Live data from Hacker News

CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

thedriven.io

321–330 of 919 posts

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#321
post #133

I just realized how much energy efficiency is being squeezed out of a Tesla. It's incredible. A normal diesel fueled sedan such as the Chevy Cruze diesel runs at about 31mpg, which is 13.2 km/l or 15.3 km/kg. Diesel has a mind-boggling 12700 Wh/kg energy density[1], which translates to an efficiency of ~827 Wh/km for the Chevy. By contrast, the Tesla Model S, has a ~540 kg battery[2]. At 272 Wh/kg (from the posted ar…

Maybe I missed something, but seems very weird to compare kg of diesel fuel to kg of battery. The posted article's figure of 272Wh/kg is for battery capacity, not energy yield from source fuel.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Honda the dark horse of hybrids? I remember riding in one and the owner explained that apparently Honda chose a hybrid architecture that was different that everyone else. The car's transition from electric to ICE was quite noticeable.

Honda has had two systems, the earlier “IMA” system which is a mild parallel hybrid. And the current “E-drive” system which is primarily a series hybrid. Series hybrids are actually pretty old tech — it’s how diesel locomotives works. The Chevy Volt also works just about the same way.

Also how azipods work on some very large ships, the diesel locomotive concept scaled up even more, sometimes with big gas turbine for power generation.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#323
post #133

I just realized how much energy efficiency is being squeezed out of a Tesla. It's incredible. A normal diesel fueled sedan such as the Chevy Cruze diesel runs at about 31mpg, which is 13.2 km/l or 15.3 km/kg. Diesel has a mind-boggling 12700 Wh/kg energy density[1], which translates to an efficiency of ~827 Wh/km for the Chevy. By contrast, the Tesla Model S, has a ~540 kg battery[2]. At 272 Wh/kg (from the posted ar…

During the introduction to a speech by J. B. Straubel, the presenter said his mentor’s motivations were that 1% of the energy in the gas tank was moving the passenger, 12% the car, and the rest was lost.

We should measure efficiency based on that number.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#324
post #133

I just realized how much energy efficiency is being squeezed out of a Tesla. It's incredible. A normal diesel fueled sedan such as the Chevy Cruze diesel runs at about 31mpg, which is 13.2 km/l or 15.3 km/kg. Diesel has a mind-boggling 12700 Wh/kg energy density[1], which translates to an efficiency of ~827 Wh/km for the Chevy. By contrast, the Tesla Model S, has a ~540 kg battery[2]. At 272 Wh/kg (from the posted ar…

> 13.2 km/l For diesel, this is really really bad. Most gasoline cars will run more economic than this, let alone diesel. If your diesel runs less then 17 to 18 km/l something is wrong. (my opinion is based on how things are in .nl, other parts of the world can and will be different of course)

Yeah 13.2km/l for a diesel is quite terrible if we’re talking regular cars. I personally average in the 20 to 25 range with mine.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#325
post #127
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> battery with 500 Wh/kg Wow, that's amazing, creeping up towards the energy density of gasoline at around 1200 Wh/kg Of course you don't have to lug around the spent gasoline after you've used it, but that's really the problem too innit?

Isn't it break even point, considering >60% of the gasoline energy is dissipated as heat, and <40% to make the wheels spin?

No, the number for gasoline is missing one zero; with the correct number, gasoline is still 6-8 times more energy dense per kg.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#326
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK may be the most confusing; fuel is sold in litres, but fuel efficiency is expressed in MPG, and furthermore the gallons aren't the same as US gallons. I guess at least the miles are the same!

I suspect the British fuel system is designed to hide the cost per mile of driving, at least tacitly. At present it's difficult to work out without some external tool.

It's more like once it's established it's hard to change - if you started listing 'miles per litre' that would be like it was 'designed to hide the cost of driving', because I would have no idea how that compared.

(Quite normally for my age in the UK I think, I'm familiar with both metric & Imperial measurements, but generally fairly bad at converting. Except I know 568ml = 1 (UK! Not US!) pint - for which I can thank my alma mater Imperial and its student bars: Metric, and FiveSixEight. I could probably guess effectively at lbs and kg from butter/flour. Of course I know 2.54cm = 1". A yard is 'a bit' less than 1m. It's the bigger ones that seem more obscure/are harder to work out from familiarity I suppose.)

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#327
post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oof. Jet engines are 35% efficient, I'd assume electric planes would be double that, does that change the calculation? Naively I'd say we 'only' need 4.5GW?

I feel like the back of the envelope calculation must have slipped a decimal point somewhere. 9GW is approximately 1/4 of the total electrical consumption in the whole of the UK. From memory aviation as a whole is only 2% of global emissions (although it might have an extra forcing effect due to being released directly into the upper atmosphere) where as electricity generation is 20-40% of emissions.

google and wolfram alpha tells me one fully tanked 737 stores 16 tons of kerosene, which translates to 261.1 GJ at 35% efficiency (72.5 MWh). doesn't sound too far off. assuming the same energy will be required for an electric airliner and you want to charge it to full in an hour... you probably need much more than 72.5MW power plant per aircraft because fast charging is nonlinear...? numbers which are hard to comprehend at scale in any case

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#328
post #316
post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though that makes me think that hybrids have a real future. Or hydrogen fuel cells. Anything that doesn't require charging directly from the grid all the time, because although parts of the USA and Norway are ready for that, it's very tricky to get right globally. Maybe hybrids like the Prius get to be so efficient that such cars will have a truly negligible impact on global warming.

Hybrids that emit carbon will still have a huge effect on global warming, simply because there are so many cars. There isn't a huge amount of headroom for efficiency increases, so you're only going to get anywhere near "net zero" by charging from a renewable grid nearly all the time.

Hybrids almost never emit carbon though. Because they're almost always running from the battery that you charged up from the wall before leaving home for your daily commute. And the daily commute is less, or maybe a little over the battery range. If it isn't then you have bought the wrong car, if you goal is carbon neutrality.

You can use a smaller battery, which means using less rare materials that are very expensive. There are a lot of indirect emissions with electric vehicles, and it's important to look at the big picture.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#329

1200wh/kg is when it will get really interesting to me. Half the weight and double the range would be great. Plus, electrified ultralight "aircraft" start to have numerous advantages over the traditional 2 stoke engines.

Why would it only be interesting at that point? At 500wh/kg, if the cost is low enough, you're already going to eliminate fossil fuels from basically everything except long range flights and shipping.

> Half the weight and double the range would be great

You don't need to quadruple energy density to achieve that. If you just half the weight (without increasing the total amount of energy in the battery), you're going to significantly increase range. The less weight you have, the less energy you need to move the vehicle.

> Plus, electrified ultralight "aircraft" start to have numerous advantages over the traditional 2 stoke engines.

I think you'll have plenty of benefits with ~300wh/kg (that's the target for many useful eVTOL aircraft).

The key challenge is you should redesign the whole aircraft around electric flight to get the full benefits. Look at NASAs Maxwell X-57 for an example of how that could look.

With 500wh/kg you can start taking over most regional flights. Yes, the range won't be as good as jet planes. But jet planes have FAR more range than they need because they don't design a special purpose aircraft for shorter range. They just put less fuel in.

But it'll probably take 10-20 years regardless of when we get good batteries because it'll take a long time to design and certify the aircrafts.

Re: CATL has announced a new “condensed” battery with 500 Wh/kg

#330
post #133

I just realized how much energy efficiency is being squeezed out of a Tesla. It's incredible. A normal diesel fueled sedan such as the Chevy Cruze diesel runs at about 31mpg, which is 13.2 km/l or 15.3 km/kg. Diesel has a mind-boggling 12700 Wh/kg energy density[1], which translates to an efficiency of ~827 Wh/km for the Chevy. By contrast, the Tesla Model S, has a ~540 kg battery[2]. At 272 Wh/kg (from the posted ar…

12700 doesn't include all the diesel engine parts. Also, electric motors much more efficient.

Still, your point stands.

Post reply on HN