Electric Car Batteries of the Future

Mitsubishi i-MiEV Forum

Help Support Mitsubishi i-MiEV Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Just picked this up from another forum & was wondering if anyone has heard about it

Researchers at UCLA are making and using graphene (from graphite) and making super supercapacitors. Certainly interesting, you can read the article and watch the video.


http://cnsnews.com/blog/stephen-gut...eakthrough-even-make-electric-cars-worthwhile
could-stunning-new-battery-breakthrough-even-make-electric-cars-worthwhile
 
Your link got line-broken...

http://cnsnews.com/blog/stephen-gutowski/could-stunning-new-battery-breakthrough-even-make-electric-cars-worthwhile

With a quote like, "This technology is so promising that it may even make electric cars worthwhile", I wonder about the bias of the reporter. :evil:
 
An affordable high capacity super-fast-charging battery/capacitor is only half the equation, of course. Given the difficulties we're seeing in siting and paying for mere 50 kW Level 3 chargers (Fujitsu makes a big point of how much easier it is to support their 25 kW Level 3 charger), the logistics of setting up chargers to quickly top off 100 kWH battery packs would be truly daunting.
 
I am not as worried re chargers. Here is my thinking.

Most of us have already realized that the ~100km daily range of today's EVs cover say 98% of our needs... If by magic, we could drop-in batteries in our present iMiev with 3.3kw chargers, what would happen is that we would carry on charging (L2) at home, every night, difference being that we would not be able, nor need in 98% of cases need to charge it to 100%.

Lets imagine that you have a 300km autonomy and exceptionally drove 250 one day. Then you could exceptionally recharge on Fast charger or carry on charging at home, gradually catching up to compensate the fact that at home you can only charge the equivalent of 120km/day...

By the way, such batteries would cycle less and will be less likely to be fully charged or fully empty, all three arguing for better longevity...

I think in the next 15 years, we will suddenly see a shift in the offered choices with three categories of cars dominating:

1) ICE, either for the classic lover like today's Swiss mechanical watches.
2) EVs with batteries offering ~300km ranges
3) EVs with batteries offering ~50km ranges with batteries but with hydrogen cells.

All other hybrids would be in the transition phase... Lets hope I am not way off as in Back to the future film, seeing flying cars in 2013 :lol:
 
I should clarify, what I'm reacting to is the gist of this story, which is suggesting that this would move us closer to the ICE model of quickly replenishing the energy store of a vehicle that could then travel hundreds of miles on that energy store. Judged by that standard, EVs are found wanting, and I think that will continue for some time to come.

While I appreciate Llecentaur's comments re: the way an EV would normally need to be charged, and agree with the general assessment that improved battery tech would be a very good thing indeed for all concerned, that's not exactly the issue I was trying to address.

My point was that I think people place a lot of emphasis on the portable battery side of the EV charging problem, and tend to overlook the very real obstacles to delivering lots of kWH on demand in a short time frame. Ideally, one would draw steadily from the grid and gradually build up charging capacity to slam into EVs as they pull up for their quick-fix. Practically, this would involve solving some of the same electricity storage problems that bedevil many renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

I believe that EVs have real virtues, but there are also limitations that are going to be with us for some time. For this reason, I think discussions about range and infrastructure are pretty misguided. We already have vehicles that exploit massive infrastructure to support their long-range travel - that's what oil-burning ICE is all about. EVs cannot compete with that directly, and attempts to get close give us an inaccessible gilded coach like the Tesla S.

We should instead turn this argument around and point out what EVs do so much better - run cheaply and replenish their power just about anywhere, especially and most conveniently overnight in their home garages. That makes them great for a wide range of uses revolving around local transportation. Solve a couple of problems like highway cruising (some reason we can't resurrect the bodies of the EV1 and/or gen1 Insight?) and heating (with heat pumps, kerosene heaters, and/or improved insulation), and EVs will truly fit in the garages of most household fleets.
 
OT - flying cars in 2013

http://www.e-volo.com/

At the Hannover fair CEBIT today. It is not a flying car, just what became out of a drone but it is almost the size of a car and it flies electric, the prototype at least.

Most interestingly you do not need to be a pilot with license and all because it is the robot flying, not you, and the robot has got a license.

Things like that give us motors, controllers and batteries, better and cheaper than today.

Oh, I do see a range of some 2000 kilometer in an i-MiEV very soon and that will put ICE into the museum. It is a known chemistry and physics all we have to do is get an idea not preventing the desintegration of the cells when charging but actually living from the permanent rebuilding of those cells. The Wankel motor would have turned ICE upside down if it was not patents preventing that. Now it is too late - for the Wankel at least. If grassroots without patents invent the future then the patent maffia cannot stop it from happening.
 
Back
Top