Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Israeli Firm Makes Kilomile Claims For Electric Car Battery Tech

Posted by timothy on from the proclaimers-need-to-up-their-game-a-bit dept.

cylonlover writes with this tantalizing excerpt from GizMag "Israel-based company Phinergy claims to have developed metal-air battery technology that promises to end the range anxiety associated with electric vehicles. The company's battery currently consists of 50 aluminum plates, each providing energy for around 20 miles (32 km) of driving. This adds up to a total potential range of 1,000 miles (1,609 km), with stops required only every couple of hundred miles to refill the system with water."

7 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. batteries are not rechargable by mrvan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From TFA (I know, but there were no comments yet ;-):

    The company says the aluminum plate anodes in its aluminum-air battery have an energy density of 8 kWh/kg, but the batteries are not rechargeable. Once the energy is expended, the plates, which add up to around 55 pounds (25 kg) per battery, need to be replaced. However, the company points out that aluminum is easily recyclable and that swapping the battery out for a fresh one is quicker than recharging.

    That makes it a lot less appealing, I would say...

    1. Re:batteries are not rechargable by santax · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It will depend on the price. If I can get a new battery like I would get a new gas-container for my cooking needs, no problemo. Just as long as it's at a reasonable price.

    2. Re:batteries are not rechargable by Ksevio · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That would be a big downside - however, they also say they can get it a 200 mile range using Lithium ion batteries which is respectable. It could be that this one time use battery is to quell the complaints of people who say "But what if I want to road trip 500 miles into the middle of no-where!"

    3. Re:batteries are not rechargable by rlwhite · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The article says the battery contains 55 lb of aluminum. The price of aluminum currently fluctuates in the general vicinity of $1 per lb, so we're talking at least $50 in raw materials. Add in other materials, manufacturing costs, and profit, and I'm going to guess a $100 battery is not out of the question. Maybe $75 if we're lucky. That sounds high as a gas replacement initially, but if it truly gets 1,000 miles on the aluminum battery and we compare it to a gas-sipping car (we'll say 50mpg), the gas at $3.50/gal would cost $70 for 1,000 miles. When you consider how few cars in the US get that good of mileage and the ever-climbing price of gas, we are probably somewhere close to a break-even point economically.

    4. Re:batteries are not rechargable by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's ridiculous, given how energy-intensive it is to produce aluminum in the first place, and that if it was widely adopted you'd need a huge supply of ready-to-swap aluminum batteries. My suspicion: this isn't really a "battery", it's just recovering some of the substantial energy in the aluminum metal itself.

      That's what all batteries do, electrochemically recover, at a rate more or less matched to the application, the chemical potential energy of what they are filled with. Some are also capable of being driven in reverse, to restore them to their original state. Others depend on electrochemistry that isn't so neatly reversible within the confines of a conveniently sized battery, and have to be broken down for recycling. Aluminum is the latter, unless you are willing to pop an entire aluminum smelter into your battery bay.

      Aluminum makes the point particularly obvious because the most cost-effective refining process is very similar indeed to driving an aluminum-air battery in reverse, so the amount of electricity going in is blatantly visible(unlike metals for which non-electrochemical refining processes are preferred).

    5. Re:batteries are not rechargable by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Congratulations. You have "discovered" what space programs have already known for decades - the Gibbs free energy change of elemental aluminum converted to aluminum chloride or aluminum oxide is massive. Among the largest there is for a chemical reaction. Several times greater than that of hydrogen converted to water or carbon dioxide (which is the basis for energy release in hydrocarbon fuels). That's why aluminum is a popular fuel in solid rocket boosters. On a per-mole basis, it's much better at storing energy. And it's still pretty competitive on a per-weight basis.

  2. Re:Sounds promising by mlts · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The process of refining bauxite to get aluminum is extremely energy intensive. Other than having a pure oxide to put in, it almost is pointless to bother recycling the "battery".

    This is one of the last things I want to see in widespread use, unless we have modern nuclear plants, fusion, or some other next gen energy source, just because turning aluminum oxide back to a usable metal uses so much electricity.