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

Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#51

Post by credit_guy »

ralfd wrote: post #43

30 years lifetime sounds great. But doesn't hydrogen diffuse through metal? Can it be contained such a long time?

The use case for this is to charge the battery during the day and discharge it during the night. It is not for seasonal energy storage. There are no batteries that can be used for seasonal storage, nothing comes within a factor of 100 of being economical. But batteries for seasonal storage requires very few cycles, one per year. This battery here can go through many thousands of cycles. If you don't use it for daily storage, you are paying for something you don't need.

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#52

Post by User23 »

atoav wrote: post #16
VBprogrammer wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Saving a few hundred kilos of mass on a truck that pulls 80 tonne is just not that valuable. From my understanding of the trucking industry, in many sectors, this isn't true at all. For example, in tipper trucks where you are carrying literal dirt and rocks from one place to another every kg counts and tare weight of the truck is very much a consideration, even in the relatively minor variations between diesel truc…

> In the US weight restrictions are even lower than in Europe in many states. Given that road wear grows to the fourth power (!) with vehicle weight, I hope you guys feel well with the fact that your tax dollar subsidizes those ultra heavy trucks.

I do, because I like stores being stocked and deliveries arriving. And so do a supermajority of my fellow citizens.

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#53

Post by zucker42 »

mcdonje wrote: post #47

Since it's relatively low pressure (5% of a hydrogen fuel cell), couldn't they have larger batteries for grids? The current size would be great for homes.

This video discusses that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zG-ZrC4BO0

But, keep in mind that Undecided is overly optimistic about pretty much every emerging technology.

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#54

Post by User23 »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #35
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because none of those things existed before the automobile.

I'm not even sure what you are trying to say. Perhaps try having a grown up discussion rather than trying to win internet points via your superior sarcastic smack downs. Retail stores certainly existed before the automobile. People walked, biked or used horses to get to them. Horse and cart were used to deliver things to them.

Even in living memory getting a special order item required 4-6 weeks for shipping, and that was if you paid extra!

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#55

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #45
AtlasBarfed wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CATL's sodium ion batteries are slated to soon (1-2 years, mostly just mundane factory construction and logistics) to hit $40/kwhr. No nickel / cobalt / etc. I think LFP is basically already under that as well (I think they are in the 60-70/kwhr range). For grid storage, that is probably the only metric that matters: cost per kwhr of storage (and sufficient cycle endurance).

How can LFP be both under $40/kwhr and in the 60-70/kwhr range?

Sodium ion was the $40/kwh and LFP is $70/kwh

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#56

Post by marcosdumay »

atoav wrote: post #16
VBprogrammer wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Saving a few hundred kilos of mass on a truck that pulls 80 tonne is just not that valuable. From my understanding of the trucking industry, in many sectors, this isn't true at all. For example, in tipper trucks where you are carrying literal dirt and rocks from one place to another every kg counts and tare weight of the truck is very much a consideration, even in the relatively minor variations between diesel truc…

> In the US weight restrictions are even lower than in Europe in many states. Given that road wear grows to the fourth power (!) with vehicle weight, I hope you guys feel well with the fact that your tax dollar subsidizes those ultra heavy trucks.

> fourth power (!) with vehicle weight

Divided by tire. That's why heavy trucks have so many of them.

Most countries regulate the weight by tire, so that this actually doesn't change between trucks.

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#57

Post by toss1 »

I'm curious how they solved the hydrogen leakage/seepage problem through the walls. Even though it is designed for many (daily?) cycles and not long-term storage, it seems that H2 is in the tank anytime there's a charge ready or building. Maybe the pressures are low enough that it's insignificant even over 30k cycles?

Or does it just require occasional recharging with water or H2, and if so, what is the value of "occasional"?

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#58

Post by hmottestad »

> So far, EnerVenue has been operating a pilot production line that can manufacture 100 megawatt-hours’ worth of batteries per year—and they’ve deployed small-scale test systems. But, says Heinemann, the company already has over 7 GWh, or about 400 million dollars’ worth of purchase orders...

We should soon see if this is a viable business then.

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#59

Post by justsomeadvice0 »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #45
AtlasBarfed wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CATL's sodium ion batteries are slated to soon (1-2 years, mostly just mundane factory construction and logistics) to hit $40/kwhr. No nickel / cobalt / etc. I think LFP is basically already under that as well (I think they are in the 60-70/kwhr range). For grid storage, that is probably the only metric that matters: cost per kwhr of storage (and sufficient cycle endurance).

How can LFP be both under $40/kwhr and in the 60-70/kwhr range?

I think GP intended to convey "under the price in the article" ($83/kwhr).

Re: Nickel Hydrogen Batteries by NASA

#60

Post by thfuran »

soco wrote: post #19
danw1979 wrote: post #12

This sounds great on paper but there’s a couple of questions left hanging: > We take the battery, put it in an open fire, and watch it continue to heat up. What ends up happening is that the pressure above top charge will force the hydrogen back into water. And then we have a release valve designed into the unit so at a predesigned pressure and temperature that will release, and you’ll get a steam vent.” But what abo…

How are today's batteries doing when put in the barbecue fire? The new ones only need to not do (much) worse.

How batteries do when placed in a barbecue is, for most applications, much less important than how often they spontaneously initiate a barbecue.
Post reply on HN