However, my colleagues and I have engineered a new design for these batteries which allows them to be charged and discharged hundreds of times without breaking down. We hope to have a commercial product ready in the next 2–4 years...
We hope to have a commercial product ready in the next 2–4 years. We are working with industry partners to scale up the breakthrough, and looking toward developing a manufacturing line for commercial-level production.
Translation: "We're trying to raise money."
Actually, the cost reductions in batteries in the past five years have been amazing. You will see a very rapid switch to electric cars and commercial vehicles under 20,000 lbs. in the next two to three years - although the range will be about 275 miles for the mid-market. I'm told by people in my company that the next generation of batteries will come to market in two years; in vehicles in three to four years. Regarding solar, I just got a quote for solar on my house in Chicago. Without subsides - and with Chicago's very cheap electricity - there is a 7% IRR. With the available subsidies the IRR is 21%. Every new house that isn't behind a high-rise should be built with solar on it now.If one in five of these battery breakthroughs made it out of the lab in just the last 10 years we'd already have Tesla's with 1000 mile range using batteries so small and/or inexpensive the price of a model 3 could be slashed $20,000. PLUS: everyone would have a solar panel over their garage for cheap which could supply all the needed power for their car due to solar power advances.
I hate to throw anything out. Likely these batteries can be used for stationary storage after they are no longer useful for motor vehicles. On my street two houses were just built with reclaimed brick. The masons did a great job, tons of new brick did not have to be baked and old stuff stayed out of the landfill. No subsidies were required.Friend of mine is doing work on repurposing batteries of hybrid vehicles once they've been depleted.
I'll have to ask him again what applications he found. He's an EE by trade.I hate to throw anything out. Likely these batteries can be used for stationary storage after they are no longer useful for motor vehicles. On my street two houses were just built with reclaimed brick. The masons did a great job, tons of new brick did not have to be baked and old stuff stayed out of the landfill. No subsidies were required.
Yes, and I expect it to continue. I however detest these regular "breakthroughs" which probably don't even make it to market 5% of the time. I don't detest them actually, and they are the price of finding what works. I detest the reporting as if it is a done deal, and things are about to improve dramatically right away. They've been at this kind of reporting ever since I can remember.Actually, the cost reductions in batteries in the past five years have been amazing. You will see a very rapid switch to electric cars and commercial vehicles under 20,000 lbs. in the next two to three years - although the range will be about 275 miles for the mid-market. I'm told by people in my company that the next generation of batteries will come to market in two years; in vehicles in three to four years. Regarding solar, I just got a quote for solar on my house in Chicago. Without subsides - and with Chicago's very cheap electricity - there is a 7% IRR. With the available subsidies the IRR is 21%. Every new house that isn't behind a high-rise should be build with solar on it now.
What do you think the limit is?electricity has to come from somewhere and there are limits to how much solar and wind can be used.
Coal used for electricity generation has been almost totally phased out in Alberta Canada. It's in progress right now and has been for 2 years. We've gone to natural gas at ~ 1/2 the emissions.What do you think the limit is?
On a related note, interesting to note that in the UK coal dropped from over 40% of electricity in 2012 to 2% in 2019. Change can happen faster than we might expect.
What do you think the limit is?
On a related note, interesting to note that in the UK coal dropped from over 40% of electricity in 2012 to 2% in 2019. Change can happen faster than we might expect.
Yes, and I expect it to continue. I however detest these regular "breakthroughs" which probably don't even make it to market 5% of the time. I don't detest them actually, and they are the price of finding what works. I detest the reporting as if it is a done deal, and things are about to improve dramatically right away. They've been at this kind of reporting ever since I can remember.
Ah, but we have plenty of land. Look at wind power in Iowa, Indiana, Texas,for example.Wind turbines require 1,000 times more land than a nuclear power station, about 500 more times than natural gas.
Agreed, but that is a political question totally separate from the science of what is and will be possible. Regarding that figure, where did it come from? Seems high by a few orders of magnitude. https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2018/03/16/how-much-do-renewables-actually-depend-on-tax-breaks/This switch was accomplished entirely by market forces. What I don't want is to see trillions more spent on subsidies while electricity prices triple.
I'll have to ask him again what applications he found. He's an EE by trade.