Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New 'semi-solid' battery could recharge EVs as fast as pumping gas
Engadget ^ | 6/8/11 | Sharif Sakr

Posted on 06/08/2011 5:00:36 PM PDT by dangerdoc

Researchers at MIT reckon they've struck oil. In fact, you're looking at what they call "Cambridge crude" -- a substance that could halve the weight and cost of EV batteries and make them quicker to charge too. The black goo is packed with a high concentration of energy in the form of particles suspended in a liquid electrolyte. When separated by a filter, these particles function as mobile electrodes that can be pumped into and around a system before the energy is released. So instead of waiting up to 20 hours to juice your Nissan Leaf, you could potentially just pump this pre-charged substance into it -- rather like dirty old gas. Until now, no such "semi-solid flow cell" has been able to hold useful quantities of energy, but this stuff literally oozes with it. Not only could it power EVs, it could even be used for large-scale electricity storage for utilities. The researchers insist this energy revolution is years off -- but when it comes, there will be blood.


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: blood; muslim; scientist; snakeoil; zombies
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

1 posted on 06/08/2011 5:00:38 PM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

And I suppose the goo tank, theoretically, could be simultaneously emptied back into the filling station reservoir so that the used goo could be recharged?

Could work.

Or, how about a system that swaps out more solid pre-charged batteries?

The latter could be vulnerable to some problems, though. Swap junk batteries for good.


2 posted on 06/08/2011 5:05:05 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

It sounded interesting.

Regular or premium goo?


3 posted on 06/08/2011 5:06:35 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

A dark liquid that holds alot of potential energy...only instead of pumping it out of the ground, you have to make it.

I’m no MIT researcher; but, I’ve got a theory:

Mining coal out of the ground, burning it to convert potential energy into mechanical energy, converting said mechanical energy into electrical energy, transmitting said electrical energy for hundreds of miles, and converting back into potential energy in this ooz....is probably less efficient than just putting a fossil fuel in a car. Just a hunch.


4 posted on 06/08/2011 5:06:50 PM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

Doing a battery swap isn’t efficient because the number, because even if you could quickly do a swap, the number of batteries needed to service the average number of customers a day would fill a large warehouse.


5 posted on 06/08/2011 5:08:49 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lacrew

I agree.
The EV thing only works rationally if you get your juice from hydro or nukes.


6 posted on 06/08/2011 5:10:21 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston
Or, how about a system that swaps out more solid pre-charged batteries?

The latter could be vulnerable to some problems, though. Swap junk batteries for good.


Would be OK if you just leased the batteries, a bit like the propane tanks from your hardware store - turn an old one in and get a new one...

7 posted on 06/08/2011 5:11:04 PM PDT by az_gila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

This, not you, is stupid... We don’t have the capicity in the grid to handle it.


8 posted on 06/08/2011 5:23:28 PM PDT by babygene (Figures don't lie, but liars can figure...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
Add this to the very large list of breakthroughs reported each month that will solve our energy needs.


9 posted on 06/08/2011 5:24:03 PM PDT by NoLibZone (Until Reagan rises from the dead: Thank God McCain didnt win. Obama's better than some RINO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

I have a much simpler solution: DRILL BABY DRILL!!!! AND SELL THE DAMNED OIL AND TO HELL WITH OPEC!!! Sorry for shouting but I’m sick and tired of stories about krazy-kooky-enviro-friendly energy’’, ‘’electric cars’’ solar power’’ ‘’green jobs’’. It’s all a lot of neo-Marxist bs to turn us into Belgium. Drill here for the damned oil and do it now!!


10 posted on 06/08/2011 5:24:49 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston
Or, how about a system that swaps out more solid pre-charged batteries?

This is already available in Japan. I believe they might be testing it in SF and possibly NY too.

11 posted on 06/08/2011 5:28:37 PM PDT by I Drive Too Fast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

http://www.cnet.com.au/electric-car-battery-swap-station-trial-in-japan-339296437.htm


12 posted on 06/08/2011 5:29:27 PM PDT by I Drive Too Fast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

I can think of some real benefits.

The biggest problem with coal is that it is difficult modulate power as needed. In general power companies will run coal for baseline load 24 hours a day and cycle on and off more expensive NG turbines as the load changes. If there were a less expensive way to store electricity, the entire load could be generated with cheaper coal.

It would be a pretty good way to back up power in an industrial or commercial setting.

It may even be a good way to power a car too, who knows.


13 posted on 06/08/2011 5:38:46 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

I totally agree.

New tech stuff is fun from a “thought experiment” perspective but, what we need to do now is utilise what we have that we know works.


14 posted on 06/08/2011 5:39:38 PM PDT by IAMIUBU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lacrew

Thank you. So much of this “green” nonsense is based on foolishness and ignores the simple fact that most electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels or using nuclear power.


15 posted on 06/08/2011 5:45:08 PM PDT by Upstate NY Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lacrew
Mining coal out of the ground, burning it to convert potential energy into mechanical energy, converting said mechanical energy into electrical energy, transmitting said electrical energy for hundreds of miles, and converting back into potential energy in this ooz....is probably less efficient than just putting a fossil fuel in a car

Your hunch is not entirely correct for a couple of reasons having to do with efficiency. A gasoline engine is about 15% fuel to wheel efficient, not counting the cost of crude in the Middle East to refined gasoline in your tank. Coal plants are quite efficient as is the conversion of electricity to mechanical energy in an electric motor.

The real issue is capital cost because of the battery, lifetime, range, and performance.

16 posted on 06/08/2011 5:48:11 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

As always, I ask: where does the electricity come from?


17 posted on 06/08/2011 5:48:45 PM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
The researchers insist this energy revolution is years off ...

Scientific speak for this stuff has huge negatives that we never mention in these attention grabbing PR releases.

18 posted on 06/08/2011 5:48:50 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

I can just see it..”OK folks, at the count of three, everyone plug in. One, Two, Three!” ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZAP. The grid melts down and the whole country goes dark.


19 posted on 06/08/2011 5:50:33 PM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

I’m betting on unicorn farts as the ultimate energy source.

(Does that make me a Dimocrat?)


20 posted on 06/08/2011 5:50:38 PM PDT by chickenlips
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

“The black goo is packed with a high concentration of energy in the form of particles suspended in a liquid electrolyte.”

Brawndo? It has electrolytes!


21 posted on 06/08/2011 5:51:47 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crz

he grid melts down and the whole country goes dark.

Like North Korea?


22 posted on 06/08/2011 5:53:09 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
"As always, I ask: where does the electricity come from?"

I heard a quick chemical reaction. Not sure.

23 posted on 06/08/2011 5:53:26 PM PDT by AGreatPer (May 21 end of world canceled, Friday nights at Walter Reed continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

Seems like something with potential for standby/reserve power aps. Right now utilities with significant numbers of NUGs, (non-utility generators) have to keep a lot of capacity, (at considerable expense)on “spinning reserve” ready to meet demand surges and keep the grid stable. “Peaking” plants using gas turbines and NG fuel exist to quickly take up load surges. Some of these conditions might well offer practical application for this “goo”. I’m for anything that decentralizes and localizes our power sources. >PS


24 posted on 06/08/2011 6:00:26 PM PDT by PiperShade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

Nah, it’s that electric plasma stuff from Demolition Man.


25 posted on 06/08/2011 6:01:33 PM PDT by stylin_geek (Never underestimate the power of government to distort markets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
"The researchers insist this energy revolution is years off -- but when it comes, there will be blood."

...and guts, zombies, and all of that? Sounds pretty coherent.


26 posted on 06/08/2011 6:02:29 PM PDT by familyop (Shut up, and eat your brains!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
What's that "fanatical conservative" code word "efficiency" !

Don't you know about the fairy-tale land of liberal ooz... where we all ride around...

/sarc


27 posted on 06/08/2011 6:04:20 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen (If you are a Patriotic Conservative Christian Capitalist, please Visit my Profile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
Coal plants are quite efficient as is the conversion of electricity to mechanical energy in an electric motor.

You haven't factored in the loss while the electricity passes through power cables from the plant through the grid.

28 posted on 06/08/2011 6:06:04 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

Batteries degrade. They charge less, as they age.


29 posted on 06/08/2011 6:06:18 PM PDT by familyop (Shut up, and eat your brains!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

this is not true. You have bought into the liberal “climate warming” “carbon” midset.

The goal is NOT to lessen carbon footprint rather CHEAPER and BETTER. That’s what will WIN!

So, the source of the fuel does not matter. The “goo” recharged at for example 10 cents/KWH is still about 10 times cheaper than gasoline. No matter WHERE the energy comes from.

This whole “carbon dioxide is pollution” nonsense is junk science, pure and simple.


30 posted on 06/08/2011 6:06:37 PM PDT by BereanBrain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BereanBrain

WTF? where did I say anything about carbon?

I’m talking about cheap juice


31 posted on 06/08/2011 6:09:04 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

Slap on a couple of E-catylisers in your car and go back to steam powered vehicles.


32 posted on 06/08/2011 6:17:31 PM PDT by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

The average coal plant is 28 percent efficient, with the best around 45 percent. I think known battery technology is around 50 percent. I’ve read of a Mazda project on a 30 percent engine. I’d like to know what the efficiency of a Prius is, as it seems to be a much better concept than a plug in. I did a calculation once on how much power it would take to charge batteries in a ‘battery swap’ station. The same could be done for an ooze station. Assume 8 pumps, 75 percent used for 12 hours a day, with 10 minutes a fill up....at 10 kwh per fillup. Each night, the station would have to impart over 4,000 kwh over a 12 hour period....and this is just one ‘filling’ station, to let people get 40 miles, with today’s technology. When thee gas station has to knock down the car wash to make room for the transformer, it starts to look very inefficient to me. There are losses in transmitting and stepping down this kind of power.


33 posted on 06/08/2011 6:23:49 PM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

you implied that coal fired is not cheap.


34 posted on 06/08/2011 6:24:34 PM PDT by BereanBrain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: PiperShade

I’m for anything that decentralizes and localizes our power sources.
____________________________________________________________

Exactly.


35 posted on 06/08/2011 6:30:45 PM PDT by free me (Sarah Palin 2012 - GAME ON!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

Absolutely. We should just stop all this stupid research into “new” things. We’ll never use it. We already have everything we’ll ever need. What good has new technology ever been, anyway?


36 posted on 06/08/2011 6:33:09 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx

Coal.


37 posted on 06/08/2011 6:38:23 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear

‘You haven’t factored in the loss while the electricity passes through power cables from the plant through the grid.’

About 5%.


38 posted on 06/08/2011 6:40:01 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

I’m not down with global warming, and these
hybrid cars are a joke.

That said, gas and oil prices may only get worse,
and I’ve wondered if solar cells wouldn’t
be a perfect application for cars.
Sit it right on the roof.

We’ll still neet oil for many things;
but solar cars, to me, sounds like a better
idea than rechargeable batteries, if new technology
is coming.

Does that sound feasible?


39 posted on 06/08/2011 6:43:36 PM PDT by CaptainPhilFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

“Batteries degrade. They charge less, as they age.”

True for standard batteries. We don’t know about the chemistry this technology. Pumping out the old goo and pumping in new could be equivalent to rebuilding the battery giving it more recharge cycles.


40 posted on 06/08/2011 6:44:35 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
Eliminate the subsidies and eliminate electric and hybrid kiddycars!
41 posted on 06/08/2011 6:54:51 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

“Batteries degrade. They charge less, as they age.”

More than that. They eat energy during charging that is quickly lost before you get a chance to use it(much more with older batteries). It is dissipated as heat. And you thought incandescent light bulbs were wasteful.


42 posted on 06/08/2011 6:55:54 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CaptainPhilFan

At noon on the equator, the sunlight sunlight energy about 1 kilowatt per meter squared. Averaged over a sunless day, you may be talking 6-8 kilowatt hours. For a large car, you could probably mount about 6 square meters of solar cells giving a theoretical 36-44 kilowatt hours. Unfortunately, affordable solar cells are about 10% efficient giving you about 1 horsepower peak power or if you use a battery about 4 kilowatt hours of power per day. That would take a car about 15-20 miles per day.

I posted an article a few months ago about a potential solar cell technology that would be 90% efficient. Now you are talking about a car that could be powered over 100 miles per day just on daily solar input. Unfortunately, just the batteries to store this much energy would buy a couple of regular cars. You would also have to deal with minor problems such as winter and rainy days.

If the technology improves, solar could be practical for stationary applications, it could even charge up the batteries on electric cars. Unfortunately, neither the solar cells or batteries are here yet. I posted this article because it may be an improvement on the battery side of the equation.

I don’t know if any of this will ever be practical but I find it very interesting.


43 posted on 06/08/2011 7:01:25 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: dalereed

44 posted on 06/08/2011 7:09:40 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

So far as yet gasoline seems to be the best fuel for an internal combustion, piston engine such as that in a car. It’s also lubricates the engine and other moving parts(people always concentrate on the rear of the car, never under the hood) Gasoline comes from oil and oil comes from the ground. And we’ve got lots of it. Oil is a demoracys most precious natural resource. It’s the black blood that makes possible all we produce and build and drive and fly to be the super power we are, to enjoy the standard of living we have— and to be free. It’s the reason the liberals and the ‘’greens( reds, really) are pushing this ‘’green revolution; green technology’’ bs. They hate American exceptionalism , they hate freedom.


45 posted on 06/08/2011 7:15:16 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

Use the hundreds of years of oil in the United States known reserves and kill electric cars!

I had 2 cars a whole lot faster that electric thing over 50 years ago.

128 in the quarter mile and 154 at bonneville in 1954.

Our stock 1957 Corvette was clocked at 157 in the back straight at Riverside in 57.


46 posted on 06/08/2011 7:17:49 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

DangerDoc, you’re a smarter man than I am.
That’s very good information to have; perhaps
solar cells will get better over time. Thank
you for reply, and not laughing at me :)


47 posted on 06/08/2011 7:23:48 PM PDT by CaptainPhilFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: CaptainPhilFan

I’m not smarter, I am just interested in the subject and have been following it for a while.


48 posted on 06/08/2011 7:31:22 PM PDT by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc; AGreatPer
Coal

Yup. Coal provides 44.9%, natural gas 23.4%, petroleum 1% (fossil fuel component 69.3%); hyroelectric 6.9%, and other renewables 3.6%. Nuclear energy accounts for 20.3%.

The consensus since Fukashima seems to be that nuclear is intolerably dangerous so we won't see many new plants built - it takes at least a decade to go through the approval process anyhow. The Monkey Wrench people think hydro dams are unthinkable and want to tear them out. It's very unlikely we'll see any major new hydro projects. At present output the total from hydro and other renewables is a pathetic 10.5% of the total used.

Since about 70% of U.S. electricity comes from fossil fuels I don't see how a faster way of charging car batteries with it is going to solve any problems. I believe nuclear power is the only long-range solution.

49 posted on 06/08/2011 8:17:33 PM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

I’m wondering if it catches fire as well as the original batteries?


50 posted on 06/08/2011 8:19:07 PM PDT by MasterGunner01 (To err is human; to forgive is not our policy. -- SEAL Team SIX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson