From the man who invented Li-ion batteries no less...
https://fossbytes.com/goodenough-solid-state-battery-glass-electrolyte/
https://fossbytes.com/goodenough-solid-state-battery-glass-electrolyte/
Even more battery news
- Thread starter anotherkiwi
- Start date
A few manufacturers produce already solid state Lithium batteries, exploiting their extreme thinness but the capacity remains very low (0.1AH range).
We may have to wait until 2030s before the capacity of solid state Lithium cells get into the region of 3AH.
E-bikes don't really need solid state Lithium batteries though. There are two advantages that solid state batteries bring: they are a bit thinner and they work in a wider temperature range, down to -40C whereas normal batteries only go down to -20C. BTW, you can't roll up those cells, so no 18650 SS cells.
D
Deleted member 4366
Guest
The inventer has a cracking name so the invention must be good enough in this case.
the work is brilliant, but these things take a very long time in an industry as matured as energy.
The fundamental problem with Lithium battery is the metal intercalation process itself. When you move atoms/ions from one electrode to the other, you change the volume of the electrodes.
The fundamental problem with Lithium battery is the metal intercalation process itself. When you move atoms/ions from one electrode to the other, you change the volume of the electrodes.
From the abstract: "The result is a safe, low-cost, lithium or sodium rechargeable battery of high energy density and long cycle life."
What is not to like? All the correct buzzwords are there. Missing from the abstract is the fast charging bit, I didn't create an account to access the whole article but I trust (yes, I know...) the journalist from fossbytes. The target application is cars, the patents are patented and they are waiting for a manufacturer to swoop down and buy up the technology. I have heard of a guy in California who might be interested...
that may explain the use of big words.I have heard of a guy in California who might be interested...
Safe? glass can't bend
Low cost? not.
The other two are OK but by the time they scale up the capacity of these solid state batteries, the goal post would have moved forward.
It's a bit like nuclear fusion, it's always 'it'll be here in 30 years'.
I think the safe bit is because they haven't managed to explode one yet in the lab. Back to pouch battery form factor, I have about 20 Ah worth of those in a metallic suitcase...
I think they picked a known weakness of current batteries (the one in the Galaxy Note 7). The number of Lithium batteries that caught fire is pretty low considering how many are left in the sun.
Going by the record on battery advance announcements, the odds against it ever appearing are immense, 1000s to 1 against.From the abstract: "The result is a safe, low-cost, lithium or sodium rechargeable battery of high energy density and long cycle life."
What is not to like? All the correct buzzwords are there. Missing from the abstract is the fast charging bit, I didn't create an account to access the whole article but I trust (yes, I know...) the journalist from fossbytes. The target application is cars, the patents are patented and they are waiting for a manufacturer to swoop down and buy up the technology. I have heard of a guy in California who might be interested...
The only time I ever treat these announcements as a possibility is when a product arrives in the market. Then the only time I treat one as realistic is when it's proven in service for a while.
It's a sobering thought that after some 200 years of secondary cells and thousands of announcements of amazing advances, there's only been five widely marketed fundamental types, with only three of those surviving and only two suitable for widespread use.
.
.
So often the technology we actually get is not the technology that is actually already tried, tested & trusted but deemed to be 'disruptive' by vested interests etc.
The same can be said in many other areas of endeavour too.
If only it were as simple as great ideas or developments forcing their way through to the market etc.
Accidents happen though and sometimes we get just what we need most...
The same can be said in many other areas of endeavour too.
If only it were as simple as great ideas or developments forcing their way through to the market etc.
Accidents happen though and sometimes we get just what we need most...
that is true at the moment.
However, batteries belong to the physical world, you just can't create and manipulate batteries with the same ease as you do with information.
.. Very well put. There is now significant investment in these chemistries, and there will be small incremental improvements year on year. Think back over how the nickel metal hydride batteries climbed from 1.2v 600mah to 1.4v 2600 over a number of years and with improved self discharge rates . When you have a manufacturing plant operational , you can make minor tweaks on a monthly basis, and sometimes totally reconfigure the plant if the improvements are worthwhile. The Intel plants are a case in point. .. most of the plant remains but specific tools are upgraded
Even so, there will be battery technologies & chemistry in use right now that we mere consumers are unlikely to get hold of until they themselves have been well surpassed. Market forces, iterative development etc (or whatever else) notwithstanding- we get what we're given and what's not for us yet is not for us yet.
But you can be sure there is much better battery tech in use (or shelved as 'disruptive technology'') right now around the World.
It's simply arrogant to assume we have the best - or anything approaching it - at our disposal commercially for the masses. At whatever price.
DARPA anyone?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA
But you can be sure there is much better battery tech in use (or shelved as 'disruptive technology'') right now around the World.
It's simply arrogant to assume we have the best - or anything approaching it - at our disposal commercially for the masses. At whatever price.
DARPA anyone?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA
Last edited:
" State of the art" is a misunderstand term. What is technically feasible, and made available to selected groups, may not be economically feasible for mass production or consumption. However in time most technologies filter down to the masses .. think diamond coated drill bits. In some cases I would hope that the authorities keep back some technologies e.g radioactive sources, gene manipulation kits
This is pure conspiracy theory stuff. If it were true evidence would leak out from time to time, nothing can be kept permanently secret.
The truth is that if there's profit to be made, it hits the market asap, even when it doesn't work well. NiMh batteries were a perfect example with their false launches.
.
.
We're talking batteries here though. 'gene manipulation' & 'radioactive sources' dangers are irrelevant.
Straightforward batteries, extremely powerful, safe enough and way beyond what can be conceived of on an obscure little forum populated by ebike enthusiasts (however knowledgeable etc) - will be in use, it's safe to say, right now around the world. Just not for us.
And 'trickle down' frequently does not apply as often as we might think or want - otherwise there would be no hunger, no thirst, no extreme and degrading dehumanising poverty etc.
Some things are just not allowed to happen for the masses.
Power = power.
We simply don't have it in the way that those that do have - whatever the need or benefit.
For even a 'fit for public knowledge' example of what's on the tables right now take a wee look at the DARPA wiki linked. It reads like science fiction fantasies. Can you or I begin to even imagine what's not fit for public knowledge?
And everything has to be powered, often in the field, discretely.
Just saying....
Straightforward batteries, extremely powerful, safe enough and way beyond what can be conceived of on an obscure little forum populated by ebike enthusiasts (however knowledgeable etc) - will be in use, it's safe to say, right now around the world. Just not for us.
And 'trickle down' frequently does not apply as often as we might think or want - otherwise there would be no hunger, no thirst, no extreme and degrading dehumanising poverty etc.
Some things are just not allowed to happen for the masses.
Power = power.
We simply don't have it in the way that those that do have - whatever the need or benefit.
For even a 'fit for public knowledge' example of what's on the tables right now take a wee look at the DARPA wiki linked. It reads like science fiction fantasies. Can you or I begin to even imagine what's not fit for public knowledge?
And everything has to be powered, often in the field, discretely.
Just saying....
Ps if something were kept permanently secret.....how would you know?
As for the 'c' word, there are perhaps a few maybe?
Of course not... We know everything!
As for the 'c' word, there are perhaps a few maybe?
Of course not... We know everything!
wiki lists them here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_in_lithium-ion_batteries
More than enough material to write one article a week.
How is it that the scientists who develop battery technology don't know anything about these mysterious super batteries? Why is it that even the US military satellites use the same lithium cells that we have. How is it that the world's largest car companies who wag the tail of governments know nothing about these secret batteries. And how is it that if they are "right now around the world" as you say, nothing ever leaks out? There's no such thing as a true secret, humans find them impossible to keep, hence the well publicised leaks.
The only thing that's safe to say about this is that it's nonsense.
.