Posted on 06/10/2014 6:46:54 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine
Israeli company Phinergy claim to have produced a battery that can power a Citroen C1 for 3000km, and have demonstrated a 1800km drive with a more practical version, three times that available from commercial electric cars. Even more dramatically, the battery weighs just 100km, a fifth of the weight of those in the Tesla Model S.
Metal-air batteries use the oxygen in the air around them, rather than storing it in liquid or solid chemicals. They can store far more energy than most competing technologies. Not needing to contain the oxygen can also cut the weight dramatically – Phinergy claim that 70% of the weight in a conventional car battery is in the cathode, mostly just to store the oxygen.
With such benefits, metal-air batteries have been a topic of research for some time. Lithium-air batteries have theoretical energy per weight almost as high as petrol. However, a range of practical problems have prevented widespread commercialization.
Aluminum-air batteries don't have the same potential energy per kilogram of lithium-air battery, but could theoretically reach energy densities many times better than the lithium-ion batteries that are currently the industry standard.
One of the challenges for metal-air batteries is to capture enough oxygen to provide the power required. Phinergy's porous electrodes have the surface area to allow this. A silver-based catalyst prevents carbon dioxide from permeating the electrodes, a common problem for other experimental versions of this technology that reduces their lifespan to the point of impracticality.
Like anything based on aluminum, there is a lot of embodied energy in Phinergy's batteries, but they are manufacturing their products in Quebec, where the electricity is almost entirely sourced from hydroelectric stations, keeping the carbon footprint small.
The big disadvantage of aluminum-air batteries is that they don't last. The aluminum turns to aluminum-hydroxide. While this can be recycled, it can't be recharged by plugging the battery into a powerpoint. Instead the whole battery will need to be replaced when the aluminum has been used up. Advocates of this system claim that battery swaps can be done quickly and easily.
However, any battery that needs to be replaced so frequently is not only expensive, but runs into the problem that has bedeviled many alternatives to gasoline-powered cars. People are reluctant to buy vehicles that depend on the availability of refueling or replacement stations if these are not available everywhere they might be needed. On the other hand, without a critical mass of owners of suitable vehicles, such stations are not viable.
By extending the capacity of the electric car to drive much further on a single charge, aluminum-air batteries greatly reduce this problem when it comes to quick recharge points, but at the cost of increasing the need to be able to access places where batteries can be replaced.
Phinergy's solution is to use a twin battery solution. A small lithium-ion battery will allow trips up to 50km, more than adequate for most city journeys. The aluminum-air battery will be saved for longer trips, avoiding the need to replace it except where the car is used for frequent long journeys. If the whole battery was aluminum-air the car's maximum range might be as much as 3000km, but with the need to replace the entire engine thereafter.
Even if these problems have been successfully addressed, it remains to be seen whether Phinergy have found a solution to the other major obstacle to aluminum-air batteries, the high cost of the anode.
A zinc-air battery could potentially offer even more advantages but has been hard to mass produce. Phyinergy claim they are on the way to commercializing that as well.
Is Freeper here aware of any gas or diesel powered engine that runs at a constant (optimal) speed that could be used to power a small electric battery charger?
I am looking for a very small one
Research the engines used in the smallest diesel generators. There’s a small Subaru diesel that is popular in offroad utility vehicles that might be decent, other manufacturers as well.
Keep trying. Maybe the next discovery will be the one.
Whatever shortcomings this currently has will be overcome pretty quickly.
Then we can wave goodbye to Arab oil and American companies gouging us at the pump.
First, you don't want constant speed - the optimal speed depends on the load. You want a generator with a sine wave inverter. There are many of those sold at Home Depot, Harbor Freight, etc. They can be very small, portable, and quiet. A diesel engine may be not a good fit for a very small generator.
Despite my freaking out, the walleyes were the best in the world.
lol!
They've gone on to a better place?................
It ain’t a battery.
As others have pointed out here, you’re generating electricity by (effectively) burning aluminum.
And where do you get the aluminum from? The electrolysis of oxidized aluminum - essentially by using the energy of electricity to reduce the aluminum oxide back to the metal.
So unless they’ve invented a perpetual motion system, they’ve simply come up with an energy transduction system - you take an energy source in some form (just for fun, let’s make it coal); you use it to generate electricity; you use that electricity to make aluminum metal; you use that aluminum metal to get back (some of) the electricity you put in, and run a car on it (until the aluminum is used up).
Whether it makes any sense or not depends on your ultimate energy source (nukes? coal? hydro?) and how great the energy losses are in every step of the process (unfortunately, there’s no getting around the laws of thermodynamics).
In the corporate world, PowerPoints have proven themselves to be a total energy drain. PowerPoints combined with spreadsheets have been known to actually suck the life right out of unsuspecting employees.
It all depends on cost. I drive less than 10,000 miles a year. Running a car on a non-rechargable battery would not bother me if the battery replacement was quick and easy. And cheap. If those conditions are met, a stop at the service station every two months or so is ok with me.
I'm not sure it's supposed to, nor the gas engine cars in the same class. On the other hand Nissan has a lease going on for the Leaf for $199 a month. That is about $161 less than the wife spends on gas for her commute.
That is the estimated cost of the materials. I doubt it would sell for anywhere near that. That would be like estimating the cost of a computer by the weight of the metal and plastic, or the cost of a car for the scrap value of the metal.
Also I saw in the article that the “Al-air battery must also be refilled with water every 200 miles, to replenish the electrolyte”
so.... the range is really only 200 miles!!! before you have to stop. That’s a pretty key point left out.
But since carbon is a good thing it’s okay.
That's 3,600 miles per month, or 180 miles every weekday. Almost 100 miles one way. Not one of those shorter commutes.
And here is the problem. The Leaf may be cheaper, but it simply won't deliver the range that your wife needs on daily basis. Not even one way, to be plugged in. Leaf is good only when any car is also good - for short trips strictly within the city.
Your wife's driving pattern may benefit from a Tesla... the range will be sufficient if you get a 85 kWh model. It costs $81K. You may want to make a spreadsheet and see what works for you. Note that the insurance on a $80K car will be higher than on a cheap commuter car. Consider winter and darkness - the battery is discharged much faster. Consider if the distance driven per day is guaranteed (no random side trips to parents, for example.) Today an EV is a demanding friend.
I do that in less than 10 days.
I quickly plugged your numbers into Tesla's own online calculator. You will be paying $1,125/mo x 72 months, total $81K, on top of $8,170 of 10% downpayment. So the full cost of a financed car will be about $89K. If you drive 40,000 miles per year and the gas price is $4.00/gal and a comparable car is capable of 40 mpg, and if you get a $0.15/kWh special price on an EV plan, then you will be saving $169/mo on an EV. Ignoring the lost profit on a non-invested $89K, you will need 89000/169 = 526 months, or 43 years, to break even. If instead you keep your current car and invest $89K into 5% tax-free (municipal) bonds for 43 years, you will get $725,320. Driving 40K/year in a 40 mpg car (any hybrid will do this or better, and many gas-only cars) will cost you 1K gallons per year, or $4K. Over 43 years it will be $172K. In other words, purchase of Tesla - if we assume for a moment that it survives for 43 years, which it won't do - will set you back by more than half a million dollars.
Naturally, if the gas price increases this will also change. However there is research already that promises synthetic fuels for less than $2/gal.
That’s a misleading comparison, isn’t it? A more realistic scenario would be to compare Tesla to a roughly equivalent, new luxury car with the same level of refinement and features.
Leaf owners report an avg. of 80 miles. The wives commute is 40 round trip. Her Pacifica gets about 15 MPG on the Hwy. At $4 a gallon that’s $360 per month. I include weekends and round up.
And I’d love a Tesla S, and I love my wife. But I wouldn’t turn her lose in ANY $80k car.
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.