ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Building a better battery

Posted: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 2:30 PM by Alan Boyle


Donna Coveney / MIT
A material called lithium iron phosphate, shown here in a lab dish, could soon be
used in batteries that can be charged up in a matter of seconds rather than hours.

How many hours does it usually take to charge up a battery pack? Researchers have tweaked a material already being used in lithium-ion batteries to cut that time down to a fraction of the usual wait. They say the technology could be used to juice up batteries in seconds rather than hours.

The tweak has the potential to change the way we use gizmos ranging from mobile phones and laptops to plug-in electric vehicles over the next couple of years. But as usual with these kinds of innovations, there's a catch or two.

MIT Professor Gerbrand Ceder and graduate student Byoungwoo Kang explain the technique in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature. It involves processing lithium iron phosphate, also known as LiFePO4, in a different way. This type of lithium-ion battery has been targeted for use in a variety of plug-in vehicles, including the Chevy Volt, but one of its shortcomings has been that the batteries are sluggish when it comes to taking in and pushing out electrical energy.

"They have a lot of energy, so you can drive at 55 mph for a long time, but the power is low," Ceder explained in a news release from MIT. "You can't accelerate quickly."

Ceder and his colleagues took a close look at the chemistry involved with lithium-ion transport, using computer simulations, and determined that there was no intrinsic reason why the ions should be moving so slowly through the battery's energy-storing material. The problem was that the ions had to move in specific directions across the surface of the material in order to enter nanoscale "tunnels" leading into the material itself. It was as if the ions had to follow a maze of surface streets to enter a transit tunnel.

Ceder and Kang found a way to cook the surface of the LiFePO4 material into a glassy structure that let the ions move around quickly, as if they were traveling on a beltway that bypassed surface streets. That sped the ions toward the tunnels and increased the charge/discharge rate by a factor of about 100. The researchers built a small test battery in the lab that usually needed six minutes for a full charge or discharge. When the material was tweaked, that time was cut to 10 or 20 seconds.

Further tests showed that the tweaked material doesn't degrade as much as unprocessed materials during repeated chargings and dischargings. Another plus is that LiFePO4 batteries don't go up in flames, as has sometimes been the case with other types of laptop batteries.

Changing lifestyles
"The ability to charge and discharge batteries in a matter of seconds rather than hours may make possible new technological applications and induce lifestyle changes," the researchers observed. Based on their experiments, they estimate that the typical cellphone battery would take 10 seconds to charge.

If recharging becomes less of a pain, power-hogging mobile applications such as full-screen video might look more attractive to the devices' users. (iPhone owners, are you listening?)And laptop users might not have to hunt around so frequently for a wall outlet to plug into.

Batteries for small devices could be the first to benefit from the beltway tweaking, the researchers said. But in time, faster-charging batteries could change the way we think about plug-in vehicle power, and could provide backup storage for solar- or wind-generated electricity. MIT says that two companies have already licensed the technology, and Ceder thinks the first tweaked batteries could hit the market in two to three years. (The researchers declined to name the two companies, citing concerns about proprietary information.)

So what's the catch? Kang told me that it remains to be seen whether laptop and mobile-device batteries can be processed to build in the surface-level "beltways" while keeping them small enough to fit the required space. "In terms of volume, this material is not that good in comparison to commercial material," he said.

A plus for plug-ins
Kang said the technology would be well-suited for the bigger batteries used in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.

"We think the plug-in hybrid is more proper for our material, because the material is quite stable and it discharges quickly, and you can achieve faster acceleration of the car," he said.

The catch for that application is that you wouldn't be able to pour in electrical power as quickly as you'd want to from your outlets at home. "Home does not have that kind of power," Kang said. "We need more power. ... The point is, with the battery, there's no limitation. The limitation comes from an external source."

The ideal situation would be to have a network of high-power electric charging stations, which would allow you to juice up your electric vehicle on the road much as people fuel up their gas guzzlers today. Ceder and Kang estimate that an 180-kilowatt power source could give a full charge to the typical plug-in car's 15-kilowatt-hour battery in five minutes.

The researchers say their tweaked material would provide the advantages of supercapacitors (high discharge rates) without the disadvantages (relatively low energy density). But scientists are coming up with a number of different technologies for better batteries - including silicon-based batteries, which I wrote about last year. How do all these battery breakthroughs compare? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comment section below.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

I can't wait to see this in cars.  I would love to have a plug-in car so I don't have to bother with shopping around for the best deal on gasoline.  It could also be used for power storage with extra energy created by solar pannels (or have other sources of power) when you can't sell it back to the grid.  This could could give the military support on the go to run things out in the field.
This is not new. It has been going on for several years. The technology came out of MIT. It is in commercial release, just to show you how far along it is from being a good idea.
http://www.a123systems.com/ check out this site if you want to read the facts.

the cars  accelerate slow? or the path of the ions?because as far as i know electric cars can accelerate twice as fast as a gas guzzler.the subject is about faster charging but when the part about the chevy volt is unclear to me.

[ALAN ADDS: Ceder is saying that the cars accelerate relatively slowly on electric power, and that's because the batteries don't discharge quickly enough. The reason they don't discharge quickly enough is basically because the ions (and electrons) don't move fast enough out of the battery material. If you've driven a hybrid, you'll know that when you tromp on the pedal for a fast getaway, the gas engine will definitely kick in. That's why experts advise that you accelerate slowly if you want to maximize your mileage with a hybrid. As for the Chevy Volt, that car (still under development) is due to use LiFePO4 batteries. A123 Systems already uses the "nanophosphate" material in its plug-in hybrid batteries, as another commenter has noted. This new research relates to a processing method that improves the charging/discharging performance of those batteries.]

The power is low meaning current.  So you cannot take off as fast...
Seeing as how electric vehicles have already proven that they can generate more horsepower than gas engines can, it will be an interesting to watch the transformation of "grease monkeys" into techno-geeks as they talk about their latest LifePO4 battery and brushless motors on their cars - instead of superchargers and any  hop-ups related to fossil-fuel burning vehicles.

I welcome that, and hope it arrives soon.  Fast AND clean - pretty cool, indeed.
There are liars, damn liars and then there are battery engineers.
Where is all this electricity going to come from? Don't tell me solar. Most of the solar electricity we have now comes from hyroelctric dams, not wind. Even so, it amounts to 6% of the total that we use right now, not accounting for any electric vehicles. Charge them at night when all the residential A/C is running? This is all such a crock. Electric cars are really coal fired cars. That may solve a political problem, but it doesn't solve the environmental problem. An electric car will still have a big carbon foot-print.
how will this technology be affected by the imminent restrictions on the use of lithium batteries?  just like every effective cold medicine, lithium batteries are used in the manufacture of methamphetamine.  i've heard grumblings from law enforcement about banning or controlling them.  wall-mart already tracks purchases of them.  i know it is kinda off-topic, but seems to be a real problem with the technology- we may not be allowed to use it.
I'm rooting for the supercapicitors myself. In terms of a direct energy replacement for batteries, if they could get the energy density up, they "fuel up" much like a gas tank does.

Until you have one or the other of these fast charging storage systems up, electric vehicles are just a niche market. But a 15kw storage system is far below what should be expected. A 20 gallon tank of gas has a net caloric value of 136kw. If gasoline powered vehicles were as efficient as electric vehicles, it would really be

No matter how you look at it, to replace gasoline electric storage systems have to meet or exceed gasoline's net 2400 watt hours/kg caloric value. Even li-ion batteries only have around 150 w-h/kg, and EEStore's claimed 400 w-h/kg near term goal is still a fraction of gasoline's practicality. And you can fuel a 20 gallon tank in 5-10 minutes.

These breakthroughs are a good step in the right direction, but there's a lot more work and innovation needs to be done before we're ready to kill off gasoline.

Think of it this way: you need technology to get to the point where the gasoline tank of a car can be replaced with the power storage device, and the engine/transmission can be replaced with a motor to retrofit all of the legacy vehicles.

For the foreseeable future (say 5-10 years), hybrids of one sort or another are the only practical solution we have. Besides, it would take that long to beef up our electrical delivery systems and build power plants (whether wind turbines or something else) to generate the electric power tens of millions of vehicles would require to replace gasoline.

The grid isn't ready for millions of people charging at least 50kw vehicles all within a few hours of each other, and it would take years of planning and tens of billions of dollars in infrastructure to equip it. The electric "gas station" of the future would have to deliver 5000kw an hour if charge times were down to 10 minutes. And that's imagining that 50kw is sufficient, which it isn't for a gasoline replacement.

Consider the number of gas stations in a city like Los Angeles, and you're talking some serious energy delivery challenges. Consider that the city of Los Angeles is a tiny fraction of the region identified with "Los Angeles", and you can see some really serious challenges in store for energy delivery. Though you can always have electricity "tankers" to fill in the gap.

To replace diesel, which is more efficient, those numbers would have to be even larger.
While the electric car and it's development is great (especially for the environment), it will never fully replace the gasoline-fueled car anytime soon.  Just ask those driving enthusiasts if they're willing give up the sounds a gasoline powered car makes for the low hum of electricity...like I said, not anytime soon.
Would it be feasible to equip a plug-in vehicle with a combination power source of a fast-charge battery as described in this article paired with a supercapacitor to provide burst power for acceleration?  These are the areas that stimulus dollars should be spent: provide short term job creation for research and long term job creation with new products.
You know I hate to sound cynical, but the truth is that once we have the entire system in place, the cost of charging your electric car and the high-power charging place will be just as much as it was to fill up your car with gasoline.  Generating electricity is not free either.  And we want to save on fossil fuel emissions, but over 50% of electricity generated in the US is accomplished through the burning of coal, which creates pollutants too.  There is no easy fix for these problems.
Massive redundancy is found in successful structures in nature, so it might be best to design batteries with massive redundancy, especially if there's significant differences in recharge time between cell sizes.
How about a long extension cord? Or put certain places and lanes on the road where you can extend a contact to a charged rail to recharge. Something like the subway third rail system.
Sounds promising...except for the network of 180 KILLOWATT! recharging stations.  If you think airconditioners in the summer put a massive strain on the electrical grid, imagine how much more powerstations we'll need to add to the current grid inorder to fule a city full of electric vehicles or plug in hybrids.  180 killowatts is enough to power a large city block! Drive around your city and count the gas stations you see.  Now imagine if half of those were charging stations.  You're talking about many MEGAWATTS of additional power per city.  And realistically, this extra power isn't going to come from wind and solar power.  It's going to come from the addition of traditional plants like nuclear, coal, gas, and where available, hydro.  These are big projects that won't be built quickly.  This, plus the cost of plug-in hybrids, is going to make these vehicles more of a niche market oddity then a revolution in transportation.
"If you've driven a hybrid, you'll know that when you tromp on the pedal for a fast getaway, the gas engine will definitely kick in. That's why experts advise that you accelerate slowly if you want to maximize your mileage with a hybrid"

I have been driving a Toyota Prius since January 2002. The battery/electric motor provides much greater acceleration (from a stop) than the small gasoline engine. From a dead stop acceleration is from the electric motor-only BECAUSE it has greater acceleration than the gas engine.  Only after the car is moving a few miles per hour does the gasoline engine kick-in, but this is because the maximum speed on battery-only is low. The Prius user groups actually suggest accelerating quickly and braking slowly to take maximum advantage of the hybrid design. The quick acceleration removes energy from the battery and the slow braking uses only the regenerative braking which recovers the energy used in acceleration to charge the battery instead of wasting energy with friction braking.
Slow discharge too on the Volt. The Vold design keeps an ultracapacitor in line between the battery and the power train to allow for fast discharge during acceleration, then the battery refills the ultracapacitor for the next incident where a larger discharge is required. The ultracapacitor is also used to take up power during regenerative breaking.
To recharge a battery which is a storage device, you need to input a specific quantity of energy. If you increase the rate of energy input you have to  have a source that can supply the increased quantity over a short time cycle and you need to address the resulting heat issues. So in laymans terms you need a ton of electrical current available and the recharging process become rather dangerous with potential for explosion.

We'll see just how well this whole deal works out...
Open your mind: Just because you CAN recharge a home battery superfast doesn't mean you have to, you can just accumulate the charge over hours.  This technology COULD work at home, if you use an extra set of batteries in a home charging station.  The home LiFePo4 or capacitor batteries could recharge slowly for hours with household current at night (special commercial rates after midnight) or during the day with possibly some renewable like solar.  Then the charge could be transferred fast between the home battery and the car battery.  You would not have to rely on expensive gas power stations for normal commuting.
Interestingly, conventional lead/acid batteries can be discharged fast enough to be used in drag-racing.

The electric motor used has its highest torque at the lowest rpms, which is also ideal for quick acceleration.

There is even an organization of racers:

http://www.nedra.com/

It is fascinating to watch what appears to be an old beat-up sedan humiliate someone in an overpowered & expensive racing car on the dragstrip.

And they're nearly silent too, and not just from lacking the roar of an internal combustion engine.

They can be modulated so there is no wheelspin, with all available power going into forward motion rather than smoke & noise.
Think about this concept:   use TESLA coils along a road...one for each mile or so... transmit electricity wirelessly and run the cars motors. Batteries would be useful when you digress from these type of roads.
The issue with electric-only cars has always been on the battery/capacitor side.  Electric *motors* are highly efficient and powerful.  Electric *storage* is relatively poor.  Hybrids were designed in an attempt to take advantage of this, where a gas-powered engine (along with other systems, like the one that uses the energy from braking) is used to charge batteries that run an electic motor the majority of the time.

With the advances in solar cells and small wind stations over the last few years, more efficient and longer lasting batteries are the next piece in the puzzle for reducing dependence not only on oil, but on coal as well.
This WILL happen.  But it will happen over a number of years.  Not everyone will jump on the electric bandwagon immediately.  Just like when the horseless carriage did not disappear overnight, neither will the internal combustion engine.  This will take time.  During this time different modes of supplying charges will be tried and eliminated.  There will not be an overnight need of many "new" megawatts in just a matter of days.  
It is amazing how people associate battery powered cars with the Volt. The Volt is a failure. Get familiar with the Tesla Roadstar teslamotors.com This is the future of eletric cars not the Volt. This car is SOLELY run off of laptop lithium ion batteries, its range is 250 miles not that failure 40miles. Its 0-60 is presently 3.9s. This Battery only powered Tesla Roadster is faster than almost all sports cars and uses no Gas at all. They are starting production on 4 door Roadsters for a $45k Price range area.
The Tesla Roadster is the future get to know it.
I've read about inventions of this nature before, and they almost never come to market. Why is that?
It's ashame because it sounds like a great idea.
this will all work just fine, until the large and grossly wealthy oil companies begin to believe it
will really work, then they will scoop up the patent
and all of us who thought it would be just great,
will never hear of it again.  how much do you want
to bet, the back room boys are already scheming.
Regarding the debate of electric cars accelerating slowly.  Electric motors generally have higher torque at low RPMs compared to combustion engines.  But at higher RPMs the electric motor weakens.  This is why in a hybrid, the electric motor will give you a nice kick off the starting line, but then the combustion engine kicks in once you're up to speed.  Power is a function of RPM's X torque.  So, while an electric motor does provide good torque from rest, a combustion engine provides more "power".
If they impliment the use of mini turbines strategically placed in the most airodynamically productive places around the car the wind caused by the car moving could return a charge to the battery.
I'm sure the government would figure out how to soak us for charging up a plug-in care for road use just like they plan to do with gasoline.  Bet that 5 minute charge at a station would be expensive.
To those who think that we're simply replacing oil fueled vehicles with coal, which would negate the environmental benefits of electric vehicles:  There will be significant energy efficiency gains by having power that is generated from a few large scale commercial plants rather than millions of little portable ones all over the roads.  

Even if all the extra energy generated to power electric vehicles came from new coal plants, the carbon foot print is still significantly less (and the environment better off) because of the efficiency gains from economy of scale.    
if you can make a battery powered anything thump like a harley .... count me in ..... otherwise HOHUM!!!!!
Even if all the power is from coal, due to the effientcies of an electric, it would still be half the carbon foot print of an IC engine vehicle.

BYD a Chines battery & car maker (Warren Buffett has invested in them) all ready have a 40 mile range electric on the road, with a LifePo4 battery. Looks a bit like the GM Volt. So the future has all ready arrived. The best design though is the Volvo Recharge with in wheel 24 phase electric motor/brake per wheel. Lighter, simpler, cheaper.    
If you have to drive your to some battery charging station that means that they can regulate prices outside of accordance with conventional energy.  They will charge you prices much more comperable with gasoline than with your regular electric bill.  If you cannot charge your car at home and pay your electric bill for the output, then the value of having an electric vehicle has been reduced to environmental only, not economical.
How far "up" do they "charge up" batteries?  Why don't they just charge the batteries?
Supercapicitors can discharge fast enough to give a great boost of power. They can also discharge fast enough to blow your arm off.

I wonder what a fully-charged, giant battery can do if it was discharge quickly?
we can provide the power... (nuclear)
If I remember my sixth grade science class correctly hydrocarbons are created mainly from decomposing animal/plant matter.   We need to be better stewards of oil and use it only for the manufacture of items that can't be made with any other material not burn it.   Any guesses on how much hydrocarbon material there may be on other planets?
Regards
Give inventors the right incentive and solutions will be found. Perhaps high speed flywheel technology could be buried under gas stations instead of fuel tanks. They could draw from solar panels, windmills, or the grid when demand is low and deliver their power to quick charge vehicles as needed.
I wonder if this new tech coupled with super capicitors could be used to harness the power of lightning strikes.
I also wonder why research into electric vehicle technology seems to be the consumer car and not into the cargo transport industry. I assume they have to go "where the money is". It would make more sense to me that they start EV tech with a larger vehicle to stuff more equipment into. A semi truck could carry lots of batteries, take full advantage of the low RPM torque scale, and use the massive surface area of the trailer to mount solar panels. Start big then refine your way to small. If the new battery only takes a few seconds to charge, you could use capacitors to store quick jolts of electricity from highway-side electric rails like a trolley car, or maybe an electro-magnetic inductance tunnel. Am i going to far? Back to StarTrek for me.
What if the power grid was built into (buried under) our highways, roads, and streets?  I have read that the technology to wirelessly recharge batteries is being developed using magnets.  Your vehicle could recharge while you are driving.  What if we can develope highways that produce thermal energy to add to the power grid?  How hot does pavement get in the summer time?    
As much as we love our gas guzzlers.. the sound, the torque, conversion over to electric for vehicles is inevitable. Actually once an appropriate power source is available (fuel cell, super good batteries, etc) they can be really quite fun. Anybody who's ridden in a high performance electric car will tell you - they're no slouch. Just pure, viscious acceleration. Sweet whine from the motor and no shifting.

But regardless of all that, electric power is waay more efficient than combustion could ever hope to be. The cost to operate them  are ~1/5 the cost of gas guzzlers. When combined with green tech for charging (solar, wind, etc.) the cost drops even further. No oil changes, filter replacements, expensive engine parts... the Tesla Roadster only requires a checkup once a year and costs 3 cents a mile to operate and thats on grid power.

These batteries will make it so any electic car can perform as good or better than combustion. When they achieve that level, they'll start sellin like hotcakes. The cost will come down. It will also stimulate the green energy business so people can charge at home cheaply. This is where we're going and it is the best solution.
Quick charges are one solution to the problem of the apartment-dweller who wishes to purchase a plug-in electric. A lot of apartments have street parking only or parking that is away from the resident's apartment/condo. Don't think I'd like to snake a 120-ft. extension cord out my balcony door, dropping it down to street level, then running it along the edge of the building and around the corner.
Lithium is very abundant in the oceans but very costly to extract. Dried ocean beds on land are very few and can supply for electronic power not the tons for transportation power. The raw material for a battery will become the new "oil" in the future.
I built an electric vehicle for around town. It will do 60 mph and will travel 25 to 30 miles on a charge. It has the same power of the gas engine. I love driving past the gas stations!!! I would love to have better batteries. I would be real happy to go about 80 miles on a charge. The only time I buy gas is for the Prius. This setup is not for everyone ,but it works for me...
The Tesla roadster can do 0-60 in under 5 seconds. Electric vehicles on the way from China in as little as two years get 200 mile range and travel at speeds exceeding 75 mph.

The equating of the energy from gas to that of a battery is only valid if both motor and drive systems are equally efficient. They're not, electric is more than 3 times as efficient in that regard.  It does make an excellent point however, the majority of the gas we put in our tanks does nothing to make us go. So why would anyone argue that it is not in our collective best interests to make vehicles more fuel efficient or to make the leap to a new paradigm--electric vehicles.

The majority of commuters travel less than 40 miles a day.  So all the worst case fear mongering scenarios regarding the grid can't possibly charge all the electric vehicles, or that all electric vehicle batteries need to be sized to provide 300 mile ranges with near-instantaneous recharging is ridiculous.  Further, if you need that kind of range for one or both of your vehicles there are always hybrids, and soon plug-in hybrids.

Hobbyists have been converting their lightweight vehicles to electric vehicles with basic deep-charge lead acid batteries for the past 30 years.  The cost, assuming you own the vehicle is in the $8-10 thousand range.  The typical vehicle goes 40 miles on a single charge.  Keep it simple stupid does not seem to apply to the auto industry.  Sometimes lots of stuff is built in to increase the profit margin, to bolster an engineerign technique, or to delay or put off a project none of which has been good for the electric vehicel or us.  

Remember, these hobbyists are converting vehicles that were never designed to be electric.  So there is no regenerative braking.  They have to power steering and brake systems designed for a combustion engine vehicle.  In doing so they drastically decrease the efficiency of the converted vehicle.  Even so, they still get 40 miles per charge.  They do it in their garages, for a token amount compared to the billions the auto makers expend.  And I understand and accept they have legal/safety issues to address.  But most of that stuff could be handle with managing expectations.  Like, here is a car for $18K that gets 60 miles on a charge, is best for city driving and limited highway with a maximum speed of 65 mph.  Millions upon millions of us would buy that car.  We would all still have our second car, but now we could bypass the pumps.  And filling up on electric costs effectively 30-50 cents a gallon--crude comparison.  

And many do charge their vehicles with solar power.

It is ethically and morally wrong to undermine a paradigm shift to an electric transport system that clearly is more efficient, more healthy for us and the planet.  Arguments about the electric vehicle being dirty when powered by electricity from a coal burning power plant have been debunked.  Electric cars recharged at night would actually make these plants cleaner!  How?  Each night as demand drops dramatically the plants need to slow down the production of electricity to preventing blowing out the grid.  This process is cumbersome, inefficient, and for coal plants, very dirty.  By increasing the utilization of spare capacity the plants would not have to step down and it would be a win, win scenario.

When you add to this, that it is possible that the electric grid could borrow power from electric vehicle batteries that are plugged into the grid to supplement huge demand spikes you have a win, win, win.  Yes, it is new, and yes it will take some common sense and new thinking, but electric vehicles are more than possible.

There were those who spoke against electricity, the light bulb, the telephone, the radio, TV, and believe it or not for the past hundred years the electric car.  For once the electric car was the premiere vehicle.  But a concerted effort has been made to keep electric vehicles off the market to promote the value of oil and gasoline.  Look into electric street cars being bought up by petroleum companies, or the events surrounding the demise of Thomas Edison's battery technology when he first partnered with Ford.  But today is different because even the oil companies are saying resources are becoming scarce and because we now know the harmful effects of burning, oil, gasoline and coal.  The electric society founded on renewable energy is the only way so many of us can survive without fouling the water, air and soil we require to survive.
after a careful reading of all comments i nominate "there are liars, best liars & battery engineer"
Great article Alan!  It's nice to see battery technology getting somewhere on making a better battery.  Hopefully this will make it into cars soon rather than being sat on.  Better living through Science!
Electric Cars are NOT NECESSARILY "Coal Powered Cars".  Here in Washinton State, while we do use a little coal power, the electricity "On the Margin" is actually natural gas, so if Electric Cars are charged during the day they are actually natural gas powered cars -- very efficient natural gas powered cars.  If you run an Electric Vehicle on Coal you still reduce CO2 by about 1/3 compared to gasoline cars.  If you run it on natural gas, you are reducing CO2 by about 2/3 compared to gasoline cars.  And, if you charge your car at night in Washington State when there are few other electricity users, you are probably charging your car on a combination of Wind (which blows most at night) and Hydro Electric -- which means you are running 100% clean and green.  Or, if like my case, your household chooses to pay a 10% surcharge to buy 100% green electricity, then you can charge your car and be sure that you are only supporting green electricity -- you are running your Electric Vehicle 100% green!
I am on a trip in my electric car, it's 10 degrees out, and an ice-storm occurs. How will an electric car generate enough heat (throwaway energy to a gas engine) to keep the car ice-free and warm for the passengers, without cutting my usable range by 7/8?  Nobody seems to want to address this issue.  How is the Tesla heated?  Or is that a California climate - only car??
Just like the EEStor thing, people are wanting the EV  to happen so badly that they latch on to the first thing that looks good.
Looking at it carefully, the study does not mention energy density, cost, reliability, weight, etc.

It may still have some of the inherit problems with Li-ion.  This discovery will proibably require years of development before it can be safely placed in EV's

Right now we have Ni-Mh and acid batteries that would be viable if a cheap, powerful ultracapacitor were available.  I found a possible candidate on Ultracapacitors.org. (Reticle Carbon).  With a few minor mods. this one could do the trick.  


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1831393

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google