What is Digg?95 Comments
- Berkana, on 09/22/2008, -7/+35Definitely, direct utilization of solar power is more efficient that the use of biofuels. The plant that is the most efficient at converting solar energy into biomass is the miscanthus grass, but it's efficiency is about 1%:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/07/miscanthus ...
Conventional solar panels have an efficiency of between 12-15%, and modern multi-junction photovoltaics have an efficiency of about 40%. New solar concentrating methods permit an 80% reduction in the amount of the photovoltaic material needed:
http://soliant-energy.com/products.php
A comparison between even the most optimistic biofuel (algae) and direct utilization of solar energy shows that there's no competition; biofuels are not a long term solution if you want to get the most useful energy out of an acre of land. And unlike most biofuels, solar panels don't consume water as they produce usable energy:
http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1454/70/
Algae based biodiesel is projected to produce enough energy to drive 370,000 miles per acre of land used per year of sun exposure, which is many times more efficient than corn or soy based biodiesel, but direct utilization of solar energy using conventional technologies yields 2,250,000 miles per acre per year. There's really no competition. The future is not about biofuels; it's about the "electron economy". And no, the "hydrogen economy" is NOT the answer. Here's why:
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html - curlybracket, on 09/22/2008, -0/+14oon isn't oon enough
- HarrisonBn, on 09/22/2008, -0/+14why haven't these been around earlier? Any weaknesses not stated in the article?
- scythe33, on 09/22/2008, -0/+14Cool, though LiFePO4 has been around for a while-it just hasn't been marketed. This seems like it would go well with the silicon-nanowire anode: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanowire_battery
- TokyoKoss, on 09/22/2008, -0/+12Awesome, in 15 minutes it can be charged up to 90% of its capacity.
- aussiebuddha, on 09/22/2008, -0/+7I use Lifepo4 in RC models.
the problem is lower energy density than lion.
Safer and lighter but you need more batteries to get to the same mah as li-ion. - Jahnathan, on 09/22/2008, -3/+10As the chart shows in the article, LiFePO4 has a lower charge density - which means more weight for the same mileage.
- PrometheusBorn, on 09/22/2008, -0/+6Are you somehow suggesting that these articles for miracle cure-alls submitted to Digg sometimes don't always include all the facts, such as things that may make things not as desirable as they sound?
(Sorry for being pessimistic, it just seems like everyday there's things like that... although I truly do hope this battery is as good as it sounds) - keithburgun, on 09/22/2008, -0/+6Dr. Goodenough is behind this?
- dattaway, on 09/22/2008, -0/+6I saw one false claim in the article. Lead acid batteries last several years with daily full discharge cycles every day in our 24 hour operation. That's more than 300 discharges in the first year.
- TopherT, on 09/22/2008, -1/+7I think you commented on the wrong article.
- evodevo1, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5What's wrong with the Cobalt Li-ion batteries? From the chart, they have greater energy density than the LiFePO4 (phosphate Li-ioin).
- dullnation, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5Lack of mass production? Sometimes things take a long time to come to market simply because they haven't had a snowball effect of being adopted commercially by anyone at all. Once a couple of companies start using them, everyone has to, to keep an edge...
- notoneofus, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5Then you didn't understand Toyota and Honda in the 70s and 80s, but were fine with the direction of GM and Ford?
- dimplemonkey, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5make it for my iPhone and I will pitch a pup tent. Otherwise, it's just another Mad Libs.
Today, _________ (Industry) __________ (high end profession) have developed ______ (amazing breakthrough) that will help _________ (positive adjective) the amount of __________ (current technology). Although still in development, ___________ (high end professionals) say it should be available to the public in ____ (double digit number) years. - aussiessuck, on 09/22/2008, -0/+4DeWalt has been using these batteries in their cordless drills for how long?! RC plane people have been onto these things for well over a year, much more rugged than LiPo's.
- Anth, on 09/22/2008, -0/+4As mentioned above, the lower energy density has its tradeoffs. The biggest thing IMO is cycle life. 3,000 cycles is one cycle per day for 8 years. Granted that the Volt's battery is warrantied for 10 years, I would expect that after the battery gets down to 80% after it hits its cycle rating, in that time they'll have pushed battery tech along enough that it wont be an issue anymore (we'll see batteries with 1000wh/kg and cycle ratings over 7500).
- Berkana, on 09/22/2008, -1/+5Oops. I had multiple tabs open, and confused my tabs. But in any case, my post does give some perspective about the competition between batteries and biofuels.
- ripple123, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3HAHAHAHAHA OH SNAP.
- MxM111, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Well, if you do not use the word "breakthrough" in the title, you do not get digg's front page.
Did anyone notice that this old "breakthrough" technology is 30% LESS EFFICIENT in Wh/kg than Cobalt Li-ion? That means that you need heavier batteries to achieve the same millage in the car. - MrFurious2k, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Not exactly a "breakthrough" considering they've been around for a while. I'm guessing cost is the reason we haven't seen them more frequently though. The bullet points were interesting, but they were almost always a comparison to Lead Acid batteries. I'd have preferred a direct comparison to Lithium Ion considering that is the type most of us use in our laptops.
- TehProphet, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Arizona?
- branndon, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Man I'm really looking forward to a set of these in the Chevy Volt. It's already claiming 600+ miles per tank.
- GawtMilk, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3I've seen probably more than a hundred "invisibility cloak" articles on Digg in the past couple years. Same thing here. These breakthroughs almost never amount to anything.
- fritzek, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4sorry... 27 kWh. But everything else is correct
- fritzek, on 09/22/2008, -3/+6OK. Lets take some electrical car: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
27 Wh. To recharge 90% of it in 15 minutes, you'd need a steady supply of 100 kW(don't counting losses). Let's continue...I assume, you're from US, so On 110 Volts, You'd need approx. 1000 Ampers. Sounds good? Try to plug 0.1 ohm resistor in your power socket.
Let's assume you'd have such supply of energy(yes, some companies do), what would it couse to distribution network if there were people plugging and unplugging those chargers.
So yes, LULZ! - Anth, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4LiFePo4 sucks compared to Lithium Titanate batteries from Altairnano (Reno, NV). 10,000 charge cycles, no limits on operating temperatures (army and navy looking into using their batteries), the only issue is manufacturing costs. If they can bring them down, a 12kWh battery would drive a Volt 55 miles and fit in the same space as the current 16kWh battery they use now (which only gets 40 miles/charge) .
- punx777, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Here's a man to respect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Goodenough - insomnislacker, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3It's not about selling less of them, it's about expanding the markets for where they can be used.
Energy is necessary for everything we do, and currently we have a variety of ways of storing that energy. Batteries make up a relatively small percentage of that storage currently (oil being far more dominant). If a company is able to make batteries with near the amount of energy storage, at less than or equal to the cost of oil, with less than or equal to the space and weight requirements, they will become the ubiquitous. After that, it'll be all about how we acquire the energy to recharge the batteries. But at least that's a centralizable problem. - 12340987, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_cobalt_oxide
toxic
There is a list of other advantages in the article, which would seem to negate the lower energy density disadvantage. - apeweek, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2These have indeed been around a while, despite the impression the article gives.
- dn11, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2I'm being lazy and not reading everything in detail, can anyone tell me why this technology won't be good for electronics like laptops as well? why just electric vehicles?
- apeweek, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Sorry, these are not new. Here is a page full of hobbyists that have had LiFePO4 batteries in their electric cars for a few years already: http://www.evalbum.com/battb/THUN
- Zuwxiv, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2All of that stuff is good, no doubt. It's absolutely critical that battery production is less harmful to the environment, with the constantly growing amount of them we're making.
But the biggest hurdle for battery tech in cars and bicycles has to do with range and power density. Given the choice between a greener faster charging electric car with a 20 mile range, or a more destructive tech that gives you 40 miles, I think most people would choose the latter. - esc27, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Solar is ideal if, you can store it. Batteries like those in the article will hopefully prove to be the long term solution, but even hydrogen could work for a while (use solar energy in the American west to produce hydrogen) if battery power takes to long to develop. A battery (IMO) needs to sustain a normal, four person sedan at 60 mph for up to 150 miles to be viable.
- twodollars, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2but still...ooner or ater
- paker, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2http://www.evalbum.com/
- apeweek, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2http://www.evalbum.com/battb/THUN
(Electric vehicles with Thunder Sky LiFePO4 batteries) - fantasticjon, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2wow, skull and bones. This guy was hanging out with future presidents and congressmen in college.
- ChayesFSS, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Where are the batteries that run off of pee?
- spaceshipsix, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Then you don't really understand the basic idea of market competition.
- fooljoe, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1How is this a breakthrough? 1) They're not new 2) They have less energy density than the standard Li batteries 3) They have cycle life comparable to the current standard battery for EVs and hybrids, NiMH.
So basically these purport to perform as well as NiMH but for a much higher price tag since they're "breakthrough" technology. And they have no real world performance data, which NiMH batteries have been in EVs on the road for 10+ years. The only reason these even exist is that the NiMH batteries in cars like the Rav4-EV are locked up by Chevron, who holds the patents and refuses to produce them. The only breakthrough we need is breaking Chevron's illegal patent squatting, if only there was someone in government who'd go against the likes of Chevron. - ChayesFSS, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1You seem to be trying too hard
- LogicBomB, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Anyone else try to decode the chemical name before reading the description?
- Flecko, on 09/23/2008, -1/+2This simply isn't true. Lithium Phosphate batteries only LOOK like they're charged to 90% after 15 minutes. They have a nearly flat voltage curve for 90% of its capacity. The graph has a sharp bend at the end, and one at the beginning. This is why batteries produced with this chemistry have very bad State-of-Charge displays. Check out something made by Black and Decker that uses Lithium Phosphate...the display has like 3 bars.
With Lithium Ion you get a +/- 1% accuracy on State-of-Charge. - Flecko, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1Thats an absolute lie. LiFePO4 batteries won't work above roughly 80C or below -10C. Its just like regular old Lithium Ion batteries...you start to reach points where the impedance becomes a problem.
- EtherGnat, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1You'd be right in a monopoly environment. With healthy competition it won't happen--if just one company is willing to bring a better technology to market to increase their market share everybody is forced to do so to remain competitive.
- inactive, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Umm Helloooo...Li-Ion batteries have been out for quite sometime now. Being introduced into for more power hungry needs doesn't make it a breakthrough.
- RMartinBikes, on 02/23/2009, -0/+1Hi,
Checked your profile on Black Planet. We are an Electric Vehicles/Transport firm and would feel glad to add you in our network.
N
(On behalf of R Martin Bikes.)
http://rmartinbikes.blogspot.com - flashingcurser, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Anything with the word "cobalt" is toxic.
-
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is