A 'revolution' in batteries

J Quinlan — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:01:52 GMT

These are the types of technologies we need to help us uncouple our society from foriegn oil. Good for them.

A 'revolution' in batteries

S-P, Philly, PA — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:15:17 GMT

I'm wondering how fast the battery can be recharged. If it takes 10 times longer to recharge, the application is limited.

A 'revolution' in batteries

John, Bethlehem, PA — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:52:27 GMT

The trick with these sorts of innovations isn't merely coming up with the technology, but making it reliable and mass-produceable. Still, we're long overdue for a major breakthrough in energy storage.

As for any theoretical reduction in petroleum consumption, don't forget that we have to generate the power to charge these batteries. Even if you were to eliminate all gasoline consumption by private vehicles overnight, you'd just replace that with an increased demand on the nation's power grid. The energy has to come from somewhere.

A 'revolution' in batteries

A Baker — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:52:42 GMT

A battery that has the potential of 5 to 10 times the stroage capacity?? Feed those Lab Rats! This is just what this country needs to get back in the tech spotlight! Good work guys. I'm looking foward to getting some new U.S.A. Tech.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Brent Duran, Lenexa, KS — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:18:16 GMT

Very interesting article. If someone were to combine this new battery technology with the new, highly efficient quantum dot solar panels, the world's power paradigm could begin to shift. Such a shift could spur new investment and industry, propelling the world economy forward. Again, a very interesting and optimistic article.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Avery, Orlando, Florida — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:47:32 GMT

Reduces need for foreign oil? Yes, but more importantly... reduces the need for oil... PERIOD. After the last World War, the US enjoyed a period of technological and intellectual growth unrivaled in it's previous history, and unmatched since (driven by many factors: our war victory and the ensueing economic optimism, the influx of German scientists, and the enormous military/aerospace industries that grew as a result). The modern energy/environmental landscape could provide this country with the inspriation it needs to once again fire up the resourcefulness and creativity of the American workforce... I'd like to imagine a future with no burned fossil fuels, one where the US is at the forefront of energy development... from batteries to fusion.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Doug Fingles, Warner Robins, Ga — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:59:30 GMT

I wonder if this could be the tipping point for electric-powered aircraft? Replacing the weight of fuel systems, combustion chambers, etc, with an electrical storage system that drives the fan blades may actually make economic sense now. In addition, the noise reduction alone would make for safer flight paths and less congestion.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Brad Jensen, New York, NY — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:07:24 GMT

Wonderful! However, the research & development process should be pushed forward, covering both electrodes, considering the energy needs which we all face now. Perfect it commercialize it sooner.

A 'revolution' in batteries

John — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:08:48 GMT

While I'll agree that this is a step forward, you still have to rely on fossil fuels to charge these batteries. It'll take more energy and hence, more money to charge a battery that theoretically holds 10x the charge.

A 'revolution' in batteries

j9 — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:19:10 GMT

J Quinlan -- That is a naive view. How do you think these things are researched, built, and charged? WITH OIL!!!

A 'revolution' in batteries

Mike, Clearwater, FL — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:29:17 GMT

Who knows if this particular technology will eventually work in commercial applications but even if not, I love seeing this kind of research going on.

Right now we (the U.S.) have such a TREMENDOUS opportunity to take the lead in alternative energy and make a phased and orderly transition from dependency on foreign oil. No it's not going to happen overnight and there will likely always be a place for gas/diesel engines but with global demand for energy increasing, this is literally of strategic importance to our well-being as a nation. The fact that it's so poorly sponsored is almost criminal.

This is the equivalent of the space race for the mid 21st century and we haven't even found our running shoes.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Eric, Thousand Oaks, CA — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:37:10 GMT

This is a great article about reducing gas and oil needed for energy, but don't forget that we will still need oil to make plastics and lots of other materials that are in everyday products.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Dave Puetz, Tonica, Illinois — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:48:22 GMT

Hello, does anyone do research before they pop off about the energy to charge batteries coming from oil? Oil only acounts for about 2% of electrical generation in USA, 50% from coal. Power companies detest using oil to make power. It is the last resort for peaking units since it is so expensive. Have any of you witnessed any wind farms going up recently? I work at a nuke plant which has new neighbors moving in- 266 wind generators at a megawatt a piece. That is where your green electricity will come from.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Byron Raum, Beverly Hills, CA — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:49:15 GMT

I see no reason why we need to rely on fossil fuels to charge these batteries. We can use nuclear fuel or any other source. It does not have to be oil. Furthermore, keep in mind that if we burnt oil at near-100% efficiency (which we can at a large, carefully designed plant), and transmitted the energy to charge an electric car, we would get 100s of mile to the gallon burnt.

A 'revolution' in batteries

dr death — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:58:26 GMT

it all sounds like a good idea,as we can see the benefits clearly for applications of more energy,will the researchers and developers give a more overall evaluation of this technology before mass production of a potentially hazardous material?

A 'revolution' in batteries

Fred, Gainesville, Florida — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:05:11 GMT

WRONG! They will be charged off our electric grid which will have new nuclear reactors added to it.

As a side benefit, we'll be spending our energy dollars at home rather than sending them to terrorist breeding countries.

This is win - win!

A 'revolution' in batteries

Frank, Dallas, TX — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:09:33 GMT

Ironically, these kinds of things will, at first, have the peverse effect of INCREASING our dependence on foreign oil. To wit: the domestic demand for oil will drop, lowering the price. When the price drops, oil companies will stop buying from the most expensive producers first. Guess where those are? The Gulf of Mexico, west Texas, and Canadian oil sands.
Nonetheless, we need to get this kind of technology going anyway - unless you like breathing pollution. Even the dirtiest coal plant (inside the US) can produce power more cleanly than the cleanest internal combustion engine.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Terry, hemet calif. — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:17:43 GMT

solar and wind generators with an inverter and battery storage at home would eliminate or at least reduce the power grid use, also an onboard solar panel can charge your car while your at work. regenerative breaking into the new super capacitors will also reduce battery discharge when you accelerate, the batteries can only absorb power at a certain rate, overflow power can be stored quickly in a capacitor as well as quickly discharged into an electric motor reducing the load on the batteries during acceleration.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Michael, Suffield CT — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:27:41 GMT

Two points:
1)I agree that this is a step in the right direction and could help us to get off of the fossil fuel dependency.

2) While I agree that charging the batteries may initially depend upon fossil fuel generation, what's to stop the engineers from pairing up their batteries to solar cells, which could charge or trickle-charge the batteries? It's sort of short sighted to not see that this is a piece of the puzzle, rather than it being the goal in and of itself.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Rick, Minneapolis — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:32:50 GMT

It's good to see this new technology. I'm sure it'll mature in time. I'm anxious to see if these new batteries hold as much charge as advertised? You still have to use energy to charge these so you borrow from peter to pay paul as far as the carbon game goes. I'm sure some folks will find an inventive way to use these.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Darrell, Englewood, CO — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:11:05 GMT

Several years ago, Motorola developed and patented a methanol based, refillable fuel cell that would give a cell phone a one month talk time. The same engineers took a sabbatical to develop the tech two or three times further. This tech has completely disappeared as we still don't have a cell phone that lasts any decent length of time. What happened to that tech? Why can’t we seem to get anywhere with longer batteries. Will history repeat itself with this silicon based battery?

A 'revolution' in batteries

John Watje, Yakima, Washington — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:13:58 GMT

What about reviving Buckminster Fuller's idea on a geodesic style national power grid? Feeding, electrical power from all sources increases the efficiency of the grid (or, mega-grid if you prefer). Even excess power from these batteries will do. Also, why cannot this new battery technology be used in solar arrays?

A 'revolution' in batteries

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:10:55 GMT

Lookout Duracell!

A 'revolution' in batteries

terry, hemet, calif. — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:23:38 GMT

the technology is already here! its the oil companies that are putting road blocks in the way to prevent the loss of revenue going into their pockets! They pay politicians kickbacks to slow down legislation on alternate energy sources. But of course that has been a "NO BRAINER" for years! we need to get the politics out of Americas creativeness and allow free reign to those who can really take us into the future. If we don't the the rest of the world will pass us up and we will become a 3rd world country.

A 'revolution' in batteries

vishnu b thapa — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:30:40 GMT

Chicago known as the windy city which would be just the right place to generate clean wind energy battery.just my humble suggestion.

A 'revolution' in batteries

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:33:30 GMT

I have to agree with Brent Duran. If this technology become commercially available, we will be reducing our need for polluting fuels with combination of solar cells (as was mentioned) along with wind power and hydroelectric that allows fish to go upstream to spawn. I would hope that all of the presidential candidates put federal research money to keep this going. The current administration wouldn't think of it.

These batteries could have applications for space travel as well. They could serve as a back up when there is no light to run the facility if they use solar panels.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Darren Pope — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:02:33 GMT

Yeah... what we need is a wind powered battery. You could just have a little propeller on all your devices... lol.

A 'revolution' in batteries

uwe fruendt san felipe baja,mex. — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:29:24 GMT

if the new batteries are used in cars, the should use the forward momentum of the car to recharge the batteries. we used to have dynamos on bicicle tires to produce the electrisety for the lights. even if 10%would get back in to the batterie,it would be good for 50 miles more.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Karl, Houston Tx — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:34:46 GMT

The efficiency of creating energy from a power plant is maximum of about 60% the efficiency of an automobile is around 12%; thereore use of batteries should reduce the consumption of energy and total CO2 to the atmosphere substantially. The US already has the infrastructure to provide the power as the power plants are underutilized during the night time when mose users would be charging their cars. The only problem is that the exisitng infrastructure is primarily coal, and there is not enough coal production to take make up the gap if batteries became norm for automobiles. Theanswer will be nuclear, wind and solar. We have the technology to become 100% energy effiecient today, these developments will make it practical and affordable for everyone.

A 'revolution' in batteries

George Dongarra - Wenonah, NJ — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:46:06 GMT

Battery technology is key to our mobility future. Charging vehicles at night when power demand dips will work great for the electric companies. I would like to see more options for vehicle conversions in the future. Today the one thing that has been keeping conversion kits from going mainstream is the current battery technology. Maybe this is what we have been waiting for.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Pete Smith — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:53:38 GMT

Excellent. Yes, a piece in the puzzle. More efficient, less expensive solar panels + higher capacity batteries = less dependence on oil. In the event of an oil crisis, the only folks driving will have panels on their roof and batteries in their car.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Phil Appleton, Madison, WI — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 22:12:06 GMT

1 Charge them up using solar power in the South
2 Transport them using battery powered semis

No oil. No pollution. No $100 oil.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Scott, Ankeny, Ia — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 22:27:01 GMT

All the nay-sayers honking about how it takes oil to generate electricity to charge the batteries need to do some basic research. All the tech efforts currently going into bio-to-electric, as well as alternatives such as wind, geothermal, and yes, cleaner nuclear power make electric generation non-oil-dependent. Anything we can do to cut our nursing at the oil breast is good. This is just another step! Keep up the good work!!!!

A 'revolution' in batteries

stan, phoenix, az — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 22:44:55 GMT

First, there is no 100% efficient energy generation. Don't believe me? Do a search for carnot cycle.

Second, solar and wind are great but they are intermittent and low grade. Unless you want to use energy at the whim of nature, you have to have conventional power to back them up. Dual build cost, dual maintenance cost. Even here in Az where solar is plentiful the utility company charges twice the price for solar as conventional. And when I priced out converting my home to solar it would have taken 15 years just to pay the capital cost, forget about the maintenance and battery costs.

The power source would have to be nuclear - 10000 year supply and high grade energy.

This is a great step in the right direction though. A car that can do 100 miles between charges and that charges overnight could eliminate 80% of our commute gasoline consumption.

And the battery could be exchanged at the filling station for longer trips.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Rodge Noyle, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, Ireland — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:02:55 GMT

I can't see this reducing the amount of fossil fuel used unless electric cars etc. are constructed (and
BOUGHT more to the point) on a large scale. It will be decades before everyone has given up combustion engines in favour of electric cars. It's still a brilliant innovation though. Now the best way to cut out fossil fuels is with solar power, not wind turbines. If an area the size of Texas was filled with solar panels, it would generate enough energy to power the world. Wouldn't need much land area to power a country the size of island now. Plenty of ocean to build platforms on to, instead of oil rigs.

A 'revolution' in batteries

C-rob, Celina, OH — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 00:13:57 GMT

am I the only one that just thought about how much longer I'd be able to play my Gameboy in a single charge?

A 'revolution' in batteries

Craig H. Blissfield Mi — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 00:43:26 GMT

A car powered by these new batteries that could go 150-250 miles before requiring a recharge would almost eliminate the need for a back up gas engine to keep the batteries charged. Few people drive over 200 miles in a normal day.

Coat the cars roof, hood & trunk surfaces with solar panels, along with braking generation/charging, and the cars max range could be greatly extended beyond what the battery alone could do.

As to the electrical supply to charge them. Concentrated solar, photo voltic solar, wind, damn type hydro, stream bottom hydro, tidal generators, wave generators, nuclear....biomass...ect. A long list of upcoming electrical sources is rapidly being developed. Oil would not be needed, though coal will be for many years yet.

A 'revolution' in batteries

CM, Modesto CA — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 03:17:53 GMT

To answer some questions: While rate of charge wasn't mentioned, the extraordinarily high surface area of the silicon nanowires should result in a very high power output and should support high power fast charging. Other LiIon batteries using nanoscale electrodes, such as from A123 and Altairnano, also support fast charging.

Reducing our oil demand will not cause an increase in oil imports. That argument isn't rational.

The methanol fuel cell is still under development, but is more expensive than LiIon batteries, and the methanol fuel costs more than electricity. To get a month of cell phone talk time would require a very large brick sized methanol tank, shrinking it to cell phone size would mean refilling with methanol every day - at a much higher cost than recharging batteries.

"Using the forward momentum of the car to recharge the batteries" is already being done, it is called "regenerative braking", it slows down the car as momentum is converted back into electricity. Regenerative braking is about 75% efficient, but that is better than standard friction brakes that are 0% efficient. No, we won't drive around with the regenerative brakes on all the time, that would reduce driving range and performance.

We won't ship batteries around for charging, it is much more efficient and cheaper to ship electrons by wire.

Covering a car with photocells is currently too expensive to be practical. Much better to set them on a roof facing the sun to get the maximun power from this expensive source. If solar technology improves and drops the price down really really cheap, then we might start seeing "solar painted" cars.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Joe Real, Davis, California — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 03:58:08 GMT

This type of battery improvement has the capacity to turn the whole automotive industry and help revie the US economy. A vast majority will be able to use the plug-in cars with increased range compared to what is possible now. The current 40 mile range of converted plug-ins is not sufficient. Increase that range to just 5 times, it will be useable by more than 95% of the population who go to work daily.

It is true that we might use carbon-based fuel in the various electric plant to power up these cars, but then those CO2 generating plants will become a point source which are easier to control. If gasoline or petrols were used by cars, the CO2 emissions would be everywhere and they cannot be captured easily. Whereas if those CO2 comes from power plants, they can be easily recaptured, like producing baking powder (http://www.news.com/Can-baking-soda-curb-global-warming/2100-13838_3-6220127.html?tag=nefd.lede), trapping in some rocks to solidify as limestone (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22506764/) , or can be used to enhance production of biodiesel from algal cultures where CO2 is recaptured, and still others that can convert CO2 into fuel building blocks by the use of catalysts, water and lots of concentrated sunshine (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070418091932.htm). The point is that if CO2 emissions are pinpoint rather than scattered, it is easier to deal with. Besides, the conversion efficiencies of power plants are much better than internal combustion engines. And we don't need to literally use fossil fuels to generate electricity. We have alternatives that are cheaper than nuclear sources such as those solar thermal plants, wave, tidal, hydroelectric, underwater ocean or sea currents, geothermal, wind and biomass energy to name a few.

Commuting to work is one of the major producer of carbon dioxide. If these are replaced with electric cars that are zero emissions which will be possible with increased range, then it would be revolutionary if the price of these new batteries become affordable. The use of all zero emission vehicles for daily commuting would truly have dramatic impact on carbon emissions. At a good range of 400 miles, that would even include the out of town escapades and vacation. Imagine the Aptera vehicle that gets 120 miles to a charge, and could now be extended to 1,200 miles. Now I can commute to Canada from California without having to pay for blood oil.

Still another uses for these batteries would be for energy storage to even out the variabilities of wind, wave or solar energy.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Des Emery — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:10:25 GMT

Nuclear energy to generate electricity. Electrical grid to distribute power. Service station terminals to pump electricity into batteries (instead of gasoline, buy a volt, not a gallon). Build an automobile with a generator under the hood, powered by air-flow from the forward speed of the vehicle through a wind-tunnel effect to supply auxiliary power for lights, stereo, wipers, etc.

A 'revolution' in batteries

OneVoice, Frederick, MD — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:36:06 GMT

Great new breakthrough. I'm looking forward to my all-electric car already )whether it be a Volt or some other plugin) Other great points are decrease in the materials and energy used to create inferior batteries and the decrease in alkaline and spent rechargable batteries going into landfills and shipped to 3rd world recycling dumps.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Ev2G — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:02:13 GMT

Since nobody mentioned Nanosafe from Altairnano(Alti) I'll do it.
They produce the best existing Nanobattery in existence today.
http://altairnano.com/index.html

A 'revolution' in batteries

Jon Pinkus — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:36:47 GMT

Charging an EV from the gird costs between 2 and 3 cents a mile (3 to 5 cents per km) while gas costs from 10 to 15 cents a mile .

A 'revolution' in batteries

Mark Griffin, St. Helens, Ore. — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 09:20:40 GMT

Some great comments. Everyone talks about the depandence on oil, which I have to agree, is something we all would like to reduce. A battery, no matter how efficient, or how long it will hold and deliver the charge impressed on it, is still no more than a storage device. A 100 KwHr battery will need 100 KwHr of power put into it, from any generation source available, be it a bicycle hooked to a generator to a nuclear reactor. It is just a storage device and does not depend on oil, per say, to operate. If these new batteries work at 10x the efficience, full funding and development should be provided to bring them to the commercial market, which will bring the overall price down, to where their end uses will be determined by all of the other free thinkers and expirmenters that have made this Great Nation what it is. Able to solve our problems at the grass roots level.

A 'revolution' in batteries

jeff — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:04:12 GMT

People just do not understand the energy criss. We do not have an energy shortage. There is penty of oil, solar, wind, power avalable. There is a STORAGE problem, the only way we currently store large amounts of energy is in the form of refined oil. IF I HAD A BATTERY THAT COULD STORE ALL THE SOLAR ENERGY CONVERTED TO ELECTRICITY from my rooftop. For a mear 30000 dollars us I could be self suficent from grid and all the oil my family uses for the rest of my life! But batterysn currently are not up the chalange. some people say that is to much but I spend 3000 a year on gass alone so the payback for a system that could store all the energy I produce would be worth it.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Pat, mountains of montana — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 19:49:51 GMT

I've operated off grid for 4 years now, (3200 sq foot home all modern) and my batteries are in need of replacing. Anyone familiar with hybrid alternative power systems understands that the batterys are the weak link in the system. I could go from 3 days use of stored electricity, to a month. I could then turn all my excess production into hydogen production for my new hybrid. The future seems endless if only our government had any foresight. No thanks to, and no help from the government, I'm living the green life.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Chris HBG PA — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:09:08 GMT

VERY NICE!

A 'revolution' in batteries

Wm, Deltona, FL — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:25:28 GMT

I can only hope that like so many things have in the past this does not end up being manufactored in china, singapore, or some Central or South American country because of lower labor costs. I feel that to stimulate the economy we need to first of all get rid of the treaties like NAFTA and other "Open border treaties" that were supposed to help the economy instead of tanking it. This idea while radical needs to be put into place very soon. Why you might ask? Simply because any researcher knows that with so many people focused on the field of energy storage there will be another break through in the field in short order. Why not get a FLEXABLE manufactoring facility in place that will allow a "simple" change over as technology provides improvements? Beleive me, the cost of building a flexible structure vs one that is designed to last in the same configuration is many times cheaper in the short and long run. What does one mean when one says "flexible"? Its very simple, one builds in extra capacitys in power supply capability, extra room to expand as the manufactoring needs and demands change and extra infrastructor in the building, the roads and utilities. This will cost too much one would say, and my response would be that it cost less to put these expansion capabilities in when one first builds than it does five, ten or even 2 years down the road. ALL cost to build increase with time, every firm will tell you this if you ask. The initial outlay in capital would be expensive, the future gain in saved capital would be invaluable. But that is another story.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Wild Bill, Central Texas — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:10:36 GMT

If they could only find the material combination to create superconductors that work at room temps.Combine that with electricity and "PRESTO" no more need for fossil fuels. Those batteries would go a very very long way then indeed.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Frank, Dallas, TX — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:19:29 GMT

"Reducing our oil demand will not cause an increase in oil imports. That argument isn't rational."

Try to understand an argument before dismissing it. That isn't what I said - it increases our dependence on imports, the reason being that domestic production will be the first to be shut off. The actual quantity of imported oil would stay the same or drop a little, but the quantity of domestic oil produced would fall to nearly zero. If we are importing 70% of our oil, and we reduce demand for oil by 30%, and the domestic oil is the most expenive, would we not then be importing 100% of our oil?

A 'revolution' in batteries

SolarBattMan — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:17:37 GMT

Cover the batteries with solar cells, so when they go dead, toss them on the patio for a couple days, and put them back in.

Better yet, make roof tiles out of self-charging battery material, just look out for the leaks!

A 'revolution' in batteries

Chee G. — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:41:21 GMT

the bottom line is that this car if battery was made into, will never be produced. why? because the oil companies will blast it to oblivion so to speak. Capitalism, Aint' it wonderfull?

A 'revolution' in batteries

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:59:02 GMT

If they start now, they could breed a Super-Hamster, to run a larger cage wheel. That would couple to an alternator that would charge the batteries. Hamsters run on peanuts, not Oil. "Fill'er up with Planters and Check the Rat."

A 'revolution' in batteries

Jayson, San Pablo City , Philippines — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 06:35:55 GMT

to charge that battery, we still need OIL, so i think they should also focus on improving in harnessing of the power of the sun

A 'revolution' in batteries

Wayne in Kansas City, MO — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:45:31 GMT

While I appreciate the higher level of intelligence in the comments here than after other articles online (i.e., some of you can actually spell and put together a sentence or two without making a fool of yourself), you armchair scientists crack me up!

My favorite phrase so far: "battery powered semis!" LOL

Heck, let's go for broke and try building a matter/antimatter reactor!

A 'revolution' in batteries

Dr. Mike, Temecula, CA — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:42:33 GMT

Wow, you people really think that wind and solar can supply the entire country with its power? How naive! Let's take Seattle, it is sunny about 3 days a year and has no wind to speak of. There has not been a new nuclear power plant in the US for almost 40 years. A solar panel that could run 2 100-watt light bulbs costs around $750 plus all of the batteries to store that energy and the switches to control it. Are you all ready to invest that? It is estimated that solar photovoltaid energy costs $1.25 per KWh. You are probably paying $.25 right now. Are you willing to pay 500% more on your energy bill?

You have all also overlooked the fact that it is 100% assured that another country is going to beat us to this technology because there is so much red tape here. I will bet any of you $100 that China will have these batteries years before we do. Patent or no patent, it doesn't matter in China. I will bet another $100 (although I won't be around to collect it from you) that another nuclear power plant will not go up in the next 100 years in the US. Americans are too stupid to approve of such a project. If stupid Americans still think that cell phones cause brain cancer (like one of the comments above) despite all of the research to the contrary, what is the likelihood that they understand nuclear power? Need more evidence? How about the comment that room temp superconductors are the answer to our problem? Deep, deep misunderstanding of basic science.

And please don't blame it on this secret society called "the government." They are us, we are them. If we demanded clean energy, they would give it to us. Unfortunately, 99% of Americans would rather buy batteries at the 99 cent store than fund technology to create better batteries.

And saying that we can lead the world in green energy . . . we are already decades behind. Look at France and their nuclear program, Copenhagen and their offshore wind turbines, Ireland and their conversion of tidal energy, Iceland and its geothermal program, Germany and its numerous windmills, the solar power tower in Spain, and the 550,000 photovoltaics in Germany. We will be purchasing technology from these other countries, not vice versa.

These batteries last longer, they are not necessarily more efficient. If a car takes 5,000 Watts of energy from gasoline, it will take 5,000 Watts of energy from battery power which will come from petroleum burning power plants for at least the next 100 years. If we built cars that could only go 70 miles per hour instead of 180, that would be a big step in the right diretion. It's never going to happen in a Cadillac Escalade country.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Norbert N. Walkiewicz, (aka Norb Walker) — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:20:44 GMT

Gas, oil, electricity, batteries, wind power, water power, are all wonderful, but being a 77 year old, and seeing so much change over the last 50 years, I believe our futures future depends on MAGNETISM, since the whole universe is self controlled by magnetism. 1-26-2008

A 'revolution' in batteries

TM — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 05:44:20 GMT

As Karl and others mentioned, charging the batteries during the night would allow more use of Wind and Water energy that are underutilized right now. All the electric cars could be charged at night for a penny per kilowatt hour resulting in effective fuel rates under a dollar per gallon equivalent gas energy.
Motors to better utilize energy are being built by NASA and others, and just need a market of millions of units to drive the costs down. (See Halbach array motors if you care.)

As CM mentioned (Read his comment carefully, lots of good notes there) increased surface area (aerogels redux) allows decreased current density, resulting in lower heating at greater charging rates.

This is similar to work done two decades ago with Aerogels, in fact I'm not sure if there is any difference. What broke down then was that the plants to fabricate low cost aerogels and build batteries out of them would have cost 10's of millions of dollars to start and 100's of millions to be competitive, so none of the companies ever came to fruition. Just because someone can show a good technique in a lab, will it ever become mass produced. The cost to do this test was probably a few hundred thousand dollars. Just try hiring any of the PhDs. When you get down to the hundreds of thin layers of exotic materials, all the EESTORE and Nanowire / Aerogel / Super whatever technologies start to look the same. We spend TRILLIONS of dollars on the oil industry world wide. Don't expect this to compete until someone is ready to pony up a few billion.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Dennis Reid, Denver Co — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 06:24:40 GMT

It would be nice to see this type of technology used by incorporating it into the car body itself so that the car body would be the actual battery.

A 'revolution' in batteries

John Doe — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:15:58 GMT

In Japan most of the people drive cars with 600-1000 ccm (that's 0.6 to 1 litre) displacement that will go 40 -45 miles per gallon without any hybrid technology. And they had been producing them for 20 years now. So to change all macho [B.S.] 2 ton trucks and sports cars being driven around for no reason at all (yeah right, you need big SUV to take children to school or buy takeout pizza). That change only would cut USA oil consumption for motoring in half, without technology shift. To decrease consumption of food you eat less, to decrease consumption of oil you consume less oil. Period. There is no free lunch. There are hybrid cars today that will halve the usual gasoline consumption but nobody buys them because they are sissy cars that no "real American" will buy.. Consumption is a result of huge marketing campaign that big is beautiful. IT IS NOT. It is wasteful, stupid and aesthetically ugly. We need to change, change our ways and habits.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Cosmic Spike, London, England. — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:43:36 GMT

Plenty of ideas then; good! My memory was stirred by a not so good proposal above. There was an article in a respectable journal like SciAm or New Scientist some year or so ago about discrete power supplies to individual components on circuit boards. These individual supplies could be painted (two dissimilar layers) onto the circuit board adjacent each component. Not batteries but original sources that do not depend on light etc.
If this is not a fairy story it is surely a key part of the jigsaw. Amongst the more obvious applications there may also be the possibility of scaling such technology to trickle-charge batteries of various capacities. If the materials required are not overly expensive etc., etc.. cosmicspike@yahoo.co.uk

A 'revolution' in batteries

Henry Gibson, Portland OR — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:40:21 GMT

Batteries have existed in commercial production for ten years that would power a modified Toyota Prius for more than 100 Miles on electricity alone with no new battery developments and only slight Prius modifications. They are already being used in several parts of the world, including the US, in buses and trucks. They weigh a bit more per unit energy stored than the PROPOSED lithium car batteries but are now known to be safe and reliable. They can be improved as to weight and power capacity and have a life that has been proven to be long enough for cars. And they use relatively cheap materials that are not in short supply, and could use even cheaper materials. They are called ZEBRA batteries. Only the US car makers and oil companies and the Califonia and the US government have prevented their widespread use by modifying the CARB rules. They will always be cheaper and easier to use than fuel cells and hydrogen in cars, and even if the high fuel prices drop to half they are cheaper in the long run than gasoline.

BUT it should be required by law that all electric vehicles have a back up small, or even tiny, fuel powered engine-generator. The weight of such a provision, including fuel, can be less than that of a spare tire and will at least eliminate the range consideration worries of people who might buy electric cars. There is no common fuel that weighs than hydrocarbons and they can be made from cheap coal if necessary. Electricity will be used for most miles in such a car but there is no reason for not building a light-weight generator into every electric vehicle for the occasional extended range trip. Cars used regularly on extended range can have more than one such units for long distance fast freeway travel. With an adequately designed battery only ten to twenty horse-power is needed in such a car for the fastes long distance freeway travel. An OPOC engine can provide such power while weighing only twenty pounds or less. Smaller higher speed engines could be used instead in cars that have only occasional long distance use.

Stop printing, believing or reporting that batteries for long distance cars do not exist; They are being mass produced this very moment at prices that make operating a car with them cheaper than with gasoline even in the US. The Cost of the PRIUS is another matter. Cheap electric cars are needed. The new $2500 car in India should be reengineered with the cheapest motors and controls possible. The battery would cost more than the car....hg...

A 'revolution' in batteries

Tom Langley Bowling Green, KY — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:21:40 GMT

This is fantastic news. One of the men who first went around the world in a balloon, Bertrand Picard is developing a solar powered airplane to popularize solar energy. This type of battery could power the aircraft at night. A Spanish company called BFS is developing a process to make biopetroleum from marine algae. Another company called ls9 is making ge microbes to make gasoline, diesel etc. We don't need oil from foreign countries, let's get to work.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Me, MT — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:54:22 GMT

Frank your missing one point:

While we reduced our dependency on oil other countries like China and India are increasing theirs. Therefore, theoretically, the demand will stay the same or increase keeping the cost high. Then we would still use our oil until we didn't need it, and then sell it to other countries.

We need to keep oil high once we got off of it so that we can stay competitive. If the demand dropped too much, the price would drop, and it could be cheaper than our energy. If that happened it could ruin our economy.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Morgan, Phoenix, AZ — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 22:04:36 GMT

So, how will an ecosystem which is used to having sunlight on it continually, react to being shaded by the acres of solar panels being discussed? And has the concern over bird deaths due to wind machines been addressed?

A 'revolution' in batteries

Louis Phoenix, Az — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:45:49 GMT

this bodes well. It is time to reinvest in the electric car. with the GM skateboard car frame the flexibility in shape will allow for greater power and applicability.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Louis Phx Az. — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:54:04 GMT

Frank, I'd like to see your data that supports that domestically produced oil is more expensive than imported.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Seth Eugene Oregon — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:27:32 GMT

A breakthrough of this magnitude is definitely a point in the right direction. Energy storage is the problem that these new batteries are directed towards. It would be nice for everything in a persons house to be operated by one of theses batteries. If we can increase the amount of electricity we get from electricity. Wow that would make every ones electric bill a little lower.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Ken Morgan Orlando Florida — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:59:21 GMT

This invention will end up like all the other battery technology "breakthroughs"; GM will purchase the patent rights, lock them in a safe in Detroit somewhere and no one will ever hear about this invention again. Just like the guy in Florida who ran his car on water, and powered his cutting torch with water; it made all the newspapers when the story came out, and then nothing....no one ever heard of this guy again. Detroit makes them instant millionaires, and their 'breakthroughs' are never heard of again.

A 'revolution' in batteries

jimmy james florence , al. 35630 — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:26:01 GMT

just develope and market the thing! the mechanical minded human will develope power source to charge it.
maybe even human powered by something such as a childs wind up toy . simple is it not?

A 'revolution' in batteries

Chris, King George, VA — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:01:42 GMT

This is great new indeed! I just that Toshiba has a battery that can recharge in less then 5 mintues and hold something like 8 times the normal storage.

Either way, it's good news for everybody, now all we need is the source.......I'm still pulling for the fusion reactors, but till then, we'll have to rely on solar, wind, and other traditional sources. Either way, it's a step in the right direction atleast.

A 'revolution' in batteries

Rick, Wildomar, CA — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:32:45 GMT

whoa, folks, lets not kid ourselves. Improved battery tech won't give us energy. The energy sources we have that are said to be 'green' are also horrifically inefficient nd thus expensive for that inefficiency, when you consider more thn the cost of production. Wind power: cost of the land, labor to install wind generators/conduits, etc.; Nuclear power: waste from reactor, cost of nuclear fuel, safety issues; Solar Power: drastically expensive, inefficient, etc. Col is bad, but it is also cheap. I do not condone it, but the money put into these 'alternate' energy sources should be used to completely redesign the way we think about energy.

Vacuum/Zero point energy, anyone?
You may think it is ridiculous because of the 'free energy' hype, but google it. There are some interesting ideas out there. For instance, did you know that the vacuum energy in a light bulb, if extracted and put to use with 100% efficiency (which is highly doubtful, but for simplicity's sake), you would have enough energy to boil all of the oceans on Earth. The amount of aenergy contained within sugr cube's volume would supply enough energy to meet our power demands for the next million years.

It may seem far-fetched, but give it consideration. Anything is possible!

A 'revolution' in batteries

Rick, Wildomar, CA — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 04:22:32 GMT

That reminds me. Have any of you checked out the late Floyd Sweet's Space Quantum Modulator- renamed to the Vacuum Triode Amplifier?

A 'revolution' in batteries

mk — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:01:03 GMT

batteries only store and release energy, they don't create it. we will still use oil, coal, & nat. gas to charge the batteries and power our nation -- unless we use wind, solar, water, wave, nuclear...