Batteries That Charge In Seconds


The infrastructure of the US wouldn't be able to handle everyone using these batteries.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I might be mistaken, but if I recall a different article on this discovery, the discharge is just as quick, meaning it can't be used for consumer electronics. In fact, this article (and the other I read) mentioned using these batteries in hybrid cars.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'dcpmark' said:
I might be mistaken, but if I recall a different article on this discovery, the discharge is just as quick, meaning it can't be used for consumer electronics. In fact, this article (and the other I read) mentioned using these batteries in hybrid cars.
Quick discharge just refers to how much juice it can deliver at a given time not how long they last. Current technology can't deliver as much of it's energy as fast as the chemical reaction is too slow.

If they hold for example 10 AH then it will still last 10 hours if the current drain is 1 amp. High discharge means that if needed it could deliver a burst of say 10 amps (and would then last 1 hour). Standard batteries may only be able to deliver 2 amp bursts. (all of these numbers are just for example ) This just means the new cells would be good for high drain things such as electric cars.

'Phawx' said:
The infrastructure of the US wouldn't be able to handle everyone using these batteries.
And the infrastructure when the automobile was new couldn't supply gas very well either.

Things change, if things shifted towards electric the infrastructure would be built. Solar carports could be put up to charge from the sun as well. Businesses could put solar panels on their now flat roofs and rout the power to outlets in parking lots etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
1Ah batteries that could completely charge in 5 seconds would tax current 110VAC 15 AMP breakers and might possibly trip.

The Pandora's battery is at 4Ah, also the majority of Laptop Batteries being 4Ah or 8Ah, would destroy current breakers in household. Also, car chargers that would want to drain this amount of power would possibly set fire to the car. Or you would have to put trickle charges onto these guys, but than..what's the point? Charging these batteries in five seconds is not reasonable with our infrastructure, Discharging at a very fast rate, however I can see. Portable rail guns (dismissing the need to bolt it down) and cars needing massive juice to sprint real fast to get into traffic I can see.

The logistics just aren't there. 250 Million Americans own cell phones. If 1% of them decided to jack in at the same time, that would be 1.8 billion amps over the span of 5 seconds on top of our already huge use of energy.

Lets say these cellphones needed 5v, that would be 45 Gigawatts needs over the span of 5 seconds. You would need 70 Square miles of solar panels that are 20% efficient to support 1% of American cell phones. That's only 1% and I am only talking about cell phones. Not other devices that use batteries. Controllers, GPS devices, notebooks, etc.

Than if you wanted to start delivering that to vehicles as well. It will be an incredible hurdle to upgrade our infrastructure while using it at the same time. I honestly don't think we have the resources for it. And I don't think Solar panels would cut it. We would need to create multiple monsters of nuclear power plants built deep underground to produce enough energy . Or blanket the entire US in solar panels. I guess we could get the cost down considerably if everyone were to get it installed. But they don't produce energy at night.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'DaveC' said:
high drain things such as electric cars.
Lol, I remember when a digital camera was described as "high drain"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Phawx
I think you're missing an obvious advantage. A small Internal Combustion engine could be used to top-off your car while you drive, and deliver extra power for hauling or going up steep inclines. The batteries maintain cruising speeds and the ICE shuts down while the batteries have enough charge to maintain. A car could conceivable run for hundreds of miles on a (International Unit of Liquid Measure) of gas that way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'Phawx' said:
1Ah batteries that could completely charge in 5 seconds would tax current 110VAC 15 AMP breakers and might possibly trip.

The Pandora's battery is at 4Ah, also the majority of Laptop Batteries being 4Ah or 8Ah, would destroy current breakers in household. Also, car chargers that would want to drain this amount of power would possibly set fire to the car. Or you would have to put trickle charges onto these guys, but than..what's the point? Charging these batteries in five seconds is not reasonable with our infrastructure, Discharging at a very fast rate, however I can see. Portable rail guns (dismissing the need to bolt it down) and cars needing massive juice to sprint real fast to get into traffic I can see.

The logistics just aren't there. 250 Million Americans own cell phones. If 1% of them decided to jack in at the same time, that would be 1.8 billion amps over the span of 5 seconds on top of our already huge use of energy.

Lets say these cellphones needed 5v, that would be 45 Gigawatts needs over the span of 5 seconds. You would need 70 Square miles of solar panels that are 20% efficient to support 1% of American cell phones. That's only 1% and I am only talking about cell phones. Not other devices that use batteries. Controllers, GPS devices, notebooks, etc.

Than if you wanted to start delivering that to vehicles as well. It will be an incredible hurdle to upgrade our infrastructure while using it at the same time. I honestly don't think we have the resources for it. And I don't think Solar panels would cut it. We would need to create multiple monsters of nuclear power plants built deep underground to produce enough energy . Or blanket the entire US in solar panels. I guess we could get the cost down considerably if everyone were to get it installed. But they don't produce energy at night.
They said the COULD charge in 5 seconds not that they HAVE to.

You could spread that time out to 1 hour or so with electronics in the charger as well. This would be equivalent to people running the AC on a hot day which they do. Once these batteries are released chargers could be made to be slow at first and then upgraded as the infrastructure improves.

Also since the charging time is shorter the chances that allot will "jack in" at the same time is diminished because the window will be smaller.

Yes some infrastructure would be needed but that would have the benefit of stimulating the economy too. Solar may not be able to do the WHOLE job but if it takes a load off of the regular grid it will help allot. The entire top of the car could be coated with solar cells as well giving a charge while sitting out at work, the mall etc. Again they wouldn't be able to completely charge the car by itself but if it helped out by 5% per car imagine how it would add up if they all had it.

The whole problem with the electric car now is that the range is not as good as gas and it takes too long to charge. This means after travelling 200 miles (which is an average of 2-3 days for commuting to work) you would need to stop and charge for 8 hours. Batteries will never hold as much energy as a tank of gas. With these new cells though you could drive 200 miles, then charge at an "electric station" (instead of gas station) for 5 minutes and pay at the "pump" for the juice like you do now for gas.

These batteries are only a good development. You can always make it so they charge in more time than 5 seconds but having the option is great however.
'mindlord' said:
@Phawx
I think you're missing an obvious advantage. A small Internal Combustion engine could be used to top-off your car while you drive, and deliver extra power for hauling or going up steep inclines. The batteries maintain cruising speeds and the ICE shuts down while the batteries have enough charge to maintain. A car could conceivable run for hundreds of miles on a (International Unit of Liquid Measure) of gas that way.
While true we really need to get away from gas where possible. Burning fossil fuel is just not good. Yes hybrids cut down, but as the population increases you will be back at square one in time. Cars will use less gas but there will be more cars, SNAFU.

Fossil fuel will be needed for things like airplanes which will never be electric due to power to weight ratio. High speed rail though could be electric (rail is the future actually, what happens when oil is scarce? no more passenger airplanes, oil will be rationed for military use).

For cars though no gas is best if possible (and these batteries make it practical). Don't forget a hybrid has a heavy gas motor, all of the fluids, plumbing etc that goes with them. This means allot of the energy in the batteries will be used up lugging around the heavy gas engine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top