posted by
martyb
on Wednesday November 26 2014, @09:29AM
from the but-how-big-and-heavy-will-it-be? dept.
from the but-how-big-and-heavy-will-it-be? dept.
Reuters has another one of those new battery technology stories (and, yes, it does contain the word nano.)
What makes this more interesting is the Israeli firm in question has a number of high profile investors including an "Asian Phone manufacturer" and the owner of Chelsea football club. They are also talking about a product in 2016 rather than the usual 5 years' time.
I am not convinced by the extrapolation up to car batteries as you'd need a very thick cable.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Charge Phone Batteries in 30 Seconds and Fast-Charge Electric Cars by 2016
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 18 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 26 2014, @09:48AM
I ain't got time to wait, I needs to drive to the convenince store for cigarrets right now! You gay marxist electric car lovers are all the same: fucking stupid.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Shimitar on Wednesday November 26 2014, @10:18AM
While this might be funny, this is exaclty the kind of comments which drove me away from /.
Please, here comments are usually nice and interesting... QUALITY over QUANTITY.
Old-style /. stupid trolls pretty-please stay away.
Coding is an art. No, java is not coding. Yes, i am biased, i know, sorry if this bothers you.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday November 26 2014, @10:49AM
Shimitar - Our community does a reasonable job of modding such comments down to 0 fairly quickly after they appear. If I may offer a suggestion? Change your default browsing level to '1' and all the dross and troll comments will be reduced down to headings only, which can more easily be ignored. I'm sorry to say that asking them to stop is a waste of time - indeed, some of them thrive on your feedback.
janrinok
(Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Wednesday November 26 2014, @11:34AM
I like to see (and make) some funny comments once in a while (although I agree, this example wasn't really that funny). Would be great to have a simple technical solution to this dissent. I'd propose the following:
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 1) by curunir_wolf on Wednesday November 26 2014, @02:56PM
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by jimshatt on Wednesday November 26 2014, @10:52AM
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Wednesday November 26 2014, @06:38PM
You just drive into the socket.
(Score: 2) by jimshatt on Thursday November 27 2014, @10:33AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 26 2014, @11:02AM
E over I × R
Not big cables. Just high voltage. Pile'em high. (More cells)
Imagine a motor and battery system that ran on 1.2volts. Thats a lot of amps. It would be the Rube Goldberg of electric cats.
I would want my car to run on 150v dc to the controller and batteries/charger. That way I can just rectify the 120 ac from the wall. No fancy charge station.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday November 26 2014, @12:34PM
No fancy charge station.
Good idea AC but you'll still need current limiting or you'll end up blowing fuses. The internal resistance of an efficient cell is pretty low, even put in series with a zillion of them.
The other annoyance of stacked cells is eventually you'll discharge / reverse charge one. So you need a really fancy charger that babysits each cell, or not care about battery life.
I hear what you're saying and as semiconductor tech continues its Moore's Law-like march we'll eventually have single cells everywhere and switching upconverters bolted right to the cell. Much more efficient and cheaper to make (aside from the cost of the semiconductors... today)
Just because multi-megavolt DC power transmission lines exist doesn't mean my wall socket interface isn't 110. I suspect something that can charge a car battery that quickly runs in the kilovolt / kiloamp range. Or they've redefined "car battery" down from Tesla like ranges to golf cart like ranges.
(Score: 2) by Snow on Wednesday November 26 2014, @09:30PM
I can't remember where I heard it, but I thought it was a cool stat. When you are filling up your car with a fuel pump, the electricity equivilent would be about 5MW (my calculations below suggest it's actually 15 MW). I was unsure about the numbers, so here is the breakdown:
1L of gasoline == 7594 kCal/litre
60L of gasoline == 455640 kCal == 529,554 watt hours
529,554 watt hours / 2 min for a fill. (I work with dispensers all day. I checked the logs, and our gasoline pumps seem to pump about 40L/min. Used 30L/min) = 15.886 MW(!).
Now to check my work... If my car holds 529kwh of fuel and has a 200kw engine, then going balls to the wall, my tank should be empty in 2.75 hours. Hmm. That seems a little long. IF the engine runs at 40% efficiency, then that would bring it to 1.1 hours, which still seems a little long.
Feel feel to check my work, and call me an idiot if you find a mistake!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 27 2014, @04:04AM
This roughly matches the calc a friend of mine made when he was asked the question in an oral qualifying exam (part of his Masters in Physics, iirc). To duplicate the energy flow of gasoline when filling up a normal car tank (~ two minutes) takes something on the order of all the power output from a good size nuclear generating plant--to charge a car-sized battery pack in two minutes.
One expensive solution is a charging station with enormous local storage--a huge stationary battery (or ultra-capacitor) pack or maybe a giant flywheel with motor-generator on the shaft. In either case the storage can be charged up over a longer time and then transfer the energy to the car at a high rate. The extra step will cost something in efficiency. As another poster noted, for this kind of power it might be better to have fixed terminals on the car which are directly plugged into the charger, avoiding thick, heavy wires.
(Score: 2) by Foobar Bazbot on Wednesday November 26 2014, @07:39PM
From TFA:
He hopes to use the same technology to create a car battery that recharges in two or three minutes, rather than current models which commonly need to be charged overnight.
Consider a 60kWh battery. If you want a one-hour charge, that naturally requires 60kW (lower bound, more in practice) -- or 300 amps at your proposed 150VDC. But if you want to charge it in 3 minutes, you'll need 1.2MW, or 6000A at 150VDC.
There's a reason even today's relatively slow-charging EVs are generally charged from 240VAC rather than 120VAC, but even 480VAC (relatively common in industrial settings) still requires obscene current for a hypothetical 2-3 minute charge.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Wednesday November 26 2014, @11:07AM
owner of Chelsea football club
Wow, owns Chelsea football club, huh? A sure sign of solid business acumen.
Actually, I have no idea if Chelsea are good or bad, but it's a safe bet that you can rag on pretty much any sports team and get some laughs.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by arslan on Wednesday November 26 2014, @10:13PM
Chelsea is a top football club (or soccer to you) in the English Premier League, one of the top leagues in the world for one the most popular game in the world. Its owner, Roman Ibramovic is a Russian Billionaire (oil I believe).
I don't know what your definition of business acumen is, but his association with this venture is a good sign that they will be well funded to pull off whatever they need to that requires financial resource.
(Score: 1) by bookreader on Wednesday November 26 2014, @12:19PM
Wake me up when they provide information about the advantages of this new technology in the capacity/weight ratio. This has been the main "show-stopper" of the batteries for decades - for cars, mobile devices, and so on. Recharge speed is important in some cases, but not all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 26 2014, @03:56PM
Indeed, even for laptop batteries, I'd prefer one which I charge overnight and which then powers it for two weeks over one which I can charge in a minute but which is empty in a day.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday November 26 2014, @08:10PM
Recharge speed is important in some cases, but not all.
Well for automotive and phone use, clearly recharge time does matter.
It probably matters more than some modest increase in weight.
You seldom see anyone complain about the weight of their cell phone. In fact the term "feels good in the hand" has become a standard catch phrase in cell phone reviews as a stand in for heavier than it looks.
Most people are happy with a phone that gets them comfortably through one day with a few hours of reserve.
Most drivers think an electric car becomes practical when you can drive as far as an ICE car will travel in one day.
But people quickly see through the requirement for an hour long charge after the first 200 miles just to achieve the next 100 miles. Or never daring to pass an electric outlet with your rapidly depleting phone battery.
Stop making my phone thinner and lighter. Double the battery please.
And 265 (optimistic) miles in a Tesla doesn't even last till lunch stop.
For practical use, short charge time trumps weight in just about every case.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.