This is soltesza's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following soltesza's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
90% coulombic efficiency doesn't sound very high. Best current li-ion is 98%+. Of course, if energy density and specific energy is very high, this will still have a market.
I thought this site was about green cars, not about dirty polluting diesels. Start stop system on a diesel is lipstick on a pig.
Meh. Another hybrid in 2018... Toyota what are you doing ??? Where is my Prius EV?
Looks like a fairly tall profile which seems counter intuitive. Maybe I am wrong here, but flat battery packs feels like a better choice for most retrofits (more variability).
This is very encouraging. The 32% full-energy target combined with the 32.5% energy efficiency target should result ~55% lowering of total carbon emissions by 2030.
Great stuff. I was hoping that the Győr plant gets the electric motor production project since they would be hit especially hard if ICE motor production starts dropping seriously as EV production ramps up at VW and Audi.
The Bolt sold only 1/8th of the Model3 volume in June, so its sales are miniscule and practically there is no competition between them. Even if the current Model3 average selling price is $50K+. 20% boost will not change that. When the Model3 production reaches sustained 5K/week (20K per month, very soon), Bolt sales will go down to 1/20th (5%) of Model3 sales. It will be practically invisible. GM has to change something radically in case they want to stay relevant. They are going to be crushed by Tesla if they continue like this.
It doesn't matter much if it is more expensive than graphite anodes since it is probably a smaller increase at the all-including price of the cell. For a lot of applications cost/cycle is the most important metric so if it doesn't degrade, it can be a winner, for example for grid applications. Of course, only if a similarly powerful cathode can be found and coupled with it.
@Engineer-Poet I consider ~12c / kWh (8.93c + OM) from synthetic methane acceptable since: 1) you can very likely recover some of that cost by selling the process heat (cogen) 2) we don't need that much of this kind of electricity anyway (proper mix of solar and wind regionally should minimize the need) so it can be mixed with the very cheap RE electricity that is used up immediately (so the average rate is still low). Yes, it is inefficient but it is good enough and allows 100% renewable grids today. Nuclear is a non-starter until waste reprocessing is properly solved and safety reaches the level where it can be insured against the full possible liability without any state support (like renewables). So, its 3c/kWh production cost is irrelevant due to its externities. The current fleet should only be allowed to operate until it can be phased out without positive CO2 effect.
So, what is the exact: - full-energy efficiency (thermal+electric input vs gained H2 energy content) - electric energy efficiency (electric input vs gained H2 energy content) of this new electrolysis system? 700C is high-grade heat which is not easy/cheap to come by. It will either need dedicated CSP plant or integration into a nuclear powerplant right?
@EP In Europe, district heating is fairly common in cities. Thus, P2G efficiency can be calculated with the electricity -> gas > electricity + heat pathway (co-generation). That is up to 54% efficient according to wikipedia, not 36% as you quote. 40-50% efficiency is perfectly OK for seasonal/deep storage if the cost is right. RE generation is getting stupidly cheap, so P2G looks to become increasingly viable to me. Since most components needed for P2G is fairly low-tech and high-level of automation seems possible, capex and opex should not be prohibiting. Given the fact the most of Europe already has fully built-out natgas infrastructure (lots of gas based generation assets + huge, full-winter-length storage), that should limit the necessary investment to the P2G generator plants themselves.
This is really great, I hope this gets built according to plans. Europe desperately needs catching up to US and China in battery production capacity.
It seems that Audi's P2G bio/synthetic methane fuel plants are already pretty much viable and profitable at current CNG prices. They seem to finance it from future profits from P2G production. Brilliant.
@Harvey Even a 100 H2 stations would be only a drop in the ocean (and we are far from there yet). There are 16000 gas stations in California and H2 cars will require similarly dense coverage since you cannot refuel at home. With BEVs, 90-95% of the time you can slow-charge at home, at night, so no public charging/refueling station is needed for the majority of the year and it has maximum comfort. A German company, Ubitricity is already producing kits which can transform public lamp posts into public-access car chargers very cost effectively. This is good for people not having a house with a dedicated, installed charger. There is already deployment of this technology in London (see the Fully Charged show). The 30% ratio for cleanly produced H2 is also very low, 70% comes from reformed natural gas. I am installing solar panels on my house and will have a near-100% renewable ratio for an EV (will be refueled mostly at home). I agree with E-C-I here, there is no business or environmental case for H2 vehicles at the moment. FCVs need an awful lot of improvement to compete with BEVs for a typical car owner: - $35-40K purchase price - At least 80-90% renewable H2 production (like a net-metered solar array) with as low distribution losses and energy expenditure as with electricity - Similarly low fuel prices like the electricity for the BEV from a net-metered solar array (>2c/mile) - Similarly low maintenance costs like current, modern BEVs for the first 10-year, 200K-mile operating period ATM, I say it is not going to happen, all car makers will switch to BEVs and even the remaining ones will cancel FCV development before FCVs could really grow up. I am not against FCVs religiously, I just don't see a viable path for them to become successful before the current window of oportunity closes.
What are the advantages of this chemistry in relation to established and under-development battery chems? It seems that power density is low ("like other lithium metal batteries") but energy density is only medium ("like LiCo2"). I don't know faradaic efficiency but if it interchangeable with coulombic, then 57% is probably very low.
This sounds like a huge advancement. Correct me if I am wrong but this should result in a big capacity increase (even if it is for the anode) without significant cycling performance penalty (if the capacity loss remains linear). Why didn't they include capacity and power estimates for their new cell?
@Harvey It really depends on the price at which they can produce. Since Russian-sourced NG is fairly expensive here in Europe, I would say that it stands a chance but it is impossible to say without seeing their cost structure. Of course, the Russians can probably lower their prices to an extent so this process better have some serious price advantage if only market forces are considered. On the other hand, the EU would like to get rid of their energy dependence on the Russians so political factors may also come into play. If someone can demonstrate that e-gas from renewables is an economically viable substitute to Russian NG, that would garner a lot of interest here.
The authors conveniently sidestep a lot of issues currently present with FCVs. As ChrisL noted refueling time is WAY higher for fuel cell vehicles when we consider the very few H2 stations currently operational. They should have included the average trip time to the refueling station. Moreover, since many of the currently operating H2 stations are reportedly not capable of fueling at 10K psi (only 5K psi), the range FCVs get is about half of their maximum. With that correction, their range is comparable to current EVs but they have the huge inconvenience of needing to go to the H2 station while EV users simply plug in at home (zero time going to a fueling station).
85% is really respectable in power plant efficiency. Way to go Siemens!
24% of all sales is a nice result from Toyota but I am still very dissatisfied with their plugin play. There is no Toyota EV on the horizon which could fight the Tesla ModE or the Bolt.
Meh. Should have real plug-in hybrid and EV configuration to be noteworthy.
@Centurion Could you be courteous enough to comment in English?
This is a huge step in the right direction. If this could be improved to the point that it can serve as a secondary battery together with a normal li-ion battery, it could serve as the perfect range extender. Your car could have a smaller, say 100km, li-ion battery for normal city driving+commuting and the li-air extender for longer trips. The huge energy density of the li-air is good for long range, the high power density of the li-ion battery is good for regenerative braking, acceleration and quick-charging when you are in a hurry. Both the li-ion and li-air batteries can slow-charge at night when you are at home.
This is all nice and well, but it won't be enough for me to buy a Prius again (even if I am very satisfied with my second gen Prius). My next car will most likely be a full electric one. I think Toyota doesn't understand its customer base, this is why they are going to bleed a lot of enviroment-oriented customers in the near future. Current Prius owners will simply ignore their FCV scam and buy a BEV or EREV from an other manufacturer. If Toyota had even a half-decent EV, I would probably go with them because I like their fantastic quality. Given their lack of EVs, I will have to settle for a Nissan, a VW or maybe Tesla.