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

221–230 of 331 posts

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

#221

Post by lightedman »

gambiting wrote: post #116
lightedman wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

How does someone with such short temper get to work in the aerospace industry? You know we are just a bunch of random strangers on the internet and telling someone to "sit down" just comes across as funny more than authoritative. And I don't think telling someone "I know exactly what the fuck I'm speaking of" has ever had the desired effect on the internet, it just screams insecure - if you're really an expert make i…

"How does someone with such short temper get to work in the aerospace industry?"

My temper is very even. I simply do not tolerate bullshit from nobodies who are speaking garbage. And I get to work in aerospace because it seems that out of the millions of people that tried to get my job I'm the only one with the relevant mixed-domain expertise to realize what a company wants to do and get it done.

I have hardware in orbit, I can with 4-sigma certainty guarantee the poster trying to chide me does not.

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

#222

Post by seanmcdirmid »

not_the_fda wrote: post #129
heaney-555 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest battery chemistries perform incredibly well in cold and hot climates. Internal combustion is not clean, and is inherently significantly less efficient than an electric motor. Also, LFP chemistries are incredibly safe compared to NMC, which is what you're concerned about in terms of thermal runaway. ICE is mostly stagnant tech. Meanwhile EV tech is rapidly improving!

> The latest battery chemistries perform incredibly well in cold and hot climates. Depends on your definition of cold. California cold sure. Wisconsin cold you are looking at losing 40%-60% range.

China cold tests their EVs in Harbin and Mohe, where “cold” means -40 (F or C doesn’t matter, it’s the same). They lose some range, and indoor charging garages are more common (for better charging performance), but the tech has gotten good enough that even harbiners (a small city of 20 million people) are adopting EVs at a rapid clip.

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

#223

Post by hunterpayne »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #159
jgilias wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In current battle conditions isn’t the range primarily determined by the size of the fiber optic spool attached to the drone than battery capacity?

Most Ukrainian drones don't use fiber optic I don't think. To deal with EW, they're favoring autonomous targeting/guidance for the final part of the strike.

No...its valuable to know if the drone did its job. That and the extra expense of the boards makes it not really so useful in practice.

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

#225

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

cyberax wrote: post #209
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

heh, ok, that’s strange. So when you say it’s got a 350 mile range, but then make the point you only need to charge to 40% that you would be fine with a single vehicle that had a 140mile range? I swear buying an EV in 2026 breaks brains. The push back has been so bad because the mfgs pushed the single car lie… but the people that jumped in now need to defend their $60,000 purchases. I get it, but please don’t think y…

> “5-10 minutes every two hours” … lol, that’s good when you’re going from LA to San Diego. If I had to stop every two hours on a road trip I’d get a train ticket, it would feel a lot faster. Sorry, now you're spewing nonsense. LA to SD does not require charging at all. I did more than 120000 miles of road trips in my EVs across the US and Canada, even before they were fully covered with charging networks. So I know…

You can’t just assume every time you go somewhere your battery is fully charged.

I mean, you can, because you are clearly emotionally tied into your purchase. But I can’t as an engineer.

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

#226

Post by stirfish »

duped wrote: post #144
ridgeguy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I remember something about someone trying to do a photo shoot with candles in abandoned cars in a junkyard

Edit: https://petapixel.com/2015/06/11/explosion-at-junk-yard-phot...

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

#228

Post by rogerrogerr »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #225
cyberax wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “5-10 minutes every two hours” … lol, that’s good when you’re going from LA to San Diego. If I had to stop every two hours on a road trip I’d get a train ticket, it would feel a lot faster. Sorry, now you're spewing nonsense. LA to SD does not require charging at all. I did more than 120000 miles of road trips in my EVs across the US and Canada, even before they were fully covered with charging networks. So I know…

You can’t just assume every time you go somewhere your battery is fully charged. I mean, you can, because you are clearly emotionally tied into your purchase. But I can’t as an engineer.

I can, because I charge it every night. Also, I have never once engaged in a long road trip that I did not know about at least a few hours in advance.

I think you should not get an EV. But I like mine.

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

#229

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

epistasis wrote: post #151
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm not an automotive EE, could you explain more about BYD? I'd love to hear more from an expert!

Things like crash, fire, egress, homologation and pedestrian impact, long term service… these are things western mfgs obsess over, and BYD doesn’t give a shit about.

You can buy BYD vehicles without airbags.

They’re Chinese market vehicles.

It’s like DJI drones, they work, and they cheap, some are even decent performance on paper, but they aren’t “real” in a sense that serious users would demand.

It’s OK if a BYD is bricked with a bad OTA. It’s less OK for the auto industry in the rest of the world.

It’s taken Tesla a LONG time to figure out building computers is easy, and cars are hard. Same for BYD.

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

#230

Post by qwery »

jojobas wrote: post #216
qwery wrote: post #83

If you know a bit about electronics, you might be a bit surprised by the term 'solid-state battery'. It's a poor analogue to the more common usage of solid-state with semiconductors, integrated circuits, etc. -- a "solid-state" cell is still a chemical cell. It's not a paradigm shift on the level of, say, replacing a relay with a MOSFET.

Non-solid-state batteries have liquid/gel electrolyte.

Wood is a solid-state battery.

The term has obviously been selected because of how revolutionary solid-state electronic devices were/are. And it's not like they selected it after a revolutionary energy storage device was introduced. Solid-state batteries (cells) are an incremental improvement, at best.

And because this is the web: I am not being negative about the technology. I happen to be of the radical opinion that incremental improvements are good, actually.

Post reply on HN