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

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
Three Cheers!!!! But why stop there?!?!

Long live the bag phone, the transistor radio, CRT TV's, The Model A and the 56k modem!!

Bring back the good old days of inferiority and planned obsolescence too!!!
Why stop there??

Long live stone knives and bear-skins!!! 🤣

(Sorry, I could not resist. 🤣)
 

SixTymes

Posts: 162   +105
Interesting about the longevity of those pesky batteries.
But so far so good.
I live in a city near a wind farm......supplier of the charge.
virtue signaling on ev's and your to the new future pollution, that is hilarious! I bet you don't even know what percentage that wind farm charges. and have you even watched Michael moores movie on wind farm scam? doubt you have.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
virtue signaling on ev's and your to the new future pollution, that is hilarious! I bet you don't even know what percentage that wind farm charges. and have you even watched Michael moores movie on wind farm scam? doubt you have.
Sheesh! Where the hell have you been?
You really should read this:

 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
If only we were able to get those wearing their tin-foil hats to leave them at home.
They won't. Want to know why? Here in the south, tin foil hats are huge sellers, and it never dawns on them that they can make their own in seconds! /s :D

I've been following the topic for many years - I saw that research from PNNL when it first came out - in 2007
I was always behind alternates to fossil fuels, though far from an expert. Pretty much just an enthusiast because of the garbage the oil companies pulled on us for many decades, and then EVs since the first Ford Focus EV in 2011 because it was the first electric that looked like a real car.

Sorry, I could not resist.
You could have, you just didn't. ;)
 

Bulllee

Posts: 229   +157
virtue signaling on ev's and your to the new future pollution, that is hilarious! I bet you don't even know what percentage that wind farm charges. and have you even watched Michael moores movie on wind farm scam? doubt you have.
Fair enough but I do bet,as all gamblers do.
 

RudyBob

Posts: 239   +251

gamerk2

Posts: 603   +525
Great, another article about pie in the sky battery technologies. We've been hearing this crap for 10+ years now at least and there's still nothing really new out there. It's just small improvements over time, but nothing revolutionary like all the tech listed in this article. *yawn* Wake me up when I can actually buy NEW battery tech.

Problem has been focusing on improving current tech to meet needs. Inventing a new battery chemistry is expensive, especially since most of the patents on promising chemistries have long been sold to oil companies, limiting development.

Then there's the whole issue that initial production is always at a loss, which necessitates a ton of outside funding; not everyone is a Billionaire like Musk was, and even he nearly ran out of cash getting Tesla started up.

If we threw hundreds of billions a year at the problem, we'd be all electric within a few years. But the investment isn't there.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 603   +525
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.

*sigh* Not true at all. The loss of winter-time production was known and accounted for by Texas, and was picked up by existing power-generating utilities. The grid failed because those utilities (coal, natural gas) we pushed far beyond normal capacity and Texas had absolutely no way to make up the difference since it's grid is insulated. Renewable utilities kept producing at their normal winter-time production levels.

EDIT

Now with links:

 
Last edited:

gamerk2

Posts: 603   +525
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.

The problem with Fusion so far is the cost of maintaining a stable reaction offsets any cost-savings of the energy produced. The actual "do fusion" part we've managed since the mid-80's; it's reaching that point where you have a stable, self-sustaining reaction that's the killer.
 

mbk34

Posts: 203   +132
It would be an interesting future article to cover all the world changing battery technologies that have been announced and which, if any, made any difference at all. Maybe touch on the reasons they didn't work and perhaps even mention the downsides of those that did work. It might be a long article - I can think of 2 others I've read about in just the past month (liquid air batteries and iron air batteries).
 

gamerk2

Posts: 603   +525
Smokers are vastly inferior. And they are the only source of energy that hurts us through design. They are the Model A of power generation and should have run their course decades ago.
More like a century. Remember, that cars originally were primarily battery powered. It was only because the Model T worked out that everyone jumped on the gasoline bandwagon and battery technology stagnated for over half a century.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,314   +533
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.

Sure, statistics and research can always show whatever the one who paid for it wants. The problem is that 70% of the "possible" capacity would imply that people charge their cars at night, in ideal interval when consumption is low.

But if you're living in a project, then you don't have your own garage. You need to use a charger somewhere else. And you certainly won't take your car at 01:00 at night to the charger, and then return by 02:00 home, and sleep for just a few hours before you have to go to work.

The whole system is a mess. And regarding fusion power plants, LOL, I won't even go deeper into that. I'm willing to bet you won't see a working fusion power plant in the next 30 years. I'm old enough to remember when they promised them "in 30 years from now", and that milestone has passed without them showing anything even remotely usable.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,314   +533
And regarding mentioning Germany and renewable energy, rather than reading about it in CO2-propaganda silverlining media, maybe you should read how "ecology" works in practice:


It's always interesting how this "free energy" is so damn expensive, unreliable and inefficient.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
They won't. Want to know why? Here in the south, tin foil hats are huge sellers, and it never dawns on them that they can make their own in seconds! /s :D


I was always behind alternates to fossil fuels, though far from an expert. Pretty much just an enthusiast because of the garbage the oil companies pulled on us for many decades, and then EVs since the first Ford Focus EV in 2011 because it was the first electric that looked like a real car.
I wouldn't call myself an expert. I do, however, consider myself relatively well-read on the developments in the pipeline.
You could have, you just didn't. ;)

Sure, statistics and research can always show whatever the one who paid for it wants. The problem is that 70% of the "possible" capacity would imply that people charge their cars at night, in ideal interval when consumption is low.
That was government research by a national laboratory. Not "sponsored" research by commercial interests in EVs, batteries, clean energy or the environment. As I see it, there is a big difference between research performed by National Laboratories, and research paid for and sponsored by industry and commercial interests.
But if you're living in a project, then you don't have your own garage. You need to use a charger somewhere else. And you certainly won't take your car at 01:00 at night to the charger, and then return by 02:00 home, and sleep for just a few hours before you have to go to work.
That is the situation right now. Neither of us has a prophet, or crystal ball for that matter, that can absolutely say what the future will bring. I highly doubt that with the current thrust in the industry toward EVs by all the major and minor auto industry players that infrastructure will remain the same. Infrastructure will have to be developed, and is being developed ATM.
The whole system is a mess. And regarding fusion power plants, LOL, I won't even go deeper into that. I'm willing to bet you won't see a working fusion power plant in the next 30 years. I'm old enough to remember when they promised them "in 30 years from now", and that milestone has passed without them showing anything even remotely usable.
I am old enough to also know. However, this recent research puts even "break-even" within reach. You're entitled to laugh as much as you want, however, science, not laughing, will prevail. That is what science does - research - test - analyze failure points - test again - repeat until success - not just give up because things did not go as hoped.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
And regarding mentioning Germany and renewable energy, rather than reading about it in CO2-propaganda silverlining media, maybe you should read how "ecology" works in practice:


It's always interesting how this "free energy" is so damn expensive, unreliable and inefficient.
Mistakes are an opportunity for improvement. If humanity just gave up at an inkling of failure, we all would still be using stone knives and bearskins. It is easy enough to find any number of reports out there that say "too expensive, riddled with problems, doomed to failure." I am willing to bet that at least some of those are sponsored by fossil fuel/political interests that have shown themselves not to care if their "energy source" has proven harmful as long as it still brings in profit/campaign donations. (Even the site you referenced refuses to let viewers look at it without permission to set cookies/display ads.)

Whether we like higher costs or not, something needs to be done to transition to better energy sources. Perhaps it is more of a failure of the world's economic systems. Everyone wants a free ride; no free-ride model is sustainable.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
virtue signaling on ev's and your to the new future pollution, that is hilarious! I bet you don't even know what percentage that wind farm charges. and have you even watched Michael moores movie on wind farm scam? doubt you have.
Since when did Michael Moore become the be all and end all for all things green/innovative/progressive/scientific?
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,581   +4,988
The problem with Fusion so far is the cost of maintaining a stable reaction offsets any cost-savings of the energy produced. The actual "do fusion" part we've managed since the mid-80's; it's reaching that point where you have a stable, self-sustaining reaction that's the killer.
I think this post is filled with mis-information.

At this point, it is impossible to determine what the costs will be. Neither you nor I have any inkling of what might come about. Many scientists across the world are working and collaborating on the problem. They have finally conquered a major portion of the problem. I think it highly likely that the collaboration of scientists will find a solution.

We can all continue to weigh the costs of progress and of stemming environmental degradation until our faces turn blue. While we debate the costs, environmental degradation is not getting any better. The environment supports humanity. If it continues to degrade while we debate how much our survival is going to cost us, perhaps it will get so bad as to not be fixable. Then what will we do? Continue to debate the costs of the survival of humanity?
 

gamerk2

Posts: 603   +525
I think this post is filled with mis-information.

At this point, it is impossible to determine what the costs will be. Neither you nor I have any inkling of what might come about. Many scientists across the world are working and collaborating on the problem. They have finally conquered a major portion of the problem. I think it highly likely that the collaboration of scientists will find a solution.

We can all continue to weigh the costs of progress and of stemming environmental degradation until our faces turn blue. While we debate the costs, environmental degradation is not getting any better. The environment supports humanity. If it continues to degrade while we debate how much our survival is going to cost us, perhaps it will get so bad as to not be fixable. Then what will we do? Continue to debate the costs of the survival of humanity?
Oh, I'm not disagreeing. My personal opinion is its already far too late to solve the problem, and society is going to collapse under the weight of all the climate related problems (loss of resources, mass migration into northern countries, etc.).

Honestly, "blow off the atmosphere with nukes" is fast becoming the least bad option on the table. I think Musk, Bezos, and company have the right idea: get off the planet ASAP.
 

Tantor

Posts: 206   +381
Interesting about the longevity of those pesky batteries.
But so far so good.
I live in a city near a wind farm......supplier of the charge.
*sigh* Not true at all. The loss of winter-time production was known and accounted for by Texas, and was picked up by existing power-generating utilities. The grid failed because those utilities (coal, natural gas) we pushed far beyond normal capacity and Texas had absolutely no way to make up the difference since it's grid is insulated. Renewable utilities kept producing at their normal winter-time production levels.

EDIT

Now with links:


Very true. Renewable energy is simply not capable of being the primary source. It will always be marginal. That's the failure that was 'amply' demonstrated in Texas.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,687   +1,737
TechSpot Elite
More like a century. Remember, that cars originally were primarily battery powered. It was only because the Model T worked out that everyone jumped on the gasoline bandwagon and battery technology stagnated for over half a century.
Yep, but I was talking more about electricity generation. If the nut bags of the 70s and on had quit their opposition to Nuclear, we would be breathing much cleaner air. Might even have stalled the EVs?