/sci/ - Science & Math

Batteries don't have anywhere near the energy density of gas

this is true its a major problem and not getting much better and with lengthy charge times and limited materials fuel cells are a lot more promising

They're heavy.
Moreover, you need alot for a decent "miles per gallon" figure.
Also, those fuckers aren't significantly lighter when empty, whereas a liquid fuel based car will become lighter.
Once again, these heavy batteries need to be placed somewhere on the chassis, which effects handling.
The final problem:
Batteries work best when slowly charged.
Quick charging ruins cells quicker than your mom gets her knickers off, which is pretty damn quick.
Gasoline? Well sir, why don't you spend a minute at this convenient pump?

>>2254737

>>this is true its a major problem and not getting much better

On the contrary, while batteries have lower energy density, an electric drivetrain is upwards of 85% efficient while a gasoline engine drivetrain is about 20-25% efficient. Most of the energy in gasoline is lost as waste heat, vibration and transmission friction.

While there's a huge gap between the two on paper, it narrows drastically in practice. There exist electric cars today that'll do 375 miles on a charge at highway speeds with the heater on. They do so by using greater battery mass than the equivalent size of a fuel tank, which you can do as batteries are solid state and simple to pack into the vehicle's frame wherever there's space to do so.

>>and with lengthy charge times

Charge times are now down to 10 minutes with Lithium Titanate batteries, available in the Phoenix Motors SUV.

>>and limited materials

Lithium is plentiful.

>>fuel cells are a lot more promising

Did you know they cost a great deal more than the typical EV battery and wear out much faster? The current state of the art in fuel cells would function for about six years provided you drove only two hours per day.

1) US production of energy by type. Coal, 44.5%, looks that way to me Mad.

>>2254737
Fuck yeah nigger.
I have visions of rolling up to a service station in my hydrogen car, quick releasing the fuel cell
(which some mechanic dude catches, throws in the recycled cells skip)
installing the new cell and burning off.
I assume it would be cost effective to have pre-charged cells over topping up yo hydrogen but
A
P
U
M
P

I
S

F
I
N
E

T
O
O

>>2254743

>>They're heavy.

Lead acid, yes. NiMH, yes. Lithium, no.

>>Moreover, you need alot for a decent "miles per gallon" figure.

Yes, but this isn't a significant problem.

>>Also, those fuckers aren't significantly lighter when empty, whereas a liquid fuel based car will become lighter.

This is true, but of dubious benefit.

>>Once again, these heavy batteries need to be placed somewhere on the chassis, which effects handling.

Which is why production EVs are carefully designed to balance the battery weight. Have you read reviews of the Nissan Leaf? All say it handles beautifully.

>>The final problem: Batteries work best when slowly charged.
Quick charging ruins cells quicker than your mom gets her
knickers off, which is pretty damn quick.

Not true anymore; Toshiba's SCIB and Nanosafe's Li-Titanate batteries both tolerate a 10 minute charge without accelerated degradation.

>>Gasoline? Well sir, why don't you spend a minute at this convenient pump?

Why wait to fill the tank when I can have my battery swapped in under two minutes? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfdYU7gk8fs

> Phoenix Motors SUV
charge time
On-Board Vehicle 7KW Charger: 5 to 6 hours / 6 to 8 hours
Off-Board Charger: 1 hour / 20 minutues

range
Urban (UDDS): 70+ miles per charge / 100+ miles per charge

>>2254758

>>1) US production of energy by type. Coal, 44.5%, looks that way to me Mad.

Which is cleaner, a vehicle powered 44.5% by coal, or 100% by gasoline?

Which is cleaner, burning coal at a centralized high efficiency plant in your state and sending the power to your house (with an average transmission loss of 6.5%) or drilling for oil overseas or offshore, shipping it ashore using massive oil tankers that burn dirty 'bunker oil', shipping it from the port by truck to a refinery, refining the oil into various petrol products, then shipping it by truck again to the local gas station?

I presume you informed them of Tesla Motors, the only company that makes electric cars that actually look like cars.

>>2254763

All true, but it has a 10 minute fast charging mode:

http://www.forbes.com/2008/01/12/electric-cars-nanotech-tech-sciences-cz_as_0112nano.html?partner=ya
hootix

"Altair's designers say that the key advantage of their battery is that it can in principle be recharged in an unprecedented 10 minutes. Making this a reality, however, depends on building out a network of high-voltage charging stations."

>>2254737

Current fuel cells need scarce, exotic metals like Platinum or Rhodium for the catalyst, and there aren't enough of these metals in the world to build a fuel cell for everybody's car. There has also been some talk that there also may not be enough Lithium in the world to build a battery-powered car for everybody either.

3) All EV batteries are Lead Acid (PbA), Ni-Cd and NiM, Lithium Ion, or Sodium Nickel Chloride.

Of those, only the lithium ion battery is not a heavy (toxic) metal.

Limitations of lithium ion batteries:

# Subject to aging, even if not in use - storage in a cool place at 40% charge reduces the aging effect.

# Expensive to manufacture - about 40 percent higher in cost than nickel-cadmium.

>>2254760

Fuel cells don't work that way. They do not themselves store power. The hydrogen is stored in compressed liquid hydrogen tanks, then fed through the fuel cell to generate electricity.

What many don't realize is that a fuel cell is very very similar to a battery. It has a cathode and anode material, an electrolyte and so on. Pic related. It just costs more and wears out faster than lithium batteries.

>>2254770

There's Platinium in the asteroids.

>>2254768
we've all heard a thousand different super battery super capacitor hype stories but until they put them into production or let a proper study be carried out i remain unconvinced

>>2254758

We should have invested in green enrgy decades ago!
It sucks we produce most of our energy by coal, but if we can change that, electric cars will be perfectly clean

why the fuck am i here

>>2254775

>>Of those, only the lithium ion battery is not a heavy (toxic) metal.

Correct, and it's the predominant battery in all new EVs. :]

>>Subject to aging, even if not in use - storage in a cool place at 40% charge reduces the aging effect.

The same is true of gasoline.

>>Expensive to manufacture - about 40 percent higher in cost than nickel-cadmium.

It's coming down rapidly, though. In 2008 the cost per kilowatt hour for lithium ion batteries was $1,000. Enerdel now sells lithium ion batteries to Nissan at $375 per kwh, thanks in large part to the opening of domestic stimulus funded battery manufacturing plants.

>>2254770

>>There has also been some talk that there also may not be enough Lithium in the world to build a battery-powered car for everybody either.

"Study: Lithium Fears Unfounded, Plenty To Meet EV Demand"

http://www.thecarconnection.com/marty-blog/1034758_study-lithium-fears-unfounded-plenty-to-meet-ev-d
emand

>>2254765

The efficiency of coal fired power plants is about 30%, 2.1 lbs of CO2 is generated from every kwh being produced. In charging a battery and energy transfer, the loss is 90%, when the power from the battery is being used, there is only 72% efficiency. So for that single kwh produced, we also produce 2.1 lbs of CO2. But that 1kwh only reaches the battery at .9kwh, then when it is converted into motion we have .65kwh remaining.
Assuming that a gasoline car is able to get 25 miles per gallon.
One gallon of gasoline is able to produce 36.6 kWh/US gallon.
That when converted into motion in cars, there is only 20% efficency. So that results in a transfer of only 7.32kwh for one gallon. The carbon dioxide output for the combustion of one gallon of gasoline is 2421grams (2.421 kg -> 5.34 lbs carbon per gallon) 5.34 lbs of carbon has not been converted into CO2 yet, so the conversion results in 19.5lbs of CO2 per gallon of gasoline.
19.3lbs*.65kwh/2.1lbs = 6.03kwh electricity
6.03kwh of electricity will produce the same amount of carbon dioxide emissions as does gasoline.
6.03kwh/7.32kwh*100 = 82.4% as carbon efficient as gasoline

>>2254779

>>we've all heard a thousand different super battery super capacitor hype stories

And they come true, just not fast enough for the average American's attention span. Lithium Ion batteries were first developed in the 1970s. It takes a long time for new chemistries to come to market. Several new chemistries have come out relatively recently though, including NiZN and Li-Titanate. Lithium Air is expected to be next.

>>but until they put them into production or let a proper study be carried out i remain unconvinced

Li-Titanate is in a production EV right now, and NiZN double As can be bought from the local radio shack.

you have to be more sceptical about battery cars most advertised aren't going into production and will only have a few for rental
and until the first generation of cars can be counted as reliable and affordable electric cars probably won't pick up

and your righting off fuel cells far to quickly their production is incredibly limited but investment by the chemical industry is huge and all the arguments you have thrown at them were true of battery's a few years ago before the large investment in them.

the point is it's too early to declare a winner to do so if foolish arrogant and short-sighted

>>2254795

>>The efficiency of coal fired power plants is about 30%,

60% for modern combined cycle plants.

>>In charging a battery and energy transfer, the loss is 90%

You have it reversed, charging a battery is 90% efficient. 10% is lost, often less with newer variants: http://batteryuniversity.com/index.php/learn/article/charging_lithium_ion_batteries

>>when the power from the battery is being used, there is only 72% efficiency.

85% with modern EV drivetrains assuming a brushless DC motor.

Here's the MIT study into the comparative efficiency and cleanliness of electric cars versus gas cars. You'll notice EVs come out ahead.

http://web.mit.edu/evt/summary_wtw.pdf

It rarely happens that a thread on /sci/ strikes my interest AND is decent. let's bump this baby

>>2254805

>>and your righting off fuel cells far to quickly

"Writing", "too'.

>>their production is incredibly limited but investment by the chemical industry is huge and all the arguments you have thrown at them were true of battery's a few years ago before the large investment in them.

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/05/08/obama-doe-slash-hydrogen-fuel-cell-funding-in-new-budget/

The Department of Energy cut all funding for fuel cell development after an internal investigation determined that by the time fuel cells could match battery prices, batteries would be so much better that fuel cells would be essentially obsolete.

Guys
What we need to do is liek
build tiny atomic power plants....
FOR CARS.

Here's Toshiba's 'Supercharge Ion battery', a next gen lithium variant already on the market that, like li-titanate, can be fast charged in 10 minutes without accelerated degradation. No significant increase in capacity though.

Nissan's second generation battery packs purport to offer twice the range that the Leaf currently gets for the same price. Sucks to be an early adopter.

>>2254796

>And they come true
no they have not eestor, graphite batteries and bio batteries have never materialised and there are thousands of others that made the news and then died

they happened just like that article you posted big claims and no data what so ever to back it up

and by the way you mis-quoted that article the SUV didn't have 10 min charge time the battery company said they were working on it

>NiZN double As can be bought from the local radio shack
to say small disposable or slightly reusable batteries and the batteries required for cars are equivalent is stupid it has little bearing on how they will perform

>>2254812
the department of energy is incredibly short-sighted many university's and chemist are investing their money in fuel cells and as i said you declaring a winner before the race has started

>>2254812
the department of energy is incredibly short-sighted many university's and chemists are investing their money in fuel cells and as i said you declaring a winner before the race has started

>>2254834

>>no they have not eestor, graphite batteries and bio batteries have never materialised and there are thousands of others that made the news and then died

Yes, but others have seen the light of day. The fact that scammers exist does not mean no progress is occurring, just that you're paying too much attention to scammers and not enough to actual advances.

>>they happened just like that article you posted big claims and no data what so ever to back it up

Except that's not the case for li-titanate. You, personally, can go order some li-titanate batteries if you like.

>>and by the way you mis-quoted that article the SUV didn't have 10 min charge time the battery company said they were working on it

They often demonstrate the ten minute charge at auto shows. Your hyperactive cynicism aside, Toshiba's achieved the same thing. It's the new benchmark in EV charge times: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-Zv5RFgmWY

>NiZN double As can be bought from the local radio shack

>>to say small disposable or slightly reusable batteries and the batteries required for cars are equivalent is stupid it has little bearing on how they will perform

I'm not saying it, they are. EVs are among NiZNs listed applications:

http://www.powergenix.com/

>>2254849

>>the department of energy is incredibly short-sighted

I'm sure you didn't think so when they favored hydrogen.

Umad, hydrofag? Umad?

>>2254767
Piss off furry

and stop sucking Elons dick

>>2254860

Typical NASAfag. See this is Robert Zubrin, he ain't a NASA fag, he disapproves of your gov'ment-run bureaucratic shit.

>>2254867
I approve of the privatization of space

In fact I plan on working for SpaceX eventually

the difference between you and me is that im american so I actually have a chance of working for him

also Im not an insane underage third world furry who has no idea how to into space

>>2254856
wow to think that the fate of the planet comes down to a petit competition in your mind, ego should have nothing to do with it it's not about which horse wins its about getting to the finish line.
its obvious now that you don't care about the finer points of the energy debate but are just another sad person who likes to argue on the internet

>>2254878
shame just being american doesn't make you smart enough to actually get a job with him

As for battery swapping it's relevant to point out that two commercial swap stations now exist; following the successful pilot program in Tokyo, a swap station has been built in San Francisco, with plans for more along major highways.

I'll probably be visiting San Francisco soon and I'm looking forward to dropping by and getting a good look at it.

>>2254897
No it does not

I said "have a chance of working for him"

>>2254901
>I'll probably be visiting San Francisco
ohhh how nice you can go visit the castro meet some nice guys and suck cock

I remember you, I still follow Hampture and Earth Rover.

>>2254878

Homeschooled sixteen year old deist who keeps asking others on 4chan of all places to solve his homework, keeps repeating things about a "rule of thumb" that is bullshit because he can't calculate a Hohmann...

Yep, you sure have a chance of getting a job at SpaceX buddy!

Each swap station costs $500,000 to build, same as the average gas station. A swap takes just under two minutes. The batteries are owned, maintained and eventually replaced by the corporation. You lease them for an 8 cent per mile fee that covers the accumulated cost as they degrade, plus what's necessary to pay Better Place employees, maintain the swap stations and so on. The swapping robot can accommodate different battery types as it uses a sort of universal gripper, and it spray washes/dries the underside every time prior to swapping.

>>2254923

>>I remember you, I still follow Hampture and Earth Rover.

Now that I've moved I'll finally be making some progress on Earth Rover. Hampture Mk.III is still being shipped, but I'll have to wait for warmer weather to deploy it. Thanks for following along all this time. :3

>Buy electric car
>Buy extra batteries
>Buy 2 rockets
>Smash batteries
>Acquire Lithium
>Mix with Fluoride
>Add some Hydrogen
>Fuel rocket
>Strap rockets to side of car with breakaways
>2 stage car, fuck yeah
>Buy photovoltaic cells
>Buy ion thruster
>2 stage car capable of exploring the universe while it replenishes itself

OP you are a faggot from alaska you have the brain of a dog and the face of a faggot

>>2254938

Enjoy your milligee acceleration. Laser-pumped solar sail here, ion thrusters are for faggots.

>>2254939

I assumed he was Texan because there's this oceanography-fag I know who's from there. I make those connections lol.

>>2254914
> implying the american space industry isn't build on russian technology and foreign intellect

>Homeschooled
Autodidact its very different

>sixteen year old
17 almost 18

>deist
this matters why?

>who keeps asking others on 4chan of all places to solve his homework
Was asking them to check my world thats very different then asking then to solve it

> keeps repeating things about a "rule of thumb" that is bullshit because he can't calculate a Hohmann...
if I did I probably would have gotten the question wrong you assumed I could not

>Yep, you sure have a chance of getting a job at SpaceX buddy!
Better then you
Hows that third world education working for you?

>>2254943
>implying Laser-pumped solar sail aren't equally shit

>>2254944
its Germen technology and original american technology

Remember Robert Goddard? you know the inventor of the liquid fuel rocket.

Also theres a big difference between European immigrants and third worlders

>>2254946

>Autodidact its very different

Okay, whatever you say.

>Was asking them to check my world thats very different then asking then to solve it

I'm in a good mood today so I'll assume those are not all lies. Which they totally are.

>if I did I probably would have gotten the question wrong you assumed I could not

Aye, but it was a correct assumption.

>Hows that third world education working for you?

Pretty good actually, now that you ask the other day they offered me this scholarship (After I told the head mistress I'd be leaving, lol).

>>2254943
Enjoy having your shitty Japanese sail ripped to fucking shreds by micrometeorites.
I'll be over here with tech that's only limited by the amount of power I can generate + car for safety.

>>2254955

>Also theres a big difference between European immigrants and third worlders

True, the difference is that your lovely liberal universities think of Europeans as just too common and pretentious, while they just love minorities. Thank God for white guilt and liberal bias, eh?

also I remember saying that you live in a sandy shithole

that means you are probably from the middle east or Africa

We sure are allowing a lot a immigrants from those areas

>>2254939

>>OP you are a faggot from alaska you have the brain of a dog and the face of a faggot

Thank you for your thought provoking contribution to the thread, good sir.

>>I assumed he was Texan because there's this oceanography-fag I know who's from there.

I move around a lot for work, but I've never lived in Alaska. I'd like to someday for a short period as I think snowy expanses are uniquely beautiful. :3c

Also please stop making this thread about space travel

>>2254960

Dusty is different from sandy, sure is reading comprehension in here.

>>2254958

Enjoy your solar-electric power subject to the Inverse Square law unlike my glorious fresnel-lens-focused arrays of thousand-gigawatt lasers.

>>2254956

>>2254965
>Dusty is different from sandy, sure is reading comprehension in here.

or memory

>>2254955
Robert Goddard did not invent the liquid fueld rocket he simply built the first recorded one
fun fact invented by a russian


>Also theres a big difference between European immigrants and third worlders
your not going to get very far hating on people like that

>>2254967

Oh, I can see you have nothing better than a reaction image. I guess the cat got your tongue.

Or should I say... The clouded leopard got your tongue? How does it feel like Scia, being under her tongue?

>>2254961
your white fucktard

Can you two take this fight elsewhere? You're shitting up the thread.

SURE IS GRAMMAR IN THIS THREAD

>>2254982
you did that by yourself with your unscientific one-sided argument

>>2254972
http://tinyurl.com/397z9ho
>>2254974
pic related

>>2254982

>>2254988

>>you did that by yourself with your unscientific one-sided argument

SShhhhh. Here.

>>2254990
The idea of liquid rocket as understood in the modern context first appears in the book The Exploration of Cosmic Space by Means of Reaction Devices [1], by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky. This seminal treatise on astronautics was published in 1903.
The only known claim to liquid propellant rocket engine experiments in the nineteenth century was made by a Peruvian scientist named Pedro Paulet.[2] However, he did not immediately publish his work. In 1927 he wrote a letter to a newspaper in Lima, claiming he had experimented with a liquid rocket engine while he was a student in Paris three decades earlier. Historians of early rocketry experiments, among them Max Valier and Willy Ley, have given differing amounts of credence to Paulet's report. Paulet described laboratory tests of liquid rocket engines, but did not claim to have flown a liquid rocket.


just because he is credited with making the first one doesn't mean he did or invented it

any credibility of NASA was lost when the US celebrated a nazi because he was useful even though he lead the development of a project to bomb mainland america

GUYS
why not
1) standardise battery size and output
2) charge batterys at fuel stations and then swap the uncharged for a charged one
3)save time and allow oil selling people to not feel too butthurt

>>2254990

And I'm supposed to get butthurt because...? No, really, I hate fursuiters and people who go to furry conventions & associated nutjobs.

>>2255014
> Paulet described laboratory tests of liquid rocket engines, but did not claim to have flown a liquid rocket.>>2255014

to successfully invent something is has to WORK!

also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Paulet
>Had Paulet's claim been authenticated, he might today be considered the father of liquid-propellant rocketry, rather than Robert H. Goddard, who in 1926, flew a liquid-fueled rocket engine in a test vehicle.
you will give credence to unauthorized inventors just to spite america

pathetic

I agree with you OP.

Hydrogen is Bullshit.
first off, you don't get energy out of hydrogen. you get energy back from it. The energy you put into getting the hydrogen to start is EXACTLY the same as the energy you get back (minus inefficiencies). In other words, hydrogen is just another type of battery.

As such, its not a very good battery. its hard to store and expensive to use. Also we have no infrastructure for it at all. In short, if you have to use alternative energy batteries are over 9000x better than hydrogen.

yes theres the extended tail pipe argument. The energy produced en mass at power plants is still orders of magnitude more efficient than literally having a tiny generator in every vehicle. More importantly, by putting cars on the grid, it consolidates the problem of clean energy into one place. whereas before you would have to make clean cars and a clean grid, now you just need a clean grid (not mentioning air planes and boats here).


When I get out of college, I want my first car to be an EV.

>>2255033

That's being done. We already discussed it in this thread: >>2254931 >>2254901

http://www.betterplace.com/

>>2255042
Better?

>>2255046
Thanks, I didn't/won't read the thread. Shame on me.

>>2255043
there's a difference between spiting America not giving proper credit the idea was not original however he is the first person to prove a flight occurred i'm sure he was very brilliant as were the numerous people involved

however you are still an stupid little asshole not because you're american but because you are

>>2255048

>>When I get out of college, I want my first car to be an EV.

Admirable. Having driven a few I'd warn you against secondhand conversions. If you can convert a car yourself it'll be orders of magnitude cheaper. I recommend Thunder Sky batteries. You can order a complete setup from them; battery cells, binders, battery management circuit, even the correct charger for the custom number of cells you've chosen. I went to them for my moped, and my experience has been so good I plan to buy their cells to convert a little Honda I'm not doing anything with.

http://www.thunder-sky.com/home_en.asp

>>2255061
Are there punctuation keys on your keyboard?

>however you are still an stupid little asshole not because you're american but because you are


great rationale

>>2255086
and yet its a truth that spans the length and breadth of 4chan

Bumping for non-religion thread

>>2254939

anon i cannot even begin to express how hard i laughed and for how long. i am now going to use that as my primary insult in real life encounters

such an unnecessary, random insult i cannot stop the laughs. thank you, have a merry christmas