HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Blog

Superbattery: The Next Great Triumph of Engineering

NO RATINGS
< Previous Page 3 / 3
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 8/8
williamlweaver
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Redistribution of Energy Production
williamlweaver   1/13/2012 2:35:29 PM
Rob I believe we are after the same goals. I've no stick-to-it-iveness to any technology when innovations abound, but as you know, oil and gas is much bigger than the fluids -- it is entire economies that support and surround it. My adverse reaction is to calls for conversion to electric vehicles because they don't burn fossil fuels and are therefore "free", when it comes to energy consumption. It sounds ridiculous to scientists and engineers, but to a general voting public who thinks the moon landing was staged in California and big business is hiding the technology to the flux capacitor, the rhetoric can be disastrous

I like your transitional approach that may include super-efficient ICEs. I'm rooting for efficient electric motors and transmission systems that are powered by super-efficient on-board turbine generators --- much like a Diesel Locomotive. I spent a few years working in the Fuels and Lubrication Division of the US Air Force Power and Propulsion Directorate... Advanced Turbine Composites and innovations such as the Trapped-Vortex Combustor would go a long way to hybridizing our fossil fuel economy with more efficient use of electricity, all while avoiding an increased reliance on Coal spurred by a political push for rechargeable electric vehicles... 


Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
No combustion is better
Ann R. Thryft   1/13/2012 2:23:38 PM

Benj rides again! Great to see your byline here at DN. Thanks for the clear, concise summary of the state of battery technology and the more human side of the politico-social environment that forms a backdrop to developments in this area.

Rob, I'm with you on getting free from oil, but I can't support alternative--or any--internal combustion engine designs. To me, the key word is "combustion," as in, burning. 

 


Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Redistribution of Energy Production
Rob Spiegel   1/13/2012 1:58:00 PM

China uses even more coal than North America. They get 68 percent of their electricity from coal, and goes into the same air we eventually breathe. I've got it in the back of my head that tremendous gains could be made by creating a super-efficient, super lightweight internal combustion engine. And while technology that makes oil use more efficient may be a big step forward in reducing consumption, I really can't see sticking to oil in order to support the industry. I'm glad we didn't support buggy makers or typewriter manufacturers.


williamlweaver
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Redistribution of Energy Production
williamlweaver   1/13/2012 10:57:50 AM
Jerry, thanks for the correction. I've used the 50% coal number for a while now, as a Google search returns values of 57%, 54%, and 45% (an average of 52%), but I'm happy to use the www.eia.gov values of 45% from Coal, 24% from Natural Gas (69% fossil fuels). I'm not sure I would count Zinc/Air and Aluminum/Air reaction as 'batteries', but I'll go with fuel cells. The only difficulty being that electrolysis powered from our 69% fossil fuel grid is required to reduce the oxidized Zinc and Aluminum ore into new, battery cells which are non-rechargeable. 

I'm happy to learn the off-peak production level of the grid can be utilized to charge 50M EV's, but I'm concerned that would lead to running at 100% peak capacity 24/7. I'm not sure for how long our current infrastructure could handle that duty cycle without failure...


Jerry dycus
User Rank
Gold
Re: Redistribution of Energy Production
Jerry dycus   1/13/2012 10:16:04 AM
 

         WW, you are so leading us straight to financial ruin.  Feel free to keep burning that oil but you pay for it and all it's other costs which we pay in our taxes of about $1T/yr for oil wars, pollution, corporate welfare, balance og payments, etc.

   Oil won't slow just because of EV's but instead from slowing demand from higher oil prices and dropping RE costs. So don't blame EV's for FF job losses.

     Coal hasn't been 50% for w while now and dropping like flies as they should because they kill 30k, hospitalize 150k/yr in just the US amoung much other costs. Coal, oil get the profits, yaxpayers get the shaft.  By the time any number of EV's are on the road coal plants will be far less, about 20-25% of the cleanest, most eff ones. 

  And Ev's will be the battery pack of the grid allowing it to balance out without having to run costly generators in case of peak demand, saving enough in fact to charge 50M EV's according to utility studies without increasing capacity.

For those who don't know I've been driving EV's at 25% of an ICE's cost or 15 yrs at about 250-600mpg equivalent.  So keep paying your oil masters if you want. I'll pass.

Nukes are not being built because they are way overpriced.  Not until gen 4-5 smaller, far safer, more cost effective modular reactors come online will it be viable here.  

Back to batteries, we already have 2  'air' batteries available techincally. They are Zinc and Alum/air batteries.  They are good for about 1k miles/charge, then you have the insides replaced. Trails worked well but no one wanted to build enough and the charging plants  to make them work.

williamlweaver
User Rank
Platinum
Redistribution of Energy Production
williamlweaver   1/13/2012 8:59:43 AM
I really (really) tried to consume this article from a neutral position, but too many buzzwords and cliches set off my political alarms. Kissing BP and OPEC goodbye? -- so we can embrace GE, GM, and Korea-based LG Chem? Simply changing the name of the organizations that provide energy fixes nothing, other than the spelling of the current boogeymen. We already have a battery that 'breathes in' oxygen from the air. It's called an internal combustion engine. And the hydrocarbon fuel it uses is the product of millions of years of photosynthesis. And the distribution network is already in place and provides countless thousands of jobs. Make it "game over for gasoline" and then figure out how to accommodate all of the displaced careers from exploration, drilling, refinement, transportation, pipeline infrastructure, and convenience stores and gas stations to name a few. 

"By extending the technology of power storage beyond car batteries into 'green' areas of solar, wind, and biomass...we will...reduce the suffocating impact of carbon emissions..." Wow. Confusing "Power Production" for "Power Storage" is a common problem in the non-technical media. If all Americans switched to Chevy volts tomorrow, our currently 50% Coal-fired electricity grid will need to charge all of the batteries --- and with no new Nuclear Reactor permits, no unsightly wind turbines off Nantucket and the demise of Solyndra, I can only predict that the electricity shortfall needed to power all of the batteries will necessary come from burning more coal and building more oil-fired power plants. Again --- the theme of Redistribution sucks up all of our debate time, rather than passionately arguing for Innovation. 


Beth Stackpole
User Rank
Blogger
Superbattery challenge
Beth Stackpole   1/13/2012 7:10:46 AM
Here, here!! David, I applaud your strong call to arms to get the private sector and government research dollars behind battery development. I agree that it's a short-sighted view to squash investment here due to lingering concerns about the economy and the still all-out push to promote budget austerity. I love your comment, "We should be glad to pay up, if only for the sake of kissing BP and OPEC goodbye." Ok, maybe not a complete break-up, but it's certainly time in the relationship to start "seeing other people."

 




<<  <  Page 8/8
Partner Zone
More Blogs
Major global metropolitan areas are implementing a vast number of technology, energy, transportation, and Internet projects to make the metropolis a friendlier, greener, safer, and more sustainable place to be.
Here’s a look at robots depicted in movies and on TV during the 1950s and 1960s. We tried to collect the classics here, omitting the scores of forgettable B movies such as Santa Claus Conquers the Martians and Dr. Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine. Stay tuned for slideshows of robot stars from later decades.
A scientist at the University of Pittsburgh has achieved a breakthrough in the quest to create artificial cartilage with human cells for treatment of degenerative joint disease.
The LG G Watch is a smartwatch that was released by LG on June 25. It runs the Android-based Android Wear OS. See how it compares to Samsung's Gear Live, released the same day.
Researchers worldwide are working to minimize the time it takes to recharge a Li battery. The latest research coming out of the University of California could cut the time it takes to recharge to 10 minutes.
Design News Webinar Series
7/17/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
6/25/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
5/13/2014 10:00 a.m. California / 1:00 p.m. New York / 6:00 p.m. London
5/8/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York / 7:00 p.m. London
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Jul 21 - 25, Design Products With Bluetooth Low Energy
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: August 12 - 14
Sponsored by igus
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service