>> Locking in anything, particularly power generation, to what is known at
>> any one time, like the present, is a mistake, at best.
>
>> Electricity specifically being something wide open to new discovery as it
>> itself is new in terms of human ability to know enough to manipulate it.
>> Solar is in the wings. They both should have been coming center stage 30
>> years ago.
>
> What's really inexplicable is that it's nearly impossible to find
> anyone, even here on newsgroups, who will deny future advances in
> battery technology will be significant.
I agree. I think that there will be great advances (albeit slowly) in battery tech the future, but even so, I don't think that
battery technology is the major limiting factor at this point.
What is lacking is a automotive 'platform' that allows batteries to drive vehicles.
Currently, even if you would have the ideal battery around, there is nothing you can do with it (other than rebuilding your vehicle
completely).
That is because all vehicles sold today the ICE drives wheels directly (via the drive train).
Hybrids (like the Prius) are 'parallel' hybrids, which add a (not so strong) electric motor/generator and add a (not so large)
battery.
That helps a little bit in fuel efficiency (partial regenerative braking mostly) but it also makes the overall system more
expensive.
If you enlarge the battery (for plug-in), you are not adding much value to the vehicle, since the electric motors are a (power)
limiting factor in parallel hybrids (they are not strong enough for normal operation, including normal accelleration and freeway
cruising.
I think we need 'series' hybrids before the role of batteries becomes important.
In series hybrids, electric motors drive the wheels, and the ICE is reduced to a secondary role (auxiliry power unit).
The ICE is much smaller there, and runs much more efficient, and also the stronger electric motor/generators can take more advantage
of regenberative braking.
This not only makes series hybrids up to a factor 2 better (more efficienct) than even parallel hybrids, it also creates a
'platform' for plug-in and even all-electric drive.
For example, if most cars on the road would be series hybrids, then I could imagine a very inexpensive plug-in or all-EV conversion
kits (consisting essentially only of a battery), and this would immediately increase the (electric) driving range, and NOT
compromise on power.
This series hybrid as a platform for automotive design would allow easy 'retrofitting' of batteries on existing vehicles if liquid
fuel again becomes more expensive than electricity or when batteries become better or cheaper than today.
Currently, the decision between battery or gasoline cannot be taken by the car owners, because retrofitting batteries is not an
option.
With series hybrids on the road, even if battery technology would not advance that much, the 'market' (not discussions in this NG
:o) could decide if battery technology is advanced enough or not.
My 2 cts.
Rob
>
> It's common for the majority but rare for _everyone_ to be hopelessly
> optimistic. Even nuclear has a nut case poster with a junk science
> "proof" that controlled fusion is impossible on earth.
>
> Where can we find a proof on battery limits?
All batteries have a 'theoretical' upper energy density limit, which is rather easily calculated (at least if you are an electro
chemist).
Currently, most batteries operate far from this theoretical upper limit (often a factor 10 off what is possible).
I actually am looking for scientific papers that explain why they are so far off their theoretical limit, and how to improve on
that.
>
>
> Bret Cahill
>
>
