Live data from Hacker News

Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

electrek.co

71–78 of 78 posts

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#71
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would this be a correct summary of the paper? 1) eliminates Cobalt 2) improves energy density (more range) 3) faster charge rate 4) less SOC (state of charge) swing, meaning less cost & weight 4) 5x longer lifespan

1) 532 is not a new chemistry. It's not even the lowest cobalt chemistry; there's 511 and 811 beyond that (811, or 80% nickel, 10% manganese, and 10% cobalt, is not yet technically feasible). 2) Range is decreased. 532 has lower energy density. 3) Maybe..? But nothing truly significant. The additives in this chemistry mean a lot of heat gets generated during charge/discharge. Heat is the limiting factor during charge…

> This will be pretty enormous for grid storage

It's unfortunate they call it grid storage. Apparently you can make money by connecting a battery to the grid as the one in South Australia does make money, but I have no idea how it does it. Perhaps the price goes through the roof when a coal generator trips out and a battery can react so fast it gets first dibs on the money. The one in South Australia has certainly done that. It must be something like that as the storage is so small and the batteries so expensive they would have to get an astronomical price on what they do sell.

A house battery on the other hand - that's a different matter. The price of retail electricity at is 3 times the wholesale price, and unlike the grid battery the house usually pays nothing to charge it - it comes from the root top solar. Even so batteries aren't competitive yet, as in the return you get on installing one in a house in Australia is currently negative. But if the price drops by 1/2 it will save money by adding a battery.

I struggle to see how grid batteries fit in, but house batteries (which are really a grid battery installed at the other end of the wire) seem like they are just around the corner.

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#72
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very unlikely. Winter batteries aren't a huge problem as long as you are gentle until the pack is warm. Hot batteries are more of an issue, as they don't really like temperatures above 90-100 F. Keeping the battery at half charge helps reduce that damage a lot. Ultimately if you live in a hot climate the best thing to do is have a cool garage. The higher heat while out and about is not an issue, just the constant lev…

Was wondering about if you could put a liquid coolant loop from the battery to the charging socket on the car, then have a heat exchanger in the plug and run water to and from it using a jacket round the cable, so you can have a rapid charge that also helps heat your bath water.

A supercharger tops out at 250 kW throttles down when the battery pack gets to ~115 F. Hot water heaters run from 120-140 F. Domestic circuits at at most ~7kW, so you'll realistically never be able to do anything useful with the waste heat. At low power like that battery charging is 98-99% efficient.

Another problem is that the coolant loop needs to be kept quite clean. The fins are only about a few millimeters wide and in some cars (eg Model 3) they're electrically hot. Any grit or buildup making its way into the system is a huge problem and just having a valve that can open can cause problems.

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#73
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) 532 is not a new chemistry. It's not even the lowest cobalt chemistry; there's 511 and 811 beyond that (811, or 80% nickel, 10% manganese, and 10% cobalt, is not yet technically feasible). 2) Range is decreased. 532 has lower energy density. 3) Maybe..? But nothing truly significant. The additives in this chemistry mean a lot of heat gets generated during charge/discharge. Heat is the limiting factor during charge…

> This will be pretty enormous for grid storage It's unfortunate they call it grid storage. Apparently you can make money by connecting a battery to the grid as the one in South Australia does make money, but I have no idea how it does it. Perhaps the price goes through the roof when a coal generator trips out and a battery can react so fast it gets first dibs on the money. The one in South Australia has certainly do…

> Apparently you can make money by connecting a battery to the grid as the one in South Australia does make money, but I have no idea how it does it.

It is called the ancillary market. Basically if the grid voltage or frequency drifts off target too much, the mismatch causes semi-catastrophic shutdown of connected generation. It's... Kind of like if the timing belt in your car broke? Multi-ton generators rotating at thousands of RPM suddenly start to change direction, and they would fly apart if not for safety shutdowns.

The ancillary market exists to prevent that. Standing contracts are posted to bring fast generation like hydro power or gas turbines on the second power gets too low or too high. In Southern Australia there is very little of those resources and due to technical neglect and the governments pro-coal policies, the growth in power demand led to an unstable grid. Their limited number of fast "peaker" plants just couldn't keep up. That's why the battery made money hand over fist- 1.5 years to pay for itself, a wholly unheard of thing in civil projects like this.

Note that I've elided over a lot and ancillary markets worldwide are very highly regulated. They are very complicated, require sub-second reactions, and are generally a problem of the commons. One of the major problems that lead to the SA blackouts was the government expanding the acceptable frequency window- to ~5x what the rest of the world does (iirc). Companies immediately stopped making an effort to switch quickly and made poor long term decisions, relying on undercutting competition.

> I struggle to see how grid batteries fit in, but house batteries (which are really a grid battery installed at the other end of the wire) seem like they are just around the corner.

I think nuclear is one of the likely use cases, but it requires huge changes in carbon regulation. Nuclear is also highly capital intensive and benefits just as much as renewables from storage. A carbon tax is required to make the costs make sense though.

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#74
post #46

I'm sure batteries would be immensely better if the military would spend money into research towards better batteries.

As someone who works in gov contracting, please no. Spend money literally any other way. Give it to the DOE. Fuck, just signing Musk a check would probably be better. The DoD is singularly ineffective.

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#76

>> The new battery tested is a Li-Ion battery cell with a next-generation “single crystal” NMC cathode and a new advanced electrolyte. If this is anything like growing single-crystal parts for aircraft, it won't be cheap. The real question should be whether these new battery modules will last twice as long while remaining less than twice as expensive. >> Controlling the charge to less than 100% state-of-charge also h…

> If this is anything like growing single-crystal parts for aircraft, it won't be cheap.

I'm still catching up, but it won't be expensive like that. You grow single crystals by keeping them hot and cooling them very slowly in a controlled atmosphere. Turbine blades are meant to operate in the hottest conditions in any machine on earth. Accordingly, they must be cooled at extremely high temperatures. The cost of single crystal turbine blades also pales in comparison to the cost of the blades themselves.

> Um, that is cheating. Running any battery at less than capacity will extend its life. You could put two batteries in the car, run them at 50% or alternate between them, and get double the life.

Cycle life is often plotted as equivalent full cycles. If you get two batteries, running both at 50% DoD, you will increase the amount of lifetime full-cycle equivalents by ~10-50x, depending on the chemistry.

Lowering the depth of discharge means lowering the voltage difference between the electrodes. At 4.0 V you have very few side reactions. At 4.2 V, the battery is charged. At 4.3 V (~110% charge) the battery is dangerous. At 4.6 V (~120%) the battery is plating lithium onto its anode and is about to short circuit and blow its pressure release. Fire is heavily involved. Small decreases in voltage lead to big improvements in stability.

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#77
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was wondering about if you could put a liquid coolant loop from the battery to the charging socket on the car, then have a heat exchanger in the plug and run water to and from it using a jacket round the cable, so you can have a rapid charge that also helps heat your bath water.

A supercharger tops out at 250 kW throttles down when the battery pack gets to ~115 F. Hot water heaters run from 120-140 F. Domestic circuits at at most ~7kW, so you'll realistically never be able to do anything useful with the waste heat. At low power like that battery charging is 98-99% efficient. Another problem is that the coolant loop needs to be kept quite clean. The fins are only about a few millimeters wide…

I'm talking about having a domestic supercharger. You can get up to 70kW at the company head fuse as a standard residential customer in the UK. You can also go higher, but you have to apply for a quote, so at the moment getting a true domestic supercharger is a bit pricy.

However, they are going to have to upgrade it all anyway if we get loads of electric cars.

As for the coolant loop, I wasn't suggesting to have a valve that can open, just a closed loop to the socket and a heat exchanger that then heats the water flowing through the handle of the plug.

You then store the water in an insulated tank and use it as a preheated supply feeding your main water heating system.

Re: Tesla battery researcher unveils new cell that could last 1M miles

#78
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This will be pretty enormous for grid storage It's unfortunate they call it grid storage. Apparently you can make money by connecting a battery to the grid as the one in South Australia does make money, but I have no idea how it does it. Perhaps the price goes through the roof when a coal generator trips out and a battery can react so fast it gets first dibs on the money. The one in South Australia has certainly do…

> Apparently you can make money by connecting a battery to the grid as the one in South Australia does make money, but I have no idea how it does it. It is called the ancillary market. Basically if the grid voltage or frequency drifts off target too much, the mismatch causes semi-catastrophic shutdown of connected generation. It's... Kind of like if the timing belt in your car broke? Multi-ton generators rotating at…

> The ancillary market exists to prevent that. Standing contracts are posted to bring fast generation like hydro power or gas turbines on the second power gets too low or too high.

Ahhh, so that's how it works. Thanks.

> In Southern Australia there is very little of those resources and due to technical neglect and the governments pro-coal policies,

I struggle with that. South Australia is in the position it is is (50% renewable, 100% on occasions) because it has very little coal, and what they do have is low quality. In fact they import it from QLD and NSW. All that posturing from federal liberal politicians blaming SA Labor for choosing renewables is just that. In reality they didn't have much choice. It's very hard to be pro-coal when you don't have any.

> Nuclear is also highly capital intensive and benefits just as much as renewables from storage.

I've never thought about it - but that's probably correct. However I'm firmly in the camp of "if it was truly cheaper than coal or renewables, nuclear would be everywhere now". The data makes it fairly plain safety concerns are overblown - it's actually one of the safer forms of energy production. If it was cheap the loud protests from the anti-nuclear nuclear lobby would be ignored, just as the protests from the anti-wind lobby are mostly ignored.

Post reply on HN