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

Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

construction-physics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 331 posts

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#141

Post by epistasis »

zuzululu wrote: post #112
not_the_fda wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a huge issue in cold climates.

uphills + cold/hot climates, the ranges won't be able to compete with ICE. its basic physics. cold uphill still reduces charging speed, available power, and range, while sustained heat accelerates degradation. Thermal-management systems mitigate those weaknesses by consuming energy and adding cost, weight, and complexity. meanwhile ICE has gotten ridiculously clean and efficient over the years it is more efficient at…

> its basic physics

Could you ELI5 these basic physics? I've heard many people make claims like this but there's never any physics that actually follows. I've had most of an undergraduate curriculum of physics, so if it's beyond basic, then don't be afraid to refer to those physical ideas.

> meanwhile ICE has gotten ridiculously clean and efficient over the years it is more efficient at the shaft does not settle total-system efficiency, cost, weight, resource use, grid losses, battery production, or suitability for every operating env

Is 30% "ridiculously clean and efficient"? 35%? I'm not sure I can agree with that at all.

Battery production? That's ridiculously efficient. For a very small amount weight, there's an insane amount of Wh that get shuttled through that material, which can then be recycled into even more kWh of storage than went into the recycling process, due to the continual improvement in battery production efficiency.

Meanwhile, every single gallon of gas results in 20 pounds of CO2 emissions. Fracking oil requires disposing of 2-10 gallons of dirty waste water for every gallon of gas. That's a massive amount of waste for only 20-50 vehicle miles.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#142

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

not_the_fda wrote: post #103
trollbridge wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the problems with gasoline is its explosive nature, which the fuel storage and delivery system of a car attempts to mitigate. It has a better profile for burning off than a battery though since it will spill out and burn away from the vehicle.

Gasoline isn't that explosive. You can shoot up a gas tank and it will just burn. What you see on TV is movie magic. Gasoline vapor can explode, but you need the right air to fuel ratio and a spark.

Uh… gasoline has a super high vapor pressure. If you start out at the wrong ratio, it does what it can to make that ratio right.

I’ve seen a few gasoline fires that start by burning, and then much more rapidly expressing potential.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#143

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

swiftcoder wrote: post #132
not_the_fda wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it can't. To combust it needs ~ 500F. If you left it out uncovered in the open and allowed the it to vaporize with a spark nearby, it might explode, but thats not spontaneous combustion. Gasoline sitting in a sealed container wont spontaneously combust.

Didn't everyone have one of those old mechanic friends who liked to put the cigarette out in the can of gas to scare the tourists?

That is definitely one of those “it worked the first 50 times no problem” tricks.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#144

Post by duped »

ridgeguy wrote: post #114
duped wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poorly stored gasoline can spontaneously combust, though. So more like a firebomb.

Gasoline doesn't do that. Perhaps you're thinking of the following? What it does do is slowly polymerize, becoming useless as an ICE fuel in time, typically in a year or two. This is why backup generators should run on propane, which has no degradation mechanism.

No, I'm thinking of improperly stored gasoline evaporating and combusting.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#145

Post by marcosdumay »

BiraIgnacio wrote: post #135
enslavedrobot wrote: post #5

Solid state batteries come in several flavours. Most of them don't stop dendrites. The flavour you want is polymer, single ion conducting solid state with an ion transport activation energy below 10kJ/mol at room temperature and no phase transitions from -40C to 80C. That is the holy grail of SS batteries.

> The flavour you want is polymer, single ion conducting solid state with an ion transport activation energy below 10kJ/mol at room temperature and no phase transitions from -40C to 80C. what makes it so? I don't know anything about this subject, I'm really curious now about what the perfect battery would be.

No idea why polymer single ion conducting would stop dendrites (I know people are looking for it, I don't know why).

But 10kJ/mol of activation energy is another way of saying less than 100mV of internal loses, and avoiding phase transitions means that your battery won't stop working on that temperature range.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#146

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

piquadrat wrote: post #72
superxpro12 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to my polestar 2 pls. and then come back again in the winter when it drops another 30% due to the battery heater energizing

Your Polestar 2 battery is based on battery technology that is 5+ years old. Right now you can buy a BYD car in China that charges at up to 1500kW - close to 10x the peak charging rate of a Polestar 2.

I’m an automotive EE… I find particular interest when someone mentions BYD as what “works” in electric vehicles.

Wild fucking west right there.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#147

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

rogerrogerr wrote: post #53
jqbd wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would wager charging time is basically solved, adoption is only thing that's left.

Yeah, when I take a road trip I genuinely enjoy the cadence of charging. 5-10 minutes every two hours, just enough to go to the bathroom or walk around. I get to my destination not materially later, and feeling far more relaxed than when I was doing death marches in a gas car.

This is such a euphemism to pretend that you’d like to wait two hours at a refueling station.

Anyone who’s ever driven between Seattle and Portland and seen the e16b charging lots of people sleeping in their cars knows there is a whole different side to your rosey picture.

EV owners are still internalizing their range anxiety into a benefit.

I get it; I like EVs for their around town purpose, but man it’s almost fantasy to sell it as “5-10 minutes every two hours”.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#148

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

thelastgallon wrote: post #94
toss1 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be relatively straightforward to imagine — we already have that in gasoline-powered internal combustion engines. The Watt-hours per kilogram of good Lithium Ion batteries is around 250-280 Wh/Kg; for Lithium Iron Phosphate it's about 180 Wh/kg, and for Sodium-Ion about 170 Wh/Kg. The raw energy in gasoline is about 12,300 Wh/Kg but automobile internal combustion engines get only about 20-30% efficiency yiel…

An EV doesn't need to have 480 miles of range. Nobody is driving that distance daily. 98% of trips are under 50 miles. Only 0.8% of the trips are over 100 miles! Also, EVs use regenerative braking. That should help a little bit. EVs should be built with 100 - 150 mile range. All families with 2 cars can immediately switch one of their cars to a daily driver EV and the other vehicle is a minivan. There are lots and lo…

> EVs should be built with 100 - 150 mile range. [..] if they need to go longer, US has a robust rental car industry

As an EV owner myself, no. Absolutely not.

The reason is simple: The mere existence of low-range EVs hurts overall EV adoption, because people aren't going to rent a car just for a road trip. You're talking about adding $100+ per day on what's supposed to be a cheaper method of travel compared to flying.

ICE-holes don't think critically. They don't care that long range EVs exist. They'll just see one that only gets 100-150 miles of range and go "See? EVs have short range. They're not appropriate for road trips. That's why I'll never get one.", despite plenty of 250+ mile options.

Now, I suppose you could argue that this type of person would simply never get an EV and would just come up with a different reason, and you'd probably be right. But the general point still remains: People want a car that satisfies ALL their needs and won't settle for something that works "only" 98% of the time.

Re: Why is everyone trying to build a solid-state battery?

#149

Post by schainks »

laxisOp wrote: post #6

We need way more research on batteries. People cant ingine what is possible if we make battery 10x energy dense.

How is billions every year on R&D not enough, especially when you measure consistent improvement year over year in the technology?

10x energy dense does not mean 10x safer. Gasoline is still widely used because it is considered one of the safest options around!

The problem is more nuanced than just "let's do all the battery density"

Post reply on HN