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

The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

ourworldindata.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 330 posts

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#241

Post by giva »

silly-silly wrote: post #188
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Battery powered trains seem really unlikely to me. It's hard to imagine a situation where it's cheaper to do a battery powered train than a train track that supplies power (aka how most subways work).

The rest of the world doesn't live in high density built up areas. Many small crops farming trains in rural areas can not and will not be allowed to run power through the tracks in above ground situations.

The rest of the world uses overhead lines for powering trains (I'm a bit shocked to learn that this is not the norm in the US, actually)

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#242

Post by legutierr »

amelius wrote: post #237
oblio wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we fix everything except for aircraft, we will have done enough. At that point aircraft can keep using fossil fuels for a while longer. Cars, trucks, buses, trains, HVAC, factories are what needs to be electrified ASAP.

If every industry thinks like that ...

Is there another industry that is facing similar physical constraints that would hamper a transition? I understand that reducing the carbon output in concrete production is difficult to the point of being nearly economically infeasible. Other than that?

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#243

Post by mgoetzke »

_Microft wrote: post #240
oblio wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we fix everything except for aircraft, we will have done enough. At that point aircraft can keep using fossil fuels for a while longer. Cars, trucks, buses, trains, HVAC, factories are what needs to be electrified ASAP.

If batteries do not make progress fast enough, synthetic fuels might be a temporary(?) solution. With these we can have the advantage of the high energy-density of hydrocarbon fuels for use cases like airplanes without having the climate effect of fossil fuels. Remember that the problem with fossil fuels is that they increase the amount of carbon in (short term) circulation which is what leads to further accumulation…

I doubt there is enough electricity available to also power the generation of synthetic fuels in high mass. Maybe for limited use cases (percentage wise)

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#244

Post by mgoetzke »

walrus01 wrote: post #231
FabHK wrote: post #224

Nice that the cost has come down. Unfortunately, that which makes electric cars and planes feasible, namely energy density (Wh/litre) and specific energy (Wh/kg), has not improved that rapidly. The article mentions a factor of 3.4 over 30 years for energy density, ie 4% p.a., or doubling every 17 years. I think electric aircraft need another doubling or two in specific energy to become feasible, so another few decade…

If one looks at the Wh/kg of the very best li ion batteries right now (about 250Wh/kg) and then compares it to the Wh/kg in avgas or jet a or diesel, it's nuts. Even if you lose 40-60% to waste heat. The amount of energy contained in those fuels is ridiculously dense by comparison.

And the energy stored in it does not need to be paid :) That is why these companies make so much money of course.

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#245

Post by scotty79 »

legutierr wrote: post #242
amelius wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If every industry thinks like that ...

Is there another industry that is facing similar physical constraints that would hamper a transition? I understand that reducing the carbon output in concrete production is difficult to the point of being nearly economically infeasible. Other than that?

There are some ideas about cement industry: [pdf] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#246

Post by branko_d »

oblio wrote: post #232
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably less explody than a propane tank. Turns out that pretty much any form of energy storage can release a bunch of energy in a short time if pushed hard enough.

I was thinking the same thing until someone pointed out that lard stores a ton of energy but you can't really make it explode. I hope.

But you can make it burn!

https://madison.com/wsj/huge-grease-fire-was-a-hot-mess/arti...

> With so much oil-rich food on hand, including lard, cheese and more than 10 million pounds of surplus butter stored by the federal government, the fire was a hot mess — fast-moving, destructive and difficult to put out.

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#247

Post by pjc50 »

mgoetzke wrote: post #243
_Microft wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If batteries do not make progress fast enough, synthetic fuels might be a temporary(?) solution. With these we can have the advantage of the high energy-density of hydrocarbon fuels for use cases like airplanes without having the climate effect of fossil fuels. Remember that the problem with fossil fuels is that they increase the amount of carbon in (short term) circulation which is what leads to further accumulation…

I doubt there is enough electricity available to also power the generation of synthetic fuels in high mass. Maybe for limited use cases (percentage wise)

Well, what energy where and at what cost? It's possible that there will be renewable overbuild to the extent that there are enough times of cheap or negative energy prices, especially in sunny locations, that can be used for fuel creation.

(The downside I must mention is that high capital cost low utilization low running cost => still high cost)

The USN have a solution in their back pocket: https://www.zmescience.com/research/us-navy-synthetic-jet-fu... , presumably for at-sea refuelling using surplus energy from the reactors of carriers.

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#248

Post by ganafagol »

_Microft wrote: post #240
oblio wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we fix everything except for aircraft, we will have done enough. At that point aircraft can keep using fossil fuels for a while longer. Cars, trucks, buses, trains, HVAC, factories are what needs to be electrified ASAP.

If batteries do not make progress fast enough, synthetic fuels might be a temporary(?) solution. With these we can have the advantage of the high energy-density of hydrocarbon fuels for use cases like airplanes without having the climate effect of fossil fuels. Remember that the problem with fossil fuels is that they increase the amount of carbon in (short term) circulation which is what leads to further accumulation…

Synthetic fuels scale up even worse than battery density.

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#249

Post by ganafagol »

mgoetzke wrote: post #244
walrus01 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one looks at the Wh/kg of the very best li ion batteries right now (about 250Wh/kg) and then compares it to the Wh/kg in avgas or jet a or diesel, it's nuts. Even if you lose 40-60% to waste heat. The amount of energy contained in those fuels is ridiculously dense by comparison.

And the energy stored in it does not need to be paid :) That is why these companies make so much money of course.

Oil is free? Not sure where the Saudis got there riches from then.

Otoh sitting in the sun for a few hours to charge some battery via rays from the sun is itself free.

Re: The price of lithium-ion batteries has declined by 97% in the last three decades

#250

Post by londons_explore »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #226
londons_explore wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they have the word zinc on them, they're about 400 mah. If they have the word alkaline, they're about 3000 mah. And there isn't much in between. There are a few other weird chemistries, but they're never on the sweet price-performance curve, so avoid them.

That's not entirely true, capacity greatly depends on current draw and there is significant variability between brands (e.g. https://www.powerstream.com/AA-tests.htm ) Long time ago I stumbled upon a great website with a Wh/€ (the metric that really counts) for almost all brands, but I couldn't find it right now

Anything I own that's discharging at 2 Amps (!) no longer uses AA batteries. All those devices now have built in li-ion batteries.

AA batteries are relegated to clocks, TV remotes, doorbells, and other low drain devices.

In that scenario, all alkaline are pretty much the same.

Post reply on HN