Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

newatlas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 396 posts

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#261

Post by GuB-42 »

mschuster91 wrote: post #196
GuB-42 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where this myth came from but there are many smartphones that are water resistant and with a user replaceable battery. One of the first in the mainstream was the Motorola Defy, there is also the Samsung Galaxy S5. Neither were particularly bulky. Interestingly the Galaxy S6, which followed the S5 was neither waterproof nor has a removable battery. I currently have one of the very few remaining smartphone…

> I don't know where this myth came from but there are many smartphones that are water resistant and with a user replaceable battery. They do exist, but usually (at least for Samsung and CAT, I owned both brands) come at the cost of flimsy backplanes that come loose when falling and/or are prone to break off the tiny snaps when you need to access the SD/SIM card or battery.

I actually find these Samsung "flimsy" backplanes really great and not actually flimsy. I never broke these tiny snaps even though it sometimes feels like they will. I have broken snaps many times while opening devices but not those from Samsung backplanes.

For me, that they come loose when falling is actually a feature. The energy of the fall has to go somewhere, and having that back cover and sometimes battery fly off means that energy is not dissipated elsewhere where it could be more damaging.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#262

Post by chx »

hedora wrote: post #182
thebruce87m wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The highest peak electricity demand in the UK in recent years was 62GW in 2002. Since then, the nation’s peak demand has fallen by roughly 16% due to improvements in energy efficiency. > Even if we all switched to EVs overnight, we estimate demand would only increase by around 10%. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002, and this is well within the range the grid can capably handle. > In…

The way I think about this is that I use an L1 charger at home that draws 1500 watts about half the time (on a normal day). That's ~= 15 light bulbs from the 1990's, or roughly 6 desktop PCs. I switched from incandescent to LED bulbs, and a desktop to a laptop, so that's almost enough to offset the EV's usage. Also, we have solar panels, and a house battery that can time shift our energy consumption.

A modern fridge and washing machine are both vastly more efficient, too.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#263

Post by ggreer »

ForOldHack wrote: post #189
dredds wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No animals/plants live on arid salt-flats. They pile the lithium salts and let it dry before carting it away. What changes if they also use the sodium?

"Lithium Mining Is Leaving Chile’s Indigenous Communities High and Dry (Literally) As the metal fuels the clean tech boom, companies race to mine the Atacama Region. At stake: fragile ecosystems, scarce water resources, and ancient ways of life." https://www.nrdc.org/stories/lithium-mining-leaving-chiles-i...

If you do industry in a place teeming with life, people try to stop it because you're harming lots of living things. If you do industry in a desolate place, people try to stop it because you're harming the few rare species that can survive there.

The more important issue to consider is: What is the global effect? In this case lithium mining means cheaper electric vehicles, which reduces demand for petroleum. Petroleum extraction & combustion is far more harmful to the environment, so this is a net win.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#264

Post by astrange »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #238
WalterBright wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people need 200 mile range for an EV? For example, my daily mileage averages about 5 miles. As an errand-runner, a 30 mile EV would be very practical. The huge benefit of this is a smaller and cheaper battery, and the biggie - much less weight. Much less weight leads to much less tire/brake wear and tire/brake dust pollution. I'd still have a second gas car for the trips.

Most people do not want to have to own two cars.

If you rarely need to take long distance trips you can rent a car that does it.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#265

Post by elihu »

alemanek wrote: post #74
_yb2s wrote: post #67

I had an early EV with only 80 miles of range, and found it extremely useful for most in town travel and commuting. Now that EVs are pushing ~400 miles range at about 300Wh/kg, assuming sodium is about half that (from what I've seen), you'd still get a respectable 100-200 miles in a car. For me, and I imagine a lot of people, that would be totally acceptable if it means lower cost, and batteries that effectively last…

From the article it claims charge speed 10x that of lithium and 50,000 cycle lifetime. I don’t know about you but a EV that can go 150 miles and charge to 80% again in 2min would be super compelling to me. Solid commuter car but not too annoying on the rare roadtrip. But, I am guessing grid frequency regulation use cases are going to make these too expensive for a car for a long time.

Fast charge speeds make electrified highways a more viable option. There are some projects in Europe using overhead lines (for trucks) or power rails embedded in slots in the road surface (usable by cars or trucks) so that vehicles can recharge while moving. Building a network of electrified highways is expensive though.

One way to reduce initial costs is not to electrify the whole length but to have, say, one mile of electrified road per every ten miles of highway. To get unlimited range from that 1:10 ratio, you need the vehicles to have batteries capable of absorbing power 9x faster than the vehicle uses it to maintain highway speeds.

I could see EVs having a large lithium ion pack and, if this technology is really that good, a smaller sodium ion battery to act sort of like a capacitor to smooth out intermittent charging.

I could also see low-capacity-high-power-density batteries being used in hybrids, though those need to be able to sustain high discharge rates as well as high charge rates, and I don't think the article mentioned discharge rates.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#266

Post by mulmen »

pkulak wrote: post #252
mulmen wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern transmissions can’t be two orders of magnitude more complicated than a modern ICE. If they are then I need to get into transmission design. An automatic transmission is basically just a series of planetary gears anyway. I would expect the marginal complexity between an ICE transmission and a hybrid transmission to be within a multiple of 2, but closer to parity. They’re both extremely reliable but an EV transm…

I dunno, maybe 100x was an exaggeration, but not by much! Take a look at this transmission from 2007. They haven't gotten simpler. Lot's of cars are sporting 10-speeds these days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_transmission#/media/...

The number of speeds is a function of the number of planetary gearsets. They’re just connected in series. More speeds isn’t more complex, it’s only a larger part count. By the time the transmission is computer controlled and has two speeds it’s as complex as it’s going to be.

Modern ICE are also extremely complex. Turbo systems, sensors, air management, heat management, the list goes on.

So yeah, a modern transmission is complex but a modern ICE isn’t simple. By comparison they’re very similar in terms of complexity, the ICE possibly being even more complex.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#267

Post by topspin »

agrocrag wrote: post #140

Are we still a ways out on being able to buy these for consumer use? Looks like most of the sales partners are industrial/commercial use. Couldn't dig up anything on their site about home use.

All of the initial production from this plant is spoken for. Part of the deal that secured the funding, exemptions, fast-tracking, tax breaks, etc. is a big public utility battery facility in the state (MI).

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#268

Post by SmellTheGlove »

hnav wrote: post #245
mulmen wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern transmissions can’t be two orders of magnitude more complicated than a modern ICE. If they are then I need to get into transmission design. An automatic transmission is basically just a series of planetary gears anyway. I would expect the marginal complexity between an ICE transmission and a hybrid transmission to be within a multiple of 2, but closer to parity. They’re both extremely reliable but an EV transm…

The thing that mechanically totals modern crap cars (think cheap Nissans and Subarus) is often the CVT. Ford and GM have transmission problems pretty often. GP is totally right that the planetary eCVTs actually make cars way simpler. Look at Ford's (horrendous reputation with small cars) hybrids from the 2010s, lots of them running around with 300k on the clock.

> (think cheap Nissans and Subarus)

You don't even need to limit it to the lower end models with Subaru. The top trim Outback and Ascent have a CVT these days. If you want an automatic transmission in your WRX, same thing - a CVT. Anyway, you're not wrong.

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#269

Post by willglynn »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #156
proee wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Understood, but even if you are trickle feeding thousands of small houses with say 1kw(max) each, that still requires Megawatts of power. 1k*1k=1M. Therefore, you still need high voltage transmission lines to move this power from the source.

Currently most houses have a instantaneous load requirement of 100kw (some much higher) which means your transmission line size / load requirements are going down 100 fold. That effectively allows us to "dismantle unnecessary high voltage transmission lines". Yes there will still be high voltage lines, (and even the lines that go right up to your property are typically 1000 volts or more, which qualifies for "high vo…

Large single family homes have 400A 1Ø 120/240V service, which is 96 kW peak or 76.8 kW for NEC's definition of continuous. Most have 200A service or smaller, which is half that.

What load do you imagine causes "most" homes to exceed 100 kW, and "some much higher"?

Re: Lithium-free sodium batteries exit the lab and enter US production

#270

Post by ClassyJacket »

_yb2s wrote: post #81
alemanek wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article it claims charge speed 10x that of lithium and 50,000 cycle lifetime. I don’t know about you but a EV that can go 150 miles and charge to 80% again in 2min would be super compelling to me. Solid commuter car but not too annoying on the rare roadtrip. But, I am guessing grid frequency regulation use cases are going to make these too expensive for a car for a long time.

I missed the 10x charge speed- that is a killer feature that more than makes up for the reduced range.

My Model 3 already charges at 180kw. Are they saying cars built with these batteries will charge at 1.8Mw? How are they going to build charging infrastructure at that level?
Post reply on HN