Stanford researchers may have found the solution to making lithium-ion batteries last longer
New Nanostructure Technology Can Mean Longer Battery Life : Read more
New Nanostructure Technology Can Mean Longer Battery Life : Read more
- Status
As amazing as this is, I wonder about more than just consumer electronics...what about automotive applications? Could this be the holy grail that allows EVs to surpass traditional gasoline cars in terms of demand? If I could drive back and forth to work for a week on a single charge as compared to a single tank of gas I'd be more than happy to jump on that wagon!
segio526
Distinguished
- Apr 21, 2010
- 196
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]downsb[/nom]As amazing as this is, I wonder about more than just consumer electronics...what about automotive applications? Could this be the holy grail that allows EVs to surpass traditional gasoline cars in terms of demand? If I could drive back and forth to work for a week on a single charge as compared to a single tank of gas I'd be more than happy to jump on that wagon![/citation]
Everything staying the same, these batteries would also take 10x more time to charge. If they can charge and discharge faster than current batteries, we'll be seeing these things in more applications. For example, they could displace lead acid batteries in cars and UPSes if they can discharge faster.
Everything staying the same, these batteries would also take 10x more time to charge. If they can charge and discharge faster than current batteries, we'll be seeing these things in more applications. For example, they could displace lead acid batteries in cars and UPSes if they can discharge faster.
BulkZerker
Distinguished
- Apr 19, 2010
- 846
- 8
- 18,995
[citation][nom]Chainzsaw[/nom]Can't wait for the day when you can have a desktop replacement laptop that runs purely on solar power as well as indoor lightning. Of course have a small battery with it as well.[/citation]
What your wanting has more to do with solar cell efficiency, not battery capacity. A netbook needs around 30 watts to run, so unless you have as solar cell producing at least 28 watts the battery is going to need a substantial battery to keep the device running.
What your wanting has more to do with solar cell efficiency, not battery capacity. A netbook needs around 30 watts to run, so unless you have as solar cell producing at least 28 watts the battery is going to need a substantial battery to keep the device running.
[citation][nom]segio526[/nom]Everything staying the same, these batteries would also take 10x more time to charge. If they can charge and discharge faster than current batteries, we'll be seeing these things in more applications. For example, they could displace lead acid batteries in cars and UPSes if they can discharge faster.[/citation]
That we would have to see, lead acid batteries have been around so long because they are extremely durable, relatively cheap, and easily recycled(almost a 100% rate), not that I wouldn't like to see it, but outside of limited cases where cost is irrelevant and performance is important it will be hard to replace them.
That we would have to see, lead acid batteries have been around so long because they are extremely durable, relatively cheap, and easily recycled(almost a 100% rate), not that I wouldn't like to see it, but outside of limited cases where cost is irrelevant and performance is important it will be hard to replace them.
digitalgriffin
Splendid
- Jan 29, 2008
- 3,540
- 1,483
- 25,390
Welcome to six years ago. Berkely had made similar announcements about the potential of silicon in batteries. However they have made no real advancements towards production. This is just another paper of little advancement trying to spur another round of funding.
digitalgriffin
Splendid
- Jan 29, 2008
- 3,540
- 1,483
- 25,390
[citation][nom]Chainzsaw[/nom]Can't wait for the day when you can have a desktop replacement laptop that runs purely on solar power as well as indoor lightning. Of course have a small battery with it as well.[/citation]
LMAO. That day will be never. Assuming your light source was 100% efficient (no energy wasted as heat. It all went to light) and your collection source could collect ALL that light (absolutely impossible), you would at best collect about 13 Watts. It takes 13 Watts to run an Atom processor alone.
LMAO. That day will be never. Assuming your light source was 100% efficient (no energy wasted as heat. It all went to light) and your collection source could collect ALL that light (absolutely impossible), you would at best collect about 13 Watts. It takes 13 Watts to run an Atom processor alone.
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 7
- 43,265
[citation][nom]segio526[/nom]Everything staying the same, these batteries would also take 10x more time to charge. If they can charge and discharge faster than current batteries, we'll be seeing these things in more applications. For example, they could displace lead acid batteries in cars and UPSes if they can discharge faster.[/citation]
Or, you could put ten small batteries based on this technology into a single one of the same size as current batteries. Each small one could theoretically charge as fast as the older battery and if you charge all ten independently, then you can now charge and discharge ten times faster than before. It's more complicated and that might leave more room for failure, but it's something worth looking into, at least I think that it is.
[citation][nom]downsb[/nom]As amazing as this is, I wonder about more than just consumer electronics...what about automotive applications? Could this be the holy grail that allows EVs to surpass traditional gasoline cars in terms of demand? If I could drive back and forth to work for a week on a single charge as compared to a single tank of gas I'd be more than happy to jump on that wagon![/citation]
A Tesla electric car can go up to 600 miles per charge. Electric cars don't have a problem with capacity (at least, Tesla cars don't, pretty much any other purely electric car is using ancient battery tech that is from the 70s and can't come close), they have a problem with charging time and cost. What I mentioned above might help the charging time problem (unless they already do something like that), but how do we reduce cost? Then we have to realize that we aren't really saving the planet by using electric cars when we consider where the electricity came from.
I don't know for sure about other countries, but the majority of the USA's power generation is from fossil fuels and nuclear fission plants. Switching the fuel from one fossil fuel being used in the car to another being used in a power plant (or Uranium) doesn't seem like much of an improvement, if even an improvement at all.
If we used modern nuclear fission technology, such as those newer thorium power plants instead of our old uranium power plants, then I think that we would be doing some good, at least from what I've read about them. There's also the option of using hydrogen instead of any other fuel too. Hydrogen is pretty much everywhere, burns well, burns clean (burning hydrogen gets you water vapor instead of pollutants), and hydrogen is very light.
Or, you could put ten small batteries based on this technology into a single one of the same size as current batteries. Each small one could theoretically charge as fast as the older battery and if you charge all ten independently, then you can now charge and discharge ten times faster than before. It's more complicated and that might leave more room for failure, but it's something worth looking into, at least I think that it is.
[citation][nom]downsb[/nom]As amazing as this is, I wonder about more than just consumer electronics...what about automotive applications? Could this be the holy grail that allows EVs to surpass traditional gasoline cars in terms of demand? If I could drive back and forth to work for a week on a single charge as compared to a single tank of gas I'd be more than happy to jump on that wagon![/citation]
A Tesla electric car can go up to 600 miles per charge. Electric cars don't have a problem with capacity (at least, Tesla cars don't, pretty much any other purely electric car is using ancient battery tech that is from the 70s and can't come close), they have a problem with charging time and cost. What I mentioned above might help the charging time problem (unless they already do something like that), but how do we reduce cost? Then we have to realize that we aren't really saving the planet by using electric cars when we consider where the electricity came from.
I don't know for sure about other countries, but the majority of the USA's power generation is from fossil fuels and nuclear fission plants. Switching the fuel from one fossil fuel being used in the car to another being used in a power plant (or Uranium) doesn't seem like much of an improvement, if even an improvement at all.
If we used modern nuclear fission technology, such as those newer thorium power plants instead of our old uranium power plants, then I think that we would be doing some good, at least from what I've read about them. There's also the option of using hydrogen instead of any other fuel too. Hydrogen is pretty much everywhere, burns well, burns clean (burning hydrogen gets you water vapor instead of pollutants), and hydrogen is very light.
Zingam_Duo
Honorable
- Mar 22, 2012
- 289
- 0
- 10,780
As usual the promising technology will be commercialized after 10-15 years and will have upto 2-3x more capacity than the promised theoretical 10x.
Zingam_Duo
Honorable
- Mar 22, 2012
- 289
- 0
- 10,780
[citation][nom]BulkZerker[/nom]What your wanting has more to do with solar cell efficiency, not battery capacity. A netbook needs around 30 watts to run, so unless you have as solar cell producing at least 28 watts the battery is going to need a substantial battery to keep the device running.[/citation]
And with future LED lighting, that won't ever work.
And with future LED lighting, that won't ever work.
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 7
- 43,265
[citation][nom]jdwii[/nom]I stop reading after this[/citation]
Most of us probably don't like iPads, but they do have good battery life.
Most of us probably don't like iPads, but they do have good battery life.
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 7
- 43,265
[citation][nom]zingam_duo[/nom]And with future LED lighting, that won't ever work.[/citation]
Maybe, maybe not. LEDs often use much less power than other light emitting devices, but they do emit a lot of light for their power usage.
Maybe, maybe not. LEDs often use much less power than other light emitting devices, but they do emit a lot of light for their power usage.
[citation][nom]zingam_duo[/nom]As usual the promising technology will be commercialized after 10-15 years and will have upto 2-3x more capacity than the promised theoretical 10x.[/citation]
This. Because they will want to milk consumers and give better battery life in the next model of laptop or phone etc, thus giving everyone a "reason" to upgrade every 2 years.
This. Because they will want to milk consumers and give better battery life in the next model of laptop or phone etc, thus giving everyone a "reason" to upgrade every 2 years.
blazorthon
Glorious
- Sep 24, 2010
- 14,022
- 7
- 43,265
[citation][nom]digitalgriffin[/nom]Welcome to six years ago. Berkely had made similar announcements about the potential of silicon in batteries. However they have made no real advancements towards production. This is just another paper of little advancement trying to spur another round of funding.[/citation]
Maybe, but this seems to be telling us that actual advancement has been made in the field; it's probably not just begging for more funding.
Maybe, but this seems to be telling us that actual advancement has been made in the field; it's probably not just begging for more funding.
AndrewHitchcock96
Honorable
- May 29, 2012
- 15
- 0
- 10,520
I'm in grad school developing a new kind of battery and I have a few things to say about this:
1) I assume this is Yi Cui. He is amazing.
2) There's nothing special about nanotech making batteries better. The key is making them cheap. I mean, this is good research but don't get so excited just yet.
3) A 10x improvement in anode energy density might translate to a 10% increase in overall battery energy density. This is because anodes are way better than cathodes right now, meaning they're already a much smaller part of the battery. Make them 100% smaller (not there) and the battery is still much less than double the previous energy density.
Sorry to rain on the parade. I'm not being jealous or anything. This is amazing research and I'd die for a publication like that. Just saying this doesn't mean iPhone 6 will last a week on a charge.
1) I assume this is Yi Cui. He is amazing.
2) There's nothing special about nanotech making batteries better. The key is making them cheap. I mean, this is good research but don't get so excited just yet.
3) A 10x improvement in anode energy density might translate to a 10% increase in overall battery energy density. This is because anodes are way better than cathodes right now, meaning they're already a much smaller part of the battery. Make them 100% smaller (not there) and the battery is still much less than double the previous energy density.
Sorry to rain on the parade. I'm not being jealous or anything. This is amazing research and I'd die for a publication like that. Just saying this doesn't mean iPhone 6 will last a week on a charge.
[citation][nom]fonzy[/nom]Been hearing about Battery tech breakthroughs for a long time, why do they never make as an actually product for consumers.[/citation]
about 1 article per month since 10 years ago about batteries. yet we have the same old li-ion tech.
about 1 article per month since 10 years ago about batteries. yet we have the same old li-ion tech.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Question Download speed is slow on only my PC - please help!- Started by Ograsmium
- Replies: 16
-
-
Question New installed W11 on sdd, D drive (HDD) goes to the 100% in seconds
- Started by Emily_Vin
- Replies: 7
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram