Sakuu's 3D printed solid state battery could be a boon for electric vehicles

RudyBob

Posts: 239   +251
While I do support advances in battery technology, especially for smaller mobile devices, and as an auxiliary power source in cars and planes, none of this will make electric cars more useful.

A completely new energy source is required. Either something you can pour inside of the car (like hydrocarbons, or hydrogen, or liquid electrolyte) or an onboard electricity generator powered by..... something. That's how electric cars become ubiquitous. Batteries will never reach the energy density of simple hydrocarbons (such as gasoline, or natural gas, or even ordinary sugar).
Smart Man!!
 

Dimitrios

Posts: 918   +719
Most people wrongly claim that EVs charged from coal plants are dirtier than ICE/fossil fuel vehicles. Its easy enough to find the research that states this, but most people seem more interested in parroting the views of others. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikesc...-cleaner-even-when-the-power-comes-from-coal/

http://redgreenandblue.org/2019/01/21/evs-cleaner-gas-powered-cars-even-plug-coal-power-plant/
But what the heck. Why search for truth when outright crap information fits the narrative?
(read this next link carefully)
https://www.reuters.com/business/au...become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/

Thanks for the articles.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
Batteries will never reach the energy density of simple hydrocarbons (such as gasoline, or natural gas, or even ordinary sugar).
To be honest, I don't see why they would have to, and I don't see the connection.
A completely new energy source is required. Either something you can pour inside of the car (like hydrocarbons, or hydrogen, or liquid electrolyte) or an onboard electricity generator powered by..... something. That's how electric cars become ubiquitous.
So plugging in a vehicle is not the equal of jamming a nozzle in a hole and pressing a trigger because you can't "pour" an electrical charge?

I hope I missed your point man because what I see is very convoluted.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
While I do support advances in battery technology, especially for smaller mobile devices, and as an auxiliary power source in cars and planes, none of this will make electric cars more useful.

A completely new energy source is required. Either something you can pour inside of the car (like hydrocarbons, or hydrogen, or liquid electrolyte) or an onboard electricity generator powered by..... something. That's how electric cars become ubiquitous. Batteries will never reach the energy density of simple hydrocarbons (such as gasoline, or natural gas, or even ordinary sugar).
Never is a long time. I highly doubt that you are correct. There are already laboratory developments out there that have 10X the current energy density of Lithium batteries. As I see it, it is only a matter of time before any one of the efforts like this is commercialized. https://phys.org/news/2019-01-tiny-silicon-particles-power-lithium.html
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
I'm sorry, did I miss something...which part do you find a conspiracy or unbelievable? The grid failed in Texas this winter due to green energy sources not producing like they should and removing the natural gas pumping systems from the gas wells. California's grid is always on the verge of failure. Current electricity generation is mostly from natural gas and coal...renewables are very low down the list. Mandating electric vehicles and severely cutting our own energy production has only resulted in gasoline being driven up by $1.00 a gallon or more in just a year. There is STILL no such thing as an affordable EV larger than a shoe box. I can find the study about someone attaching a 2,000 lb trailer to a Tesla Model X, causing a 40% drop in range, but everyone knows that the more you load a battery, the shorter the time to drain. That goes for acceleration, etc.
I don't believe I said DO NOTHING, quite the opposite, I said I'm for better sources..but paying $10.00 a gallon for gas and paying $75k for my next car are not on the list...This is NOT a conspiracy, it's a result of these policies that are NOT ready for prime time.
I'm not going to address the parts of your post that have been addressed by others.

The range issue when towing is no different than fossil fuel vehicles except for the current range capacity of EVs and the fact that they take so long to recharge compared to filling your tank with gas. For anyone who hauls stuff, I am sure that is an issue with EVs as much as I am sure that it is an issue that hauling stuff even with a fossil fuel vehicle is much more expensive than driving that same vehicle without hauling something. As I see it, with all the research going on into EVs, these issues will get worked out.

Furthermore, if the major automakers who have announced that they are converting their production to EVs actually come through with what they have said and don't succumb to the political winds of the day, prices will come down - as they have with any and every new development in technology.

Right now, there are no policies that require you to switch to an EV and get rid of your fossil fuel vehicle. So, you can still tow with your fossil fuel vehicle. Gas is not yet $10/gallon. Maybe it will get there, I don't know.

Honestly, I don't really care if it does. Fossil fuels are proven to be dirty and the pollution is widely known to cause problems. If the environment is so f-d up from fossil fuel use and the environment is so drastically changed that the current ecosystem collapses, all of us will have a lot more problems than $10/gas.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
Gas is not yet $10/gallon. Maybe it will get there, I don't know.
Honestly, I don't really care if it does. Fossil fuels are proven to be dirty and the pollution is widely known to cause problems.
I think the exact same way. The higher the gas prices go, the more EVs\Hybrids sell. And I will just sit back and watch the oil producers cut their own throat with this look on my face 🤣
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
I can find the study about someone attaching a 2,000 lb trailer to a Tesla Model X, causing a 40% drop in range, but everyone knows that the more you load a battery, the shorter the time to drain.
Part 3. It's actually a question. Would you care to guess how much the fuel economy would drop with a gasoline or diesel engine towing 1 ton?

Answer with facts please, I have a 2019 Ram 2500 and I do fairly long distance tows often, so I already know.
 

ChrisH1

Posts: 168   +75
"Current EV batteries aren't designed to be recycled"

100% of Tesla batteries are recycled. https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/support/sustainability-recycling

That doesn't mean 100% of each battery is recycled, of course. Up until recently, approximately 60% of each battery was recycled.

Recently, Tesla has been getting the process in-house, and now can recycle 92% of the battery's content. Aim is to go for 100%.

https://interestingengineering.com/tesla-says-it-can-now-recycle-92-of-battery-cell-materials
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,314   +533
Never is a long time. I highly doubt that you are correct. There are already laboratory developments out there that have 10X the current energy density of Lithium batteries. As I see it, it is only a matter of time before any one of the efforts like this is commercialized. https://phys.org/news/2019-01-tiny-silicon-particles-power-lithium.html

That's not the main problem. The main problem is, the bigger the battery you have, the higher power density you need to recharge it in reasonable time. We have 150 kW chargers now. But imagine if all cars were electric, and 50% of population connect their car to a 150 kW charger on that particular day (and just like traffic jams, there will be peak times where all the chargers are in use).

Imagine that power usage, and the power production needed to feed those chargers all at the same time.

With gasoline/diesel/gas it's easier. You put it into tanks upfront. It can be stored "offline" cheaply and used when needed. But electricity cannot be stored cheaply. Batteries are too expensive for an ordinary charging station to store 1-day worth of electricity.

Which means we're gonna need a lot more electricity production capacity than we have today. And nuclear power plants aren't the answer. On top of creating radioactive waste (so, now there will be 10x more waste and more incidents) they are also pretty inflexible. You can't increase production for 2 hours, and then decrease for the next 4 hours. Only hydro power plants, geothermal power plants, and gas turbines can do that.

Coal and nuclear power plants can't do that.
 
Last edited:

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
Not in the shops they didn't, not even close. When the asking price for a pack of 6 x AAA is 6 euro, you know you are being robbed blindly. The manufacturer most likely sells those for something like 50c.

When you need those a lot, life is easier, as you can buy a large bulk of those from Amazon for cheap. But most people need only very few batteries, like myself, and so ending up over-paying absurdly.
If the article were about batteries for a flashlight or portable radio, IMO, your comment would have relevance; however, it is about batteries specifically targeted to EVs

In the future, developments for EVs just might be applied to batteries for flashlights or portable radios, or whatever, and when that happens, we all may see cheaper prices for such batteries.

I've been a fan of Energizer Ultimate Lithium batteries (in AAA and AA sizes) for a long time because they last far longer than other batteries, don't leak like alkaline batteries, and their shelf-life is unparalleled. The "extra batteries" that you have to buy will probably still be perfect when you need them. I do the same, BTW. I buy the largest quantities of these that I can find from where ever I can find them. I have a drawer full of them that I bought several years ago, and they are still far from their expiration date. As I see it, from their longevity, both in use, and shelf life, they turn out to be cheaper than the equivalent alkaline batteries. And unlike alkaline batteries, our local public recycling center accepts them for recycling when they are spent.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
How will the charging energy be produced?
I suggest reading the links in one of my previous posts to this thread.

And in case you have not heard, there is ongoing research in this area as well.

IMO, one of the most exciting and potentially promising areas of research is Fusion - where a major milestone has just been reached. https://www.llnl.gov/news/national-...nt-puts-researchers-threshold-fusion-ignition
Fusion is still likely many years away from a viable commercial power plant, however, that development puts such a plant within reach maybe, for once, really within 20-years.

EDIT: Science is doing what science does. Researching, learning, and improving day by day. I am sure we all wish progress were faster, however, at least science is making progress.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
Whatever happened to graphene based batteries?
Despite the reservations and dis-information from the tin-foil hat crowd, there is still plenty of research in the field, and what looks like efforts to commmercalize the technology. For instance - https://phys.org/news/2021-08-layered-graphene-unique-quantum-confinement.html
IMO - what is arguably more promising, assuming the research leads to a commercial product, are supercapacitors - https://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=111835
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
That's not the main problem. The main problem is, the bigger the battery you have, the higher power density you need to recharge it in reasonable time. We have 150 kW chargers now. But imagine if all cars were electric, and 50% of population connect their car to a 150 kW charger on that particular day (and just like traffic jams, there will be peak times where all the chargers are in use).

Imagine that power usage, and the power production needed to feed those chargers all at the same time.

With gasoline/diesel/gas it's easier. You put it into tanks upfront. It can be stored "offline" cheaply and used when needed. But electricity cannot be stored cheaply. Batteries are too expensive for an ordinary charging station to store 1-day worth of electricity.

Which means we're gonna need a lot more electricity production capacity than we have today. And nuclear power plants aren't the answer. On top of creating radioactive waste (so, now there will be 10x more waste and more incidents) they are also pretty inflexible. You can't increase production for 2 hours, and then decrease for the next 4 hours. Only hydro power plants, geothermal power plants, and gas turbines can do that.

Coal and nuclear power plants can't do that.
Yes, I know. And no one is making progress, right? Hint: Read one of my posts above. Like I said, never is a long time, and research will continue into the problem. There are plenty of brilliant (more so than any of us posting to this thread) people out there, that completely understand the problem despite reservations from others like you.

At this point, I don't see anyone thwarting the EV push just because fossil fuels are fast, cheap, and easy - and incomparably dirty. Transporting to market and refining fossil fuels is far more dirty than electricity. To use a quote from Kosh of Babylon 5 "The avalanche has started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote."
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
But imagine if all cars were electric, and 50% of population connect their car to a 150 kW charger on that particular day (and just like traffic jams, there will be peak times where all the chargers are in use).
Why speculate? I see no links here to even remotely backup your speculation.

In 2007, already, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (one of the leading laboratories in the US for alternative/green energy) did a study and published a report on this very topic. In that, they concluded that in 2007, already, there was enough excess electric capacity in the US to power 70% of the US' small vehicle fleet.

But don't take my word for it, read the research yourself. https://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.asp?id=272
“PNNL’s original study on this topic revealed that for the nation as a whole, about 70 percent of the energy needed to operate cars, pickup trucks, vans and SUVs could be supported using generating and transmission capacity that’s already available,” said PNNL energy researcher Rob Pratt. “The new study allows us to take this one step further and say now that we know there’s enough electricity, what other challenges, especially at the distribution level, do we need to address to make PHEVs a reality? We will also look at environmental and grid benefits that we can realize as PHEVs are adopted into the market place.”
Honestly, I trust actual research by leading scientists like this far more than wild speculation and supposition.
 

mgwerner

Posts: 133   +144
Ohh, look, another battery article. Let me know when one actually hits the market and is successful, instead of another lab/startup "breakthrough."
 

RudyBob

Posts: 239   +251
I suggest reading the links in one of my previous posts to this thread.

And in case you have not heard, there is ongoing research in this area as well.

IMO, one of the most exciting and potentially promising areas of research is Fusion - where a major milestone has just been reached. https://www.llnl.gov/news/national-...nt-puts-researchers-threshold-fusion-ignition
Fusion is still likely many years away from a viable commercial power plant, however, that development puts such a plant within reach maybe, for once, really within 20-years.

EDIT: Science is doing what science does. Researching, learning, and improving day by day. I am sure we all wish progress were faster, however, at least science is making progress.
Long Live Fossil Fuels.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
Why speculate? I see no links here to even remotely backup your speculation.

In 2007, already, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (one of the leading laboratories in the US for alternative/green energy) did a study and published a report on this very topic. In that, they concluded that in 2007, already, there was enough excess electric capacity in the US to power 70% of the US' small vehicle fleet.

But don't take my word for it, read the research yourself. https://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.asp?id=272

Honestly, I trust actual research by leading scientists like this far more than wild speculation and supposition.
Usually when you post I just give it a thumbs up and move on rather than speak because you are much better at speaking than I am. But I just want to add to the post above. Some won't like the origin, but all statistics are clearly sourced.


QUOTE - "Fact: If 80% of all passenger cars become electric, this would lead to a total increase of 10-15% in electricity consumption."
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
Usually when you post I just give it a thumbs up and move on rather than speak because you are much better at speaking than I am. But I just want to add to the post above. Some won't like the origin, but all statistics are clearly sourced.


QUOTE - "Fact: If 80% of all passenger cars become electric, this would lead to a total increase of 10-15% in electricity consumption."
Interesting read, and I welcome the reinforcements. If only we were able to get those wearing their tin-foil hats to leave them at home. :laughing:

I've been following the topic for many years - I saw that research from PNNL when it first came out - in 2007.

EDIT: The article mentions another aspect that people often overlook. The fact that EVs are able to provide power back to those who own them - enough so that they can act as backup power sources - to homes.