5 times increase at 1/5 the cost in 5 years? What are you smoking?

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
A 1/5th increase in capacity at five times the cost is more realistic in five years. :(

That's about what happened between SLA batteries and today's most advanced lithium ones.
 

jazper53

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 20, 2012
890
18
Brighton
That sounds like lithium has maxed out on performance, further development to increase a further 1/5th at 5x the cost would be far to expensive IMHO
 

Scimitar

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jul 31, 2010
1,772
40
Ireland
The buzzword is nano, of course. Nano-this and nano-that, nano bleedin' everywhere. I think I'll apply for a research grant for nano-telly and nano-coffee in bed. Nano-bed, naturally.
 

KirstinS

Esteemed Pedelecer
Apr 5, 2011
3,224
899
Brighton
I keep hearing amazing thi gs about graphene and what it can do for batteries. All in the lab though - never in high st
 

jazper53

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 20, 2012
890
18
Brighton
I keep hearing amazing thi gs about graphene and what it can do for batteries. All in the lab though - never in high st
Graphene foam batteries have been quoted as having similar performance as Lithium, but the charge times are quoted to be as low as 15 minutes, which sounds like a big step forward in usability
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
Graphene foam batteries have been quoted as having similar performance as Lithium, but the charge times are quoted to be as low as 15 minutes, which sounds like a big step forward in usability
I remember in the early days of Li-polymer Toshiba quoting 3 minutes charge time prospects. But here we are taking 4 hours to charge same.

No research area is so deserving of the "take it with a pinch of salt" comment as batteries and all the claims I've seen over the last 60 years have failed to be realised. After two centuries with them in various uses, we still use lead acid batteries for the largest worldwide high discharge application, in cars.
 

Scimitar

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jul 31, 2010
1,772
40
Ireland
No research area is so deserving of the "take it with a pinch of salt" comment as batteries and all the claims I've seen over the last 60 years have failed to be realised.
Oh, I think back to the utterly dreadful pocket-money-robbing experiences I had as a lad with the awful Ever-Ready carbon dry cells and realise the modern NiMh (especially the LSD) is a fantastic bit of gear. We get so used to what we've got we lose sight of how wonderful it is.
 

eclectic_bike

Pedelecer
May 3, 2011
72
3
I believe it is a matter of political will and resources.

The necessary sciences need to come together under one roof or as they call it a 'hub'. The targets may be difficult to accept or believe but remember that we got a man on the moon in less than 10 years. Such projects need massive commitment; something on the scale of the moon landing or the Manhattan project.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
Oh, I think back to the utterly dreadful pocket-money-robbing experiences I had as a lad with the awful Ever-Ready carbon dry cells and realise the modern NiMh (especially the LSD) is a fantastic bit of gear. We get so used to what we've got we lose sight of how wonderful it is.
Primary cells are a different thing though, you are comparing chalk with cheese, rechargeable with single use.

I'm speaking only of secondary cells, i.e. rechargeable.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
I believe it is a matter of political will and resources.

The necessary sciences need to come together under one roof or as they call it a 'hub'. The targets may be difficult to accept or believe but remember that we got a man on the moon in less than 10 years. Such projects need massive commitment; something on the scale of the moon landing or the Manhattan project.
Sometimes it's more a matter of physics, and that's particularly true with batteries.

For a large earlier part of the last 100 years battery development took a back seat, but since 1971 there's been huge resources put into it with some gains but which still fall over 90% short of what's needed in terms of life and performance.

We already know what the best materials and methods are, for example which elements on the periodic table make the best cathodes in differing chemistries. All the work is now concentrated on getting the best out of that knowledge, and that points to low percentage gains over the next decade or so.

Batteries are unlikely to ever be the answer for our mobility needs and I'm sure we will eventually adopt different approaches such as either removing the need to travel or improving mass public transport.
 

Geebee

Esteemed Pedelecer
Mar 26, 2010
1,256
227
Australia
I am more optimistic about battery improvements, yes there has been a lot of wildly hyped failures over the years, but a decade ago my bike had a 36v 12 amp SLA battery that weighed 16kg and had a usable capacity at high drain around 6ah if you wanted any kind of life out of them.
My recently built LiPo 36v 5ah weighs around 1kg or double that for 10 ah and most of that can be used regularly, and cost is in the same ball park.

I don't expect the hub to achieve the stated goal but it hopefully may make some major improvements in weight and price.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
I don't expect the hub to achieve the stated goal but it hopefully may make some major improvements in weight and price.
Those who market them will regard the second as an improvement - - - - - - - in profitability!

But I see your comparison as false, home build cost for example with a reduction in capacity.

The SLA to lithium truth is that weight is a quarter of what it was for the same capacity, but the average cost is easily 5 or more times what it was, and the lithium battery life still leaves much to be desired. Yes, there are a few lower cost e-bike maker's batteries but also many dearer.

And most importantly, they are still a very long way short of what is needed in every respect. Even if development doubled all performance factors, they would still be unsatisfactory for most applications.
.
 
Last edited:

Scimitar

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jul 31, 2010
1,772
40
Ireland
Primary cells are a different thing though, you are comparing chalk with cheese, rechargeable with single use.

I'm speaking only of secondary cells, i.e. rechargeable.
I'm not comparing chalk with cheese at all. I'm comparing what was available then to what is now and that's all finest cheddar, innit?
 

Geebee

Esteemed Pedelecer
Mar 26, 2010
1,256
227
Australia
Maybe I could have worded that better, the price being similar was for the 10ah LiPo compared to the 12 ah SLA, the LiPo having the larger usable capacity by far in ebike use, weight wise 18kg vs 2.8kg, I just weighed the 36v 5ah pack in its case and it was 1.4kg so x2 2.8kg (heavier than I remembered).
Both battery packs were DIY, so the comparison stands as accurate for my use.

Whoops, just checked the SLA spec's for the batteries I used they weigh 6kg each so 18 kg all up. I have adjusted the weight above to show this.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
I'm not comparing chalk with cheese at all. I'm comparing what was available then to what is now and that's all finest cheddar, innit?
You are Dave, single use primary cells are a very different technology to rechargeable secondary cells. Whether one or the other wasn't available for a particular use isn't relevant, rechargeable lead-acid was around and that is the relevant secondary cell comparison with NiMh.

Primary cells have made progress in their own right, the zinc-carbon of yesteryear that you mentioned should be compared with today's alkaline batteries for example, but that progress isn't relevant to rechargeables.
 

Scimitar

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jul 31, 2010
1,772
40
Ireland
You are Dave, single use primary cells are a very different technology to rechargeable secondary cells. Whether one or the other wasn't available for a particular use isn't relevant, rechargeable lead-acid was around and that is the relevant secondary cell comparison with NiMh.

Primary cells have made progress in their own right, the zinc-carbon of yesteryear that you mentioned should be compared with today's alkaline batteries for example, but that progress isn't relevant to rechargeables.
Yes, I know what primary and secondary cells are, thank you.
My point was and is that the sh it we could buy back then stands comparison with what has been available for a few years now for the same applications and people using them and comes off very poorly indeed.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
52,872
30,417
I agree there, true of so many things, not just batteries. Tech consumer goods are far better today than ever they were back then.