Earlier quoted context omitted.
If people are willing to rewire their homes for kettles, I guess a couple hundred bucks isn't that bad. > limited by the battery's rated number of cycles Obviously the battery should be replaceable. (It should be in most electronics, really...) > The battery's proximity to the heat source wouldn't help. That doesn't seem like a particularly tricky problem to me. The standard kettle already tries as hard as possible t…
> Obviously the battery should be replaceable. (It should be in most electronics, really...) This is super wasteful when we can just hook up a heating element to an insulated tank and keep it hot like Quooker [0] does. Assuming the 3L tank, that would mean probably 20 minutes to heat the tank if it's entirely emptied for the US, but that's how long it would take to boil that water with an electric kettle _anyway_. If…
Also: a hot water tank is just another type of battery. If it's really well insulated, it might work pretty good, but the self-discharge rate is probably still a lot higher than a lithium ion battery. If you aren't using boiling water every day this seems like it would be very wasteful.
I don't see anything terribly wasteful about the concept of putting batteries in a few more things. They're very recyclable, and already extremely abundant. It's not necessary, but neither is pushing several kW through a kettle just to get water to boil a bit faster. So really, that might be worth interrogating first...