a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by elizabeth
elizabeth  ·  3581 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Map: The Most Common* Job In Every State [Interactive Map]

Thanks :) Basically unless there's a major change in the way batteries are made, a good enough battery is unrealistic.

I guess I can still hope someone invents some kind of car battery you can switch out easily kinda like on a cell phone or some extra efficient solar powered truck roofs that charge the battery while you roll. But eh, surely if that's the stuff I come up with after 5 mins thinking about the subject, either it's completely unrealistic at the moment or some's already working on a prototype. Or maybe these are acceptable solutions for cars but don't apply to trucks.

Thanks for taking the time to spell it all out for me. It's a bit disappointing honestly, eco-friendly trucks would have been great :)





kleinbl00  ·  3581 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Here's what I can tell you.

When I started college, I spent some time in a vehicle design program. In 1995, the golden rule was a thousand pounds of batteries had the energy density of a gallon of gasoline. This thing here has a 600cc Kawasaki motor, and a thousand pounds of Sonnenschein NiMH batteries that cost $80k.

If you had told me energy density of batteries would be up by a factor of seven in less than 20 years I wouldn't have believed you. It hadn't gone up by more than 50% since WWII. But at the time, a Motorola StarTac was state-of-the-art.

The Cell Phone revolution absolutely drove an improvement in battery design. You couldn't begin to run an iPhone on the battery in a StarTac - 230 minutes talk-time out of 500mAh. An iPhone 6 has an 1800mAh battery that gives it 14 hours of talk time and it's a much, much smaller phone. But here's the thing: in 1994 computers were profligate users of power. The original Dec Alpha chip dissipated enough heat to literally cook an egg (250W). Moore's Law was all about cramming cycles and energy in the smallest space possible... which flipped some time around 2003, 2004. People started caring a lot more about battery life than they did about horsepower because what we had in 2004 was pretty much good enough for most people. Ever since, the focus has been on more efficient chips as opposed to big skookum batteries. We've also kind of accepted the rise of the secondary battery pack; we carry outriggers for our phones now so that we can flatten the bejeesus out of them and still function.

The radical improvement we've seen in batteries over the past 20 years could continue. Using rough math, we need about 40x the energy density we have now... which is a long ways off. And if we got there, we'd be in a position for electric aircraft, electric helicopters, electric pogo sticks, electric everything before we'd hit the sweet spot for electric long-haul trucks. It just takes a shit-ton of juice to haul 40 tons of mail. That is probably something you aren't considering: those giant trucks you sweep by on the freeway weigh 20 times as much as your car, and an electric car is already a marvel.

It's easier with rail anyway. Lay down a cable and leave all the batteries back at the station... ;-)

briandmyers  ·  3580 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    If you had told me energy density of batteries would be up by a factor of seven in less than 20 years I wouldn't have believed you. It hadn't gone up by more than 50% since WWII.

And this would not have happened without lithium-based cells. We've now squeezed lithium technology nearly as far as it can go; we may well get vastly better batteries in the future, but if so, it will be (I predict) because we've found a new kind of battery - a revolutionary not evolutionary change.

insomniasexx  ·  3581 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I was just reading an article about the state of batteries and innovation. While we've shot exponentially higher in almost all other areas of technology, the technology in batteries (a chemical reaction) has remained essentially unchanged.

I believe this was the article I read, but there's a ton of knowledge out there on batteries and their relatively stagnant evolution. http://www.cnet.com/news/why-batteries-arent-getting-better/

kleinbl00  ·  3581 days ago  ·  link  ·  

To add to this: The magic factors everyone cares about for batteries are energy density and recharge time. The article touches on how batteries are basically layers of metal and dielectric; the more layers of metal, the higher your energy density. Electricity in batteries is a chemical process; the more reactive that chemistry the faster batteries can charge and discharge. So - the thinner and more reactive the battery design, the higher performance the battery. Which also means the higher performance your battery, the more sensitive it is to damage... and the more dramatic the results.