why the fuck hasnt anyone made a better alternative to batteries for storing energy? youre telling me they can jam over 5 gorrillion transitors into an iphone but cant make a better battery that what they had 60yrs ago? is big oil porpusely dettering battery advancement?Ice are dinosaurs compared to electric motors, but as long as electric energy storage sucks, ice will never be replaced
China will fix it
they did it's called gasoline you retard
>>28957345>say super capacitors are the next big thing>"uhhh umm yeah we couldn't actually build one, no refunds"
It's almost as if generating power in situ is inherently better than storing it and dragging heavy electron containers around?
>>28957352>"gasoline is a better energy storage"
>>28957375yes, are you actually retarded
>>28957353Supercaps have been in use in pretty much everything but the automotive propulsion sector for quite some time. A lithium/supercap hybrid pack would make a lot of sense imo. You could dump a fuckload of energy into the supercaps for a couple minutes then slowly bleed it off into the lithium pack. You could use the caps as a electric naws per se and take some load off the lithium pack. But oh no that's too complex. Better stick to using 2000lb battery packs.
>>28957345They didYou didn't want it
Taiwan's ProLogium already has a solid state battery production line in full deployment.In the next handful of years, definitely by 2030, this kind of "solid state" battery (the materials are actually a kind of supercritical gel) will start being the norm.After that the progress of the technology will make the batteries more than twice the capacity of lipo/li-ion. This tech is already 1000x safer.So 2x the power per weight is good, still not at the level that would make an electric appliance truly functional (1000wh/kg), but hey 200 pounds for 40kwh of battery is a way better option than 20kwh
>>28957390You're right, let's make a gas cell phone!
They even got used in buses.
>>28957533The best engine configuration for a phone or laptop would obviously be a boxer or rotary.
>>28957568Imagine having to go to special stations to refuel it instead of just plugging it in at home.
>>28957568I love this concept, when I text really fast I can make beautiful VROOM noises and smells to advertise to everyone in the room that I'm going fast.
hydrogen
>>28957476I just did an autistic deep dive into these, they're as viable as gas powered PHEVs, but cleaner since the only tailpipe emission is water.We also can't have water powered cars because it requires electricity to separate hydrogen from oxygen, so if you're doing that onboard you need lots of electricity and it would be a very slow process to make enough to make a hydrogen combustion engine move at car speeds, so you'd have so much battery and it would take so much time you'd just have an EV essentially. You could do it offboard, have a home system that converts water into hydrogen all day then compress it, but fuck you're turning your garage into some dangerous industrial facility. Hydrogen combustion also gives off nitrous oxide which is bad for the atmosphere, this is just a bad concept overall. The cleanest system is hydrogen being used to charge batteries through some weird process of making electric charges through combining the hydrogen with oxygen, then using that electric charge to charge a battery, then using the stored electricity to run an EV motor. The problem is compressed hydrogen is prohibitively expensive due to limited infrastructure, we'd need lots of established infrastructure for all the hydrogen production and distribution, like we have now for oil production and distribution.The stand-in most efficient concept for now is PHEVs. You essentially have a multifuel system with great range and the benefits of EV power boosts and quiet running, along with the cheap and available infrastructure of gasoline. The downside is it still makes fart noises and shits out stinky carcinogens that turn men into trannies.
US military explored the idea of micro engines to replace battery cells for war logistics.But I can't for the life of my find the video i watched.
>>28957607>Military EVsI can see it now. They truck in a microreactor on each side and send their RC war toys against against each other. Many explosions, many fires, much pollution.
>>28957476Now, we live in strange times. And since the windmill and solar craze in Europe, there is always some professor touting that you should make a gigantic H2 factory in case the supply of power greatly outperforms the actual European power needs. And then bottle that H2 and sell it, at a reasonable price.H2 tech currently exist as a stopgap in case of global oil embargo, for the nations that could really be in deep shit. Those nations are already in a position with nuclear power, but bad access too deep sea or land oil.But it also do not help that the various OEMs will make H2 tech vehicles, just to bolt it together and keep the institutional knowledge. So the Mirai isn't a real vehicle, its a Camry frame that is intentionally bolted together to strap on the extra stuff for the H2. Which means its a Camry with a empty engine bay, less interior space, etc. The Mirai exist so Toyota can maintain and develop the technology in case WW3 and a oil embrgo hits Japan. Even if there is a real chance that by the time WW3 hits, cheaper batteries like sodium could already have penetrated and replaced the market.
>>28957345>battery that what they had 60yrs agoWe aren't using Cadmium batteries in cars anymore.It's all lithium batteries which became a thing only around 30-40 years ago.
>>28957547>mechanical failure of a weighty flywheel at 200k under your butt
>>28957617I don't see why they don't just develop the infrastructure and implement it now, every country has great access to hydrogen, only few have great access to petroleum.It's actually really fucking stupid that we're not rushing to implement this technology. I suspect leadership is being bribed by the Saudis.
>>28957622Because if you do the napkin math, Hydrogen costs about 3x the price of electricity. For any of the countries with Hydro power that is completely fine. Hydrogen there should cost about 53€ per GWh + taxes and infrastructure.For nuclear and petroleum that quickly reaches 250€/GWh + taxes and infrastructure. For a more functional nuclear state like USA or France its still about 150€/GWh. Mind you, that there is still going to be a conversion loss from H2 to whatever you are using it for.At this point H2 infrastructure exist for industrial use, or to enrich LNG
There was no developmental push for batteries for a long time, the lead acid and a few other chemistries pretty much did what ever you needed. Then the smartphone came out and they realised they needed to push lithium batteries. Then everything started getting jammed with batteries and development really started to get funded. Now we are one or two generations ahead of those early lithiums. Battery tech tree research has barely begun. Within 30-50 years they will be competitive in all fields with gasoline. Electric motor design is also progressing in huge leaps bounds even from only 10 years ago, I can't believe the power in my little Milwaukee M12 gen3 Drill tm, It's comparable to one of the huge 18v chonkers of not too long ago.
>>28957345>why the fuck hasnt anyone made a better alternative to batteries for storing energy?It existsIt's called a fuel tank
>>28957600Last time I looked at it, it actually made some sense in freight, replacing diesel trucks, but it was less of a slam dunk for passenger vehicles
>>28957671Freight is also getting dominated by battery electric trucks. They can use the existing infrastructure for EVs to charge at speeds of 300-400 kW while dedicated truck charging points and Megawatt charging get rolled out, not to mention overnight charging. In Europe and China the drivers have mandatory breaks that can be used to charge the truck without significant time losses.Look at Milence as a CPO aimed exclusively at trucks that's continually expanding.https://milence.com/network/Meanwhile hydrogen fuel stations are closing down.https://h2.live/en/Hydrogen may stand a chance in long range maritime traffic but for land based applications it has already fallen too far behind. And we're already seeing battery electric ferries and similar short range vessels.
>>28957635>Milwaukee M12 gen3 Drill tmis that the new-ish one that needs the super expensive redlithium batteries? i got one off a guy from zuckbook marketplace for cheap with the battery, it's great how it has almost as much power as the mid torque.
>>28957671>>28957690Still not there, but its interesting.If you got short-medium haul, you can crunch the numbers. Is there a appropriate vehicle which can do the daily route with more than 50-70% of the battery range, and what will it cost to drive it 200.000km vs diesel? All at the small cost of installing a small charger at the place you pick up the vehicle, to charge it in between shifts. This is already happening in Europe, and started happening once the NV200 hit the market. And its only going to get more interesting as more capable vehicles with actual range hits the market.
>>28957732Battery electric is competitive on long haul relying on public charging infrastructure. For short haul and fixed route it's a nobrainer at this point.New trucks have ranges of 500+km and with a 45min charging break at 300KW you're already set for the distance you can drive in a 9h shift. MCS will make it more attractive for driver rotation.
>>28957599Doesn't make sense. Might as well create ethanol.
>>28957375>>"gasoline is a better energy storagelol a 1500 pound Tesla battery has the energy density of 15 pounds of gas
>>28957822Electrolysing hydrogen from water makes sense. Turning it into ammonia for easier storage/transport is an option. But if you want ethanol you should just farm it. Brazil is already doing that at scale.
Just develop compact fusion
>>28957842Then why can't a car drive 30,000 miles on a single tank?
>>28957375Gasoline is fantastic at packing lots of energy into a given volume, but the only ways we have of extracting said energy are horrendously inefficient.
>>28957842>blockades your gas
>>28957907People keep saying this but hardly anything uses gas. Everything uses batteries.
>>28957533
>>28957936Because extracting electricity from a battery is a lot easier and a lot more efficient than doing so from gasoline.
>>28957345there's gasoline/diesel/ethanol/propane/hydrogen/etc, and there's new battery chemistries coming out at a pretty regular clip now. also even the humble lead acid battery has had a lot of improvements over the last 50ish years (SLA, AGM, etc). for infrastructure there's flywheels and "gravity batteries" and pumped-storage hydroelectric>is big oil porpusely dettering battery advancement?also yes>>28957476i looked into these and basically all the "problems" aren't what karens and conservatives screech about, it's more that storing hydrogen in a tank sucks ass because making an impermeable tank is nontrivial, and hydrogen simply isn't very energy dense so you need a lot of it to compete with propane or wood gas or whatever which are already cheaper. it's a bit of a niche thing but hydrogen powered gas generators exist for remote job sites and such. hydrogen's only advantage over propane/wood gas/natural gas is that it's "clean"
>>28957956>hydrogen simply isn't very energy denseIt is per mass but not per volume.
>>28957951So it's a better energy storage.
>>28957989It depends on how you define better storage. flywheels are better for charging and discharging but there's cheaper options for long term storage such as dams.
>>28957994Dams are not a good energy storage since you can't scale them up. You need ten times more energy storage? Sorry, all the river valleys are dammed up.
>>28958092 Pumped storage works on height. They build them up in the mountains, not in valleys.
>>28958097That uses a lot of water, and batteries are 10 times cheaper. Dams are only economical because the water rains from the sky for free.
>>28958100the water isn't consumed after you "use" it, retard
Why not coal?inb4>b-because its just bad... ok!
>>28957634If we could have a plug-in hybrid that could run on electric power alone for a decent range, then backup hydrogen tanks to bolster the batteries for long distance trips, that could be practical. You'd only be filling those tanks on longer distance trips.Even if the cost is more, it still has the benefit of being clean energy, and cutting our dependence on foreign oil which is skyrocketing in price.
>>28958208>benefit of being clean energyLmaoLol even>our dependence>dependence on foreign oil?US is drilling shale to potentially offset global oil embargo, following policy lines after the last OPEC round..The primary H2 investor is still Japan, for the exact reason that they ended up completely oil dry during the later stage of WW2.So you are... European? MENA but not allied with the Gulf states?
>>28957892It could, make the tank huge.A typical Tesla battery is 1,000-1,700 lbs depending on the model. The majority of the weight in an EV is the battery. Meanwhile gas cars have a 10-20gal tank, a gallon of gas is 6lbs.60-120lbs gets more range than 1,000-1,700lbs. That's really fucking bad and the whole point of this thread. Electric energy storage isn't even comparable to liquid gasoline energy storage. Battery tech has to improve.
>>28957936>Everything uses batteries.Most of your low energy consuming products are not comparable to a car. A car has to move a lot of weight and go 80+mph. That's not comparable to your phone or TV remote...
>>28958213If we had enough oil to sustain ourselves, we'd be using it wouldn't we?
>>28958233You're conveniently forgetting to include the rest of the weight of the drivetrain in your little equations. 120lbs of gas does not move a car 300 miles. It has to be pumped through an engine and transmission and axles in order to go anywhere and those components can weigh up to 1000lbs as well.
>>28957354
>>28957936Ok then, can you make a commercial rocket or a fighter jet that runs only on electricity? Let me know how it goes.
>>28958270>Tesla model Y weight: ~4,500lbs>Toyota Corolla weight: ~3,000lbs>Tesla model Y range: ~300 miles (which is dependent on a lot of factors and basically a bullshit claim)>Toyota Corolla range: ~450 milesThe shit you contrarians will try to argue about...
>>28958261First off>ourselvesNo, you are not defining it. And as such you a dishonest coward.Secondly:Its more that its a multi step process.Once you ration, you can disassociate fromt he OPEC price cartel. But that also means breaking several important functions of global trade, where one of the more important is that each different region has different distillation fractions. But there is also the futures market, and the international shipping aspect as well.But more importantly: Its not there yet.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970s_energy_crisisGo read up on it. Once it was over, it still took 7 years for market to re normalize. All because some production was shut down, and some fractioning was moved to serve national economies. And the slowdown caused by the counter allocation in several western countries.
>>28957617There is a tremendous amount of natural hydrogen under the ground in europe. Electrolysis from water to produce hydrogen to feed fuel cells is indeed retarded. But natural hydrogen resources that need a bit of refinement are not. Europa could become at last energy self sufficient. Whatever that would only bring more migrants. But we cannot turn our back on such a resources that would contribute to bring worldwide energy stability.
>>28958275I'm not really arguing I just think your point is stupid. I mean technically, on a fundamental level, we agree with each other. I just think "range per pound" is a retarded metric that has pretty much never been relevant to anyone in the automotive industry until right now when you realized it was a way to get a "win" over EVs
>>28958275You compared a basic economy car to a luxury car. Completely terrible argument. Compare it to an equivalent luxury car like a $40,000 BMW. Those have a 3700lb curb weight.
>>28958457Ok then let's go with the model 3. You get 500lbs less weight but also only a 220 mole range. Congrats you drove my point home even harder.
>>28958484280 miles for the shortest range m3.
>>28958354>range per pound" is a retarded metricOh yeah, fuel economy is a stilly metric. Right.
>>28958702Fuel economy is dollars per mile if you're comparing two different fuel types.
>>28957578>>28957593maybe it would be two stroke or nitro
>>28958714Energy used is a perfectly valid comparison. A litre gasoline or diesel is some 30-40MJ, 1kg hydrogen 120MJ, 1kg LNG or LPG 50MJ and 1l ethanol has 20MJ.1kWh is exactly 3.6MJ.
>>28957862Hydrogen is a nightmare. Methane is a much better fuel.Electricity to Methane (google e-methane) is possible and if we had abundant electricity from fusion that would be the optimum choice of fuel.
>>28958843And why would that matter? That's like counting A.I. token usage per day for determining someone's productivity at work.
>>28958843>1kg hydrogen 120MJ,that sounds chemically impossible unless you're talking about some kind of exotic fuel cell and not literally just burning gaseous h2
>>28958354>has pretty much never been relevant to anyone in the automotive industryit only hasn't been because until recently your only choices were gas or diesel, and which one you pick would be over things other than raw fuel efficiency>>28958156external combustion is for BPD whores
>>28958100>techbros in charge of understanding the water cyclehint: after you use all that water during a peak period, you pump it back up to the top when electricity demands are low. you don't just wait for rainfall to refill the basin after discharging all the stored water into space
>>28958955It's the potential chemical energy stored in those fuels. You're not going to get the full usage out of the rest either.At least hydrogen has fuel cell vehicles available so it will have better fuel economy than hydrocarbons.
>>28957533I've always dreamed of butane phones. You joke because don't have any idea how good it could be. Imagine a phone with a 2-week battery life which you could refill from a butane canister in 5 minutes. Or a laptop which lasts for a month on a single charge and gets refilled the same way.If we had butane phones and other butane technology, we'd probably have butane outlets in our houses with a quick connect fitting that you could plug your shit into. It would be some kind of standardized cable that attaches to your phone or computer and to the wall and automatically refills it.
>>28958955What is confusing about it?Its 1kg, and its a compressible gas/liquid. And yes:Its nonsensical as a unit because you still have conversion losses at both sides of the fuel. You might have 120MJ/kg, but that is never reaching the wheels, and the wheels output are rated in kWh.>>28958714>>28958843I agree with anon, its dollar per mile. Or Euro per kilometer.
>>28959051>>28958714That's too dependent on local prices. Energy sources vary wildly in price across the world, time of the year and even the specific hour.>Its nonsensical as a unit because you still have conversion losses at both sides of the fuel.Isn't that the whole point behind fuel economy? To see how much of the energy you put into your vehicle is actually used for movement.
>>28957533>/o/ - TechnologyYou get lost buddy?
>>28959112Fuel economy is when you're comparing two different things using the same fuel. Even if you were to use mpg vs mpge then EVs still easily beat out all nonhybrid cars. The idea that gas is somehow better simply because its more energy dense is silly
>>28959112>Isn't that the whole point behind fuel economy?Yes, but you don't measure it in a nonsense unit such as BTU.>Energy sources vary wildly in priceNot in any of the functional economies. If it swings more than 10%, its fucked.
>>28959119>then EVs still easily beat out all nonhybrid cars.Why would hybrids fare better?
>>28959112Everything you said is true. Meaning electricity will be better in one place, and gas will be better uh...somewhere I guess.
>>28959128You're asking me why hybrid cars get better mpgs than nonhybrid cars? That's something that needs to be explained to you?
>>28957547I think someone should make a peddle car, like what you see on the board walk, with two counter spinning flywheels on the bottom. 4 passengers, 4 sets of peddles. Whole family contributes to the fly wheels, and a clutch to engage/disengage it. Needs some sort of automatic gear selection or some such, but that's where my idea falls off because it quickly jump out of my realm of knowledge.
>>28959217I'm asking why electric wouldn't beat hybrids.
>>28959217wrenchlet
>>28959227I didn't say they wouldn't. The discussion is electricity vs gas. Obviously hybrids can't be included as gas powered cars if they get to benefit from electrification too.
>>28959051if you compress a gas, its mass doesnt increase. its volume decreases. it's still whatever j per kgjoules and "kilowatt-hours" are basically the same unit, being some amount of energy. no one measures vehicles in kWh except for ebikers though, that shit is a made-up unit for electrical companies to bill you more effectively."conversion losses" from weird unit use does not impact real world performancehydrogen is just chemically simple and breaking one(1) chemical bond should not release more energy than complex hydrocarbonsim willing to admit i might be wrong on hydrogen's pure energy density by burning it but you sound like a moron and i will distrust everything you say now. in fact even if i am just wrong on hydrogen's energy density, re-reading your post, you are a Disingenious Asshole; 1l of diesel is not equivalent to 1kg hydrogen, since if we're doing this stuff by mass, 1l of diesel is not 1kg
>>28959269ah, a knee jerk reddit shitpost of its finest quality.
>>28959269>no one measures vehicles in kWh except for ebikers thoughBEVs always use kWh for their batteries and energy usage.Some fucker is probably going to use kWh/h for power, as ridiculous as it is.>1l of diesel is not equivalent to 1kg hydrogen, since if we're doing this stuff by mass, 1l of diesel is not 1kgThe point is being able to compare mileages. Fuels liquid under standard conditions will be measured by volume, fuels that would be gaseous unless compressed/chilled are measured by mass.Saying that 1kg diesel has 45MJ just adds an extra conversion step.
>>28959278>Fuels liquid under standard conditions will be measured by volume, fuels that would be gaseous unless compressed/chilled are measured by mass.if you're measuring raw combustion power you should do the proper stochiometry and do it by mole, and if normes can't handle that, then translate it to mass either way. one liter of gasoline is like 650-700 grams, not 1kg. i will not fall for your Protestant trickery
