The highest energy density lithium ion battery in the world is INSANE
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- The highest energy density lithium ion battery in the world is INSANE
👇👇 The Electric Viking store/merchandise 👇👇
shop.theelectr...
Size guide and other help for the store 👇
theelectricvik...
🔔 Subscribe and hit the notification bell! ► www.youtube.co...
Join me on Patreon ► / theelectricviking
Join as a member in The Electric Viking UA-cam►
/ @electricviking
Members-only videos (see videos before anyone else)►
• Members-only videos
👇👇 Please donate here for Shanna (Viking's wife) if you can 👇👇
gofund.me/ef66...
See what happened to Shanna:
• Stage 4 can go to hell...
Get a 10% discount on tickets to Fully Charged Live in 2023 (and meet me in person). 10% discount code for London and San Diego will be released closer to the event dates.
Buy ticket from here: tickets.lup.co...
The Electric Viking on other platforms:
Rumble ► rumble.com/c/T...
Facebook page ► / theelectricvikingfb
Facebook group ► / theevfbgroup
Twitter ► / theevking
Instagram ► / theelectricvking
Pinterest ► / theelectricviking
Telegram ► t.me/theelectr...
TikTok ► / theelectricviking
My Stake referral link ► tinyurl.com/he...
👇 See more about me 👇
• You've been asking; he...
👇 My Bali trip 👇
• I went to Indonesia an...
👇 Video about My Skateboard 👇
• EASIEST & cheapest way...
👇 Subscribe to my kids channel 👇
tinyurl.com/su...
See more videos:
World's highest energy density Lithium Air battery solved! Up to 2000km EV range!
• World's highest energy...
Is this the first production electric car with a SOLID STATE battery?
• Is this the first prod...
NEW wireless battery management system are a GAME changer
• NEW wireless battery m...
NEW Sodium, Aluminum battery is 15X cheaper than sodium or lithium
• NEW Sodium, Aluminum b...
Are Iron Flow batteries the solution to the world's ENERGY needs?
• Are Iron Flow batterie...
World's first Nano Flow cell energy powered EV's are coming?!
• World's first Nano Flo...
Australia’s biggest vanadium flow battery & gigawatt battery factory
• Australia’s biggest va...
How 1 African country moved from fossil fuels to renewables with a giant battery
• How 1 African country ...
Germany sets renewable energy RECORD in 2022 - will hit 85% in 2030
• Germany sets renewable...
41% of Americans say EVs are better for the environment than gas cars
• 41% of Americans say E...
Australian researchers develop 'breakthrough' sodium battery
• Australian researchers...
Australia’s biggest vanadium flow battery & gigawatt battery factory
• Australia’s biggest va...
Titanium diboride enables extreme fast charging without battery losses
• Titanium diboride enab...
The world’s first CO2 battery is WAY better than people think
• The world’s first CO2 ...
The EV Super Battery that charges in 60 seconds & lasts 100 yrs
• The EV Super Battery t...
NASA's solid state battery could change EVERYTHING
• NASA's solid state bat...
16 NEW battery giga factories planned in North America
• 16 NEW battery giga fa...
The first grid battery in the world to provide system strength
• The first grid battery...
SAIC reveal NEW EV brand; the Feifan R7 Electric SUV
• SAIC reveal NEW EV bra...
Jaguar Land Rover say key to EV success, don't fire, retrain!
• Jaguar Land Rover say ...
The first affordable, lightweight 2 seat electric sports car has 500HP
• The first affordable, ...
The cheapest electric sports car in the world is AWESOME
• The cheapest electric ...
NEW Tesla Model 3 rival gets 50,000 orders in 2 hours
• NEW Tesla Model 3 riva...
Sweden's EV sales in 2022 - sales show China & Tesla impact
• Sweden's EV sales in 2...
#battery #lithiumionbattery #solidstatebattery #batteryproduction #evs #evproductions
This channel may use some copyrighted materials without specific authorization of the owner; but content used here falls under the “Fair Use” Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976.
Allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Contact us for any copyright issues. If you want a credit of any footage we are using, please let us know.
Website: theelectricvik...
Email: contact@theelectricviking.com
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
From the chart at 1:45, from 1992 to 2015 battery energy density increased almost linearly. Battery research spending increased dramatically around 2015 and since then battery capacity has increased dramatically and appears to be speeding up, not diminishing. This is what happens when R&D spending increases.
I wonder what's the physical theoretical limit for battery energy density, for semiconductor it's the thickness of the silicon or carbon atom
Sorry to burst your bubble and everyone who liked your comment, but this is a linear graph, not a logarithmic graph, meaning an exponential curve is to be expected at a constant rate of improvement.
Edit: sorry for the ambiguity of "constant rate of improvement" I mean it as a constant percentage rate of change. Not a constant numerical rate of change. I hope ive used the right terminology and cleared things up.
@@injest1928 you're right, the battery energy density will double every few years, and this roughly happens consistently.
@@injest1928 You are incorrect. A constant rate of improvement would result in a straight line with a positive slope on a linear graph. Something doubling every few years is not linear improvement, it is exponential improvement and would show up as a curve on a linear graph.
@@patrickhawley1392 economy growing 2% a year grows exponentially. Battery capacity grows 5% a year on average, it is an exponential growth, doubling every 14 years on average.
There is no practical limit to this growth as an individual atom can theoretically release enormous amounts of energy..
The future will be batteries but it may take a while..
There is a lot going on in battery technology research but the key is that 90% wont make it as a commercial viable solution we just have to wait and see which product will enter the market for an afforable price.
I think catl condensed matter cells are legit. And some of the solid state&semi solid state cell stuff actually now in the hands of oems.
once you pass 600wh/kg you pretty much kill any logic left to using hydrogen as a fuel.
you forget refuelling. Pretty big part of the logic to operate a commercially viable vehicle.
@@pan6593 Higher energy density batteries = longer range vehicles = needing to charge less often
There NEVER has been any logic behind hydrogen unless you magically find a new catalyst for fuel cells which uses common materials.
@@pan6593 once a battery can go past the length of a shift, that almost becomes null
Ye let's not forget About that lithium that's mined , Putting so much CO2 in the air , so there is logic so actually just buzz off about hydrogen being useless , Over time If they create these batteries more over time , then what was the point of switching from Petrol and Diesel to electric when it's not even friendly for the environment , electric cars will gradually reach the CO2 levels that Petrol and Diesel cars have already polluted.
As an mountain biker, 711 watts would be perfect, my current 700 watt battery weighs 3.8kgs. Yes it’s a niche market, but when not zipping up and down mount a bike trails, my bike even with its nobly tyres does 50 miles on the road… so useful fun transport
How does reducing 2.8 kg helps that much
You're confusing between Watt vs Watt-hour! 😢
My current bike a Specialized Turbo Levi Comp is 23kg. It’s good, but you notice the weight and resultant momentum and inertia on more twisty sections, jumps etc. plus quite a lot to lift on hike and bike sections
No I have a 700 watt hour battery that weighs 3.8 kg, hence a 1kg 711 watt hour battery would be great
@@karthikeyanm.v8381 acceleration and de-acceleration. Lighter is better,. Even down hill you are usually pedaling hard out of corners, faster to accelerate with a lighter bike and you use less energy.. Change in momentum, easier to turn.
Honestly how many times have we heard this? 700 is almost 2x as energy dense as the highest battery made today. Time will tell. I was under the impression that there are companys making silicon anodes. I want to say those anodes can go directly into current battery manufacturing wothout any retooling. They were claiming 500
He’s full of it.
Don’t know about batteries, but a lot of analysts are pretty dense.
@@FrunkensteinVonZipperneck That appears to be the CURRENT reality, yes. ;)
Everything I'd always done on paper with 1 or 2 cells to run tests on. Nothing ever bears any fruit from these wishful claims. If we could get a energy density of 400 with 2000 cycles it would be great. Don't hold your breath waiting
The research is interesting and it shows it is possible. However, it will take a while before these batteries hit the market. Battery energy density is doubling every 14 years these days and if they maintain that rate then we can expect these batteries around 2040 or so. Not exactly tomorrow but the research shows it is possible so eventually.
Better energy density batteries will also help replace more dirty 2 and 4 stroke small engines that are still very common in so many applications. Power tools will be more powerful and lighter, large solar-powered power banks will become more portable. I'm glad the researchers also recognize that they have to address safety (and liability) issues as well. I hope recycling technology keeps up too. BTW America, when are we finally going metric and joining the rest of the world?
I understand that anything technological in the US is fully metric but they have to convert to imperial or whatever to satisfy the ignorant masses.
Music to my ears... Just what I needed to hear. Add this battery tech to the improvement in electric motor and the future is looking very positive
Any improvement is most welcome, however it gets to the stage of greeting each announcement with "yeah, but when will it be in production"
As interesting as it is to see a +600Kwh pack, it’s the performance characteristics on discharge and charge as well as cycles and life expectancy that matters
The people researching and making these batteries know that more than those of us that are merely commenting on UA-cam.
Let's keep "positively" encouraging them to get us there. 😌
According to one article I read on this, the cell retains 78% of its capacity after 3 cycles.
Please share the article you have read......
Minor detail. 😂
@@heppo6 Further extending the operating voltage range to 1.25-4.8 V, the energy contained in the low voltage interval assists the gravimetric energy density up to 701.06 Wh·kg−1 and volumetric energy density to 1621.84 Wh·L−1. Despite a small capacity reduction in the second cycle, the battery capacity shows a high retention of 78.2% in the third cycle. The energy density is 711.3 Wh·kg−1 and 1653.65 Wh·L−1 according to a third party testing report of parallel batteries. The volume change of the initial cell is only 5.09% after the first cycle.
@@keithbajema2358 Do you have a link to or the name of the actual white paper or study?
@@keithbajema2358 Is this study done by yourself?
Having 1,6kWh per liter. means in the space of a gas tank of 50 liters a 80kWh pack would fit! So no special car design needed to allow for the pack. Exciting!
50 litres of gas is 37kg but 50 litres of this cell chemistry is 116kg so it wont be as simple as replacing like for like because of weight distribution concerns.
@@drc6940 The weight difference is about the same as a passenger in a back seat. That should be no problem at all.
An energy expert confusing W/kg with Wh/kg 😮He did this at least 10 times so no slip of the tongue.
It boggles the mind. I wonder if he even reads the comment section.
I think it was a slip of the tongue, tho. He does lots of these prezzen, cut him some slack.
@@jonb5493 no excuses for obvious errors.
@@jonb5493 nope. He makes all kinds of errors every day. he pretends to be an authority on engineering matters that he clearly has not the foggiest idea about on any kind of technical level so he is basically a conman in a nice white shirt that never gets old.
@@bashful228 Wow what a load of rubbish! I hope someone pays you for your trolling. Ask Mark Mills what they pay him!
Yes, this is coming for sure. I am happy I live to see it after dreaming of it for almost 50 years...
for a 711 Wh/kg you can still keep on dreaming for a few years but progress is still happening.
mercedes announced a new battery tech with high silicon loaded graphite anodes from Sila.
i expect cars ready to buy from mercedes next years with this battery that has 20% more energy density. maybe already at the end of this year
@@stefanweilhartner4415 Yes. At least, I have come back now to this after Tesla announced a completely new battery factory in China, where they will make pouch batteries also...
Hi Sam. I think that once most electric cars achieve about 400 miles of range, the most important issue will be how fast those batteries will be able to supercharge without degradation. At least for the car industry, this will become the key aspect of battery development. If they can charge up to 80% - 90% in less than 10 minutes, then it will be game over for all naysayers.
the batteries with less graphite and more silicon in the anode have a lower inner resistance. therefor you have less heat losses and you can charge faster without overheating.
additionally you get more range per charged kWh.
@@stefanweilhartner4415 Thanks! Let’s hope they are actually able to do this, as it will finally kill the internal combustion engine.
Myself, like most people, definitely don’t need faster charging, or more than 300 miles. A Tesla with 300 mile range is more convenient driving across North American than gas. (The car is almost always waiting for you to finish feeding or relieving yourself).. Day to Day, when not road tripping; your sleeping .. and note: Unlike ice,EV’s go much farther city driving.
@@justinmallaiz4549 yes, enough for most people. but needing and wanting something is often different. a lot of people buy more than they need. more horsepower, more luxury, bigger, better styling, high quality. same with range and charging speed.
so, car companies focus more on what people like to buy and not what they need.
that was the nice thing in the beginning small cars with about 75 to 100 miles of range perfect for going back and forth to work, day to day errands etc. we could still use a few of these
this is the best news I've seen yet for batteries; unfortunately it is lacking details such as # of cycles, temperatures for operating, charging and discharging C rates. please post details when you can!
because this is just a prognosis of a theoretical concept for 2025.
you cannot test a battery for the cycle life etc. that does not exist.
I remember the race to get 100bhp per Ltr with Ice …
Now it’s batteries!! WE WILL DO IT 😊
This will be great for sports cars. I wouldn't want or need more than 350 km range in a lightweight sports car. High density like this will be so much better for electrifying old classics too. Imagine if a big enough pack could fit in place of an old Mustang's V8, but weigh 40% less, leaving room in there for a 'frunk' as well.
Always gonna shoot for more capacity than needed on paper myself. Batteries with higher capacity typically can put out more kWh. They lose capacity over charge cycles and over time as well.
Anecdotal example, I use an electric weed eater that now only gets me about half as far through my cutting as it used too(before battery dies).
the future of classic cars is of interest.
i think most classic car collectors would really want the car to be restored to stock as much as possible. but even jay leno, who we all know likes restoration to be as authentic as possible, puts on brakes and changes the battery for obvious reasons.
so i can't see any advantage of buying a classic car just to put a big battery in it.
i, myself don't like classic cars. they look different but that's their only appeal. i like nice soft seats and an air conditioned ride when i go to buy ice cream.
I am from Pakistan which is a developing country. We are not interested in EV batteries. Rather, we need stationery battery storage for our Home Solar Systems. We have long electricity outage. Please make videos about reliable and affordable for developing country people stationery power storage.
I guess future me,
Sodium Ion battery ka mass manufacturing jab ho ga,
Tab
Sodium ion battery, kai times cheap ho ga Li-ion battery se.
(Kyu ki Sodium is much cheeper than Lithium)
Then,
Sodium ion battery will be the best option for Stationary storage.
India-Pakistan bhai bhai
My need to get out of the car and walk around every hour or two is much less range than my EV.
We love that for China. I hope they get a start on this and start the production and protect the Intellectual Property for this.
Electric airplanes will be 15-30 % cheaper in total operating costs for an airline in comparison to synthetic aviation fuels. Electric propulsion gonna save the air travel industry in an ironic shift of fate.
I have been looking into E mountain bikes. These things are big dollars per kilo. Weight is a factor. Lighter is better. A better lighter battery may show up in this market before the automotive market as price is less of an issue as weight is to this market.
I disagree about enough for commercial airlines.
True
Let me know when it's mass produced...There are a number of new higher capacity batteries, but none of them are in production yet. There is always something that is difficult to overcome. Good Luck.
In your example, if battery for car weight is only 50 kg. With 100 kg, range should be almost double, because if you count car weight, passengers, these extra 50 kg of battery probably, is less than 5%, of total weight.
His example was a battery with a capacity of 50 kWh (which currently would weigh hundreds of kg), not a 50 kg battery. That said, I think you’re mostly correct anyway; heavier packs do reduce range, but not nearly as much as he’s implying.
On a positive note, while it is far from easy to replace the engine of an ICE vehicle with the better version that came out ten years later, I would expect we will see a thriving and cost-efficient business in upgrading Teslas just as we are already seeing for Nissan Leafs. Question I would ask is - will we see an extension of the average life of a BEV as compared to ICE vehicle and what impact will this have on the industry ?
Every couple of days there seems to be an announcement about better batteries and lighter, more efficient and more powerful motors. Quite dizzying!
We're in an early stage of battery density. Densities like this will seem prehistoric soon enough.
Yep look at the video recorders of the early 1980's vs what is now in a mobile phone. 1000m range will be just normal. People will charge maybe once a month. Plus EV motohomes and Pickups will be common place. Imagine an EV motorhome with capacity to drive and power the heating and appliances. It will happen and soon.
@@michaeldawson6309 makes no sense really, the can reach 40.000 horsepower nad more, 4000 miles range etc but what metric really matters is:
first and foremost, price, then the sum of all parts which is really where most hyped systems fall off quickly.
because really any battery technology is good enough for a car for what most people need, in china there are even led acid batteries still used for extremely cheap electric cars.
many things to consider, the hardest seems to be simply availability of massive amounts. atm even before price.
then longevity, density, charging speed, cold weather performance, efficiency, weight, etc etc etc
for now, its just the availability, and it will be the most important thing for quite some time.
there is currently an infinite demand on batteries.
for aviation density is everything, atm
@@michaeldawson6309 When I look at all the UFO / UAP discussions, you have to wonder, what is powering craft that can do interstellar travel. Based solely on what I've heard from Bob Lazar and Luis Elizondo, recovered craft have "batteries" that store enough energy to power a craft to travel light years. These craft have been examined, and if any of that can be reverse engineered, then what we see today, will be like a joke compared to what is possible. When I see these articles, all I think is "yeah, whatever", because I know there's got to be several orders of magnitude greater knowledge out there. Given the universe is ~14 billion years old, and we've only really made great leaps in the last 100 years or so, there have to be civilisations out there that are so far beyond us that it's a joke.
@@bigrobsydney then again, you would seemingly believe anything you’re told.
@@bashful228 Not necessarily. It seems highly unlikely that in the observable universe we are the only sentient life. If you can accept that, then it's not difficult to accept that, mathematically, the last 100 years or so are barely a blink in the eye cosmologically. I could ask you right back; do you not think other civilisations could be further ahead than us? And what do you make of the observations both by eye, and by multiple different systems, being made by pilots like Retired Navy Commander David Fravor, where these craft descended from 80,000 to sea level in one second?
750 W/kg? Surely we should be discussing energy, the unit of which is the joule. The unit must be J/Kg. A puny capacitor can put out 750W for a millisecond. I am confused.
It’s Watts hours per kg…and that’s your energy density.
You missed the time designated Hour portion of power... >
In batteries the unit for energy density used is usually Wh/kg and I suspect he just forgets to say the "hours" in "watthours per kilogram". If not then this is a power density discussion and not energy density. The 2170 cells have a power density of 350-400 W/kg (and energy density of 300 Wh/kg) so even if this is the case then that 750 W/kg is still an impressive number.
The chart at 1:45 shows Wh/Kg.
The "Electric Viking" has been using the wrong units for energy density for years. Does he even read the comment section?
Worth noting that if you have over twice the energy density of current batteries, and the same weight of batteries in the car (for loner range), you only have to charge them half as many times in a year for a given annual range. For example, for 10k miles a year, a car with 500 miles range heads 20 charges / year, compared with 40 charges/year for a car with 250 miles range. (Of course, double those numbers to limit charging to 30% to 80% for longer battery life). People forget that phones die in under 3 years because they are charged daily.
“People forget that phones die in under 3 years (…)” Really? Then maybe you should tell that to the phone I’m writing this on; it’s been in use for 4+ years, and still does just fine on battery life. Then again, I’m not using known battery hog apps like Facebook or Instagram; those buggers poll your location and communicate back to their respective servers so much that they even make a brand-new iPhone feel useless due to running out of charge!
TLDR: Stop assigning what you see as poor battery performance, to hardware failure. More often than not, it’s actually software doing things in the background that you don’t even know/think about.
@@jacobcarlson4010 Yeah, most phone batteries last far more than 3 years, but the issue here is battery degradation which is an undeniable fact of lithium-ion batteries. Software or not, Lithium-Ion will lose some of its capacity with each cycle and performance will get worse, replace your phone's battery and notice the night and day performance difference.
Aviation fuel is about 10-12kWh/kg and with modern turbofans hitting 50% thermal efficiency, the benchmark for long-haul travel is at 5000-6000Wh/kg.
And modern long-haul aircraft are burning through about 60 megawatthours of fuel per hour. Make that 30 megawatthours by ignoring thermal efficiency. Now multiply that by the 3, 6, 10 or even 12 hour flight you might want to be able to go on in the future as well.
Now think about the kind of grid and power generation infrastructure it would take to fit an airport with charging facilities on-gate (for every gate) that can recharge a 6 hour range aircraft with 180 megawatthours within a 3 hour turnaround window that would be most profitable for the airline and the airport.
We’re talking about a 60 megawatt fast charger per gate. Multiply that by the 100 or so gates at Frankfurt Airport, for instance and you’re looking at a 600 Megawatt plant or about half a big nuclear reactor block.
Maybe I’m just being narrow-minded about the future, but juggling just a few numbers, the scale of the challenge just seems insurmountably daunting…
Strapping a small nuclear reactor on a plane might be an option, but in my honest opinion, there’s no way around synthetic aviation fuel for this century at least!
But since you have to do carbon capture, H2-electrolysis and fischer-tropsch synthesis for e-hydrocarbons, it might even be more efficient to just keep burning conventional fuel and only do direct air capture.
Applying Moores law to batteries i believe 1000km range will be commercially available by end of next year. Competition is pushing competition to overdrive.
It's available now with nios max pack made of semi solid state cells and 140kwh. And catl quilin pack's of 140+kwhs. 👍🏻
How do we purchase these batteries with the high energy density?
This is the game changer at least for this hour till the next in later in the day. I realise the research will make a breakthrough sooner than we think. And whatever country or company who does it and brings it to market will be king. Car will just have smaller, lighter batteries and do 500 miles real world to a charge.
You don’t seem to realise that battery technology has been advancing in tiny steps for decades. But the big research funding only started a decade or so ago. Especially the t funding program. There’s no king. There’s also no evidence this is a “game changer” the most overused buzz phrase on this channel, by Sam in the first instance and all the idiots who parrot him in the second instance.
Before we all get carried away: battery-electric aircraft won't replace jet aircraft in any application that requires speed greater than about 600kph. A battery-electric will be prop-driven, and props become noisy and inefficient as the tips approach mach-1. So at this stage, the options for low-carbon jets are to use synthetic AVTUR fuel, or to run on liquid or pressurised hydrogen.
Hi Sam, please say watt hours instead of just watts.
we’re not talking about specific power we’re talking about specific energy
ahhh - but will EV's have more range than a comparable ICE vehicle? It could be that the EV manufactures may stick with battery packs giving around 300 mile ranges & just fit smaller (but more energy dense) batteries - thus reducing vehicle weight, which as you say has an impact on range (during accelerations at least, not so much steady state cruise), AND also reducing costs due to smaller battery packs.
I think we might see greater variation in ranges of EV's than we have today. For example, I can see small cars having battery packs only giving 250-300 miles ranges - these are more likely to be used to 'pop down to the shops' once a week, or doing a daily commute. While EV Trucks might see battery packs giving >500 mile ranges as they are more likely to be used for long distance haulage. Maybe 'GT' (Grand Tourer) larger passenger cars would be offered with circa 500 mile ranges. The other aspect here is the weight of the battery pack as a percetage of the total vehicle weight - ie a large battery capable of >500 mile range on a haulage truck might be a relatively small percentage of the total vehicles 30 ton weight, but a battery pack for a small 'around town' car with 250 mile range might be a greater percentage of its ~850-100kg total weight than the 30T haulage truck. Just a thought.
Longer range as long as you're not doing real work like hauling a trailer or driving an RV
yeah gas and diesel truck don't lose any range when towing a trailer and RV are great on fuel
All the world needs is the energy density that provide 600 miles of range for a 60 KG of battery pack that costs less than $2000 per pack with 15 years of life cycle that does not catch fire. When that happens ( hopefully in a year I or two) we would have 90% electric Vehicles by the end of the decade. IMO.
I just wondered what is being done to promote easy replacement of batteries. If the issue is poor cycle-life, wouldn't the best answer be to facilitate replacement? That way you can buy an EV today, cheaper but with short battery life, and be sure that in 3 years or so you're not snookered.
China is doing work in that regard with swappable battery tech. Doubt it'll catch on, atleast in current form, but it's being played with
The vast majority of airplanes are not "gasoline powered". Jets and turbo props use Jet A1, Jet A or Jet B, which are types of kerosene. Piston planes in the US use avgas, which is a type of gasoline (it usually has tetraethyl lead and a higher octane rating than normal gasoline), but outside of N. America, most piston planes are switching to diesel.
Seriously? Diesel for piston aircraft?
That’s like having Lee Lu fall into your cab and take you on an interstellar adventure.
Hope this is not as fictional.
The more range, the more people adapt. The cheaper everyone drives including trucking and heavy transport, the cheaper things cost in the stores. The cheaper life gets. But you can get it now. I saved so much money with my EV that I treated myself with a European luxury vacation. If only my groceries were cheaper, life would be perfect.
Can't wait, wanting to electrify my small aircraft in a couple years
Could you maybe use the correct term for energy density in future videos? It is Watt hours per kg (not Watts per kg). Thank you.
Excellent! By the way, watt, if you pardon the pun, is the price per watts per kilogram?! Perhaps they use some sort of quantum dots and/or structures. Quantum dots when I last read are great, but there are issues with them.
My prediction is at least 3 new batteries (in production) per year for the next decade. Researchers all over the world are on notice, you don't have "years" to get to market. By then there will be something better.
Wrong! 1) Not W/kg, but Wh/kg reads as Watt hours per kg.
2) Not enough for long range aviation as we know it. Jet fuel has an effective energy density of ca 4000Wh/kg. But since it doesn't weigh anything after being consumed, while batteries do, jet fuel does have almost 7000 to 8000Wh/kg energy density
Yeah, I don't get the "this will power long range aviation" hype either.. Seems to me that doubling energy density will double the range but since the range of electric airplanes is currently very unimpressive even doubling it won't amount to much.
Wonder what the efficiency of each energy density propelling the aircraft. For instance ICEs waste 75% of gasoline energy density to heat and friction while EVs waste less than 10%.
@@stevennelson7518 Jet fuel has 10kWh/kg times up to 40% efficiency for energy conversion at the turbine shaft =4kWh/kg
Technically true, but... Jet engines are nowhere near as efficient as electric motors. An electric motor can do a lot more with a kilowatt-hour of potential energy than a jet engine ever could.
Jet fuel has about 12000Wh/kg
Good info as usual Mr. Viking; your chanel is the best I have found. Many other chanels are just click bait and spend a couple of minutes explaining why better batteries are better (snore). You, sir, get right to the important details so we'll done.
As for the 600mile range, yes that just might see me buying an EV provided it was a 4 motor in-wheel drive system.
When will 1Wh per gram happen? I think within ten years. Then we will truly be electrified on all levels.
U can't do that with airplane
Tesla model 3 standard version battery along with all cooling and electrical component weighs 324kg or 715 pounds and has the capacity of 50kwh.
Current Max energy density in model 3 = 244Wh/kg
Weight of battery in model 3 standard = 50kwh/244Wh/kg = 204Kg
Weight of battery in model 3 standard if we use the battery with energy density 711Wh/Kg = 50kwh/711Wh/Kg = 70kg
Thus, reducing the weight by ~130kg or 287pounds. The model 3 standard range weighs 3552 pounds or 1611Kg. This weight reduction alone will improve the battery range by around 10.5% i.e. the range will increase from 272m or 437Km to 300m or 480Km. The car will also be a lot more nimble and fun to drive.
Hoping for the magic number of 1kwh/kg, with this pace it could happen in the next 10 years(large scale production).
Note: Most of the values considered are approximate and not absolute.
“This Charges Everything” 😂
Weight does not significantly affect range for electric road vehicles, it has more of an effect on ICE vehicles because there is no KERS, it is everything for aviation because more weight requires more lift which requires more speed/drag. Road EVs are held up by the ground so they only have to push the air out of the way to maintain the same speed, weight is not included in this equation. It does add to rolling resistance but you can simply increase the tyre pressures to compensate for most of that..
The reason large batteries don't seem to give more range is because ICE designers don't know how to make efficient EVs. The largest batteries are used for the least efficient vehicles.
Weight is a pretty big factor for electric vehicles in my experience. Had an electric scooter that would get me home or not depending on if I was wearing a backpack
@@james3876 was home at a higher altitude? Could have increased your air resistance? Does it have KERS?
Atomic fuels have energy densities from 1000 to 10,000 times higher. So 711 WattHours/Kilogram would be 711,000 WH/KG or 7.11 MWH/KG. We need such fuels for hypersonic flight, earth to orbit, fast transit to Mars, and for remote mining and infrastructure projects for Mars, Moon, and many remote places on Earth. Take a 100 Meter tall rocket fuel tank with oxygen and shrink to 1 meter.
The technologies needed to achieve that are now possible. They were not last year. But much has changed this year with AI assisted engineering and scientific design, and in speeds of hardware assisted iterative design.
Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation
A Prius has a range of 674 miles. Also, Google says a Prius emits 200 grams of co2 per mile, whereas a Tesla emits 160.
It's amazing the amount of research and development been pored into EV's, what a pity the old boys did near nothing. If they had tripled the range of ICE, they would have far fewer issues right now.
Performance Metrics Required of Next-Generation Batteries to Electrify Commercial Aircraft
[doi 10.1021/acsenergylett.9b02574]
Regional (500 nautical miles, 30-75 passengers): 600 Wh/kg
Narrow Body (~1000 nautical miles): 820 Wh/kg
Wide Body (>2000 nautical miles, 200-400 passengers): 1280 Wh/kg
So a bit away in layman talk, but a slight revival of the the propeller.
I fail to understand why adding another 50 kg battery pack wouldn't double the range. Would the surrounding elements have to be modified significantly?
This is awesome! I can’t wait to get rid of my $500 beater and trade it for this!
It will get to the point where there will be no argument left to support buying an ICE vehicle. It just won't make any sense. Can't wait. Great video, thanks again.
The primary safety challenges with lithium-metal or sodium-metal anode batteries is their difficulty passing the puncture test and seal leakage, both of which lead to rapid oxidation/combustion (fire) events, so such batteries have great theoretical potential, but have not been shown to be practical batteries for any transportation applications.
For comparison, Jet A is about 11,800 Wh/kg, right? How could something that isn’t even on the same order of magnitude be a viable replacement? Maybe it is, I just don’t understand how it could be.
Huge gap between lab scale and scale up in GW factory. Just have read in the latest nature comm paper from Matt Lacey that shows the problems between research and industry. On pack level this will reduce alot.
Watt-hours per kg
FWIW, the crossed lighting on your face in your videos is dreadful creating dark crossed shadows in the eye sockets. The solution is to move your fill light to the camera axis where it will reach everywhere the camera sees, including into the eye sockets.
Hi Sam, interesting story. Exciting to hear about energy densities of this order. I am a bit disappointed that it has come out of an autocratic and potentially adversarial state. By the way, energy density is measured in Wh/kg (energy per mass), not W/kg (power per mass).
Does this not show that a western political system is irrelevant to the innovative thinking of an engineer.
Why aren't these battery companies targeting high end electric mountain bikes? Weight is super critical and the market will pay a real premium to save weight. Only a small battery so suits low production volumes. Small battery so any danger of combustion is less critical. Etc etc.
That density world make it possible for a small aircraft to do transcontinental route
Who needs 600 mi of range in a car? Less than 1%. More likely batteries get cheaper and lighter and faster charging. My 279 mi range model Y all-wheel drive is no problem for road trips with the fast superchargers.
Watt is power, like horsepowers. Watthours is energy, like calories. The density is for something you can store. You can't store horsepowers, so the density can't be 500 W/kg, but it can be 500 Wh/kg.
When the legend clearly states W-h-L-1 (can't write superscript here), you please please can't say Watts per liter. It clearly says Wh/l, i.e. Watthours per liter. You still get a like.
whole lot of "if's". Seems like someone 'announces' a "new miracle battery" a couple of times a week....I'd be a bit more skeptical of the time frame for when these things make the transition from theory to reality.
jet fuel is 11944.4 w*h/kg while this study has a value of 711.3 w*h/kg. you cant ditch fuel for batteries till you reach 8000 9000 10000 w*h/kg for battery energy density.
If the battery is lighter because of density, then can the add solar cells to vehicles to go further?
I would go from the hypothetical weight of the charges to define the maximum energy density possible for 1 kg...and also make it a goal that the battery doesn't wear off and shows no reaction while getting short circuited...which is the only reason why the old Li Ion batteries fumed and caught fire. Also: should be abundant as sand from the deserts in Africa and China. From this point on you can search for materials that cime closest to these goals.
Where can I buy this?
Remind me when Japan introduced Li-batt on Boeing 787 and It caught fire.
Can you cover the Q1 2023 Quantumscape investor letter?
Nicola Tesla was correct when he developed wireless power. I am confused as to why Tesla is not pursuing this. Batteries would only be used for backup in instances of power signal loss.
Wrong. Clearly you do not understand physics or you would never have made such a statement. The only practical wireless power is short range electromagnetic induction which becomes very inefficient at spacings more than a few centimetres. Wireless power via electromagnetic waves is a non-starter. Tesla did not understand physics either and was really just a crank with just a couple of ideas that turned out to be useful.
You keep saying x number of "Watts per kilo" but watts is a measure of power not energy capacity or density.
All the written docs I saw stated (correctly) Wh/k, which of course is Watt hours per kg.
At what point are batteries energy dense enough to be considered a weapon?
What about superfast charging.
If there is a battery that have 700Wh/kg will make the motorbikes nois to fade away
into the history. No buisseness in making expensive fuel to some ice engines, while 99% run on electricity 🤔
Okay, so I fed Chat GPT with the facts of how much fuel a 747 used from London to New York, and a hypothetical battery of 750wh/kg: Chat GPT:
Certainly, let's recalculate the battery weight required for an electric airplane with a battery energy density of 750 Wh/kg to complete the London to New York trip, taking into account the given fuel consumption, engine efficiency, and energy density.
Given:
Fuel consumption: 70,000 kilograms
Specific gravity of jet fuel: 0.85
Electric engine efficiency: 90%
Battery energy density: 750 Wh/kg
First, let's calculate the energy equivalent of the fuel consumed by the jet engine:
Energy consumed = Fuel consumption * Specific energy of jet fuel
Energy consumed = 70,000 kg * 42.8 MJ/kg (approximate energy content of jet fuel)
Energy consumed ≈ 2,996,000,000 MJ
Next, we calculate the effective energy required by an electric engine, considering the higher efficiency:
Effective energy required = Energy consumed / Electric engine efficiency
Effective energy required ≈ 2,996,000,000 MJ / 0.9
Effective energy required ≈ 3,328,888,888 MJ
To convert this energy into watt-hours (Wh), we divide by 3.6 million (1 MJ = 1,000,000 Wh):
Effective energy required (in Wh) ≈ 3,328,888,888 MJ / 3.6 million
Effective energy required (in Wh) ≈ 924,136,111 Wh
Now, let's calculate the weight of the battery required, considering the updated energy density of 750 Wh/kg:
Battery weight required = Effective energy required / Battery energy density
Battery weight required ≈ 924,136,111 Wh / 750 Wh/kg
Battery weight required ≈ 1,232,181 kg or 1,232 metric tons
Therefore, with a battery energy density of 750 Wh/kg, an electric airplane would require approximately 1,232 metric tons of batteries to complete the London to New York trip.
I apologize for the confusion earlier, and I appreciate your patience.
High density future of battery is inevitable. Manufacturers should demonstrate it once.
Battery tech and AI are developing so fast, 2030 will be an entirely different world.
usually in the ballpark of 3..5% more energy for 3..5% lower cost per year.
and the dropping costs for an EV is driving the sales. not the government, not some idealists, no brainwashing.
only the scientists and engineers are driving that progress to make an EV better and cheaper.
and you can't stop the scientists and engineers to follow their passion. nobody can.
Honestly mate, 711 wh/kg is nowhere near enough for aircraft, maybe 3-4000 is comparable to avgas/Jet A1
Does this mean Enovix is screwed?
Nice, how long before my EV can fly?
This sounds great, just don’t let them make them, as they will fail in every way.
It isn't watts per kg, it is watt-hours per kg. Please get your units right.
I've been considering electric bicycles for me and my missus as we get closer to retirement for 3 years now, looked at probably a hundred 'banana-seat' styled offerings. My hesitancy is mostly based around the thing catching fire. I'm unlikely to burn 3k on any day, so I don't want an investment going up in deadly smoke. It might just be me. 700KWh/Kg is amazing even down to the smallest purpose pack like a single human's transport. Maybe we could LOSE those hideous box frames AND strap-on external batteries. Make bikes slimmer and lighter and more powerful. GO Fat Bottomed Girls! Get On Your Bikes and Ride! Everything is coming up roses but still expect thorns. If these new designs and chemistries eliminate spontaneous combustion too, I'm all in.
shoutout to Nik Kershaw for 'Roses', a truly majestic description of our time. :)
Very soon electric airplanes will start making sense for flights inside the US or inside Europe.
Could you please say watt *hours* per kilogram for energy density. Love your content but it literally hurts my ears to hear you using the wrong units.
argonne national lab is working on a 1200w./kg battery
700 Wh/Kg is nowhere near enough for electrifying planes. At most, you'd be able to electrify the equivalent of the Bombardier Q400 at its full 4.5 hour range at max payload without sacrificing passenger count AND without having to build much stronger landing gear.
You are not electrifying the A220 until you hit 950Wh/Kg. You're not electrifying the A321 until you hit nearly 1275Wh/Kg.
In about 30 years the excitement on electric cars will be history.
Watt hours please. It grates
Jeotoptera Bladeless fan engine for planes, yes!
Its watt-hours per kilo, not watts. Quite a difference.
Watt HOURS per kilo.
711 Whr/Kg can power a large commercial airliner!! I'm calling BS on that one. Show us the maths EV. Jet A1 fuel is 12000Whr/Kg and if you think 711 is going to crack it - you've been taking someone else's meds again.
How does the electrical energy from a battery get converted into thrust to replace a turbofan jet engine? Yes it could run a propeller but that isnt a large commercial airliner. Its not even large anything.
Yes but 711 might revive the propeller, for medium haul anyway. (less than 300nm)
@@lionelwylie2326 I'd need to do the maths, but EV said large commercial airliner and he's talking out of his hairy Scandanavian arse.