• Air battery to let electric cars outlast gas guzzlers
    129 replies, posted
[B]Air battery to let electric cars outlast gas guzzlers[/B] [release]ONE of the biggest drawbacks with owning an electric vehicle (EV) is range anxiety - a driver's nagging fear that the battery charge will not get them to their destination. [B]Now IBM claims to have solved a fundamental problem that may lead to the creation of a battery with an 800-kilometre (500-mile) range[/B] - letting EVs potentially compete with most petrol engines for the first time.Standard electric vehicles use lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries, which are bulky and rarely provide 160 kilometres (100 miles) of driving before they run down. A newer type, known as a lithium-air cell, is more attractive because it has theoretical energy densities more than[I] 1000 times greater[/I] than the Li-ion type, putting it almost on a par with gasoline. Instead of using metal oxides in the positive electrode, lithium-air cells use carbon, which is lighter and reacts with oxygen from the air around it to produce an electrical current. But there's a problem. Chemical instabilities limit their lifespan when recharging, making them impractical for use in cars, says physicist [URL="http://www.almaden.ibm.com/background/?wilcke"]Winfried Wilcke[/URL] at IBM's Almaden laboratories, based in San Jose, California. So Wilcke studied the underlying electrochemistry of these cells using a form of mass spectrometry. What he found was that oxygen is reacting not just with the carbon electrode, as it was known to, but also with the electrolytic solvent - the conducting solution that carries the lithium ions between the electrodes. However, if the electrolyte reacts with the oxygen when the car is in use it will eventually be depleted. So, working with his colleague Alessandro Curioni at IBM's Zurich research labs in Switzerland, Wilcke used a Blue Gene supercomputer to run extremely detailed models of the reactions to look for alternative electrolytes. This included a form of atomistic modelling right down to the quantum mechanics of the components, says Curioni. "We now have one which looks very promising," says Wilcke. He won't reveal what material it is but says that several research prototypes have already been demonstrated. And as part of Battery 500, an IBM-led coalition involving four US national laboratories and commercial partners, the hope is to have a full-scale prototype ready by 2013, with commercial batteries to follow by around 2020. If it works, this would solve a major obstacle with lithium-air batteries, says Phil Bartlett, head of electrochemistry at the University of Southampton, UK. There are other practical issues to address, such as enabling such batteries to cope with moist air. "Lithium in water spontaneously catches fire," he points out.[/release] [URL="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328466.200-air-battery-to-let-electric-cars-outlast-gas-guzzlers.html"]Source[/URL] [video=youtube;ZmHZhBqI500]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmHZhBqI500[/video] [img]http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/global/images/us__en_us__energy__battery500_info2__748x443.gif[/img]
Doubt it, this story. Will never see it again like all breakthroughs.
Too bad gas companies are gonna lobby the ever living shit out of this in the name of LOL MAXIMUM PROFITZ.
[QUOTE=tier56;34096803]Too bad gas companies are gonna lobby the ever living shit out of this in the name of LOL MAXIMUM PROFITZ.[/QUOTE] Probably dumb of me to ask, but can someone please explain to me how companies manage to do this? Like, the full process they go through in order to do this.
[QUOTE=zzzz;34096839]Probably dumb of me to ask, but can someone please explain to me how companies manage to do this? Like, the full process they go through in order to do this.[/QUOTE] I'm no expert, but I'm guessing it involves brown envelopes under the table.
[QUOTE=zzzz;34096839]Probably dumb of me to ask, but can someone please explain to me how companies manage to do this? Like, the full process they go through in order to do this.[/QUOTE] I'd assume they would try to patent the invention for themselves, then never use said patent to gain as much profit from their current products as possible, then, when the time comes, they finally use said patent to create the newest product, rinse and repeat forever.
Good thing IBM is supporting this, so that would be harder to do.
Is there actually any evidence that oil company and such are trying to shut up people who make alternative energy breakthroughs?
So many alternatives to gas have been made, but thanks to greed from the big companies we'll never see them put in place.
[QUOTE=zzzz;34096839]Probably dumb of me to ask, but can someone please explain to me how companies manage to do this? Like, the full process they go through in order to do this.[/QUOTE] There are a few ways. One of them is for the company to buy up the patent(s) related to the new technology. Another way is to get whichever congressman or men they provided campaign finances (and more) to pass a law which makes the switch more difficult. Often times this will just be tacted on to some other piece of legislation which would be impossible to shoot down, thus allowing it to be put into effect. I'm sure there are other methods to, but these are the most prominent that I know of. However, it should be known that it is very wildly exaggerated that oil companies stop these types of progresses. Maybe slow down a bit, but for the most part they just compete with their own technological advances. Using their own technology and their placement within the government already, they can take precedent over other, more efficient technologies, and thus remain in business.
[QUOTE=.FLAP.JACK.DAN.;34097144]Is there actually any evidence that oil company and such are trying to shut up people who make alternative energy breakthroughs?[/QUOTE] There probably is, and a good place to start would be to take a look at oil company patents. Try [url]http://www.freshpatents.com/[/url] Shell: [url]http://www.freshpatents.com/Shell-Oil-Company-cndirs.php[/url] Here's an interesting Exxon patent: [url]http://www.freshpatents.com/Gasoline-production-by-olefin-polymerization-dt20060831ptan20060194999.php[/url]
The main problem I see with full electric cars right now is that you cant just fill up and go like you can with gas/diesel/LPG cars. Im sure these will work well in cars like the chevy volt, but the batteries as they are now are way too expensive.
[QUOTE=belgiumtoast;34096778]Doubt it, this story. Will never see it again like all breakthroughs that cut into the profit margins of an established industry.[/QUOTE] fixed
I still won't buy them. I'm not giving up my gas burners, just not gonna happen. Besides, more people switch to electric, more gas remains for those of us who don't want to switch. So yeah. You guys have fun. More V8s for me, more gas for me. Edit: Oh, hey, wonderful. Thanks for the free boxes, guys. Makes it easy to organize valvetrain parts when I'm working on my engines. Keep them coming!
Gas runs out -> People buy electrical cars.
[QUOTE=belgiumtoast;34096778]Doubt it, this story. Will never see it again like all breakthroughs.[/QUOTE] I know, right? I mean, what ever happened to ENIAC? When was the last time you heard people talking about that?* *Sarcastic optimism
[QUOTE=Cmx;34098322]The main problem I see with full electric cars right now is that you cant just fill up and go like you can with gas/diesel/LPG cars. Im sure these will work well in cars like the chevy volt, but the batteries as they are now are way too expensive.[/QUOTE] Wasn't there a type of battery, which used a liquid(ish) substance that could be replaced like fuel?
[QUOTE=.FLAP.JACK.DAN.;34097144]Is there actually any evidence that oil company and such are trying to shut up people who make alternative energy breakthroughs?[/QUOTE] ...That's kinda the point.
800 km is pretty far though.
[QUOTE=TestECull;34098497]I still won't buy them. I'm not giving up my gas burners, just not gonna happen. Besides, more people switch to electric, more gas remains for those of us who don't want to switch. So yeah. You guys have fun. More V8s for me, more gas for me.[/QUOTE] How dumb can you be?
[QUOTE=Rapist;34111941]How dumb can you be?[/QUOTE] "Hurr durr I want my cars loud and messy!!!! hurrrrrrrrrr big engines! Manly! AMERICUHHHHH!!!!!!" There, that sums up his mindset pretty well.
[QUOTE=.FLAP.JACK.DAN.;34097144]Is there actually any evidence that oil company and such are trying to shut up people who make alternative energy breakthroughs?[/QUOTE] Watch the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car or the summary of the part about oil companies on wikipedia: [release]The oil industry, through its major lobby group the Western States Petroleum Association, is brought to task for financing campaigns to kill utility efforts to build public car charging stations. Through astroturfing groups like "Californians Against Utility Abuse" they posed as consumers instead of the industry interests they actually represented. Mobil and other oil companies are also shown to be advertising directly against electric cars in national publications, even when electric cars seem little to do with their core business. At the end of the film Chevron bought patents and controlling interest in Ovonics, the advanced battery company featured in the film ostensibly to prevent modern NiMH batteries from being used in non-hybrid electric cars. The documentary also refers to manipulation of oil prices by overseas suppliers in 1980s as an example of the industry working to kill competition and keep customers from moving toward alternatives to oil.[/release]
[QUOTE=Thund3rdome;34098567]Gas runs out -> People buy electrical cars.[/QUOTE] If "gas" (oil/petroleum sources) runs out we are also done with plastics and many medicines.
I fucking love science [QUOTE=bord2tears;34113748]If "gas" (oil/petroleum sources) runs out we are also done with plastics and many medicines.[/QUOTE] Also industry will screech to a halt, very many things require oil and petrol to keep things running.
[QUOTE=Rapist;34111941]How dumb can you be?[/QUOTE] Not dumb at all. It's called personal preference. I like engines. I have liked them since the day I was old enough to say the word 'wrench', and I will continue to like them until the day I'm too weak to lift a wrench. I also enjoy the act of driving. I find comfort and pleasure in cruising down a twisty country lane with a clutch pedal under my left foot, an H-gate under my right hand, and nothing but the sweet song of a healthy engine providing the soundtrack. Such a thing is the most pleasurable thing I can do that involves being fully dressed, to be honest. I won't hate on EVs once they fix the range issues, but that doesn't mean I want to buy one either. I just don't like driving something that's dull and soulless, and that's all you're going to get with EVs. There's no rowing through the gears while carving through the corners in the countryside listening to a sweet sounding four pot or V8, there's just a dull hum and a thousand pounds of batteries making the car understeer. Boring. I'll convert them to run on hydrogen once gasoline runs out. Simple enough to do. [QUOTE=Miskav;34112046]"Hurr durr I want my cars loud and messy!!!! hurrrrrrrrrr big engines! Manly! AMERICUHHHHH!!!!!!" There, that sums up his mindset pretty well.[/QUOTE] Uhh, no. Nice way to make a wild assumption. I don't like messy cars, waste of money. I don't want them leaking a drop of anything. That's hard on the environment, makes my driveway ugly and slippery, and did I mention it costs a fortune to top up the leaking fluids? And I don't insist on big engines. I like big, throaty V8s, sure, no self-respecting gearhead doesn't, but my dream car only has a three liter V6 or so. Honda NSX, to be specific. Those things get 25-30MPG average when you drive it like a civic, but because of the layout you can start pretending you're Senna at the drop of a hat, and the car will most happily oblige. The engine sounds fucking sweet, too. Ontop of that, lol Honda. They will last 200,000 miles without much more than routine oil changes, and they're a dream to work on. All of this can be had for between 15,000 and 30,000 dollars. Makes you wonder why anyone even remotely interested in driving buys a Civic, eh? Other cars I want include: Caterham, Ford Escort MkII w/ Cosworth 2.0L, Lancia 037, Lancia Stratos and a mid-tier Porsche 911 Carrera 4. Note that none of these cars break 3.2L displacement. I also want an R34 Skyline, but I'd stick an LS9 V8 in that just to escape turbo lag, so it has no point in this discussion. Nice job making a complete arse of yourself though. I'm sure you'll get REAL far in life assuming everyone who likes cars and would choose one over an EV with similar range is a muscle car fanatic. You're stone dead wrong. To be fair, though, I can sort-of see why you two are being arses over it. The Netherlands and Estonia aren't known for having many petrolheads so I imagine it's hard for the two of you to fathom why someone would choose a gas burner over an EV. I'd bet money the two of you see cars as nothing more than tools used to get you long distances that aren't covered by public transit, not a means of enjoyment. Still doesn't excuse you two though.
[quote] "Lithium in water spontaneously catches fire,"[/quote] I like how this is a side problem at the end of the article. "Great, when do we start production?" "As soon as we get the kinks worked out." "Such as?" "Oh, you know, the final design for the production factory, the contract with the shipping company, getting the battery to stop randomly lighting on fire, you know, the little stuff." [editline]8th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;34116417]Not dumb at all. It's called personal preference. I like engines. I have liked them since the day I was old enough to say the word 'wrench', and I will continue to like them until the day I'm too weak to lift a wrench. I also enjoy the act of driving. I find comfort and pleasure in cruising down a twisty country lane with a clutch pedal under my left food, an H-gate under my right hand, and nothing but the sweet song of a healthy engine providing the soundtrack. Such a thing is the most pleasurable thing I can do that involves being fully dressed, to be honest.[/quote] ...And electric motors are better in every way. [quote]I won't hate on EVs once they fix the range issues, but that doesn't mean I want to buy one either. I just don't like driving something that's dull and soulless, and that's all you're going to get with EVs. There's no rowing through the gears while carving through the corners in the countryside listening to a sweet sounding four pot or V8, there's just a dull hum and a thousand pounds of batteries making the car understeer. Boring.[/quote] Yeah I know, why drive something that produces a fraction of the pollution and has a tenth of the moving parts, when you can drive a vehicle filled with the most flammable liquid we can mass produce using an engine that converts roughly ten percent of the combustion into actual useful energy! [quote]I'll convert them to run on hydrogen once gasoline runs out. Simple enough to do.[/quote] Hydrogen is extremely difficult to store and highly dangerous as a result. Gas stations are unlikely to ever sell hydrogen in any real quantities as electric vehicles beat hydrogen ones in every fashion available. Currently range is disputable, but there are a number of fun solutions in the battery market, but so far they have shit for easy conversion systems for gas stations that store hydrogen. Not to mention the overall danger still imposed by hydrogen in a car accident. [quote]Uhh, no. Nice way to make a wild assumption. I don't like messy cars, waste of money. I don't want them leaking a drop of anything. That's hard on the environment, makes my driveway ugly and slippery, and did I mention it costs a fortune to top up the leaking fluids? And I don't insist on big engines. I like big, throaty V8s, sure, no self-respecting gearhead doesn't, but my dream car only has a three liter V6 or so. Honda NSX, to be specific. Those things get 25-30MPG average when you drive it like a civic, but because of the layout you can start pretending you're Senna at the drop of a hat, and the car will most happily oblige. The engine sounds fucking sweet, too. All of this can be had for between 15,000 and 30,000 dollars. [/quote] Electric motors require even less fluids and have a much better power to motion conversion ratio than internal combustion engines, hydrogen or gasoline. They never flood and are limited only by the physical resilience of the material and the amount of power you can shove in the pipe in terms of RPM's. [quote]Nice job making a complete arse of yourself though. I'm sure you'll get REAL far in life assuming everyone who likes cars and would choose one over an EV with similar range is a muscle car fanatic. You're stone dead wrong.[/QUOTE] ...but you just proved him right. You provided no convincing evidence or argument for choosing an internal combustion engine over an electric vehicle. Your only reasoning is the sound made by the engine. Which will be little comfort when a family sedan can be modified with a firmware update to fucking annihilate your V8 in a straight up drag race. Again. Electric motor. Power curve isn't a curve. It is a straight fucking line. Push the pedal and you can snap the axle instantly without electronic moderation. It can do exactly the same thing at 6 or 60 mph because there is no power drop off until ridiculously high speeds.
You guys say it'll disappear, but it's backed by IBM. They have a pretty substantial legal arm.
Id like to see what the electrolyte is made of. If its made of platina like hydrogen cells this thing would be just as expensive and therefore unused as hydrogen cells.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34116490] ...And electric motors are better in every way. [/quote] ....No, they aren't. On paper sure, but they don't excite like a nice engine does. [quote]Yeah I know, why drive something that produces a fraction of the pollution and has a tenth of the moving parts, when you can drive a vehicle filled with the most flammable liquid we can mass produce using an engine that converts roughly ten percent of the combustion into actual useful energy! [/quote] Why build an expensive gaming PC that wastes 50% of the power coming in as heat when you could buy a cheap little Dell that will check your email and use next to no power? [quote]Hydrogen is extremely difficult to store and highly dangerous as a result. Gas stations are unlikely to ever sell hydrogen in any real quantities as electric vehicles beat hydrogen ones in every fashion available. Currently range is disputable, but there are a number of fun solutions in the battery market, but so far they have shit for easy conversion systems for gas stations that store hydrogen. Not to mention the overall danger still imposed by hydrogen in a car accident. [/quote] Gasoline tanks rupture far far faaaaaar more often than hydrogen tanks do. [quote]Electric motors require even less fluids and have a much better power to motion conversion ratio than internal combustion engines, hydrogen or gasoline.[/quote] And your point is? [quote] They never flood [/quote] The last engine I flooded is so small I can wrap one hand around the entire thing. That engine displaces 0.18 cubic inches, 3ccs for those of you on metric, and runs on a mixture of alcohol, castor oil and nitromethane. I haven't even seen a car engine flood in person, and I drive plenty of flooding-prone carb'd engines. Flood a car engine and there's either a SERIOUS fuel system problem that needs addressing or the driver is a fucking idiot who doesn't know how to start an engine with a carb on it. [quote]and are limited only by the physical resilience of the material and the amount of power you can shove in the pipe in terms of RPM's. [/quote] As are ICE engines. The only limit to how fast you can spin a piston engine is how strong the rods, crank and block is. We have the technology to feed them air and fuel at RPMs far in excess of what they can handle structurally. [quote]...but you just proved him right. You provided no convincing evidence or argument for choosing an internal combustion engine over an electric vehicle. Your only reasoning is the sound made by the engine. [/quote] I provided plenty of evidence as to why someone would do so. It's called personal preference. Some of us just enjoy the act of driving, and for those of us in that group the sound of the engine is 100% part of the equation. If it wasn't you wouldn't see, and hear, so many cars on the road with loud exhausts. You can make a very free flowing exhaust system that's whisper quiet if you want to, but nobody does, because the sound is a good portion of why gearheads like the cars they like. [quote]Which will be little comfort when a family sedan can be modified with a firmware update to fucking annihilate your V8 in a straight up drag race. [/quote] So? I don't really care. Let them. I'm not in it for bragging rights, I'm in it to have fun. Besides, if I'm out enjoying my car, it's going to be on a road where I'm the only mobile car for miles. That way if I fuck up I don't take anyone else with me. So yeah. Let that family sedan have a three second to sixty powertrain. I don't really care. I'll take my sweet sounding 5 second to sixty ICE powertrain over it, on the sole basis that I prefer the sound and the act of rowing through the gears. [quote]Again. Electric motor. Power curve isn't a curve. It is a straight fucking line. Push the pedal and you can snap the axle instantly without electronic moderation.[/quote] I could build a V8 that could rip it's transmission in half if you dump the clutch. Your point? [quote] It can do exactly the same thing at 6 or 60 mph because there is no power drop off until ridiculously high speeds.[/QUOTE] If I said I cared I'd be lying worse than a GOP candidate. I don't want a dull, boring, predictable little milk float motor in my car. That doesn't excite me. I want to be exited. I want to enjoy driving. I want to drop two cogs and listen to the engine absolutely scream while the back end slides around a corner. I want to enjoy driving, not feel like I'm in an overblown golf cart. Sure the motor may be better on paper, but it isn't better for me, and that's all there is to it. If it isn't better for me it isn't going into my driveway. I get this same debate in RC circles, where electric power has become commonplace. I tell them the same thing. I enjoy engines, so I'm always going to buy engine powered cars. I don't care if it's a foot long or the size of a minibus, it's going to have an ICE powertrain or it's not going to be in my driveway. I'll run diesel or hydrogen if I have to, but I'm keeping ICE power.
[QUOTE=Thund3rdome;34098567]Gas runs out -> People buy electrical cars.[/QUOTE] I'd buy a Ford Nucleon. [img]http://pndblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2009/01/10/ford_nucleon.jpg[/img]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.