know this because they are already common. There are a few at my local Walmart. There are a couple more at Costco. Many businesses already provide them in their parking lots.

      Would there be a gas station at every corner

      Electric charging stations are not the size of gas stations. They are the size of a parking meter.

    71. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Right now a station with 6 double-sided pumps can service 12 cars at a time. 12 cars every 5 minutes is 144 cars per hour. If charging takes 1/2 an hour, you'd need 72 chargers to maintain the same number of customers. How many gas stations have room for 72 parking spots?

      My local supermarket has its own petrol station. It also has a few hundred parking spots. Would be quite simple: You park your car, plug it in, do your shopping, and pay for the electricity with your shopping. Details can be worked out easily. But in the end, if I _can_ charge at home overnight, there isn't that much demand for extra charging.

    72. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets see... 800 miles, at 50 MPH... that's quite an impressive bladder and digestive system you've got to be able to go 16 hours w/o a rest stop.

    73. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Very nice. Your plan restricts the choices of everyone equally. Very liberal of you.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    74. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Junta · · Score: 1

      Cars certainly are keenly interested in weight as well, it's a large driver of efficiency. Also, given the ability to omit an engine and some drivetrain components means even if you still have relatively lower volumetric density that the battery might still come out ahead.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    75. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cfulton · · Score: 1

      And you never drive more than 500 miles in a day. So np.

      --
      No sigs in BETA. Beta SUCKS.
    76. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Then you are a danger to other people in the road.
      Yeah, Yeah, your a perfect driver, and after 10 hours of driving you just as a alert as the first hours because you are special.

      Well then,. you'll sit in your car fuming for 30 minutes. The rest of us will relax and stretch are legs.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    77. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Considering demand, he'll be paying 40 dollars a gallon.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    78. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      How expensive is it?
      How long does it take to charge?
      How long can it hold its charge before it leaks?
      How many recharge cycles can it do?

      You left out: How can the oil industry profit from it?

    79. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      My range anxiety is 200 miles. as being a typical american who cant afford to live within 30 miles of where my job is, I have to drive close to 125 miles a day. 200 mile range will make up for the winter range degradation that everyone sees with electric cars. I would prefer a 300 mile range to make up for range loss due to the fact that batteries will lose about 30% of their capacity in the first 2-3 years and this car MUST last 10 years.

      Add all the above together and the car can NOT cost more than $16,900 MSRP or it will be a complete failure like the Volt is at the $42,000 only the rich man price tag. It needs to be simple. No it does not need heated leather seats with 12 way power adjust and siatshu massage. No you dont need carpet. Do the right things to make it light and affordable.

      Electric cars are NOT new technology. They existed before the current car. Everyone tries the bullshit response of "it's new tech it has to be expensive" no it doesnt.

      If these car makers really wanted to change the world, make one that sells NEW for $9,999. even a 2 seater commuter that had hand crank windows would sell like hotcakes at that price. Because it's in the price range of even the bottom 15% They could afford to buy one with their tax refund and credits.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    80. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by skids · · Score: 1

      Or if it isn't carrying high voltage, which reduces the need for current.

    81. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I always slow-charge (trickle charge) all my batteries in order to avoid damage. I have NiCads that are 20 years old and still work! Of course it helps that my charger "refreshes" batteries as they become old and lose capacity:

      http://www.amazon.com/La-Crosse-Technology-Battery-Charger/dp/B000RSOV50

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    82. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Have you timed a whole gas stop? I have yet to find any car that can refuel in 5 minutes. A gas stop is 10 minutes to 15 minutes.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    83. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by lxs · · Score: 1

      People who have to wait 30 minutes have plenty of time to have a coffee or a bite to eat. Merge with a coffee house. Instant captive audience.

    84. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      A number of employers are starting to mention free charging as a perk, in part to draw people in and in part to show off how 'green' they are.

      Suckers, I've been charging my phone from my office PC for years :-P

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    85. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by afidel · · Score: 2

      Cruising at highway speeds takes between 15-20HP for most passenger vehicles, 15kw in something the size of a car is nothing. You routinely see a single rack of servers using that kind of power, a passenger car is about the size of 5 racks so you should be able to charge at 5x your discharge rate without anything more than a bit of forced air (AC will be needed if ambient is above ~90F assuming the battery can handle temperatures similar to what electronics can handle). Now, that still means it will take ~1.5 hours to fully recharge so this won't be the best tech for cross country trips but for everything else it should work fine (when I do long distance travel I try to keep my meal stops to under an hour, this type of recharge time would reduce my per-day travel distance by a few hundred miles which can be significant).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    86. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sadly a Leaf cant make my 40 mile commute and back. not when the weather is below 70 degrees F which is 70% of the year.

      Oh and it costs more than a Honda Civic + 10 years of gasoline at $5.00 a gallon.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    87. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Not a bad idea, but if the car already has a battery cooling system it could just run at full capacity from the station's power.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    88. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I am more lazy. I dont want to plug it in. Why cant they make induction charging mats? Drive over it, the charge light comes on.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    89. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Electric cars are faster and lighter.
      So.. what advantage does gas have again? oh, wait, you like to here them go VROOOOMMM.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    90. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      People already do this. The tank exchange racks are not selling you a full tank but a 80% full tank.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    91. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Include an unfoldable solar panel in the car and a small pole to put a mini wind turbine on ;)

      Or,
      for those rare occasions when you're going to be driving 500 miles in a day,
      rent a small fifth-wheel add-on trailer with a fuel tank and generator set.
      The amount of power needed to maintain highway speeds is rather small,
      on the order of 10-15 horsepower.
      Several gallons of alcohol or a modest tank of compressed biogas
      can be refueled quickly during long trips.
      For the large majority of driving, though,
      you don't have to drag around the extra weight.
      Renting makes sense for people whose need is infrequent;
      if you're one of the people who have to make long-distance trips regularly,
      you can buy your own.

      If you are going to go that route, then why not just put a small gas or diesel engine in the car to turn an alternator and power the electric motors that way. Railroads have been doing that for 90 years. A little honda generator runs 8 hours on two gallons of gas. At 60 mph, that equates to 240mpg. Even for city driving, say 20mph, that's still 80mpg.

    92. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      In our information age, who cares how many there are? As long as there are GPS's with listings of reasonably close-by stations(idk, every tens of miles on the highway?), which there already are, the gas/electric station on every block becomes obsolete.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    93. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      The same number that are at full saturation of 144 cars an hour. None.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    94. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      It will be like the 40s and 50s. Lot more stations, and you will walk to them and they will drive you out and do a quick charge to get you the remaining distance.
      Well, you'll call them actually.

      Or you are stuck until the solar charger gives you enough juice to limp into a station. In that regard, it is actually better then Gas.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    95. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Like oil, lIthium is not an unlimited resource.

    96. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1

      Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      Nope, not yet. Ship it in an actual car, then it will be our move ;-)

    97. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would be happy with 5 hour recharge if I could recharge at home.

    98. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 2

      So? How does this address longer-range driving?

      It does not. Charging a battery with, for example, 4x capacity will require 4x as much power, will take 4x as long.

    99. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Why? I can fill jerry cans and keep a supply at home. People do this now with the current scumbag pricing that gas stations do. My neighbor keeps 60 gallons of gas in 15 jerry cans in his garage when prices are normal. when they do the $0.25 a gallon spike for the weekend or no reason, he uses his can gas.

      not a problem, maybe for someone who is too lazy to lift cans, but that is a lazy bum problem not a logistics problem.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    100. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by skids · · Score: 1

      The sheer amount of energy to perform this kind of action is going to require connectors to the recharging equipment to be in the kiloVolt range, or perhaps MegaVolt and have amperage with that voltage that can only be supplied by a direct power line to a nuclear power plant.

      ...or an ultracap bank that had been gradually charging while you were at work.

      We already have battery chemistries that can fully charge in 15 minutes. We already have plenty of experience transforming voltages to get them over smaller wires, and we have plenty of experience engineering safety mechanisms that prevent HV systems from pumping current until connectors are securely fastened and the expected load parameters are observed.

      It's completely doable. Though likely people will find they are perfectly happy with a 2 hour charge in the long run, as they adjust culturally and habitually.

    101. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I don't like them either but they're no longer the worst influence or biggest bully.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    102. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2

      Back when I was poor I had to limit my travel to currently available cash. I wasn't always able to afford a full gas tank and would only fill up $3-5 worth until the next payday. Sometimes overly privileged people that don't have to live on a budget don't know these things.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    103. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still can't take me from Maryland to California in 3 days

      Right, because that's really something that the average person does on a weekly, monthly, or even yearly basis.

      Question, why is it you think that an EV will never succeed unless it is capable of 100% doing everything that a gasoline car can do, even if the average person would never notice the things it cannot do? Hell, even among gasoline cars, some can do more than others, but I don't see you complaining about how, say, Ford's new compact will be a flop because it cannot drive off-road.

    104. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That's one way to look at it but I would call it a supply problem at that point...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    105. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      Do you have a "jerry can" equivalent? Because sure as Monday, somebody is going to run out of juice in the middle of nowhere.

      Well hopefully it is you, and you in the middle of a desert.

    106. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      Sure, parking lots, parking garages, in your employer's lot (maybe 3rd party operated, like your vending machines)...

      Just a problem of getting people to roll it all out. You couldn't get me to invest in that right now because nobody drives electric vehicles. And I don't want an electric vehicle because I'd have nowhere to charge it (I live in a condo).

    107. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I see your porint, but it might be a little overblown. The leaf has a battery of 24 kwh, and you likely won't find any EVs over 50kwh in the near / mid future. so the 4x is a little high. second, for longer-range driving, no big deal, different strokes for different folks. If your driving needs ar compatible with an EV, then you can get an EV. If an EV can't meet your needs, then you can get a gasoline car. Your comment is common, and it implies that this is a death knell for EVs, like they're impractical and will fail. Not true, just different strokes for different folks.

    108. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting the thousands and thousands of truckers out on the road. They won't be switching to electric any time soon. At worst, the GP would have to switch to diesel.

    109. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by skids · · Score: 2

      Batteries don't charge from 10% to 80% in just 30 minutes.

      "Batteries" shouldn't be generalized with broad-brush statements. There are many chemistries some of which have absolutely no problem with a 4C charge rate.

    110. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 0

      I do 10 hour offroad rallies without taking a dump, only a piss at the 1 hour break between 5 hour stretches of driving. You just avoid eating large meals the day before and take a dump before you start.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    111. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mlts · · Score: 2

      Virtually anything electric is, be it electric heaters, refrigerators, et. al.

      However, the reason why we still use gas/diesel engines is that gasoline takes up a relatively small amount of volume for the energy it gives off, even at 25% efficiency or less. Getting batteries that are are in the ball park with energy storage with volume would completely change this. Electric motors do not need an intake/exhaust system, and the cooling system can be downsized due to less waste heat.

      Plus, it will be nice to have full torque at 0 RPM which electric motors can do.

    112. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Teancum · · Score: 5, Informative

      My bullshit meter is being pegged off the charts to even consider this. Yes, there might be some supposed "automated facilities' that could pull this off, but I shudder to think of the potential accidents, lawsuits, and other issues that could come from such a "fast recharger". "Training" might be able to help with the technicians who are at a filling station performing this task, but any kind of casual attitude will result in a great many deaths.

      I'll also note that the example of a Nissan Leaf is hardly the best one to use as well, as it certainly isn't going to have this magical "500 mile range" as suggested in the original article.

      As for grid impact.... I've seen first hand what the current infrastructure of California has for any kind of significant grid impact. I was involved with a.... interesting industrial scale engineering project (subject to NDAs for specifics that I can't go into right now). Let's just say almost everybody in the SF area would recognize it if I mentioned it.

      The interesting thing about it for the purposes of this discussion is that it used 1 MW of energy off of the existing power grid in downtown San Francisco, and I was on the engineering team to get it set up. As a part of our testing process, we would "turn it on" and often use that full rated capacity of sucking the 1 MW off of the grid for relatively short periods of time and then turn it off after the test (usually about 15-20 minute test for what we were doing). At the same time we had the radio on tuned to a local station, and it made us sick to realize that when the device was turn on that it triggered blackouts throughout the city and those blackouts ended when we turned the device off.

      Even if you use a power buffer like a huge capacitor bank to store the amount of energy needed to recharge a vehicle like a Tesla Roadster (which has roughly the quoted 500 mile range suggested in the original article) in a short period of time, that capacitor bank will need to be recharged in roughly a similar amount of time... with a power load for a heavily used recharging station to be roughly equivalent to this device I was using in San Francisco. I could easily see such a filling station be in the MegaWatt range for power consumption. In other words the overall electrical transmission infrastructure to get a whole series of stations like this built would require a substantial construction effort just to get those power transmission lines put to all of those station.

      So do you like a future with high voltage power lines being built in your backyard? That is the future you are asking for here, where those become a much more common sight in almost everybody's neighborhood. The grid impact of these stations is going to be enormous with any kind of electric vehicle future.

    113. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ballpoint · · Score: 2

      500 miles * 200Wh/mile = 100kWh. 400kW of power to transfer this energy in 15 minutes.

      1kA @ 400V (or 100A @ 4kV) will do. The power can come from another, bigger house battery that is (relatively) trickle charged from the grid or local sources.

      So no problem really.

      --
      Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
    114. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

      but it's not like you can request an 80% full vs 50% full. you take what they have. it raises a good point, how do you know that they're not ripping you off?

    115. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

      so i put a battery in your charger so you can charge while you charge!

    116. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by danceswithtrees · · Score: 1

      High currents require thick wires - conductivity correlates linearly with the diameter of a wire. :?

      Conductivity correlates with diameter^2.
      Conductivity correlates linearly with the area of the wire

    117. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dasher42 · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like a small stirling engine would do ya right.

    118. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Despite what you see in the moves. O2 by it self does not explode.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    119. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sourcing for any of that? Use you imagination isn't even close to valid reply, though my nuclear powered car/plane/gunship is awesome!

    120. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Definitely true, we're not going to see anything more powerful than a 220V charger at home for the foreseeable future,..."

      My Miele washing-machine has been on 380 Volt for the last 23 years and there's a connector free for my car if I buy one.
      Lots of people in Europe have those, it also helps if you rent powerful professional machines around the house who require it.

    121. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

      I was thinking it probably had a passive or low-power cooling system - if any - for normal use. This is basically an add-on for certain applications, and most of the mechanics of it would be located at the station. (Just have heat-exchanger tubes in the car.)

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    122. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Like oil, lIthium is not an unlimited resource.

      Actually it is pretty much unlimited. The oceans contain trillions of tons of lithium. It is highly water soluble, so lithium tossed in a landfill should eventually return to the ocean.

      We don't currently extract lithium from seawater because it is cheaper to get it from salt deposits, but if/when the salt deposits run out, we have the ocean as a fall back.

    123. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ballpoint · · Score: 1

      Yes they do. Current LiPo cells can be charged in 12 minutes and discharged in 1 minute. Doing so affects longevity, but the impact may continue to decrease like it did over the last decennium.

      --
      Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
    124. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think perhaps you need to re-read how electricity works again...

    125. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by guttentag · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      OK, I'll bite. This is an "air breathing" battery that uses oxygen from the atmosphere to create lithium peroxide and electrical energy. What if I drive to some place where there is no air, like Los Angeles, and get stuck there?

    126. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it absorbs oxygen when running, and releases oxygen while charging, wouldn't you be exchanging a FULL one for an EMPTY one?

    127. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by digitalsolo · · Score: 1

      Show me an electric car that can make 900 horsepower and weigh in at less than 3000 US lbs and I'll be thrilled about it.

      --
      Just another ignorant American.
    128. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just think of the potential accidents that could happen with ordinary drivers operating dispensers of incredibly flammable gasoline on their own! We need automated facilities, or at least trained technicians, if we are to dispense this hazardous fuel to our cars. And imagine a future with high-capacity gasoline tanks buried underground in the middle of a city, slowly leaching fuel into the surrounding soil in almost everybody's neighborhood!

    129. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Golddess · · Score: 2

      Restricts choices? Sounds more like a natural progression than a deliberate implementation. People buy electric cars == demand for gas stations goes down == fewer gas stations. I'm not seeing anything in 140Mandak262Jamuna's post to indicate a malicious forced closure of gas stations.

      Would you also say that, when buggy whip manufacturers started going out of business because people were buying cars, that the people buying cars were "restricting choices" for everyone else?

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    130. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You buy gasoline now with the assurance from the supplier that the octane rating is what is displayed, even paying a premium for premium octane numbers. Want a battery with low usage, $$$, can get by with a more used one then $.

    131. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      You know, I'm sure there's lots of people who use their laptops and/or cellphones so much that they have a spare set of batteries on hand. They just charge the one that's not being used.

    132. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Story posting in 2014: "What ever happened to lithium air batteries?"

    133. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Although not numbered, I'm going to label them 1 to 4 in the order they are shown:

      #1 and #4 are simply economics - if they can't do that, then they won't come out.

      #2 I believe I remember reading something like that before (80% at 30 minutes). I don't like that too much, can you imagine the lines at the fueling plugs? Do you really want to refuel for 30 minutes? Then again, I could see restaurants adding fueling stations. Fuel your car an you at the same time. It could be an interesting market. And when you don't have a long trip, then you'll probably fuel at home anyway.

      #3 Given that they react with air, I think it would vary by the seal that 'shuts off' the battery. Trickle discharge could take from weeks to years, depending on the seal quality (an initial little bit of 'fast' discharge from air in the battery system, and then after that, rather slow).

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    134. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mark-t · · Score: 1
      The heavier the battery, the more power the battery is going to need to move the entire car. The bigger the battery, the larger the car has to be. Owing to the typical densities of the materials used in building a car, size does not have to impact weight (an outer shell can be largely hollow, for instance), as much as weight will impact size.

      Weight is the fundamentally more important factor. Size is important for practical reasons, but weight is important for physical ones.

    135. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Bigby · · Score: 1

      I routinely fill up in under 5 minutes. Granted, my 10 year old car gets 38 mpg and has only a 10 gallon tank, but it is quick.

    136. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Teancum · · Score: 2

      What about the danger of explosion? As it recharges it release oxygen. You wouldn't want to leave your Lithium-oxygen EV in your garage but outside so the O2 can safely escape rather than build up.

      The danger of high concentrations of Oxygen is not a concern about explosions, but rather fire. Oxygen in high enough concentrations can burn almost anything, which is where concerns about compressed Oxygen is treated as a hazardous material subject to special transport considerations.

      Still, the partial pressure of Oxygen would need to be substantially higher than the already existing percentage of Oxygen in the air we are currently breathing, and for home recharging operations done in a typical garage... I just don't see that becoming a significant factor unless your garage is completely air tight.

      For devices that produce Hydrogen (such as Lead-Acid batteries found in almost every internal combustion engine automobile and some electric vehicles due to the low cost to produce those batteries) such concerns about explosive mixtures of gasses are certainly much more legitimate. On the other hand, how many hydrogen gas explosions have you heard about from recharging lead acid batteries? There are enough of them around that I'm sure you could find a few news stories about the issue through sheer statistical probability, but they are quite rare. Oxygen would be much, much safer to work with than even the Hydrogen from this much older electric battery technology.

    137. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      That's got to work safely even when the car is covered in wet salty mud and slush. If they can crack that problem, *and* the petrol-like energy density - or better yet, diesel-like energy density - then electric cars might start to become more viable. Lithium Peroxide sounds like nasty stuff, and I do wonder how it stacks up against a split petrol tank in the "fiery death" stakes.

      Of course, what would make a huge contribution to improving electric car range would be abandoning boring concept cars like the Tesla Roadster and making something practical. Who cares about doing 0-60 in four seconds, in real world driving?

    138. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      You will only care about that issue if you *own* the battery that comes with the car.

      If battery swap stations were the norm, you undoubtedly would never own any battery. Instead, batteries would be like discs from Netflix.

      In an ideal world, they would only be able to bill you for the actual amount of juice that you ended up pulling out of the battery before you have to swap it again (as determined by your car's and/or the battery's control logic).

    139. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing. We have a new business model here

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    140. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Bigby · · Score: 1

      All that power will go from oil to....oil. Oil power plants. At least for the short term. In the long term, they will diversify their energy portfolio. They will get into sun, wind, hydro, and nuclear (uranium) business.

    141. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Superconductors and semiconductors aside, conductivity is a constant that's dependent on the metal(s) the wire is made of.

      The amperage capacity of a wire changes as a function of it's size. The rule-of-thumb is that capacity increases roughly by a factor of 6 every time it's diameter doubles.

      Because electrical current flows along the surface of a conductor, not it's interior, you get much higher capacity using many small strands over a single solid wire of equal diameter.

      Insulator material/thickness also plays a part in the practical capacity of a wire.

    142. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Hah! I've done over a thousand back on the East Coast. It's pretty easy to do 1200 or more out west, especially once you hit the 75-85mph speed limits in the less populated areas north of Denver, Montana, Wyoming and points west. If you want to see range anxiety, try driving anything out in Utah on a Friday night after 9pm. I really tested (and was rather impressed with) the limits of a Celica. I think I was at 500 miles and dipping down into the last quarter tank before I found an open gas station.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    143. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like an odometer, stick a "charge #" on there. Give a discount if charges are above a certain number.

    144. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Actually with solar panels getting better that options is actually pretty viable. You could charge up enough in an hour to get to another town most likely.

      I don't think so. How many square metres of solar panels can you carry in your car? 1 hour * 1 square metre * 500 watts (energy from sun per square metre) * 20% (solar to electricity conversion efficiency) = 0.1kWh. OK let's say you amazingly have 3 square metres of panels. That's 0.3kWh. A Prius can travel up to 1.6 km using 0.3kWh (using Toyota's figures of up to 24 km on 4.4kWh).

      If you can drive to a nearby town after a 1 hour solar charge, it's probably faster to walk there instead.

      --
    145. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but 3 things to consider in cpu6502's case.

      1) They are driving for 16 hours, not 10.

      2) They imply that they don't even stop to take a piss, that their first break is after they've traveled the 800 miles and arrived at their destination.

      3) They specifically state that they are eating along the way (and presumably drinking too).

      I will say this though, I have gone 24+ hours between dumps before, so I suppose I should have left off anything regarding needing to take a dump within that time frame.

    146. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The long drives could easily be handled by having a standard connector that a generator could plug into. A lightweight trailer with a generator, and a plug into the back of the car, and you have just converted your electric car into a hybrid. This could even be done today if the auto industry wanted it to happen. Most people would be fine with a 100 mile battery in their car and the ability to tow a small trailer that extended them to 300 miles.

    147. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Recharge in less then 5 minutes?

      Driving out of your way to go to a gas station will seem like a real drag when you start to see everybody else charging their cars at home...

      --
      No sig today...
    148. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

      Please keep in mind that working in the lab does not equal working in the real world.
      so don't assume that it WILL make it out to the real world, it might not.
      it's neat i will admit but so were a lot of other stuff in this field and others, but most of them did not make it out of the lab.

      Time will tell and it will be a good idea to hold off on the parties until it works outside of the controlled environment of the lab as well as it does in the lab.

    149. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      The tare should be on the tank somewhere. Weigh the thing and subtract the tare.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    150. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Then you can charge it yourself, since you don't need to spend hours charging it to full.

      Likewise you could still charge it overnight, or when you are at home.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    151. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's why the cars need a standard connector on the back. So you can hook up that generator trailer and recharge while you drive.

    152. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by c · · Score: 1

      30 minutes isn't a big deal at an individual level, but when it takes *everyone* an order of magnitude longer to fill up, things don't scale too well anymore. Service centers and gas stations are basically designed around a certain throughput, and either they have to be drastically altered to allow for more cars being refuelled for longer periods of time or you face a many hour lineup to get your 30 minutes "on the plug".

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    153. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Thank you, golddess. Exactly what I meant.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    154. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I'd like to have my home robot change the battery.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    155. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Electricity is much MUCH cheaper than gas.

      And if you are poor, then you will want to drive one of the older gas powered vehicles anyways. Why would someone who can't afford a full tank of gas be driving a new car? I've been there, believe me, but I was driving a jalopy I got for $2000.

    156. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by s122604 · · Score: 2

      I drive 500 miles each way to work, so this will never work for me..

    157. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Why not? An ICB takes in air from outside. Wet salty mush isn't exactly good for engine blocks either. That is currently solved with a simple air filter.

    158. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by s122604 · · Score: 1

      Doubtful at least in the USA.
      We already have more natural gas than we really know what to do with. Oil fired electric plants are costly, messy, and unreliable when in comparison to a combined cycle natural gas plant.
      They only exist in isolated places, for got reason.

    159. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Someone forward this comment to some convenience store operating CEO. This is a hundred billion dollar idea right here. EASY.

    160. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      30 minutes isn't a big deal at an individual level, but when it takes *everyone* an order of magnitude longer to fill up, things don't scale too well anymore. Service centers and gas stations are basically designed around a certain throughput, and either they have to be drastically altered to allow for more cars being refuelled for longer periods of time or you face a many hour lineup to get your 30 minutes "on the plug".

      Most people don't fill up every day - people usually can get 2-3 days or more worth of commute in before they have to fill up (ymmv, of course).

      You're making the assumption that people "fill up" when necessary, when for the vast majority of cars, they're parked in only a few spots for significant periods of time. E.g., at home - plug car in when you get home and leave it charging until you leave in the morning. At work you can do the same as well - drive up, plug in, go to work. Forget to charge? no biggie (at 500km).

      Going to the mall? Well, at 500km, just park it.

      It's like people who demand that their cellphones get 14 day standby battery life - maybe if they're travelling I can see a possible need (in case you can't toss in a charger), but that's stretching it. Most people put down their phones and go to sleep, at which point it's a perfect time to charge the phone battery so it's full for the next day. (I can understand some frustration over the latest phones not making it through the day, however).

      The long-distance drive family vacation and extended period away from power are exceptions to most driving and cellphone use. Hell, gas powered cars aren't going away anytime soon, and I'd expect there will still be rental places that can rent you a gas car for that long driving trip instead of packing it all in the family electric car.

    161. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Instead of charging the battery in the car, exchange the empty battery for a loaded one.

      Know an easy and inexpensive way to quickly lift and replace (with reasonable positional accuracy) a battery that weighs 400 pounds? (And that's just the small one in a Chevy Volt.) You'd need a forklift.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    162. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Actually, supercaps found a niche in buses. A bus only needs to get to the next stop. So make each stop a pantograph overhead charger and you got a winner.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    163. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This idea is going to seem ridiculously silly in the future when batteries can charge faster than a tank can fill (Even Gen. X'ers will live to see it, I'm sure). I will seem incredible forward-thinking B-)

      For a website filled with electrical and computer engineers, the entire notion that you can recharge an electric battery quick with enough energy to be able to send an automobile over 500 miles in less than 15 minutes should seem totally ludicrous.

      No, it should seem feasible, but difficult. I don't expect computer engineers to necessarily have a clue, but as an electrical engineer, I've previously run the numbers, and will proceed to redo them quickly for your benefit:
      Going off my general knowledge of gasoline-powered automobiles, a "typical" car might get 35 mpg cruising at 55 mph using only 50 hp (not engine rating, actual horsepower used at cruise), and has a fuel capacity of 20 gallons.
      Using these figures in the obvious way, I come up with about 1.7 GJ of mechanical energy at the crankshaft. Permitting 90% electrical->mechanical efficiency, that'd be 2GJ of battery required for equivalent performance. (Quibble with my typical values if you like, but I think I'm correct to order of magnitude.)

      The sheer amount of energy to perform this kind of action is going to require connectors to the recharging equipment to be in the kiloVolt range, or perhaps MegaVolt and have amperage with that voltage that can only be supplied by a direct power line to a nuclear power plant.

      Charging a 2 GJ battery in 15 minutes requires on the order of 2 MW, plus charging inefficiencies. While this is certainly infeasible for a standard home installation, it hardly requires a nuclear power station; Wikipedia says the world's largest coal-fired power plant is 4GW. 2MW is feasible for recharging at highway stations, provided that electric cars are mostly recharged overnight at home (at much lower rates, manageable by household wiring), reducing demand from every vehicle, all the time (as with filling stations) to only those vehicles needing a top-up during the day (mostly road trips). Then you can get away with a single 2MW service at each station, ~20 MW to match the 8-12 gas pumps needed to service the gasoline fleet during rush hour.

      (This is not to say our electrical infrastructure won't need significant upgrades -- distributing it to homes and over a longer time doesn't change the total energy required; but that's a separate issue.)

      Worst case, suppose electric infrastructure can't be extended to supply some filling stations for whatever reason -- maybe they're off in the boonies somewhere. What would it take for my neighborhood gas station to set up the ability to recharge electric cars from its liquid fuel supply? Well, as it happens, producing 2.6MW from diesel fuel is a solved problem with significantly improved fuel efficiency from vehicle engines, which combined with the elimination of road tax on fuel consumed by the generator, makes it economically feasible. (Yes, this takes away much of the supposed "green" benefit of electric cars, but if the car runs on overnight charging from nuclear power 90% of the time, with the occasional diesel-fueled quick charge for road trips, I'd call that a win; it's certainly better than running a gasoline car all the time because there was no quick-charging option.)

    164. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Kompressor · · Score: 1

      Electric charging stations are not the size of gas stations. They are the size of a parking meter.

      More like the size of a parking lot, no? (Assuming we're talking about long-distance travelers with mostly depleted batteries, not commuters or those running errands who can top off at the grocery store while they shop)

      --
      kmem russian roulette: Aquillar> dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/kmem bs=1 count=1 seek=$RANDOM
    165. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      I have found that the not "overly privileged" don't know how to live on a budget. They just tell themselves that they do. I have been poor. Your comment is right in there with the people who say that they can't pay off their credit cards because they are poor, so they keep the cards maxed out, pay off a little each month, and then recharge the amount they paid off.

      If you put $5 of gas into your empty tank, you will be able to drive $5 worth of distance. If you put $5 of gas into your mostly full tank and drive $5 distance, you have traveled the same distance and spent the same amount of money. Being poor was hard. I didn't like it, but even then I would watch other poor people rationalize why being poor made their self destructive habits a requirement.

    166. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by s122604 · · Score: 1

      Why 16,900?
      You can't get much of anything for that price these days, even a reasonably equipped corolla/civic/focus/cruze will cost more.
      Considering it's a new technology, that frees you from ever having to buy gas, and releaves you of a lot of maintenance issues, a considerable premium is justified

      All this aside, if 200 miles is your bogey, you can get into a natural gas powered civic, which now has a 250 mile range for under 30k.
      You can fill it up at home, and there are more nat gas stations out there than you realize, but still not enough

      My modest proposal, convert the bulk of the postal truck fleet to CNG and make every post office a publicly available CNG filling station.

    167. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If your driving needs ar compatible with an EV, then you can get an EV. If an EV can't meet your needs, then you can get a gasoline car.

      Exactly.

      Your comment is common, and it implies that this is a death knell for EVs, like they're impractical and will fail. Not true, just different strokes for different folks.

      I see a lot of EV proponents discounting the drawbacks, and arguing every which way that EVs with just a little bit of improvement will be good enough for nearly everybody. Let's face it, hipsters congregate in dense urban areas where any car is a luxury, and many just can't imagine that some of us actually live a long way away from anything ;-)

      Funny thing is, I would need a lot more range to use an EV, but slow charging times would not bother me so much for a secondary car, because many times it would have multiple days to charge ;-)

    168. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by fredrated · · Score: 1

      There is no proof by analogy.

      This is true because 'analogy' is not a mathematical tool, and proofs only exist in mathematics.

      Analogies are better: they can convey knowledge instead of proof.

    169. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by FridayBob · · Score: 1

      Recharge in less then 5 minutes?

      Who cares about how long it takes to charge a car with a set of batteries that has a range of 1000 km. In that case, if it does take 8 hours to fully recharge, so what? I'll worry about that as I fall asleep.

    170. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Railways have been doing things that way because a generator and electric motors weigh less and are more efficient than a transmission and whatever gear boxes and trans-axles would be needed to shuffle torque from the diesel engines to the wheels.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    171. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Pretty much everyone, whether they realize it or not. It is sad, but most people see cars as a giant toy instead of the heavy machinery that it is. Just look at 95% of car commercials. They stress how much fun it is to drive. They brag about how the cars are inspired by race cars. They show them doing all sorts of dangerous things.

      Once in a while you get a commercial that focuses on efficiency or comfort, but the majority are all about speed and power. I'm with you. I would much rather see them make concept cars that are cutting edge and extreme in practicality.

    172. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Well, road trips and middle-of-the-night emergencies. Your kid needs to go to the hospital to get his appendix out, say, or someone needs to watch your sister's kids because her husband was in a car crash. I'm not going to be comfortable with a battery powered car unless it's still got at least a 25% charge after a day of heavy use..

    173. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

      > Sadly a Leaf cant make my 40 mile commute and back

      I thought the real range was about 100 miles?

      > weather is below 70 degrees F

      That sounds too big. Li-ion is generally less susceptible to temperature effects until you get down around 45 degrees.

    174. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      loads and loads of people drive between Florida on the I95 corridor to the North East or the other way, every year, many tens of thousands of people a month, likely, and many of those do it straight through, 1200+ miles, 20+ hours. I've done it a few times. Most of that trip is with a 65+ MPH speed limit and either route 81 or 95. With the exception of the big cities, I95 is 75+ MPH most of the time anyway.

      Three charging stations placed conveniently would settle the trip and provide handy rest-stops and butt numb relief.

      I'm wondering what these batteries could do for large trucks. Could a tractor trailer use several in parallel to complete the a 10 hour day? How about my plow truck, can I get one for the bed of the truck, recycle/sell the big diesel engine, and be ahead of the game? I know, this is years from commercial use.

    175. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by who_stole_my_kidneys · · Score: 2

      Horsepower is measured at the top RPM, so while your waiting on your RPM to get up to that 900, the electric car has instant power (or horsepower, if you want to call it that) all the way through. But if you insist on using the HP analogy, the White Zombie http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/zero_to_60_mph_in_less_than_3.html weight is only 2,275 pounds, Has 355 volts of energy and can generate 2,400 instantaneous amps. Convert that to 1kW = 1.34 HP accroding to http://auto.howstuffworks.com/how-does-horsepower-figure-into-electric-cars.htm and you get 852kW = 1141.68HP

    176. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Ironic. You imply that the person that wants to stay on the road is sad. I know when I take a road trip, I don't need to choke down a snack since I actually have people to take road trips with. I can leisurely eat a meal in the passenger seat while the other driver takes over driving. I also like to take my stops at places that I would actually enjoy being instead of hanging out at a gas station. Maybe if you actually made contact with other humans, you might understand and stop projecting your sorrow onto other people.

    177. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would seem to me that the maintenance over Flywheel's operating at high speeds 24/7 are slightly more than just filling a hole in the ground.

    178. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by holmstar · · Score: 1

      And imagine a future with high-capacity gasoline tanks buried underground in the middle of a city, slowly leaching fuel into the surrounding soil in almost everybody's neighborhood!

      Actually, that does happen... a lot. Probably more so for older gas stations.

    179. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tsotha · · Score: 1

      I envision a service arrangement. You buy an electric car, but there's just an empty space where the battery goes. You pay some company every month to provide you with charged batteries (which they own) at their station. You don't care if the battery you're getting hasn't been stored properly or isn't manufactured to the highest quality as long as it doesn't damage your car. As the charge gets low you take it back to the station, and they swap it out with a fresh one. Then they look at the readout on the depleted battery and say. "You used x kwh, so that's a $35 debit to your account."

      These companies would have to recycle old batteries after awhile, and some would keep newer stock than others, meaning you'd get more range out of some than others. But as a consumer you'd balance it all against the price and decide which company to go with.

    180. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Luxury! I have to walk 2000 miles uphill through a swamp in the rain each day.

    181. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I think perhaps you need to think outside the box a bit.

      4 battery packs, 4 chargers, 1/4 the time.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    182. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you have to worry about poor people being able to afford an electric car in the near future. Never mind one featuring hardware by IBM.

    183. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by jkflying · · Score: 1

      whoosh!

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    184. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by holmstar · · Score: 1

      In the case of this battery, an empty one would be heavier (it absorbs oxygen as it discharges) than a full one. You could theoretically weigh it to determine charge level.

    185. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Coren22 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The plug performs a "handshake" and won't go full power without a safely mated connection. There are people who think of these things.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    186. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by CaptainLugnuts · · Score: 1

      Quit whining: Inifinti has got you covered.

    187. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [[ Instead, batteries would be like discs from Netflix.]]

      You mean they'll always be way more scratched-up than if you owned them, and sometimes you'll get about fifteen minutes in and it just stops working / won't go any further?

    188. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by rthille · · Score: 1

      Or a popup, self-connecting plug in the floor of the garage.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    189. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 2

      Because people have played mario cart, and I don't want to be hit by a red shell because I got to the charging mat first.

    190. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      "Considering it's a new technology,"

      Again, people who cant read nor know any history.

      electric cars are NOT A NEW TECHNOLOGY. It predates the Internal combustion powered car. I know people that have had electric vehicles in the 70's and 80's. the only thing that has been lacking is the Battery technology cost per watt. Back then you drove around with thousands of pounds of lead acid batteries that can not be discharged below 60% without damaging them. Deep cycle batteries let you go down to 40% but at a cost of longevity.

      Today, if you found a source for the batteries, you could build yourself a Li-ION pack that would weigh a few hundred pounds and have the same 40 mile range that a "fiat Le-Car" with a DC-10 started bolted in place of the engine would give you. This was a incredibly common conversion that people did in the 80's

      And this is based on the old electric motor-> transmission design. NEW technology would be hub motors, and not even GM can do that. The Volt is nothing more than a fancy-optioned 1980's electric car conversion. there is nothing at all on that car that is innovative in ANY WAY. They even had "regenerative braking" back in the 80's by doing what is called "engine braking" and it is how he Volt and the others all do it. use the motor to generate power, you set up a dead zone in the brakes that trips a switch. the brakes really don't do anything for the first 1/4 pedal travel but trip the switch to let the motor generate electricity and slow the car moderately, after that they actually engage the hydraulic brakes to slow the car even faster than the engine generation does.

      Again, all of this is very old technology that has been around and in the public domain forever. the ONLY thing new is the battery. and this battery will not see the light of day for another 10 years.

      A 200 mile low cost electric car can be made right now. The car makers refuse to do it because they dont want thin profit margins and the general public is still stupid enough to pay $20K for a commuter car.

      Why $16,900? because that is the price point that most real middle class (If you make more than $100K you are upper class) can afford. anything more is a far harder expense to swallow so they will stick with ICE cars..

      The point of Electric cars is to get off of oil. you cant do that until you make one that people can afford. and $16,900 is a price point that will start adoption. $40,000 is not.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    191. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Recharge in less then 5 minutes?

      Why? To be honest, we really do NOT want it to recharge in 5 minutes. The reason is that you want to make it inconvient to 'fill it up' in the daytime. If it takes say 30-60 minutes to fill up a battery that will get you 300-500 mile range, then ppl will chose to recharge at night.

      And yes, there is PLENTY of power in the west for recharging at night. In fact, such an arrangement will actually lower the costs of electricity and encourage nations to install new electric generators all over. The reason is that it is cheaper to send electricity through the country side if it provides power for homes, businesses, and vehicles.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    192. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's face it, hipsters congregate in dense urban areas where any car is a luxury, and many just can't imagine that some of us actually live a long way away from anything ;-)

      Have you considered that living far away from everything is a luxury too? We're going to have to give up some of our luxuries if we want to be sustainable. Rural living for those not involved in agriculture is probably one of them.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    193. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by holmstar · · Score: 1

      ICBMs are all rockets. There are air breathing cruise missiles, however.

    194. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know I've actually seen larger cars than your Accord on the roads today; I think it must actually be possible to build cars with greater volume. Obviously a larger frame would affect MPG, but so would more weight.

    195. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most americans drive a 30 gallon using SUV that they have to fill every 200 miles because they drive at 85mph. So their average gas stop is 20 minutes. 3 to climb out, 10 to fill, 5 to yell at the 30 children in back, 3 to climb back in, and another 10 to check her hair and talk on the cellphone wile everyone else is waiting to get to the gas pump.

    196. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      We could call it a 'convenience' store!

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    197. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      this is what I say, why not all of these solutions?

      plug it in at home using either trickle charge or a buffer-battery in the shed out back

      plug it in at work

      plug it in while grocery shopping

      swap the battery in a fast-change filling station

      and finally, stand in line for 30 minutes at a "quick-charge" station?

      I don't see why all these things couldn't be put to work.

    198. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Khyber · · Score: 2

      "Filling such a high capacity battery inside of five minutes requires an incredibly high current."

      Nope, you can get 480/277/240 lines installed at low current and charge just fine, assuming your battery bank is within that voltage range (assuming there is nothing else than a rectifier to go from AC to DC.).

      What's going to be the killer is how FAST you can safely charge the battery.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    199. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by MattskEE · · Score: 1

      Even if you use a power buffer like a huge capacitor bank to store the amount of energy needed to recharge a vehicle like a Tesla Roadster (which has roughly the quoted 500 mile range suggested in the original article) in a short period of time, that capacitor bank will need to be recharged in roughly a similar amount of time... with a power load for a heavily used recharging station to be roughly equivalent to this device I was using in San Francisco. I could easily see such a filling station be in the MegaWatt range for power consumption. In other words the overall electrical transmission infrastructure to get a whole series of stations like this built would require a substantial construction effort just to get those power transmission lines put to all of those station.

      Large discontinuous loads can be difficult for utilities to supply, but if charging stations charge up capacitors or some other local energy storage to be used to supply to high peak load of fast battery charging then the utility can easily supply the load, because utilities like steady loads. There will be an increase in average power delivered, and the load may have a somewhat higher peak to average ratio, but let's look at the increase in average power: Total vehicular energy usage from petroleum (including boats, planes, shipping, etc.) is on the order of 25% of US energy consumption, electricity accounts for about 40% of energy usage (source LLNL 2010 based on EIA data). If we convert all cars to electricity that's maybe a 50% total increase in electricity usage. Big, but not game changing. And the increase will be gradual, not instant.

      Smart grid concepts are another option to present a more continuous load to a grid circuit by ensuring that the number of cars charging on a given circuit is relatively constant, and this can be spread out over many charging stations across a city. Those who are in a hurry can pay a slight premium to charge immediately, and those in no rush can take advantage of cheaper rates. It's much like discounts currently available for those who use less power at peak times.

      So do you like a future with high voltage power lines being built in your backyard? That is the future you are asking for here, where those become a much more common sight in almost everybody's neighborhood. The grid impact of these stations is going to be enormous with any kind of electric vehicle future.

      That's hilarious, your dystopian future is one where we have a few more power lines! As I said we're looking at order of 50% increase in electricity usage to accommodate electric vehicles. They're not going to have to run HV transmission lines in people's backyards to make this work, they'll take the existing power infrastructure and upgrade it - increase voltage, add more circuits in parallel. Even if they build dedicated circuits to every fast-charge station you won't see much of it because it's going to be focused in commercial areas and near highways where gas stations are. Who cares if there's a new power line next to the highway? Actually, who cares if there's a new one in your backyard? There's a power line I can see from my backyard and I don't care.

      The fossil fuel gravy train is leaving the station, and sooner or later you'll need to get on board with the alternatives, even if it means *shudder* more electrical power lines.

    200. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by rthille · · Score: 1

      Please have your sarcasm detector checked :-)

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    201. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Khyber · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Sadly a Leaf cant make my 40 mile commute and back."

      That's funny, I just drove one while I had my Taurus' transmission worked on.

      Temps were around 60F and I did an 80.2 mile drive out to Garden Grove and back.

      I'll be doing the same thing again tonight. Fridays are my Garden Grove work nights.

      I live in the middle of downtown Riverside.

      Your numbers make zero sense in my personal experience.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    202. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      You mean they'll always be way more scratched-up than if you owned them,

      Yes, but you still won't care since you don't own them.

      and sometimes you'll get about fifteen minutes in and it just stops working / won't go any further?

      Probably not, because they're unlikely to repeatedly send the batteries through the US Postal System wrapped in nothing but a thin paper envelope. (Every Netflix disc we've had that wouldn't play was cracked all the way through the plastic, probably from this treatment.)

    203. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cnaumann · · Score: 1

      Have you ever calculated the amount of power being delivered through a gasoline filling hose?
      Gallon of gas = 1.3 x 10^8 Joules.
      20 gallons of gas in 5 minutes = (20 * 1.3 x 10^8) / (5 * 60) = 8.7Megawatts.
      That is 876 Amps at 10,000 Volts.
      Liquid fueled cars are going to be around a long, long time.

    204. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Have you considered that living far away from everything is a luxury too?

      Considered it??? I live it every day and pay the price. It's like you think I have no clue how I'm living.

      We're going to have to give up some of our luxuries if we want to be sustainable. Rural living for those not involved in agriculture is probably one of them.

      Fuck you. No, really, I mean it, go fuck yourself. You have no idea at all to what extent my lifestyle is sustainable or not, what effects positive or negative it has on the environment.

    205. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think "ICB" meant "Internal Combustion something-that-starts-with-B". I just can't think of what would be in the context, since the specific point of comparison was internal combustion engines.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    206. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like the gasoline induction sniffer mats you use now. Oh wait there aren't any. Or if your chaffuer does it now he can learn to plug in in.

    207. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mounthood · · Score: 1

      Gas stations could get "backup" generators -- 1mw is affordable for a station. It would also allow individual stations to deploy when they want to, and EV drivers would get more choice over time.

      --
      tomorrow who's gonna fuss
    208. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by afidel · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm very surprised that Tesla never made a product out of the trailer they made for one of the beta model roadsters.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    209. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of form factors, when do I get my quad GPU 16-core laptop with a 10 hour battery life, RAID, and 19" screen? That's what would be possible with a 12,000 Wh/kg battery.

    210. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by trout007 · · Score: 1

      Or make the electrode in fluid form and instead of recharging onboard just pump out the electrode and replace it.

      http://www.hybridcars.com/news/mits-liquid-battery-could-refuel-minutes-30157.html

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    211. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's for real world LI Ion you recall wrong - Nissan recently stated QC charging is no worse then normal charging in their intensive cycle testing. They are investing to install thousands of quick chargers in the US and Europe.

       

    212. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by holmstar · · Score: 1

      The air intake would definitely need filtration. I would think the main problem would be fine particles clogging the pores of the cathode.

    213. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by holmstar · · Score: 1

      The battery IBM is developing would be more on the order of 100 lbs. Though that is still too much to be practical. The exchange would likely need to be performed by a robot with cars having a standard mount in a standard location.

    214. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      How big is your gas tank? Most American cars are 15 gallons and it takes nowhere near 10-15 minutes.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    215. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Electric cars aren't lighter (yet, but this new battery may change this). Gasoline will have an advantage on the track longer than for short-run events or daily driving because running electric cars at wide open...motor controller causes them to burn through all their energy FAST. Gasoline in your tank doesn't heat up and become less efficient when you burn it quickly.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    216. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by charlesj68 · · Score: 1
    217. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      I can't speak for other areas, but in Vancouver, Canada (and most surounding cities) ALL new homes are required to be wired for electric car chargers. They don't have chargers installed, but they have the wiring in place to add one easily.

    218. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      The Mitusbishi i is closest to what you want but it costs about $20k.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    219. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      I'd agree, but you've still got to deal with the chicken-egg situation of ownership and infrastructure, I suppose. And there's another one with price of the cars / volume.

      No doubt it's coming... it's just a question of how long.

    220. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      I really wish people would read about batteries before they tout faster ways of dumping energy into them. All batteries have a limit on how fast they charge. Charge them too fast and they heat up and explode. Another issue is getting power to the vehicle. For example a Tesla model S can go 300miles on 85KwH. to charge that in five minutes would require an input of 85*12=1.02Mwatts. At 220V that would be 4636 amps. Considering that a 1/2" copper wire can only handle a little over 302Amps think how big the wire would need to be to handle 4600 Amps. That is even assuming the charging efficiency is 100%; which it is not.

      You can't just do a little simple math and charge faster.

      By the way, flywheels are generally used to even out power on the grid. When the is a little too much generated they spin up. When they need a little more juice they spin down.

      The "trickle-charged from the grid" at a service station is just mathematically ludicrous. Say a station has 5 charging stations and a charge takes 5 minutes and each charge is 40Kwh. What happens when every station is busy. Even taking to account 5 minutes extra for payment and other things that would be 5 stations * 6 cars per hour * 40 kWh = 1.2MWh of electricity every hour. How many flywheels would it take to store that much energy? What happens on a long weekend when this could go on for hours? Eventually the flywheels will spin down and energy will have to be drawn from the grid. Otherwise one would have to wait for the flywheels to spin up and that could take a while. I do not think that a 1.2MW draw from the grid could be considered trickle.

    221. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Hatta · · Score: 1

      If it involves the continued release of CO2 into the atmosphere, it's not sustainable.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    222. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>> If you manage to hit the 500 mile range then half an hour to recharge your own body is probably a good idea.

      Nah. I drive 800 miles w/o stopping. I have food in the car that I eat as I'm going (or make a quick stop at McDonalds for take-out). Fie on taking breaks and wasting precious time.

      That's real fucking neat-o! I'm a slob too! What size bottle do you piss in? Do you prefer boxes or bags for shitting in? I like bags.

    223. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      Batteries do store energy as a chemical reaction. But what is the efficiency of a battery in terms of the percentage of energy you get out vs what was put in? It's probably well over 90%. As battery technology improves the energy storage method might more resemble a capacitor than the chemical battery. Capacitors can be charged almost instantly and are also fairly efficient. They don't store as much energy as a battery however (might need a megafarad capacitor to replace a battery!)

    224. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      That's about 550HP, about one locomotives worth.

    225. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      If it happens, that is.

      If it's not shipping it's little more than pipe dreams. We've had things like holographic storage promised for decades and little's come of that. We've had other highly promising technologies that could be applied to vastly greener transportation and power, such as solid-oxide fuel cells.

      Nothing. If it's not shipping, it's little more than a damned pipe-dream until it gets there. Sure, wes hould be working on it and trying to make it happen- but don't pin your hopes on it until it ships.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    226. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to New Jersey.

    227. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Heh... I'd shudder to see anything other than one of the possible amped up ultracapacitor technologies doing that. :-D

      It's possible. Hell, the ultracapacitor stuff's technically possible. But not a single one of them has made it yet to a commercial product.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    228. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      2MW is about 2700HP. That's somewhere between the output of a locomotive and a battleship.

    229. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's not entirely true. There are upper limits to current density even in superconducting wires.

    230. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Heh... Considering that they're still going to be largish (Keep in mind, you're storing 10-40 gallons of volume of that level of energy in a "car" or "truck" on average...)- that's a lot of smaller modules to snap out or one honking big one.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    231. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      No, it will contain four times the energy density, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it'll take four times as long.

      Just look at the NiMh turbo chargers (7-15 minute chargers...they've got them out there...) against the 2-4 times capacity batteries that've come up over the years for an instance of how one does not lead to the other.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    232. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 1

      I don't have to imagine such a future because the place you describe already exists: Newark, NJ. ;-)

    233. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

      In how many cities do 99% of people have a gas pump in their garage? With an electric infrastructure commercial charging stations would be the exception, not the rule.

    234. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bringing it back to the story, this gives energy parity with gasoline so the range would be more or less on parity with a gasoline vehicle or better. If you can slide your credit card and turn a crank to change the battery at a fill/charge station and slow charge at home what would the problem be?

      IMHO this takes the technical challenge of range and power density out of the way and makes it come back to dollars. Somehow I doubt this is price competative with gas. Part of the problem there is that gasoline is heavily subsidized, without tax incentives we'd be looking at $16+/gallon. Even if this beats the real price of gas, you'd wouldn't be likely to get the same kind of subsidies put on it that are put on gasoline.

    235. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How DARE you talk to a progressive that way! He is clearly your moral superior.

    236. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Engine, transmission, gas tank, exhaust. Just make the batteries into the floor with a bit of armoring on the bottom and it would probably work out smaller.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    237. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by AndyMoney · · Score: 1

      Regardless of how many chargers you have, most modern houses (200amp panels) would only provide enough power to charge a 50 kwh battery in 1 hour minimum (if you turned off all power in your house and had special 50amp breakers).

    238. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by error_logic · · Score: 1

      Weight is related to inertia but otherwise doesn't change the efficiency much if you're moving on a highway, for example. Size->Volume->Surface Area->Air Resistance. The size of the car increasing will tend to reduce efficiency.

    239. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not really a big fan of the Leaf myself -- I think the technology still has a ways to go before it's useful -- but I was a bit skeptical of your claims. So I did the math.

      Oh, and before I start, yeah, the Leaf is not for you if you commute 40 miles each way, no matter the weather. That pushes its range a bit too close to the max, in my opinion. But on to your other claim.

      Base model Civic Coupe
      MSRP: $15755
      FE: 39 mpg
      Cost of Gas(given): $5.00
      Cost per mile: 12.8 cents
      Cost to drive 80 miles/day, 5 days/week, 52 weeks/year, for 10 years: $26,624
      Total cost: $42,399

      Base model Leaf:
      MSRP: $35,200
      FE: 3.6 mi/kWh
      Cost of electricity(average): 11 cents/kWh
      Cost per mile: 3.05 cents
      Cost to drive 80 miles/day, 5 days/week, 52 weeks/year, for 10 years: $6,344
      Total Cost: $41,544 ...So not quite. But damn close. And that's assuming you found somewhere at work to plug the Leaf in, though honestly, I can see that happening.

      Of course, this is all back of the envelope, but I don't see the figures changing much.

      First, the Civic was their cheapest model, with no options. But, you can usually haggle a bit, and it doesn't count sales at the dealership.
      Second, the Leaf didn't take into account federal and state subsidies, which can knock six or seven thousand off the price. But I wouldn't count on those subsidies always being there, anyway.
      Third, I wouldn't have put the average price of gas over the next ten years at $5.00. I'd actually put it at something closer to $7.00 or $8.00.
      Fourth, that said, the price of electricity would no doubt rise linearly with the price of gas, so not much would change there.
      Fifth, this doesn't take into account repair costs, the need to replace the leaf's battery, the possible need to replace either car's engine, transmission, etc. We are talking about 208,000 miles, here! My guess, though, would be that being a more expensive vehicle, the Leaf would suffer on this point.

      So, in conclusion...you're probably mostly right. Yay for math!

    240. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I would think the danger from gas fumes in this mythical air tight garage would be more of a concern even than hydrogen...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    241. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by michael_cain · · Score: 1

      Why carry the weight of the genset, fuel tank, and fuel around when all you're doing is commuting to work, driving to the grocery, etc? Which make up 90%-plus of the "standard" usage, at least by hours. Let's face it -- in 25 years, most of us will be driving cars that are much smaller and much lighter most of the time; lugging around a genset will be a convenience we won't be able to afford.

    242. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      easy, ever seen a charger pack? if you put one of these batteries in it, then you could probably store 50 miles of juice in it. also, they are useful in general for emergency power in a house or for boats and campsites.

      They are the type of widget that is useful to have in a car as it is. If it could store motive power as well, then all the better

    243. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lluc · · Score: 1

      And imagine a future with huge capacitors buried underground in the middle of a city, slowly leaching electrolyte into the surrounding soil in almost everybody's neighborhood!

      FTFY

    244. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      You should live closer to where you work. That commute is ridiculous.

    245. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dr2chase · · Score: 1

      Just spin up the home flywheel while you're out driving, spin it down to run the charger.

    246. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sneakyimp · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Fuck you. No, really, I mean it, go fuck yourself. You have no idea at all to what extent my lifestyle is sustainable or not, what effects positive or negative it has on the environment.

      This is insightful?

    247. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Not quite sure what you were getting at with comparing putting $5 of gas in a mostly empty tank vs a mostly full tank, but I'm not sure you'd actually get the same travel distance from both scenarios.

      A 10 gallon tank of gas weighs more than a 1 gallon tank of gas. Therefore, it will require more fuel to move a car with 10 gallons of gas vs a car with only 1 gallon of gas in the tank.

      However, as the tank empties, there may be a tendency for the gas in the tank to slosh around more, which may have the potential to increase fuel usage under certain conditions. For example, you have two identical cars, 1 with a 5 gallon tank that is completely filled, and 1 with a 10 gallon tank that is half-filled, so both cars have 5 gallons in their tanks. Under certain driving conditions, the car with the half-filled 10 gallon tank may burn more fuel than the car with the completely full 5 gallon tank.

      So it seems probable that one method of filling up would give you more MPG. However, I am not knowledgeable enough to say which, or if it'd be worth it, or even if it be a wash (the efficiency gained from the car becoming lighter as you burn off fuel being equally offset by any inefficiencies introduced from gas sloshing in the tank).

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    248. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by photonic · · Score: 1

      Because your laziness of saving 2 seconds would easily cost you more than 10% in efficiency. That would be like filling your car with gasoline and not giving a shit that you spill large amounts of fuel just because you are to lazy to properly connect the hose. WIth both fuel and electricity prices remaining high for the forseable future, efficiency will count till the last percent.

      --
      karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
    249. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever considered burrying those HV lines into the ground where they won't be noticed?

    250. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ( Haruchai , posting as AC due to previous mod ) You should report that to Nissan unless your commute happens to be uphill both ways See below for the experiences of a gent with a 130-mile daily round-trip who has racked up 36,000 miles on his Leaf in 11 months. http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1075494_11-months-36000-miles-in-a-nissan-leaf-electric-car-no-problem

    251. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And audio cue could be played when the successful connection is made. Some sort of electronic sounding grown of pleasure.

    252. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      You glossed over the part where they describe *interchangeable batteries*. Once battery sizes and connections are standardized, everyone will have the same batteries. You can take the dead batteries out of your car and replace them with charged ones from the store at the charging station. This could easily be faster (and safer) than pumping gas.

    253. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Batteries with higher energy-density will allow hybrids with greater electric range so you won't need a gas-only car and if it's a plug-in hybrid, will have the choice of gassing up or charging up on your super-ultra-hyper long daily commute.

      People who see only problems will never be happy with any solutions.
      Thanks for playing.

    254. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Surt · · Score: 1

      A superconducting wire capable of charging a car battery does not have to be very thick. Sure, if you want to have cross country transfer cables carrying millions of killowatts hours, that cable will be thicker.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    255. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by wealthychef · · Score: 1

      Yes, and your salary needs to be increased. Oh, and your wife should treat you better.

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
    256. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by wealthychef · · Score: 1

      Sure, a flywheel in every home. Totally workable. Good idea, but I don't think it scales.

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
    257. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Had you RTFA, you would see that these batteries have a storage density 15 times greater than current batteries. That would mean a 400lb battery weighs could be reduced to less than 30 lbs. Also, note the discussions here about multiple batteries. It doesn't have to be one giant battery and in fact probably shouldn't be for various practical reasons.

    258. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by lupine · · Score: 1

      So... recharge at work? Even 110V trickle charge would be able to provide you with the few extra miles you "need".

    259. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can't be too long, though. Otherwise people are just as likely to wander to the McDonald's down the block.

    260. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      Sounds good in theory, but thinking longer term...

      It would be ideal to charge from the house most often, rather than from a filling station. Because of this, there would be pressure to get the refill time down to as low a time as possible. That pressure for technology to progress wouldn't be so great if we went about exchanging them in the manner you suggest. Also, it means extra storage/time/pumps for the garages to maintain round the clock, and may also mean the design of the car has to be more stringent and less flexible as a result.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    261. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Yes, and your salary needs to be increased. Oh, and your wife should treat you better.

      So true! Finally someone understands me.

      But seriously, to spend roughly 2 hours a day, 5 days a week *commuting*? That's time you don't get paid and time you don't spend with your loved ones and time you don't spend fapping or playing xbox or whatever. Ugh. All ecological considerations aside, that sounds sucky. Not sure what Lumpy does with the rest of his life, but he spends at least 5% of it driving a car to and from work.

    262. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      And longevity? How many recharge cycles? How long until it needs to be replaced, and how much to replace it?

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    263. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      That's odd, I expected the design to 'feature' dangly metal scraps which filter through the side of the plughole in a tentacle like fashion. Perhaps even for the whole mechanism and pipe to be metal through and through with just a tiny bit of rubber on the end to act as insulation. This would ensure people have to be very careful when they recharge, and only touch the small rubber bit. Perhaps that could create a new market for rubberized extending tongs.

      I don't know - if I didn't know any better, it's almost as if....... some slashdotters have a thing against using high power in any form.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    264. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dr2chase · · Score: 1

      You're NOT a typical American if that's your daily commute. There are many people with commutes that long, but they're not typical. The median commute distance (it's a hard number to find, at least last time I looked) seems to be somewhere between 11 and 16 miles.

      And it's in your interest not to hope that this fails -- what's your plan, when fuel gets scarce and expensive, because all the people with shorter commutes are still burning precious gasoline?

    265. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1

      No, it will contain four times the energy density, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it'll take four times as long.

      Yes, actually, it is (almost, read on).

      Just look at the NiMh turbo chargers (7-15 minute chargers...they've got them out there...) against the 2-4 times capacity batteries that've come up over the years for an instance of how one does not lead to the other.

      That is an irrelevant example. 1) Total efficiency of charge/discharge is already 80% or better, so there's not much room for gain from more efficient chargers. 2) The present limit on charge speed is not the charger or the batteries, but the amount of power that you can get through a household circuit.

      So it is a foregone conclusion, that with the way houses are presently wired to the grid, 4x the charge will take close to 4x the time. In order to drop the charge time, will require re-wiring back to the transformer...

    266. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could easily be a trucker; ever hear of a truckers helper? No need to stop if you don't need to drop a deuce.

    267. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      As the OP pointed out - the issue isn't just chemistry, it's energy dissipation. Batteries aren't 100% efficient at transforming incoming current into chemically stored energy, and the balance usually comes out as heat. When you're talking about a high capacity battery, you're talking about a *lot* of heat.

    268. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      Electricity is much MUCH cheaper than gas.

      I always see this argument - but what happens when an entire nations' worth of people transition from gasoline to electricity? Dramatically increased electricity demand is going to push up the price of electricity. I'd estimate that in the long run energy prices will be pretty close to a wash.

      Consider this: my current residential electric usage for my wife and I runs about 6kW-hr/day. Assuming 20% gasoline efficiency and 100% electric transportation efficiency, this amounts to about 1 gallon of gasoline per day, or the equivalent of about 30 gallons of gasoline a month. This is probably a very generously low estimate for average household gasoline consumption. So if we traded all gasoline for electricity, we're looking at something like doubling the electricity demand.

      While the grid itself can handle this, what will the spot prices for energy do if we double the demand for electricity producing source material?

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    269. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by RodBee · · Score: 1

      He had the insight to offend a hipster on /. based on privacy and lifestyle issue. Touches /. people on all the soft spots. Damn yes, it's insightful.

    270. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little bit of gasoline spilled on you isn't dangerous unless you're right next to an ignition source.
      Thousands of volts of electricity going through your body in a second is, however.

    271. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      UK houses can supply that kind of current. The US is somewhat disadvantaged by being on 120V (spare a thought for the Japanese on 100V) but I understand that a lot of properties have access to three phase power.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    272. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What!! You mean not everyone has 480V/3-phase power running to their homes! (I've got 400Amps capacity now. Don't think I could hit the limit without blowing something to bits) Substandard planning, that's what it is!

    273. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      I think this is one of the better arguments against a pure-electric solution for an automobile... cost over time. $10k can get you a lot of gasoline and we still have no real indication of how long a life these batteries will have. If you have to replace the batteries every 50k miles at even $3k per set then the total TCO is not at all worth it. I easily burn through 50k miles in two years with my current commute. Electric cars cannot save me from gas. :p

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    274. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Actually no, it won't take 4x as long. The power outlets can already supply more power than current batteries can take. Each battery is made up of thousands of cells that all charge simultaneously. Furthermore they don't charge at a linear speed, so you can fast charge at high current to 80% and then lower the current to top them off.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    275. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recharge in less then 5 minutes?

      YES. Simply design cars so that the battery stack is swappable. Pull into service station, drive over battery swapping robot. Robot removes battery, checks it, credits you with energy still in it, and replaces it with a fresh one, charges you for the difference, and puts the one you just deposited into a charger. This would also, by the way, eliminate drive-offs. If you don't like the idea of there being a record of where you've driven, well... stop using a vehicle required to have a LICENSE PLATE on it.

      Fill up in much less than five minutes actually, since there is no reason batteries can't have S/N's, (provided proper anti-tampering and anti-spoofing measures are built-in) and you can simply get a fuel bill each month, so you don't have to do anything. Just pull in, stop, wait 30 seconds, or so, and depart.

      To keep the system honest, your car would keep its own record of charge used, so that if a station starts over charging people, it will be obvious (since the cumulative discrepancy will be large and easy to see). This is of course, unless you are willing to trust the stations. OTOH, we already do so when we fill up. The pump SAYS it's 12 gallons, but is it REALLY? How much of that got sucked down the vapor return tube? Hmm? I'm not suggesting gas stations may be selling the same gasoline over and over again to different customers, but it COULD be happening, and how the hell would you know?

      Anyway, if the batteries have sufficient charge-after-charge longevity, and if they're as safe as gasoline (not very) or safer, this should finally herald the end of King Gas.

      YAY!!!

    276. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Genset is something we can start doing now without having to find some alternative energy source or some new battery technology or an unlimited supply of lithium for current technologies (if used on a mass scale) or how to upgrade the power grid to distribute the energy to recharge all of those batteries or even produce new power production to produce the energy.

      Energy isn't free. Whether from gasoline or batteries, it has to come from somewhere. The advantage of using existing technologies to extend the range of vehicles such as genset, is it allows for new technologies to be developed.

      I do agree that we need to go back to smaller lighter vehicles. There is a reason why a 1976 Honda got 40mpg. It weighed 1000lbs less than today's Honda. If inefficient engines of the 70s could produce decent gas mileage, think of what highly efficient engines of today could accomplish if they didn't have to be in such heavy vehicles.

    277. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing wrong with high voltage power lines as long as they are shielded.

      The grid is a bad design as it sits and isn't the solution to this problem.

      A national power structure of linked capacitors and solar/wind chargers that spans our interstates and highways and uses wireless to power vehicles traveling down the road seems like the way to go. Conductive rubber with metal strips charge strips on the road is another option vs wireless. The vehicle is moving, why would you need all the power stored in one place and unless a vehicle is traveling 100 miles a minute there is no need to be able to draw 500 miles worth of energy in five minutes. The battery described shouldn't be the power source for the vehicle, it should be the buffer. If you travel 500 miles on the interstate, when you exit, you should still have a full buffer remaining. When such an infrastructure is combined with the 500 mile buffer described that is quite an impressive range. Put a solar panel on top of the vehicle and you increase this more.

      Put a cap on current a vehicle can draw based on a typical four door sedan and you're creating a predictable cap on demand. This automatically helps prevent abuse, there is nothing to stop you from having a vehicle that draws more you just need to pay for that power generation. Maybe your vehicle runs at a loss and carries a larger buffer. Maybe you're vehicle is a semi and has both a buffer and covers the trailer in solar panels. SUV's and Van's have room for panels and could carry a second battery. There are enough options here that pretty much all the vehicle types currently allowed should be possible.

      In the long term it probably wouldn't cost more than the subsidies for the oil, gas, and electric industry and revamping the grid.

    278. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Oohh someone didn't RFTA.

      There is no carbon involved. It sucks in oxygen for the battery reaction, and charging re-releases the oxygen.

      I'm sure it will have its environmental impacts just like everything else, but as with most batteries, the worst of it will be in production and/or disposal, not usage.

    279. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Railways have been doing things that way because a generator and electric motors weigh less and are more efficient than a transmission and whatever gear boxes and trans-axles would be needed to shuffle torque from the diesel engines to the wheels.

      And that would be different in a road vehicle how? If electric motors are to power our vehicles, a small gas powered generator with a small fuel tank is no heavier than the battery packs in use and the range is much further and does not require recharging (whether 30 minute quick charge or overnight full charge -- just 5 min gas station stop). There are still emissions, but they are greatly reduced since 2 gallons of fuel last 8 hours. Besides, producing the extra electricity at the power plant to recharge all of the rechargeable cars produces emissions, too (unless powered from nuclear or hydro-electric).

    280. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1

      Actually no, it won't take 4x as long. The power outlets can already supply more power than current batteries can take. Each battery is made up of thousands of cells that all charge simultaneously. Furthermore they don't charge at a linear speed, so you can fast charge at high current to 80% and then lower the current to top them off.

      Bullshit. The Nissan Leaf has a 24kWh battery. It takes hours to pull that much power out of any normal household circuit, at full capacity, just short of overloading and tripping the breaker. (From 3.5 hours for 230V circuit with 30A legs to 11 hours for a 110V circuit at 20A.) So, yes, pulling 4x that much power will take 4x as long, unless you have a substantially upgraded circuit.

    281. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      No, actually electric heat is often very inefficient. In places with mild winters, a heat pump is much better. Heat pumps are good down to about 0 degrees C.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    282. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      To cover your and tmosely's point above, I was thinking more of salty wet gunk getting on the high-voltage battery terminals and frying the poor bugger who has to haul it on and off the car.

      These things have to be safe to work with even in wet conditions, with unskilled staff. Otherwise, it's going to be just plain murderous.

    283. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mark-t · · Score: 1

      For the same reason that you don't want to fill up your gas tank, presumably... more than likely because you need to get somewhere right now, but don't have enough fuel, and don't have enough money to fill all the way to the top at the moment.

    284. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by photonyx · · Score: 1

      When you add up the cost of the materials for the flywheel (they need high tensile strength), the cost of maintaining near-vacuum in the flywheel enclosure (you don't want any air friction losses, do you) and the cost of service (you essentially have a bunch of rotating parts), then the flywheels lose some of their attractiveness. Low mobility and high energy loss due to friction, just to name two.

    285. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dougmc · · Score: 1

      This idea is going to seem ridiculously silly in the future when batteries can charge faster than a tank can fill

      Maybe you don't understand just how much energy gasoline holds.

      Gasoline contains about 45 kJ of energy per gram. That means a 20 gallon tank has about 2.5 billion joules -- enough power to generate 1.21 gigawatts for two seconds. Considering that the local gas station can fill this tank in two minutes, that's equal to about 20 megawatts of power -- at 220 volts, that's 90,000 amps.

      Race car pit teams probably do dump fuel into their race cars at a rate around 1.21 gigawatts.

      As I see it, people will either wait for their cars batteries to charge at a rate much lower than we can fill their gasoline tanks -- or we'll swap entire batteries. Or maybe we'll have fuel cells that are powered by gasoline anyways.

    286. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1
      Umm, no. Your bullshit meter is being a bit over active. Lots of bullshit attached to this article, but my comment is spot on truth.

      You talk about danger Fromm fast rechargers? It just looks like a gasoline pump. Anybody can use it. Thre's all sorts of interlocks, so you can't remove the plug from your car until the cable's bee ndrained, for example.

      You talk about the Nissan leaf not being a good example? It's the most popular EV in America, and most upcoming evs will the the same form factor. So it's a pretty good example.

      You miss the point of a buffer. If you only fill up one car an hour, then you only need to draw enough current to fill the buffer over the course of that hour. So this reduces the load at any given time. If your charging needs are more cars, then you add more buffer until you maintain your desired draw.

      You somehow scale up from one EV to a fleet of a million EVs. My point was about one charger, which draws 20kva at most, and does not threaten the grid like your super secret SF project. It's an interesting question of how to support a fleet of evs, but not an impossible one.

      Lastly, I don't like your tone, so go fuck yourself.

    287. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      Although that is a legitimate counter-argument, high-voltage electricity is arguably more of a danger. Gasoline requires both a spill and a sufficient source of heat to become a problem, and it is easy to control via gravity. High voltage electricity simply requires something conductive enough touches the live contact. There is a definite jump in hazard when you go from "potentially lethal when ignited or ingested" to "potentially lethal if touched". Not that it isn't feasible to make it safe for the public to dispense, but extra care would certainly be needed in designing the safetey mechanisms involved. Currently the only people handling such voltages are trained and equipped with proper protection, so standards will need to be above and beyond what we have now.

    288. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      A separate, smaller, lightweight reserve battery that can be carried by hand and easily replaced.

    289. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by CSFFlame · · Score: 1

      In EVs, DC brushed is actually around 85-87% and AC Induction is ~90-94%

    290. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2

      I see a lot of EV proponents discounting the drawbacks, and arguing every which way that EVs with just a little bit of improvement will be good enough for nearly everybody. Let's face it, hipsters congregate in dense urban areas where any car is a luxury, and many just can't imagine that some of us actually live a long way away from anything ;-)

      Except that statistically that argument is true. MOST people in the US don't drive that much further than 40 miles per day. Some people do live a long way from everything (I used to drive 100+ miles per day, every day, for five years). Most do not. Most people's daily commutes would be served by EVs. The TCO issues and the long tail use cases are the issue, not the daily use scenario.

    291. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by digitalsolo · · Score: 1

      I'm well aware of the way the conversions work. My family currently holds the world record for quickest pass on an ICE powered motorcycle and an electric motorcycle.

      There is a long way to go before electric catches up with ICE on anything near a max effort performance car. They just cannot yet reliably move the power, not to mention the fact if both drain in 90 miles of fun, it's an awful lot longer wait to reload the electric (or huge expense and effort to swap batteries).

      --
      Just another ignorant American.
    292. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Fuck you. No, really, I mean it, go fuck yourself. You have no idea at all to what extent my lifestyle is sustainable or not, what effects positive or negative it has on the environment.

      I'm sure the Bourbons had a similar attitude right before they got hauled out to the guillotine.

    293. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is great but it would still be a hell of a trickle. How many cars do you think go through a gas station in a 24hr period? Most aren't actually empty. So if it takes 300KWH to fill a battery that is 150KWH to each car assuming you average 50% between the empties and charge top offs. That's a lot of juice really fast. The gas station I fill at is mid sized with 8 lanes. Each lane has two pumps stations and can pump to two cars per station so overall 32 people pump at once. So that is 4.8MWH every 5 minutes. You won't be at that demand all night. So again, lets average it out, you are completely full for 12hrs and completely dead for 12hrs. 12h*60m/5min*4.8MWH is 691.2MWH per day or a 28.8MW "trickle" to your flywheel.

      That is for one gas station.

    294. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by holmstar · · Score: 1

      And I read it as being sarcastic. It is reasonably safe to work with gasoline, so long as you aren't a complete moron. But despite the sarcastic intent, fuel leaking from old gas station storage tanks is a real problem.

    295. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shudder away you luddite myope. That you once participated in a (ill-conceived? poorly executed? student?) project that fucked-up hardly qualifies as damning evidence that a 1MW is technically infeasible or even impractical. There are LOTs of electrical grid users who merrily draw more than 1MW without any such problems. I'm an engineer for Honeywell and I'm sitting in one in one now. (And no: it's not some massive facility that you would even notice specially. It's simple, they run a medium voltage (13kV IIRC) line to it and make sure the grid to which it's connected has been designed and planned for it to be used!) High voltage lines running thru your back yard? Oh No!!! Oh Wait... these lines are already strung all over every major city (e.g. http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/infrastructure/3part_enlargements.html). We're not talking about the mondo 220kv lines that most people think of when you say "high voltage lines." Your scare tactics won't work on me.

      We have to stop confusing arguments that "It hasn't been done before" for "It can't be done practically." If there are real technical blocking points, then raise them. If some infrastructure is too weak where you want to put up a charging station, then figure out what is weak and what it would take to make it work, and if it still makes sense.

      The whole point of engineering is to take what is possible and practical and make it happen, even if (especially if?) it hasn't been done before. Hopefully somewhere in your engineering classes you ran across the quote from von Karman: "Scientists study the world as it is, engineers create the world that never has been. " So get out and start fucking creating.

    296. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you make the mistake to offer a free wifi.

    297. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No air? You do realize that YOU need oxygen to respirate right? Even a place like Los Angeles has oxygen, or everyone would be falling over dead.

    298. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ".... interesting industrial scale engineering project (subject to NDAs for specifics that I can't go into right now). Let's just say almost everybody in the SF area would recognize it if I mentioned it."

      ????

      That is one terribly ineffective NDA.

    299. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Air resistance is more dependant on the shape of the vehicle than its simple size.

    300. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      " We're going to have to give up some of our luxuries if we want to be sustainable"
      Not according to this battery.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    301. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      you will note the it takes far more the 7 hours to fully charge , not 3.5 hours. So, not not 4 times as long.

      80% in 30 minutes at 480

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    302. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The only thing I need to reread is my sig.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    303. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I suspect that as this catches on, home will be built with charging cars in mind and be wired for 480.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    304. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "My family currently holds the world record for quickest pass on an ICE powered motorcycle and an electric motorcycle. "
      then why was you original statement so fucking stupid?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    305. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If you are driving Maryland to California in 3 days, you are a menace and should be stopped.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    306. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The average price paid for a car in the US is 32K.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    307. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by geekoid · · Score: 1

      He is talking about this battery. How long did you hold back you're lame excuse to look smart be telling us something we all know? did you just skim right thought it? Search and replace for 'New technology' without bothering to read?

      And don't tell people what they can afford, ann 100K is not upper class. I don't make 100K and I can afford a 30K car. The fact you can't manage you money is secondary.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    308. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Must be nice to own a home. Many urbanites either live in an apartment or condo. Often with designated shared parking. The very core group of people that could benefit from EVs are at a disadvantage when it comes to recharging them. I suppose you could have a recharging pole next to each parking space like an old school drive in movie theater from the 1950s with wired speaker mounts. But then you looking at maintenance, vandalism, and the dense electrical infrastructure capable of handling the nightly recharging load.

      As others have suggested, the best way to address this with EVs is to use swappable cells where the owner pays for electricity and not the container (battery pack). The cells of course being a public vessel by which to obtain a recharge.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    309. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1

      you will note the it takes far more the 7 hours to fully charge , not 3.5 hours. So, not not 4 times as long.

      Not sure what you mean... Are you saying that full charge is far more than 7 hours, so most of that time is trickle charge, so time to full charge won't be 4x because the trickle time won't increase? If so, I'd buy that.

      80% in 30 minutes at 480

      Not sure what this means, but I'm guessing you're claiming one can get an 80% charge in 30 minutes if one has a 480A line for charging? If so, the entire supply to your house is not 480A, 150A & 200A are very common, with 300A sometimes being seen on new really high-end homes. So, if that is actually what you were saying, you, like the prior posters I've been arguing with, are assuming a source of power in the house that simply does not exist.

    310. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      It is possible to build a reliable power grid, and it is possible to upgrade existing grids if required. Much of California's electric power problems are due to the bizarre way the electric market was half deregulated. Retail distribution was regulated, but power production was deregulated, and a semi-breakup was forced on the existing monopoly. This led to a situation where it made no economic sense to build new power generation facilities which after a few years lead to the power crisis of 2000.

      Electricity is a commodity that I think makes sense to provide via a well regulate monopoly. The only way to increase profits is to cut corners which leads to reliability problems.

      Providing the power required to charge electric cars will not present any technical issues.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    311. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by masonc · · Score: 1

      > Filling such a high capacity battery inside of five minutes requires an incredibly high current.
      Ultra-capacitors. Charge up all day, release that to the car in minutes.
      Or - one battery in car, one on charge.
      There's always a solution.

      --
      CM www.cometenergysystems.com Blog: http://caribbeanrenewable.blogspot.com/
    312. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ridiculous! 500 miles on electric would be on average over 100 Kwh. To replenish charge to the same capacity in a half hour should require a deliverable service of 200Kw. Which would mean 440v service at 460A. That amount of energy flow is enough to vaporize a crowbar. Not something I would trust just anyone to do. The heat dissipation from the storage reaction within the battery at that charge rate... would be tremendously challenging. During the charge cycle this battery exhales pure O2... one spark and you're in trouble.

    313. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      Or if it isn't carrying high voltage, which reduces the need for current.

      I'm pretty sure you have that backwards. Stepping up the voltage reduces the current, and vice a versa. Long range transmission is done with high voltages to reduce resistive losses.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    314. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      Why would we even need dedicated stations except for people who want a big quick charge? I would expect charging stations to be everywhere after a while.A charging station is about the size of a parking meter, and a lot of businesses would like to make more money selling electricity to their customers. Stop for coffee, charge the car. Stop at walmart, charge the car. Stop almost anywhere, charge the car.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    315. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by CityZen · · Score: 1

      "Hmm, it's not charging." "Try rebooting the power plug."

    316. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can also hook an extra trailer to the generator trailer with a bio-reactor in it to make fuel for the generator. Then another trailer hooked to your bio-reactor that sells vegetarian fast food, using the wood waste and cuttings as compost for the bio-reactor. At the very end, hooked to the vegetarian food trailer can be a trailer with some dirt in it to grow the vegetables in the first place.

      You'll still need fossil fuels though, for your fertilizer of course.

    317. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly.

      If they did that, they could also build such mats into the road - say the 100 meters leading up to intersections, making it possible for vehicles to be charged while they're stuck in traffic.

      Hell, if you made those things, you'd make it possible for parking lots to work as automatic charging stations.

      Suddenly you can end up with a society, where vehicles do not need to travel to gas stations to increase their range.

      If you do that, no-one will ever be able to buy porn magazines, and THAT is the REAL reason why induction charging mats will never be put into reality.

    318. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dbIII · · Score: 1

      California was a well know joke in the electicity industry in the 1990s and you guys still have not recovered from it. A badly placed fart could almost set off a blackout.
      Then again, my country based our electricity trading system on your well known joke :(

      However 1MW is nothing compared to the gear that mines use, paticularly draglines which can vary between drawing 30MW to 9MW within a few seconds.

    319. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if I've missed something here or you have. You've just described the BBQ gas bottle swap system that's been running for a few years at nearly every petrol station in the city I live in.
      I'd say "solved" instead of "solvable".
      If you are talking about an industrial scale then industrial gas bottle providers got there a couple of decades earlier with acetylene, propane etc.

    320. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by NemoinSpace · · Score: 1

      At a cost of $100k, even amortized over 5 years. How much do you plan on charging per "fill-up"?
      I don't know many attendants that can ring a cash register correctly, much less run a 1MW gen set.

    321. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The 15x improvement in density is clear from the summary. However, the current assumption is that automakers will use that higher density to increase distance to something reasonable rather than to decrease the weight of the battery for easier transport. The Chevy Volt battery weighs 400 pounds and provides between 1/6th and 1/12th the range of an average gasoline-powered car. So to achieve range parity, you're still going to need close to a 400 pound battery even with this new battery technology. For an SUV or mini-SUV, the battery might even be over 400 pounds.

      As for your other point, you could use multiple packs, of course, but when you do that, each pack needs power connectors, handles, and some sort of solid wall to protect the cell from impact. That costs you a lot of volumetric energy density, and to some extent, weight density. Also, you now need a separate charge controller per pack where otherwise you might have been able to get away with fewer, and that probably translates to more wires as well, which translates to more weight. When you're dealing with high-current DC systems, the weight of wiring can be significant. So there's a non-negligible materials cost and materials weight associated with such a design.

      Here's a second reality check: we still have dozens of different sizes and shapes of 12-volt starter batteries some 40 years after the industry switched over from 6-volt batteries. I'd rate the odds of automakers standardizing on a single-digit number of standardized giant lithium-ion packs (and losing much of their competitive advantage in the process) somewhere around the same as the odds of a ball of frozen ice crystals remaining intact inside Satan's lair.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    322. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by McFadden · · Score: 1

      It gave us an insight into his lack of self-control.

    323. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by DarkLegacy · · Score: 1

      All of that energy is currently being generated by the internal combustion engines in vehicles from the petroleum-derived fuels. In essence, they already create a decentralized energy grid, utilized only for transportation, complete with supply and distribution infrastructure which is several times larger in magnitude in overall energy consumption than the primary grid. That demand HAS to make its way onto the primary grid eventually, or else we'll hit a brick wall at high speed (pun intended) when we suddenly realize that the global stockpiles of oil have dried up.

      --
      127.0.0.1
    324. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So do you like a future with high voltage power lines being built in your backyard?

      Can they be DC? If so then sure.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    325. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you may have missed ArsonSmith's point. His point is that sometimes you just have $5. A gas station could have a promotion where you spend $10 and get $50 dollars in gas, but you would be stuck with your $5 purchase.

      Just about everyone has something that they have to buy in stages. If you don't pay cash in full for your house, do you have self-destructive habits?

    326. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tftp · · Score: 1

      Except that statistically that argument is true.

      I can agree with that. Today the reference range of a Leaf is what, 60-80 miles in fair weather? That is marginal for majority of drivers who don't buy the EV as a 17th car in their garage. Even if you drive 5 miles to work every day and a Leaf would be fine, every other weekend you load the family into the car and drive 100 miles to see relatives. Leaf can't do this, and so it becomes irrelevant. An EV with only double range (120-150 miles) would cover most of reasonable trips that people are likely to do. Once you have that covered then you can say that longer trips require a rental car.

    327. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by digitalsolo · · Score: 1

      The electric vehicles you're talking about have nothing in common with a modern high output sports car. They are dedicated drag cars that are in no way streetable.

      I have a car with ~900 RWHP that I can get in and drive to California tomorrow, with heat and a stereo. The electric cars that are currently at that level of performance (and the White Zombie is over a half second slower in the 1/4 mile than my car) are not something you can get in and drive daily in the summer comfortably, let alone take on a 100+ mile trip to a track without a trailer. You're comparing apples and oranges, and aside from being a total asshole, I'm lost as to what possible point you're trying to make. Keep trying though, you're totally showing me what's up.

      --
      Just another ignorant American.
    328. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sjames · · Score: 1

      Or 4x the current if the battery can stand it.

    329. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tftp · · Score: 1

      Dramatically increased electricity demand is going to push up the price of electricity.

      This is only true in a small part. You need to consider that electric power can be generated locally. Today it is not practical because oil is cheaper than wind or solar. These methods will be competitive once the oil becomes scarce.

      Still, it doesn't mean that a common man would be able to drive to mountains just to see how it is up there. Travel will be prohibitively expensive (just as it was before the industrial revolution) unless you are one of them techs, or whoever gets paid well. The current situation with the job market in the USA is not very optimistic. In essence, human labor in most part (except creative/engineering) will be not required at all. Truck drivers will be replaced with robot cars, for example - what are they to do? Can a truck driver learn to program neural networks?

    330. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by tftp · · Score: 1

      I have yet to find any car that can refuel in 5 minutes. A gas stop is 10 minutes to 15 minutes.

      That's ridiculous. My gas stops (for about 6 gallons, about 65% of the tank's capacity) take about 2 minutes.

    331. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

      umm, duh alert. GHGs are involved because a better EV battery would displace petroleum consumption.

    332. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      Fuel stations will not be able to compete with, smart shops, malls, restaurants, parking stations charge you car while parked and add it to the bill, every minute counts and it's not a large price, spend enough and have the charge thrown in for free (induction charging). Even kerb side parking can incorporate induction charging. You can of course charge up when you visit family/friends if your running low (wouldn't abuse that too often).

      The whole idea of filling up is just so last millennium and disposable battery thinking versus rechargeable battery thinking. Think of it more as keeping your charge levels up, rather than filling from empty. Think smart parking slogan 'We Help Keep You Going'. So fuel stations D E A D, in commercial applications (taxis, delivery vehicles) they'll just swap batteries in house.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    333. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Maxx169 · · Score: 1

      Couldn't you just 'charge' something up at home and then use that to dump a metric shit ton of current into your car battery very quickly when you want to charge that?

    334. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your cell phone get the same battery life it did 3 years ago? How about that laptop?

      No?

      Battery performance declines. How useful is that car at 60% battery capacity in a few years?

      This isn't an iphone. It isn't meant to be thrown away in 24 months. Average car lifespan/design is 14 years. Is it cool to be throwing 8k into your car every 4-5 years? 7-8 years? What if your commute barely makes it new? Gonna sweat it out in a few years, hope you make it?

    335. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by c9brown · · Score: 1

      hipsters congregate in dense urban areas where any car is a luxury, and many just can't imagine that some of us actually live a long way away from anything

      Actually, much of the world's population lives in dense urban areas. They are called cities.

    336. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by ongelovigehond · · Score: 1

      Of course, your average gasoline powered ICE only extracts about 25% of that energy. An electric motor can reach over 90%, so you wouldn't need as much energy to recharge. Something like 200 A @ 10kV should be possible to engineer. Combined with regenerative braking and nightly home charging, this should provide enough juice for fairly decent consumer experience.

    337. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1

      Or 4x the current if the battery can stand it.

      The point, of course, is that the current (haha) battery chargers already max out the current that is available from residential supply. Use 4x the current would require substantial changes to your houses' supply--new 2" or larger cables from the transformer at the street, or 25kV run to the garage.

    338. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sribe · · Score: 1

      Couldn't you just 'charge' something up at home and then use that to dump a metric shit ton of current into your car battery very quickly when you want to charge that?

      Possibly, and an idea worth investigating. How the cost would compare to bringing 50kW electric supply to the house would be a big question. And of course you'd have to factor in at least 10-20% loss for the extra conversion/storage step.

      And don't forget, if it takes 3.5 to 11 hours to draw the power held by an EV battery now, to draw the power necessary to charge a battery with 4x the capacity, would take 4x*1.1 as long... And of course if you're depending on time-of-day rates to charge off-peak cheaply, then there's about 1/3 of each day that you don't want to be charging, so you could easily be at the point where it takes more than a day to store up enough power to charge the car.

      Regardless, the point still stands, charging EV batteries with 4x the capacity of current ones would require substantial upgrades at the house, whether to the feed from the utility, or some kind of offline storage/charging device--neither one is going to be cheap.

      Also, either one would require *huge* upgrades by the utilities in order to be deployed to more than a fraction of homes. The first few % will be great for the utilities, because they will even out load at off-peak hours, helping with base vs peak load management. But if EVs become common, then peak vs off-peak hours could flip, and you'd have the same issues as now--except charging times would be peak times, and there'd be no discount... Seriously, it's all about the power that it takes to operate a car being substantially greater than the power it takes to run your whole house. That's the point that people keep missing.

    339. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please read up on what a transformer is. Then come back to the party with some education of the discussion.

      Because you are 100% wrong simply because you have zero education on the subject. Losses in charging already exist, or do you think they are plugging 240V AC directly to the batteries? There are already have about 25-35% losses from the charging station and additional 5% loss (that is real not your 10%) of the resulting is well into the acceptable range. Plus you are talking HOME chargers that will be charging at a 15-20 amp rate, so the losses are much, much, lower than a 4-6KW charging system....

      Just because you are too lazy to know what you are talking about does not make your wild assumption believable to anyone reading.. Because what I am talking about is already starting production at some companies, Nissan for one.

      I agree with lumpy, greater adoption will drive demand for the "I'm far too rich and lazy to plug it in" crowd. As it is, only the rich can afford these glorified toys.

    340. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You drove a 5+ year old used one? Because that was the biggest point he is making.
      Your experience in a brand new one in the land of flat land is 100% useless experience. Most americans live where it gets much colder.

      All the reviews on the car matches with lumpys numbers and not yours. So why do all the automotive magazines who did long term testing align with his numbers (and is probably where his are based) and yours are so out of whack they make zero sense when compared to the current data out there. none of them are getting winter time ranges that are anywhere near 80 miles. and what idiot is comfortable with driving a car to the edge of battery damage like that. after a 80+ mile trip you should have 25% left in the battery for real world use.

    341. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      How do you get work to install charging plugs outside. 99% of all office buildings do not have any electrical outlets outside or charging stations for cars.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    342. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Right thinking, but math is a bit off. Your average car might use closer to 20-25hp at the wheel at 55mph. Below maybe 30-40mph, power primarily goes to rolling friction in the wheels. Above that, aerodynamic drag takes over, and power consumption goes up with the cube of velocity, so you really start ramping up quickly. For tractor trailers, the high load per wheel, and per frontal area, means rolling friction is more important and the cut-over velocity is a bit higher.

      For local generation, better option would be for someone to start up large production of some ~2-5MW gas turbine. They are considerably smaller than comparable diesels, and while aircraft turbines are not all that efficient, they have to be lightweight, and a stationary turbine generator can use all sorts of tricks to bring up efficiency. Heavy regenerators exchange exhaust heat preheat the air going into the combustor, offsetting much of the fuel consumption. If you've got an abundant water supply, you can spray it into the engine, increasing air density (and specific power), as well as providing a cooling effect that allows for higher pressure ratios (and higher efficiency). The gas turbine will run off just about anything you want to throw at it, so use methane. We've got plenty of supply of that, and it's not difficult to reformulate new from scratch. More importantly, it lends itself well to temporary storage, and we have an existing distribution network, which would keep all this extra energy usage off the already stressed power grid.

      The gas turbine will get within a couple percent of a diesel generator on its own, but the high temperature, high volume exhaust lends itself towards use in combined cycle operation. Run a rankine (steam) or sterling generator off the output heat. Provide hot water to the neighborhood. Open up a laundromat. Something particularly interesting might be use of a high efficiency (~60%), low cost solid oxide fuel cell, using the exhaust of the turbine as the oxygen supply, as gas turbines run very lean leaving plenty of usable oxygen in the exhaust, as well as providing the 800-1000C needed for operation. The exhaust could again be used as a heat source for a tertiary generator.

      One thing I'm actually surprised about is that the commercial trucking industry didn't convert to a diesel electric system decades ago with rail. The trucks used on tractor trailers really aren't all that powerful, typically running on the order of 200-600hp. They don't need power, so much as the need torque, so you get very large turbo-diesels, running with an operating band only a few hundred RPM wide, and an equally large 18+ speed transmission to maintain that RPM range while accelerating. An electric motor could provide all the torque they need in a much smaller package, with a much wider operating range, and startup torque a diesel couldn't dream of. Give it a modest energy buffer for regenerative braking, and a small diesel generator. These have only started showing up in the last few years, and then only for local shuttles, things that ferry containers around a yard or city.

    343. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the whole point is to save energy, and inductive charging wastes energy.

    344. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you are only going to be using about 2 gallons of gas at a time, you only fill the tank with 2 gallons, rather than continuing to carry around an additional, unnecessary 12-16 gallons of gasoline. That's around 100lbs of weight savings right there, contributing slightly to improved efficiency from reduced rolling friction, and reduced braking losses with city driving. Also, be sure to remove those unnecessary extra car seats, the spare tire, the air conditioning unit, muffler, most of the exhaust piping, and washer fluid tank. Get the smallest, narrowest rims you can find too.

    345. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there were no air there, you'd die :-)

    346. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by sjames · · Score: 1

      That means either increasing the capacity of the feed to the home or using a flywheel storage system in the home. Alternatively, a second battery pack charging at home that you can switch out fast.

      A commercial charging station could also solve that problem.

    347. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They exist. They're just not commercially available yet : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/9708468.stm

    348. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Maybe a wind turbine on the roof to recharge as you drive...

      --
      No sig today...
    349. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by starworks5 · · Score: 1

      Me Thinks Doth protest too much, must have hit a nerve there, so how much co2 per year do you emit?

    350. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Apple studied the art of war, and in that study, they examined Microsoft and how MS reacted tp competition in the late 90s. MS attacked and destroyed the competition.

      NCR Cash Register Company produced faulty machines bearing their competition's name. That is how they succeeded to gain market control.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    351. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      Yes but there's also no particularly reason an electrical contact needs to be manually accessible by a person at all.

      Any type of disaster which would make a standardized high current connector a danger would also easily make a petrol pump a danger (i.e. ripping the cords up or something).

      And in that situation, it's easy enough to trip a breaker and cut off all supply at the source and eliminate the problem entirely. Not so for gasoline.

      And that's before you add active electronic measures where the charger can establish that there's actually a car connected to it before distributing current, and vehicle and charger can then monitor the process and kill the supply if a ground-fault occurs - probably faster then someone could be exposed.

    352. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by urusan · · Score: 1

      From what you've said about your experience with the power grid, it sounds about right for today. That said, you might want to consider more carefully why your 1 MW device was triggering blackouts.

      I'm not a real expert in this area, but I did some research related the power grid and in particular the 2003 Northeast Blackout. What I found out was that there is essentially no real time control of the present-day power grid. The power calculations that are need to be done to centrally plan the electrical flow for a geographical region take several minutes to complete. To compensate for the slow reaction time to events, the calculations setup flow in such a way that many failures and unexpected changes are acceptable. They also take the historical record into account, so that an expected regular load increase can be met. Large, short, one-time events such as your device are awful under this system. In particular, adding new generation to meet unexpected load is troublesome, as they need to do the planning calculations before the new load can be added safely (otherwise the added electricity can damage equipment and lead to a longer blackout or even a cascade failure). Allowing blackouts or even deliberately dropping load is a comparatively safe response when time is of the essence (unpowered equipment won't be damaged, and working equipment can be restarted quickly after re-planning). That's not to say it's perfectly safe (you can get too much power running through the still-powered sections when there's big drop) but at least the new capacity won't contribute to the damage and there's often plans in place to create "power islands" around the generators in an emergency. With this in mind, it should be pretty easy to see why the power grid had such trouble with your tests. I'm sure you gave the staff at the local utility quite an interesting time whenever you did that.

      However, our power grid (as well as those of many other countries) is really stuck in the mid-20th century. This system is built around the limitations of power monitoring and control in the pre-computer era...which is to say it is built around the need for centralized control of dumb field units at human timescales with highly limited information. The digital revolution has dramatically changed the way we can control power distribution, allowing distributed control of smart field units in real time with highly detailed information, but due to the cost of building infrastructure the only substantial impact at present has been the substitution of computers for humans doing the centralized calculations.

      Once we finally get around to building a smart grid, we will be able to do many things that are impossible with today's system. Renewable energy will never work on a large scale with the current grid, there's too much fluctuation, but with the smart grid they can take on a much larger portion of our power needs (in order to cover all of our needs though, we need an economical way to store lots of energy for later too). Similarly, if fast EV charging causes irregular huge spikes in demand then our current grid will not be able to handle it, but a smart grid will be able to handle it.

    353. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Shudder away you luddite myope. That you once participated in a (ill-conceived? poorly executed? student?) project that fucked-up hardly qualifies as damning evidence that a 1MW is technically infeasible or even impractical. There are LOTs of electrical grid users who merrily draw more than 1MW without any such problems. I'm an engineer for Honeywell and I'm sitting in one in one now. (And no: it's not some massive facility that you would even notice specially. It's simple, they run a medium voltage (13kV IIRC) line to it and make sure the grid to which it's connected has been designed and planned for it to be used!)

      I've worked with installations in other cities besides San Francisco where adding an extra 1MW load wasn't nearly so much of a problem. The issue with the installation I talked about in my earlier post also illustrated how fragile some power grids have become though because of a decided lack of forethought and engineering, where utility companies sometimes let their power grids get built out to the physical limits of the infrastructure.

      Yes, adding redundant cables and upgrading power transmission lines can solve a whole bunch of problems, but all of that requires investment into the infrastructure that sometimes may need a significant infusion of capital to get accomplished. That can happen from government subsidies of the utility company or showing the utility company that there will be demand for the power once they upgrade their facilities. Unfortunately it is usually more economical for utility companies to put forward a major public relations campaign for "energy conservation" than to install a new set of power transmission lines.

      I'm not saying that solutions are impossible to find for getting high voltage power lines being brought to ordinary consumer devices like a personal automobile, but there are some significant challenges for making that happen and they can't all be waved away as if the real issues are irrelevant. The kind of infrastructure needed here is something that has never been built before, and other analogies simply don't exist for what is being asked for in terms of a quick recharge facility involving high voltage electricity being handled by low-skilled minimum wage workers or the general public under less than ideal situations.

    354. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Teancum · · Score: 1

      ".... interesting industrial scale engineering project (subject to NDAs for specifics that I can't go into right now). Let's just say almost everybody in the SF area would recognize it if I mentioned it."

      ????

      That is one terribly ineffective NDA.

      You would recognize the project itself. I just can't get into specifics of the installation, and I'm choosing not to disclose any more than is necessary for this discussion because the issue of power management is something I can talk about and is not covered under the NDA. Other details like communications channels and protocols used, and security details are the kinds of things that I can't disclose. Those are also completely irrelevant to this discussion as well.

    355. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recharge in less then 5 minutes?

      5 minutes is pointless because a station with such a high power capacity will charge a huge overhead and be subject to Government taxation at the end of the day. This will be adopted by the oil companies with their ready infrastructure. I'd be happier to retain the ability for an overnight charge on cheap night rate, low tax electricity.

    356. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am more lazy. I dont want to plug it in. Why cant they make induction charging mats? Drive over it, the charge light comes on.

      You can't be assed filling up your own car, queuing up, getting your card skimmed in all sh*tty weathers?
      Instead you want to waste 20% of the electric bill on an inefficient energy transfer system?

    357. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly a Leaf cant make my 40 mile commute and back. not when the weather is below 70 degrees F which is 70% of the year.

      Oh and it costs more than a Honda Civic + 10 years of gasoline at $5.00 a gallon.

      Not in the EU by a far mile.

    358. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your move, range anxiety crowd.

      I have a petrol powered car. Feel anxious for my running costs.

      High road tax,
      High servicing costs.
      Lots of consumable items, some expensive, all engine related.
      Having to clack around with the clutch and a gearbox.
      The worry of failing my exhaust check every year.
      The cheap to buy but expensive fuel energy requirements is like paying the never-never on the drip.

      I pray for the day to buy a leaf type car with an 80KWH battery at present Leaf prices.
      The downside is I do not consider the air/Lithium battery anywhere near prime time because water vapour, particulates etc. will be a killer.

    359. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Better Place has been building out battery switch stations in Israel with plans for Australia and Denmark ( and possibly southern China ).
      Now if your talking about just popping them in and out because you don't have a robotic swap station or you're caught on the side of the road, that would need a different design - but I guess there's no need to have a single large battery.

      Still, it would be quite a task for 1 person; the swap station would be the preferred method.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    360. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Yes, I drove a used one. Newer ones actually suck worse than the original model.

      "So why do all the automotive magazines who did long term testing align with his numbers"

      Because they don't know how to drive and have lead feet.

      Put me against most automotive magazine writers, they'll lose on the track against me, in most any test. I think my own traffic records and hypermileage exposure is pretty evident.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    361. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Nope, that's simply free market forces in action. Conservatives will love it.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    362. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by fuzzywig · · Score: 1
      Quick thought experiment:
      Say it takes 1 minute to put 20 litres of petrol in my car (I suspect fuel pumps are a bit faster than this, but it's a nice round number).
      If the energy density of Petrol is about 30MJ/l that's the equivalent of 10MJ/s == 10MW

      To transfer the same amount of electrical power, let's assume we can use three phase at 400V, that would be a current of 25,000A, which would require some bloody thick cabling.

      So yeah, replacing the whole battery pack looks a bit more feasible than charging a battery in under 5 minutes (just how long are you willing to wait in a service station?). Of course, as pointed out below, if you can plug your car in at home and let it charge overnight, you can get away with much lower current draw.

    363. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>If you are driving Maryland to California in 3 days, you are a menace and should be stopped.

      Communist. Won't even let me drive 12-13 hours a day without trying to outlaw the practive.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    364. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communist. Won't even let me drive 12-13 hours a day without trying to outlaw the practive.

      Moron. It's not about specifically outlawing driving 12-13 hours a day, it's about the fact that chances are very high that you will end up exhibiting symptoms of fatigued driving after that much time. No need for a "thou shalt not drive more than 12-13 hours a day law" when existing laws against bad driving will already catch you.

      Just for the sake of argument, I'll agree that you might be able to exceed 13 hours. But should you at any point start exhibiting symptoms of fatigued driving, whether that's 2, 12, or 20+ hours after you begun your journey, then yes, you are a menace and should be stopped.

    365. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      You must be in lousy physical shape if you can't handle sitting for 12 hours while driving straight-ahead across the mostly-empty midwest.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    366. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be in lousy physical shape if you can't handle sitting for 12 hours while driving straight-ahead across the mostly-empty midwest.

      No more so than you likely are, given your inability to sit at a desk for a mere 8 hours a day performing a monotonously-repetitive task without some sort of mental stimulation. ;)

      I think you're taking the term "fatigued driving" too literally. It's not just about physical exhaustion, it's also about mental exhaustion. With all the posts you make about how your job is sooooo booooooooring that you have to listen to music and such just to stay attentive, I know that you know what mental exhaustion can do to a person.

    367. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a good sneeze...

    368. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously ??

      You spend 7 hours getting to work ? Why ?!?!?!? I can;t think of any reason to go through such misery (and polution of the environment)... unless of course there is a nubile girlie to sooth your tensions when you get there ? :-)

    369. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by smithmc · · Score: 1

      If your driving needs ar compatible with an EV, then you can get an EV. If an EV can't meet your needs, then you can get a gasoline car. .

      But if you live within EV range of work, then you can save a lot more money by buying an efficient gasoline-powered car. The car itself will be a lot cheaper, and the savings in electricity vs. gas will not make up the difference. Figure on (where I live) 8 cents/kWh, and a 100-mile range for that Leaf and it's 24 kWh battery - that's about 2 cents a mile. Meanwhile, a Ford Fiesta gets a combined EPA rating of 33 mpg, which figuring on $4/gal gas (again where I live) gives about 12 cents per mile. So you save 10 cents/mile with the Leaf. Supposing you drive 5000 miles a year (remember, "if your driving needs are compatible with an EV"), then you save about $500 a year with the Leaf vs. the Fiesta. Which means a lot of years - even if the electricity were free - before you've saved back the price difference between the two cars...

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    370. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

      Let's look at it from a different, more productive way. Say 10 cents a mile fuel savings, $5k price differential. You make up the price differential after 50,000 miles, and save an additional $5k when your odometer rolls over. So the question is, how long do you plan on keeping your car? I tend to keep them mouth 150,000 miles, so it's a good bet for me.

    371. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by smithmc · · Score: 1

      Let's look at it from a different, more productive way. Say 10 cents a mile fuel savings, $5k price differential. You make up the price differential after 50,000 miles, and save an additional $5k when your odometer rolls over. So the question is, how long do you plan on keeping your car? I tend to keep them mouth 150,000 miles, so it's a good bet for me.

      $5K price difference? MSRP on a Leaf is over $35K, with tax incentives as low as $27K. MSRP on a Fiesta is as low as $13K depending on model. So it will take 140K of your 150K ownership before you break even, and you will see a whopping $1000 "windfall" at the end. (And it took a major handout from Uncle Sam to even make it that close - in a free market, the electric car would be a major loss vs. the gas car.) Thia is all assuming your Leaf (and its batteries, etc.) actually lasts you 150K miles, by the way - good luck with that...

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    372. Re:Gasoline-like energy density by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More than half of the danger of high current charging comes from the transition period when both volatile fuels and high voltage electrical connectors are used in the same location. There are of course connector designs to minimize this hazard.

  2. This cannot be allowed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll get in the way of increasing fossil fuel prices, especially if the people get over nuclear anxiety.

    Quick, manufacture an incident in the past, using our time machine!

    1. Re:This cannot be allowed. by Scootin159 · · Score: 2

      If this really is the 'next big thing', does this mean that Lithium will soon replace Oil as the 'natural resource to have'? At least the lithium could be easily recycled...

    2. Re:This cannot be allowed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oil is consumed in most applications. The lithium only acts as a storage devices for electricity. The electric energy is consumed, not the lithium.

  3. Air isn't new by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary makes it sound like they've never used air in batteries before. Most small batteries, including hearing aid batteries, are zinc-air. This is why they come with a small sticker on one side - you remove the sticker and give the battery a minute or so to take in air. That said, I don't believe the zinc-air batteries "breathe" like how the article describes, and they're certainly not rechargeable so kudos to IBM.

    1. Re:Air isn't new by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 1

      This is the first thing I thought of when I read the summary also.

      According to Wikipedia, rechargeable Zinc-Air fuel cells do exist, and ReVolt has developed rechargeable Zinc-Air batteries for use in vehicles, although they are not on the market yet.

      Lithium-Air was first suggested for powering cars in the 1970's, but there is a whole host of challenges listed on that page. The biggest issue is dealing with oxidation from the environment. IBM seems to have put out this article just to draw attention to the concept, but I don't think they've actually solved any of the problems.

      --
      Free unix account: freeshell.org
    2. Re:Air isn't new by geekoid · · Score: 1

      yes,because no material science as been developed in the last 40 year.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. No cathode by noh8rz3 · · Score: 1

    The reason it can be lighter is because there is no cathode in the battery. Most batteries have an internal anode, cathode, and electrolyte. In this case, the cathode is replaced by ambient oxygen, so it saves weight. attn pedants: dont' lash out if i have my anodes and cathodes confused.

    1. Re:No cathode by camperdave · · Score: 1

      In this case, the cathode is replaced by ambient oxygen, so it saves weight.

      The cathode (or anode as the case may be) still needs to hook up to the motor. If ambient oxygen is the cathode, then you'd need some sort of oxygen resistant antenna or mesh - heavy enough to handle the current - in order to complete the circuit.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:No cathode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No cation, actually. You still need the cathode to complete the electric circuit.

    3. Re:No cathode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anion. Whatever.

  5. Wow! by sirwired · · Score: 1

    Assuming this can be productized in a relatively reasonable timeframe, this is a HUGE advance. And, if IBM is reporting it, it is more likely to actually be true. (As opposed to some random no-name startup with results that cannot be duplicated and just happens to be up for a round of funding soon...)

  6. How much mass does it gain with use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    the oxygen used in a lithium-air battery comes from the atmosphere, so the battery itself can be much lighter.

    When the battery is recharged, the process is reversed and oxygen is released

    The article was a bit brief, but from this read it seems that as the battery is discharged, it gains mass, but I'm just not seeing how much mass it would gain.

    Also, if that thing releases pure oxygen when you charge it, I'm not charging that thing in my garage.

    1. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by SJHillman · · Score: 2

      Odds are it doesn't release enough oxygen to make a huge difference with most common flammables. Even if it does, it can be solved with a cheap and easy weekend project to add an exhaust vent to your garage... something you may want to invest in anyway. Likewise, the mass gained by discharging it is probably a small fraction of the overall battery weight and won't make any noticeable difference - go pick up an air compressor that's empty. Now fill it up to max rated and pick it up. There's a weight gain, but not a lot compared to the dead weight of the non-air components.

    2. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      If it is an issue, then the charger itself would be designed to do the venting. The hookup would be akin to a central vac hose: power in and a vacuum to draw the oxygen outside.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    3. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article was a bit brief, but from this read it seems that as the battery is discharged, it gains mass, but I'm just not seeing how much mass it would gain.

      It uses lithium peroxide (Li2O2), so about 2.3 times the mass of the lithium in the batteries.

    4. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Odds are more likely that for it to generate enough electrons to drive enough current to be useful, it is going to have to breath quite a bit of oxygen. To recharge quickly is going to take a LOT of voltage driving a LOT of current. So now you have this HUGE spark plug in a highly oxidized environment.

      What would be cool is if I could run a vacuum compressor on the exhaust, pumping it into a bottle and saving it. Then I wouldn't have to buy oxygen for welding anymore. (Wouldn't want to breath it, 'cause I would just assume that it would be packed full of nasty contaminants).

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article was a bit brief, but from this read it seems that as the battery is discharged, it gains mass, but I'm just not seeing how much mass it would gain.

      It uses lithium peroxide (Li2O2), so about 2.3 times the mass of the lithium in the batteries.

      Okay, thanks. The article was light on details, but this at least does give us an absolute upper bound of slightly more than tripling the mass of the chemically active parts of the battery. Again, that article was too light on details to get an exact number from here, but that still sounds like more than a negligible amount. Kind of interesting to drive a car that's more massive as the "fuel" runs out instead of the other way around. Should make for some interesting mileage/efficiency calculations.

    6. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by Jumperalex · · Score: 1

      Or to say it another way ... similar to how current gas hoses perform vapor capture to prevent venting of hydrocarbon fumes.

      --
      If you can't be good, be good at it!
    7. Re:How much mass does it gain with use? by Chuckstar · · Score: 1

      I also didn't see how much mass it would gain. But it seems unlikely that the change in mass would be significantly more than the change in mass cars currently experience with gas tanks going from full to empty.

  7. Critical question by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    How long does it take to recharge? Current li-ion cars can get to 80% charge in half an hour.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Critical question by Junta · · Score: 1

      Don't think in percentage of charge and in terms of capacity or range. 80% of 100 miles and 80% of 500 miles is likely not going to charge in the same time.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  8. Don't get too excited yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There liars,
    there are damned liars,
    and then there are battery chemists.

    Does anyone remember the hoopla about aluminum-air batteries? A variety of problems kept them from going main stream. I don't know what will plague lithium-air batteries but I'm darn sure it will be something. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium%E2%80%93air_battery

    1. Re:Don't get too excited yet by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      Based on your link and the summary, it looks like the theoretical energy density maximum of Li-air is about six times the theoretical energy density of Al-air. Most of the other issues mentioned in your link have already been solved and it looks like they're still being actively developed for use in portable electronics (IE: laptops).

    2. Re:Don't get too excited yet by Tx · · Score: 1

      The wikipedia article you linked to says that Al-air batteries are non-rechargeable, which puts them immediately into a much smaller niche of applications, especially since many of the applications for non-rechargeable batteries aren't all about energy density, but also about charge-retention etc. There's so much more demand for better rechargeables, with electric vehicles, intermittent power generation (solar, wind etc), that there's a lot more mileage (sorry) in researching anything that might deliver.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    3. Re:Don't get too excited yet by Stem_Cell_Brad · · Score: 2

      If this was coming from somewhere else, I would be more swayed by your battery histrionics point. But, IBM does not frequently dish out bullshit results for publicity.

    4. Re:Don't get too excited yet by shoor · · Score: 1

      The energy density of aluminum may be less, but aluminum is a lot more common than lithium. As for rechargeability, as others have pointed out, one could exchange used batteries for new ones, it wouldn't be worse than refilling a tank once the infrastructure was in place. Putting the infrastructure in place would be a big deal though. And, also as pointed out by others, having a rechargeable gives more options, replace or recharge as convenient. I seem to recall that aluminum burns with a very hot flame, so it might have safety issues, but lithium can burn also can't it?

      Nobody knows the future.

      --
      In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
    5. Re:Don't get too excited yet by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      I remember from a Natl Geo article a few years ago that aluminum is being considered as rocket fuel because once you get it down to around 10nm, it's quite explosive.

  9. Cant Wait........ by who_stole_my_kidneys · · Score: 2

    I have been touting electric cars for years now as the next big thing....this makes me look like less of an eco-asshole :-P

    1. Re:Cant Wait........ by aglider · · Score: 1

      Chances there are that we all are.
      We mind the "pollution" involved in using a car (any car type). But we'd mind the one involved into the whole process, from manufacturing a car to dispose it!
      I fear that electric cars (whatever battery technology they use) just move the pollution stuff from "usage" to "manufacturing" and "disposing"!

      --
      Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    2. Re:Cant Wait........ by ballpoint · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No offense, but you sound like a typical green. Whining about a 1% problem, then whining even harder when said problem is reduced to a 1ppm problem.

      Greens are like some high maintenance girls in that regard. They don't want their supposed problem solved, they just want to whine about it.

      --
      Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
    3. Re:Cant Wait........ by aglider · · Score: 1

      1ppm? 1% problem?
      You really think cars will last forever? For more than, say, 10 years?
      Do you think that a Li-whatever battery grows from grass and dung?
      That an electric motor or an internal combustion one can be made from sand and water?

      By the way, I'm not green but a physicist.

      --
      Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    4. Re:Cant Wait........ by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      A stopped clock *is* always right twice a day after all... :) :)

      No, my problem isn't with eco-assholes per se, but with eco-assholes who don't understand the technological, logistical, infrastructure, and social challenges that lay between a wistful hope for a practical electrical car and the actual existence of one sitting in Joe Sixpack's driveway. (I'm not saying or implying that you are one mind you, just noting their existence.) My full ire is reserved for those who not only don't recognize the existence of such challenges, but who also insist the sole reason we don't have practical electrical cars is because some byzantine corporate/government conspiracy.

    5. Re:Cant Wait........ by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Screw cars, I want a Thinkpad that only needs to be charged once a week :D

  10. Not vital... by sirwired · · Score: 2

    I've been with the "range anxiety" crowd for a while now... the current capacity of electric vehicles has meant you pretty much MUST own a second car, or you'll be renting a "real" car pretty often.

    If my car can go 500 miles on a charge? The last time I was riding in a car that went that long without an overnight stop (which could be used for charging) was college. Now that I have actual money? If I'm going 500 miles, I fly. (And even if I was driving, I'd get a hotel room for overnight... straight-through shift driving is something I just don't do any more.)

    1. Re:Not vital... by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      500 miles at an average 60mph is a bit over 8 hours... the vast majority of drivers will make at least one 30 minute stop for food, rest, etc sometime over an 8+ hour trip so if this goes mainstream, the applications it won't work well for would be more an exception than the rule. Hell, you could go NY to LA and only stop to charge 7 or 8 times... I'd have to stop for gas more often than that.

    2. Re:Not vital... by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I used to drive 1500 km in 12 1/2 hours. Not recommended though...

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    3. Re:Not vital... by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      For one person with at least a 1 month lead so you don't get burned by the crazy pricing system, flying is definitely the way to travel long distances. But for a group or shorter distances, it's not so obvious. Add in remote endpoints, and driving wins. 200 miles? Drive it. 300 miles? Still driving that, thanks. 500 miles? Now I'll think about flying, but am still probably going to drive. Getting flights between small regional airports is annoyingly roundabout and expensive. San Angelo, TX or Brownsville, TX (some of the largest US cities not served by an Interstate) to Fargo, ND is over $500 per person, double the price of a flight from DFW to Minneapolis. Push a little further north, to Winnipeg in Canada, and the already high price just about doubles again. Layovers might be so long and flights so infrequent that driving would not be much slower. There is little to no public transport at the small places, so you must rent a car or lean on family and friends to ferry you around.

      You need decent range if you live in a place like San Angelo. Range anxiety is not restricted to electric cars there.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
  11. kWh/kg (electric) != kWh/kg (thermal) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thermal energy in gasoline has to be converted to a more useful form of energy (i.e. turning the wheels), the efficiency of this is going to be ~20% for a automobile. The battery is supplying much more useful energy, the efficiency of converting electricity to useful energy is going to be something like 90% (or more). So a battery with the same energy density of gasoline actually has at least 4 times the useful energy of the same size (weight actually) gas tank.

    1. Re:kWh/kg (electric) != kWh/kg (thermal) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As it turns out, gasoline engines aren't as bad as you think: A modern efficient engine will generally push 30%, with certain technologies allowing 35% or higher. You're also failing to include losses inherent to the drive chain, which can often only be about 80% efficient or so. So, factoring that in we see that the system efficiencies work out to be:

      30% (gas) * 80% (gears/wheels) = 24%
      90% (electric) * 80% (gears/wheels) = 72%

      Which makes the electric system only about 3 times more efficient. (Of course, it becomes a _lot_ more complex than this in reality, as engines have variable efficiencies and electric motors can afford different drive chain designs, but a factor of about 3 isn't a bad rule of thumb.)

    2. Re:kWh/kg (electric) != kWh/kg (thermal) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The peak efficiency of modern automobile engines are certainly higher than 20%; however, unless you are driving between 35-45 mph with no stop lights your average efficiency is going be be less. Also there are a number of benefits with an all electrical system - you can turn it off at stop lights - you can regain some of the braking power. Regardless, kWh/kg (electric) > kWh/kg (thermal) so your range should be really good (assuming that these have a volumetric density similar to a gasoline system).

      When considering the overall efficiency of these we will need to take into account the efficiency of the recharge cycle, but these are still going to be better (miles per Btu consumed either by the car for a gasoline car or by the power plant for the battery car)

    3. Re:kWh/kg (electric) != kWh/kg (thermal) by Paul+Pierce · · Score: 1

      While your numbers are actually correct (some electric motors can be high 90% efficient) you are missing a major factor.

      If you think of gas as a battery (since it is simply stored energy), the amount of energy you get from 1 L ~= 35MJ
      For 1 L of the best batteries you get ~1.3MJ

      So even if the electric automobile was 100% efficient your still 5.4 times more efficient with gas (7MJ per/L versus 1.3MJ/L)

      The all electric vehicle will not be the future.

  12. Comparable? by SlashAdotter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    According to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Common_energy_densities The energy density for gasoline 47.2 MJ/kg and Lithium air battery 9 MJ/kg. If five times less is "comparable" I wouldn't mind the li-air car cost of $4000 which is comparable to a regular gas car.

    1. Re:Comparable? by sanosuke001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wikipedia also states that gasoline is 13kWh/kg vs. the summary's stated 12kWh/kg for IBM's new battery. Maybe IBM's version is better than the version referenced in your link?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline#Energy_content_.28high_and_low_heating_value.29

      --
      -SaNo
    2. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something is wrong with someone's calcs:
          9MJ/kg != 12 kWh/kg
          47.2 MJ/kg = 13.1 kWh/kg

    3. Re:Comparable? by wren337 · · Score: 1

      Less than an order of magnitude is comparable I suppose. And the average car now costs $30k
      http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/yourmoney/sc-cons-0419-money-consumer-watch-20120420,0,4360931.story

    4. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous+CowWord · · Score: 5, Informative

      Putting aside a potential flaw in reporting, you are still ignoring efficiency. Gasoline engines are only 15-20% efficient. Even at 20%, that is 47.2*0.2 = 9.44 Electric engines are around 80% efficient. 9*0.8 = 7.2 Suddenly it is a lot more comparable...

      --


      Disclaimer: My opinions are my own and do not, in any way, reflect the opinions of my employer or university.
    5. Re:Comparable? by ZeroSumHappiness · · Score: 4, Informative

      1. It's the same order of magnitude. Yes, that's comparable.
      2. The AC above you actually gives you the exact reason it's better than that. A gasoline internal combustion engine will be 20%-35% efficient at translating that 47.2 MJ to rotary motion of the wheels. A lithium air powered electric motor, however, is 80%-90% efficient. So you're looking at 9.4-16.5 MJ at the transmission versus 7.2-8.1 MJ at the wheels. Assuming a 95% efficiency drivetrain from flywheel to wheels that gas power goes down to 8.9-15.7 MJ. Yeah, that's pretty comparable. Of course, gasoline engines are over 100 years old and lithium-air battery systems less than a decade old, so I think there's some room for improvement there.

    6. Re:Comparable? by aglider · · Score: 1
      --
      Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    7. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to take into account the ICE efficiency for gasoline. Which is not factor of 5, but not that far either. Besides that an electric car has a lot of tricks, like regenerative breaking or filling up when going downhill. None of my cars has an 800km range and I don't complain (I have to drive 1100 km to bring my kids to their grandparents). The problems are rather 1) how far could it be recharged after a break every 4 hours or so (2 drivers swapping every 2 hours, every other break being a bit longer) and 2) how much range does it really get in mountainous areas (I have to cross a mountain range and there are very long upwards slopes, it will certainly refill the battery in the downwards ones)

    8. Re:Comparable? by LeDopore · · Score: 1

      One kWh is 3.6 MJ. That means 12 kWh/kg is 43.2 MJ/kg. The IBM air-breathing Li battery claims ~5x the energy density as the reference Li-air battery used in Wikipedia.

      --
      Expected time to finish is 1 hour and 60 minutes.
    9. Re:Comparable? by DreadPiratePizz · · Score: 1

      Consider though that gasoline engines are only about 35% efficient. Electric motors are considerably better than that. A lot of that energy in the gasoline is lost as heat, so the battery doesn't have to have the same energy density in order to perform as well in a car.

    10. Re:Comparable? by xs650 · · Score: 1

      Looks like IBM took into consideration of internal combustion engines vs electric motors. With an internal combustion engine, about 20-30% efficiency in highway use, an electric motor and electronics could be as high as 90% efficient. Pick the right numbers and that takes care of your 5 times less.

      Naturally they compared their yet to be mass produced batteries with average or less efficiency internal combustion engines instead of the best available modern engines like in diesels or Atkinson cycle Hybrids.

    11. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole point of the article is a "better" Lithium-Air battery, thus the higher density. If you convert the units using the conversion factor at the top of the same Wikipedia article you linked, the new maximum energy density for Lithium-Air is 42.85 Mj/kg

      That is VERY comparable.

      Also: #StopCISPA

    12. Re:Comparable? by SlashAdotter · · Score: 1

      So, accounting for gasoline engine's inefficiency and the fact that li-air is 43.2 MJ/kg is it now 4-5 times more efficient than gas?

    13. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using the numbers provided by the article rather than wikipedia, you wind up with 9.44 for gas and 9.6 for electric. To say its comparable is an understatement. Granted, an electric vehicle has to cart around the mass of those batteries whereas a gas vehicle reduces weight as it travels, just the same, they are seemingly very comparable given back of the napkin math.

    14. Re:Comparable? by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 1

      Gasoline engines are only 15-20% efficient.

      Gasoline engines are 20-30% efficient, up to 35%. Diesel engines are higher, up to 50% thermal efficiency.

      Gasoline: 47.2*.25 = 11.18Z
      Diesel: 47.02*.35 = 16.52

    15. Re:Comparable? by paramour · · Score: 2

      Did you read even the summary or just Wikipedia? 12kWh/kg, the projected max energy density of these batteries, and what they were calling "comparable", is about 43 MJ/kg (1 kWh = 3.6 MJ). That's only10% less than gasoline and "comparable" seems apt. Open question how close actual batteries ever get to that max, but that's not what you were complaining about.

      And then there is effective density, when you consider the amount of energy that can be used for productive work. A gas engine typically wastes 70% to 80% of it's energy while electric motors over 100hp waste less than 8%. So lets see, using the best efficiency for gas, .3 * 47 = 14MJ/kg and for electric the NEMA minimum, .92 * 43 = 40MJ/kg, and we have electric motors with li-air batteries at 3 times the effective density of ICE with gasoline. There are other real-world considerations for true effective density, but it seems you were right after all, "comparable" isn't fair -- to a li-air car, which you seemingly would be willing to pay $60,000 for.

    16. Re:Comparable? by kipsate · · Score: 1

      But what happens to efficiency when it's freezing and I turn on the heater during my trip?

      --
      My karma ran over your dogma
    17. Re:Comparable? by simula · · Score: 1

      Tesla motors claims that the roadster is 88% efficient at converting electricity into mechanical energy taking into account all losses (battery, motor, etc).

    18. Re:Comparable? by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Interesting question. Probably about the same as running the air conditioner.

    19. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um - I think it's a lot less than 15-20%. Let's see, with a 50L tank, you have gas with a density of about .75 giving 37.5kg of fuel.

      E=mc^2
      =37.5*299 792 458^2
      = 3370331920263066150 Joules of energy in a tank.

      So, for a car that has 100kW engine, you drive at 100km/h non stop until the tank runs dry. We'll say you get 5L/100km, so you run out of gas in 10 hours of driving. 100kW*3600s*10h= 3600000000 J

      So efficiency?
      3600000000J / 3370331920263066150 = 1.068 *10e-9 %. Definitely inefficient.

    20. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Diesel engines are higher, up to 50% thermal efficiency.
      Not even close.

      If the engine is made from steel, the Carnot limit dictates that the total mechanical energy output cannot exceed 37%. That assumes a temperature differential of zero Celsius versus the melting point of steel. The efficiency of any practical engine is considerably lower (the Carnot limit assumes that all energy output is mechanical, i.e. the amount of heat energy leaving the system must be negligible).

      The only way that you can get a higher figure than that is if you include heat generation as "work done" (in which case, the final figure will be 100% efficiency).

    21. Re:Comparable? by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      The gas engine takes practically no hit for heating the car. It is using waste heat from the engine.
      The electric drive will have to use the battery to heat some nichrome, unless it can pull some waste heat off the motors (that 10 to 20% has to be going somewhere).

      Driving an AC compressor will be equivalent for the gas or electric engine.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    22. Re:Comparable? by error_logic · · Score: 1

      Air conditioner = Heat pump. Would that work in reverse as effectively? Hmmm...

    23. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Diesel engines are higher, up to 50% thermal efficiency.
      Not even close.

      >

      Actually, diesel can. Diesel can even exceed 50%, but I'd love to see you shoe horn this thing into your car. For any car engine, you are correct. Not even close.

      I find it useful to know exactly which diesel engine people are talking about when they start talking about how efficient diesel can be.

    24. Re:Comparable? by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Yes, 20-30% on a bench in their ideal power band.

      Now run that engine at 15% load, or how about 50% for 3 seconds, 20% for 3 seconds, then 10% for 40 seconds then idle for 30 seconds and 40% for 5 seconds ad nauseum.

      Even cruising down the highway, you'll be looking at an engine turning under its peak efficiency rpm band, and and a lower load% than is efficient. Most gas engines seem to get their highest efficiency from running about 75-80% of all out, but this power isn't usually needed.

      One of the reasons hybrids can get better gas-mileage than non-hybrids on the highway: the engine is more closely sized output needed for highway cruising, with the electric motor giving you acceleration/hill climb power.

      All in all, I bet the actual gasoline->mechanical energy provided in most cars for common driving situations (mixed city/highway) nets less than 10% efficiency.

      Sam

    25. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you have to compare the energy conversion rate to be equitable though. an ICE car is at best 25 percent efficient (this is with using hybrid drive train and the whole nine yards, without it's closer to 15%). an electric car is more like 90+ percent efficient. what it loses in sheer storage, it makes up for in effeciency.

    26. Re:Comparable? by makomk · · Score: 1

      From the Wikipedia article:

      A major driving force in lithium-air battery development is the demand for advanced battery technology for the automotive sector. The energy density of gasoline is approximately 13 kWh/kg, which corresponds to 1.7 kWh/kg of energy provided to the wheels when accounting for losses. The theoretical energy density of the lithium-air battery is 12 kWh/kg excluding the oxygen mass. It has been theorized that a practical energy density of 1.7 kWh/kg at the wheels of an automobile could be realized when accounting for over-potentials, other cell components, battery pack ancillaries, and the much higher efficiency of electric motors.

    27. Re:Comparable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your numbers are not correct. Diesels can get up to 50% and Gas engines are better than you stated.

    28. Re:Comparable? by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      But what happens to efficiency when it's freezing and I turn on the heater during my trip?

      What I've seen in Sweden (many years ago) was an Eberspächer petrol/diesel power heater that came on when it got too cold. It had something like a 5 liter tank that lasted "forever", i.e. you don't need to burn nearly as much fuel if you only need to heat a car vs. moving it. (I've read that some ultra low consumption diesels now come with them as well, as there isn't enough waste heat from the engine for low temps.)

      Now cooling is going to be tougher, you'd have to use some battery energy to run a compressor of some kind in order to get any efficiency.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    29. Re:Comparable? by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      The Prius electric motor is water-cooled - and that'll probably be the trend for electric cars in the future (at least till hub motors become viable I guess - but there are reasons to think we'll never totally use them). So the heat it puts out can be pretty trivially relocated to somewhere more useful.

      In heat pump mode you could direct the input air over the radiator grille, which would pretty seamlessly improve it's efficiency.

  13. Releases oxygen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While oxygen isn't technically flammable, many materials that are normally flame retardant explode into flame when exposed to high concentrations of oxygen.

    1. Re:Releases oxygen? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      so who said there would be high concentrations of oxygen? do things burst into flames near forests and algae ponds?

    2. Re:Releases oxygen? by jpapon · · Score: 1

      Well, forests often do.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    3. Re:Releases oxygen? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      haha, but I've found trees burn even when taken outside the forest.....something more to do with fuel and ignition event than little extra oxygen present

  14. Life isn't made of press releases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This sounds great... just like the dozens of other game-changing energy breakthrough articles I've read over the years. Until it comes to market and works as advertised I'm not going to get too excited.

  15. Thermal problems with my anode by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    This is from IBM, so it is intended for a laptop computer, right? The cathode may be ambient oxygen, but with the energy density involved, if I park this thing in the wrong place, I could burn by anode?

  16. err.... moisture not a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know that funny thing that happens to all those special molecules on the far left of the periodic table. You know... the catch fire and scream part?

    1. Re:err.... moisture not a problem? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      because the gasoline in your car and the natural gas lines in your home don't have the catch fire and scream problem?

    2. Re:err.... moisture not a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I'm late to respond here, but maybe you'll see this. The problem I am talking about is that Lithium ( and Sodium, Potassium and AFAIK all Alkali metals except hydrogen ) will combust when exposed to water.
      It's not like gasoline. The chemical reaction reaction will cause Hydrogen and Oxygen to be released with sufficient heat to combust )
      Didn't you ever wonder why your highschool chemistry teacher always kept the Lithium and Sodium sables in a jar filled with oil?

      So.... open air battery invites moisture. I'm surprised it's not mentioned how they deal with this.

    3. Re:err.... moisture not a problem? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      being permeable to oxygen and being open to air are not equivalent

  17. pfft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where were going, we don't need wire.

  18. Source of oxygen for working out in your garage! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that leaving your car running in the garage will have the opposite effect (oxygen instead of carbon dioxide) I wonder if you could leave your car running in your garage and then exercise out there and work out harder because of the enriched oxygen atmosphere...

  19. Google car changes things by Stem_Cell_Brad · · Score: 1

    If your car drives itself, the 500 mile-human-body-barrier may not be as relevant in 2020. It seems like the driverless car and this battery are slated for a similar timeline.

    1. Re:Google car changes things by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Actually if I could couple my car electronically to a car ahead of me, so that it is always 5 feet behind it, but drives independently on its own, it would be great. We could create "virtual road train". Professional drivers assisted by machines will do the actual highway driving. We would link up to them and relax in our own cars.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    2. Re:Google car changes things by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      For that matter, the truckers could offer in-motion refueling as well as virtual chauffeuring services.

      --
      Nullius in verba
  20. Air pollution and density? by aglider · · Score: 1

    How would that battery efficiency be affected by air pollution and low- high- density cases?

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  21. Re:Won't see the mass market by rubycodez · · Score: 2

    the investors in Big Oil make money, not oil When other energy sources become available, they will invest in those. they know we're coming off of peak oil production and they want their money flow. they just want their big piece of the action.

  22. Re:Won't see the mass market by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

    Big Oil will eventually run out of oil and have no choice but to turn to batteries for cars.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  23. Premature Article AGAIN!! by jklovanc · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the video we won't see these batteries in cars until "2020 or 2030". That seems like a long way off considering the summary says "demonstrated a light-weight, ultra-high-density, lithium-air battery" As far as I can glean from the vague articles is that all IBM has done is demonstrate the fundamental chemistry on a supercomputer. As far as I can tell they have not actually built a working battery of significant size and definitely not one of a size that would power a vehicle. There have been may technologies that work well in pristine laboratory environments but fail when they attempt to scale and/or have to deal with the dirty environment. Sure the battery may even work on a small scale when exposed to pure oxygen but how does it deal with the other elements in the atmosphere? Take a look at this. I do not see where IBM shows how that deal with any of these issues.

    1. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

      By that time, they'll not only be electric but can also fly.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    2. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by geekoid · · Score: 2

      It's not premature. It's an article about some information at IBM. People talking about this like it's rolling out are the ones that are wrong.

      You only want to here about things when they are available? stop reading science and wait for the commercial to come one while you are watching American Idle.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If as GP says, all they've done is simulate the chemistry on a computer, then yes, it's premature. It wouldn't be premature if the summary said "IBM simulates promising battery chemistry", but it doesn't. It states that "IBM Creates 'Breathing' High-Density Lithium-Air Battery", and goes on to say that the company "has successfully demonstrated" the battery. Whether or not it's premature as an article depends upon whether the summary is even close to being accurate.

    4. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by g8oz · · Score: 2

      If you want product announcements maybe you should frequent Engadget not Slashdot.

      Congratulations to IBM on moving forward with some world changing research.

    5. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrats to somebody with a simulation on a machine? Bullshit, build a working model at real scale then call me. You're not "advancing research" if you don't have a working prototype.

    6. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please note the last few lines of the article:
      "Supercomputers also played a big part in this breakthrough; IBM isn’t a battery-making company, after all. IBM Blue Gene/P supercomputers at IBM Research in Zurich and Argonne National Laboratory in Chicago were used to model and optimize the li-air chemistry. The battery prototypes themselves are being built at IBM Research Almaden, California."

      In other words, they used the supercomputers to optimize the mix, and they're currently building the prototype on the model. It's not premature to talk about it because I'm pretty sure IBM knows a thing or two about building, and using them for practical purposes (as we've truly seen).

      Here's hoping the prototypes work well! Hats off to IBM is what I say.

    7. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Announcing "breakthrough" technology that will take 8 to 18 years to com to fruition? We may have portable fusion generators by then.

    8. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      You only want to here about things when they are available?

      When a research paper puts a time line like 8 to 18 years for implementation in anything usable they usually mean the following;
      1. We have little or no confidence that this technology is actually viable.
      2. We hope better technology will come along in the mean time making our research moot and hiding the fact that it would never work in the first place.
      3. Give us money now anyway.

      Come on, 18 to 18 years? Anything that will take top scientist that long to refine is not a "breakthrough" but very preliminary research. We may have portable fusion generators by then.

      People have been trying to make lithium air batteries since the 1970's. All this article adds to the conversation is that IBM is looking into it too. Is that really news?

    9. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by iceaxe · · Score: 1

      From where I am, in 2012, 2020 is not very far off at all. 2030 might be considered far off, by the very young. In terms of bringing new tech to market, 8 years sounds pretty optimistic. I have some optimism that we'll lick this oil dependency thing yet. Maybe this tech, or something like it, or something it leads to, will be part of that. In any case, it's interesting.

      --
      WALSTIB!
    10. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by strack · · Score: 1

      it might be worthwhile to just take a tank of liquid oxygen with you to feed into the battery. considering the oxygen will end up bound up in the battery when its fully depleted anyway, its probably not that much of a loss in specific energy density

    11. Re:Premature Article AGAIN!! by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Then instead of filling up on gasoline one must fill up on liquid oxygen and electricity. That is just swapping one liquid for another. Also oxygen tanks are not light as they have to contain a lot of pressure or very low temperature. Also if you have a fire with fuel like gasoline from the other vehicle and add a lot of oxygen you get an explosion.

  24. Re:Source of oxygen for working out in your garage by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    You don't want too much oxygen, especially since it's flammable.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  25. Recharge WHILE you drive! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Remember that in the future the idea will be to charge your car in the car park or at home, not just on the road.

    Actually, in the future, it is likely that you will be able to recharge while you are driving. Here is how it will works: automatic lane control and braking systems will enable cars to travel in "platoons", with just a few inches between cars. This will greatly extend the range of your car by reducing air resistance, but the cars can also be magnetically coupled, so they can push and pull each other. So if you are on a long trip, and your battery is low, the computer in your car can automatically negotiate with other cars in the platoon and purchase power. You can use this to coast without draining your battery, or even run your engine in reverse and recharge your batteries as you drive.

    1. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

      What happens when an errant deer runs onto the road, a tire blows out, or an imperfectly maintained car malfunctions in any way whatsoever? Bam! Bam-bam-bam-bam--WOOMPH. Fifty dead, film at 11.

    2. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you have clearly identified a problem that will make it impossible for the idea of linking a bunch of "cars" together in a sort of "train" to catch on.

    3. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      What happens when an errant deer runs onto the road,

      The cars radar detects the deer, and applies the brake within milliseconds. It also communicates automatically with other cars in the platoon so they can apply their brakes simultaneously.

      a tire blows out,

      The automatic steering system takes control, and keeps the car in the lane until it can safely pull onto a shoulder.

      or an imperfectly maintained car malfunctions in any way whatsoever?

      The car's computer would disengage the engine and coast to a stop.

      Bam! Bam-bam-bam-bam--WOOMPH. Fifty dead, film at 11.

      Look, the technology to handle all of your scenarios already exists, and already handles these situations better than humans. The people designing these things are not idiots.

    4. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens? That's easy.

      Deer: The car breaks but doesn't swerve hitting the deer like it supposed to. The deer dies and the car gets a little damaged. This is better than today where many people make the mistake of trying to avoid said deer and make things much much worse for themselves. Often rolling their car or hitting a tree. Tree, deer, tree, deer...hmmm I choose deer.

      Tire blow outs happen. And once again not overreacting is the key. There are already plenty of sensors including tire pressure that would allow a car to react to a blow out much much faster and effectively than a person.

      Your last statement about some sort of malfunction is much to vague to even try to respond to. Engine dies? Axle breaks? Brakes fail? What?
       

    5. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would imagine it would be more like a train wreck. If they are actually magentically coupled, there would be a small cushion area, plus your bumper, and if the computers can communicate fast enough, they can all brake at relatively the same speed/force. This could turn a 50 car pile up into a 5 car pileup with 1 or 2 cars totalled.

    6. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Or just embed some inductive charging on sections of main roads.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by chill · · Score: 1

      And the car gets a little damaged? That's a funny one right there. Obviously you've never seen deer/car collisions at highway speeds.

      The average weight of a adult, male, white-tailed deer is around 200 pounds. Feel free to do the math regarding kinetic energy and force. Then contemplate the phrases "5 mph bumper" and "crumple zone".

      Feel free to Google for images on the subject, if your imagination isn't graphic enough.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    8. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Or some really long cords.

    9. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right that this reduces air drag, but you're wrong that this will enable regen for non-lead vehicles. It won't. You'll just reduce the drag, you won't make it go negative. It will dramatically increase range, but you won't be able to charge while driving.

    10. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      air is a horrible dielectric, not to mention the "cancer" you'd probably get from driving over the equivalent of 1000 cellphones all transmitting at the same time.

    11. Re:Recharge WHILE you drive! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Look, the technology to handle all of your scenarios already exists, and already handles these situations better than humans

      That's true. It's called rail. PRT, to you.

      Your move.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  26. This can't be true by geekoid · · Score: 1

    RnD is dead, ask anyone on /.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  27. Re:Comparable? - Its efficiency by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

    Your gasoline powered engine has a maximum efficiency of 37%. Typical efficiency is 20% or less.

    Given that, the energy that is convertible to motion is only 9 MJ/kg for the ICE (internal combustion engine) car.

    A BLDC (brushless DC) motor is up to 90% efficient -- and that is also typical.

    --
    Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  28. Heavy when empty? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But wait a minute, wouldn't this mean that your batteries would get heavier as you drive? (taking up oxygen)
    So when they're fully charged they seem like the best thing ever. But when they're half empty, not so much ...
    (right?)

  29. Not "linearly" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    AC because I moderated. No, conductivity varies as the crossectional *area* of a conductor, and therefore as the *square* of the radius, not "linearly".

    1. Re:Not "linearly" by Rhywden · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're correct. Still, with the currents required, that would still make for a thick wire :)

    2. Re:Not "linearly" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was down to the surface area of the conductor (i.e. the circumference) rather than the cross-sectional area (although the two do go together). Therefore if you have a hollow "wire" it can be thinner (smaller radius) than a solid one because you have more surface area (external surface and internal surface). Or am I wrong? Some days I wish I had paid more attention in Physics class.

    3. Re:Not "linearly" by Kompressor · · Score: 1

      The surface area issue only comes into play with alternating current - it's called the Skin Effect. The higher the frequency, the thinner the area that the current travels on. According to the linked Wikipedia article, the skin effect at 60Hz (North American household power) is 8.5mm deep. I would take this to mean that the entirety of a 17mm think wire would carry current, but an 18mm thick wire would have a small part at the core that wasn't carrying current. The way to get around this is by using Litz wire. Click the link for more fun facts!

      --
      kmem russian roulette: Aquillar> dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/kmem bs=1 count=1 seek=$RANDOM
    4. Re:Not "linearly" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's cross-sectional area, i.e. the circle you see when you cut through a wire. If the wire is circular that's pi*r*r, for a wire with a square/rectangular cross-section it's l*w.

      The issue of hollow conductors is a consequence of the "skin effect" which affects certain AC currents (as memory serves it's with high frequency ones). With these the current only actually passes through the outer part of a solid wire, so some bright spark came up with the idea of hollow conductors to save on expensive copper. I'm just guessing, but I assume that when the skin-effect is significant the current-carrying capacity of a conductor may indeed be related linearly to the diameter/circumference as you say.

    5. Re:Not "linearly" by zzatz · · Score: 2

      Direct current flows through the entire cross section, so area counts. Alternating current induces forces which push the current towards the outside. The dimensions where this skin effect is strong enough to consider depend on frequency. For 60Hz, you can ignore skin effect for currents less than about 100A.

    6. Re:Not "linearly" by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      In AC applications sure, in DC, no.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    7. Re:Not "linearly" by mhajicek · · Score: 1

      AC because you modulated? I thought we were talking DC.

    8. Re:Not "linearly" by dougmc · · Score: 1

      I would take this to mean that the entirety of a 17mm think wire would carry current, but an 18mm thick wire would have a small part at the core that wasn't carrying current.

      Not exactly. The skin depth is defined as "the depth below the surface of the conductor at which the current density has fallen to 1/e". So most of the current flow happens within the skin depth -- but not all. Current flow as a function of depth tapers off, but there's no hard cutoff.

      The core does carry some current -- just not very much.

  30. IBM Energy by Locutus · · Score: 0

    so this explains why IBM has been getting out of the computer hardware businesses( PC, hard disk, printers, etc ) over the past few years. They're about to become an energy company. The other good thing that this is IBM and not some small company is, they are not likely to sell out to the existing oil industry and sell the patent so they can bury the technology.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  31. Now, your Prius ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... will not only suffer from anemia, but emphysema as well.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Now, your Prius ... by stevenfuzz · · Score: 1

      My Prius suffers from awesome. Heart my farts baby.

  32. Warning: summary parroting extremetech by LeDopore · · Score: 1

    If you look at about 2:15 in the first video of the first link, you'll see IBM is claiming an energy density of about 1.5 kWh/kg to 2 kWh/kg. They don't claim 12 kWh/kg; that's a "theorized" limit that extremetech quotes without substantiation from IBM.

    --
    Expected time to finish is 1 hour and 60 minutes.
    1. Re:Warning: summary parroting extremetech by HeavyDDuty · · Score: 1

      You deserve +50 for pointing this out.

  33. 9megawatt connections? by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    There is one issue with these 500mi batteries I can think of, how do you charge them quickly? if you assume it takes about 30KW do push a prius sized vehicle at 50mi/hr then a 500 mile battery would mean about 300Kw/hr storage. I'm not sure if that is what is here or not, but let's assume yes. To charge a 300kW/hr battery in ten mites would require a 1.8MegaWatts connection for every car at the "pump". Sounds kinda dicey. do you really trust that every car pulling up is maintained so well that a bad connection would not explode if you put a megawatt into it?

    Even swapping out batteries and charging them off line would not actually decrease the demand. If a "busy" interstate gas station typically had 5 people/ ten minutes filling up all day long then whether you change batteries or not, it is still a 9mega watt station. If you could charge them overnight when they were closed, then it is still a 4.5Mwatt station to maintain a ten minute pit-stop time.

    So simply building a large battery does not entirely solve the range problem with electric cars.

    What about charging them at home? same problem if everyone is your apartment building wants to go 500 miles every day.

    But that's just it. most people in your condo are not going to go 500 miles every day. Electric cars still make sense for commuters rather than long range travelers. Commuters drive a tenth of that, so the power demand is a tenth. this makes charging them at home sensible.

    so this is a big advance but it is still does not solve the 500 mile recharge problem.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:9megawatt connections? by gewalker · · Score: 1

      All you need is a 10MW LFTR reactor to supply power for the charging station.

    2. Re:9megawatt connections? by goombah99 · · Score: 2

      This inspired me to look again at these. my 30kw was a number I came up with a long time ago from coefficients of drag on a honda car.

      Now that we have all electric cars you can actually measure this. The chevy volt and nissan leaf are the best ones made and they manage just over 37Kwh/100 miles at "highway" speed.

      assuming highway speed means 55mph then 100 miles is 1.8 hours. So that means it takes 20kw to propel these at 55 mph.

      now the drag power it takes to propel any object through air scales as the velocity cubed. So to go from 55 to 65 would require 1.65 times more power if we assume that nearly all of this scales as drag.

      assuming this is the case and assuming the engine does not lose efficiency with speed then this means we need about
      33Kw to drive a small car at 65 mhp.

      (alternatively if one assumes HWY driving means 65, and people drive at 75 then we get 30kw)

      So my ball park number is still about the same.

      It is perhaps worth noting that it takes about 2.5x more power to go 75 than it does 55!

      anyhow it takes
      370 to 600 WH per mile (depending on how fast you drive)

      185KWh to 300KwH to go 500 miles.

      Which brings us back to
      1.1 to 1.8 MWatts to charge in 10 minutes ignoring coupling losses.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    3. Re:9megawatt connections? by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      So you really think it will be safe to connect a megawatt cable to the privately owned and maintained vehicle?

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    4. Re:9megawatt connections? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Considering we pump highly flammable gasoline into the same thing I would say yes.

      The charge controller on the car would function like the one on your laptop. Of course there would be a data link and some sort of cable test before full power was turned on, or do you think these will be charged by stripping the end off a lamp cord?

    5. Re:9megawatt connections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better solution is using that battery as a buffer rather than a power source. If it takes 30KW to power a prius sized vehicle to 60mph than you need to supply 500w to each vehicle over the course of a minute via connection to the road.

      A safe following distance is considered to be the distance traveled in 3 seconds. 60mph is 88ft per second so 176ft plus the 15ft length of a prius gives us 190ft per car. A mile is 5280 ft, so that works out to 27.78 cars per mile lets call that 28. That means it takes 14KW per mile to power a fully loaded interstate. A 10w solar panel built into the road every meter or a 100w panel every 10 meters would do the trick.

      Of course every mile of interstate is not loaded every minute of every day. Not even close. You build it to handle a fully loaded interstate and then sell the excess power back to the grid.

    6. Re:9megawatt connections? by tftp · · Score: 1

      Considering we pump highly flammable gasoline into the same thing I would say yes.

      Pumping gasoline is still safer. There are very few parts involved, and their failure is not that likely to result in fire. The parts (such as the hose, the tank, the lid) are not under much stress; they never wear out. The gasoline, as we pour it, is inactive - it is not burning, and it will take some effort to burn it.

      However a battery charging circuit will contain hundreds of components, each working close to their theoretical limit. You will have semiconductors, bus bars, flexible kA-rated cables, and lots and lots of Lithium. If anything goes wrong and is not instantly detected by safety circuits the car can literally explode. Some faults (such as fire within Lithium cells) can be indistinguishable from normal charging unless you are monitoring the size and the temperature of each cell.

  34. energy by pitchingchris · · Score: 0

    We would probably spend more on energy to charge the battery than we are spending on gasoline today. And if the grid energy isn't green to begin with, I don't see how it really got us anywhere.

  35. Subtext by jklovanc · · Score: 2

    From the linked video it states that a car sized batter will probably not be available until 2020 or 2030. I think the subtext to that is really "We don' think this technology is actually viable and hope that some new technology will be found within the next 8 to 18 years that will make our research moot but give us money now anyway".

  36. Re:Source of oxygen for working out in your garage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You got the movement of the oxygen during the charge/discharge cycle backwards, but I see what you're trying to do there. However, you might make a case for a far less stinky way to kill yourself. Leave the car running in the garage, and instead of carbon monoxide poisoning, you'd just die of hypoxia.

  37. Re:Won't see the mass market by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Big Oil will eventually run out of oil and have no choice but to turn to batteries for cars.

    Just as in the future Big Lithium will eventually run out of lithium and have no choice but to turn to ??? for cars.

  38. Re:Source of oxygen for working out in your garage by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    You don't want too much oxygen, especially since it's flammable.

    and corrosive.

  39. Re:Won't see the mass market by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Yes, because IBM will just sit on a multi-billion dollar discovery and on one else in the world could possible make another one.

    Idiot.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  40. You buy the car but rent the battery by sectionboy · · Score: 1

    can't wait to see blue logo-ed battery stations around the country.

  41. off by 150 by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    where do you get this 200Wh/mile? Wind resistance and storage conversion (in and out) inefficiecincy are the dominant factors for highway travel. wind resistance is pretty much set by the size of the car's crossectional area. So irrespective of how light or efficient you can make the engine you are not going to beat that. I estimate it take 30KW to push a honda accord size car at highway speed.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:off by 150 by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Nissan Leaf draws 34 kWh per 100 miles, or .34 kWh (340 Wh) per mile. So that number is in the right neighborhood, if a little low.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:off by 150 by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Informative

      tesla roadster: 53 KWH / 220 miles =~ .25 KW/mile.
      Tesla model S: 42 kwh / 160 miles =~ .25 KW/mile.

      Again, perhaps a bit low, but fairly close.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:off by 150 by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      oops my bad. our numbers actually agree. within a factor of 2. I goofed on the units comparing my power to your energy. A more realistic number is about 300 kWh for a thin corvette roadster or 500 for a family car.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  42. oh no by johnwerneken · · Score: 0

    We are in for it now. Li-O reaching gasoline energy density will lead some to think that electric vehicles should not only be tolerated but encouraged, now that they are "practical". What a disaster. No one will think of generation and transmission inefficacies to provide recharge energy nor of the great fun of manufacturing the darn things. Another yuppie fanatic disaster about to be foisted on the public. Used to be one could rely upon the rich and the powerful to squash the idiot mob but now, witness IBM, they have decided to join in and simply grab most of the profit. Are the rest of you just too damn stupid to understand your own natures or those of your fellow beings?

  43. Cars only? by Twinbee · · Score: 1

    I don't know why, but the article and videos only mention cars, not laptops, phone or other gadgets (portable convector heater anyone?).

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  44. uHaul - starts renting towable generators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many people do more than 60 miles a day of driving (that is like a 25 mile/way commute with 10 miles of shopping around too.)
    If you plan to go on a long trip, you could go to your local car dealer (or even the local uHaul) and rent a towable generator to take you on that long trip (assuming the car has a connector that can handle enough current to drive you at freeway speeds.) Better yet, they could build a vehicle like the Volt and this would just make the battery weight much less.

    1. Re:uHaul - starts renting towable generators? by Kompressor · · Score: 1

      And then put it on rails?

      :-D

      --
      kmem russian roulette: Aquillar> dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/kmem bs=1 count=1 seek=$RANDOM
  45. Electric Drive Train? by clonan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are assuming that EV will simply replace the current engine and fuel tank with an electric engine and battery... This is not what has to happen.

    Currently engines are big and heavy so you only have one. You then have to transfer the rotational energy of the engine to the wheels. But Electric motors are very light and tiny. So why not have 4?

    Put a small electric engine in each wheel and you eliminate the entire drive train... no more drive train losses and EV's are back up to 90%.

    Your 72% efficiency only applies to ICE cars that have been converted to EV's.

    1. Re:Electric Drive Train? by dirtyhippie · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea ... but what happens when one of your engines produces less output than another, or god forbid, fails? Like in an aircraft, you have some serious sideways pointing motion in your vehicle. Unlike in an aircraft, you don't have gobs of room to react to the situation. That can be addressed with electronics, but that adds to complexity, cost, and weight.

      A drive train presents a solution that has many years of safety testing behind it. Eventually we may move to a system like you propose, but it won't be any time soon. There are lower hanging fruit.

    2. Re:Electric Drive Train? by LoLobey · · Score: 1

      If I remember correctly there is a problem of "un-sprung" weight and it's detrimental effects to the handling of the vehicle. Motors attached to the wheels are unsprung weight and would require a more substantial suspension system. The additional weight worth the efficiency inpact?

      --
      We have nothing to fear but fear itself! And Spiders!
    3. Re:Electric Drive Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Put a small electric engine in each wheel and you eliminate the entire drive train... no more drive train losses and EV's are back up to 90%."

      Unsprung weight is bad.

    4. Re:Electric Drive Train? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that EV will simply replace the current engine and fuel tank with an electric engine and battery... This is not what has to happen.

      Currently engines are big and heavy so you only have one. You then have to transfer the rotational energy of the engine to the wheels. But Electric motors are very light and tiny. So why not have 4?

      Put a small electric engine in each wheel and you eliminate the entire drive train... no more drive train losses and EV's are back up to 90%.

      Your 72% efficiency only applies to ICE cars that have been converted to EV's.

      They've tried putting the electric engine in the wheels as you say; however, there are still a lot of problems with doing so.

      Some of the initial Prius and other hybrids at the time actually had 2 drive trains - once for the electric side and one for the gasoline side - combined in some manner. Really inefficient as you carry double the weight. I think they're now down to one drive train.

      But needless to say, it's not likely going to change from present designs for quite a while due to the issues with the 4 rotational motors.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    5. Re:Electric Drive Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, also for electric motors it goes that the bigger the machine, the more efficient it is. And few people would like the idea of having a bunch of steel, copper and permanent magnets as parts of their suspension.

    6. Re:Electric Drive Train? by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      The motors don't have to be in the wheels, they can just be located by each wheel and provide power to it. You just replace the axles or whatever with a pair of motors. You'll still have some kind of linkage to connect each motor to its wheel so that the motors weight isn't unsprung. The advantage of 4 motors would be better stability control and performance.

      Electric Locomotives have actually put motors in wheels for a long while. They of course operate on much smother surfaces than cars and don't to worry about unsprung weight. But one of the manufacturers a few years back started a project aimed at putting their motors in car wheels. Their demonstration vehicle was a Mini Cooper I believe.

    7. Re:Electric Drive Train? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      The motors don't have to be in the wheels, they can just be located by each wheel and provide power to it. You just replace the axles or whatever with a pair of motors. You'll still have some kind of linkage to connect each motor to its wheel so that the motors weight isn't unsprung. The advantage of 4 motors would be better stability control and performance.

      Electric Locomotives have actually put motors in wheels for a long while. They of course operate on much smother surfaces than cars and don't to worry about unsprung weight. But one of the manufacturers a few years back started a project aimed at putting their motors in car wheels. Their demonstration vehicle was a Mini Cooper I believe.

      Locos typically have the motor mounted above, with a belt to the axle still. And yes, from what I understand, nearly all newer locos currently in use are nearly 100% electric in the drive train, even if they use a diesel engine to power the batteries instead of catenary lines - in either case, they vehicle bodies (and thereby the motors) are still on springs to smooth the ride. Don't know when they changed over in that respect, but it is quite amazing.

      However, tracks are not exactly very smooth. True, you don't get potholes like you do on the road, but it can still be a very rough ride. (Disclaimer: I work in the railway diagnostics business at the moment. And yes, even high speed track can be very rough.) The roughness just manifests itself in a different way - through warped track among many other things.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    8. Re:Electric Drive Train? by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Motor in hub... Ferdinand Porsch did that nigh a century ago. BBC had two articles on three guys in London who did this a few years back. US Army looked into this for their "mule" maybe thirty years ago. Etc., et al.

      It works. With issues, such as sprung weight and more massive motors to handle the loads.

    9. Re:Electric Drive Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't put the engine in the wheel, you'll increase the unsprung mass.
      But you could mount it inboard and connect it to the wheel with a half-axle and a constant velocity joint.

    10. Re:Electric Drive Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The energy loss in the transmission can be very low. Transmissions can often reach >=90% energy efficiency. In the case of ev, the bottle neck is electrical heating and hysterisis due to high currents. The problem is maintaining the efficiency over all speeds which is somewhat difficult to achieve. Even if you put 4 motors directly on to the wheels, it is difficult to get them running at an high efficiency over all all torques and speed not to mention the lack of a passive system in balancing the load between the motors.

    11. Re:Electric Drive Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it makes a right hash of the suspension dynamics. Avoid unsprung mass wherever possible.

  46. First tree's, now oxygen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One wonders how this will affect the planets oxygen in general. Tree's a chopped down at a crazy rate which affects the earths carbon-dioxide/oxygen plus overpopulation. Imagine more people, less tree's + machines (on top of the engine taking air for combustion engine) taking more oxygen for batteries...I think I'm going to start investing in oxygen. People laughed at paying for bottled water....look now.

  47. Re:Source of oxygen for working out in your garage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't want too much oxygen, especially since it's flammable.

    Yeah and keep that di-hydrogen monoxide off my lawn too! Too much of that stuff will kill you!

  48. Re:Source of oxygen for working out in your garage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    High concentrations of oxygen aren't flammable without a fuel source at which point, the fuel becomes highly combustible with the abundance of oxygen.

  49. Re:Won't see the mass market by El+Rey · · Score: 1

    Exactly! If this tech works some oil company will buy the patent and the technology won't see the light of day until the patent expires, just like Chevron did last time...

  50. International Battery Machines? by tekrat · · Score: 1

    I.B.M. == Internal Breathing Mechanism?
    It's Battery Magic?
    Come up with something on target for a new battery company....

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  51. Come again? by fnj · · Score: 2

    You don't want too much oxygen, especially since it's flammable.

    Not big on chemistry, are you? Oxygen is not flammable. It is the opposite of flammable. Flammability is the property of being combinable with oxygen in such a way as to produce flame. O2 does not combine with O2.

    1. Re:Come again? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Well you're technically correct (the best kind!) but O2 can accelerate combustion so it needs to be handled somewhat like a flammable gas - except instead of keeping it away from oxygen and flame you need to keep it away from fuel (almost anything) and flame.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Come again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't want too much oxygen, especially since it's flammable.

      Not big on chemistry, are you? Oxygen is not flammable. It is the opposite of flammable. Flammability is the property of being combinable with oxygen in such a way as to produce flame. O2 does not combine with O2.

      No but 3 * O2 > 2 * 03 in the right circumstances

    3. Re:Come again? by company+suckup · · Score: 0

      You be sure and tell that to the nurses the next time you're on O2 at the hospital and need to light up a cig.

  52. And can it recharge 1000s of times? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many EV battery theories seem to work well until the expectation is imposed that you'll be able to use it all day and recharge it every night and do that without dropping in efficiency such that you are still using the same battery with ~80% of its initial range several years later.

    I've read of at least 4 "breakthroughs" that fail the test of lasting long enough that their initial costs makes sense.

    So come back to me when you have a battery that makes economic sense defined for me as its cost is comparable to the costs of gas over say a 5 year period.

  53. Won't work in Beijing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No oxygen!

  54. Harmed by 2nd hand smoke? by Al+in+SoCal · · Score: 1

    Wonder if the battery can be harmed by 2nd hand exhaust and / or smoke? I don't want my battery coughing (backfire?).

  55. My needs are simple by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

    I simply need some of these not-yet-available batteries to power the flying car that I don't yet have.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:My needs are simple by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      flying cars have been around since the 1940s. if you don't have one it's your own fault

  56. Ignore this.. by gQuigs · · Score: 0

    I'm posting to cancel out a bad moderation.... yay :/

    1. Re:Ignore this.. by wealthychef · · Score: 1

      Interesting -- what strategy is this?

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
  57. Is it going to catch fire on a humid day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it obtains oxygen from the atmosphere, how are they going to keep water vapor from igniting the lithium?

  58. good and all, but the real question is.... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    how many recharges? Seriously, I would rather have a car that have similar specs and costs to the leaf or the model S, but then be able to get 100K to 1M charges, rather than having a longer driving car, that only takes 1-2K charges. At that point, you can literally drive the car into the ground and still have a use for the storage.

    If this takes another decade to come to market, there is a real good chance that super caps will dominate it by then.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  59. exchanging batteries won't work. by mbkennel · · Score: 1

    It's the equivalent of Gresham's law. If some gold coins get debased, then people will not exchange the good ones, only the bad ones.

    Similarly, people will do the same with very valuable battery packs, the recently manufactured ones with full capacity will disappear from the changing station and only bad ones will be available. If anybody gets a good one in exchange by accident (some newbie), they would sell it at a high price, and buy a lower quality one and trade that one back in.

  60. Well... by sirwired · · Score: 1

    To be fair, the amount of current required to fast-charge a car in 1/2 hr (with a 500 mile battery, no less) is enormous. A whole parking lot full of those cars charging at once? That'd require the power feed the size of what you'd use to power a medium-size factory.

  61. Re:Source of oxygen for working out in your garage by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    If charged in your garage, your house could be referred to as "a fuel source". Some people, like 3 former astronauts, consider that a bad thing.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  62. Ford by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Too bad Fiat already has the name 500, no one will be able to use it now!

  63. Oxygen... Hey, isn't that important for something? by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    If our entire transportation sector used these things, about how much atmospheric oxygen would be in battery use at any given moment? I'm hoping it would be insignificant, but that's how we start thinking about a lot of things.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  64. Who knew. by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    Steve Jackson's Car Wars was ahead of its time.

    Can I get a dualie pickup with a turret please?

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  65. Flow version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next, they need to make a flow battery version of this.

    Drive down the road, turning fresh electrolyte (no peroxide) into spent electrolyte (with peroxide). You have one tank, with a non-permeable membrane between the two sides. Pull into a refueling station. Pump out the spent stuff, pump in the fresh stuff, over the course of a few minutes. Congrats. You just refueled. The station can deal with regenerating the spent stuff, so it can be reused. You don't have to worry about high-current or high-voltage electrical power being transferred to your vehicle.

    They're already working with Zinc- and Vanadium-based flow redox batteries. They don't have a very high energy density, which is why you hear much about it. They were running a bus on such a system. Look here for more details.

    At that point, all those whining about how long it takes to recharge will be out of excuses. Personal transportation can transition away from petroleum.

    <sarcasm>
    And there will be unicorns and butterflies for all.
    </sarcasm>

  66. hybrids don't weigh a lot more, plug-in hybrids do by spage · · Score: 1

    When you step up to a plug-in hybrid with 30 mile range the battery weight is indeed substantial (Chevy Volt weighs 3781 lbs), but below that it isn't much of a factor and can easily be offset by high-strength steel and other weight savings. With its ~1.3 kWh 123 lb battery back the Prius weighs 3042 lbs, meanwhile a VW Golf 4-door weighs 3023 lbs. The Prius plug-in weighs 3165 lbs but only has a 4.4 kWh battery good for 11 miles all-electric.

    --
    =S
  67. Fire hazard by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    After depleting the battery, drive it into the garage, close the door, and recharge. In a few hours, the garage is full of about 90% oxygen. Light a cigarette, and it'll go off like a flare. In surprise, drop the cigarette onto a pile of sawdust, and KABOOM!

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  68. Re:Oxygen... Hey, isn't that important for somethi by jimmydigital · · Score: 1

    If our entire transportation sector used these things, about how much atmospheric oxygen would be in battery use at any given moment? I'm hoping it would be insignificant, but that's how we start thinking about a lot of things.

    No problem.. I hear Druidia has all the air we would ever need.

    --
    Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -HLM
  69. Anode material by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone else notice that they have their anode listed as lithium metal?
    So let me get this straight, the battery is essentially open to the atmosphere so if can get oxygen to run and the anode material, which seems that it will also be open to the atmosphere, is made of lithium metal... so the second it rains or you get to a high humidity area your car is going to explode...

  70. Current Infrastructure (pun mildly intended) by aaronb1138 · · Score: 1

    Assuming their battery concept is the real deal and comes to fruition, why not come up with a system which retains the ability both to charge overnight and instantly fill up.

    The swappable battery bank idea is silly. Charge deltas, consistency, fraud, monitoring... it is all too much work.

    The design of the battery could be adept at being literally tanked up. Create an apparatus for purging the oxygen rich Lithium ions while replacing with full charged ones in some gas or liquid carrier.

    The filling hose would need to have at least 3 lines and fit on sealed. One line in, one line out, and one for a purge liquid or gas (to get Oxygen out of the fittings)... I think liquid nitrogen would do the trick. Even the concept of Octane ratings could be maintained. Lithium certified at multiple levels of charge (relative to carrier fluid), 80%, 90%, 95%... etc. Gas stations could use their own large scale batteries to recharge the waste Li2O2 back to Li2 overnight, or in electrically remote areas, get it trucked in.

    If we have the materials science to build the batteries, then containment, storage, and disbursement should equally be within reach.

    The only real issue one could argue is the inherent danger in transporting Li2, but we've worked around that with gasoline (though it is substantially less reactive).

    Heck, even fathers could still scald their children for running their batteries into the ground by not buying premium at the pump.

    I would apply for the patent myself, but I don't really feel like doing the work to figure out the correct and safe working fluid for happy go boomy Li2.

  71. How long at the filling station? by HArchH · · Score: 1

    I hope they remember to make the "Charge 5 Project" along with it, because when I'm down to 10% of the charge I'm still going to start having range anxiety.

  72. and it costs about the same as a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    '55 chevy?

  73. VW predicted 800 km range electric car by 2020. by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

    If I remember correctly, Volkswagen Chairman Martin Winterkorn predicted that by 2020, an electric car about the size of today's Volkswagen Golf with a battery pack almost the same volume size as the Golf's fuel tank could go 800 km (497 miles) on a single charge, thanks to dramatic improvements in lithium-ion and ultracapacitor battery designs. If Winterkorn's prediction becomes reality, this will be the beginning of the end of the age of petroleum-fueled automobiles, light trucks and SUV's. By 2025, people will be looking back at the "quaint old days" of fueling up a personal vehicle with gasoline or diesel fuel. :-)

  74. (Dis)charge issues and implementing unobtainium. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The battery will have to be in bellows as a self contained unit. Not an air breathing cell at all.
    There is no way water vapour or any other reactive contaminants can get in contact with the lithium or risk losing it's efficacy.
    The cell walls and the substrate also require porosity. This will reduce the charge density and the "air" will need a degree of active mixing due to its low density.

    This is a short editorial to stir a wasps nest of thinkers and supposers like myself and everyone else here. There is no hand portable rechargeable lithium air cell that we can safely offer a warrantee to.

    Plenty of unobtainium on Pandora. I'll wave you goodbye as you leave.

  75. The Art of Driving by John Taylor Gatto by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    Your comment reminds me of: http://johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/1d.htm
    "An analogy will illustrate just how radical this trust really is. What if I proposed that we hand three sticks of dynamite and a detonator to anyone who asked for them. All an applicant would need is money to pay for the explosives. You'd have to be an idiot to agree with my plan -- at least based on the assumptions you picked up in school about human nature and human competence.
        And yet gasoline, a spectacularly mischievous explosive, dangerously unstable and with the intriguing characteristic as an assault weapon that it can flow under locked doors and saturate bulletproof clothing, is available to anyone with a container. Five gallons of gasoline have the destructive power of a stick of dynamite. The average tank holds fifteen gallons, yet no background check is necessary for dispenser or dispensee. As long as gasoline is freely available, gun control is beside the point. Push on. Why do we allow access to a portable substance capable of incinerating houses, torching crowded theaters, or even turning skyscrapers into infernos? We haven't even considered the battering ram aspect of cars --- why are novice operators allowed to command a ton of metal capable of hurtling through school crossings at up to two miles a minute? Why do we give the power of life and death this way to everyone?
        It should strike you at once that our unstated official assumptions about human nature are dead wrong. Nearly all people are competent and responsible; universal motoring proves that. The efficiency of motor vehicles as terrorist instruments would have written a tragic record long ago if people were inclined to terrorism. But almost all auto mishaps are accidents, and while there are seemingly a lot of those, the actual fraction of mishaps, when held up against the stupendous number of possibilities for mishap, is quite small. I know it's difficult to accept this because the spectre of global terrorism is a favorite cover story of governments, but the truth is substantially different from the tale the public is sold. According to the U.S. State Department, 1995 was a near-record year for terrorist murders; it saw three hundred worldwide (two hundred at the hand of the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka) compared to four hundred thousand smoking-related deaths in the United States alone. When we consider our assumptions about human nature that keep children in a condition of confinement and limited options, we need to reflect on driving and things like almost nonexistent global terrorism."

    Anyway, the new battery sounds like an impressive innovation if it proves out in production. There are many innovative peopel at IBM Almaden; it is truly an amazing accomplishment. With that, and hydrigen storage in metal hydrides, both useful for storing intermittent renewable energy, and maybe hot or cold (LENR) fusion, our society is well on its way to ensuring an abundance of energy for all for basic needs.

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  76. Power plants are like tank farms by virginiajim · · Score: 1

    I live near a nuclear power plant that produces 1.9 Gw within a few miles of a large population center. Why can't spare batteries be charged there as well as any power distribution yards then trucked to distribution points just as fuel gets to gas stations? Nuclear plants produce surplus power at night and this one probably still uses its to pump water uphill to a reservoir that than runs water back down to hydro-generate power during peak periods. The new batteries may be a cheaper investment for a power company than additional transmission and distribution lines. Distributed power in batteries provide other advantages during power outages that gasoline in underground storage tanks at gas stations do not. Problems certainly exist, but if production and recycling costs are reasonable, this would be a great resource. Charged batteries pose hazards, of course, just like petroleum products, but can still be moved exactly the same -- train, boat, barge, truck, even planes -- and provide more opportunities by way of local charging from solar and wind. Maybe I can supplement my retirement in the country with a windmill that charges batteries I swap with neighbors? Wow!

  77. Just don't have a bad crash on a wet day. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All that lithium metal would make for a nasty hydrogen explosion if exposed to water.

  78. Re:Won't see the mass market by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    that old nonsense? battery technology at the time was indeed not ready for practical use in automobile, woefully inefficient example from the last 100 years nonwithstanding. big oil investors will invest in something that can make money, not pie-in-the sky.

  79. Re:Won't see the mass market by El+Rey · · Score: 1

    Not ready? BS!

    The proof: Toyota RAV4 EV. Based on 14 year old technology this thing can go 100-120 miles on a charge. Some of the original battery packs have lasted 150k miles.

    The battery tech was there. It worked. Hell, it is still working as 750 of these are still on the road!

  80. Alternative transportation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Lithium-Air vehicle gets to a price point that matches a eco-gas box over a 5 year life span, those that own homes may start the transfer from Oil to E. As long as the range is over 150 miles in cold weather (32 degs) it starts to make financial sense. And lets not forget the billions of your tax dollars going to fight wars over foreign oil deposits.

    And for those in reasonable healthy shape, maybe the eBike will come of age when a long range bike hits a reasonable price point. You can get ~30 mph avg and 100 mile range now with selected pricy eBikes but their price compares to used eco-gas boxes which of course most are more comfortable with. The advantage of the eBike over an electric car however is you can take it in your apartment when the day is over and charge it on standard house current plug.

    Don't write it off. Yeah, it's not ready for prime time but anyone that shrugs off the promise has little incite as to what a electric transportation device can provide when the power density and storage capacity closes in on gasoline.

  81. Now, couple it with this tech by lamer01 · · Score: 1